This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

REGD. No. DL (N )-04/0007/2003-05 रजिस्ट्रीसं० डी एल ( एन ) -04/0007/2003-05

भारतको राजपत्र The Gazette of India

प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक

WEEKLY

नई दिल्ली, सितम्बर 7 सितम्बर 13 , 2003, शनिवार/ भाद्र 16- भाद्र 22 , 1925

सं. 37 ]

37] NEW DELHI, SEPTEMBER 7-SEPTEMBER 13, 2003, SATURDAY/BHADRA 16 - BHADRA 22, 1925 No.

इस भाग में भिन्न पृष्ठ संख्या दी जाती है जिससे कि यह अलग संकलन के रूप में रखा जा सके Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation

भाग II-खण्ड 3-उप- खण्ड (ii) PART II Section 3 Sub- section (ii)

भारत सरकार के मंत्रालयों ( रक्षा मंत्रालय को छोड़कर ) द्वारा जारी किए गए सांविधिक आदेश और अधिसूचनाएं Statutory Orders and Notifications Issued by the Ministries of the Government of India

(Other than the Ministry of Defence)

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

वित्त मंत्रालय

(Department ofRevenue)

(राजस्व विभाग)

OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE: MADURAI

केन्द्रीय उत्पाद शुल्क आयुक्त का कार्यालय: मदुरै

No. 2/2003-Customs (NT)

सं. 2/2003-सीमा शुल्क ( एनटी )

Mudurai, the 29th August, 2003 मदुरै, 29 अगस्त, 2003

S.O. 2568. In exercise of the powers conferred on meunder Section 9 ofthe Customs Act , 1962 (52 of 1962) read with Notification No.33 / 94- Customs ( NT ) dated 01-07-94 of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance , Department of Revenue , New Delhi , I hereby declare "CHETTINAICKENPATTI VILLAGE, DINDIGUL TALUK, DINDIGUL DISTRICT" in the State of Tamil Nadu to be a warehousing station under the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962) for the purpose of setting up of 100% Export Oriented Undertakings.

का० आ ० 2568.- सीमा शुल्क अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962 का 52 ) की धारा 9 जो भारत सरकार, वित्त मंत्रालय, राजस्व विभाग, नई दिल्लीके अधिसूचना सं. 33/94- सीमा शुल्क ( एन टी ) दिनांक 1 / 7/94के साथ पठित , द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैं एत‌द्वारा तमिलनाडु राज्य के, दिंडुक्कल जिला, दिंडुक्कल तालूका के चेट्टिनायक्कनपट्टी गांव की सीमा शुल्क अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962 का52 ) के अधीन शत प्रतिशत निर्यातोन्मुख उपक्रम स्थापित करने हेतु भांडागार घोषित करता हूँ ।

[फा. सी. सं. IV/ 16/ 74/2003-तक.]

[File C.No.IV/ 16/74/2003 -Tech. ] M. SURÉSH, Commissioner

एम. सुरेश, आयुक्त

(6155)

2491 GI/2003 6156

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22, 1925

मुख्यआयकर आयुक्त, कोलकाता-1 का कार्यालय कोलकाता , 2 सितम्बर, 2003

का० आ० 2569. आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 की धारा 120 की उपधारा ( 1 ) व ( 2 ) में प्रदत्त शक्ति तथा इस संबंध में प्रदत्त अन्य समस्त शक्तियों के अनुसार मैं, मुख्य आयकर आयुक्त, कोलकाता-1, एतद्वारा क्रमशः स्तंभ ( 2 ) व (3 ) में उल्लिखित आयकर आयुक्त/ संयुक्त आयकर आयुक्त के अधीन निम्नलिखित कर वसूली अधिकारियों के नये पद सृजित करता हूँ ।

यह आदेश तत्काल लागू होगा ।

4 मु.आ.आ. प्रभार आ.आ. प्रभार अपर/संयुक्त कव अ

आयकर

आयुक्त

मु.आ.आ.कोल-6 आ.आ. टीडीएस

कवअ-57

रेंज -57

रेंज-58

कव अ-58

रेंज-59 कव अ-59

[फा. सं.: 2ई/34/क व अ/2003-04 ] एन. पी. सेनगुप्ता, मुख्य आयकर आयुक्त OFFICE OF THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KOLKATA- I

Kolkata, the 2nd September, 2003

S.O. 2569.-In accordance with the power conferred by Sub-sections ( 1 ) & (2) of Section 120 of the Income Tax Act , 1961 and all other powers enabling me in this behalf. I, the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax , Kolkata - l , hereby create the new posts of TRO as given below, under the administrative control of the Commissioner of Income Tax and Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax mentioned in Columns (2 ) & (3 ) respectively against cach.

This order will take immediate effect .

4 CCIT Charge CIT Charge

TRO

Addl /

Jt . CIT

CCIT, Kolkata-VI CIT-TDS Range-57 TRO- 57

Range -58 TRO- 58

Range-59 TRO-59

[F. No. 2E/34/TRO/03-04] N. P. SENGUPTA, Chief Commissioner of Income Tax ( आर्थिक कार्य विभाग ) (बैंकिंग प्रभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 3 सितम्बर, 2003

का० आ ० 2570.-भविष्य निधि अधिनियम, 1925 ( 1925 'का XIX ) की धारा 8 की उप- धारा ( 2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग

[PART II Sec. 3 (ii) ]

करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार, एत‌द्वारा, यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त अधिनियम के उपबंध भारतीय लघु उद्योग विकास बैंक अधिनियम, 1989 ( 1989 का 39 ) के अंतर्गत स्थापित भारतीय लघु उद्योग विकास बैंक के कर्मचारियों के लाभ के लिए स्थापित भविष्य निधि पर लागू होंगे ।

[फा.सं. 17/11/2001- आईएफ- II ]

एम. के. मल्होत्रा, अवर सचिव

A (Department ofEconomicAffairs) (Banking Division)

NewDelhi , the 3rd September, 2003

S.O. 2570. In exercise of the powers conferredby sub-section (2) .of Section 8 of the Provident Fund Act, 1925 (XIX of 1925) , the Central Government hereby direct that the provisions of the said Act shall apply to the Provident Fund established for the benefit of the employees of the Small Industries Development Bank of India established under the Small Industries Development Bank ofIndiaAct, 1989 (39 of 1989) .

[F. No. 17/11/2001 -IF.II]

M. K. MALHOTRA, Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली, 3 सितम्बर , 2003

का० आ ० 2571.- भविष्य निधि अधिनियम, 1925 (1925 का XIX ) की धारा 8 की उप - धारा (3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार, एत‌द्वारा , उक्त अधिनियम की अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित सार्वजनिक संस्था का नाम जोड़ती है:-

" भारतीय लघु उद्योग विकास बैंक अधिनियम, 1989 ( 1989 का 39 ) के अंतर्गत स्थापित भारतीय लघु उद्योग विकास बैंक " ।

[फा.सं. 17/ 11/2001- आईएफ- II ]

एम. के. मल्होत्रा, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 3rd September , 2003

S.O. 2571. In exercise of the powers conferredby Sub -section ( 3 ) of Section 8 of the Provident Fund Act, 1925 (XIX of 1925), the Central Government hereby adds to the schedule of the said Act the name of the following public institution namely :---

"The Small Industries Development Bank of India established under the Small Industries Development Bank of India Act, 1989 (39 of 1989) " .

[F. No. 17/11/2001 - IF.IIJ

M. K. MALHOTRA, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 3 सितम्बर, 2003

का० आ० 2572 ,- राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबन्ध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध ) स्कीम , 1980 के खण्ड 3 के उपखण्ड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम, 1980 की धारा 9 की उपधारा ( 3 ) ( ज) एवं ( 3 - क) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का 6157 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, एत‌द्वारा वैद्य देवेन्द्र त्रिगुणा, 143 -ए, सराय काले खां, निजामुद्दीन पूर्व, नई दिल्ली को 3 सितम्बर, 2003 से तीन वर्ष कीअवधिके लिए ओरियंटल बैंक ऑफ कॉमर्स में अंशकालिक गैर-सरकारी निदेशक के पद पर नामित करती है ।

[फा. सं० 9/17/2000- बीओ -1 ]

रमेश चन्द, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 3rd September , 2003

की धारा 9 की उपधारा ( 3 ) के खंड (ङ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, एत‌द्वारा श्री सी ० एम ० पुरी, कम्प्यूटर टर्मिनल आपरेटर, सेंट्रल बैंक आफ इंडिया, कनाट सर्कस शाखा , नई दिल्ली-को 5-9-2003 से तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए और उसके बाद उनके उत्तराधिकारी की नियुक्ति होने तक या सेंट्रल बैंक आफ इंडिया के कर्मकार कर्मचारी के रूप में उनकी सेवाएं समाप्त होने तक या अगले आदेशों तक, इनमें से जो भी पहले हो, सेंट्रल बैंक आफ इंडिया के निदेशक बोर्ड में कर्मकार कर्मचारी निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है, परंतु वे लगातार छह वर्ष से अधिक की अवधि तक पदधारित नहीं करेंगे।

[फा०सं० 15/3/2002- आई ० आर० ]

ए० थामस , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 5th September, 2003 S.O. 2572. In exercise of the powers conferredby Sub -section (3 ) (h) and ( 3 -A) of Section 9 of the Banking Companies ( Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings ) Act, 1980 read with sub -clause ( 1 ) of Clause 3 of the Nationalised Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme, 1980, the Central Government, hereby nominates Vaidya Devendra Triguna , 143 -A, Sarai Kale Khan, Nizamuddin East, New Delhi as part -time non-official directorofOriental Bank of Commerce for a period of three years with effect from 3rd September, 2003.

[F. No. 9/17/2000-Β.Ο . ] RAMESH CHAND , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 3 सितम्बर, 2003

S.O. 2574. In exercise of the powers conferredby Clause (e) of Sub -section (3 ) of Section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 read with Sub- clause ( 1 ) of Clause 3 of the Nationalised Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme, 1970, the Central Government hereby appoints Shri C.M. Puri, Computer Terminal Operator , Central Bank of India, Connaught Circus Branch, New Delhi as a Workmen Employee Director on the Board ofDirectors of Central Bank of India for a period of three years with effect from 5-9-2003 and thereafter until his successor is appointed or till he ceases to be a workman employee of Central Bank of India, or until further orders , whichever is earliest provided that he shall not hold office continuously fora period exceeding six years .

[F. No. 15/3/2002- IR] का० आ० 2573.- राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबन्ध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध) स्कीम , 1980 के खण्ड 3 के उपखण्ड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम , 1980 की धारा १ की उपधारा ( 3 ) के खण्ड (ग ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, एत‌द्वारा भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक, भोपाल के क्षेत्रीय निदेशक कुमारी उमा सुब्रहमण्यम को श्री वी० एस ० दास के स्थान पर तत्काल प्रभाव से और आगामी आदेशों तक पंजाब एंड सिंध बैंक के निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है ।

A. THOMAS , Under Secy.

[फा. सं ० 9 /9/2003- बीओ -1 ]

रमेश चन्द, अवर सचिव

नईदिल्ली, 5 सितम्बर , 2003

New Delhi, the 3rd September , 2003

S.O. 2573.- In exercise of the powers conferredby clause ( c) of Sub-section (3 ) Section 9 of the Banking Companies ( Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1980 read with Sub- clause ( 1 ) of Clause 3 of the Nationalised Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme , 1980, the Central Government, hereby nominates Kum . Uma Subramaniam , Regional Director, Reserve Bank of India , Bhopal as a Director of Punjab & Sind Bank with immediate effect and until further orders vice Shri V.S. Das .

[F. No. 9/9/2003 -B.O.1]

RAMESH CHAND , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 5 सितम्बर, 2003

का० आ० 2575.- राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबंध और प्रकीर्ण उपबंध ) स्कीम, 1970 के खण्ड 3 के उपखंड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम, 1970 कीधारा 9 की उपधारा ( 3 ) के खंड (ङ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, एत‌द्वारा श्री सुरेश विष्णुपंत डांगे , विशेष सहायक, यूनियन बैंक आफ इंडिया, एम.जी. रोड शाखा, वड़ोदरा को 5-9-2003 से तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए और उसके बाद उनके उत्तराधिकारी की नियुक्ति होने तक या यूनियन बैंक आफ इंडिया के कर्मकार कर्मचारी के रूप में उनकी सेवाएं समाप्त होने तक या अगले आदेशों तक, इनमें से जो भी पहले हो , सेंट्रल बैंक आफ इंडिया के निदेशक बोर्ड में कर्मकार कर्मचारी निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है, परंतु वे लगातार छह वर्ष से अधिक की अवधि तक पदधारित नहीं करेंगे ।

[फा०सं० 15/ 3/2003- आई० आर० ]

ए० थामस, अवर सचिव का० आ ० 2574.- राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबंध और प्रकीर्ण उपबंध ) स्कीम, 1970 के खण्ड 3 के उपखंड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम, 1970 6158

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22, 1925

New Delhi , the 5th September , 2003 S.O. 2575. In exercise of the powers conferredby Clause(c) of Sub- section (3 ) of Section 9 of the Banking Companies ( Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 read with Sub- clause ( 1 ) of Clause 3 of the Nationalised Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme, 1970, the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Suresh Vishnupant Dange , Special Assistant, Union Bank of India, MG Road Branch , Vadodara as a Workmer Employee Director on the Board of Directors of Union Bank of India for a period of three years with effect from 5-9-2003 and thereafter until his successor is appointed ortill he ceasesto be a workman employee of Union Bank of India, or until further orders, whichever is earliest provided that he shall not hold office continuously for a period exceeding six years .

[F. No. 15/3/2003- IR] A. THOMAS, Under Secy.

स्वास्थ्यऔर परिवार कल्याण मंत्रालय ( भारतीय चिकित्सा पद्धति एवं होम्योपैथी विभाग ) नई दिल्ली, 27 अगस्त, 2003

का०आ० 2576. केंद्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम , 1976 के नियम 10 के उपनियम (4 ) के अनुसरण में, स्वास्थ्य और परिवार कल्याण मंत्रालय के भारतीय चिकित्सा पद्धति एवं होम्योपैथी विभाग में हिंदी का कार्य साधक ज्ञान रखने वाले कर्मचारियों की संख्या 80 प्रतिशत से अधिक हो जाने के फलस्वरूप उसे एत‌द्वारा अधिसूचित करती है ।

[ सं ० ई ० 11018 (2 ) /2003 - भा० चि० प० ( रा० भा० ) ] सुमन श्रीवास्तव, उप निदेशक ( रा ० भा० ) MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (Department of ISM & H)

New Delhi , the 27th August , 2003 S.O. 2576. In pursuance of sub - rule ( 4) of Rule 10 of the Official Languages (Use for Official Purposes ofthe Union) Rules, 1976 , the Central Government hereby notifies the Department of Indian System of Medicine & Homoeopathy. Ministry ofHealth & Family Welfare where the percentage of Hindi knowing staff has gone above 80% .

[No. E 11018(2)/2003 - ISM(O.L. ) ] SUMAN SRIVASTAVA, Dy. Director (O.L. )

वस्त्र मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 4 सितम्बर, 2003

का०आ० 2577.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के प्रयोग के लिए) राजभाषा नियम , 1976 के नियम 10 के उपनियम 4

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii ) ] के अनुसरण में, वस्त्र मंत्रालय के अंतर्गत आने वाले निम्नलिखित कार्यालयों को जिनमें 80% से अधिक कर्मचारियों ने हिन्दी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है , अधिसूचित करती है:-

1. केन्नानूर स्पिनिंग एण्ड वीविंग मिल, पो ० बा० सं० 1601 , कक्कड़, कन्नूर -670005 (केरल)

2. अनुसंधान प्रसार केन्द्र, केन्द्रीय रेशम बोर्ड, आवास विकास कालोनी, कच्चे बाबा मार्ग , गोण्डा ( उ० प्र० ) 3. अनुसंधान प्रसार केन्द्र, केन्द्रीय रेशम बोर्ड, मोहल्ला बेहली, वार्ड सं ० 10, रामपुर रोड, ऊना ( हि ० प्र ० ) 4. अनुसंधान प्रसार केन्द्र, केन्द्रीय रेशम बोर्ड, जिला परिषद् डाक बंगला , बागेश्वर ( उत्तरांचल )

5. अनुसंधान प्रसार केन्द्र, केन्द्रीय रेशम बोर्ड, शांति सदन , शिवापुरम , बशारतपुर पूर्व, गोरखपुर ( उ ०प्र ० ) 6. कार्यालय विकास आयुक्त ( हस्तशिल्प ) , हस्तशिल्प विपणन एवं सेवा विस्तार केन्द्र, कोडकी रोड, भीमराव नगर, भुज- कच्छ, गुजरात-3700011

7. भारतीय कालीन प्रौद्योगिकी संस्थान, चौरी रोड, भदोही, जिला-संत रविदास नगर ( उ ०प्र ० ) ।

[सं० ई-11016/1/99- हिन्दी]

सुधीर भार्गव, संयुक्त सचिव MINISTRY OF TEXTILES New Delhi , 4th September, 2003

S.O. 2577.- In pursuance of Sub -Rule 4 ofRule 10 oftheOfficial Language (Use for Official Purposes ofthe Union), Rules, 1976 the Central Government hereby notifies the following offices under the Ministry of Textiles ,whereof more than 80 % staff have acquired working knowledge of Hindi.

1. Cannanore Spinning & Weaving Mills , P.B. No. 1601 , Kakkad, Kannur -670005(Kerala) 2. Research Extension Centre , Central SilkBoard, Avas Vikas Colony, Kachchey Baba Marg, Gonda(U.P. )

3. Research Extension Centre , Central Silk Board, Mohalla Behli, Ward No.- 10, Rampur Road,Una (HP)

4. Research Extension Centre , Central Silk Board, Zila Parishad Dak Bangalow , Bageshwar (Uttaranchal)

5. Research Extension Centre, Central Silk Board, Shanti Sadan Shivapuram , Basharatpur East, Gorakhpur(UP)

6. Office of the Development Commissioner (Handicrafts ) , Handicrafts Marketing & Service Extension Centre , Kodki Road , Bhim Rao Nagar, Bhuj -Kutch, Gujarat -370001 6159 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 18, 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7. Indian Institute of Carpet Technology, Chauri Road, Badohi , Distt. Sant Ravidas Nagar (U.P.).

[No. E- 11016/ 1/99 -Hindi ] SUDHIR BHARGAVA, Jt. Secy.

Government hereby notifies the Steel Authority of India Limited, Branch Sales Office , Shri Mohini Complex, 345, S.V. Patil Marg , Nagpur -440001 (Maharashtra ) under the administrative Control of Ministry of Steel, where more than80% staff have acquired working knowledge ofHindi.

[No. E. 11011/6/2001 -HINDI] ANITA PARVEEN, Director विदेश मंत्रालय (सी०पी० वी० प्रभाग ) नई दिल्ली, 25 अगस्त, 2003

नागर विमानन मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 1 सितम्बर, 2003

का०आ० 2578. राजनयिक कोंसली अधिकारी ( शपथ एवं शुल्क) अधिनियम, 1948 ( 1948 का 41 वां ) की धारा 2 केअंक (क ) के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एत‌द्वारा भारत का सहायक उच्चायोग कैंडीमें श्री प्रमोद कुमार अग्रवाल सहायक को 25-08-2003 से सहायक कौंसली अधिकारी का कार्य करने के लिए प्राधिकृत करती है ।

का०आ ० 2580.- सरकारी स्थान ( आप्राधिकृत अधिभोगियों की बेदखली ) अधिनियम , 1971 ( 1971 का 40 ) की धारा 3 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार एतद्वारा भारत सरकार , नागरविमानन मंत्रालय , भारत के राजपत्र के भाग II , खण्ड 3 , उपखण्ड (ii) में 20 जनवरी, 2001 को प्रकाशित दिनांक 9 जनवरी, 2001 की अधिसूचना सं ० एस ० ओ० 84 को इस प्रकार संशोधित करती है । [सं० टी० 4330/01/2003 ] उपेन्द्र सिंह रावत, अवर सचिव ( कौंसुलर )

MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS

उक्त अधिसूचना में, पटल में, कॉलम ( क) में, क्रम सं ० 4 के सामने वाली प्रविष्टिके लिए, निम्नलिखित प्रविष्टि प्रतिस्थापित की जाएगी:-

(C.P.V. Division) New Delhi , the 25th August, 2003

" सहायक महाप्रबंधक ( कार्मिक/प्रशासन ) , एयर इंडिया लिमिटेड, मुख्यालय मुम्बई" ।

[फा० सं ० एवी० 18050/ 02/97- एए] के० के ० पदमनाभन, अवर सचिव

MINISTRY OF CIVIL AVIATION New Delhi, the 1st September , 2003 S.O. 2578.- In pursuance of the clause (a) of the Section 2 of the Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Oaths and fees) Act, 1948 (41 of 1948) , the Central Government hereby authorise Shri Pramod Kumar Agrawal , Assistant in the Assistant High Commission of India, Kandy to perform the duties ofAssistant Consular Officer with effect from 25-08-2003.

[No. T. 4330/01/2003 ] U.S. RAWAT , Under Secy. (Cons .)

S.O. 2580.- In exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (40 of 1971 ), the Central Government hereby amends the notification of the Government of India, Ministry of Civil Aviation, No. S.O. 84 dated 09th January, 2001, published in the Gazette of India , Part II , Section 3, Sub- Section (ii ), dated the 20th January , 2001, namely:-- इस्पात मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 28 अगस्त, 2003

Inthe said notification, in the Table, in Column (A), against Serial No. 4, for the entry, the following entry shall be substituted, namely:-

"Assistant General Manager (Personnel Admi- nistration), Air India Limited, Headquarters , Mumbai " [F. No. AV. 18050/02/97-AA]

K. K. PADMANABHAN, Under Secy.

का०आ० 2579.- राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम, 1976 ( यथा संशोधित, 1987 ) के नियम-10 के उप नियम (4 ) के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एत‌द्वारा इस्पात मंत्रालय के प्रशासनिक नियंत्रणाधीन शाखा विक्रय कार्यालय, स्टील अथॉरिटी ऑफ इण्डिया लिमिटेड, श्री मोहिनी कॉम्पलेक्स, 345, एस.वी. पाटिल मार्ग, नागपुर-440001 ( महाराष्ट्र) जिसके 80 प्रतिशत से अधिक कर्मचारीवृन्द ने हिन्दी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, को अधिसूचित करती है ।

पर्यावरण एवं वन मंत्रालय ( राष्ट्रीय नदी संरक्षण निदेशालय ) नई दिल्ली, 2 सितम्बर, 2003

[सं० ई० 11011/6/2001-हिन्दी] अनीता प्रवीण, निदेशक

MINISTRY OF STEEL New Delhi, the 28th August, 2003

का०आ० 2581.- भारत के संविधान के अनुच्छेद 299 के खंड ( 1 ) में प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए राष्ट्रपति गंगा कार्य योजना चरण II के अन्तर्गत 65 करोड़ रुपए की अनुमानित लागत से कलकत्ता लैदर काम्पलेक्स के लिए सामूहिक बहिस्त्राव शोधन संयंत्र के आंशिक वित्त पोषण के लिए राष्ट्रीय नदी संरक्षण निदेशालय , पर्यावरण एवं वन मंत्रालय, भारत सरकार और पश्चिम बंगाल सरकार के बीच S.O. 2579. In pursuance of sub - rule (4) ofRule 10 ofthe Official Language (Use for official purpose of the Union) Rules , 1976 (as amended, 1987) the Central 6160

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2003/BHADRA 22, 1925

ऋण करार के संबंध में संविदा एवं आश्वासनों संबंधित कार्यों को निष्पादित करने के लिए राष्ट्रपति की ओर से राष्ट्रीय नदी संरक्षण निदेशालय , पर्यावरण एवं वन मंत्रालय में अवर सचिव ( परियोजना ) को प्राधिकृत करते हैं ।

[फा० सं० के ० 13011/2/97 - एन आर सी डी- II ] ए० के ० सिन्हा, अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS (National River Conservation Directorate) New Delhi, the 2nd September, 2003 S.O. 2581 .--- In exercise of powers conferred by clause ( 1 ) of Article 299 of the Constitution of India, the President is pleased to authorize the Under Secretary (Project) in the National River Conservation Directorate, Ministry of Environment and Forests to execute on behalf of the President , the contract and assurances in respect of the Loan Agreement between the Government of India in the National River Conservation Directorate, Ministry of Environment and Forests and the Government of West Bengal for part financing of Common Effluent Treatment Plant( CETP ) for Calcutta Leather Complex under Ganga Action Plan . Phase II at an estimated cost of Rs. 65 crore .

[F. No. K- 13011/2/ 97 -NRCD -II] A. K. SINHA , Under Secy.

कृषि मंत्रालय ( कृषि एवं सहकारिता विभाग ) नई दिल्ली, 25 अगस्त, 2003

का०आ० 2582.-भारत सरकार , कृषि मंत्रालय, कृषि एवं सहकारिता विभाग की दिनांक16-7-2003 की समसंख्यक अधिसूचना में आंशिक संशोधन करते हुए एत‌द्वारा क्रम संख्या 7, 8 और 9 पर उल्लिखित 3 कार्यालयों के नाम हटाए जाते हैं ।

[सं. 3-2/2003- हिन्दी नीति] आशीष बहुगुणा , संयुक्त सचिव

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE (Department ofAgriculture and Cooperation) NewDelhi , the 25th August, 2003 S.O. 2582.-In partial modification ofGovernment of India , Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation notification of even number dated 16-7-2003 , names of 3 offices mentioned at Serial No. 7,8 and 9 are hereby deleted.

[No. 3-2/2003 -Hindi Neeti ] ASHISH BAHUGUNA, Jt. Secy.

संचारऔर सूचना प्रौद्योगिकी मंत्रालय (डाकविभाग)

नई दिल्ली, 28 अगस्त , 2003

का०आ ० 2583.-राजभाषा नियम, ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजन के लिए प्रयोग ) , 1976 के नियम 10 के उप नियम ( 4 ) के अनुसरण में केन्द्र सरकार, डाक विभाग के अधीनस्थ कार्यालय डाकघर कटरा, जम्मूएवं कश्मीर सर्किल, जम्मूको जिनके 80 प्रतिशत कर्मचारियों (ग्रुप घ कर्मचारियों को छोड़कर ) ने हिन्दी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है , अधिसूचित करती है ।

[सं०11017-2/2003 - रा० भा० ] डॉ० पुष्पलता सिंह, निदेशक ( राजभाषा ) MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

(Department of Posts) NewDelhi , the 28th August , 2003

S. O. 2583. In pursuance of Rule 10(4) of the Official Language (use for official purposes of the Union) Rules , 1976 , the Central Government hereby notifies Post Office, Katra subordinate office of the Department of Posts where 80 per cent staff has acquired the working knowledge of Hindi .

[No. 11017-2/2003 -OL] DR. PUSHPLATA SINGH, Director (OL) 6161 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13 , 2003/भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

उपभोक्तामामले, खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय

(उपभोक्तामामले विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 28 अगस्त, 2003

का.आ. 2584.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट तथा माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स हाईमेक इंजीनियर्स प्राईवेट लिमिटेड, प्लाट नं. 14. रोड़ 10, एम आई डी सी, मारोल , अंधेरी -400093 द्वारा विनिर्मित " हाइमेक " श्रृंखला की स्वतः भरण मशीन ( निकास नलिका कपाट प्रणाली ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " हाइमेक " है ( जिसे इसमें उक्त माडेंल कहा गया है.) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिहन आई एन डी/ 09/2003/ 96 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक स्वतः भरण मशीन ( निकास नलिका कपाट प्रणाली ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 5000 मि. ली. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 मि. ली. या समतुल्य भार है । यह अधिकतम 40 पूरण प्रति मिनट की दर से भरती है । यह मशीन मुक्त प्रवाह वाले स्यानता हीन द्रष उत्पादों जैसे खनिज जल, दुग्ध, मृदु पेय, बीअर, व्हिस्की आदि को भरने के लिए डिजाइन की गई है । यह 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करती है ।

[फा. सं . डब्ल्यू. एम.- 21 ( 85 )/2002 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 6162

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22, 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii)] MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS , FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs)

New Delhi , the 28th August, 2003

S.O. 2584.-Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority , is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( See the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of automatic filling machine ( Vent pipe valve system ) of " HYMECH " series with brand name " HYMECH" (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Hymech Engineers Private Limited , Plot No. 14, Road 10 , MIDC, Marol , Andheri - 400093 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2003/96 ;

The said model is an automatic filling machine (Vent pipe valve system) . Its maximum capacity is 5000 ml and minimum capacity is 200 ml or equivalent weight. It fills at a maximum rate of 40 fills per minute . The machine is designed for filling free flowing non- viscous liquid products like mineral water , milk , soft drink , beer, whisky etc. It operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hz alternate current power supply .

[F. No. WM-21 (85 )/2002 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY , Director of Legal Metrology 6163 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003 /भाद्र 22, 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 28 अगस्त, 2003

का.आ. 2585.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट तथा माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स हाईमेक इंजीनियर्स प्राईवेट लिमिटेड, प्लाट नं. 14, रोड़ 10, एम आई डी सी, मारोल, अंधेरी -400093 द्वारा विनिर्मित " हाइमेक " श्रृंखला की स्वतः भरण मशीन ( निकास टाइमर आधारित प्रणाली ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " हाइमेक " है जिसे इसमें उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2003/97 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक स्वतः भरण मशीन (टाइमर आधारित प्रणाली ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 20 लीटर और न्यूनतम क्षमता 5 लीटर या समतुल्य भार है । इस मशीन को मुक्त प्रवाह वाले स्यानता हीन द्रव उत्पादों जैसे खनिज जल, मृदु पेय, बीअर, व्हिस्की आदि को भरने के लिए डिजाइन किया गया है । यह 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू. एम. - 21 ( 85 )/2002 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 2491 G1/2003-2 6164

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2003 /BHADRA 22, 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii)]

New Delhi , the 28th August, 2003

S.O. 2585.-- Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority , is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( See the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and ( 8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of automatic filling machine (Timer based system ) of "HYMECH " series with brand name " HYMECH " (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufacturedby M/ s. Hymech Engineers Private Limited, Plot No. 14, Road 10, MIDC, Marol , Andheri -400093 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/ 2003/97 ;

The said model is an automatic filling machine (Timer based system) . Its maximum capacity is 20 litre and minimum capacity is 5 litre or equivalent weight . The inachine is designed for filling free flowing non- viscous liquid products like mineral water , milk, soft drink , beer and whisky etc. It operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hz alternate current power supply.

[F. No. WM-21 ( 85)/2002]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 6165 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली , 5 सितम्बर , 2003

का०आ ० 2586.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स एल सी एस कंट्रोल्स प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, नं. 4/1066 , ग्यारहवां लिंक रोड, रुकमणी कालोनी , नेहरू नगर, चेन्नई -600041 द्वारा विनिर्मित ए डब्ल्यू एल एफ एस श्रृंखला के स्वचालित मशीन ( द्रव्य भरण ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एल सी एस " है ( जिसे इसमें मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/ 2003 / 165 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( आकृति देखें ) स्वतः चालित और भरण ( द्रव भरण ) मशान ह । इसका आधकतम क्षमता 210 कि. ग्रा. है । अधिकतम निर्गम 20 से 120 आधान प्रति घण्टा है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 440 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के इस अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत , उसी यथार्थता वर्ग और उसी मेक वाले ऐसे तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जिनकी अधिकतम क्षमता 5 कि. ग्रा . से 300 कि. ग्रा. तक की रेंज में है और जिनका विनिर्माण उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त , डिजाइन और उसी सामग्री से किया जाता है जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है ।

['फा. सं. डब्ल्यू. एम.- 21 ( 150 )/2002 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 6166

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13, 2003/BHADRA 22, 1925

[PART II SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 5th September, 2003

S.O. 2586.- Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (See the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and. Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section (7) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of the automatic Weighing Machines ( liquid filling) of AWLFS series with brand name LCS (herein referred to as the Model ) manufacturedby M/s . LCS Controls Private Limited, No. 4/1066 , 11th Link Road, Ruckmani Colony , Nehru Nagar , Chennai -600041 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2003/ 165 ;

The said model ( see the figure ) is an automatic weighing and filling Machine (liquid filling ) . The maximum capacity is 210 kg. The maximum output is 20 to 120 containers per hour. The light emitting diode display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 440 Volts , 50 hertz alternate current power supply .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section ( 12 ) of the said section , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity in the range of 5 kg to 300 kg manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which, the approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 150)/2002 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director Legal Metrology 6167 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13, 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 5 सितम्बर, 2003

का०आ० 2587.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 (1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) द्वारा प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स एल सी एस कंट्रोल्सप्राइवेट लिमिटेड, नं. 4/1066, ग्यारहवां लिंक रोड, रुकमणी कालोनी , नेहरू नगर, चेन्नई -600041 द्वारा विनिर्मित " ए डब्ल्यू एस एफ एस." श्रृंखला के स्वचालित मशीन ( ठोस भरण ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एल सी एस " है ( जिसे इसमें मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2003 / 166 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ;

उक्तमॉडल ( आकृति देखें ) एक स्वचालित तोलन मशीन ( ठोस भरण ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1 कि. ग्रा. अधिकतम निर्गम 20 पूर्ण प्रति मिनट है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम धारा की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के इस अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत , उसी यथार्थता वर्ग और उसी मेक वाले ऐसे तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जिनकी अधिकतम क्षमता 2 ग्रा. से 5 कि.ग्रा. तक की रेंज में है और जिनका विनिर्माण उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन और उसी सामग्री से किया जाता है जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू. एम. - 21 ( 150 )/2002 ] पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 6168

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22, 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] New Delhi , the 5th September, 2003

S.O. 2587.- Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority , is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section (7) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of the automatic Weighing Machines (solid filling) of AWSFS series with brand name LCS (herein referred to as the Model ) manufactured by M/ s . LCS Controls Private Limited, No. 4/1066, 11th Link Road, Ruckmani Colony , Nehru Nagar , Chennai -600041 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 2003/ 166;

The said model (see the figure) is an automatic weighing Machine (solid filling) . The maximum capacity is 1 kg. The maximum output is 20 fills per minute. The light emitting diode display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 hertz alternate current power supply.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section ( 12 ) of the said Section, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with the maximum capacity in the range of 2 g. to 5 kg . manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 ( 150) /2002 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY , Director, Legal Metrology 6169 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13, 2003/ भाद्रपद 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

कोयला मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 4 सितम्बर, 2003

का. आ. 2588.- कैन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला धारक क्षेत्र( अर्जन और विकास) अधिनियम 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 4 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई, भारत के राजपत्र, भाग 2, खंड 3 , उपखंड (ii ) , तारीख 6 अक्तूबर, 2001 में प्रकाशित भारत सरकार के कोयला मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 2646 तारीख 25 सितम्बर, 2001 द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट परिक्षेत्र की भूमि में, जिसका माप 13.599 हैक्टर ( लगभग) या 33.60 एकड़ ( लगभग ) है, कोयले का पूर्वेक्षण करने के अपने आशय की सूचना दी थीः ,

और केन्द्रीय सरकार को यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त भूमि के भाग में कोयला अभिप्राप्य हैः ,

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 7 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, इससे संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित 13.599 हेक्टर (लगभग) या 33.60 एकड़ ( लगभग ) माप की भूमि में खनिजों का खनन, खुदाई, बोर, खोज तथा तलाश, प्राप्त करने, उन पर कार्य करने और ले जाने के अधिकारों का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की सूचना देती है ।

टिप्पण 1 . इस अधिसूचना के अंतर्गत आने वाले क्षेत्र के रेखांक संख्या एसईसीएल/ बीएससपी/जीएम ( योजना ) /भूमि, 268 तारीख 7 अप्रैल 2003 का निरीक्षण कलेक्टर, रायगढ़ ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) के कार्यालय में या नियंत्रक, 1 , काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट, कलकत्ता-700001 के कार्यालय यासाउथ ईस्टर्न कोलफील्डस लिमिटेड (राजस्व खंड ) सीपत रोड, बिलासपुर 495006 ( छत्तीसगढ 1 ) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकता है ।

टिप्पण 2 , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 8 के उपबंधों की ओर ध्यान आकृष्ट किया जाता है जिसमें निम्नलिखित उपबंध हैं-

" 8 , अर्जन की बाबत आपत्तियां ( 1 ) कोई व्यक्ति जो किसी भूमि में जिसकी बाबत धारा 7 के अधीन अधिसूचना निकाली गई है, हितबद्ध है, अधिसूचना के निकाले जाने से तीस दिन के भीतर सम्पूर्ण भूमि या उसके किसी भाग या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के किन्हीं अधिकारों का अर्जन किए जाने के बारे में आपत्ति कर सकेगा । 6170

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRAPADA 22, 1925 [PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )] स्पष्टीकरणः- इस धारा के अर्थान्तर्गत यह आपत्ति नहीं मानी जाएगी कि कोई व्यक्ति भूमि में कोयला उत्पादन के लिए स्वयं खनन संक्रियाएं करना चाहता है और ऐसी संक्रियाएं केन्द्रीय सरकार या किसी अन्य व्यक्ति को नहीं करनी चाहिए ।

(2) उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन प्रत्येक आपत्ति सक्षम प्राधिकारी को लिखित रुप में की जाएगी और सक्षम प्राधिकारी आपत्तिकर्ता को स्वयं सुने जाने का या विधि व्यवसायी द्वारा सुनवाई का अवसर देगा और ऐसी सभी आपत्तियों को सुनने के पश्चात और ऐसी अतिरिक्त जांच, यदि कोई हो, करने के पश्चात जो वह आवश्यक समझता है, वह या तो धारा 7 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन अधिसूचित भूमि के या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के संबंध में एक रिपोर्ट या ऐसी भूमि के विभिन्न टुकड़ों या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के संबंध में सआत्तियों पर अपनी सिफारिशों और उसके द्वारा की गई कार्यवाही के अभिलेख सहित विभिन्न रिपोर्ट केन्द्रीय सरकार को उसके विनिश्चय के लिए देगा ।

(3) इस धारा के प्रयोजनों के लिए वह व्यक्ति किसी भूमि में हितबद्ध समझा जाएगा जो प्रतिकर में हित का दावा करने का हकदार होता यदि भूमि या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकार इस अधिनियम के अधीन अर्जित कर लिए जाते हैं । "

टिप्पण 3. केन्द्रीय सरकार ने भारत के तारीख 4 अप्रैल, 1987 के राजपत्र के भाग 2, खंड 3 , उपखंड (ii) के पृष्ठ 1397 से 1400 पर प्रकाशित अधिसूचना सं० का.आ.905, तारीख 20 मार्च, 1987 द्वारा कोयला नियंत्रक, 1 , काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट, कलकत्ता-700001 को उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 के अधीन सक्षम प्राधिकारी नियुक्त किया है ।

अनुसूची

छाल ब्लाक ( विस्तार )

रायगढ़ क्षेत्र

जिला - रायगढ़ ( छत्तीसगढ़ )

रेखांक सं ० एसईसीएल/ बीएससपी/ जीएम ( योजना) /भूमि, 268 तारीख 7.4.2003 खनन अधिकार

तहसील जिला

टिप्पण

क्रम संख्या

ग्राम का नाम

क्षेत्र हेक्टर में

पटवारी हल्का नम्बर

8.550

बंधापाली

भाग

रायगढ़

धरमजयगढ़

नवापारा 31

3.299 भाग

रायगढ़

धरमजयगढ़

खेडापाली

1.750 भाग

रायगढ़

धरमजयगढ़

योगः- 13.599 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 33.60 एकड़ ( लगभग ) 6171 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्रपद 22, 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

( 1 ) ग्राम बंधापाली ( भाग) में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्याकः 410 (भाग) (2) ग्राम नवापारा ( भाग ) में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्याक 479 ( भाग ) , 480,481,482( भाग) ,483( भाग) ,484 ( भाग) ,485( भाग) ,486( भाग ), । (3) ग्राम खेडापाली ( भाग ) में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्याक 5/2 (भाग) , 5/4 ( भाग) ।

सीमा वर्णनः

क - ख रेखा बिन्दु " क" से ग्राम खेडापाली - बंधापाली की सम्मिलित सीमा पर आरंभ होती है और भागतः खेडापाली- बंधापाली ग्रामों की सम्मिलित सीमा के साथ जाकर बिन्दु " ख " पर मिलती है ।

ख- ग-घ रेखा भागतः प्लाट संख्या 410 की पश्चिमी सीमा, फिर प्लाट संख्या 410 से होते हुए ग्राम नवापारा में प्रवेश करती है और प्लाट संख्या 479,484,485,486 , से होते हुए बिन्दु " घ " पर मिलती है ।

घ-ड-ड-1 रेखा ग्राम नवापारा के संख्या 486,485,484,483,482, से होकर प्लाट संख्या 481 की दक्षिणी सीमा से होकर बिन्दु " ड 1 " पर मिलती है । ड 1 -च-क रेखा ग्राम बंधपाली के प्लाट 410 से होकर ग्राम खेडापाली में प्रवेश करती है और प्लाट संख्या 5/2,5/4 से होकर आरभिंक बिन्दु पर मिलती है । " क"

[फा. सं. -43015/12/2001- पी.आर.आई. डब्ल्यू. ]

संजय बहादुर, उप सचिव

Ministry of Coal

New Delhi , the 4th September, 2003

S. O. 2588.- Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal , number S.O. 2646 dated the 25th September , 2001 , issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development ) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and published in Part -II, Section 3 , Sub - Section ( ii ) of the Gazette of India dated the 6th October, 2001 , the Central Government gave notice of its intention to prospect for coal in 13.599 hectares (approximately) or 33.60 acres (approximately ) of the lands in the locality specified in the Schedule annexed to that notification;

And, whereas , the Central Government is satisfied that coal is obtainable in a part ofthe said lands ;

2491 G1 /2003-3 6172

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRAPADA 22, 1925 [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)] Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -section ( 1 ) of section 7 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby gives notice of its intention to acquire the rights to mine, quarry , bore, dig and search for, win, work and carry away minerals in the lands measuring 13.599 hectares (approximately) or 33.60 acres (approximately) described in the Schedule appended hereto.

Note 1 - The plan bearing No : SECL/BSP / GM) Plg )/Land/268, dated the 7th April, 2003 of the area covered by this notification may be inspected in the office of the Collector, Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) or in the Office of the Coal Controller, 1, Council House Street , Calcutta 700001 or in the Office of the South Eastern Coalfields Limited (Revenue Section ), Seepat Road, Bilaspur - 495006 ( Chhattisgarh )

Note 2 - Attention is hereby invited to the provisions of section 8 of the said Act , which provides as follows: -

Objection to Acquisition.-

" 8 ( 1 ) Any person interested in any land in respect of which a notification under section 7 has been issued may, within thirty days of the issue of the notification, object to the acquisition of the whole or any part of the land or of any rights in or over such land.

Explanation : -It shall not be an objection within the meaning of this section for any person to say that he himself desires to undertake mining operations in the land for the production of coal and that such operations should not be undertaken by the Central Government or by any other person .

(2)

Every objection under sub- section ( 1 ) shall be made to the competent authority in writing, and the competent authority shall give the objector an opportunity of being heard either in person or by a legal practitioner and shall , after hearing all such objections and after making such further inquiry, if any , as he thinks necessary , either makes a report in respect of the land which has been notified under sub - section ( 1 ) of section 7 or of rights in or over such land, or make different reports in respect of different parcels of such land or of rights in or over such land, to the Central Government , containing his recommendation on the objections together with the record of the proceedings held by him, for the decision of that Government.

(3)

For the purpose of this section , a person shall be deemed to be interested in land who would be entitled to claim an interest in compensation if the land or any rights in or over such land were acquired under this Act "

Note: 3 The Coal controller, 1 , Council House Street Calcutta 700001 has been appointed by the Central Government , as the competent authority under section 3 of the said Act , vide noticication under S.O 905 , dated the 20th March, 1987 , published in Part- Il section- 3 , sub- section ( ii ) of the Gazette of India, dated the 4th April , 1987 at pages 1397 to 1400.

6173 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्रपद 22, 1925

Schedule

Chhal Block ( Extension ) Raigarh Area

District - Raigarh ( Chhattisgarh )

Plan Number: - No: SECL /BSP/ GM ( Plg )/Land /268 dated 7th April,2003 .

MINING RIGHTS

Remarks

District

Tahsil

Area in hectares

Serial number

Name of village

Patwari halka number

8.550

Part

Raigarh

Dharamjaygarh

Bandhapali

3.299

Part

Raigarh

Dharamjaygarh

Nawapara 31

Part

1.750

Raigarh

Dharamjaygarh

Khedapali

Total : 13.599 Hectares ( approximately) or 33,60 Acres ( approximately )

1. Plot numbers to be acquired in village Bandhapali (Part ) 410(part)

3 Plot numbers to be acquired in village Nawapara (Part ) 479 (Part), 480, 481 , 482 (Part) , 483 (Part ),. 484 (Part ) , 485 (Part ), 486 (Part ),

3. Plot numbers to be acquired in village Khedapali ( Part ) 5/2 (Part ) , 5/4 (Part).

Boundary Description.

A-B

Line starts from point ' A' on the common boundary of villages Khedapali- Bandhapali and passes partly along the common boundary of villages Khedapali- Bandhapali and meets at point 'B ' .

B-C- D

Line passes partly along the Western boundary of plot number 410 , then through plot number 410 of village Bandhapali , then enter in village Nawapara and passes through plot numbers 479, 484, 485, 486 and meets atpoint 'D' .

D - E- E 1 Line passes through plot numbers 486 , 485, 484, 483 , 482 , southern boundary of plot number 481 of village Nawapara and meets at point ' E 1' .

E 1 -F - A Line passes through plot number 410 of village Bandhapali , then entre in village Khedapali passes through plot numbers 5/2, 5/4 and meets at the starting point ' A' .

[No. 43015/12/2001- P.R.I/W. ]

SANJAY BAHADUR , Dy. Secу.

पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 2 सितम्बर, 2003

का. आ. 2589.- केकीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि महाराष्ट्र राज्य में पानेवाडी (मनमाड) संस्थापन से मध्यप्रदेश राज्य में मांगल्या (इन्दौर) तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए भारत पेट्रोलियम कॉरपोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक विस्तार पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ;

6174

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRAPADA 22 , 1925 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] और केन्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसी पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उस भूमि में जिसमें पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित है, उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए ;

अतः, अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम 1962 (1962 का 50) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) द्वारा प्रवत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , उस भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा करती है ;

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको इस अधिसूचना से युक्त भारत के राजपत्र की प्रतियाँ साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है, 21 (इक्कीस) दिन के भीतर भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के संबंध में श्री बी०पी० पाठक, सक्षम प्राधिकारी, मुंबई-मनमाड पाइपलाइन विस्तार परियोजना, भारत पेट्रोलियम कॉरपोरेशन लिमिटेड, सी/ 19- ए, स्कीम न० 78 , स्लाइस सं ० 5, ए ०बी० रोड, इन्वौर- 452010 ( मध्यप्रदेश) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

अनुसूची

तहसील: ठीकरी

राज्य: मध्यप्रदेश

जिला: बड़वानी

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नम्बर

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर

1. खेड़ी

32/1

0.1830

28/1

0.1080

28/2

0.0940

0.0680

28/3

0.0720

2. ठीकरी

12/1 , 12/2 , 12/3

0.1382

6/4

0.0300

36/1

0.0510

3. शेरपुरा

4. सेगवाल

262

0.0798

285/1

0.0580

285/4

0.1390

5. सिरसाला

114/4

0.0540

114/17

0.0540

114/14

0.0540

114/8

0.0060

84/3, 84/5

0.2340

6. खुरमपुरा

0.0900

7. बरसलाय

86/3

0.0180

368

0.0540

315/1/1

0.0120

[फा. सं. आर-31015/34/2001- ओ.आर- ।॥ ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव 6175 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्रपद 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS2

New Delhi , the 2nd September, 2003

S. O. 2589.- Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transport of petroleum products from the Parewadi (Manmad) terminal in the State of Maharashtra , an extension pipeline to Manglya ( Indore) in the State of Madhya Pradesh should be laid by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited;

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

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

Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty- one days from the date on which copies of the Gazette of India containing this notification are made available to public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land , to Shri V.P. Pathak, Competent Authority, Mumbai - Manmad Pipeline Extension Project , Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, C/ 19 -A, Scheme No. 78, Slice No. 5 , A.B Road, Indore - 452010 ( Madhya Pradesh ).

SCHEDULE

STATE : MADHYA PRADESH DISTRICT : BADWANI

TEHSIL : THIKRI

AREA IN HECTARE

SURVEY NO .

NAME OF VILLAGE

0.1830

32/1

1. KHEDI

0.1080

28/1

0.0940

28/2

0.0680

28/3

0.0720

0.1382

12/1, 12/2, 12/3

2. THIKRI

0.0300

6/4

0.0510

36/1

3. SHERPURA

0.0798

262

4. SEGWAL

0.0580

285/1

0.1390

285/4 6176

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2003/BHADRAPADA 22, 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] 1

3 SIRSALA

114/4

0.0540

114/17

0.0540

114/14

0.0540

114/8

0.0060

84/3, 84/5

0.2340 6 KHURUMPURA

0.0900 7 BARSALAY

86/3

0.0180

368

0.0540

315/1/1

0.0120

[No. R-31015/34/2001 - O.R. - II ] HARISH KUMAR, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 5 सितम्बर, 2003

का. आ. 2590.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि महाराष्ट्र राज्य में पनेवाडी (मनमाड) संस्थापन से मध्यप्रदेश राज्य में मांगल्या (इन्दौर) तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए भारत पेट्रोलियम कॉरपोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक विस्तार पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ;

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसी पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उस भूमि में जिसमें पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इससे संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित है, उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए ;

अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार, पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उस भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा करती है ;

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको इस अधिसूचना से युक्त भारत के राजपत्र की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती हैं , इक्कीस दिन के भीतर भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के संबंध में श्री वी, पी. पाठक, सक्षम प्राधिकारी, मुंबई- मनमाडु पाइपलाइन विस्तार परियोजना, भारत पेट्रोलियम कॉरपोरेशन लिमिटेड , सी/19-ए स्कीम नं0 78 , स्लाइस नं० 5, ए ० बी० रोड, इन्दौर-452010 (मध्यप्रदेश) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

10 6177 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13 , 2003 / भाद्रपद 22, 1925

[ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

अनुसूची

राज्य: मध्यप्रदेश

जिला: खरगोन

तहसील : महेश्वर

क्षेत्रफल

सर्वे नम्बर

हैक्टेयर ग्राम का नाम

0.2530

1. भवनतलाई

0.0780

22/4/1

0.0710

22/3

0.0360

0.1320

2. बाकानेर

0.2620

107/3 , 107/7

3. कुसुंबिया

0.0400

119/2

0.1885

5/1, 5/2

0.1320

4. काकड़दा

32, 36/2

0.5669

19/1/1 शासकीय चरागाह

0.1569

18/1 , 18/2

[फा. सं . अर-31015/37/2001-ओ. आर- ॥

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचि New Delhi , the 5th September 2003

S. O. 2590.- Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary is the public imerest that for the transport of petroleum products from the Panewadi (Manmad) terminal in the State of Maharashtra , an extension pipeline to Manglya ( Indore) in the State of Madhya Pradesh should be laid by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited;

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

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

Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty- one days from the date on which copies of the Gazette of India containing this notification are made available to the public , object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land, to Shri V.P.Pathak , Competent Authority, Mumbai - Manmad Pipeline Extension Project, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited , C/ 19 - A , Scheme No.78 , Slice No.5 , A.B. Road , Indore- 452010 (Madhya Pradesh).

6178

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRAPADA 22 , 1925 [PART II- SEC. 3 (ii )]

SCHEDULE

STATE : MADHYA PRADESH

DISTRICT : KHARGONE

TEHSIL : MAHESHWAR

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

AREA IN HECTARE 1. BHAVANTALAI

0.2530

22/4/1

0.0780

22/3

0.0710 2. ΒΑΚΑΝER

0.0360

0.1320

0.2620

107/3, 107/7

119/2

0.0400 3. KUSUMBIYA

0.1885

5/1, 5/2

4. KAKARDA

0.1320

32, 36/2

0.5669

19/1/1 ( GL)

0.1569

18/1, 18/2

[No. R-31015/37/2001 -O.R. - II ] HARISH KUMAR , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 5 सितम्बर, 2003

का. आ. 2591.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोक हित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि गुजरात राज्य में विरमगाम से हरियाणा राज्य में पानीपत तक , राजस्थान राज्य में चाकसू से होती हुई पेट्रोलियम (अपरिष्कृत) के परिवहन के लिए इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा "सलाया मथुरा पाइपलाईन प्रणाली के विरमगाम चाकसू, चाकसू- पानीपत और चाकसू- मथुरा सेक्सनों के संर्वद्धन के कार्यान्वयन हेतू एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ;

और , केन्द्रीय सरकार को उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए ;

अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962 का 50) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , उस भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा करती है ;

6179 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्रपद 22 , 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

कोई व्यक्ति जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है उस तारीख से जिसको भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाईन बिछाने के सम्बन्ध में श्री आर. एम . पंड्या, सक्षम प्राधिकारी, इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, पाइपलाइन प्रभाग , पो. बा . सं. 4 , डाकघर- विरमगाम, जिला अहमदाबाद, गुजरात -382150 को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

अनुसूची

जिला : बनासकांटा

राज्य: गुजरात

तालुका: वहगाम

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

हेक्टर

सर्वे सं. उप-खण्ड सं.

गाँद का नाम

तेनीवाडा

178

[फा. सं. आर-25011/21/2001- ओ.आर -1 ]

रेणुका कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 5th September, 2003

S. O. 2591. Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of petroleum (crude) from Viramgam in the State of Gujarat to Panipat in the State of Haryana via Chaksu in the State of Rajasthan , a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited for implementing the "Augmentation of Viramgam- Chaksu , Chaksu- Panipat and Chaksu -Mathura sections of Salaya- Mathura pipeline System";

And whereas it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline , it is necessaryto acquire the right of user in the land described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;

2491 G1/2003-4 6180

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRAPADA 22 , 1925 [PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] Now , therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein .

Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty- one days from the date on which the copies of the notification ,. as published in the Gazette of India , are made available to the general public , object in writing to the laying of the pipeline under the land to Shri R.M. Pandya , Competent Authority , Indian Oil Corporation Limited, (Pipelines Division ) , P.B.No.4 , P.O. Viramgam , Distt . Ahmedabad , Gujarat- 382150.

SCHEDULE

Taluka : VADGAM

State : GUJARAT

District : BANASKANTHA

Area

Hectare Are Sq.mtr. Name of the Village

Survey no . Sub-Division no.

TENIWADA

178

[No. R- 25011/21/2001 - O.R. - I ]

RENUKA KUMAR , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 5 सितम्बर, 2003

का. आ. 2592 .- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधीन भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 8 फरवरी , 2003 में प्रकाशित भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्याक का. आ. 470 तारीख 3 फरवरी, 2003 द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विर्निदिष्ट भूमि में गुरू गोबिन्द सिंह रिफाइनरीज लिमिटेड (हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉरपोरेशन लिमिटेड की समनुषंगी ) द्वारा मुन्द्रा--भटिंडा अपरिष्कृत तेल पाइपलाइन के माध्यम से गुजरात राज्य में मुन्द्रा पत्तन स्थित अपरिष्कृत तेल संस्थापन से पंजाब राज्य में भटिंडा तक अपरिष्कृत तेल के परिवहन के लिए पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 11 मार्च, 2003 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं:

6181 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्रपद 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

और सक्षम प्राधिकारी को प्रारूप अधिसूचना पर विर्निदिष्ट अवधि के भीतर कोई आक्षेप नहीं प्राप्त हुआ है ;

और सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (1 ) के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार को अपनी रिपोर्ट दे दी है;

और केन्द्रीय सरकार का उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उस भूमि में जो इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट है, उपयोग का अधिकार अर्जन किया जाना चाहिए ;

अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह घोषणा करती है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट उक्त भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाता है ;

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह निदेश देती है, उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार . इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को, केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने की बजाए सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त. गुरू गोबिन्द सिंह रिफाइनरीज लिमिटेड (हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉरपोरेशन लिमिटेड' की समनुषगी) में निहित होगा ।

अनुसूची

राज्य : राजस्थान

जिला : जोधपुर

तहसील : ओसियाँ

ROU क्षेत्रफल

स्वसरा नं.

हिस्साक्रमांक

गाँव का नाम

बिस्वा

बीघा क्रम सं.

365 1

उम्मेदनगर

365

173 कार्ट ट्रेक सरकारी भूमि

172

170 कार्ट ट्रेक सरकारी भूमि.

220

जुड

220 2

214 गै. मु. आगौर सरकारी भूमि

219

327

328

0 केलावा कलां

73 59 6182

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRAPADA 22, 1925

तहसील: ओसियाँ

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

जिला : जोधपुर

क्रम

गाँव का नाम खसरा नं.

राज्य : राजस्थान हिस्साक्रमांक

सं.

2 4 बासनी डांवरा 1964

ROU क्षेत्रफल

बीघा

बिस्वा 3

भास्वर सरकारी भूमि

1967

1968

1921

1998 5

डांवरा

1081 6 नांदिया कला

182 7

236 1 नांदियाँ खुर्द

चिन्दडी

247

261 1

ὁ

07 इस अधिसूचना में दर्शाए गए क्षेत्र दिनांक 05 दिसम्बर, 2002 की संख्या एस.ओ.आर 3780 के साथ पठित दिनांक 8 फरवरी , 2003 की संख्या एस.ओ.आर 470 के अंतर्गत अधिसूचित क्षेत्रों में सम्मिलित नहीं है ।

[फा. सं. आर-31015/45/2001- ओ.आर- II ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचि

New Delhi , the 5th September, 2003

S. O. 2592.-Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas , number S.O.470, dated the 3rd February, 2003 , issued under sub section ( 1 ) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act , 1962 (50 of 1962) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act) , published in the Gazette of India dated the 8th February 2003 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transport of crude oil from crude oil terminal at Mundra Port in the State of Gujarat to Bathinda in the State of Punjab through Mundra- Bathinda Crude Oil Pipeline , by Guru Gobind Singh Refineries Limited (a subsidiary of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited);

Andwhereas , copies of the said Gazette Notifications were made available to the public on the 11th March, 2003;

And whereas, the competent authority has not received any objection within the specified period on the draft notification;

And whereas , the competent authority in pursuance of sub- section ( 1 ) of section 6 of the said Act , has submitted his report to the Central Government ;

And whereas , the Central Government , after considering the said report is satisfied that the right of user in the land, specified in the Schedule appended to this potification should be acquired; Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 1 ) of the section 6 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that the right of user in the said land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification, is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;

6183

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13, 2003/ भाद्रपद 22, 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

And further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -section (4) of section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said land , shall instead of vesting in the Central Government , vest on the date of publication of the declaration, in the Guru Gobind Singh Refineries Limited (a subsidiary of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited) free from all encumbrances.

SCHEDULE

State: Rajasthan

District: Jodhpur

Tensil : Osiyan

Khasra No. Sr. Name of Village

по .

365 1

Umednagar

365

173

172

170

220 2

Jud

220

214

219

327

328

73 3

Kelawa Kalan

1964 Basni Danwara

1967

1968

1921

1998

1081 5

Danwra

68 6

Nandiya Kalan

182

236 7

Nandiya Khura

247 Chindri

261

ROU -Area PartifAny

Biswa

Biga

CartTrack G.L.

G.M. AgorG.L.

Bhakar G.L.

Cart Track G.L.

1 Areas shown in this notification are not inclusive of the areas notined in No.SOR 470 dated 8.2.2003 read with No.SOR 3780 dated 5.12.2002 .

[No. R-31015/45/2001-0.R . -II ] HARISH KUMAR , Under Secy.

6184

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22, 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] श्रम मंत्रालय

No. L- 20012/ 197/90 -I.R. (Coal - I) dated the 12th February, 1991.

नई दिल्ली, 14 अगस्त, 2003

SCHEDULE

"Whether the demand of the Union that S /Shri Sunil Kumar Sinha and 20 others engaged ( as shown in the annexure) through a contractor in CMPDI Staff College, Ranchi should be departmentalised and their services should be regularised in the CMPDI management with retrospective effect from the date oftheir initial engagement is justified ? If so , what relief these workmen are entitled ?"

का० ज० 2543. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सी.एम.पा.डी. आई.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के औच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- II , धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 100/1991 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 13-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं ० एल-20012/197/90- आईआर( सी-1 ) ]

2. The case of the concerned workmen according to the W.S. submitted by the sponsoring union on their behalf inbrief is as follows:-

एस. एस. गुप्ता , अवर सचिव

MINISTRY OF LABOUR

New Delhi , the 14th August , 2003

S.O. 2593 : -In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 100/ 1991) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court- II , Dhanbad now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of CMPDIL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 13-8-2003.

[No. L-20012/ 197/90- IR (C -1 ) ] S.S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL ( NO . 2) AT DHANBAD

PRESENT: Shri B. Biswas , Presiding Officer

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d) of 1.D. Act , 1947

REFERENCE NO . 100 OF 1991

PARTIES : Employers in relation to the management of C.M.P.D.I.L and their workman.

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalf of the workman : Shri K.N. Singh,

Autho. representative

Onbehalf of the employers Shri B.M. Prasad, Advocate

State: Jharkhand

Industry: Mine Planning

Dated, Dhanbad the 29th July, 2003 .

AWARD

The sponsoring Union in the W.S. submitted that the Staff Training College is a permanent establishment under the management . They submitted that the concerned workmen were engaged in the Staff Canteen and they discharged their duties continuously while the contractors for up-keeping catering and other allied services in the said Staff Training College had been changed from time to time. In the year 1986 catering , house keeping and allied services were entrusted , to Mr. Guzzini Ficsta and then to M/ s. The Chief and in the year 1988 the same work was entrustedto M/ s . Rally Restaurant and in the year 1990 it was entrusted to M/ s . S.K. Nehru . They submitted that whenthe contractors were time to time changed the workmen of the canteen remained the same since the date of their initial appointment/ engagement . They disclosed that duringpendency of the dispute in conciliation an attempt to dispense with the services was made and on complaint the ALC( C ) advised the C.M.P.D.I.L. management to maintain status quo and not to change the service condition of the workmen involved during the pendency of the conciliation proceeding. Accordingly the management desisted from the gross illegality and the contract of M/s. Rally Restaurant was extended on month to month basis . They disclosed that again in May, 1990 the management made an attempt to dispense with the services ofthe workmen while awarding contract for catering, house keeping and allied services of the said Staff Training College to M/s . S.N. Nehru which led to agitation but the management in addition to deny the services of the workmen employed additional workmen . They alleged that management declared lock out of the canteen with effect from 20-9-91 intentionally with a view to frustrate due legal process and administration and justice by the Hon'ble Tribunal . They submitted that in terms of clause 11.5 to 11.54 of the NCWA - III and Clause 11.5 to 11.54 of NCWA- IV itis agreed that industry shall not employ labour through contractor or engage contractor's labours on jobs of permanent and perennial nature as the same will be done by regular employees of the management as Principal employer shall monitor and supervise the implementation of various provision of labour laws including payment of The Government of India , Ministry of Labour in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1) (d) of the 1.D. Act . , 1947 has referred the following disputeto this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order

contractors workers by contractors at the counter specified 6185

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13, 2003/भाद्र 22, 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

of contractor are appointed and terminated by the contractor during the existence of the contractor for running the Hostel in relation to boarding and lodging of the trainees . They disclosed that the nature of job which is performed by the contractor is not prohibited under the provision of Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition ) Act, 1970. They further disclosed that the Principal employer i.e. the management have fulfilled all the obligations duties responsibilities casted upon it under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition ) Act and as such the concerned workmen had no locus - standi to raise any such dispute and for which they are not entitled to get any relief. Accordingly they have made their prayer to pass Award rejecting the claim of the concerned workmen.

5. Points to be decided in this reference are :-

"Whether the demand of the Union that S/Shri Sunil Kumar Sinha and 20 others engaged (as shown in the annexure) through a contractor in CMPDI Staff College, Ranchi should be departmentalised and their services should be regularised in the CMPDI management with retrospective effect from the date of their initial engagement is justified ? If so , what reliefthese workman are entitled ?"

FINDING WITH REASONS bythe principal employer. These agreements they disclosed are binding throughout coal industries . They disclosed thatas under Section 7 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act every Principal employer of an establishment to which this Act applies shall take a registration as Principal Employer under Section 12 of the saidAct . The contractor has to take licence for undertaking , executing any work through contractor . They submitted that in the instant case neither the C.M.P.D.I.L. got themselves registered as Principal employer nor the contractors obtained licence . They submitted that in gross violation of legal requirement the workmen had been only paid subsisting wages and had been denying even medical treatment. They submitted that the management deliberately with malafide intention violated the statutory provision of Contract Labour Regulation and Abolition Act , 1970 and Rulesthereunder , Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and Rules thereunder including violation of Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and also violation of Articles 21 , 14,16 ofthe Constitution of India . They submitted that in true sense the concerned workmen are the workmen of the management and they are rightly entitled to be regularised on job/post on the basis of actual nature of duties they performed as per NCWA with all attendance benefits. Accordingly they submitted prayer to pass award directing the managment to regularise the services of the concerned workman from the date of their joining alongwith other consequential benefits.

3. The management on the contrary after filing W.S- cum - rejoinder have denied all the claims and allegations which the sponsoring Union asserted in the W.S. submitted onbehalfof the concerned workmen . They submitted that the management is looking after the management ofCoal India Staff Training College situated in the C.M.P.D.I.L.. headquarters Campass . The object of this college is to impart training to the executive recruited as Junior Executive Trainee in CIL . The staff training college is mainly organising three courses for the Junior Executive Trainees recruited by CIL viz . Techno Appreciation Course , Supervision Management Course and Induction Training Course. Since these courses are organised at time intervals as the management do not require services for maintenance etc. and for which there was no need to recruit regular employees for jobs of 100/200 days in a year .

6.Management in order to substantiate their claim have examined two witnesses while the sponsoring union examined three workmen also to establish their claim . Considering the facts disclosed in the pleadings and also considering materials on record as well as of the facts disclosed by witnesses 1 find no dispute to hold that a Training College is situated at C.M.P.D.I.L. headquarters Campass for imparting training to the executives recruited as Junior executive trainees in CIL. The said staff training college organises three courses for the trainees recruited by CIL viz. Techno Appreciation Course , Supervision Management Course and Induction Training Course . The management submitted that since these three courses are organised at time intervals they do not require services for maintenance etc. and for which they do not require to recruit regular employees for work not more than 100/200 days in ayear. They disclosed that keeping in view the intermittent requirement of catering in the Staff Training College the licenced contractors are engaged for catering and allied services who in turn used to recruit altogether maximum 19 labourers during a year. As the catering service in the said Staff Training College was entrusted to the contractors after maintaining all usual norms , they had no liability to look into the affairs of the contractor and their employees in the matter of their services to the trainee executives in the canteen. They further submitted that as the job in question was absoluterly intermittent in nature there is no scope to say that it was prohibited under the provision of theContract Labour (Regulation and Abolition ) Act, 1970. Accordingly the management cannot be debarred from 4. Keeping in view the intermittent requirement of catering in the Staff Training College the management engage licenced contractors for catering and allied services who in turn engage altogether maximum 19 workers during a year. The job was absolutely for catering purpose and not otherwise . They further submitted that the workers employed by the contractors can by no stretch of imagination be said to be the workers of the management and therefore question of employer and employee relationship between the management and the concerned workmen never existed . They submitted that the employees 6186

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13, 2003/BHADRA 22, 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( її) ] engaging any contractor to run catering services to the Executive Trainee of the CIL . On the contrary the sponsoring union submitted that the concerned workmen were employed in the Staff Training College which is a permanent establishment under the management to run their services in the catering wing . They submitted that though time to time contractors were changed to run the catering services of the trainee executive the workmen remained the same . They disclosed that since 1986 till May, 1991 the concerned workmen were engaged continuously in the catering services of the management and inspite ofknowing this fact fully the management illegally and arbitrarily stopped them from work. MW- 1 in course of hus evidence disclosed that for running catering services in the canteen established for the benefit of the executive trainees management used to engage contractor maintaining all norms and formalities . The concerned workmen he submitted were engaged by the contractor for the interest of that catering services and the contractor was responsible to paywages to his employees . He disclosed that as training courses were intermittent in nature question of running the canteen all throughout the year would not arise . The nature ofjob as per contract which had to be performed by the contractor was to serve food, house keeping work . MW- 2 during has evidence corroborated the facts disclosedby MW- i in relation to the facts how the canteen had to be operated by the management with the assistance of the contractor it transpires clearly that the said canteen was in operation to serve food and house keeping work of the executive trainees who used to remain in the hostel while the traing course remains opened. Management during hearing submitted details ofthe training programme of the junior executive in three courses and it is seen clearly that in course of that training programme the trainees used to remain in the hostel and they were served food in the canteen during the period of training course . It is seen further that the said training courses were intermittent in nature and it would not remain open all throughout the year. It further transpires that during the period of 1986 till 1995 the management engaged several contractors to run the catering service through the canteen established for the Junior Executive Trainees namely Guzzini Fiesta , M/s. The Chief , M/ s . Rally Restaurant , M/ s . S.K. Nehru , Fresh and Garden I have carefully considered the submission of the sponsoring union and I find no dispute to hold that these contractors remained incharge of the canteen for catering purpose to serve food to the executive trainees . WW- 1 during his cross - examination categorically admitted that they were employed by the contractor and they were working in the establishment of C.M.P.D.I.L. Staff Training College .He admitted categorically that he worked there as a man of the contractor while from the evidence of WW- 2 and WW- 3 I find quite a different picture. It is exposed from their evidence that they were employed by the Principal ofthe Staff Training College . They disclosed that after getting knowledge of the vacancy they sumbitted application to the Principal and the Principal after holding test

engaged them inthe said Institution. WW- 3 admitted that asC.M.P.D.I.L is a Government Organisation they have to maintain some norms in the matter of employment of any worker. Considering evidence ofboth sides I find no dispute tohold that the concerned workmen were engaged in the canteen established by the management and according to the management those workmen were the workmen ofthe contractors and for which no relationship of employer and employee ever grew up in between them and for which the claim of the concerned workmen finds no basis at all . WW- 1 duringhis cross -examination categorically admitted the fact oftheir engagement by the contractors for operation ofthe canteen. However I find a different picture from WW- 2 and WW-3 . Naturaly onus on them to establish that theywere engaged by the Principal, Staff Training College. The sponsoring union have got ample opportunities to produce relevant papers with a view to establish that they are not the men of the contractor but were cmployed by the management . I find no hesitation to say that in support of the claim of WW -2 and WW - 3 the sponsoring union have failed to submit a single scrap of paper. Even the sponsoring union have failed to produce the employment card in Form No. XIV and Service certificate in Form No. XV in respect ofthe workmen in question in view of the direction given by the Hon'ble High Court, Ranchi in disposing of I.P.A. No. 493/1997 (R). The sponsoring union had taken another plea in support of the claim of the concerned workmen. They disclosed that as the job performed by the concerned workmenwas permanent in nature it comes within prohibited degree as per Contract Labour ( Regulation and Abolition ) Act , 1970. It is seen that during the period from 1986 to 1995 as many as 8 contractors were engaged by the management to render catering service to the executive trainees who used to remain in the hostel to attend their training courses . The management categorically submitted that as the training course was intermittent in nature there was no reason to keep the staff Training College open all throughout the year and in support of their claim they have submitted bunch of training programmes to the executive trainces . Catering services had relation with the opening of the Staff Training College . When there was no training programme question of attending trainees and their stay in the hostel would not arise . In natural course there was no question of rendering catering services to those trainees through canteen. Staff Training College according to the submission of the management was established mainly for imparting training to the Junior Executive Trainces ofthe CIL. They attend the said Staff Training College as per the programme fixed. Therefore services of the contractor was not required all throughout the year to render catering services and house keeping services to the Traince Executives . The sponsoring union in course of hearing has failedto produce a single scrap of paper to show that all throughout the year the contractors had to remain in work to render catering services to the trainces in question. They also have failed to produce single scrap of paper to show that the concerned workmen also rendered their 6187 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13 , 2003/भाद्र 22, 1925

[भाग - खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

continuously for more than 240 days in each calendar year . As such after careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances I find that the sponsoring union have failed to substantiate their claim and for which the concerned workmen are not entitled to get any relief. In the result, the following Award is rendered:-

services in the canteen all throughout the year. They have also failed to produce any document to show that the services rendered by the concerned workmen were absolutely permanent in nature . They have referred to Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act , 1970 in order to establish the claim that the concerned workmen rendered prohibited degree of job . I have carefully considered the specific provision of law and I have failed to find out any such material relying on which it can be said that engagement of the concerned workmen by the contractor to render catering services and house keeping services comes within the prohibited degree ofjob. Accordingly there is no scope at all to support the claim of the sponsoring union .

"The demand of the Union that S/Shri Sunil Kumar Sinha and 20 others engaged (as shown in the Annexure ) through a contractor in C.M.P.D.I. Staff College Ranchi should be departmentalised and their services should be regularised in the C.M.P.D.I. management with retrospective effect from the date of their initial engagement is not justified. Consequently the concerned workmen are not entitled to get any relief. "

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer ANNEXURE

1. Shri Abdul Hamid.

2. Shri Bhim Kumar.

3. Shri Bhutnath Kumar.

4. Shri Jagru Bage.

5. Shri Ganesh Singh .

6. Shri Jagdish Yadav.

7. Shri Parven Kumar.

8. Shri Biraj Minz .

9. Shri P. Chander Das .

10. Shri Sunil Singh .

11. Shri Sita Ram.

12. Shri Sanjay Minz .

13. Shri Ajay Mallick .

14. Shri Mangul Minz .

15. Shri Sanju Minz .

16. Shri Umesh Mallick.

17. Shri Ramesh Nayak.

18. Shri Jagdish Kachhap.

19. Shri Raju Mayali .

20. Shri Suresh Lakera.

नई दिल्ली, 14 अगस्त, 2003 7. It is seen that the management engaged the contractors for rendering catering services and house keeping service as per tender issued by them. They submitted that the lowest bidder was provided with the work order. I have carefully considered all papers and it transpires clearly that the management issued work order to the contractors on acceptance of the tender and specifically pointed out in the work order. which job they will have to be performed in terms of the contract . It is further seen that both the engaged contractor and the management first would enter into agreement and there- after his contractor was allowed to render catering services.. Management specifically submitted that as per work order it was the responsibility of the contractor how to operate the catering services and house keeping services for the interest of the trainees. They disclosed that the contractor used to engage their men to keep in operation of the services in question and for which they had no manner of involvement to poke their nose in the administration of the contractor for the said purpose. Considering the submission of the management it transpires such arrangement of catering services was made for the benefit of the trainees and not for the benefit of the management . In support of their claim management also submitted their Memorandum relating to catering and house keeping contract for Staff Training College building at C.M.P.D.I.L. Ranchi and also Memorandum of Association and Articles ofAssociation incorporated under the Company's Act , 1955. I have carefully considered both the documents carefully and I find no hesitation to say that the catering and house keeping services for Staff Training College was initiated by the management for the benefit of the trainees and in no way it can be tagged with the organisation for which it was established.

का० आ० 2594.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा.को.को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों केबीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- II , धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 101/93 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 13-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल-20012/217/92- आईआर ( सी-1 ) ] एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव 8. After careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances I hold that the concerned workmen did not perform any prohibited job as per Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 whichdeserve regularisation of their services. I have also failed to find out any such material based on which it can be said that they were engaged by the management to perform their job

2491 G1 /2003-5 6188

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22, 1925

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] New Delhi , the 14th August, 2003

S.O. 2594. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes , Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 101/93 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court - II , Dhanbad now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 13-8-2003 .

[No. L-20012/217/92-IR (C-I ) ]

S.S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2 AT DHANBAD

PRESENT:

ShriB. BISWAS , PresidingOfficer.

record also his date of birth was recorded as 11-10-47 . He submitted that after getting his appointment management issued Identity Card to him bearing No. 52255 wherein also his date ofbirth was recorded as 11-10-47 . As such there was no question of raising any doubt or dispute as regards to his date ofbirth recorded in the different registers by the management . He submitted that thereafter management transferred him to Dhansar Colliery from Khas Kusunda Colliery. He submitted that in the year 1987 while he was posted at Dhansar Colliery management issued service excerpt to him wherein he found that his date of birth was recorded as 11-10-42 instead of 11-10-47 arbitrarily and illegally with a view to superannuate him prematurely. Accordingly he raised an industrial dispute for conciliation which ultimately resulted reference to this Tribunal for adjudication . The concerned workman accordingly submitted his prayer to pass award directing the management to treat his date ofbirth as 11-10-47 instead of 11-10-42 and allow him to continue in service till the actual age ofhis superannuationi.e. 10-10-2007 on attaining his age of60 years .

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act , 1947

REFERENCE NO. 101 OF 1993

PARTIES : Employers in relation to the management of Dhansar Colliery of M/ s . B.C.C.L. and their workman.

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalf of the workman : Shri S. N. Goswami , Advocate.

Onbehalf of the employers : Shri D. K. Verma, Advocate

State: Jharkhand

Industry: Coal

Dated, Dhanbad the 30th July, 2003.

AWARD

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10(1)( d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-20012/ (217) /92-I.R. ( Coal -I ) dated the 21 /26-7-93 .

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Dhansar Colliery ofM/s . BCCL in treating the date ofbirth of Shri Shyamlal Nonia as 11-10-42 instead of 11-10-47 isjustified ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled for? "

2. The case of the concerned workman according to the written statement submitted by him in brief is as follows:-

He subinitted that originally he got his appointment on 11-10-71 at West Godhur Colliery/Khas Kusunda Colliery and at that time of his appointment his date of birth in the Form B Register was recorded as 11-10-47. In the CMPF

3.Management on the contrary after filing W.S. -cum- rejoinder have denied all claims and allegations which the concerned workman asserted in his written statement. They submitted that at the time of his appointment on 11-10-71 the concerned workman declared his age as 29 years . Accordingly in the Form B Register his age was recorded as 29 years as on 11-10-71 and as per his own declaration his date of birth was assessed as 11-10-42 and not 11-10-47. They submitted that in the Identity Card Register his date of birth was also recorded as 11-10-42 on the basis ofhis date of appointment as 11-10-71 . Accordingly there was no discrepancy in recording date of birth of the concerned workman either in the Form B register on in other registers maintained by them. They submitted that in the year 1987 service excerpt was issued to the concerned workman wherein also his date of birth was recorded as 11-10-42 and date of appointment as I 1-10-71 but at that timealso the concerned workman did not raise any objection about wrong recording of the date of birth therein. They alleged that the concerned workman by manipulating his Identity Card has changed his date of birth as 11-10-42 to 11-10-47 in order to enjoy service of extra five years. It has beensubmitted by them that Form B register is considered as statutory register under the Mines Act wherein his date ofbirth was duly recorded and on the basis of that record the Identity Card Register was prepared and same date of birth was also recorded there . The service excerpt was also prepared as per Form B register and in the Identity Card Register and service excerpt same date ofbirth i.e. 11-10-42 were recorded . Therefore question of recording date of birth ofthe concerned workman as 11-10-47 in the Identity Card did not and cannot arise . Accordingly management submitted that as the claim of the concerned workman is absolutely unjustified and baseless his prayer is liable to be rejected.

6189

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

4. Points tobe decided in this reference are:-

"Whether the action of the management ofDhansar Colliery ofM/s . BCCL in treating the date ofbirth of Shri Shyamlal Nonia as 11-10-42 instead of 11-10-47 isjustified ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled for ?"

FINDING WITH REASONS

further disclosed that in the year 1987 service excerpt in duplicate was issued to the concerned workman wherein along with other particulars date ofbirth of the concerned workmanwas recorded as 11-10-42 and he without raising any dispute returned back the original service excerpt to the management. They submitted that in the duplicate service excerpt the concerned workman again manipulated his date of birth only with the intention to enjoy more years of service.

5. It appears from the record that the concerned workman in order to substantiate his claim examined himself as WW- 1 . Management also in suport of their claim have examined two witnesses as MW- 1 and MW -2 .

Considering the evidence of both sides I find no dispute to hold that the concerned workman got his appointment as mason as 11-10-71 at West Godhur Colliery. which subsequently was merged with Khas Kusunda Colliery. It is also admitted fact that in the year 1976 he was transferredto Dhansar Colliery. Specific allegation of the concerned workman is that the management without his knowledge illegally and arbitrarily changing his date of birthas 11-10-42 in place of 11-10-1947 in the Form B register and issued notice of his superannuation from service with effect from 11-10-92. He submitted that inspite ofhis giving representation this regard management did not do anything for rectification of his date ofbirth as 11-10-47 which was recorded in the Form B register by the management at the time of his entry in the service. During his evidence he disclosed categorically that at the time of his employment he submitted all particulars relating to his date of birth as 11-10-47 and at that time management assured him that his exact date of birth as 11-10-47 was duly recorded in the Form B register. He further disclosed that in course of his employment management issued Identity Card to him wherein also his date of birth was recorded as 11-10-47 . The Identity Card issued by the management during his evidence was marked as Ext. W- 1 . He further disclosed that in the year 1987 management issued service excerpt to him induplicate for the comments if any in respect of the entries made therein . Relying on the copy of the service excerpt Ext . W- 2 which was retained by him he disclosed that his date of birth in the same also was recorded as 11-10-47 and not 11-10-42 .

7. During evidence of MW - 1 and MW -2 Form B register and the original service excerpt were marked as Ext. M - 1 and M-2 . From the Form B register it transpires clearly that year of birth of the concerned workman at the time ofhis entry in the service was recorded as 29 years . It is the specific claim of the management that as per declaration given by the concerned workman the said age was recorded therein. They further disclosed that on the basis of declaration of age made by him his date of birth was computed as 11-10-1942 which the concerned workman opposed vehemently. He submitted that at the time of his entry in the service he submitted all particulars showing his date ofbirth as 11-10-47 and the said date of birth was recorded in the Form B register. It is astonishing to note thatin course of his evidence the concerned workman did not consider necessary to submit those particulars before this Tribunal in support of his date of birth which he furnished to the management at the time of his entry in the service . Accordingly, claim of the concerned workman in this regard finds no basis at all . Management in course of hearing submitted the identity card register shows clearly thatdate ofbirth of the concerned workman was recorded as11-10-42 after computation of his age . From the Identity Cardofthe conce med workman on the contrary it transpires thathis date of birth was recorded as 11-10-49 . It is the specific allegation of the management that the concerned workman for the interest of his case manipulated his date of birth in his Identity Card Ext . W- 1 . I have carefully considered the Identity Card and it transpires clearly that two different inks were used in writing the same. It further transpires that the said entries were not entered into by a single person . Management submitted that particulars recorded in the Identity Card are taken from the particulars recorded in the Identity Card Register . Accordingly, all the particulars should tally each other. The Identity Card Register speak clearly that date of birth of the concerned workman was recorded on 11-10-42 and not 11-10-47. I have failed to find out any sign of manipulation in the date of birth recorded in the Identity Card Register . This register contained not only the particulars of this workman but also contained particulars of all other workmen of the management. Moreover it is maintained and preserved officially. After careful consideration of this registers I have failed to find out any such sign of manipulation which could lead to this inference that due to fault of the management date of birth was recorded therein .

6. On the contrary from the submission of the management a different picture has come to light in respect of the age of the concerned workman . It has been specifically mentioned by the management that the concernedwork man at the time of his getting entry in the service declared his age as 29 years . Accordingly in the Form B register his age was recorded as 29 years and his date ofbirth was assessed as 11-10-1942 as per declaration ofhis age made by him . They submitted that in the identity card register date ofbirth was recorded as 11-10-42 relying onthe age recorded in the Form B register. It is the specific allegation of the management that the concerned workman manipulated his age in the Identity Card as 11-10-71 . They 6190

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22, 1925

8. Copy of the service excerpt which the concerned workman submitted in course of hearing was marked as Ext. W- 1 while the original service excerpt which the concerned workman handed over to the management duly signed by him was marked as Ext.M - 2 , W/ 1 is the carbon copy ofM/2 . It is really curious to note that while date of birth ofthe concerned workman in the carbon copy of the service excerpt is shown as 11-10-47 in the original it is shown as 11-10-42 . Management specifically alleged that the digit ' 7 ' appearing before the digit ' 4 ' of 11-10-47 was manipulated by the concerned workman in the carbon copy which was retained by him . On careful consideration 1 did not find any scope to deny the allegation made by the management . The manipulation is so distinct in the open eye that for its detection there is no need to take the help of any lens. I am confident that the digit ' 2' before the digit ' 4 ' of 11-10-47 in the carbon copy of the service excerpt (Ext.W.2) was manipulated and figured as digit ' 7 ' in place of digit ' 2 ' . As the carbon copy was retained by the concerned workman there is sufficient reason to believe that such manipulation was done by him . Similarly there is sufficient reason to believe that the identity card was also manipulated by him in respect of his date of birth as it was also in the possession .

9. Form B Register is considered as a statutory register and for which all the entries therein bears legal value which is bindig upon both sides until and unless any contrary is established specifically in respect of any particular entry. It is the specific claim of the management that age of the concerned workman was recorded as 29 years in the Form B Register as per declaration made by him. They further submitted that the concerned workman made his endorsement in the respective column of the Form B Register accepting the entries recorded therein, as correct . Theconcerned workman did not challenge his age recorded inthe Form B Register till the date of issuance of service excerpt. Even after receiving the service excerpt in the year 1987 the concerned work man did not raise any dispute in respect of his date ofbirth recorded therein. On the contrary he returned back the same by putting his endorsement acknowledging acceptance of the correctness of the entries made therein. It has been exposed clearly that the concerned workman for his personal gain manipulated his date of birth in the carbon copy ofthe service excerpt which was retained by him. As such it is clear that the concerned workman did not raise the industrial dispute with clean hand and mind .

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] concerned workman is not entitled to get any relief. In the result , the following award is rendered :-

"The action of the management of Dhansar Colliery ofBCCL in treating the date ofbirth of Shri Shyamlal Nonia as 11-10-42 instead of 11-10-47 is justified . Consequently, the concerned workman is not entitled to get any relief."

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 14 अगस्त, 2003

का० आ० 2595.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा.को.को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों केबीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- II , धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 233/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 13-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं० एल-20012 /525/98- आईआर (सी-1) ] एस० एस ० गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 14th August, 2003

S.O. 2595.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 233/99 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court - II , Dhanbad now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman , which was reccived by the Central Government on 13-8-200003 .

[No. L-20012/525/ 98 - IR ( C - I )] S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 2 AT DHANBAD PRESENT:

SHRI B. BISWAS. Presiding Officer .

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10( 1) (d) of 1.D.Act , 1947 .

REFERENCE NO . 233 OF 1999

PARTIES: Employers in relation to the management of Sijua Area of M/s . B.C.C.L and their workman.

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalf of the workman

: Shri S. C. Gaur, Advocate .

Onbehalf of the employers Shri D. K. Verma , Advocate.

State: Jharkhand

After careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances I have failed to find out an iota of evidence relying on which the claim of the concerned workman could be believed. I do not find any reason to disbelieve the age ofthe concerned workman recorded in the Form B Register. As such there is no scope to say that management illegally, arbitrarily and violating the principle of natural justice issued notice of superannuation to the concerned workman considering his date of birth as 11-10-42 . Accordingly the

Industry: Coal Dated, the 23rd July, 2003.

6191

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II - खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

ANNEXURE

AWARD

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

PRESENT :

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 19(1 )(d) of the I.D. Act , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-20012/525/98 -C- I, dated the 17th May, 1999.

Shri E. ISMAIL, B.Sc. , LL.B. , Presiding Officer.

SCHEDULE

Dated the 14th day of July, 2003

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO . L.C.L.D. 141/2002

(Old I.D. No. 58/1998 transferred from Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court , Guntur )

Between:

" Kya B.C.C.L Ke Prabandhan dwara Dinank 21-12-96 se Sri Karmoo Manjhi M/Loader Ke Sewain 22-8-95 Se 7-2-96 anupasthiti Ke Karan Barkhast Kiya Jana Vidhivat V Nyayochit Hai ? Yadi nahin to KaramkarKis raahat Ke Patra Hain ?"

Petitioner

Smt. Adapa Ramanamma, Ex. Sweeper in F.C.I. Godowns , W/ o Umamaheswara Rao , Epuru (Post), Pedapadu Mandal , West Godavari District .

AND

The President,

The food Corporation of India Godown Mutta Workers Labour Contract Co-operative Society Ltd. Regd. No. E- 1393 , Near Nuzveed, Railway Station , Epuru (Post), Pedapadu Mandal , W.G. District

The District Manager ,

Food Corporation of India, Near Old Bus Stand ,

2. In course of hearing learned Advocate for the concerned workman submitted that the concerned workman is dead and he has not received any instruction either from the family of the concerned workman or from the Union about filing petition for substitution. Accordingly learned Advocate for the workman under the circumstances submitted to pass a ' No dispute ' Award. Learned Advocate for the management under the circumstances does not raise any objection . As no substitution petition has been filed on behalf of the family of the deceased workman it is needless to proceed with the hearing of this case , particularly when Mr. Gaur under the circumstances submitted to pass a ' No dispute ' Award. In view of the facts and circumstances there is no scope to proceed with the case. Accordingly a ' No dispute ' Award is rendered and the reference is disposed of on the basis of ' No dispute' Award presuming non -existence of any industrial dispute between the parties presently.

Respondents B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer

APPEARANCES :

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2003

Forthe Petitioner

For the Respondent

का० आ० 2596.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एफ.सी.

1. 2. Vijayawada, Krishna District. : Shri Ch. Sudhakar Babu , Advocate . : M/s. B.G. Ravindra Reddy & B.V. Chandra Sekhar , Advocates .

AWARD

आई. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , हैदराबाद ( संदर्भ संख्या 141/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 14-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल-22013/ 1/2003- आईआर ( सी- II ) ]

एस ० एस० गुप्ता, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 18th August, 2003

This case I.D. No. 58/1998 is transferred from Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Guntur in view of the Government of India, Ministry ofLabour's order No.H - 11026/ 1/2001-IR(C-II) dated 18-10-2001 and renumbered in this Court as L. C.I.D. No. 141/2002 . This is a case taken under Sec.2 A (2) ofthe I.D. Act, 1947 in view of the judgment ofthe Hon'ble High Court ofAndhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/s . CottonCorporation of India and two others .

S.O. 2596. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 141 / 2002) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour CourtHyderabad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of FCI and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 14-8-2003 .

[No. L-22013 / 1/2003 - IR (C- II) ]

2. Inspite of several adjournments given from 24-12-2002 for enquiry of the Petitioner for nine adjournments including 14-7-2003 the petitioner has not turned - out . The petitioner's Counsel reports no instructions . Petitioner is not evincing any interest since September, 2002. There is nothing on record to support the case of the Petitioner. Hence , a ' Nil ' Award is passed , Transmit.

S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy .

6192

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22, 1925

Dictated to Kum . K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 14th day of July, 2003 .

E. ISMAIL , Presiding Officer Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for the Witnesses examined for the Petitioner

Respondent

NIL

Documents marked for the Petitioner

NIL

Documents marked for the Respondent

NIL

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2003

का ० आ ०2597 . औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एफ. सी. आई. प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , हैदराबाद ( संदर्भ संख्या 142/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 14-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं ० एल-22013/ 1/2003- आईआर ( सी- II ) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 18th August, 2003

S.O. 2597. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 142/ 2002) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of FC1 and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 14-8-2003 .

[No. L -22013/ 1/2003 - IR(C -II ) ] S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM- LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD PRESENT:

Shri E. ISMAIL, B.Sc. , LL.B. , Presiding Officer .

Dated the 14th day of July, 2003

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO. L. C.LD. 142/2002 (Old I.D. No. 59/1998 transferred from Industrial Tribunal cum-Labour Court, Guntur)

BETWEEN:

Sri P. Srinivasa Rao ,

Ex. Electrician in F.C.I. Godowns ,

S/ o Nageswara Rao ,

Epuru (Post) ,

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii ) ] Pedapadu Mandal ,

West Godavari District. AND Petitioner 1. The President, TheFood Corporation of India GodownMutta Workers Labour Contract Co-operative Society Ltd. , Regd. No.E- 1393 , Near Nuzveed Railway Station, Epuru (Post) , Pedapadu Mandal , W.G. District .

2. The District Manager,

Food Corporation of India, Near Old Bus Stand , Vijayawada. Krishna District . Respondents APPEARANCES :

For the Petitioner : Shri Ch . Sudhakar Babu , Advocate.

For the Respondent : M/ sB.G. Ravindra Reddy & B.V. Chandra Sekhar, Advocate .

AWARD

This case I.D. No. 59/1998 is transferred from Industrial Tribunal -cum - Labour Court , Guntur in view of theGovernment of India, Ministry of Labour's order No.H- 11026/ 1 / 2001 - IR(C - II) dated 18-10-2001 and renumbered in this Court as L.C.I.D. No. 142/2002 . This is a case taken under Sec.2 A (2 ) of the I.D. Act, 1947 in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/ s . Cotton Corporation of India and two others .

2. Inspite of several adjournments given from 24-12-2002 for enquiry of the Petitioner for nine adjournments including 14-7-2003 the petitioner has not turned - out . The petitioner's Counsel reports no instructions . Petitioner is not evincing any interest since September , 2002. There is nothing on record to support the case of the Petitioner . Hence , a ' Nil ' Award is passed, Transmit.

Dictatedto Kum . K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 14th day of July, 2003.

E. ISMAIL , Presiding Officer Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for the Witnesses examined for the Petitioner Respondent

NIL

Documents marked for the Petitioner NIL

Documents marked for the Respondent NIL 6193

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II -खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2003

का० आ०2598 . औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एफ. सी.आई. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , हैदराबाद ( संदर्भ संख्या 140/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 14-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं० एल-22013/1/2003- आईआर( सी- II ) ] एस० एस ० गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 18th August , 2003

S. O. 2598.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 140/ 2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of FCI and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 14-8-2003 .

[No. L - 22013 / 1 /2003 - IR( C - 11 ) ] S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

Present : Shri E. ISMAIL , B.Sc. , LL.B. , PresidingOfficer

Dated the 14th day of July, 2003

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO.L.C.LD. 140/2002 (Old I.D. No. 61/98 Transferred from Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Guntur)

Between :

Petitioner Smt . K. Bapanamma, Ex. Sweeper in F.C.I. Godowns, W/o Pakir, Epuru (Post), Pedapadu Mandal , WestGodavari District .

AND

1. The President .

The Food Corporation of India Godown Mutta Workers Labour Contract Co-operative Society Ltd. , Regd. No.E - 1393 , Near Nuzveed

Railway Station , Epuru ( Post) , Pcdapadu Mandal , W.G. District .

2. The District Manager ,

Food Corporation of India , Near Old Bus Stand ,

APPEARANCES :

Forthe Petitioner : Sri Ch . Sudhakar Babu , Advocate For the Respondent : M/ s . B.G. Ravindra Reddy & B.V. Chandra Sekhar, Advocates AWARD

This case I. D. No. 61/98 is transferred from Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court , Guntur in view of the Government of India, Ministry of Labour's order No.H - 11026 /1 / 2001-1R( C - II ) dated 18-10-2001 and renumbered in this Court as L. C.I.D.No. 140/2002 . Thisisa case taken under Sec . 2 A (2) of the I.D. Act , 1947 in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court ofAndhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No.8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/ s . Cotton Corporation of India and two others .

Dictated to Kum . K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant Transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 14th day ofJuly, 2003.

E. ISMAIL , Presiding Officer Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for the Witnesses examined for the Petitioner Respondent

NIL

Documents marked for the Petitioner NIL Documents marked for the Respondent NIL

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2003

का० आ०2599.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एफ. सी. आई. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों केबीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , हैदराबाद ( संदर्भ संख्या 138/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 14-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं ० एल-22013/1/2003- आईआर ( सी- II ) ] एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 18th August , 2003

S. O. 2599. -In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award

Respondents

Vijayawada , Krishna District .

6194

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22 , 1925

(Ref. No. 138/2002 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court , Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of FCI and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 14-8-2003,

[No. L -22013/ 1/2003 - IR(C -II) ] S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy .

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM - LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

PRESENT:

Shri E. ISMAIL , B.Sc. , LL.B. , Presiding Officer Dated the 14th day of July. 2003

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO . L.C.L.D. 138/2002 (Old I D. No. 56/98 Transferred from Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court, Guntur)

Between:

Sri . M. Rambabu ,

Ex.Technical Casual Labour in F.C.I. Godowns .

S/ oPullamraju .

Epuru (Post) . Pedapadu Mandal .

West Godavari District.

Petitioner AND

1 The President.

The Food Corporation of India Godown Mutta Workers Labour Contract Co - operative Society Ltd. , Regd.No. E - 1393 . Near Nuzveed Railway Station . Epuru ( Post) , Pedapadu Mandal . W.G. District .

2.The District Manager.

Food Corporation of India , Near Old Bus Stand, Vijayawada. Krishna District .

....Respondents APPEARANCES :

For the Petitioner Sri Ch. Sudhakar Babu , Advocate For the Respondent : M/ s. B.G. Ravindra Reddy & B.V. Chandra Sekhar , Advocates

AWARD

Tlus case LD No. 56/98 is transferred from Industrial Tribunal - cum-Labour Court , Guntur in view of the Government of India , Ministry of Labour's order No. H - 11026 /1 / 2001 - IR ( C - 11 ) dated 18-10-2001 and renumbered in this Court as L. C.I.D. No. 138/2002 . This is a case taken under Sec.2 A ( 2) of the I.D. Act , 1947 in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No.8.395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )] Sri U. Chinnappa and M/s . Cotton Corporation of India and two others.

2. In spite of several adjournments given from 24-12-2002 for enquiry of the Petitioner for nine adjournments including . 14-7-2003 the petitioner has not turned- out. The petitioner's Counsel reports no instructions . Petitioner is not evincing any interest since September, 2002. There is nothing on record to support the case of the Petitioner. Hence , a ' Nil' Award is passed, Transmit.

Dictated to Kum. K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant Transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 14th day of July, 2003 .

E. ISMAIL . Presiding Officer Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for the Witnesses examined for the Petitioner Respondent

NIL

Documents marked for the Petitioner NIL

Documents marked for the Respondent NIL

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2003

का० आ० 2600.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एफ. सी. आई. प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , हैदराबाद ( संदर्भ संख्या 137/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 14-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं ० एल-22013/ 1 /2003- आईआर ( सी- II ) ] एस० एस० गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 18th August , 2003

S. O. 2600.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref . No. 137/2002 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court , Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers inrelation to the management of FCI and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 14-8-2003 .

[No. L - 22013 / 1 / 2003 - IR(C- II ) ] S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

Present:

Shri E. ISMAIL , B.Sc. , LL.B. , Presiding Officer 6195 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

Appendix of evidence

Dated the 14th day of July, 2003

Witnesses examined for the

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO . L.C.L.D. 137/2002

Petitioner:

Respondent:

NIL

(Old I.D. No. 55/98 Transferred from Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court, Guntur)

Documents marked for the Petitioner Between:

Smt.Nandika Mariyamma

NIL Documents marked for the Respondent NIL

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2003

Petitioner

Ex. Sweeper in F.C.I. Godown, W/oPothuraju, Epuru (Post), Pedapadu Mandal , West Godavari District.

AND

1. The . President

का०आ ० 2601.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एफ० सी० आई० प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, हैदराबाद ( संदर्भ संख्या 136/2002) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 14-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं ० एल -22013 / 1 /2003- आईआर ( सी- II ) ] एस ० एस ० गुप्ता, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 18th August , 2003 The Food Corporation of India Godown Mutta Workers Labour Contract Co -operative Society Ltd. , Regd. No.E - 1393 . Near Nuzvecd Railway Station , Epuru (Post) . Pedapadu Mandal , W.G. District.

2. The District Manager.

Respondents

FoodCorporation of India . Near Old Bus Stand , Vijayawada. Krishna District .

APPEARANCES :

Sri Ch . Sudhakar Babu , Advocate

For the Petitioner

S. O. 2601.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act . 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 136/2002 ) of the Central Governinent Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court , Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the maitagement of FCI and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 14-8-2003.

For the Respondent M/ s . B.G. Ravindra Reddy & B.V. Chandra Sekhar, Advocates

[No. L- 22013 / 1 /2003 - IR(C - 11 ) ] S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

AWARD

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

Present :

Shri E. ISMAIL, B.Sc. , LL.B. , Presiding Officer Dated the 14th day of July, 2003

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO. L.C.I.D. 136/2002 This case I.D. No. 55/98 is transferred from Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , Guntur in view of the Government of India. Ministry of Labour's order No. H-11026/ 1 /2001 - IR( C - II ) dated 18-10-2001 and renumbered in this Court as L. C.1.D.No. 137/2002 . This is a case taken under Sec.2 A ( 2 ) of the 1.D. Act , 1947 in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/ s . Cotton Corporation of India and two others .

(Old 1.D. No. 57/98 Transferred from Industrial Tribunal- cum - Labour Court , Guntur)

Between:

Petitioner 2. In spite of several adjournments given front 24-12-2002 for enquiry of the Petitioner for nine adjournments including , 14-7-2003 the petitioner has not turned - out . The petitioner's Counsel reports no instructions . Petitioner is not evincing any interest since September, 2002. There is nothing on record to support the case of the Petitioner . Hence , a ' Nil Award is passed, Transmit.

Smt . Ch . Rangamma Ex. Sweeper in F.C.1 . Godowns , W/o Jojappa, Epuru (Post). Pedapadu Mandal , West Godavari District.

AND

Dictated to Kum . K. Phani Gowrı , Personal Assistant Transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 14th day of July, 2003 .

1. The . President , The Food Corporation of India Godown Mutta Workers Labour

E. ISMAIL , Presiding Officer

2491 GI/2003-6 6196

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22 , 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] Contract Co - operative Society Ltd. ,

New Delhi , the 18th August, 2003 Regd.No.E - 1393 , Near Nuzveed Railway Station , Epuru (Post) , Pedapadu Mandal , W. G. District .

2. The District Manager,

Food Corporation of India, Near Old Bus Stand,

Vijayawada, Krishna district .

....Respondents

APPEARANCES:

S. O. 2602. - In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby " publishes the award (Ref. No. 135/2002 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court , Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers inrelation to the management of FCI and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 14-8-2003 .

For the Petitioner : Sri Ch . Sudhakar Babu , Advocate

For the Respondent : M/ s . B.G. Ravindra Reddy & B.V. Chandra Sekhar, Advocates

[No. L- 22013 /1/2003 - IR (C- II ) ] S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

AWARD

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

Present : Shri E. ISMAIL , B.Sc. , LL.B. ,

PresidingOfficer

Dated the 14th day of July, 2003 This case I.D. No. 57/98 is transferred from Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Guntur in view of the Government of India , Ministry of Labour's order No.H- 11026 / 1 / 2001 - IR( C - II) dated 18-10-2001 and renumbered in this Court as L.C.I.D.No. 136/2002 . This is a case taken under Sec.2 A ( 2 ) of the I.D. Act, 1947 in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No.8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/s . Cotton Corporation of India and two others .

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No.L.C.L.D. 135/2002

(Old I.D. No. 62/98 Transferred from Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Guntur)

Between:

Smt . T. Paramjyothi ,

2. Inspite of several adjournments given from 24-12-2002 for enquiry of the Petitioner for nine adjournments including , 14-7-2003 the petitioner has not turned - out . The petitioner's Counsel reports no instructions. Petitioner is not evincing any interest since September, 2002. There is nothing on record to support the case of the Petitioner. Hence , a ' Nil ' Award is passed, Transmit.

Ex. Sweeper in F.C.I. Godowns , W/o Bala Sundaram , Epuru(Post) , Pedapadu Mandal , WestGodavari District.

Petitioner

AND

Dictated to Kum. K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant Transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 14th day of July, 2003 .

E. ISMAIL , Presiding Officer 1. The . President .

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for the Witnesses examined for the

Petitioner

Respondent

NIL

Documents marked for the Petitioner

The Food Corporation of India GodownMutta Workers Labour Contract Co -operative Society Ltd. , Regd.No.E - 1393 , Near Nuzveed Railway Station , Epuru (Post ) , Pedapadu Mandal , W.G. District .

NIL

2. The District Manager,

Documents marked for the Respondent NIL

Food Corporation of India ,

Near Old Bus Stand ,

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2003

Vijayawada. Krishna district.

Respondents

APPEARANCES :

For the Petitioner : Sri Ch . Sudhakar Babu , Advocate

For the Respondent : M/ s B. G. Ravindra Reddy & B. V. Chandra Sekhar , Advocates का ० आ० 2602.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय एफ ० सी० आई० प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , हैदराबाद ( संदर्भ संख्या 135/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 14-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

AWARD

[सं ० एल-22013/1/ 2003- आईआर ( सी- II ) ]

एस० एस ० गुप्ता, अवर सचिव

This case I.D. No. 62/98 is transferred from Industrial Tribunal- cum -Labour Court , Guntur in view of the 6197 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM - LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

Present : Shri E. ISMAIL , B.Sc. , LL.B. , Presiding Officer

Dated the 27th day of June , 2003 Government of India, Ministry of Labour's order No. H-11026/1/2001 -IR(C - II) dated 18-10-2001 and renumbered in this Court as L.C.I.D.No. 135/2002 . This is a case taken under Sec.2A( 2 ) of the I.D. Act, 1947 in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No.8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/s . Cotton Corporation of India and two others.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 16/2003

Between:

1. The President,

A. P. Collieries Mazdoor Sangh ( INTUC ) , Bellampalli , Distt . Adilabad.

2. In spite of several adjournments given from 24-12-2002 for enquiry of the Petitioner for nine adjournments including , 14-7-2003 the petitioner has not turned- out . The petitioner's counsel reports no instructions . Petitioner is not evincing any interest since September , 2002. There is nothing on record to support the case of the Petitioner Hence , a ' Nil ' Award is passed, Transmit.

...Petitioners

2. Shri G. Rajanarsu, S/o G. Narsaiah, 65 - D , Qrt . No. 20, Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd. , Colony, Bellempalli , Distt. Adilabad .

Dictated to Kum. K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant Transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 14th day of July, 2003 .

AND

E. ISMAIL, Presiding Officer

Appendix of evidence

....Respondents

1. The General Manager, Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd. , Mandamarri , P. O. Kalyanakhani , Adilabad District .

Witnesses examined for the Witnesses examined for the Petitioner

Respondent

Appearances:

NIL

Forthe Petitioner

Documents marked for the Petitioner

NIL

: M/sG. Ravimohan , R. Devender Reddy, G. Srinivasa Reddy and G. Naresh Kumar, Advocates .

Forthe Respondent :

Documents marked for the Respondent NIL

M/s K. Srinivasa Murthy and C. Vijayashekar Reddy, Advocates

नई दिल्ली , 18 अगस्त, 2003

AWARD

का० आ० 2603.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय एस ० सी०सी ० एल ० प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, हैदराबाद ( संदर्भ संख्या 16/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जोकेन्द्रीय सरकार को 14-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour by its order No. L- 22012 /23/ 91 - IR (C- II ) dated the 20-12-2002 referred the following dispute under Section 10 ( 1 ) (d ) of the I.D. Act, 1947 for adjudication to this Tribunal between the management of Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd. and their workman. The reference is ,

SCHEDULE

[सं० एल-22012/23/91 - आईआर ( सी- II ) ] एस० एस ० गुप्ता, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 18th August , 2003

"Whether the claim of the Union , A. P. Collieries Mazdoor Sangh for correction of year of birth of the workman Sh . G. Rajanarsu as 1938 instead of 1934 is legal andjustified? If so, to what relief the workman is entitled?"

The reference is numbered in this Tribunal as I.D. No. 16/2003 and notices issued to the parties .

S. O. 2603. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 16/2003 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court , Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of SCCL and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 14-8-2003 .

2. In spite of several adjournments given from 13-3-2003 for filing of claim statement and documents for fiveadjournments including today the 27th June , 2003. In spite ofnumber of adjournments Petitioner has not turned- out with claim statement and documents and since February, 2003 the Petitioner is not evincing any interest . There is [No. L- 22012/23/91 - IR(C- 11 ) ] S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

6198

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22, 1925

nothing on record to support the claim of the Petitioner. Hence , a' Nil Award ' is passed , transmit .

Dictated to Kum. K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant Transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 27th day of June , 2003.

E. ISMAIL , Presiding Officer Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for the Witnesses examined for the Petitioner

Respondent

NIL

Documents marked for the Petitioner NIL

Documents marked for the Respondent NIL

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2003

का० आ ० 2604.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एस ० सी० सी० एल ० प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , हैदराबाद ( संदर्भ संख्या 17/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 14-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[मं० एल-22012/ 134/2002- आईआर ( सी-11 ) ]

एस ० एस० गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 18th August , 2003

S. O. 2604. - In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 17/2003) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court. Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of SCCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 14-8-2003.

[No. L-22012/ 134/2002-1R(C- 11 ) ] S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

Prescat: Shri E. ISMAIL , B.Sc. , L.L.B. , Presiding Officer Dated the 14th day of July, 2003

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 17/2003

Between:

Sri Raiz Aluned.

General Secretary,

S. Singareni Miners and Engg .

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] Workers Union (HMS) , Godavarikhani- 505209 .

...Petitioner AND

The General Manager,

Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd. ,

Ramagundam- I Division,

Godavarikhani -505209

....Respondent Appearances:

For the Petitioner : M/s A. Sarojana, K. Vasudeva Reddy and K. Shashidhar , Advocates

For the Respondent : Sri K. Srinivasa Murthy, Advocate

AWARD

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour by its order No. L- 22012/ 134/2002 - IR ( CM - II) dated the 12-12-2002 referred the following dispute under Section 10( 1 ) (d) of the I. D. Act , 1947 for adjudication to this Tribunal between the management of Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd. and their workman . The reference is,

SCHEDULE

"Whether the demand of the Singareni Miners and Engg . Workers Union from the Management of M/ sSingareni Collieries Co. Ltd. , Ramagundam -I Division Godavarikhani to give promotion as Munshi Gr. II to Sh . M. Thukkaiah , Gr. III Munsh is justified? If so, to what relief the workman is entitled and from what day ? " The reference is numbered in this Tribunal as 1.D. No. 17/2003 and notices issued to the parties .

2. Inspite of several adjournments given from 13-3-2003 for filing of claim statement and documents for six adjournments including today the 14th July, 2003. Since February, 2003 the Petitioner is not evincing any interest. There is nothing on record to support the case of the Petitioner. Hence , a ' Nil Award' is passed, transmit .

Dictatedto Kum. K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 14th day of July, 2003 .

E. ISMAIL, Presiding Officer Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for the Witnesses examined for the Petitioner Respondent

NIL

Documents marked for the Petitioner NIL Documents marked for the Respondent NIL 6199 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13 , 2003/भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2003

(North) in discontinuing the synchronisation allow- ance to the workmen concerned in their 6 depots in the North Zone is justified? If not to what relief the workmen are entitled ?"

का० आ० 2605.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एफ. सी. आई. प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नई दिल्ली ( संदर्भ संख्या 10/91 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 14-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल -22012 /393/एफ/ 90 - आई आर ( सी- II ) ]

एस ० एस ० गुप्ता, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 18th August, 2003

S. O. 2605. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 10/91 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum - labour Court New Delhi as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of FCI and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 14-8-2003 .

[No. L -22012/393/F/90 - IR(C - II) ]

S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

2.The Union of the workmen has , inter alia, alleged in the statement of claim filed on behalf of the workman that the Chairman of F. C.I. had rendered the settlement on 3-5-87 with the National Co-ordination Committee of F.C. I. employees consisting of four national level trade unions including Union of the workman for payment of synchronisation allowance at 39 depots all over the coun- try, and the said settlement was enforced w.e.f. 18-8-88 after obtaining Supreme Court approval on 1-8-1988 in C.P. No. 14451/1988 in W.P.No. 534/1985; that the workmen ac- cordingly started receiving the said allowance at 39 depots all over the country vide circular No. 23/1988 dated 18-8-1988 of F.C.I. Head Quarters ; that subsequently the Zonal Manager (North) Food Corporation of India stopped payment of said allowance w.e.f. 12-6-90 of notified six de- pots situated in Delhi and Utter Pradesh because of cer- tain illegal understanding having been reached with departmentalised labour which has adversely affected and caused financial loss in wages to workman/claimants Union and that the Zonal Manager has altered the working hours at these six depots without caring for section 9A of the I.D. Act . That the act of the management in stopping the said allowance at six depots of North Zone is totally illegal and liable to be quashed. Hence this reference .

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI

PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRIB . N. PANDEY

I. D. No. 10/91

The General Secretary,

...Workman

F.C.I. Employees Union, B-2/ 112 , Paschim Vihar, New Delhi - 110063 .

3. The claim of the Claimants Union was contested by the managment by way of filing a written statement denying the allegation of the union. It was further alleged that the workmen were not entitled to get the said benefit as their work was different from regular staff wherever they were posted. That through the subsequent circular issued by theManagement certain conditions were changed im- posed for payment of the said allowance to the employees inthe category I to IV. That the claimants are not entitled to getany relief and their claim is liable to be rejected.

Versus

4.Both the parties filed various documents in sup- port oftheir case .

The Zonal Manager (North) ,

Food Corporation of India,

Ansal Bhawan , K. G..Marg,

Management

NewDelhi - 110001 .

AWARD

5. In oral evidence the management filed affidavit of MW1 Shri B. K. Dutta and MW2 Shri R. C. Srivastava . They were also cross -examined on behalf of the workman . On the other hand Union filed affidavit of Shri J. S. Duggal (workman) WW1 and WW2 Shri M. C. Tyagi, General Sec- retary of the workmen Union . They were also cross - exam- inedby A/R of the Management . Both the partics also filed theirwritten arguments .

The Central Government in the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L- 22012 ( 393 )/F/ 90 - IR( C- II ) dated 5-2-91 has referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal foradjudication:

6.None appeared on behalf of the workman or their Union since a long for oral arguments . Shri R. K. Birla has beenappearing on behalf of the Management . In absence of any representative of the workman Union I heard "Whether the action of the management of Food Corporation of India , New Delhi , Zonal Manager 6200

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13, 2003 /BHADRA 22, 1925

Shri R. K. Birla for the Management and also perused the file . At the very outset it is worth to be mentioned that it has come on the record that the earlier circular through which all the employees were given the alleged allowance , subsequ.antly caused dissatisfaction to some of the other emplovecs which gave rise to another dispute and as a re- suit of which a case was also filed before the Central Gov- ernment Industrial Tribunal , Calcutta and an award was also obtained, subsequently in view of the subsequent settle- ment purity ofworking hours was fixed for the category III to IV employees . Therefore , no synchronisation allowance is now admissible to them. At present if any of the employee performs duty beyound 6½ hours he get his over time for such working . That the management is acting fairly and in a justified manner by giving them over time allowance in case they work beyond their duty hours of 6½ hours. Thus in view of the subsequent change , the workmen are now not entitled to get any such allowance . I find that the workmen's Union has failed to establish case of the workmen so as to make them entitled to get the said allowance . Therefore , I find no force in the claim of the Union

7. In view of the above discussions , I find nothing illegal or unjust in the action of the management of F.C.1 . (Food Corpurtation of India ) in Delhi and the workmen of the petitioner - Union are not entitled to get any relief. The reference is answered accordingly.

Dated: 5-8-2003

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii) ]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 2, MUMBAI PRESENT : S. N. SAUNDANKAR, PresidingOfficer

Reference No. CGIT - 2/107 of 2000 EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF BOARD OF APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING , MUMBAI

Director, Board ofApprenticeship Training , ATI Campus , V.N. PuravMarg, Sion, Mumbai -400022 .

V/s

THEIRWORKMEN

Shri Radheshyam Dubey C/o. Shri Mohan Yadav, Ramdas Chawl, Surya Nagar, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai -400083 .

APPEARANCES :

FortheEmployer

B. N. PANDEY, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2003

का० आ ० 2606. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बोर्ड ऑफ अप्रेन्टीसिशिप ट्रेनिंग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नं. 2 , मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सी० जी० आई ० टी०-2/107 ऑफ 2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 18-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42012/182/2000- आई आर ( डीयू) ] बी. एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 18th August , 2003

S. O. 2606 .-- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. CGIT- 2/ 107 of 2000 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court No. 2 , Mumbai now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Board of Apprenticeship Training and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 18-8-2003 ,

[No. L -42012 / 182/ 20XX) -IR(DU) ] B. M. DAVID , Under Secy.

: Mr. B. Dattamoorty, Advocate For the Workman : Mr. V. V. Menon , Advocate Mumbai , the 5th June 2003

AWARD

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour, by its Order No. L -42012/ 182/2000 - IR (DU) dated 31-10-2000 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub- section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 have referred the following disputeto this Tribunal for adjudication :-

"Whether the action of the management of Board of Apprenticeship Training , Mumbai in terminating the services of Shri R. S. Dubey, Ex- Workman-cum-Pump Attendant w.e.f. 19-10-1994 is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled ?" 2.Shri Dubeywas employed in the management Board ofApprenticeship Training , Mumbai as Watchman. Vide Statement ofClairh (Exhibit -4) Dubey pleaded that initially he worked in the management from 6-4-1992 through the Security Guard Board for Maharashtra State and that he was informed then that there is a vacancy , and therefore , he had applied on 27th July 1992 and that he was consequently appointed as Watchman-cum- Pump Attendant w.e.f. 31st July 1992. Consequently, his name 6201

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

of Examination - in- Chief (Exhibit - 17 ) and closed oral evidence vide purshis ( Exhibit - 18 ) . In rebuttal , Director of the Board Mr. Rathore filed affidavit ( Exhibit - 19 ) and the management closed oral evidence vide purshis (Exhibit-23).

5.Dubey filedwritten submissions along with copies of rulings vide ( Exhibit - 24 / 26 ) and the management (Exhibit - 25) . On going through the record as a whole , written submissions and hearing the counsels , I record my findings on the following issues for the reasons mentioned below:

Issues

was entered in the muster roll and that he was receiving regular salary in the scale. It is the contention of Dubey that he worked continuously from 1st August 1992 till 19-10-1994 i.e. more than 240 days and that during the said period he was not given any memo as his service record wasclean and unblemished however abruptly by the letter dated 19-10-94 his services were terminated by the management without giving him notice pay and retrenchment compensation under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, therefore his termination being illegal and unjustified management be directed to reinstate him in service in continuity with full back wages .

Findings

Does not survive

1. Whether Sri R. S. Dubey continuously worked for more than 240 days in a calendaryear?

2. Whether Board of Appren- No ticeship Training, Mumbai is an ' industry' within the meaning of Section 2 (j ) of the Industrial Disputes Act ?

Does not survive

3. Whether the action of the management of Board of Apprenticeship Training, Mumbai in terminating the services of Shra R. S Dubey, -Workman -cum-Pump Artendant w.e.f. 19-10-1994 islegal and justifed ?

As per order below,

4. What relief the workman is entitled ?

REASONS

3.Management resisted the claim ofDubey by filing Written Statement (Exhibit- 7) contending that reference is not maintainable as the Institute does not fall within the definition of' Industry' under Section 2(j ) of the Industrial Disputes Act . It is averred that the main object of the management is to organise practical training for graduates and diploma holders in Engineering and Technology in accordance with the provisions of the Apprentices Act, 1961 and further to secure to provide training facilities in different technical establishments both in the private and public sectors in the States of Maharashtra , Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Goa and Union Territories of Diu and Daman. It is contended in order to achieve , this Board is required to establish permanent liaison between the technical institutions located in the region and that the Board is managed by the funds given by Government as grants , donations , fees etc. and that the functions of the Board are not in any manner to be declared an ' Industry' . It is further the contention of the Board that it does not undertake any activity for production/distribution ofgoods and services partaking of the nature of trade/business undertaken by the State and that main function of the Board is to provide expert and advisory service in the areas of practical training and thus the Board is predominantly engaged in the field of education . Apart from this it is further the contention of management that Dubey was appointed erroneously against non existent post by an officer who was temporarily holding charge which was administrative irregularity. It is averred that because ofthe irregular appointment of Dubey his salary could not be made from the allotted funds as objected by the A.G. Office Mumbai . It is contended since the appointment of Dubey was administrative error and that there was no post of Watchman-cum -Pump Attendant question of giving him notice pay and retrenchment compensation doses not arise. It is contended knowing the irregularity Dubey was discontinued from 19-10-94 consequently his claim being devoid of substance be dismissed with costs .

6. At the threshold the Learned Counsel Mr. Dattamoorty for the management inviting attention to the affidavit ofMr. Rathore ( Exhibit- 19) urged that the Board of Apprenticeship Training is established under the Ministry ofHuman Resources Development , Department ofEducation , Government of India with the object of organising practical training for Graduates and Diploma holders in Engineering and Technology for implementation ofthe provisions of the Apprentices Act, 1961 and that the main function of the Board is to establish liaison with technical institutions /industries in the region comprising of the five states to secure training facilities for the candidates and that the board is essentially managed by the funds sanctioned by the Government of India i.e. grants received from the Government of India and that Board is not undertaking any activity of production and/ or distribution of goods and services pertaining to the nature 4. On the basis of pleadings issues were framed at Exhibit- 11 and in that context Dubey filed affidavit in lieu 6202

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA- 22 , 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ]

(d) If the organisation is a trade or business it does not cease to be one because of philanthropy animating the undertaking .

oftrade/business and that it is predominantly engaged in the field of education and therefore relying on the rulings filed on record submits it does not fall within the definition of' Industry ' under Section 2 (j ) of the Industrial Disputes Act . Consequently, this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the reference . On the other hand, the Learned Counsel Mr. Menon inviting attention to the definition of ' industry' under the Act urged with force that what is required to be considered is the nature of organisation itself and that the prominent object of the Board isto organise practical training for gainful employment since provide expert and advisory services and that it is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, the Board employees hire the services of. various employees and that the personnel employees are basically in the categories of unskilled , skilled , technical , operational and clerical itself shows the systematic activity organized by cooperation between employer and employee for the production and/ or distribution of services calculated to satisfy human wants and wishes . Therefore , relying on the decisions filed on record , he submits that board is.an industry consequently this Tribunal has jurisdiction in width.

In Coir Board Ernakulam , Cochin's case decided on 4-3-1998 Their Lordships observed " the organisation where there are employers and employees and the organisation doessome useful work for benefit of others will have to be called an ' industry' under the Act. In Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board Vs. A Rajappa & Ors . 1978 LAB IC SC 467 Their Lordships of the Apex Court proposed to exclude training institutes , hospitals , dispensaries etc. from the scope of the definition of industry. Further in para 161/162 Their Lordships laid down tests for the determination of the ' industry ' as well as 'workmen' and observed that where a complex of activities some ofwhich qualify for exemption, the others not , involve employees ofthe total undertaking some of whom are not workmen or some departments are not productive of goods and services if isolated, even then, the predominant nature of the services and the integrated nature of the departments as explained in the Corporation of Nagpur's case will be the true test. In Physical Research Laboratory V/s. K.G. Sharma Their Lordships held the Research Institute not an industry.

7. Director Mr. Rathore in his cross - examination (Exhibit- 12) admitted that " they function in a organized systematic manner , render training facilities to the apprentices , 32 employees work in the Board as regular employees, they inspect establishments and assess their training facilities and advise to recruit apprentices and to ramihem they charge fees for training programmes from outside apprentices about Rs . 50/ - per day and that in a year they hold about 10 seminars . At this juncture the Learned Counsel Mr. Menon submits that these admissions go to show the object of the Beard is to organise practical training for gainful employment which is the criteria of industry::

8. ' lodustry' is defined under section 2 (j ) of the industrial disputes Act as follows:

9. In the case in hand, it is seen from the record the essential function of the Board is to provide expert and advisory services in the areas of practical training to both technical institutions and industry by establishing permanent liaison with these bodies and that it is predominantly engaged in the field of education. Consequently the management cannot be said to be an undertaking analogous to business or trade and that it is not engaged in a commercial /industrial activity and therefore , it cannot be described as a common venture or a commercial enterprise and it is not its object to produce and distribute services which would satisfy wants and needs of the consumer community. Therefore, in my opinion , going through record as a whole and the ratio laid down in the judgements relied by both the parties , management Board is not an ' industry' within the definition ofSection 2(j ) of the Industrial Disputes Act . Consequently reference is not maintainable . Issue No. 2, is therefore, answered accordingly.

10. Since the management Board is not an industry Issue No. 1,3 & 4 do not survive and hence the following order is passed:

ORDER

(a) where there is a (i ) systematic activity ( ii ) organized by the co - operation between employer and employee ( the direct and substantial element is chimerical ) ( iii ) for the production and/or distribution of goods and services calculated to satisfy human wants and wishes (not spiritual or religious but inclusive ofmaterial things or services geared to celestial bliss i.e.making on a large scale prasad or food) prima facie there is an industry' in that enterprise.

(b) Absence of profit motive or gainful objective is irrelevant , be the venture in the public , joint , private or other sector.

Reference stands disposed of as the Management Board of Apprenticeship Training is not an industry and consequently not maintainable.

(c) The true focus is functional and the decisive test is the nature of the activity with special emphasis on the employer -employee relations .

S.N. SAUNDANKAR, Presiding Officer भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003 /भाद्र 22 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2003

का.आ. 2607.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार ग्रे आयरन फॉउंड्री के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी/एलसी/आर/126/96 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 18-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42011/42/95- आईआर ( डीयू) बी.एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 18th August , 2003

S.O. 2607. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT/LC/R/ 126 /96 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the inanagement of Grey Iron Foundry and (heir workman, which was received by the Central Government on 18-8-2003 .

[No. L -42011 /42/95 - IR (DU ) ] B. M. DAVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Case No. CGIT /LC/ R/ 126/96

SHRIR . K. DUBEY : Presiding Officer .

6203 2. Workman's counsel Shri Dutta filed an order ofthe GM, GIF No. 1972 dated 8-12-2000 . According to this order of GM, workman Shri Harinarayan Mahore expired on 13-11-2000. Workman Shri Mahore raised this industrial dispute and claimed his original seniority . He was deferred in the meeting of DPC in 1989 and in the next meeting of DPC in 1991 , he was considered and promoted. Applicant claimed his seniority according to the orignal list . But now workman expired therefore this tribunal is unable to grant any relief for the deceased workman.

3. Therefore due to the demise of the workman , the proceedings of this case are closed and in the absence of any evidence , the Labour Ministry's reference is answered positively . Both parties should bear their own cost . Advocate fees is Rs . 1000/- if certified.

R.K. DUBEY , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2003

का. आ. 2608.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार रीजनल टेलीकॉम ट्रेनिंग सेन्टर के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण भुवनेश्वर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 358/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 18-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-40012 /95/2000 - आईआर (डीयू) ] बी. एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 18th August , 2003

... Applicant

Shri Hari Narayan Mahore , Melter Highly Skilled Grade 1, T.No. 11/553 , MS Grey Iron Foundry , Jabalpur.

Versus

The General Manager ,

.. Non - applicant Grey Iron Foundry . Post Vehicle Factory, Jabalpur

AWARD

Passed on this Ist day of the August , 2003 1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide order No. L - 42011 /42/ 95-1R ( DU ) dated 30-5-96 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :

"Whether the action of the management of Grey Iron Foundry in denying the promotion to the workman Shri Harinarayan Mahore is justified? If not , what relief the workman is entitled to ? " 2491 Gl/2003-7

S.O. 2608. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 358/ 2001 ) of the Central Govemment Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court Bhubaneswar now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Regional Telecom Training Centre and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 18-8-2003 .

[No. L -40012/95/2000 - IR(DU) ] B.M. DAVID , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT , BHUBANESWAR

PRESENT :

Shri S.K. Dhal , OSJS , ( Sr. Branch) , Presiding Officer , C.G.I.T. -cum-Labour Court , Bhubaneswar.

Tr. INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE No. 358/2001 Date of conclusion of hearing -28th July 2003 6204

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22, 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )] Date of Passing Award-5th August 2003

BETWEEN :

The Management of the Director, Regional Telecom Training Centre, Government of India ,

Department of Telecom , Vani Vihar ,

Bhubaneswar -01

1stParty-Management

AND

Their Workmen Shri P.K. Gochhayat,

perennial in nature under Contract Labour Act . One Shri Manoj Kumar Tripathy who was the known person of the 1st Party - Management was appointed. therefore, he was disengaged for which he raised the dispute before the Asstt. Labour Commissioner (Central), Bhubaneswar . After failure of conciliation the present reference has been made . The 2nd Party has prayed for reinstatement in service and to institute proper disciplinary proceeding or prosecution against the 1st party -Management .

Ex-Attendant , C/ o . Office of the Bhartiya Mazdoor Sangh , Plot No. 219. Sector- L , Mancheswar, Bhubaneswar -751010

.. 2nd Party--- Workman

APPEARANCES :

Shri Sanatan Das , Dy . G.C. RTTC .

None

Forthe 1stParty -Management Forthe 2nd Party-

Workman

AWARD

The Government of India in the Ministry of Labour in exercise of Powers conferred by Clause (d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub- section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) have referred the followingdispute for adjudication vide their order No. L-40012/95/2000/IR ( DU ) , dated 30-05-2000:

3. The 1st Party-Management in reply to the Claim Statement has filed their Written Statement . In the Written Statement, it has been averred by the 1st Party -Management that, the present refence is not maintainable and there is no relationship of employer and employee between the parties and the question of termination does not arise , as the 2nd Party was never a workman under the 1st party- Management . As there is a ban imposed for engagement ofany casual labourer with effect from 30-3-1985 no casual labourer has been engaged by the 1st Party - Management . The further case is that one Shri Manoj Kumar Tripathy . contractor was awarded the work of gardening and documentation under the agreement dated 1-12-1998. The engagement of the contractor was approved by the Government of India and in the meantime the contract work of Shri M.K. Tripathy has come to an end since 30-4-2000 and there is no scope to continue his contract as well . The 1st Party - Management has prayed to answer the reference in their favour,

4. On the above pleading of the parties the following Issues have been settled .

"Whether the action of the Management of Regional Telecom Training Centre , Bhubaneswar by terminating the services of the disputant isjustified? Ifnot, to what relief the workman is entitled ? "

ISSUES

2. The case of the 2nd Party as per the Claim Statement runs thus :

1. Whether there is any relationship between the employer and the worker?

2. Whether the reference is maintainable ?

3. Whether the termination of service of Shri P. K. Gochhayat is justified ?

4. To what relief the workman is entitled?

Onbehalf of the 2nd Party - Workman two witnesses were examined ans 12 documents have been exhibited . The 1st Party -Management had adduced no oral evidence but exhibited one document . The 2nd Party remained absent inspite of giving several adjournments when the case was posted for hearing of argument .

FINDINGS

ISSUE No. I

He is a matriculate . He approached the 1st party- Management to provide him job befitting his qualification in the year 1995. The 1st Party- Management directed him to perform the duty of documentation on daily wages basis . He was paid through voucher called as A.C.G. - 17. He performed his job satisfactorily . The Ist party - Management , on the other hand to wash away the proof of employment forcedhimto signe the A.C.G. - 17 in fictitious name. Thework performed by him was perennial in nature. In the year 1997 , the 1st party - Management purchased one Gestetner. The Ist Party -Management need extra technical hand to run the said machine . So. he was instructed to take training of handling the copy printer machine from the Gestetner Company.He successfully got the training . The 1st Party -Management did not regularize its casual worker who had rendered 240 days scrvice or more . The Ist Party - Management invited tenders in the name of others to handover the work which was

6. The workman who was been examined as Witness No. 1 in Paragraph - 12 of the cross examination has admitted that , he has not received any order of appointment from the Ist Party -Management so also any termination order. He has further admitted that, his name was not sponsored by the employment exchange nor he had faced any selection 6205

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

question of termination does not arise . In that case, it can not be said that, the termination of the 2nd Party is illegal. ISSUE No. II

8. As regards maintainability ofthe reference when Ihave come to a conclusion that, there is no relationship of employer and employee between the parties , the reference made under Industrial Disputes Act would not be maintainable.

ISSUE No. IV

9. In view of my findings given in respect of Issue No. I. III and II the 2nd party-Workman is not entitled for anyrelief.

10. Reference is answered accordingly .

Dictated & Corrected by me.

S.K.DHAL , Presiding Officer

BEFORE THE C.G.LT. CUM- LABOUR COURT : BHUBANESWAR Tr. I.D. Case No. 358/2001

List of the Witnesses Examined on behalf of the 2nd Party- Workmen:

W.W.1 . Shri Pabitra Kumar Gochhayat, the workman himself.

W.W. 2. Shri Rajendra Kunar Behera .

List of the Witnesses Examined on behalf of the 1st Party-Management:

No Witness has been examined on behalf of the Ist Party- Management .

List ofDocuments exhibited on behalf of the 2nd Party- Workman:

Ext.- 1. Copy of the Attendance Register .

Ext.-2 Copy of the receipts of the payment .

Ext. -2/1 . 2/1 . Copy of the receipts of the payment .

process . The Ext . - 1 produced on behalf of the 2nd Party is stated to be the copy of the attendance register maintained by the 1st Party - Management , which has been disputed by the 1st Party - Management . On the other hand, the Ist Party -Management has filed Ext . - A stated to be the attendance register wherein the signature of the 2nd party doesnot appear . Ext. 2. 2/1 , 2/2 reveals that , the 2nd party got some amount for doing the printing of documents. Ext . 3 is the certificate granted by the Branch Manager , Gestetner Company who certified that , he taken the training. Ext . -4 is a certificate granted by Shri M.K.Tripathy stated to be a contractor which discloses that , he had engaged the 2nd Party to carry out the documentation and gardening work and he has stated that he got the job on contract basis. Ext- 5 is the letter of the Government directing for discontinuance of contract labourer for cleaning and security purposes . Ext -6 is the letter addressed to the 2nd Party to the 1st Party - Management for his illegal disengagement . Ext - 7 is the letter signed by the President ofthe Union on behalf of the 2nd Party to the Asstt . Labour Commissioner ( Central ) Ext . -8 reveals that, the 2nd Party hadworked from 23-6-1995. Ext . - 9 is the copy of the letter of the 2nd Party addressed to the A.L.C. ( Central ) . Ext . - 10 is the application filed on behalf ofthe 2nd Party . Ext . - 11 is the letter addressed by the A.L.C. ( Central ) to the C.G.M.. Telecom . All the above documents do not reveals that , the 2nd Party was appointed by the 1st Party - Management after due selection . Moreover , the 2nd Party has failed to prove that he had worked for 240 days in a calendar year. It may be stated here that . when the case was posted for argument . the 2nd Party remained absent and did not care to place his case before the Tribunal. The initial burden lies on him to prove that , he was engaged by the 1st Party- Management and that , he had worked for 241) days in a calendar year and that he had received the payments for those days . If that is proved then it can be said that , he was a workman under the Ist Party - Management .

Ext. -2/2. Copy of the receipts of the payment .

Ext.-3 Copy of certificate issued by B.M. , Gestener India Ltd. Bhubaneshwar .

Ext.-4 Copy of the certificate given by one Shri M. K. Tripathy, Contractor.

In other words there exists the relationship employer and employce between the parties . But in my opinion, the 2nd Party has failed to place materials to prove his case . So. the Issue No. I is answered accordingly. ISSUE Na. Il

Ext.-5 Copy of the order passed by the Deptt . of Telecommunication regarding engagement of casual labourers .

Ext.-6 Copy of representation , dated 24-8-1999 to the RTTC, Bhubaneswar .

Ext.-7 Copy of the application submitted to the A.L.C. (Central) through Shri K. C. Rout, President of the Union on 16-9-1999 .

Ext.-8 Copy of list showing worked as Mazdoor on 23-6-1995.

Ext-9. Copy of application to the A.L.C. ( C ) , Bhubaneswar for raising dispute .

7. I have taken this Issue for convenient sake. In my previous paragraphs , I have recorded a finding that , there was no relationship of employer and employce between the parties . When there is no appointment, the question of terminationdoes not arise . The 2nd Party has produced the documents , which reveals that , he was engaged by a Contractor . So , that would suggest that , he was working under the contractor but not under the 1st Party- Management . The averments of the ist Party- Management is that , the contract work given to one Shri M.K. Tripathy has come to an end has not been disputed/ challenged. So , in that case , the 2nd Party is a contract labourer and he has not been appointedby the Ist Party- Managementso the 6200

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2003 /BHADRA 22 , 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] Ext.- 10

Beena , Flat No. 5 .

Copy of application submitted before the ALC( C) by the President of the Union .

Ext. -11.

Guru Ganeshwar Road, Khar(West), Mumbai -400052 .

Copy of the letter of ALC(C ) addressed to the C.G.M. , Telecom with a copy to the President of the Union .

APPEARANCES :

FortheEmployer

: Mr. Abhay Kulkarni , Advocate.

Ext. -12. Copy of Duty chart showing worked on a particular date .

For the Workmen

: Mr. Haresh Shivdasani , Advocate.

Listof Documents exhibited on behalf of the 1st Party- Management:

Ext.-A. Attendance register from 4/1995 to 3/1997 .

Mumbai , dated 25th June , 2003 . AWARD PART-I

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour by its Order No. L- 11012/ 62/ 99 /IR ( C- I ) dated 4-2-2000 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub- section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 have referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

नई दिल्ली, 19 अगस्त, 2003 का. आ. 2609.-09. औद्योगिकऔद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार जैट एयरवेज लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण II , मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 14/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 18-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

"Whether the action of the management of M / s . JetAirways Ltd. , Mumbai in terminating the services of the workman , Mr. Amrit Melant w.e.f. 24-2-1999 is justified. If not , what relief the workman, Shri Amrit Melant is entitled to?" [सं. एल-11012/62/99- आईआर ( सी-1 ) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 19th August, 2003

S.O. 2609.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947 ) , the Central overninent hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 14/2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - II Mumbai now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of JetAirways Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 18-8-2003 .

[No. L- 11012/62/99 - IR(C -I) ] S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy .

ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2, MUMBAI

PRESENT :

S.N. SAUNDANKAR: Presiding Officer. Reference No. CGIT- 2/ 14 of 2000.

EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF M/ S . JET AIRWAYS LTD. , MUMBAI

TheGeneral Manager (HR), JetAirways . S.M. Centre . Andheri -Kurla Road, Andheri. ( East ) Mumbai -400059 . V/ s.

Their Workman

Shri Amrit Melant,

2. Workman Melant was engaged as Flight Steward in the Jet Airways Company , Mumbai on 26th January, 1996. Vide Statement of Claim (Exhibit -6) workman contended that he was diligent in his work, he was confirmed from 22-6-1996 and that his record was note - worthy and that he had desire to appear for G - Mat examination in Hong Kong which is a computer adoptive test and was scheduled to be held in 9-4-1998 . It is pleaded since workman was sincere worker and as he was cordial with all he was orally consented to appear for examination and consequently he had applied for leave from 8-4-1998 . It is contended on giving application for leave from 8-4-1998 he went to Hong Kong however he had to get extended leave due to his sickness from 28th May , 1998 and that for want of communication his leave was not sanctioned that his absence from 9th April , 1998 was objected and that day he was given show cause notice alleging he had failed to report for duty within the prescribed period i.e. till 24-7-1998 . It is contended on returning from Hong Kong he had gone in the company to resume duty on 24-7-1998, however his signature was demanded on the blank paper which was termination letter which he had refused and later-on he was issued charge -sheet dated 24th July , 1998 alleging that he remained absent without leave for more than 10 consecutive days thereby committed misconduct which he had replied on 19th August, 1998. It is contended that domestic inquiry conducted against him was against the principles of naturaljustice and fair play in as much as hewas asked with malafide intention to take refresher course thereby deprived him froin contacting his defence , he was not given wages and allowance and that his evidence was recorded behind his back . It is further contended that 6207. भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13 , 2003 /भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

2. Whether the findings of the Inquiry Officer No. are perverse?

REASONS

7. So far domestic inquiry is concerned , Their Lordships of the Apex Court in Sur Enamel and Stamping Works V/s . Their Workmen 1963 II LLJ SCC pg. 367 ruled that enquiry cannot be said to have been properly held unless:

(1) the employee proceeded against has been informed clearly of the charges levelled against him.

workman was denied permission to engage defence representative of his choice and that documents were furnished to him at the last moment and thereby prejudice had caused to him. It is contended that Inquiry Officer was totally biased to him and without considering the fact of communication gap , the Inquiry Officer held that his absence was unauthorised and that he disobeyed the orders of the superiors . It is contended findings of the Inquiry Officer since not based on the evidence on record, are perverse and consequently inquiry vitiates . It is contended Disciplinary Authority based on the report of Inquiry Officer illegally terminated the workman from 24-2-1999 and the same being unjustified the management be directed to reinstate him with full back wages .

(2) the witnesses are examined - ordinarily in the presence of the employee in respect of the charges.

(3) the employee is given a fair opportunity to cross examine the witnesses .

(4) he is given a fair opportunity to examine witnesses including himself in his defence if he so wishes on any relevant matter , and

(5) the Inquiry Officer records his findings with reasons for the same in his report .

3. Management company resisted the claim of workman by filing Written Statement (Exhibit -8 ) contending that workman was Flight Steward and that inspite of complete ban on Privileged Leave he proceeded on leave for a period of 108 days from April , 1998 to June, 1998 , against the instructions of the management putting the company in loss . It is pleaded that workman remained unauthorisedly absent since examination which he desired to appear is held every three months and he could have appeared for the said examination after absolute embargo on the Privileged Leave is lifted. It is pleaded that workman was made fully aware that due to exigency of work his availability for duties is absolutely necessary and consequently his application was rejected and despite that, he proceeded on leave disregarding the management's instructions which amount to misconduct and therefore domestic inquiry was conducted against him. It is pleaded thatInquiry Officer giving sufficient opportunity and all documents conducting the inquiry found the workman guilty. It is contended inquiry being fair and proper and the findings not perverse , workman's claim being devoid of substance , be dismissed with costs in limine .

4. By rejoinder (Exhibit- 10 ) workman reiterated the recitals in the Claim Statement denying the averments in the Written Statement .

8. According to the workman the inquiry was conducted behind his back , documents were furnished only at the last moment and that he was denied to engage defence representative of his choice and that he was asked to take refresher course during the inquiry to prevent him froin conducting his defence and that he was not paid wages and allowances to meet his expenses and thereby prejudice had caused to him and hence inquiry vitiates . So far copies of documents are concerned, workman admits in his cross - examination para 21 that company had supplied him the relevant documents and so far recording of proceedings is concerned, he adınits inquiry proceedings (Exhibit- 12 ) bear his signatures . So far charges are concerned he admits in cross - examination para 19 that the charges levelled against luin were read out to him and his say was sought on that. The General Secretary Mr. Deodhar in his cross - examination para 5 clearly admitted that workman had authorised him to represent the inquiry against him . These admissions go to show that workman was allowed to engage Defence Representative of his choice and proceedings were recorded in their presence and that copy of relevant docunients were supplied.

5. On the basis of pleadings issues were framed at Exhibit- 13 and in the context ofpreliminary issues workman Melant filed affidavit in lieu of Examination in Chief (Exhibit- 16) and the General Secretary Mr. Deodhar (Exhibit - 21 ) and closed oral evidence vide purshis (Exhibit - 23 /29 ). Management company however did not lead oral evidence vide purshis (Exhibit-30 ) .

6. Workman filed written submissions (Exhibit - 31 ) . On hearing both the counsels and perusing the record , I record my findings on the issues for the reasons mentioned below:

Findings

Issues

Yes.

9. Charge against the workman was simplicitor of unauthorised absenteeism fronı April , 1998 to June, 1998 . Workman who is Bachelor of Hotel Management well versed with the proceedings , admitted he understood the charge though not replied . Had he faced any difficulty he would have complained to that effect to Inquiry Officer however that is wanting . On perusal the inquiry proceedings filed with list (Exhibit - 12) which admittedly bear signatures ofworkman it is seen charge was simple and unambiguous . Workman admittedly did not attend the inquiry proceedings on 4-8-1998 , 19-8-1998 to 2-9-1998. It was held giving long 1. Whether the domestic inquiry held against the workman was as per the Principles of Natural Justice ?

6208

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22, 1925

rope . He was allowed to engage co - worker as Defence Representative . it is not that enquiry was done with haste. It is therefore apparent that sufficient opportunity was given to the workman. No tailor made procedure is laid down for holding domestic inquiry. What is relevant is whether the procedure adopted by the appropriate authority is in accordance with law and whether the authority has acted in good faith . Whether prejudice is caused to the workman is to be looked at from the angle of justice or of natural justice . The objective of principles of natural justice is to ensure that justice is done. Justice meansjustice between both parties. The interests ofjustice demands that the guilty should be punished and that technicalities and irregularities which do not occasion. failure ofjustice are not allowed to defeat the ends ofjustice. Principles of Natural justice are but means to achieve the ends ofjustice. They cannot be perverted to achieve the very opposite end as observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in StateBank of Patiala V/ s . S. K. Sharma reported in 1996 II CLR pg. 29. On perusal the inquiry proceedings (Exhibit- 12) in the light of the evidence and observation in the case referred supra , hardly can be said that prejudice had caused to the workman on any count . Consequently inquiry can be said to be conducted as per the principles of naturaljustice and fair play .

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)] New Delhi , the 22nd August, 2003

S.O. 2610. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 22/95 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Dhanbad No. 1 as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/s . B.S.M.D. C. Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 18-8-2003.

[No. L -29012/56 / 94- IR (M) ] B. M. DAVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. I DHANBAD

In the matter of a reference U/ s. 10(1) (d) (2A) of LD . Act . Reference No. 22 of 1995

Parties:

Employers in relation to the Management ofB.S.M.D. Ltd.

AND

Their Workman

Present:

SHRI S. H. KAZMI , Presiding Officer Appearances :

Forthe Employers

Forthe Workman

Shri H. Nath , Advocate . Shri R. N. Ganguly , Advocate

State: Bihar

10. So far the findings according to the workman are perverse is concerned, 'perversity' is that when the findings are such which no reasonable person would have arrived at on the basis of material before hirn as pointed out by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Central Bank of India V/ s . Prakash Chand Jain reported in 1969 II LLJ 877. On perusal ofthe inquiry proceedings it is apparent that the findings in connection with absence are recorded on the basis of documents and evidence and consequently not at all perverse. Issues are therefore answered accordingly and hence the order:

ORDER

The domestic inquiry conducted against the workman was as per the principles of natural justice.

The findings of the Inquiry Officer are not perverse .

S. N. SAUNDANKAR , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 22 अगस्त, 2003

का.आ. 2610.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मै ० बी० एस ० एम ० डी० सी० लि० के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , धनबाद नं० 1 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 22/95 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 18-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[ सं० एल- 29012/56/94 आईआर( विविध ) ]

बी० एम० डेविड , अवर सचिव

Industry :Mineral Dated, the 5th August , 2003

AWARD

By Order No. L- 29012/56/94 - IR( Misc. ) dated 10-2-1995 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (d ) of Sub-section ( 1 ) and Sub - section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:

अनुसूची

" क्या प्रबंधन बी एस एम डी द्वारा 19 मजदूरों को स्थानान्तरण की आड़ में नौकरी से निकाल देना एवं उन्हें कार्य पर वापस लेने से इंकार करना कहां तक बाजिव एवं न्यायप्रद है । अगर नहीं तो कर्मकार किस अनुतोष के हकदार हैं ? "

2. It appears from the record that right from the inceptioni.e. from the year 1995 this case remained pending for filing of written statement on behalf of the workman whereas in the order of reference itself it stands clearly mentioned that the same is to be filed within 15 days from the date of receipt of the reference order . Several [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

adjournments were granted to the workman/ union to take necessary steps as required but even then when no any. significant development could take place then ultimately on 11-9-2002 the order was passed, after taking into account all the past developments , regarding final disposal of this case. Subsequentto that on 11-12-2002 one petition was filed on behalf of the workman/ union to set aside the ' no dispute award ' or for re - calling the order passed earlier regarding final disposal of the case . Arguments we heard upon that petition and finally on 19-5-2003 one more indulgence was granted to the workman by re - calling the earlier order by which' no dispute award' was passed. Time was granted to the workman to file written statement . Even thereafter despite adjournment being taken the written statement was not filed and position as it exists till to -day is that this refereence of the year 1995 is still pending for filing written statement on behalf of the workman . Sri Ganguly submits that he has not received any instruction from the side of the workman and as such this Tribunal is at liberty to pass any order which which it deems fit and proper . Taking into account the past development , it is evident that the concerned workman for the reason best known to him is not at all interested in pursuing the present dispute or case and so in such event it is absolutely unnecessary to allow this case to remain pending any longer.

This case , as such, stands finally disposed of.

S. H. KAZMI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 22 अगस्त , 2003

का०आ० 2611.-11.- औद्योगिकऔद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मै ० गोगते मिनरल्स के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , मुंबई नं ० 2 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 67/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं० एल- 29011/59/98- आईआर( विविध ) ] बी० एम० डेविड, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 22nd August, 2003

S. O. 2611. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 67/99 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court Mumbai No. 2 as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s . Gogte Minerals and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 22-8-2003.

[No. L-29011/59/98 - IR(M) ] B. M. DAVID , Under Secy .

6209

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22 , 1925

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL. No. 2, MUMBAI

Present

SHRI S. N. SAUNDANKAR, Presiding Officer REFERENCE NO . CGIT - 2/ 67 OF 1999 EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF M/ s GOGTE MINERALS TheManaging Partner ,

M/ s. GogteMinerals ,

146,Tilakwadi ,

Belgaum-590006.

Versus

TheirWorkmen

The President ,

Mauli Khan Kamgar Sanghatana.

Vengurla, Redi ,

Sindhudurg -416517.

Appearances :

FortheEmployer

: Mr. V P. Vaidva, Advocate .

For theWorkman

Mr.Madan Piodis , Advocate.

:Camp: Goa, Dated, the 8th July, 2003 .

AWARD

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour by its Order No. L - 29011 / 59 / 98 - IR ( M ) dated 16-3-1999 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d ) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub - section 2( a) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 have referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management of M/ s . Gogte Minerals in closing their mines and retrenching workmen without obtaining the permission of the Government is justified ? If not, to what relief the workmen are entitled ? " 2. Vide Statement of Clain ( Exhibit -7 ) union averred that the management M/ s . Ghogte Minerals without obtaining the permission of the Government closed their mines , retrenching the workmen illegally , therefore , the employer be directed to open the undertaking and reinstate the workmen with continuity in service and back wages .

6210

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii) ]

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22, 1925

3. Management resisted the claim of union by filing Written Statement (Exhibit - 9 ) . On perusing the record it is seen , my Learned Predecessor framed issues (Exhibit- 12 ) on the basis of the pleadings and when the matter was fixed for hearing both the parties vide purshis (Exhibit - 40 ) pointed out that the dispute is settled amicably on 14-3-2003 , and therefore , the same be disposed of. Since the dispute settled following order ispassed:

ORDER

Reference stands disposed of as settled vide deed dated 14-3-2003 enclosed with list (Exhibit-40 ).

S. N. SAUNDANKAR , Presiding Officer

EX. NO . 40

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL No. 2 , AT MUMBAI

REFERENCE NO . CGIT - 2/67 OF 1999 BETWEEN

M/s . GogteMinerals

AND

The Workinen employed in it

May it Please the Hon'ble Tribunal ,

The Parties to the above Reference have reached a settlement dated 14th March of the Industrial Dispute in the above Reference which is recorded in writing .

The Parties desire that an Award be made in terms of the settlement for which requisite number of copies are being enclosed herewith .

It is therefore , prayed that this Hon'ble Central Government Industrial Tribunal be pleased to make an Award in terms of the settlement so far as the terms relate to the subject matter of this Reference. The rest of the issues which are co - related to each other be treated as a settlement of the dispute between the parties outside the Court and oblige.

Redi , Dated 8th May/ July , 2003 .

For Gogte Minerals ForWorkmen Mauli Khan Kamgar Sanghatana Sd/-

Sd/-

Illegible

President

Partner

Sd/-

Illegible

Madan Phadnis .

Advocate

Senior Advocate .

MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT BETWEEN

1. Messrs GOGTE MINERALS

2. Messrs CENTRAL MINING AND TRADING SYNDICATE

3. Messrs KONKAN CONTRACTOR AND GENERAL, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

AND

4. MAULI KHAN KAMGAR SANGHTANA 5. BANDAR KHAN KAMGAR KARKHANE ANI VAHATUK KAMGAR UNION

AND

6. SOCIEDADE DE FOMENTO INDUSTIRAL PRIVATE LIMITED

MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into and executed at Redi onthis 14th day of March , 2003 between

1. Messr GOGTE MINERALS , a partnership firm registered under the provisions of the Indian Partnership Act , 1932 having its Place of Business at 146 , Tilakwadi , Belgaum 590006 , represented herein by its PARTNER SHRI ARVIND B. GOGTE;

2. Messrs CENTRAL MINING AND TRADING SYNDICATE, a partnership firm registered under the provisions of the Indian Partnership Act , 1932 having its Place of Business at 146 , Tilakwadi , Belgaum 590006 , represented herein by its PARTNER SHRI ARVIND B. GOGTE;

3. Messrs KONKAN CONTRACTOR AND GENERAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION , a partnership firum registered under the provisions of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 having its Place of Business at 146 , Tilakwadi , Belgaum 590006 , represented herein by its PARTNER SHRI ARVIND B. GOGTE;

hereinafter referred to as the " FIRST PARTY " , ON THE FIRSTPART

AND

4. MAULI KHAN KAMGAR SANGHTANA, a Trade Union having its Office at Redi , Maharashtra State ;

5. BANDAR KHAN KAMGAR KARKHANE ANI VAHATUK KAMGARUNION , a Trade Union having its Office at Redi , Maharashtra State;

representing the workinen of the FIRST PARTY , hereinafter referred to as the " SECOND PARTY " , on the SECOND PART

AND

6. SOCIEDADE DE FOMENTO INDUSTRIAL PRIVATE LIMITED , a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 , having its भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

Registered Office at Villa Flores da Silva , Erasmo Carvalho Street, Margao , Goa -403601 , hereinafter referred to as the " THIRD PARTY " , on the THIRD PART

WHEREAS :-

1. THE FIRST PARTY is the lessee in respect of iron ore mines at Redi in Maharashtra State .

2. On account of the closure of the said mines , the FIRST PARTY and the SECOND PARTY had signed and executed a Memorandum of Settlement on 28th October 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the " 28-10-1996 MOS" ) before the Asst. Labour Commissioner (C) , Vasco -Da- Gama, (Goa), under which a Voluntary Retirement Scheme ( hereinafter referred to as the " VRS " ) was acceptedby the workmen of Redi mines of the FIRST PARTY, which was however not implemented.

3. On account of non - implementation of the 28-10-1996 MOS , a further dispute arose regarding illegality of the closure of the mines which is presently pending before the Central Industrial Tribunal No. 2 at Mumbai bearing Reference No. CGIT No. 2/67/1999 .

4. Prior to the closure of the mines, the mines were locked out for a period of around 13 to 18 inoriths after dismissal of 57 workmen. Two disputes therefore arose, both of which were referred to adjudication to the Central Industrial Trinurnäl No. 2 at Mumbai , Viz . dispute relating to lockout (bearing No. CGIT No. 2/62 of 1993 ) and dispute relating to dismissal of the 57 workmen (bearing No. CGIT No. 2/23 of 1993 ) .

5. The Central Industrial Tribunal gave Awards in 1997 in the aforesaid disputes bearing CGIT No. 2/62/1993 and CGIT No. 2/23/1993 against which both the FIRST PARTY and the SECOND PARTY filedWrit Petitions in the Bombay High Courtat Bombay ( Appellate Side) being Writ Petition Nos . 352/1998 and 546/1998 (filed by the First Party) and Writ Petitions Nos . 1344/1999 and 1337/1998 (filed by the SECOND PARTY), all of which are pending final disposal in the Bombay High Court.

6. In the aforesaid Writ Petition No. 546/1998 filed against the Order passed by the Central Industrial Tribunal in the dispute relating to the lockout, the FIRST PARTY was directed to deposit the amount due to the workmen under the concemed Award and pursuant to the said direction the FIRST PARTY has deposited a sum of Rs . 14.60 lakhs in the Bombay High Court towards wages for the lockout period, only in respect of permanent workmen

2491 GI/2003-8

6211 7. The THIRD PARTY is proposing to enter into a agreement with party No. 1 herein by which the THIRD PARTY is proposing to purchase on a long term basis , the or that will be produced from the mining leases ofparty No. 1 to meet its exports commitments. Requisite Government sanction is being obtained from the State Government of Maharashtra for entering into such an arrangernment .

8. To ensure that the export commitments of the THIRD PARTY are met, it is imperative that there is continuous , uninterrupted and unobstructed supply of ore from the mining leases of Party No. 1 , for which there must be a conducive work atmosphere at the mining leases of Party No. 1 between the workmen of the FIRST PARTY and the FIRST PARTY.

9. To ensure that there is such a conducive atmosphere , the THIRD PARTY has suggested to the FIRST PARTY and SECOND PARTY that they should resolve the disputes regarding closure of the mines by agreeing to accept the terms of the 28-10-1996 MOS with additional amount by way of interest and further by also resolving the issue of the 57 dismissed wokmen who have been reinstated by the Central Industrial Tribunal by treating the said 57 workmen as having been reterenched effective from 31-12-2002 and on the same terms and conditions regarding payment ofcompensation on the basis of which the other workmen were agreed to be compensated for closure under the 28-10-1996 MOS , which suggestion has been acceptedby the FIRST PARTY and the SECOND PARTY.

10. The THIRD PARTY has agreed to sign and execute this indenture solely with a view to facilitate the payment of the sums payable under the VRS embodied in the 28-10-1996 MOS and the interest to be paid thereon and the other dues payable by the FIRST PARTY to its workmen as detailed hereunder less the amount which the FIRST PARTY has directly paid to some of the workmen, which proposal was acceptable to the FIRST PARTY and the SECOND PARTY.

NOW THEREFORE THE PARTIES HERETOAGREE AS UNDER:

1.1 The reference to " workmen " in this indenture refers to: (a) the 380 workmen of the FIRST PARTY who are covered under the 28-10-1996 MOS and (b ) the 57 workmen referred to in Recital No. 4 who were reinstated by Party No. 1 as per the award dated 27-8-97 of the CGIT. Wherever required, the aforesaid 57 workmen are hereinafter referred to as " the 57 wokmen " .

6212

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22, 1925

1.2 The trade unions comprising the SECOND PARTY represent the workmen ( including the 57 workmen) .

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ] 4.1.2 After giving due credit to the amounts paid as enumerated in Clause 3.2 , a sum of Rs. 79,26,019.00 is due and payable which is computed as under:

Sum stated in Clause 2.2

2.1 The total amount payable under the VRS as embodied in the 28-10-1996 MOS is Rs . 2,55,59,713.75 (computed upto 31-12-2002) .

2.2 The FIRST PARTY hereby agrees to pay to the 57 workmen, as and by way of VRS and on the same terms ascontained in the VRS embodied in the 28-10-1996 MOS , an aggregate sum of Rs . 80,32,367.21 ( inclusive of VDA difference , Bonus from 1999 to 2002 and computed upto 31-12-2002) .

2.3 In addition to the amount payable under the VRS embodied in the 28-10-1996 MOS and the sum payable to the 57 workmen as stated in clause 2.2 above, a sum of Rs. 25,72,039.53 is payable to the permanent workmen of the FIRST PARTY towards salary for lock - out period, as pertheAward of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal with interest thereon .

2.4 In addition to the amounts stated in Clauses 2.1,2.2 and 2.3 above , a sum of Rs. 2,29,590.00 is payable to winclımen employed by the FIRST PARTY, towards salary for the period September , 1991 to May , 1991 and for compensation .

3.1 The SECOND PARTY admits that out of the amount of Rs. 2,55,59,713.75 payable as stated in Clause 2.1 above , an aggregate sum of Rs . 21,18,705.75 has already been received by the workmen covered under the 28-10-1996 MOS , viz .:

From the FIRSTPARTY Rs. 11,80,704.90 From the SECOND PARTY Rs . 9,38,000.00

3.2The SECOND PARTY admits that out of the amount of Rs . 80,32,367.21 payable as stated in Clause 2.2 above , a sum of Rs . 7,120/ - has been received from the FIRST PARTY and a sum ofRs. 1,30,000/-has been received from the THIRD PARTY.

4.1.1 It is further agreed that the FIRST PARTY, after giving due credit to the amounts paid as enumerated in Clause 3. I above , shall pay interest @ 10% per annum for the period 1-1-1997 to 31-12-2002 or upto such date till the first instalment is paid. The FIRST PARTY shall pay a sum ofRs . 3,80,68,412.80 which is computed as under:

Sum stated in Clause 2.1

Rs . 2,55,59,713.75 Less: Paid by FIRST PARTY Rs. 11,80,705.75 as stated in Clause 3.1

Add: Interest 10% for five years Rs.. 1,46,27,404.80 1-1-1997 to 31-12-2002 Rs. 3,90,06,412.80

Rs. 9,38,000,00 Less: Paid by THIRD PARTY as stated in Clause 3.1

Rs . 3,80,68,412.80

Rs. 80,32,367.21

Rs .

7,120,00 Less: Paidby FIRST PARTY as stated in Clause 3.2

Rs . 80,25,247.21 Less: Paidby THIRD PARTY as stated in Clause 3.2 Rs . 1,30,000,00 Rs. 78,95,247.21 4..2.1 Within 60 days of the Award being passed as provided in Clause 13 below or within 60 days from the date of government sanction as stated in Recital No. 7 is obtained, whichever is LATER, an initial payment ofnot less than Rs . 71,40,000/-shall be made to the workmen as provided in Clause 4.2.2 . Such sum of Rs . 71,40,000/-shall include the sum of Rs . 14,60,000/-which has been deposited by the FIRST PARTY in Writ Petition No. 546/1998 as stated in Recital No. 6 above along with all interest accrued thereon. Such sum and interest shall be withdrawn from the High Court. The amount so collected from the High Court shall be made available to the THIRD PARTY for payment as aforesaid . The FIRST PARTY and SECOND PARTY shall jointly request the Registrar of the Bombay High Court ( Appellate side ) to issue the cheque for the aforesaid sum and interest in the name of the THIRD PARTY to facilitate payment . The sum of Rs . 71,40,000/ -shallbe disbursed by the THIRD PARTY only after receipt of the sum of Rs . 14.60 lakhs and interest from the FIRST PARTY asaforesaid.

4.2.2 The sum of Rs . 71,40,000/ - (hereinafter called the "First Instalment ") shallbe disbursed among the individual workmen as follows :

(a) The workmen have directed and instructed that a sum of Rs . 2.50,000/- ( Rupees two lakhs fifty thousand only ) be paid to Shri Madan G. Phadnis , Advocate , High Court , Mumbai . Accordingly , the THIRD PARTY shall effect payment to the said Shri Madan G. Phadnis , Advocate , High Court , Mumbai and such payment shall constitute payment of portion of the First Instalment to the FIRST PARTY.

(b ) Rs . 3,000/-( Rupees three thousand only ) to each of the 57 workmen listed in Annexure " E " hereto , who constitute those worknten who have been paid some amounts earlier by the FIRST PARTY under the terms of the 28-10-1996 MOS .

(c) Balance Rs . 67,19,000/ -of Rs . 71,40,000/-to be paid to the other 323 workmen in the same proportion as the sums individually receivablc by them , which worknuen constitute those workmen who have not been paid any amounts 6213 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

by the FIRST PARTY under the terms of the 28-10-1996 MOS.

4.2.3 The workmen have requested the THIRD PARTY that in addition to the First Instalment and simuhancously with the payment of the First Instalment , a further sum of Rs . 2,50,000/- (Rupees two lakhs fifty thousand only ) be paid to the aforesaid Shri Madan G. Phadnis , Advocate , High Court, Mumbai , which sum shall be recoverable from the workmen as provided in Clause 5.2 hereinafter .

8. Upon the execution of this indenture , Clause 5 of the 28-10-1996 MOS shall stand deleted. However, ifany new workmen are required to be engaged at the Mines of Party No. 1 , it is agreed that around 40% of such new workmen would be employed from out of the workmen covereÿXd under this indenture and 20% of such new workmen would be employed from out of the local villagers, purely on merit basis . However , the choice of individual persons for employment and the terms and conditions of employment of such persons shall be exclusively that stipulated by the THIRD PARTY or by the contractor who will carry out the mining operations on behalf of the THIRD PARTY.

4.3 The amounts payable to individual workmen of the sums stated in Clauses 4.1.1 , 4.1.2 , 2.3 and 2.4 are set outin Annexures " A " , " B " , " C" and " D " , respectively.

5.1 All sums to individual workmen enumerated in "Annexures A " , " B " , " C " and " D" , hereto shall be paid by individual cheques , in the proportion of the amounts reccivable by them as set out in the respective annexures along with simple interest @ 8.5% per annum from the day next after payment of the first instalment and till full payment is made to cach worker and shall be computed on reducing balance method .

9. The workmen and the SECOND PARTY hereby agree and undertake unto the THIRD PARTY that as long asthe agreement between the FIRST PARTY and the THIRD PARTY subsists , they shall not cause any let, hindrance , obstruction or any nature whatsoever in the running and working of the mines of Party No. 1 and in the event of breach of this condition , this agreement shall stand terminated forthwith and the THIRD PARTY shall be discharged from effecting payment as provided in this indenture.

5.2 The balance payment stipulated in Clause 5.1 shall be paid by the THIRD PARTY at the rate of Rs . 40/- perDry Metric Ton of Iron Orc produced from the Redi Mincs of Party No. 1 and which is shipped for export/ sold domestically by the THIRD PARTY , however after deducting the sum of Rs . 2,50,000/ - as provided in Clause 4.2.3 above , i. c . the amount which shall be disbursed to the individual workmen in terms of Clause 5.1 shall be the amount payable at the rate of Rs . 40 /- per Dry Metric less the aforesaid sum of Rs . 2,50,000 / - .

5.3 For the purpose of computation of tonnage as provided in Clause 5.2 , notarized photo -copies of the bill of lading/ seaway bill ( in case of exports ) or invoice (in case of domestic sales ) shall be final , conclusive and binding on all the parties hereto .

10.1 It is hereby expressly agreed and understood that the liability and obligation to pay the amounts enumerated in Clauses 4.1.1 , 4.1.2 and 2.3 is solely that of the FIRST PARTY. It is clearly understood that the THIRD PARTY, by virtue of this agreement, is only facilitating the payment due by the FIRST PARTY to the SECOND PARTY as agreed hereunder. Consequently, in the event of the termination for whatever reason ofthe proposed agreement between Party No. 1 and the THIRD PARTY for purchase ofore from Party No. 1, the obligations of the THIRD PARTY to effect payment hereunder shall likewise stand terminated and the THIRD PARTY shall have no obligation whatsoever to the workmen and the liability to make payments of the balance dues to the workmen shall again revert to the FIRST PARTY.

5.4 The amount stipulated in Clause 5.2 above shall be computed once a year around July and shall be paid within seven days from such computation in the same manner as stated in Clause 4.4.

10.2 It is agreed and expressly understood that in the event , for any reason whatsoever, the payment of the sums enumerated in Clauses 4.1.1 , 4.1.2 and 2.3 is not made fully as provided in this indenture , the balance amount payable shall continue to be payable by the FIRST PARTY and the FIRST PARTY shall continue to be liable for such sums.

6. The methodology of payment provided herein shall be in lieu of and shall supercede the schedule of payment mentioned provided in the 28-10-1996 MOS .

10.3 In the event stated in Clause 10.2 the FIRST PARTY shall continue to pay the balance amount in the manner provided in this indenture in Clauses 5.1 , 5.2 and 5.3.

11. Upon the execution of this indenture and in view ofthe settlement arrived at hereinabove , it is agreed that the FIRST PARTY and the workmen shall unconditionally withdraw their respective writ petitions enumerated in 7. That if tax is payable by an individual workman on his individual entitlement from and on the sums stated in Clauses 4.1.1, 4.1.2.2.3 and 2.4 , it will be calculated only on the basis that the day of payment shall be treated as accruing liability day and the THIRD PARTY shall deduct tax at source on all payments made hereunder and shall pay such deducted tax to the government on behalf of the FIRST PARTY who shall issue the relevant Tax Deducted atSource Certificates .

6214

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER. 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22, 1925

Recital No. 5 by filing minutes and by requesting the Bombay High Court to dispose off the proceedings in terms ofthis settlement with a specific direction in Writ Petition No. 546/1998 that the cheque for the sum ofRs . 14.60 lakhs deposited and for all interest accrued thereon be issued directly to and in the name of the THIRD PARTY, which, by virtue of this settlement, has undertaken to facilitate payment of all dues of the workmen of the FIRST PARTY including the dues accruing in the aforesaid Writ Petition.

12. Subject to Clauses 10.2 and 10.3 , it is agreed that all pending issues and disputes between the FIRST PARTY and their workmen have been fully and finally settled, and that there are no claims by the workmen against the management of the FIRST PARTY.

13. It is agreed that the FIRST PARTY and the SECOND PARTY will jointly file this Memorandum of Settlement before the Central Govt. , Industrial Tribunal No. II atMumbai in the matter of reference No. CGIT - 2 /67 of 1999 and request the tribunal to pass an Award in terms of the settlement contained herein and dispose off the proceedings accordingly .

14. The workmen have directed and instructed that a sum of Rs. 5,00,000 /- ( Rupees five lakhs only) be paid directly to the SECOND PARTY trade unions as and by way of union donations of the individual workmen to their respective unions . Whenever payment is effected to workinen under the terms of this agreement , a sum not exceeding Rs . 1,00,000/ - per annum from the sums payable to each workmen will be deducted and paid directly to the SECOND PARTY trade unions as and by way of the aforesaid union donations . However, such deduction of Rs . 1,00,000 / - per annum shall be effected only after the deduction of Rs. 2.50,000/- as provided in Clause 5.2 is effected . However, such payment to the trade unions shall be effected only after the SECOND PARTY trade unions submit a list of their respective members to the THIRD PARTY and such list is duly verified by the FIRST PARTY and intimation that such verification has been duly carried out is duly conveyed by the FIRST PARTY to the THIRD PARTY

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have signed and executed this settlement at the place and on the date first hereinabove stated.

SIGNED AND EXECUTED BY THE FIRST PARTY For and on behalf of M/ s . GOGTE MINERALS

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii ) ] M/ s. CENTRAL MINING & TRADING SYNDICATE

Sd/-

(ArvindB. Gogte) Partner

For and on behalf of M/ s. GENERAL RESEARCH DEV. CORPN .

Sd/- (ArvindB. Gogte) Partner

SIGNED AND EXECUTED BY THE SECOND PARTY REPRESENTING THE WORKMEN Forand on behalf of MAULI KHAN KAMGAR SANGHATANA (Sharad A. Sawant) President

Sd/- Sd/-

(V. B. Juwalekar) General Secretary

Forand on behalf of BANDAR KHAN KAMGAR KARKHANE ANI VAHATUK KAMGAR UNION

Sd/-

(V. S. Bude) General Secretary

SIGNED AND EXECUTED BY THE THIRD PARTY For and on behalf of SOCIEDADE DE FOMENTO INDUSTRIAL PRIVATE LIMITED. Sd/-

(Auduth M. Timblo ) Chairman & Managing Director

WITNESSES :

Name : A. S. Kambli

(Arvind B. Gogte)

Partner

For and on behalf of

Name : P. G. Bhobe

Address: Redi

Address: Former , Marefo 416517

REGD . No. 216/2003 6215 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/भाद्र 22 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Balance due

87599.04

183178.90

124824.77

170025.45

104894.72

174694.56 182870.96

150789.26

141808.51 117120.77 179875.65

118911.36

119009.60

117642.50

105611.52 128373.21

107373.21

197242.16

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

Advance paidby fomento on

2000-8-9-2002

2001

1000.00

2000.00 1000.00

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00

.by fomento in

Advance

Notpaid

Total

33974.64

64509.54

57670.97

45045.29

69817.09

66260.46 68951.61

67453.37

47934.29

45716.76

45240.94 53928.19

40264.95

40729.32

40460.52

74340.81 45753.60

49264.95.

Interest for6 years @10%

Total Amount

56624.40

96118.29

79890.48

75075.48

82108.26 75401.56

67434.20

76194.60

67108.26

76256.00

67882.20

89880.32

107515.91

116361.81

110434.10 114919.35

112422.28

123901.35

21648.24

31353.64

41481.77

28634.39

42346.00

22824.16

58039.82

Amount paidby Gogte minerals

Total Amount due

75075.48

78272.64

79890.48

96118.29

89880.32

75401.56

96068.59

110434.10

112422.28

107515.91

114919.35

90706.36

116361.81

107548.24

125148.08

123901.35 118602.00

123590.03

3788.55

4023.88

4430.72

2272.31

1117.08

4314.24 4992.50

7707.04

5932.08

6949.89

1392.15

4430.61

4859.56

8111.59

2164.36 4170.08 5391.00

2612.03

EL&SL Amount due

13-01-2003

ANNEXURE-A

49.0

45.5

EL & SL days

PERMANENTWORKERS

cable

appli-

CALCULATIONMADEUPTO31-12-2002

gratuity

73958.4077.0

73958.4056.0

73958.4014.5

85449.6056.0

105243.6028.5

70542.6062.0

111130.8045.0

89168.4079.5

111931.2057.0

108398.40

99841.2088.0

87957.0083.0

105441.6062.5

88542.0022.0

120978.0028.5

Compen-

120978.00

1GOGTEMINERALS,REDI.

113211.0060.0

122509.2015.0

sation inclusive oflegal

77.04 77.04

77.73 82.12

77.04

79.88

87.58

8419

78.38 87.42

91.65

89.85

98.38

91.65

92.81

Daily wage rate

2021.00

2003.00

2480.00

2077.00

2277.00 2541.0097.73

2057.0079.12

2038.00

2336.00

2383.00

2558.00

2413.00

2383.00

2073:0079,73

222135.00

Total monthly ofsalary/ wages

172273.00

ser- vice

AsperV.R.S.Agreement28-10-1996,GratuityandLeaveWagestobepaidtoall380workers

date

mentyears

31-5-1974

7-9-197422

1-6-1981

15-5-1980

1-10-1974

31-5-197422

31-5-1974

15-5-198016

15-5-1980

15-5-1981

2-11-1978

31-5-198115

Appoint-Total

10-9-197719

29-9-1974

31-5-198115

27-10-1972

29-10-197521

14-10-197422

8.ShriK.L.Morajkar

9.ShriP.V.Mathkar

7.ShriR.M.Parah

15.ShriR.L.Redkar

6.ShriN.S.Kamat

18.ShriH.T.Kadam

5.ShriS.R.Desai

16.ShriF.S.Montero

1.ShriD.N.Mayekar

3.ShriS.G.Arondekar

14.ShriK.K.Gosavi

4.ShriP.S.Pendse

10.ShriA.S.Bugade

11.ShriS.H.Pednekar

17.ShriA.H.Redkar

13.ShriM.G.Gantalkar

2.ShriP.O.Bhujang

12.ShriAnantA.Shetkar

No.

Sr.Name

(MINES) 6216

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22. 1925

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 276.37

Balance due

98233.76

143166.88

161545.92

183930.16

-3040747.50

156419.20

201527.96

182743.61

137532.00

153390.80

223537.92

154475.47

209908.96 218844.43

209065.30

211036.90

210265.73 142484.08

208517.24

192174.84

198475.01

202207.20

214253.92 fomento

1000.00

17000.00

1000.00

Advance

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00 1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000.00 paidby on

1000.00

100000 2000-8-9-2002

2001

1000.00

33000.00

fomento

Advance

1000.00

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

2000,00

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00 853.64

Total Interest for6 years

54437.58

76697.99

37962.66

83191.66

79465.86

69653.85

69723.81

61704.72 58646.55

59407.20 80263.84

84951.72

79974.65

1159030.31

59053.30

79524.49

52699.50

75553.13

76952.70

79318.97

54556.53

81470.22

73190.57 @10%

Total Amount

1422.73

90729.30

63271.10

98422.17

1931717.19

97744.25

99012.00

90927.55

127829.98

116089.76

87832.50

116206.35 102841.20

138652.77

132443.10

141586.20

133773.06

132540.81 133291.08

132198.28

125921.88

128254.50

121984.28

135783.70 Amount

minerals

246328.02 41857.00

paidby Gogte

Total

Amount due

1422.73

90729.30

87832.50

97744.25

99012.00

98422.17

90927.55

2178045.21

127829.98

141586.20

116089.76

102841.20

105128.10

138652.77

116206.35

133773.06

132198.28

121984.28

132443.10

133291.08

135783.70

128254.50

132540.81

Amount due

6111.30 1422.73

8528.98

5629.25

6193.77

4158.56

2676.00

98997.81 9557.10

4275.15

9349.20

8527.17 3647.46

8328.60

6682.28

2415.21

4699.48

7528.50 5739.48125921.88

5604.55

5246.28

6995.70 7941.70

11429.10

EL&SL

17.0

59.0 68.5

cable

sation&

appli-

gratuity

inclusiveSL

Compen-EL

2079047.40

93492.0090.0

95571.0090.0

84618.0078.0

92115.0055.0

96336.0025.0

85323.0067.0

28044.80

80304.0090.0

119301.0081.5

111931.2055.0

111931.2053.5

92228.40

130125.6024.5

121014.0085.0

130125.6086.5

120182.4074.5

130125.6037.0

133257.6090.0

127842.0082.0

121258.8090.0

127498.8057.5

oflegaldays

wage rate

Daily

83.69

77.73 77.73

98.58

77.04

90.42

81.73

77.73

103.88

28.58

104.65

83.65

106.19

134.46 107.04

102.35

Total

salary/ wages

TOTAL

2037.0078.35

2021.00

2351.00

2721.00

2176.00

2701.00

2175.00

2761.00

2563.00 2312.00

monthly

2021.00

2406.00 2175.0083.65

3496.00 2783.00 2563.00

2563.0098.58

2661.00

2271.0087.35115302.0076.5

2003.00

2125.00

2021.00 2518.0096.85 3 18

ser-

vice

mentyears dateof

1-9-197224

7-9-197719

4-5-197026

Appoint-Total

4-9-197917

6-9-197422

1-9-197026 26-9-1995

31-5-198115

31-5-197422

16-9-197917

31-5-198115

31-5-198122

31-5-198115

15-5-198016

26-9-197026

30-10-1978

23-10-197224

20-10-197224

No.

19.ShriR.S.Rane

20.ShriS.E.Arolkar

24.ShriR.J.Kambli

23.ShriA.K.Naik

30.ShriM.B.Kambli

22.ShriS.N.Nagolkar

28.ShriK.I.Bastwadi

21.ShriH.M.Fernandes

29.ShriM.S.Kushnaji

34.ShriL.D.Raul

35.ShriS.B.Redkar

25.ShriJ.D.Kerkar

39.ShriDeoS.Raut

40.ShriG.L.Sutar

26.ShriA.Y.Korgaonkar

33.ShriV.D.Panjikar

Sr.Name

27.ShriS.B.Ghorpade

31.ShriA.N.Kushnaji

36.ShriS.N.Bugade

38.ShriA.M.Narsule

41.ShriP.N.Perera

37.ShriA.Y.Bhagat

32.ShriA.B.Nandgadkar [ भाग II II- खण्ड 3 ( 3 (ii) ]

6217 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

Balance due

15 175535.06

140330.62

116362.24

162200.18

178350.40

5168588.30

159221.18

172274.06

107311.68

114115.68

178517.76

185379.14

179257.15 139813.82

169910.40 169933.70

126909.84

186016.16

153181.82

200217.31

154731.76

100648.32 155104.45

115826.88 1000.00

Advance

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000.00 25000.00

1000.00 1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000.00 paidby fomento on

2000-8-9-2002

by in

2001

Advance

2000.00

fomento

2000.00

2000.00 1000.00 2000.00 57000.00

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00

1000.00

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

NotPaid

NotPaid Total

Interest for6 years

53373.98

66950.65

41366.88 61200.07

60832.94

43635,84

68069.16

43918.38

68006.40

64841.40

1968970.61 76206.49

38868.12

68346.43

70642.18

64850.14

70881.06

58539.17

53555.18

65727.77

48341.19 58568.18

58774.41 43435.08 @10%

Total Amount

88956.64 68944.80

72726.40

73197.30

3281617.69

89258.64

97565.28 111584.42 101388.24

80568.65 97613.64

113344.00

97957.35

102000.11

109546.29

72391.80

127010.82

64780.20

113448.60

113910.72

117736.96

108069.00 108083.57

118135.10

Amount

minerals

21566.52

26974.16

27527.96

157307.70

10000.00

29382.06

paidby Gogte

22933.68

23759.36 Total Amount due

96472.76

99700.56

89258.64

9 111584.42 101388.24

97957.35

97565.28

3438925.39

80568.65 97613.64

113910.72

127010.82

110523.16

87713.88

96151.16 102579.36

109546.29

113344,00

113448.60

112000.11

108083.57

108069,00

118135.10

117736.96

8 4591.42 6780.24

6544.76

7107.36 3942.96

6012.24

4582.36

5752.02 5479.97

1718.55

5107.11

6476.80 7241.40

5109.00

3912.65

3339.09 7043.52

1134.48

7358.56

2829.48

4311.50

1374.84

185206.39

1484.96 EL&SL Amount due

& SL

days

50.0

cable

appli-

sation

gratuity

inclusive

Compen-EL

95472.0067.0

95757.6042.0

89928.0065.5

94608.0064.5

83246.4078.0

105940.8054.5

106207.2090.0

76656.0049.0

106893.0039.5

84884.4038.0

3253719.00

106207.2041.5

96238.8022.5

106867.2087.0

106893.0043.0

96238.8018.0

106867.2080.0

96430.8012.0

94666.2016.0

102960.0065.5

121258.8074.0

110378.4088.0

113823.60

oflegal

Daily wage rate

84.08

80.96

93.88

77.08

74.46

94.54 99.92

80.46

78.00

80.46

77.73

118,77

105.12

83.62

76.38 106.08

76.38

118.77

92.81 wages

Total

TOTAL

2186.00

3088.00

2758.00 2733.00 2105.00

2598.00

2092.00

2441.00

2004.00

2105.0080.96

2076.0079.85

1986.00

2028.00 2021.0077.73102603.6070.5

2174.00

monthly salary/

2242.0086.23

2021.00

1936.00

3088.00

1986.00 3

22 22

ser-

vice

172458.00

172413.00 dateof

mentyears

1-6-1974

6-9-197422

Appoint-Total

1-6-1974

6-9-197422

6-9-1974

1-6-197422

6-9-197422

2-4-197719

31-5-198115

20-9-197917

13-2-197521

1-11-1978

10-5-197026

31-5-198115

20-9-198016

1-10-1979 31-5-198115

31-5-198115

28-10-197521

25-10-197521

11-10-1979 1

51.ShriU.S.Padwal

61.ShriM.G.Rane

55.ShriP.Y.Raut

62.ShriG.S.Kambli

53.ShriM.P.Redkar

56.ShriS.N.Kambli

44.ShriU.V.Satoskar

59.ShriA.S.Kambli

No.

46.ShriM.G.Warkhandekar

50.ShriA.G.Manjrekar

52.ShriS.R.Kambli

57.ShriP.G.Parab

58.ShriL.R.Parulekar

60.ShriV.V.Chinchanekar 43.ShriN.S.Bhosale

47.ShriL.F.Fernandes

49.ShriA.N.Kambli

54.ShriV.B.Kanyalkar

63.ShriK.I.Mhaskar

48.ShriJosephD'Cruz

64.ShriH.M.Solkar 42.ShriS.M.Deshpande

45.ShriD.S.Kanyalkar

Sr.Name 6218

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22 , 1925

775.38 Balance due

2371930.02

173260.88

110805.12

116588.16

11282688

11000.00

1000.00

Advance

paidby fomento 2000-8-9-2002 on

by in 2001

25000.00.

2000.00

fomento

Advance

NotPaid

290.77

902973.76

43435.08 65347.83

42676.92

43720.56

Total Interest for6 years @10%

484.61 Total Amount

71128.20

72391.80

72867.60

108913.05

1504956:27 Amount

116796.20

23728.68

23759.36

22615.12

paidby Gogte minerals

484.61 Total Amount due

96151.16

96596.28

93743.32

1621752.47

108913.05

484.61

729.52

52063.67

1307.88

1578.45

1484.96

EL.&SL Amount due

7.0 EL & SL days

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii ) ].

Balance due

178888.20

194613.57

163814.27

198029.76

174147.76

154046.62 203856.08

140916.72

137774.40 on

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

Advance

1000.00 paidby fomento

2000-8-9-2002

2001

1000.00

fomento

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

1000.00

2000.00

Advance

Total Interest for6 years

53218.77

74105.09

75386.16

58142.48 76821.03

68208.08

62180.35

66430.41 52790.40. @10%

Total Amount

88697.95

96904.14

87984.00

103633.92

125643.60

123508.48

128035.05

110717.35

113680.13

Amount minerals

29511.30 paidby Gogte

Total Amount due

88697.95

96904.14

103633.92.

128035.05

123508.48

110717.35

125643.60

113680.13.

117495.30

8182.14 7057.05 1748.93

7390.80

5255.68

3985.92

3335.35

1262.95 2016.30 EL&SL Amount due

& SL

PERMANENTWORKERS

gratuity appli- cable

Compen-

93013.808.0

94666.2016.0

95288.4014.0

1569688.80

107334.6015.0

sation inclusive oflegal

cable

appli-

2GOGTEMINERALS,REDI

sation inclusive

Compen-EL

99648.0048.0

87435.0013.0

88722.0083.0

118252.8090.0

120978.0077.0

118252.8064.0

107382.0041.0

115479.0022.0 oflegaldays gratuity

111931:2022.5

(CENTRALMINING&TRADINGSYNDICATE)

Daily wage rate

91.19

93.42

105.23

TOTAL

2429.00

2413.0092.81

2736.00

1800.0069.23 Total monthly salary. wages

172371.00

vice

mentyears dateof ser-

1-6-1996 AppointTotal

1-10-197917

1-10-197917.

1-10-197917

1-10-1979

65.ShriR.T.Tulaskar

66.ShriS.V.Kocharekar

68.ShriB.R.Redkar

67.ShriD.S.Tandel

69.ShriR.J.Harmalkar Sr.Name No.

rate Daily wage

77.73

91.65

91.65 Total

2159.0083.04

2021.00

2526.0097.15

2563.0095.58 2383.00 2135.0082.12

2383.00 monthly salary wages

242135.0082.12

ser-

222115.0081.35

vice

Total

mentyears dateof

1-9-197224

1-6-198115

1-6-198115 Appoint-

2-10-1972

2-11-1976.20

21-10-197422

20-11-1974 11-11-197521 Sr.Name

72.ShriS.Z.Redkar

77.ShriK.D.Draxi No.

76.ShriH.B.Hukkeri

75.ShriM.L.Redkar

78.ShriD.K.Arolkar

70.ShriS.T.Tendulkar

73.ShriS.B.Rane

74.ShriB.B.Manjrekar

71.ShriK.P.Paranjape 6219

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003 /भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग 11 - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Balance due

676290.46

4544344.57

137049.44

177705.20

157880.96

139452.70

137534.88

176646.96

201251.60

158803.39

137231.48

133182.97 170565.54

165548.38

173248.80

192980.16

181810.85

159288.34

175155.90

156220.15

179350.56

182743.61

194732.08 186163.73

2000.00

23000.00

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

Advance paidby fomento 2000-8-9-2002 on

5000.00 2001

48000.00 1000.00

1000.00 2000.00

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

1000.00

Advance

fomento

256233.92

53044.76

59580.36

52700.50

75844.35

52518.54

52586.81

67367.61

67764.45

66093.30

60858.13

65087.08

51068.61

66808.46

63205.63

68381.46

70936.40

69653.85

60676.27

1730754.21

73774.53 69304.07

59707.56

72742.

Total Interest for6 years @10%

427056.54 Total Amount

87644.68

99300.60

88407.94

87834.30

87530.90

112940.75

85114.36

126407.25

101127.12

110155.50

116089.76

112279.35

113969.10 101430.21 105342.72

111347.44

108478.46

99512.60 118227.33

121237.60

122957.55 115506.78

60408.972884590.36

30897.67

Amount paidby Gogte minerals

427056.54

88407.94

87834.30 99300.60

87530.90

87644.68

126407.25 Total Amount due

2944999.33

112940.75

101127.12

112279.35

105342.72

108478.46

99512.60

110155.50

111347.44

116012.03

101430.21

122957.55

113969.10

121237.60 116089.76

115506.78

118227.33

10031.34

1072.54

2882.25

1175.68

1365.30

2679.95

3396.60

1061.90

620.55

1473.26

4888.32

6415.50

4114.95

1881.12

4939.41

105077.53

4342.24

6977.70

2820.20

4158.56

4080.83

6296.13

3575.58

4655.20

EL&SL Amount due

& SL

7.0

64.0

64.5

19.0

appli- cable

417025.20

95904.0042.5

87335.4014.0

86469.0018.0

gratuity

86469.0014.0

96238.80

2839921.80

123525.0035.0

110260.8035.0

86469.0015.5

inclusive

96490.80 103461.6024.0

103740.0070.5

96692.4031.5

Compen-

107005.2056.0

111931.2052.5

111931.208.0.0

111931.2053.5

106991.4090.0

108164.4052.5

116582.4057.5

111931.2046.0

122337.00

10700520

sation oflegaldays

76.61

82.35 76.57

75.85

78.38

79.92

75.85

76.38

78.38

91.00

76.58

77.54

88.65

77.73

80.96

77.73 77.73 77.53

89.53

77.73

Daily wage rate

TOTAL

wages

Total

1992.00

2141.00 1991.00

1972.00

1972.00 2078.00

1972.00

1991.00

1986.00

2038.00

2016.00 2366.00

2016.00

2021.00

2305.00

2105.00

2328.00 2021.00

monthly salary

24 24

of ser- vice

mentyears date

25-9-197719

2-10-1972 1-8-1972

4-10-1977

1-8-1972

9-11-1977

27-9-197719

25-9-197719

18-9-1973

7-12-197323

17-12-1976 Appoint-Total

16-9-1972

15-10-1971

21-9-1973

16-12-1974

23-10-1975

14-12-1975

20-10-197224

23-10-197224

20-12-1973

19-11-1978

13-10-1973

Kudav

100ShriK.R.Redkar

98.ShriG.M.Chadedar

96.ShriD.M.Redkar

95.ShriJ.G.Phatgi

99ShriA.H.Tashildar

94.ShriS.S.Dharane

93.ShriD.K.Budhihal

97ShriB.H.Tashildar

92.ShriR.I.Sheikh

91.ShriV.R.Salgaonkar

87.ShriI..S.Redkar

88.ShriG.A.Kerkar

90ShriD.B.Tivarekar

89ShriA.R.Gawade

86.ShriT.S.Kerkar

85.ShriG.V.Bhagat

83.ShriA.J.Jeral

84.ShriA.S.

No.

82.ShriJ.J.Fernandes

80.ShriC.D.Draxi

79.ShriS.N.Gadekar

81. ShriD.N.Gadekar

Sr.Name

2491 G1 /2003-9 6220

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22, 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 15

Balance duc

53071.66

175090.80

111074.88

101873.28

124559.20

192012.82

163645.31

1898986.93

202886.40

178797.89

108820.32

152501.76

201068.16

133584.45

1000.00

Advance

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

11000.00

1000.00

paidby fomento on 2000-8-9-2002

by 2001 in

fomento

Advance

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00 2000.00

23000.00

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00 2000.00

77207.40 76525.56

470810 724870.10

39327.48

41932.62

68174.21

62116.99

20276.87

66784.0.5

51219.17

58313.16

73129.81 42778.08

Total Interest for6 years @10%

Total Amount

78474.50

65545.80

71296.80

33794.79

69887.70

85365.28

97188.60

128679.00

113623.68

127542.60

111306.75

103528.32

121883.01

Amount

1000.00 82180.231208116.83

29220.00

paidby GOE minerar

23317.73

28642.50

Total Amount due

33794.79 85365.28

79474.50

88863.53

98530.20 97188.60

1290297.06

113623.68

128679.00

103528.32

127542.60

100516.80

121883.01

111306.75

2470.08

4723.80 2709.28

1239.00

1848.72

53196.66

4768.59 3514.95

7012.80

1466.61 6874.20

2975.93

6812.10

6780.60

EL&SL Amount due

EL & SL days

PERMANENTWORKERS

gratuity appli- cable

inclusive

Compen-

3GOGTEMINERALS,REDI.

85887.6039.5

29026.2069.0

82656.0029.5

93504.0090.0

91656.0090.0

72662.4090.0

90408.0090.0

1237100.40

101679.6024.0

127440.0014.0

107791.8045.0

122818.8060.0

120416,4019.0

111153.6032.0

oflegal sation

[KONKANCONTRACTORS(MINES)]

75.34

91.84

76.38

77.03

77.92

78.11 77.19

77.19

88.50

78.73

69.11

TotalDaily wage rate

TOTAL

1959.00

monthly salary wages

2031.00

2388.00

1959.0075.34

2047.00 2007.00

2003.00

2007.00 1986.00

2026.00

2301.00

1968.0075.69

71797.00

years of ser- vice

Total

Appoint- ment date

1-3-1990

1-10-197026

10-9-197026

22-4-197224

7-10-197224

1-10-197719

4-10-197422

1-11-197620

1-11-197720

1-11-197620

19-3-198016

1-10-197323

31-5-198115

106.ShriV.S.Raut.

105.ShriV.P.Gosavi

104.ShriR.M.Bastwadkar

112.ShriR.R.Kahar

109.ShriS.M.Kanyalkar

No.

101.ShriRY.Gosavi

107.ShriR.D.Naik

111.ShriR.M.Malge

102.ShriDnyaneshwarS.Raut.

108.ShriS.B.Sharbidre

110.ShriM.G.Attar

103.ShriGB.Padwal

113.ShriS.R.Kanyalkar

Sl.Name 6221

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/भाद्र 22 , 1925

[भाग II-खण्ड 3( ii) ]

Balance due

366879.33

119212.77

106313.76

141352.80

3000.00

1000.00

Advance paidby fomento on 2000-8-9-2002

6000.00

2000.00

Advance by fomento in 2001

140954.75

40992.66

45829.79

54132.30

Total Interest for6 years @10%

Total Amount

234924.58

76382.98

90220.50

68321.10

23951.65

258876.23 Tofal Amount due

90220.50

76382.98

92272.75

10520.03

1169.98

6601.50

2748.55 EL&SL. Amount due

14.0

90.0

35.0 EL & SL days

PERMANENTWORKERS (G.R.D.C.)

4.GOGTEMINERALS,REDI.

248356.20

75213.00

83619.00

89524.20 Compen- sation inclusive oflegal gratuity appli- cable

78.53

73.35

Daily wage rate

TOTAL

2042.00

1907.00

Total monthly salary/ wages

2173.00 83.5715

ser- vice

date

Total mentyears of

14-1-1977

17-9-1981

5-10-1977

Appoint-

115.ShriP.T.Kambli

116.ShriD.V.Shinde

114.ShriK.Y.Gavande

Sr.Name No.

due

Balance

395314.37

169854.05

225460.32

2000.00

1000.00

1000.00 fomento

Advance 8-9-2002

paidby

by in

2000- 2001

3000.00

1000.00

2000.00

fomento

Advance

Total

Interest for6 years

150117.89

64445.27

85672.62

@10%

250196.48 Total Amount

83557.30

10000.00107408.78

73557.30142787.70 Amount paidby GOGTE minerals

Total Amount due

333753.78

117.408.78

216345.00

32607.18

6645.78 EL&SL Amount due

54.0

90.025961.40 EL & SL days

PERMANENTWORKERS (C.M.T.S.)

5.GOGTEMINERALS,REDI.

appli- cable

301146.60

gratuity

110763.00 Compen-

190383.60 sation inclusive oflegal

Daily wage rate

wages

TOTAL

3200.00123.07

7500.00288.46 Total monthly salary/

ser- vice

years of

Total

ment date

1-6-1981 Appoint-

1-10-198511

Y.S.P.Tendolkar

P.V.Joshi

117.Shri

118.Shri Sr.Name No.

6222

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22. 1925

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] 5

0.00

-0.01

846.08

Balance due

3599.86

116.91

3384.40

1661.47

2000.00

772713.66

--1000.00

166839.36

124379.52

188069.28

137216.78

151600.00

-2000

4000.00

1000.00

Advance

1000.00

paidby fomento on

2000-8-9-2002

2001

2000.00

by fomento in

1000.00

Advance

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00 1000.00 2000.00

15000.00

2000.00

Notpaid

0.00

43.84

692.28

Total Interest for6 years

1269.15

63689.76

296892.62

47767.32

71650.98

57600.00

52206.29

134995

@10%

0.00

73.07

-0.00

-0.01

Total amount

1038.42623.05

1153.00

2115.25

2249.91 79612.20

96000.00

494821.04

87010.49

106149.60

119418.30

913.38

865.35

Amount

2140.32

3138.20

3363.36

1176.91

46152.00

38650.00

31556.43

51921.00

179876.95 paidby Gogte minerals

73.07

Total amount due

865.35

913.38

1153.80

1038.42

2249.91

2140.32

2115.25

3363.36

1176.91

3138.20

674697.99

87010.49

152301.60

134650.00

111168.63

171339.30

73.07

865.35

3138.20

69410.79

5784.29

1176.91

7326.63

3363.36

8650.00

13845.60

15576.30

EL&SL amount due

9.01038.42

1.0

12.5913.38

15.01153.80

13.02249.91

25.02115.25

34.0

21.02140.32

15.0

33.0 17.0

EL & SL days

PERMANENTWORKERS

appli- cable

gratuity

sation inclusive

6.GOGTEMINERALS,REDI.

605287.20

81226.2047.0

Compen-

103842.0063.5

155763.0090.0

126000.0086.5

138456.0090.0

oflegal

[GOGTEMINERALS(EXECUTIVE)]

Daily wage rate

76.92

73.07

115.38

173.07

153.84

123.07

115.38

173.07

Total

1900.00

3000.00

1900.0073.07

1800.0069.23

2200.0084.61

2400.0092.30

1500.0057.69

2000.00

3200.00

4500.00

3000.00

4000.00

2600.00100.00

2650.00101.92

monthly salary/ wages

4500.00

2 2

I 1

12650.00101.92

vice

TOTAL

mentyears dateof ser-

1-3-1994

1-2-1995

Appoint-Total

1-6-198115

1-8-1993 1-6-1981 8-11-1994

8-11-1994 1-10-1975

1-10-1985

25-9-1995

31-5-1981 29-12-1994 10-12-1995I

28-12-1995

20-12-1994

123.ShriK.S.Kamat

122.ShriR.N.Arundekar

124.ShriModnathJha

129.ShriU.S.Kambale

126.ShriShivPrakashRao

131.ShriU.P.Rane

121.ShriM.T.Kambli

128.ShriS.V.Kakade

130.ShriA.N.Ganpuler

132.ShriR.Y.Satoskar

134.ShriK.K.Joshi

125.ShriBalaShridharan

133.ShriR.S.Gundyc

127.ShriAllampalliTataih

120.ShriP.V.Gadgil

119.ShriR.Balamurugum

No.

Sr.Name 6223 [ भाग II II- खण्ड ङ. 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13, 2003/भाद्र 22, 1925

15 15

due

Balance

Balance due

1130386.67

123963.12

191258.88

183928.56

178608.00

117884.48

156984.51

167917.71

167917.71 17759:12

14 14

7000.00

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

fomento

Advance

2000-8-9-2002

Advance paidby fomento on 2000-8-9-2002

bypaidby

2001

12000.00

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00 2000.00 2000.00

2000.00

2000.00 Advance by Fomento in

Notpaid

12 12

years

TotalAdvance

וויין for6Fomento

Interest

64094.14

72847.08

47611.17

431020.00

59994.19

70098.21

68103.00

67784.67

44581.68

Total Interest for6 years @10%

@10%

Total

Amount

Total Amount

718366.67

79351.95

99990.32

74302.80

106823.57

116830.35

121411.80

112974.45

113505.00

11 10 10

Gogte

Amount

29482.97

Minerals

29482.97

paidby

Amount paidby Gogte Minerals

9 9

due

Total

Amount

Total Amount due

747849.64

99990.32 79351.95

106823.57

121411.80

112974.45

113505.00 116830.35

103785.77

8 8

2451.17

45892.24

Amount

2111.12

5302.05

5344.95

7245.00

9844.20 9424.35

6620.57

EL&SL due

EL&SL. Amount due

7 7

& SL

EL & SL days

PERMANENTWORKERS

6 6

cable

sation appli-

sation appli- cable

gratuity

inclusive

701957.40

Compen-EL

8GOGTEMINERALS,REDI.

inclusive

97879.2022.0

74007.0065.0

97165.2069.5

Compen-

7GOGTEMINERALS,REDI.

104372.40

104372.4031.8

107406.0089.5

106260.0090.0

111567.6090.0

107672.4065.0

[ GOGTEMINERALS(JETTY)]

oflegaldays

oflegal gratuity

[KONKANCONTRACTORS(JETTY)]

5 5

wage rate

82.23

95.96 95.26

79.07

80.50

81.57

Daily wage rate

109.38 105.30

4 4

wages

TotalDaily

wages

Total

salary/

salarv

2138.00

2495.00 2477.00

2056.00

monthly

2121.00 2844.00

2093.00 2738.00

monthly

ser-

vice

TOTAL of ser- vice

TOTAL

2 3 2

date of

2-9-197422

mentyears

mentyears date

2-9-197422

1-9-198115

1-10-197917

Appoint-Total

AppointTotal

1 1

142.ShriSadanandD.Kerkar

Sr.Name

139.ShriBalkrishnaB.Redkar

137.ShriTulsidasB.Kubal

No.

138.ShriChandrakantB.Mulik

140.ShriAnkushR.Vengurlekar

141.ShriPandurangD.Salgaonkar

135.ShriSadguruG.Gadekar

136.ShriJanardanM.Palyekar

Sr.Name No.

6224

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2003/BHADRA 22, 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] 15

Balance due

246.14

77006.20

94515.49 37340.66

74204.61

88757.34

82946.50

39722.42

19218.14

97478.40

80871.57

81571.01

77691.52

101132.64

85248.00

36164.03

105206.51

48899.97 89039.84

102876.00

68346.00

95174.27

94930.13 68430.11

67708.27

118096.58

2034774.82

101952.47

Advance

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00 1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000.00 20000.00

1000.00 paidby fomento on

2000-8-9-2002

2001

fomento

2000.00

Advance

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

1000.00

47000.00

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

Notpaid

years

Total

Interest

for6

92.30

40577.44 15127.75

28951.73

7956.80

39049.74

16020.91 34409.00

36193.31

37679.40 31451.84

29627.33

39703.50

14686.51

32229.94 30259.32

31714.13

19462.49

33093.00

33389.94

45411.22

788165.56

36348.80

26754.75

38232.18

26411.29

36815.35 26515.60 @10%

Total Amount

153.84

67629.07 48252.88

65082.90 57348.34

60322.18

49378.88

25212.91 66172.50

26701.51

50432.20

62799.00 52419.73 24477.52

13261.34

53716.56

52856.88

75685.36

32437.48

55155.00

55649.90

61358.92

44591.25

44018.82

60581.33 44192.67

1313609.26

63720:30

Gogte

Amount

minerals

6074.00

17931.73 paidby

11857.53

due

153.84

Total Amount

67629.07

49378.88

66172.50

57348.34

48252.88

53716.56

60322.18 25212.91

26701.51

24477.52

65082.90 62799.00 52856.88

50432.20

13261.34

52419.73

55649.90

38511.48

75685.36

55155.00

60581.33

75578.03

44018.82

61358.92

44591.25 1331540.99

44192:67 8

due

71.38

74.38

314.92

542.63

72.65

519.00

506.76

Amouni

337.84

337.81

106.68

615.91

116.84

233.88

176.25

141.38

119.78

382.47

208.62

2206.20

2646.90

1096.87

1534.63

918.97

1701.70

1143.76

2206.20

18488.24 7

SLL

ELEL&SL

8.5

4.0153.84

1.5

5.5

22.0

cable

sation&

gratuity appli-

9GOGTEMINERALS,REDI.

inclusive

Compen-

67314.154.0

60247.801.0

48836.257.5

62280.006.0

24875.105.5

57010.504.0

48181.501.0

26085.60 53209.906.0

52623.003.0

62876.7030.0

63525.6030.0

55577.251.0

50885.1019.0

48730.50 52948.8030.0

75458.25

38404.801.5

23380.6519.0

60439.952.0

13144.502.0

44415.002.5

74541.6014.5

43810.203.0

43810.20

60439.9513.0

1313052.75 oflegaldays

rate

GOGTEMINERALSSEASONAL/TEMPORARY(MINES)

Daily

72.35 73.54

72.46 84.46

74.38 61.42

71.38

84.46 77.96

88.23

78.73

38.46

80.77

58.42

86.50

57.73

71.12

73.54

72.65

77.33

78.88 70.69

79.85

69.54

70.69

70.50

wages

Total salarv

Total 1881.00

2047.00

1934.00

monthlywage

1856.00

1597.00 2294.00

2196.00

1519.00

2011.00

1501.00 1849.00

1912.00 2076.00 1838.00

2051.00

1889.00 1808.00

1833.00

1808.0069.54 3

81884.00

21000.00

15 191912.00

142100.00

152027.00

142196.00

ser-

162249.00

17 191838.00

vice

date

ment,vears

1-1-1987

4-9-1980

4-9-198015

4-9-197916

2-9-197421

AppointTotal

2-9-197421

3-12-1986

26-9-197619

27-9-197718

21-9-1979

25-1-198115

1-11-1990

14-2-198114

16-9-197916

7-10-1976

25-12-1976

16-3-198114

12-11-1981 20-11-19869

18-12-1981

24-12-1980 18-11-1994

16-3-198114

10-12-1978

18-10-1983 20-10-197619

Name

144.Shri R.K.Amerkar

143.Shri J.N.Tirodkar

145.Shri A.B.Maldar

146.Shri U.G.Parab

148.Shri N.S.Jadhav

150.Shri B.P.Rane

151.Shri L.V.Gawade

147.Shri A.R.Rane

152.ShriD.M.Shivcharan

155.Shri P.S.Amate

156.ShriH.K.Fernandes

149.Shri S.L.Ajgaonkar

154.Shri BapuS.Kambli

160.Shri K.S.Rankale

158.Shri G.B.Walawalkar

162.Shri S.N.Tore

161.Shri V.B.Pawar

153..Shri M.N.Arondekar

163.Shri G.M.Narsule

157.Shri JagannathS.Rane

164.Shri Y.K.Desai

166.Shri P.N.Kanyalkar

169.Shri S.B.Mulla

167.Shri C.R.Sawant

165.Shri G.S.Rane

Sr. No.

168.Shri 1.M.Kolar

159:Shri R.A.Kambli 6225

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13 , 2003/भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- -खण्ड 3(ii) ]

53886.48

69684.64

42765.04

1947040.76

36143.94 76804.08

37931.76

53906.40

79211.34 55583.20

59775.20

116005.44

58212.00

79216.99

81859.44

113017.76

78910.42

37461.28 82859.44

35485.26

Balance due

57166.34

80415.02

50619.65

58306.80

58277.34

58054.40

35391.17

60811.78

68594.83

58250.40

112432.91

28000.00

1000.00 1000.00.

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000,00

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

fomento

8-9-2002 on

Advance

paidby

51000.00 2001

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00

2000-

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00

1000.00 2000.00

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00

by fomento in

Advance

Notpaid

759765.29

27256.74

29926.53

21332.43

14678.98

44627.04

16036.89

43131.66

15349.41

21339.90

22204.50

21968.70

30829.25

30831.37

43287.34

31280.63

31822.29

15172.98

14431.97

31822.29

14396.69

18982.37

22562.38 30716.41

22895.40

22604.00

22990.05

26848.06

23929.42

22968.90

Interest for6 years @10% Total

1266275.47

35554.05

49877.55

45427.90

24464.96

26728.15 74378.40

71886.10

35566.50

72145.57 37007.50

36614.50

51382.09

25582.35

39234.5023540.70

52134.39 51385.62

53037.15

25288.30

Total Amount

38159.00 24053.29 51194.02

31637.28

37603.96

38316.75

37673.34 23994.48

39882.36

38281.50

44746.77

6105.44

Amount

minerals

paidby Gogte

35554.05

45427.90

74378.40

26728.15

24464.96 49877.55

35566.50

1272380.91

71886.10

36614.50

51382.09

37007.50 25582.35

72145.57 39234.50

53037.15

51194.02

24053.29

52134.39

25288.30 53037.15

23994.48

37603.96

51385.62

39882.36 37673.34

38159.00

37742.72

Total Amount due

38281.50

44746.77 38316.75

357.70

261.40 184.05

196.50

24471.52

601.84

646.91

917.00

2187.60

1101.10

235.24 413.77

176.43

138.76

1764.30

1244.50

277.52

1637.50

208.14

937.56

246.75

1053.22

211.50

212.07

693.80

2256.90

184:05

1470.25

1354.25

2256.90

1044.12

EL&SL Amount due

4.0

3.0

8.0

14.0

5.5

11.0

3.0

30.0

3.0 3.0

14.0

3.5

14.0

25.0

19.0

3.0

EI. & SI days

35370.003.0 sation

45070.205.0

72190.8030.0 appli- cable

49693.50.2.5

26466.75

1247909.40

70785.00

35370.00

23818.05

50780.25

23818.05

35370.00

38317.50

35370.00

71092.35

50780.2530.0

23818.054.0

50341.5014.0

gratuity

37465.202.0

50786.25

37465.204.0

50780.2518.0

23818.05

37465.20

23818.0525.0

37465.2010.0

38070.00

44534.70

inclusive

38070.00

38944.8013.0

Compen-

oflegal

5070.2530.0

72.92

71.54

73.62

65.50

65.35

78.65

58.81

65.50 58.81

65.50

65.00

75.23

74.58 75.23

75.23

75.23 75.23

58.81 75.23

89.38 69.38

58.81

69.38

70.50

wage rate

72.12

70.69 70.50

6550 Daily

TOTAL

1703.00

1896.00

1914.00

1699.00

1860.00

1529.00

wages

1703.00

2045.00

1703.00

1529.00

1956.00

Total

1956.00

1939.00 1703.00

1956.00

1956.00 1956.00

1529.00 1529.00

1804.00

1529.00

1804.00

salary/

1804.00

1875.00

1833.00

1838.00

monthly

14 15

12 12

9 9

15 12

15 21

12 12 12 12

14 12

years of ser- vice

Total

ment date

1-2-1986

4-11-1983

18-9-197322

1-2-1986

8-11-1983

1-2-1986

8-11-1983

13-5-1980

14-10-1980

22-10-1981

16-12-197520

15-5-1980

15-3-198015

31-5-1974

15-5-1980

6-12-1983

23-11-1982

6-12-1983

10-10-1981

Appoint

Pednekar

Name

199.ShriS.M.Bhosale

198.ShriM.K.Pawaskar

197.ShriVR.Sawant

196.ShriC.N.Rane

192.ShriH.G.Raut

194.ShriS.M.Naik

193.ShriV.A.Joshi

195.ShriS.M.Dhupkar

189.ShriM.A.Naik

191.ShriG.T.Bhimdkar

190.ShriS.S.Bagewadi

184.ShriM.B.Gavandi

188.ShriS.R.Shetkar

186.ShriC.V.Kambli

185.ShriH.S.Vadar

187.ShriV.G.Negolkar

183.ShriM.D.Pednekar

182.ShriR.D.Redkar

181.ShriK.P.Suryaji

180.ShriA.J.Manekar

179.ShriM.N.Bugade

176.ShriY.S.Naik

177.ShriR.S.Kudav

178.ShriP.M.Redkar

175.ShriS.S.Patil

174.ShriS.1.Devekar

173.ShriV.N.Parsekar

172.ShriV.H.Redkar

170.ShriN.G.Nivajekar

171.ShriSakharamB.

No.

Sr.

6226

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22, 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )] 15

due

Balance

37649.47

96036.00

36238.03 73252.80

36708.51

58376.72

73315.68

69887.04

44606.40

72871.49 73148.35

112089.76 77687.23 88631.93

76546.18

72401.60

91386.88

98544.64

54200.00 92764.40

75407.84

88872.00

88524.00

-1000.00

69856.34

50234.40

71368.58

69970.80 90558.80

2040135.86 on

Advance

fomento

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

paidby

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

27000.00 in

2001

2000-8-9-2002

2000.00

fomento

Advance

2000.00

2000.00 1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00

1000.00

50000.00

NotPaid

Total years

for6

Interest

14890.69

15243.55

14714.26

37138.50

28594.80

43158.66

23016.27

28618.38 27332.64

30257.71

17852.40

34361.97

28555.63

28451.81

29829.82

27900.60 37704.24

35395.08

21075.00 34321.50

19962.90

29402.94

34786.65

34452.00

27364.05 34709.55

27321.13 27513.22 @10%

793925.95 11

Total

Amount

24523.77

61897.50

25405.92

24817.82

38360.45

50429.52

47658.00

47697.30

47419.68

57269.96

71931.10

45554.40

49716.36

29754.00

47592.72

46501.00

57420.00

35125.00

62840.40

57202.50

57977.75

58991.80

45606.75 33271.50

57849.25

45855.36

49004.90

45535.21

40764.611323209.92 10

Gogte

minerals

Amount

8511.48

415.38 paidby

8937.27

11038.75

11861.73

due

Total

Amount

61897.50

415.38 24523.77

25405.92

47697.30

24817.82

38360.45

47592.72

47658.00 47419.68

54065.88

50429.52

71931.10

29754.00

57977.75

69131.69

60755.11 58991.80

62840.40

46501.00

35125.00 57202.50

57420.00

45606.75 33271.50

57849.25

54792.63

45535.21

49004.90

1363974.53 8

due

70.50

79.72

705.72

999.77

130.70

119.88

211.05

850.08

61.50 Amount

626.22

748.10

127.79

1587.87

145.30

536.55

1490.80

715.40

415.38

1880.71

465.01 490.23

1430.80 1740.00

2244.30 1957.50

1375.00

1941.25

23147.33 EL.&SL.

& SL

6.0

24.0 27.0

cable

sation appli-

gratuity

inclusive

Compen-EL

38229.752.0

61897.50

23818.0527.0

47486.253.0

47587.501.0

53946.001.5

23818.0512.0

23818.0517.0

70440.3020.0

3210.001.0

50349.601.0

46966.509.0

29754.00

69003.901.5

46569.6011.5

33750.0022.0

45070.2020.0

58846.502.0

58874.4023.0

55462.50 45070.207.5

60596.1030.0

57229.6510.0

55462.50 45070.206.5

54302.406.5 oflegaldays

48289.5010.0

55908.0025.0

1340827.20 5

Daily

65.50

70.35

74.54

73.92

58.81

58.81 65.35

79.92

58.81

66.12

79.92

69.58

28.85

81.77 71.54

85.19

62.50 74.81

72.50

72.65

71.54 71.54

72.50 71.54

74.81

61.50

17.65 69.23 4

wages

Total

salary:rate

monthlywage

1529.00

1703.00

1529.00

750.00

1529.00 1829.00

1833.0070.50

1938.00

1922.00

1699.00

2078.00

1809.00 2126.00

2215.00 1860.00

1625.00

1889.00 1945.00 1860.00

1860.00

1885.00 1860.00 1961.0075.42

1599.00

2019.00 3

ser-

vice

101719.00

181945.00

11800.00

171885..00

Total

date of

mentyears

1-2-19869

Appoint-

1-2-19869

TOTAL

5-9-197916

1-4-198114

17-9-197421

3-2-197718

4-10-198015

1-11-1985

9-10-198015

6-10-19951

5-9-197916

1-10-197718

4-11-1978

8-12-198114

26-10-197421

5-10-1977

3-10-198015

23-11-198213

10-12-198114

18-9-198114

15-10-198015

22-9-197916

25-5-1995

23-11-198312

16-11-197817

2-10-198114

16-11-197817

20-10-198312 Name

200.ShriR.B.Raktade

201.ShriS.N.Raut(O)

202.ShriR.B.Sheikh

204.ShriM.S.Shetkar.

205.ShriU.H.Rane.

203.ShriJ.G.Rane

206.ShriJayavantS.Rane.

208.ShriP.S.Tirodkar.

209.ShriY.G.Redkar.

210.ShriE.R.Fernandes,

211.ShriR.T.Andurlekar.

207.ShriB.T.Kerkar.

215.ShriD.G.Bhatt.

212.ShriN.M.Tari.

214.ShriM.N.Bandekar.

216.ShriS.D.Mestri.

218.ShriA.N.Gadekar.

217.ShriV.R.Dicholkar.

213.ShriM.K.Paranjape.

219.ShriM.A.Kudomkar.

221.Shri1.H.Tashildar.

224.ShriD.K.Kerkar.

220.ShriP.P.Kushnaji.

223.ShriS.P.Rane.

222.ShriD.D.Raut.

226.ShriA.L.Shirodkar.

227.ShriP.R.Rane.

225.ShriR.M.Satoskar.

228.ShriP.J.Rane.

229.ShriV.Y.Satoksar.

6227

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13, 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- ख खण्ड 3(ii) ]

Balance due

22586.35

23310.74

28695.04

11592.82

27688.36

25910.84

26015.40

165799.54

18583.02

20315.71

Balance due

63072.72 13929.76

20073.10

80626.14

82497.98

46949.47 20449.37

37238.03

18493.92

39520.32

37649.47

776028.42

75078.40

91579.73

109971.26

оп

1000.00

6000.00

1000.00

fomento

1000.00

Advance

1000.00

11000.00

1000.00

paidby

1000.00

fomento

Advance paidby

2000-8-9-2002

2001

1000.00

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00

2000.00 2001

12000.00

Advance

fomento

1000.00

2000.00

1000.00 2000.00

21000.00

2000.00

fomento

Advance

NotPaid

years

Total for6

9594.88

5472.31

9491.53

Interest

10841.57

11508.14

68924.83

11135.64

10880.78

7685.22

6348.66 7718.63

7902.41

7618.39

7668.51

Total Interest for6 years

32061.74

18356.05

15243.55

14714.26

14820.12

24777.27

31359.80

303010.66

28904.40

35467.40

42364.22.

@10%

Total

9120.51

Amount

15991.47

15819.21

18069.28

18559.40

19180.22

18134.62

114874.72

12864.39

13170.69

12780.86

10581.10 12697.32

12808.70

Total Amount

53436.24

30593.42

52266.34

25405.92

24700.20

505017.76

24523.77

41295.45

48174.00

70607.04

59112.33

Gogte

Amount

minerals

9866.43

2840.19

7026.24

paidby

minerals

Amount

paidby Gogte

due

Total

due

9120.51

15991.47

114874.72-

15819.21

18134.62

19180.22

18559.40

18069.28

Amount

Total

12697.32

12780.86

12864.39

12808.70

13421.29

53436.24

37619.66

13170.69

52266.34

24523.77

514884.19

Amount

25405.92

70607.04

41295.45

24700.20

59112.33

48174.00

due

488.07

315.81

490.13 914.90 due

4463.62

1535.73

167.07

640.44

278.45

250.61

891.04

Amount

140.70

705.72

838.09

882.15

929.04

1390.61

498.03

2055.24

1587.87

13143.19

1554.00

Amount

8.5

294.219.0

424.786.5

ELEL&SL

4.5

334.146.0

5.0

2.0

6.5

ELEL&SL

cable

appli-

sation&

8826.30 cable

15503.40

gratuity

15503.405.5

17644.507.5

17644.50

17644.5014.0

17644.5023.5

inclusive

appli-

110411.10 sation

10GOGTEMINERALS,REDI.

Compen-

12530.25

12530.2511.5

12530.253.0

12530.2516.0

12530.25

gratuity

41154.75

51381.0027.0

36229.0519.0

51428.2511.0

501741.00

23818.0515.0

23818.0527.0

inclusive

23818.0512.0

58614.30

oflegaldays

46620.0021.0

69678.0012.0

Compen-

oflegaldays

GOGTEMINERALS(CASUAL/SEASONAL)

57.42

32.69

65.35

wage

Daily

55.69

73.19

58.81 76.12

70.35

76.19

74.00

77.42

wage

58.81 58.81

76.62

Daily

wages

850.00

Total

TOTAL

1493.00

1493.0057.42

1699.0065.35

1699.00

1699.0065.35

salary/rate

1699.00

monthly

1448.00

1448.0055.69

1448.00

wages

TOTAL

1448.00

Total

1448.00

1903.00

1529.00 1979.00

1981.00

1829.00

1529.00

1924.00

1529.00

salary/rate

1992.00

2013.00

monthly

6 6

4 6

5 5

ser-

vice

15 15 11

ser- vice

date

ment,years

1-9-1989

1-9-1989 date

1-9-1989

1-9-1989 1-9-1989

1-9-1989

1-9-1989 mentyears

Appoint-Total

1-2-1986

2-10-1984

15-5-1980

18-10-1990

5-11-1986

18-10-1990

20-10-198213

Appoint-Total

28-2-1975

17-10-19869

16-10-198114

27-10-1978

Mestri.

Gadekar

M.Bhosale

Kambli,

ShriB.G.Dalvi.

ShriD.H.

ShriR.V.Tivrekar.

ShriS.M.Mantri,

ShriD.J.Lob.

ShriSuhasB.Kambli,

ShriP.J.Fernandes.

ShriA.G.Kerkar.

252.Smt.VaijayantiD.

250.Smt.ShaliniG.

251.Smt.Shantabai

249. Smt.RamijaK.Mulla

247.Smt.SunandaV.Rane

248.Smt.MasabiD.Draxi.

246. Smt.AnsuyaN.Rane.

No.

245.ShriB.G.Kamkar

244.ShriK.A.Naik

243.ShriH.R.Nagoji

Sr.Name

239. 242. ShriA.B.Magdum

240.ShriD.B.Vadar

241.ShriR.B.Magdum

238.

237.ShriP.B.Pednekar,

236.

235.

233.

234.

230.

231.

232.ShriR.S.Welling.

No.

Sr.Name

2491 Gl/2003-10 6228

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22 , 1925

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( i) ] 16

Balance due

71987.26

84990.62

95693.60

57937.27

88443.95

89130.91

84153.89

87385.18

81538.94

88385.18

74539.90

75572.24

75457.54

72286.44

71594.72

17583.02

78882.82 48652.64

70864.70

74317.31

86720.77

53906.40

104131.92

67351:20

106504.90

1908013.34 15

fomento

Advance

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

paidby

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

2000.00 on 2000-8-9-2002

2001

Advance

2000.00

fomento

1000.00

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00

2000.00 1000.00

42000.00 NotPaid

NotPaid

Total

for6 years

Interest

27370.22

32996.48

37010.10

25256.70

22851.48

34549.09

33916.48

7718.63

33894.44

29077.46

32307.71 31702.10 28232.42

29421.58 27973.02

29464.59

19369.74

30706.06

27324.26 40314.34

28243.99 21339.90 @10%

40174.47

33645.29

738755.00 12

Total Amount

45617.04

54994.14 38085.80

42094.50

61683.50 56527.47

57581.82 56490.74

56490.74

53846.18 52836.84

48462.44 47054.03

49035.96

51176.76

49107.65

32282.90

46621.70 47073.32

12864.39 45540.44

35566.50

66957.45 67190.56

56075.48

1231258.34 11

Gogte

Amount

7975.8

6535

minerals

paidby

14510.80 10

due

Total

Amount

45617.04

54994.14

50070.30

61683.50 57581.82

56527.47

38085.80 53846.18 48462.44

56490.74

52836.84

56490.74

47054.03

51176.76

49035.96 12864.39

46621.70

38817.90

56075.48

45540.44 67190.56

66957.45

47073.32 35566.50

49507.65

due

232.74

537.84

528.50

71.69

Amount

221.55 330.57

219.24

954.98

293.84

121.56

1323.72

1781.60

367.10

716.90

334.14

843.53

645.21

222.45

588.15

291.68

196.50 518.56.

2003.12

14210.041245769.14

571:04

EIEL.&SL

4.5

cable

sation&

appli-

gratuity

11GOGTEMINERALS,REDI.

inclusiveSL.

Compen-

54456.308.0

45384.303.0

49848.753.0

61155.007.0

36304.2026.5

56258.1018.0

56196.90

52891.2013.0

56196.904.0

52617.693.0

48390.759.0

56196.904.0

48390.751.0

21055.201.5

38229.759.0

46254.605.0

66672.007.0 oflegaldays

46210.5011.5

12530.256.0

48390.7510.0

44969.408.0

66735.003.0

55783.804.0

35370.003.0

45070.2028.0

1231559.10 6

wage

Daily

77.58 73.85

67.23 67.23

73.54

73.46

73.42

81.04 65.35

55.69

74.15

Total wages

salaryrate

monthly

2017.00

1748.00

1963.0075.50

1920.00

1748.00

1912.00

1910.00

1910.0073.46

1864.0071.69

1910.0073.46

1900.0073.08

1864.0071.69

1907.0073.35

1909.00

2107.00

1860.0071.54

1448.00

1703.0065.50

1856.0071.38

1699.00

TOTAL

1928.00

1896.0072.92

1926.0074.08 CENTRALMINING&TRADINGSYNDICATE-SEASONAL/TEMPORARY[MINES]

ser-

vice

mentyears dateof

Appoint-Total

2-10-198213

18-9-198015

24-10-197718

8-12-197817

1-1-1991

1-3-197520 17-11-197718

8-10-198015

6-11-197916

19-11-197817

18-10-198312

8-10-198015

4-11-198114

19-11-197817

4-11-198114

5-10-1980

5-11-198114

8-12-198114

4-11-198114

16.10.198213

14-10-197916

16-12-197817

7-10-198312

21-11-197817

16-11-197520

Salgaonkar

1 253.ShriN.1.Shah

254.ShriG.B.Musale

255.ShriM.R.Sawant

257.ShriS.A.Raul

256.ShriB.M.Chikongin

258.ShriP.J.Haldankar

259.ShriAA.Nawar

No.

265.ShriS.K.Lob

260.ShriL.A.Hukkeri

262.ShriK.A.Gawade

269.ShriP.A.Konadkar

270.ShriC.R.Kambli

267.ShriV.S.Rane

266.ShriH.L.Perera

263.ShriK.M.Sataji

268.ShriA.P.Gavandi

264.ShriD.M.Draxi(Expired)

261.ShriD.V.

Sr.Name

272.ShriS.D.Tulaskar

271.ShriA.R.Shetkar

273.ShriK.B.D'Souza

275.ShriAnkushR.Redkar

274.ShriS.A.Manjrekar

276.ShriM.N.Naibagkar

277.ShriI.M.Hajrathbhai 6229 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

47284.62

Balance due

68275.52

47100.96

92623.94

73045.28

87539.39

93810.16

85532.51

137365.70 732578.08

1000.00

6000.00

1000.00 1000.00

on Advance paidby fomento

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00

1000.00

11000.00

in 2000-8-9-2002 2001 Advance by fomento

NotPaid

18787.86

52637.14

18856.73

32824.69

27766.98

35178.81

35483.98

25978.32

33577.27

281091.78

Total Interest for6 years @10%

Total Amount

31427.89

54707.82

31313.10

46278.30

58631.35

59139.96

87728.56

55962.12 43297.20

468486.30

8165.7

8768.52

Amount paidby Gogte Minerals

16934.22

Total Amount due

87728.56

31427.89

31313.10

51462.90

59139.96 54707.82

55046.82

58631.35

55962.12

485420.52

162.16

189.90

344.10

481.39

242.07

243.57

247.62 488.76

1357.60

3757.17

EL&SL Amount due

[MINES]

7.0

2.0

3.0

2.5

3.0

EL & SL days

97566.40

54465.75 30946.50

30969.006.0

54803.253.0

58651.206.0

51273.00

55714.50

481663.35

57273.7516.0

Compen-

12GOGTEMINERALS,REDI.

sation inclusive oflegal gratuity appli- cable

KONKANCONTRACTORSSEASONAL/TEMPORARY

68.77

81.00

80.69

75.96

84.85

81.46 81.19

82.54

Daily wage rate

wages

TOTAL

Total

1788.00

1491.0057.35

2100.00

1975.00 2098.00

2111.00

2118.00

2206.00

2146.00

monthly salary/

15 24

15 15

ser-

vice

date

mentyears

5-9-1979

2-10-1985

1-10-1980

6-10-1983

Appoint-Total

1-11-198015

1-11-1980

14-11-1980

18-10-1971

284.ShriR.Y.Mestri

286.ShriP.R.Konadkar

283.ShriA.R.Redkar

285.ShriR.R.Gosavi

281.ShriD.A.More

280.ShriZ.S.Redkar

282.ShriD.A.Mishal

279.ShriS.K.Bogarnale

278.ShriR.T.Sungar

No.

Sr.Name 6230

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22 , 1925

[ PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] 15

Balance due

75821.28

93834.67

88133.78 82539.17

81668.69

94490.98

87910.98

80073.15

95021.55 96013.66

95132.99 94490.98

98733.02

65241.91

1229106.82

Advance

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

paidby fomento

12000.00

2000-8-9-2002

2001

Advance by in

2000.00

fomento

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00 2000.00

24000.00

fnr6 years

Total interest

34175.17

29557.98

32077.19

36313.00 36559.12 31750.76

36383.08 30402.43

34091.62 36380.12

36559.12

36424.87

25590.72

38149.88

@10%

474415.06

Total amount

56958.62

49263.30

53461.98

60521.67 60931.86 52917.93

60638.47

56819.36

50670.72

60633.54 63583.14

60708.12

42651.20 60931.86

790691.76

Amount

9852.64

paidby Gogte Minerals

8102.33

17954.97

Total amount due

49263.30

60521.67 60931.86

56958.62 53461.98

60633.54

60523.36

60638.47

56819.36

52917.93

50753.53

63583.14

60708.12 60931.86

amount due

74.77

111.87

387.90 111.47

522.06

148.16 223.74

518.56

689.13

245.53

298.32 621.84

522.06

1233.18

5708.58808646.73

El.&SL

1.5 1.5

3.5

7.0

EL & SL days

cable

sation appli-

gratuity

13GOGTEMINERALS,REDI

inclusive

Compen-

52228.809.5

48875.405.0

56847.15

60409.80

60563.701.0

56671.202.0

60409.807.0

52228.8017.0

62961.50४.0

60004.807.0

60409.804.0

50508.00 60409.80

60409.803.0

802938.15

oflegal

G.R.D.C.SEASONAL/TEMPORARY[MINES]

Daily wage rate

74.58

72.54

74.58

74.08

74.77

74.31

74.58

Total

salary wages

1939.00

2017.0077.58

1886.00

1939.00 1886.0072.54

monthly

1926.00

1926.0074.08

1944.00

1939.0074.58

1824.0070.15

2021.0077.73

1939.00

TOTAL

1939.00

3 14

171932.00

ser-

vice

date

mentyears

AppointTotal

11-1-1981

6-10-197718

5-10-1977

19-9-197916

20-9-197718

19-9-197718

20-9-197718

5-10-197718

19-9-197718

19-9-1977

1-10-197916

17-11-1978

18-10-197817

Palkar

288.ShriS.S.Kambli

289.ShriN.L.Jadhav

287.ShriP.G.Mulik

290.ShriM.K.

No.

292.ShriG.R.Kambli

291.ShriJ.AGodkar

294.ShriH.M.Bijalanikar

293ShriD.B.Draxi

298.ShriS.K.Dhuri

297.ShriAH.Ladkhan

299.ShriP.N.Apte

Sr.Name

295ShriM.I.Bastwadi

296ShriH.F.Hajarathbhai

300ShriBhikajiSKambli 6231 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

due

74796.35

2639987.42

42722.66

43528.42

91305.98

52939.12

54158.71

128418.28

44803.39

57774.00

49166.40

148020.38

61977.20

77709.20

136770.75

83112.22

Balance

77450.45

117717.04

60348.00

72948.43

145948.46

139337.22

153546.40

154052.00

125406.03

138570.02

135793.82

171666.47

24000.00

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

Advance

fomento

paidby

2000-8-9-2002

48000.00

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00

2001

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00

Advance

fomento

NotPaid

years

1016995.28

56632.64

52414.03 Total

17146.00

34614.74

17448.16 29173.63 48906.86

20977.17

19562.40

21434.52

for6

22415.25

Interest

48152.26

30265.95

23616.45

45268.89

31917.00

53376.46

55855.67

58894.50

53088.76

30168.92

58704.90

28480.66

23380.50

52047.68

65124.93

@10%

29877.12.17926.27

1694992.14 Total

87356.72

94387.74

34961.95 57691.24

28576.67

48622.72

35724.20

81511.43

29080.26

32604.00

37358.75

50443.25

53195.14

75448.15

39360.75

88960.77

80253.77

Amount

98157.50

93092.79

88481.26

50281.53

97841.50

47467.77

38967.50

86746.14

108541.55

13023.84

6971.25

6052.59

Amount

minerals

paidby Gogte

1708015.98 Total

87356.72

81511.43

57691.24

94387.74

28576.67

48622.72

35724.20

29877.12

34961.95

35132.85

39575.25

37358.75

53195.14

39360.75

50443.25

75448.15

80253.77

88960.77

93092.79

98157.50

50281.53

97841.50

Amount due

86746.14

88481.26

38967.50

47467.77

108541.55

932.63

121.84

45198.03

695.70

965.25

3071.72

1567.22

750.75

692.74

3226.29

1534.72

2867.67

940.75

1966.25 2354.95

1287.05

2180.75

878.28

357.50

1132.02

3340.67

2172.50

1856.50

1294.59

1847.34

2088.87

2036.26

3037.25

Amount due

2.0

9.5

& SL

ELEL&SL

days

cable

57569.40 80578.0012.5

1662817.95

91161.4543.0

84285.0041.0

47088.0022.0

27009.4523.5

sation

27009.4543.0

32607.0032.5

34437.1510.0

52502.40

34437.1518.5

35392.5027.5

38610.0013.5

38610.0010.5

74507.4012.5

76913.1043.0

48262.5030.5

95985.0023.5

91798.2016.5

87828.7514.5

49403.2512.0

95985.0027.5

gratuity appli-

38610,005.0

86445.0026.5

inclusive

45378.9029.0

84898.8023.5

14GOGTEMINERALS,REDI

105504.3028.5

Compen-

oflegal

74.92 74.61

75.03

71.50

75.26

72.92

71.50

78.46

rate

77.69

78.07

73.19

79.00

76.84 79.00

72.03

wage

Daily

KONKANCONTRACTORSJETTYSEASONAL/TEMPORARY

TOTAL

1940.00

1951.00

1948.00

1584.0060.92

1814.0069.76

1884.0072.46

1809.0069.57

wages

1809.0069.57

1859.00

1896.00

1957.00

Total

2020.00

1903.00 2030.00

2054.00

2040.00

1873.00

1998.00 2054.00

1859.0071.50

2044.0078.61

salary/

2771.00106.57

monthly

1734.0066.699

1734.00.66.699

15 21

11 11

1859.00 71.5011

27 27

22 24

ser-

vice

date

mentyears

2-1-1985 1-1-1968 5-2-1971

1-10-1974

1-10-1986

23-9-1980

6-9-1980

1-11-1984

15-2-1984

19-10-1970

14-3-1973

5-9-1980 2-11-1970

2-9-1969 1-10-1979

1-10-1968

1-2-1973

6-10-198312

23-1-1972

1-10-1968

14-11-1983

1-10-1981

28-2-1971

12-10-1970

Appoint-Total

29-12-1983

ShriRavindraT.Yeragi

(Expired)

327.ShriPrakashP.Mane

323.ShriJagannathP.Sawant

326.ShriSabajiSomHadye

325.ShriGangaramG.Gavandi

319.ShriAshokM.Asolkar

320. 322.ShriManoharP.Gosavi

324.ShriVitthalG.Tejam

317.ShriNamdevG.Tari

321.ShriChandrakantP.Krushnaji1-10-1986

318.ShriRaghobaV.Keluskar

316.ShriKrishnaV.Hule

314.ShriAshokG.Hule

315.ShriNamdevB.Korgaonkar

312.ShriAnantV.Kambli

310.ShriUttamV.Satoskar

313.ShriVijayArjunSarang

309.ShriShrikrishnaR.Kambli

306.ShriBaliramT.Kalkhavkar

311.ShriPandurangJ.Keluskar

307.ShriPandurangP.Parab

308.ShriOhonduS.Kambli

305.ShriSuryakantN.Rane

303.ShriP.M.Gavandi

301.ShriVishnuS.Bude

302.ShriArjunG.Rane

304.ShriDeepakN.Kaloji

No.

Sr.Name 6232

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22 , 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii )] 15

Balance due

76643.10

56003.28

70859.02

40507.20

62496.46

59956.54

77009.23

22759.74

60505.42

127584.70

55091.15

35355.23

27504.96

64404.13

22759.74

98260.66 78275.72

70915.44

64404.13

76670.69

75300.88 1323267.42 on

1000.00 1000.00

Advance

1000.00

8-9-2002

1000.00 1000.00 1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000.00 paidby fomento

20000.00

1000.00 13

2000-

2001

Advance

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00 2000.00 2000.00

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00 1000.00

2000.00

40000.00 יויוין by fomento in

Total

Interest for6

9659.90

16315.20

48969.26

30003.46

29866.16

25276.55

27697.13

22126.23

24561.17

21784.18 25276.55

23608.70

14383.21

518725.28

11439.36

23814.53

37972.75

28987.83

29728.40

27718.29

29876.51

years @10%

Total Amount

16099.84

49776.94

27192.00

81615.44

50005.77

46161.89

36877.05

23972.02

42127.58 39347.84

36306.97

16099.84

42127.58

40935.29

864542.14

39690.89

19065.60 48313.05

49794.18 46197.15

63287.91 49547.33 10

Amount

minerals

7017.20

582.56

3204.08

3230.56

paidby Gogte

Total Amount due

81615.44

49776.94

27192.00

19303.92

46161.89 36306.97

50005.77

871559.34

40935.29

23972.02

42127.58

36877.05

39347.84 19648.16

19330.40

42127.58

39690.89

63287.91 49547.33

48313.05

49794.18 46197.15 8

494.40

264.80

582.56

238.32

1603.35

1954.64

1467.19

705.30

1727.99 1914.89

1033.27

2040.82

2298.44

2398.02

2641.49

2420.46

3107.18

35889,54

3107.18

1939.58

2186.43 1763.25 EL&SL Amount due

7.5

4.5

EL & SL days

PERMANENTWORKERS

sation appli- cable

gratuity

inclusive

Compen-

26697.60

35273.7022.5

48309.7520.5

3GOGTEMINERALS,REDI.

47607.7534.0

39020.4043.0

21931.2033.5

79660.0026.5

39020.4026.5

35273.7014.5

19065.605.0

44433.9024.5

39020.4043.0

37049.4033.5

19065.60

19065.6011.0

835669.80

37049.4038.5

44433.9025.0

47607.7527.5

60867.4534.0

47607.7531.0

47607.7510.0

oflegal

[ KONKANCONTRACTORS(MINES)]

71.57 71.26

72.26

70.53

73.76

72.26

71.26

52.96

70.53

60.92 72.26 68.61

70.53

68.61

70.53

wages

Total

Daily wage salary/rate

1861.00 1918.00

1879.00

1714.0065.92

1853.00 1834.00

monthly

1584.00 1879.00

1879.00

1851.0071.19

1784.00

1377.00

1784.00

1834.00

1377.00

1834.0070.53

1377.0052.96

1853.00

1834.00

1834.0070.53

TOTAL 3

8 8

141834.00

of ser- vice

14 Total

date

mentyears

5-9-198015

1-1-198411

5-9-198015

Appoint-

1-3-1987

1-1-1981

6-1-19878

2-2-1987

1-3-19878

1-1-1981

1-10-198411

25-2-19869

16-2-197124

5-10-198312

1-10-198312

3-10-198312

2-11-198015

22-12-1976

13-10-198015

328.ShriKrishnaV.Sawant

329.ShriAnandP.Gavande

333.ShriPurnanndV.Kambli

335.ShriSavalaramNaik

No.

330.ShriLaxmanV.Suryaji

339.ShriAnandR.Gavas

341.ShriDeepakY.Gosavi

347.Smt.AlkaS.Rane

331.ShriSharadT.Gosavi

334.ShriNarayanD.Rane

337.ShriDashrathK.Bagkar

332.ShriSonuG.Rane

346.SmtVrundaR.Gosavi

340.ShriBhikajiN.Raul

336.ShriGanpatD.Rane

343.ShriVilasN.Mamlekar

345.Smt.MaliniG.Gosavi

338.ShriAbhimanyuN.Raut

344.Smt.Sulochana13.Gadekar

348.Smt.PushplataG.Gosavi

342.ShriRajaramG.Gosavi

Sr.Name [ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

6233

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13, 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

Balance due

83596.26

67306.37

54641.64

91698.38

56100.86

86084.40

79204.18

155541.44

72616.32

71948.22

79548.38

70546.63

75621.38

90897.55

73284.42

121928.15

64789.30

126710.00

134487.12

155097.96

63433.46

63580.80

98845.91

105029.28

119386.93

111267.17

131638.91

2504831.42 on

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

22000.00 Advance paidby fomento

2000-8-9-2002

2001

1000.00 1000.00 2000.00

fomento

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00

Advance by

1000.00

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00

47000.00

2000.00

Notpaid

Total

for6 years

Interest

58703.04

32473.60

51557.67

59286.74

46473.06 33406.65

30955.64

25614.89

40135.98

48641.25

30076.57

21615.62

45895.10

27579.99

21412.82

50489.59

28356.12

35211.58

38192.22

35511.89

28606.66

29108.02 24967.80 965186.78

24537.55

42850.19

28105.58 25420.99. @10%

Total Amount

54122.66

50127.62

55677.75

51592.74

97838.40

77455.10

85929.45

76491.83

42691.48

98811.23

66893.30

35688.04

84149.32

81068.75

47677.76

36026.03

71416.98 58685.97

45966.65

63653.70

47260.20

46842.64

48513.36

1608644.64

59186.49

41613.00

40895.91

42368.31 10

7322.6

Amount

minerals

8053.34

56706.52

12693.05

17186.88 11450.65

paidby Gogte

Total Amount due

54122.66

51592.74

43010.64

47260.20

85929.45

81068.75

50127.62

47677.76 97838.40

55677.75 44079.37

59186.49

58685.97

84149.32

98811.23

46842.64

94641.98

79586.35

48513.36

71416.98

76491.83

54142.13

63653.70 45966.65

42368.31

41613.00 1665351.16

40895.91 8

370.60

810.50

830.43

1945.65

3279.75

1387.44

2150.25 2561.27

2429.44

2918.48

1853.00 3586.43

1037.64

2061.97

3310.50

2877.99

1238.16

3458.06

2141.32

3003.00

1753.13

1141.11

60166.51 EL&SL Amount due

37.5

26.5

31.5

23.5

37.5

43.0

39.5

SEASONAL/TEMPORARY

sation appli- cable

gratuitv

inclusiveSL

82649.70 91723.5031.5

53527.5023.5

79215.7540

50555.7041.5

50555.7012.0

70586.559.0

79215.7520.0

42017.40

41623.20180

CompenEL

47566.35

56308.5028.5

15GOGTEMINERALS,REDI.

95892.7531.5

82008.00

60343.20

26413.2032.0

44413.2043.0

39754.8035.5

74738.7019.0

45156.1510.5

38610,0042.0

47275.2015.5

39754.8615.5

1605184.65 oflegaldays

958927521.0

563085034.5

5066460

4441320

GOGTEMINERALS(JETTYDEPARTMENT)

87.46

Daily wage rate

92.65

91.50

75.92

86.42

92.65

77.88

80.42

92.65 92.27 86.42

25.04

73.62

83.42

75.92

92.65

77.81

77.19

71.50

91.12

75.92

81.31

92.27

73.62

83.81

9265

8342

Total Wages

2409.00 2409.00

2274.00

2023.00

1951.00

2409.00

2379.00

1974.00

2247.00

2399.00

2004.00

1914.00 monthly salary

2091.00

2399.00

2179.00

2169.00

1859.00 TOTAL

2369.00

1974.00

2007.00

1914.00 3

15 152169.00

132114.00

13 13

ser- vice

years

Total

ment date

1-9-197421

1-2-1979

1-3-1979 Appuint-

1-4-1973

1-10-196423

1-12-196819

1-10-196918

1-10-197713

1-10-196720

1-10-197613

1-10-196819

7-11-197913

1-11-1972

7-11-197913

1-10-197017

1-11-1979

1-10-1983 2-10-198114

1-12-1979

4-11-1981

22-1-1971

3-11-1983

10-10-196522

27-11-198312

19-11-1983 ShriKashinathS.Pednekar

ShriGopalR.Rane

N.Pednekar

A.Arondekar

V.Kambli

351.ShriAnkushS.Khobrekar

352.ShriChandrakant

350.

366.ShriSukharam

362.ShriHarishchandra

365.ShriBalkrishnaY.Tari

368.ShriLauAnantSuryaji

353.ShriNageshJ.Gawade

372.ShriArjunM.Gavandi 349.

360.ShriGangaramS.Desai

373.ShriLukramG.Kambli

356.ShriAnkushS.Pednekar

357.ShriSubhashN.Tari

358.ShriRajaramS.Korgaonkar

359.ShriDigamberR.Barde

361.ShriGovindS.Vengurlekar

363.ShriSureshN.Masurkar te

364.ShriJavavK.Ludric

367.ShriNarayanS.Sarang

371.ShriRadhakrishnaS.Bugade mhill

374.ShriAbdulhamidA.Pathan

370.ShriDigambarV.Pednekar

369.ShriGopalR.Gavandi

375.ShriVasantM.Chodankar

354.ShriKrishnaG.Arondekar

No.

355.ShriBaburaoS.Yeragi

Sr.Name 6234

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13, 2003/BHADRA 22, 1925

Balance due

57596.35

51724.92

35328.58

52530.37 35569.15

232749.37

38068412.80

0.00

1000.00

fomento

5000.00

1000.00

8-9-2002

Advance

1000.0 307000.00 0.00 paidby

in 2000- 2001

2000.00

Advance by

9000.00

2000.00 2000.00

fomento

1000. 00.00

631000.0

for6 years

Total Interest

14373.22

14088.43

20823.89

20521.85

22723.63 92531.01

14627404.80 @10%

Total Amount

34203.08

34706.48

37872.72

23955.36

23480.72

1542.836

24379008.00

Gogte

minerals

Amount

paidby

34203.08

Total Amount duc

34706.48

37872.72

23480.72

23955.36

154218.36

25559713.751180705.75

823.32

865.52

1370.48

1420.58

1340.16 5020.06 Amount duc

919918.60 EL&SL

& SL

cablc

sation appli-

[PART II SEC . 3 (ii) ) Balarice

57879.60

180350.19

211643.35

240569.10

263871.49

257492.15 248353.24

268868.66

2513615.02 237866.37

269352.55

277368.32

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00 1000.00 Amount 8-9-2002

1000 100.00 paidby fome nento on

2000.00

Amount paid by

1000.00

Fomento

1000 00.00

2000 00.00

2000. 00

2000 00.00

2000. 00

Amount

Mincrals

paidby Gogte

12)

Total

59879.60

271868.66

260492.15

214643.35

265871.49

183350.19

272352.55 250353.24 240866.37

2543615.02

280368.3 8.32

243569 569.10

(10+11+

769.20

8211.95

Bonus

7834.70

7355.95

3706.65

7489.70

8242.00

5579.55 6208.60 60

8549.20

63947.50 11

46419.00 48128.00 10592.00

44587.00

46552.00

47286.00

46824.00

30832.00

44856.00

46779.00

V.R.S.V.D.A.

148811.54

189661.15

226114.62

190070.77

199917.69

216033.46

209531.54

205426.15

218083.85

SL Payment

108286.752066812.52412855.00 8

909664.62

9011156.54

9013226.54

9011900.77

9013112.31

391980.7559879.60

9012828.46

909920.77

262716.00203282.15

SLAmount dua

ELELand

9012828.46

908951.54

GOGTEMINERALS-PERMANENT

gratuity

inclusive

32782.5019.5

22615.2024.0

37049.4012.0

22615.2015.5

Compen-

33336.0018.5

148398.30

24639795.15 oflegaldays

[A]57DISMISSEDWORKERSLIST

ANNEXUREB-CALCULATIONMADEUPTO31-12-2002

Daily wage rate

Total wages

salary/

TOTAL

1894.0072.85

1784.0068.61

1452.0055.84

monthly

GRANDTOTAL

9 91452.0055.84

101926.0074.08

ser-

vice

date

mentyears

6-1-1987

1-1-1987

Appoint-Total

2-10-1985

13-11-198312

378.ShriAtmaramB.Kanekar

380.ShriBaburaoK.Chougule

379.ShriGorakshaP.Gosavi

376.ShriJagannathS.Sarvekar

377.ShriAtmaramJ.Salgaonkar

Sr.Name No.

cable

appli-

sation

gratuity

inclusive

57898.85

178504.62

190966.15

138890.77

192313.85

214213.85

Compen-

180406.15

200566.15

205255.38

196703.08

1958525.77 oflegaldays

rate

50.79

Daily

110.23 wage

132.23

123.96

104.46

146.96202806.92

142.54

145.69

Total wages

1320.50

2716.00

3821.00

salary/

3706.00142.54

3223.00

3438.00

2866.00

3706.00

3788.00

2586.0099.46

53962.50 monthly

19 32

27 23 22 24 32

28 2792.00107.38

ser-

vice

FirstTotal

mentof

18-11-1978 15-01-1975 01-11-1979

01-10-1979 12-09-1978

18-09-1970

28-10-1980

Appointyears

29-09-1975

01-02-197924

29-09-1970 2

1 1ShriD.A.Soudagar

5.ShriD.J.Parera

6.ShriR.V.Tivrekar

2.ShriB.S.Gavade

7.ShriJ.N.Kerkar

3.ShriG.L.Kambli

4.ShriC.B.Naik

9.ShriS.P.Jadhav

11ShriR.J.Gavandi Sr.Name

8.ShriShekhAbushckhHusen

10.ShriM.V.Pilankar No.

6235

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

4734.08

66684.46

98181.89

95009.00

66115.97

49215.00

106568.15

86316.32

31277.08

35357.69

824251.53

104791.89

Balance

1000.00

8000.00

1000.00

8-9-2002

Amount

paidby fomento on

paid by

1000.00 2000.00

18000.00

2000.00

1000.00 00

2000.00

2000.00 Amount

Fomento

Amount

Minerals

paidby Gogte

31277.08

50215.00 87734.08

101181.89

69115.97

109568.15

36357.69

98009.00

850251.53

107791.89

8931632

Total (10+11+ 12)

267.0069684.46

301.00

238.00

192.00

1696.70

230.70

238.00

230.00

Bonus

6449.00

899.00

5612.40

6743.00

5693.00

5673.50

5896.35

5759.20

43650.45

VD.A.

62968.46

81803.08 VR.S

31277.08

83511.92 97110.00

36357.69

62981.62

101802.69

49290.00925.00

804904.38

Payment

9527769

98.96102524.15

19377.46

53077

11 746.31

312599.23

302921.54

242298.46

131117.00

352782.50

171608.46

221992.69

282681.54

ELELand SLAmount due SL

and

GOGTEMINERALS-TEMPORARY

appli- cable

sation

94811.54 78881.54

99121.15

50369.23

102425.19

81519.23

30530.77

61864.62 35826.92

46507.50 gratuity

93669.23

inclusive

Compen-

78552692 oflegaldays

53.08

95.77

85.92 90.58

95.77

Daily wage rate

1764.0067.85

2180.0083.85

2573.0098.96 wages

2067.0079.50

2490.00

2234.00

24525.00

Total monthly salary/

182532.0097.38

151380.00

2490.0022

222460.0094.62

16 202355.00

ser-

vice

years of

FirstTotal

ment

TOTAL

05-11-198616

12-11-1980 05-10-1984

31-05-1986

05-10-1979

16-10-1980

08-12-198413

23-11-1982

03-11-1982

03-12-1986

07-10-1978

Appoint

Name

18.ShriS.J.Naik

19.ShriP.S.Nader

17.ShriB.G.Gosavi

21.ShriG.S.Tanavade

15.ShriS.S.Adolkar

12.ShriU.M.Satoskar

14.ShriA.A.Farnandis

16.ShriN.PJadhav

22.ShriS.KKanyalkar

13.ShriK.TSalgaonkar

20.ShriR.D.Madye No.

Sr.

2491 GI /2003-11

91241.77

99724.40

68997.92

868118.32

117667.31

75947.85

106186.62 103229.31

100462.38

Balance

104660.77

2000.00

1000.00

Amount 8-9-2002

fomento

paidby

paid.

2000.00

Amount

Fomento

7120.00 Gogte

Minerals

712000 Amount

paidby

12)

Total

91241.77

68997.92

117667.31

75947.85

879238.32

106844.40

107186.62

107660.77 100462.38

10322931

(10+11+

53.00

198.00

188.00 355.00

220.00

175.00

1677.00

265.00

223.00

Bonus

4707.00

4873.00 5654.00

6212.00

4938.00

4527.00

4627.00

38667.00 V.D.A.

312900

101917.40

97280.38

101183.77 98504.31

838894.32

102384.62

11257131

8523277

7082185

V.R.S. SLPayment

1168.11

570.236899792

829.54

893.42

1114580

5488.85

9 8

121179.69

8 101023.85

373812.42

SLAmount

ELELand

and

GOGTEMINERALS-JETTY

cuble

appli-

sation

96791.54

84053.08

97324.62 100749.29

69992.31

97371.35

111677.88

gratuity

inclusive

101360.77

6842769 Compen-

82774852 oflegaldays.due

95.04

97.77

98.31

99.27

103.04

wage

9734 Daily

10369

10238

2471.00 Total

2556.00

2530.90

2581.00

2696.00

2556.00

wages

2662.00

2679.00

23273.90 salary/rate

monthly

2542.0022 23

22 21

ser-

vice

years

FirstTotal

ment

TOTAL

01-11-1984

01-10-1975

17-10-1981

01-11-1985

13-11-1976 01-10-197822

01-10-1978

01-10-1976

01-10-1975

Appoint

Name

ShriArjunAErolkar

30ShriLaxmanRGavade

31ShriHulappaSSanade

29ShriK.Subramanyam

26ShriJotibaTPatil

28ShriRamuVRajgire

25.ShriRamuVPatil

27ShriGopalHSalam

24.ShriAnantG.Kambli

Sr 6236

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22, 1925

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii) ] 17

Balance

170081.38

74853.17

170260.88

234612.31 198502.85

155763.15

Balance

314178.85

202544.85

249766.38

68639.65

79738.00

1950288.25

92248.46

94925.23

17972442

335551.35 16

Amount

1000.00

8-9-2002

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

paidby fomento on

9000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

Amount

fomento

8-9-2002

3000.00

paidby

paid by

paid

Amount

2000.00 2000.00

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00

1000.00

2000.00

Fomento

2000.00

18000.00

1000.00

2000.00

Amount

1000.00

2000.00

6000.00

Fomento

Amount

Minerals

Gogte

paidby Gogle

Amount

Minerals

paidby

12)

173081.38

76853.17

157763.15

317178.85 251.766.38

70639.65

97925.23

17326088

80738.00

95248.46

1977288.25

Total (10+11+ 12)

Total (10+11+

Bonus

947.10

882.00 3161.00182724.42

5662.00237612.31

5790.00205544.85

8665.00

Bonus

6513.00

499.00344551.35

223.00

276.00

36966.10

534600201502.85

VDA

5281.00

13564.00

13678.40

44791.00

43968.00

1133.00

46120.00

42460.00

6795.00

44018.00

6692.00

288292.40

14742.00 34412.00

VRS

Payment

145151.42

158635.38

76853.F7

158635.38

187982.31 154963.85

153696.85

152482.15

V.R.S.V.D.A. Payment

262393.85

70517.65122.00

90957.23 79605.00

329310.35

201235:38

TEMPORARY

77119.751652029:75

6649.96 & SL.

EL.ELand

412810.87

Si.Amount due

908349.23

575526.81

908349.23

908951.54

36.3719.08

777504.54

908771.54

6584.3188230.46

9012904.62

9010232.31

SLAmount

151305.00

171449.58

343311.08

ELELand & SL

C.M.T.S-

IIC.M.T.S-PERMANENT

sation appli- cable

gratuity

Compen-

sation

cable

appli-

150286.15

150288.15 14692.31

146192.31

119030.77

139624.62

74042.31

gratuity

inclusive

191003.08

87646.15

148763.08

249489.23

Compen-

inclusive oflegaldays

1574910.00

78300.00

322660.38

oflegaldaysdue

fate

wage

Dariy

wage

Daily

97.3887646.15

85.2769068.08

Totai

wages

salary:

2412.0092.77

Total

monthly

2586.0099.46

wages

1782.5068.56

2686.00103.31

2956.00113.69

salary/rate

26151.50

2532.00

2532.0097.38

2217.00

monthly

2262.0087.00

9543.00

3728:00143.38

ser-

years

ser-

vice

FirstTotal

ment

FirstTotal

ment

Appoint

01-08-197227

01-08-1972272412.0092.77

01-08-197230

01-12-1978242521.0096.96

TOTAL

14-09-197418

18-12-197428

21-09-197329

24-09-1977252534.0097.46

23-09-1977252534.0097.46

23-09-197424

Appoint-years

TOTAL

01-10-197820

07-10-198018

05-12-198120

06-01-198220

32.ShriP.Y.Raut

Sr No. Name

34.ShriS.J.Diya

35.ShriLatifD.Draxi

33.ShriH.A.Bhagat

37.ShriSadashivMRedkar

38.ShriP.M.Gavandi

39.ShriD.M.Tashildar

No.

36.ShriAnantB.Kanyalkar

41.ShriD.A.Hukkeri

40.ShriK.A.Nivjekar

Sr.Name

44.ShriN.I.Drikodikar

42.ShriA.M.Suryaji

43.ShriS.V.Mahadgut

45.ShriSambhajiR.Ghorpade

1 6237 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

108047.69

97815.88

Balance

115781.31

108047.69

84067.46

136413.77

90919.34

90142.02

413117.74

103780.92

Balance

149631.42

139363.46

55403.08

Balance

882257.31

7895247.21 232056.38

1000.00

1000.00 1000.00

1000.00

6000.00

fomento

1000.00

8-9-2002

Amount

42000.00 3000.00

8-9-2002

Amount 8-9-2002

paidby

Amount paidby fomento on

paidby fomento on

paid

2000.00

2000.001000.00

2000.00

2000.00 2000.00

Amount

2000.00

16000.00

2000.00

6000.00

2000.00

Fomento

Amount paid by Fomento

Amount

2000. 0.00

2000 00.00 paid by Fomento

88000 100.00

Gogte

7120.00

Minerals

Amount

paidby

Amount paidby Gogte Minerals

12)

111047.69

86067.46

118781.31

93919.34

138413.77

152631.42

100815.88

7.69 111047.6 93142.02

106780.92

58403.08

142363.46

904257.31

422117.74

235056.38

Total (10+11+

Total (10+11+ 12)

191.00

254.00

Bonus

254.00

267.00 313.00

259.00

222.00 1252.00

Bonus

11211230803236767.21 Bonus

5820.00

6011.00

6011.00 419.80

1071.00

V.D.A.

6519.00

1225.00

6543.00

6744.00

V.D.A.

6986.00

5664.00

887040.65

34752.00

48070.80

47651.00

V.R.S.

104782.69

131114.77

Payment

80212.46

117556.31

99978.92

135352.46

58403.08

93142.02

93499.54

181585.38

V.D.A.VRS Payment

368226.94

262768.637033214.26

V.R.S. SLPayment

due

1913.1599744.88

2277.88 14016.94

23894.08868253.31

232277.88104782.69

SLAmount

424380.92

ELELand

383868.69145890.42

262644.00

343231.31

362049.23

272654.31

SLAmount

313152.46

262198.00

553172.02

ELELand

SLAmount

908646.92

ELELand

days due

& due days SL

IIIG.R.D.C.TEMPORARY

appli-

cable

sation

cable

appli-

gratuity appli- cable

sation

inclusive

102504.81

76981.15

97831.73

gratuity

Compen-

97324.62

126733.65

142021.73

56353.85

114403.85

91301.54

sation inclusive

gratuity

844359.23

inclusive

6770445.63

Compen-

89970.00

354210.00

Compen-

oflegal

KONKANCONTRACTORS TEMPORARY

oflegaldays

oflegal

IIIKONKANCONTRACTORSPERMANENT

99.04

101.81

98.31

Daily wage rate

101.69132708.46

57.67

Daily wage rate

96.08172938.46

Daily wage rate

Total wages

2575.00

2712.00104.31

2261.0086.96

19415.00

2471.0095.84

2647.00

1480.0056.92

2556.00

2644.00101.69

145641.40 6195.50

monthly

Total monthly salary/ wages

salary/of

292644.00

ser-

182198.0084.54

vice

1499.5026

302498.00

ser- vice

years

TOTAL2575.00 ser- vice

years of

TOTAL

years

TOTAL

ment

FirstTotal

ment

10-11-1972

19-09-1979

13-10-1972

18-10-1971

Appoint

01-10-1970 01-10-1979

01-09-1970

Appoint ment

05-10-1983

01-11-1980

02-09-1974

01-10-1970

01-09-1972

Appoint

GRANDTOTAL Name

ShriAnandA.Raut

54.ShriAnkushT.Tulaskar

52.ShriS.B.More

56.ShriJairamA.Kerkar

No.

57.ShriSureshS.Kerkar

53.ShriN.L.Dabholkar

49.ShriSagunS.Dhuri

50.ShriHemantT.Yeragi 51.

55.ShriRameshA.Mamlekar

Sr. Name

No.

48.Shri1.S.Beg

47.ShrilawanMukundaNarsule

46.ShriDattaramAnkushKambli

Sr. Name

No.

Sr.

6238

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22 , 1925

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] 16

amount

Total tobe paid

1790.08

18629.94

18195.91

23972.16

19835.56

19649.82

39206.66

25733.06 31051.96

24597.03

24588.66

28726.21 24597.03

15632.96

24536.41

24666.54

25462.32

24597.03

20491.62

14397.94

21729.69

15761.23

14811.13

16143.23

14397.94

15379.23

(13+14)

years

10%

for4

525.90

interest

5473.20

5345.69

7560.00

7042.67

5772.83

5827.40

8439.34

9122.61

11518.34

7226.25

7208.44

7226.25

7480.46

7246.67 4592.73

7223.79

6383.86

6020.14

4351.29

4742.64

4518.19

4229.90

4630.42 2months 31-12-2002

Total

1264.18

13156.74

12850.22

16929.50

14008.16

18173.07

13876.99

27688.32

21929.35

17370.78

20286.87

17370.78

17327.97 17981.87

10459.84

17370.78

17419.88

17364.88

14471.48

11040.23 10861.84

15345.83

11130.81

11400.59

10168.04

10168.04 (11+12)

1196.07 1264.18

1168.20

1261.54

1652.10

1539.05

2517.12

1993.58

1844.26

1273.47

1579.16

950.89

1579.16

1575.27

1579.16

1634.72

987.37

1583.63

924.37

1578.63

1003.66

1315.59

1011.89

1395.08

1036.42 Fund10%

TotalProvident

11960.67

15390.45

12641.82 12615.45

16520.97

12734.70

19935.77

15791.62

25171.20

9873.67

18442.61

9508.95

15791.62 15791.62

9243.67

15752.70 16347.15

15786.25

10036.57

9243.67

15836.25

13950.75

13155.90

10364.17 (9+10)

amount

164.32 164.32

164.3211682.02

164.32

185.25

185.25 192.77

192.77

164.32

189.01 192.77

185.25

192.77

164.32

185.25 164.32

185.25

192.77

164.32 185.25

164.3210118.92

164.32

164.32 difference

Total50%VDA

Amount

15205.20

12477.50

11796.35

18253.60

12570.38

24985.95

16328.20

11517.70

19743.00

(7+8)

15598.85

12451.13

9709.35

9954.60

16161.90

15598.85

15567.45

9344.63

9872.25

12963.13

9079.35

15598.85

15651.00

15601.00

13765.50

10199.85 9

after

wages

4911.00

8070.00

3940.00

3764.00

05-02-93

5192.50

3764.00

4764.00

5220.00

3764.00

5028.00

5055.00

3128.00 4446.00

(50%)

Lock-out

ANNEXURE-C

11517.70

12477.50

11796.35

10294.20

16915.95 12570.38

9872.25

12388.20

9344.63

12451.13 11834.85

14979.00

9835.13

9709.35

9319.50

9079.35

13061.10

9954.60

11834.85

10539.45

10596.00

10546.00

10941.90

11834.85

10199.85 7

CALCULATIONMADEUPTO31-12-2002

M/S.GOGTEMINERALS,REDI.

23592.70 24955.00

20588.40

23035.40 33831.90 25140.75

24776.40

24902.25

26122.20

23669.70

19670.25

29958.00 21078.90

19744.50

23669.70

18689.25

23669.70

19418.70

21192.00

21883.80

21092.00

18158.70

19909.20 18158.70

18639.00

20399.70 ofLockforlock-

(3-4-5)

outperiodoutperiod

Totalwages50%wages

314.80

380.75

378.80

517.30

361.90

399.40

322.30

458.00

324.00

361.90

224.00 285.75

361.90 334.60

05-02-93

296.90

285.00

300.75

375.00

304.40 276.90

276.90

311.90 01-02-93

Months

22320.00

22860.00

19644.00

24924.00

24180.00 23760.00

24360.00

23640.00

32280.00

22584.00

28584.00

18768.00

22584.00 20220.00 18768.00 17784.00

22584.00

17832.00

20220.00

20112.00

18528.00

20880.00

18996.00

19464.00 4

01-02-92

1905x12

1980x12

1970x12

WAGESPERIODFORLOCKOUT

1882x12

2077x12

1676x12

2030x12

2382x12

2690x12

1882x12

1685x12

1882x12

1544x12

1564x12

1486x12

1740x12

1685x12

1622x12

1482x12

1583x12

to31-01-93

732.70 775.002015x12

629.601637x12

715.401860x12

761.50

757.60 798.80

780.75 916.00

723.80

723.80 648.00

644.60

723.80

21-01-92

601.50

648.00 571.50

1034.60

570.00

669.20

593.00

31-01-92salary12

553.801444x1217328.00

608.80

623.80 553.801444x1217228.00 2

1 1.ShriU.P.Rane

3.ShriP.W.Mathakar

2.ShriK.L.Morajkar

6.ShriR.J.Kambli

4.ShriS.E.Arolkar

5.ShriA.Y.Korgaonkar

9.ShriK.I.Bastawadi

8.ShriJ:D.Karkar

7.ShriS.B.Ghorpade

SL.Nameofworker

No.

11.ShriM.B.Kambli

10.ShriJ.L.D.Cruze

12.ShriA.N.Kushnaji

14.ShriM.S.Kushnaji

15.ShriV.D.Kushnaji

16.ShriA.B.Nandgadkar

18.ShriS.B.Redkar

19.ShriS.N.Bugde

13.ShriV.D.Panjikar

23.ShriS.N.Kambli

22.ShriA.B.Redkar

20.ShriR.L.Redkar

17:ShriL.D.Raul

21.ShriF.S.Montero

26.ShriP.G.Parab

25.ShriS.N.Nagolkar

24.ShriL.R.Parulekar 6239 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[भा भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

Total

1023765.53

17408.78 16652.64

17984.55

amount tobe paid

19562.09

19652.47

14713.12

17416.57

16652.64 14360.56

18975.34

18885.81 23306.09

18658.40

14184.28 20047.74

16524.30

20047.74

16329.21

18658.40

24661.43

18875.18

18940.60

14615.23

15643.71

18911.23

23516.05

(13+14)

years

300767.27 10%

5114.44

interest for4

5555.84

5548.37 6846.99

4218.92

4892.30 5747.03

5773.61

5283.60

4797.28 5116.73

4322.50

5481.57

5574.68 4854.60

5481.57

4892.30 4293.74

5889.73 7245.17

4167.13 5889.73

5564.47 5545.25

6908.67

4595.89

31-12-2002

2months

Total

722998.26

11760.34

12299.84

13878.86

12294.34

16459.10

11669.70

13337.44

11760.34

13815.03

10141.64

17416.27 10390.62 11531.93

11047.82

13400.66

10017.14

12700.95

13355.39

10321.49

13176.84 14158.01

16607.38

13329.93

13176.84

13376.13

14158.01

(11+12)

66876.37

921.97

944.60

938.32 910.65

1118.17 1069.12

1583.30

1117.67

1004.35

1496.28 1069.12

1060.88

1048.36

1287.09

1218.24

1255.91

1287.09 1154.63

1214.13

1212.49

1509.76

1197.89 1197.89

1261.71 1211.81

1216.01

Provident Fund10%

Total

668763.70

9219.67

9446.02

12559.12 9106.50

12617.15 9383.17

10483.57

10691.22

12124.95 14962.82

11181.67

12870.92

12141.26

15097.62

15832.97

10608.82

10043.47

11176.67

12182.42

11546.32

11978.95

12870.92

12160.12

11978.95

12118.12

(9+10)

9138.83

164.32

192.77

164.32

192.77

164.32 164.32

164.32

192.77

164.32

164.32 192.77 164.32

164.32

192.77

189.01

192.77 192.77 164.32

192.77

difference

50°VDA

659624.88 Total

9055.35

9281.70

9879.15

12424.38 9218.85

14770.05

10526.90

8942.18

10526.90

11952.25

11017.35 12366.35

12706.60 15640.20

11012.35

12706.60 11382.00

Amount

11967.35

11925.35 11786.18

10444.50

10319.25

11960.63

12018.10

11786.18 14933.30

(7+8)amount

94277.56

2998.00

3564.00

2984.00

3400.00

3774.00

2844.00

2880.00

2888.00 2844.00

05-02-93

wages (50%) after

Lock-out

565347.38

9055.35

9426.38

8552.25

9382.35

9281.70

9879.15

8942.18

10526.90

9218.85

11012.35

11206.05

11017.35

10526.90 9079.35

9045.35

10319.25

10444.50

11382.00

12706.60

11960.63

11866.20

12706.60

14933.30 12018.10

forlock-

outperiod

50%wages

1130694.75

18764.70

18852.75

18110.70

19758.30

22034.70

17104.50 22024.70

18563.40

21053.80

20638.50

22412.10 21053.80 18437.70

17884.35

24036.20

22764.00

23921.25

20889.00

18158.70 17884.35

18090.70

17884.35

23732.40

29866.60

25413.20

(3+4+5)

ofLock

Totalwages

tooutperiod

74191.55

288.25

276.90

286.90

261.50 326.90

342.70

315.50 336.90

302.10 365.75

283.80

323.00

348.00

362.80

276.90

294.90

281.90

273.45

366.45

276.90 273.45

273.45

01-02-93

05-02-93

LOCOUT

17280.00

17904.00

17988.00

20400.00

17712.00

20400.00

21024.00

21384.00

22824.00

19692.00

21024.00

19920.00 16320.00

Months

17064.00

22644.00

18852.00

24624.00

21720.00

17064.00

17328.00

17064.00

17592.00

24624.00

28584.00

17280.00

23004.00

90154 01-02-92

1440x12

1492x12

1499x12

1752x12

1700x12

1752x12

1700x12

1476x12

1782x12

1902x12

1887x12

1641x12

1810x12

1660x12

1360x12

1422x12

1571-x12

1422x12

1444x12

1440x12

2052x12

1466x12

2382x12

1917x12

salary×12

WAGESPERIODFOR

to31-01-93

34655..20

553.80

573.80

685.40 653.80 576.50

673.80

731.50

567.60

523.00

653.80

631.00

673.80

646.00

546.901422x12

546.90 789.20

789.202052x12

725.60

696.00 604.20

546.90 916.15

553.80

563.80

737.30

533.80

21-01-92

31-01-92

Gaotalkar

Ganpule

Satoskar

Bhujang

TOTAL 2

ShriA.S.Bugde

47.ShriP.S.Pendse

49.ShriS.R.Desai

52.ShriP.Y.Raut

50.ShriU.S.Padwal

44.ShriN.S.Kamat

45.ShriS.G.Arondekar

51.ShriA.N.Kambli

37.ShriL.F.Fernandes

43.ShriD.N.Mayekar

39.ShriG.L.Sutar

48.ShriA.N.

46.ShriP.D.

35.ShriU.V.

38.ShriP.N.Pereira

41.ShriA.S.Kambli

34.ShriM.G.Warkhankar

33.ShriN.S.Bhosale

42.ShriV.V.Chinchanekar

31.ShriS.B.Pednekar

32.ShriA.A.Shetkar

40.ShriS.M.Deshpande

30.ShriM.J.

27.ShriA.K.Naik

No.

29.ShriK.K.Gosavi

36.ShriD.S.Kanayalakar

28.

SL.Nameofworker 6240

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22 , 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] 16

paid

Total

amount

tobe

1007.62

14308.92

14184.39

19652.47

1739.23

1739.21 18666.78

1739.23

1645.40 14360.56

19652.47

14429.13

18438.98

15859.12

14017.81

14745.72

15281.33

18947.85

15428.77

21106.41

17906.28

18734.22

15666.50

14397.94

14370.37

26606.45 16231.43

15884.05

16779.90

14370.37

16638.12

445337.02 (13+14)

years

10%

for4

interest

483.39

531.05

510.96

510.95 4167.17

5503.84

5417.10

4239.07 6200.75

5484.82

5773.61

4218.92 4659.18

4203.75

5566.60

5260.60

4118.23

7816.58 4532.75

4489.43

4221.80

4229.90

4666.50

5773.161

4768.56

4602.59 4888.04

4332.08

4929.69

4221.80

130833.48 31-12-2002

2months

9899.58

1228.27

1276.57 1228.26

1228.27 10190.06

1162.01 13878.86

13021.88

13230.38

13878.86

10141.64

13182.75 10017.23

10791.90

10148.57

10168.04

11199.95

18789.86

14905.66

13381.25

12645.68 10413.65

11217.55

11462.87

10105.17

10896.02 11850.21

11750.08

10148.57

11063.91

314503.55 (11+12)

981.08

910.66

926.37

899.96 918.65

921.97 922.60

946.70 990.55

924.37

1018.18

1202.76

922.60 1261.71 1355.06

1198.43

1276.57 1228.26

1077.29

1228.27 1261.71

1183.81

1708.17

1019.78

1042.08

1228.27

1216.48

1162.01

1149.61

1068.19

1005.81

34157.93 Fund10%

TotalProvidentTotal

9263.70

9810.82

9466.95

9106.57

9186.52

9219.67

8999.62

9905.48

9225.97

9243.67

12027.62

12617.15

11984.32

12164.78

9225.97 12617.15

10197.77

10772.92

10181.77

13550.60

17081.70

11838.07

12282.57

12282.67

11496.07

10058.10

12765.67

12282.67

10420.00

10681.90 11620.07 (9+10)

164.32

164.32 192.77

164.32

192.77

164.32

192.77

164.32

192.77

164.32 185.25 164.32

164.32

185.25

192.77

164.32

185.25

164.32

185.25

164.32

192.77

164.32

5397.72341579.27 difference

Total50%VDA

Amount

9099.38

9281.70

8942.25 8835.30

9061.65

9022.20

9055.35

9646.50

9872.85

9720.23

9079.35

11645.30

9061.65 12424.38

12424.38

11834.85 10005.00

10256.48

11791.55

13365.35

10017.45 11979.53

11331.75

16917.38

10608.60

12118.33

12601.35

10489.13 11455.75

12118.25 (7+8)amount

12118.35 9

after

wages

2998.00

2810.00

2998.00 4320.00

2846.00

05-02-93

15972.00336181.55 (50%)

Lock-out

9055.35

8835.30

9045.35

9099.38 8945.55

9426.38

9426.38 9646.50 8835.30

9872.85

9079.35

8942.25

9022.20

9281.70

9061.65

9720.23

10017.45

10256.48

11331.75

11834.85 10005.00

10489.13

12118.35

11979.53

10608.60 12601.35

forlock-

50%wages

18852.75

18044.40

17884.50 17670.60

18563.40 19440.45

18158.70

18090.70 18110.70

17670.60

19745.70

19293.00

18123.30

18852.75

17891.10

18123.30 18198.75

24236.70

20034.90

23669.70 20010.00

33834.7516917.38

20978.25

21217.20

20512.95

24236.5012118.25

25202.70

24236.7012118.35

22911.5011455.75 ofLock

(3+4+5)

tooutperiod outperiod

270.20

288.25 295.00

270.20

296.15

301.90

288.25

276.90

276.90 273.50

277.10 346.5022663.50

283.80

276.90 320.75

278.25

277.10

306.30

361.90

271.70

313.65

324.40

366.3523959.05

306.00

7147.95640419.10320209.55 01-02-93

05-02-93

LOCKOUTTotalwages

Months

17328.00

18552.00

17076.00 17064.00

17280.00

17484.00

24420.00

22200.00

16860.00

19116.00 22860.00

22584.00

17712.00

17988.00 18408.00

17292.00

18840.00

20244.00 23484.00

23484.00 17280.00 16860.00

32784.00

19092.00

19572.00

23484.00

21624.00

20016.00

17292.00 17364.00

17988.00

51136 1534x12

1444x12

1957x12

1457x12

1882x12

1422x12

1570x12

1440x12

1476x12

1668x12

1405x12

2732x12

1687x12

1591x12

1441x12 1440x12

1593x12

1441x12

1631X12

WAGESPERIODFOR

to31-01-93

782.702035x12

547.00

560.40

732.701905x12

648.80

576.501499x12

540.401405x12

554.20 693.001802x12

723.00

592.301546X12

603.00

553.80 752.70

612.00

752.501957x12 590.00

540.40

567.60

553.80 612.60

627.30

576.501499x12

711.501850x12 556.501447x12

554.20 533.80

641.50 752.701957x.12

1050.75

19639.15 21-01-9201-02-92

31-01-92salary×12

543:401423x12

Warkhankar

Arondekar

TOTAL 1 2

68.ShriM.B.Awade

74.ShriS.S.Bale

75.ShriA.R.Mestri

76.ShriB.M.D'Souza

77.ShriR.D.Sutar

81.ShriK.S.Kamat 57.ShriK.M.Shiolkar

54.ShriS.R.Kambli

55.ShriA.G.Manjarekar

62.ShriM.G.Rane

64.ShriB.S.Rane

66.ShriS.G.Pandit

70.ShriVU.Satoskar

56.ShriM.P.Redkar

58.ShriA.M.Narsule

59.ShriA.Y.Bhagat

71.ShriB.J.Diva

No.

67.ShriS.R.

69.ShriL.V.Ansurkar

79.ShriN.K.Tivarekar

80.ShriJ.V.Gavade

60.ShriD.S.Raut

65.ShriR.M.Parab

72.ShriA.N.Parsekar

73.ShriS.J.Masurkar

78.ShriM.T.Kambli

82.ShriB.N.

83.ShriY.S.Naik

61.ShriG.S.Kambli

63.Shri.H.T.Kadam

SL.Nameofworker

53.ShsiV.B.Kanayalakar भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22 , 1925

[भाग ग II-खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

paid

Total

Amount

tobe

25462.32

28760.97

14879.47

24811.40

25144.10

14948.40

24811.40

183629.46

(13+14)

years,

10%

for4

interest

8449.55 7289.22

7289.22

7480.46

7386.97 4371.37

7289.22

4391.62

53947.64

31-12-2002

2Months

Total

17522.18

17757.14

17522.18

10556.78

20311.42

17981.87

10508.10

129681.82

(11+12)

955.28

959.71

1846.49

1614.29

1592.93

1634.72 1592.93

1592.93 11789.26

Fund10%

TotalProvident

9597.07

9552.82

15929.25

16142.85

15929.25

16347.15

18464.93

117892.57

(9+10)

164.32

185.25

-164.32 Amount

1440.14

difference

Total50%VDA

9432.75 Amount

9388.50

15744.00

18279.68

15957.60

16161.90 15744.00 (7+8)

116452.43

wages

5085.00

5904.00

5220.00

5154.00

5085.00

5085.00 05-02-93

(50%) after

Lock-out

9432.75

9388.50

10803.60

10659.00

18659.00

12375.68

10941.90

84919.4331533.00

10659.00 forlock-

outperiod

50%wages

18865.50

18777.00

21318.00

21607.20

21318.00

24751.35

21883.80 21318.00 169838.85

M/S.GOGTEMINERALS,(JETTY)

(3+4+5)

tooutperiod

326.00

330.40

326.00 287.00

288.50

378.45

334.60

326.00

6241 16

paid

Total

amount

tobe

1814.28

24733.44 27516.72

22322.86 15379.23

18438.98

27012.99

15379.23

22337.15

22311.91 (13+14)

years

10%

for4

533.01

interest

7266.32

7936.02 4518.19

8084.01

4518.19

6558,13

5417.10

6562.33

6554.91 31-12-2002

2months

Total

1281.27

10861.04

17467.12

13021.88

19076.97 15774.83

15757.00

15764.73

19432.71

(11+12)

987.37

1587.92

1281.27 1734.27

1434.08

1766.61

1433.16

1432.45

1183.81 12

TotalProvident

9873.67

17666.10

12812.70 17342.70

15879.20

14331.58

11838.07 (9+10)Fund10%

164.32

164.329873.67

amount

185.25

185.25 185.25

192.77

185.2514340.75

185.25

192.7714324.55 difference

Total50%VDA

9709.35164.32

9709.35

Amount

17480.85

15693.95

11645.30

14146.33

14155.50 12648.38 17157.45

14131.78 (7+8)

after

5085.00

4569.00

5646.00 2810.00

5535.00

4572.00

3410.00 05-02-93

wages (50%)

Lock-out

9577.33

8835.30

9709.35

9583.50 12648.38

10608.95

10721.78

11622.45

11834.85

forlock-

outperiod

50%wages

17670.60

19154.65 19418.70

19418.70

19167.00 25296.75

21217.90

23244.90

23669.70

21443.55 ofLock

(3+4+5)

tooutperiod

296.90

292.90

156.00

270.20

361.90 293.00

226.00 395.30

327.85 M/S.CENTRALMININGANDTRADINGSYNDICATE

2596.95

05-02-93

01-02-93ofLock

LOCKOUTTotalwages

18000.00

23616.00

20340.00

17916.00

20340.00

20616.00

20340.00

Listofworkersand50%wagesduringlock-outperiodi.e.21/01/1992to05/02/1993

20880.00

01-02-92

1968x12

1695x12

1740x12

1695x12

1493x12

1500x12

1718x12

WAGESPERIODFOR

to31-01-93

756.90

574.00

577.00

652.00

660.80

3 669.20

5193.9013504 21-01-92

652:00 31-01-92salaryx12Months

TOTAL

88.ShriR.T.Tulaskar

I 2

90.ShriS.G.Gadekar

87.ShriH.M.Solkar

89.ShriS.V.Kocharekar

91.ShriJ.M.Palekar No.

85.ShriK.J.Mhaskar

86.ShriD.S.Tandel

84.ShriB.R.Redkar

SL.Nameofworker

05-02-93

01-02-93

24360.00

16860.00

22140.00

18528.00

18288.40

20340.00

18276.00

22584.00

18528.00 20460.00 Months

01-02-92

1524x12

1845x12

1695x12

2030x12

1705x12

1523x12

salaryx12

WAGESPERIODFORLOCKOUTTotalwages

to 31-01-93

780.75 709.60

585.75

593.801544x12

586.00

651.90

655.70

723.801882x12

593.801544x12

540.401405x12

21-01-92

31-01-92

101.ShriB.H.Tasildar

100.ShriD.K.Budhiyal No.

96.ShriK.D.Draxi

97.ShriS.B.Rane

98.ShriB.B.Manjarekar

99.ShriM.L.Redkar

93.ShriS.K.Satoskar

94.ShriK.P.Paranjpe

95.ShriH.B.Hukkeri

92.ShriP.V.Joshi

SL.Nameofworker 6242

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22 , 1925

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii)] 16

Total tobe paid

Amount

19110.30

15996.27

19110.30

18219.43

18219.43 16903.42

18875.18

25635.92

2095.26

16828.89

14713.98 18890.76

14310.87 14360.56 18890.06

2836.50

14311.65

18503.50

22918.71

14359.86

15250.65

18810.70 18503.50

18516.43

20008.34 (13-14)

years

10%

for4

Interest

4699.47

5352.60

5614.33

5545.25

7531.46

5352.60

615.56

833.32

4965.98

4944.08

6733.18

5436.06

4204.55

4322.75 5549.83

4218.72

4284.32 4218.92 5549.62

4480.42

5436.06

5526.31

5439.85

5878.16 31-12-2002

185568.52631646.69 2Months

Total

13495.98

11296.80 12866.83 11937.44

18104.46

1479.70 12866.83

12866.83

13329.93

2003.18

10141.64

11884.81

16185.53

10106.55

10107.10 10141.14

13340.44

13067.44

10391.23 13340.93

13284.39 13067.44 14130.18

13076.57

10770.23

446078.17 (11:12)

1226.91

1026.98

944.66

1885.22

918.78 921.97

1169.71

1645.86

918.83 921.92

1226.91

1169.71

1211.81 1888.40

1212.77 979.11

2003.18

1212.81 1187.95

1207.67

1479.70

1471.41

1187.95

1188.78

1284.56

44883.61 12

TotalProvident

12269.07

9446.57

12269.07

9219.22

9188.27

11697.12 12118.12

11697.12

9187.77 9219.67

10269.82

10852.22

11697.12 16458,60

9791.12

10884.37

14714.12 12128.12

12127.67

11879.50

12076.72

11887.80

11879.50

14797.05

20031.77 (9+10)Fund10%

192.77

192.77 192.77 192.77

164.32

192.77 164.32

192.77

164.32 164.32

185.25

192.77

164.32

192.77

164.32

192.77

192.77 164.32

192.77

192.77 164.3212845.62

164.32

6496.30448836.08 10

Total50%VDA

AmountDifference

9023.45

9282.25

10105.50

12076.30

9055.35

11504.35

9023.95

9626.80

12076.30

9054.90

16273.35

11504.35

(7.8)Amount

10687.90

10640.05

14521.35

11925.35

11935.35

11883.95

11686.73

11934.90 11695.03

11686.73 12681.30

19867.45

14604.28

442339.78 9

wages After

2914.00

2914.00 2776.00

2776.00

2880.00

5256.00

2776.00

05-02-93

3504.00

2820.00

2880.00

2822.00

2870.00

3524.00

2820.00

2880.00

4794.00

3060.00 (50%)

85893.00 Lock-out

9162.30

8728.35

9045.35

9282.25

9823.95

9023.45

9055.35

9054.90

8866.73

9054.90

10105.50

9013.95

9055.35

9626.80

8866.73

10640.05

8873.03

11017.35 11017.35

9621.30

10687.90

11000.28

15073.45

356446.78 forlock-

outperiod

50%wages

18324.60 17456.70

17456.70

18090.70

20211.00

18564.50

21280.10 18046.90

18110.70

21375.80

22034.70 18047.90

22034.70

18110.70

18109.80

17733.45

18109.80

19253.60

18027.90 17733.45

17746.05

19242.60

22160.55

30146.90

712893.55 ofLock

(3+4+5)

Totalwages

tooutperiod

280.20

266.90 276.90

266.90

280.20

309.00

336.90 325.40

336.90

266.90

276.00 276.90

276,90 271.15

276.00

294.20

275.00

271.35

276.00

294.20

271.15

338.85

461.00 01-02-93

05-02-93

9997.85 LOCKOUT

17484.00

19284.00

16656.00

17280.00

20304.00

21024.00

16656.00

20712.00

17220.00

17988.00 17220.00

21024.00

17280.00 17280.00

17220.00

16920.00

16932.00

18368.00

17220.00 16920.00

21144.00 Months

28764.00

18360.00 4

01-02-92

1457x12

1440×12

1607x12

1388x12

1692×12

1499×12

1388x12

143512

175212

1440×12

143512

144012

1410×12

1440×12

1530×12

141012

2397×12 WAGESPERIODFOR

1762×12

1435×12

141112

to31-01-93

560.40

533.80

673.80175212

533.80 533.80

618.00 533.801388x12

663.801726×12

551.90

576.50 553.80144012

650.70

551.90 553.80

542.30

673.80

542.70

553.80 553.80

531.90 542.30

599.40

921.90

677.70 588.40153012 21-01-92

31-01-92salaryx12

21799.7056758 Redkar

Tasildar

Gavade

Phatji

SL.Nameofworker

TOTAL 1

104.ShriD.B.Tivarekar

108.ShriL.S.Redkar

103.ShriV.R.Salgaonkar

106.ShriD.M.

112.ShriD.K.Arolkar

102.ShriR.I.Shaikh

110.ShriS.N.Gadekar

105.ShriJ.G.

107.ShriS.S.Dharne

109.ShriS.T.Tendolkar

111.ShriC.D.Draxi

113.ShriD.N.Gadekar

121.ShriT.S.Kerkar

117.ShriJ.J.Fernandes

114.ShriG.A.Kerkar

118.ShriA.S.Kudao

115.ShriL.S.Redkar

120.ShriA.J.Jeral

124.ShriK.R.Redkar

123.ShriA.H.

126.ShriM.N.Gumaste

116.ShriG.V.Bhagat

122.ShriG.M.Chhadedar

No.

125.ShriS.R.Joshi

119.ShriA.R.

127.ShriS.G.Warkhankar 6243

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13, 2003 / भाद्र 22, 1925.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

1235.04

1228.90

1255.20

1290.20 14585.36

17135.74

14458.57

Total amount tobe paid

14576.09 18722.93

17203.18

17152.21

18710.12

20181.59

14801.20

20948.40

193484.79

(13+14)

362.84

368.76

361.03

379.07

4284.96

5034.23

5039.07

10% interest for

5054.04 4282.24.

5929.05

5500.52

5496.76

4247.72

56842.99

6154.33

4348.38

4'years 2months 31-12-2002

867.87

886.44

Total

872.20

911.22

10300.39

12113.14

12101.51

1029385

132113.36

14794.07

13222.41

12149.14

10210085

10452.83

1425254

(11+12)

867.87

886.44

911.22

872.20 936.40

935.80

928.26

1101.19

1100.14

950.26

1202.04

1295.69

15638.09136641.80

1201.21

1104.47

1344.92

Provident Fund1:0%

Total

9364.00

8864.40 8722.00

9112.15

11001.38

9282.60

9502.57

11011.95

12956.85

12012.15

13449.15

156380.91

11044.67

9358:05

(9+10)

12020:37

164.32

8678.65164.25

164.25

185.25

164.32

185.25

192.77

164.32

164.32:

2584.21

185.25

164.32

amount

192:77

difference

1:0

9199.68

8514.40

Total 500VDA

8557.75

8700.15

8947.90

911828

112771.60

9193.73

10816.13

10847.63

153796.70

11827.60

Amount

10880.35 11819.38

13263390

(7-8)

9338:25

14115.00

4125.00

2852.00

2854.00

4284.00

05-02-93

wages (50%) after

lock-out

9199.68

8514.40

8700.15

9118.28

9193.73 8973.60 10847163

139681.70

8979.90

9338.25 10880.35

855775

8646600

894:790

1081613

896738

forlock-

outperiod

50°wages

M/S.KONKANCONTRACTORS

18399.35

17028.80

17115.50

17895.80

17400.30

17293.20

17947.20

17934.75

21632.25

18236.55

21695.25

18387.45

18676.50

21760.70

17959:80

(3-4-5)

ofLock

Totalwages

tooutperiod

281.35

331.75

264.40 330.75

2877.00279363.40

274.40

281.15

278.85 274.25

274.60

285.50

05-02-93

01-02-93

LOCKOUT

17556.00

16584.00

17340.00 16500.00

16860.00

16500.00

17544.00

20640.00

20700.00

17112.00

17124.00

Months

17400.00

17136.00

21084.00

17820.00

LISTOFWORKERSAND50%WAGESDIRINGLOCK-OUTPERIODLE.21-1-1992ΤΟ5-2-1993

22325

01-02-92

137512

1485×12

WAGESPERIODFOR

to31-01-93

8586.40

531.50138212

528.80137512

555.801445×12

540.301405×12

661.501720×12

528.80

663.50172512

548.501426、12

548.80142712

562.301462×12

557.701450×12

676.701757×12

549.201428×12

571.00

21-01-92

31-01-92salaryx12

Bastwadkar

Gosavi

TOTAL

SL.Nameofworker

140.ShriR.R.Khar

142ShriS.D.Kerkar(Jetty)562.00146312

139.ShriM.G.Attar

137.ShriD.M.

138.ShriR.M.Malage

136.ShriN.A.Ghube

1 2

141ShriS.R.Kanayalkar

135.ShriR.Y.Gosavi

133.ShriS.M.Kanayalkar

134.ShriS.B.Sharbidre

132.ShriV.P.

131.ShriVS.Raut

130ShriR.D.Naik

128ShriD.S.Raut

129ShriG.B.Padwal

2491 G1/2003-12 .

6244

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2003 /BHADRA 22, 1923

paid

Total

amount tobe

15340.09

14375.28

19545.08

15294.18

14327.23

94176.04

2572039.53 (13+14)

years

10%

interest for4

5742.06

4223.25

4506.69

4493.21 4209.13

4493.21 27667.54 31-12-2002

755627.43 2months

Total

10800.98

10118.10

13803.02

10152.03

10833.40

66508.50

1816412.10 (11/12)

984.85

922.91

919.83

981.91

1254.82

6046.23

179391.48 Fund10°.

TotalProvident

9848.55

9229.12

9819.07

9198.27

12548.20

60462.28

1793914.80 (9+10)

164.32

164.32 164.32 amount

185.25

1006.85

26064,05

Total50°VDA

9654.75

9064.80 9654.75

9684.23

9033.95

12362.95

Amountdifference (718)

59455.43

1767850.75

after

3993.00

05-02-93-

3993.00

245783.50 wages (50°%)

Lock-out

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii ) ] Remark

Total (Rs..))

4,725.00 1,532.00

9,279.00.

2,641.00

13,278.00

93,549.00

16,151.00

14,385.00

10,309.00

5,855:00

15,394:00

808.00

5.437.00 4,894.00.

1,393.00

7,003.00

8,119.00:

8,518.00

7,587.00.

46,847.00

3,088:00

Interest@

10%for 11Yrs.

2months

4,725.00

46,702.00

74.70

69.60 55.85

59.45

51..70

68.15 69.60

45.00

TotalRs. 1,810.0

1,343.9

1,772.0

1,942.0

1,546.0 1,810.0 Salary (Rs.)

14 84

ANNEXURED

9654.75

9064.80

9684.23

9654.75

9033.95

8369.95

55462.43

1522067.25 forlock-

outperiod

50%wages

19309.50

18129.60

16739.90

19309.50

19368.45

18067.90

3644134.50

110924.85 (3+4+5)

tooutperiod

277.10

256.00

296.50 296.15

277.10

296.50

38510.65

1699.35 05-02-93

01-02-93ofLock

LOCKOUTTotalwages

M/S.GENERALRESEARCIIANDDEVELOPMENTCORPORATION

Months

15972.00

17352.00 18480.00

18480.00

18480.00 17292.00

8838

242715 01-02-92

144612

154012

salaryx12

WAGESPERIODFOR

1031-01-93

500.50

511.901331×12

533.00 592.301540×12

498.801441×12

533.001540×12

93043.85 21-01-92

3169.50 31-01-92

STATEMENTSHOWINGTHESERVICECOMPENSATIONTOTHEWINCHMANWHOWERENOTENGAGEDINSERVICESINCEOCT.'

TOTAL

GRANDTOTAL

1 144.ShriK.Y.Gavade

143.ShriP.T.Kambli

146.ShriN.L.Gurav

145.ShriA.R.Salgaonkar

No.

SL.Nameofworker

148.ShriA.S.Korgaonkar

147.ShriM.Sanmugam

63 491.452.0

21 91

112

1051.171.0 Days

ΤΟ31-12-2002

(i.c.outofSindhudurgDistrict).

Season

4-1-3

8-17

11-29 18-216 17-2-15 14-212

14-2-12

12-210

15-2=13

Last

15-4-91

25-3-88 20-5-91

15-4-91

15-4-91 20-5-85

25-5-91

15-4-91

Dateof

Employment

First

1-3-76

1-4-73

1-4-81

1-10-77

7-11-79 7-11-80

15-3-71 23-1-91

17-11-83

Dateof

Employment

Name

3.ShriJairamV.Kubal

4.ShriB.L.:Gadekar

9.ShriA.B.Parsekar

5.ShriN.P.Kerkar

6.ShriG.F.Keskar

2.ShriG.N.Palyakar

1.ShriU.S.Degaskar

8.ShriA.S.Hiroji

Sr.

7.ShriM.Pallamshetty

No.

10.ShriY.V.Parackar [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22 , 1925

ANNEXURE E

6245 LIST OF EMPLOYEES WHO HAVE TAKEN V.R.S. ADVANCE UNDER BENEFIT IN

Sr. Name of Workers

No.

Amount Rs..

3,000 1. D.N. Mayekar

2. S.G. Arondekar

3,000 3. A.S. Pendese

3,000

3,000 4. S.R. Desai

3,000 5. N.S. Kamat

3.000 6. K.L. Morajkar

3,000 7. A.A. Shetkar

8. J.D. Kerkar

3,000

3,000 9. S.M. Deshpande

3,000 10. U.V. Satoskar

3,000 11. D.S. Kanyalkar

3.000 12. L.F. Fernandis

3.000 13. J.D. Cruz

3,000 14. V.V. Chinchnekar

3.000 15. H.M. Solkar

3,000 16. R.T. Tulaskar

3,000 17. S.V. Kocharedkar

3,000 18. D.S. Taridel

3,000 19. D.K. Arolkar

3,000 20. G.V. Bhagat

30000 21. R.Y. Gosavi

3,000 22. M.J. Akhtar

3,000 23. R.M. Mhalge

3,000 24. P.T. Kambali

3,000 25. Y.S.P. Tendolkar

3,000 26. M.T. Kambli

3,000 27. B.N. Aroandekar

3,000 28. K.S. Kamat

84,000

THE YEAR 1997

Sr. Name of Workers No.

Amount (Rs.)

3,000 29. A.N. Ganpule

30. R.Y. Satoskar

3,000

3,000 31. Ankush Vengurlekar

32. V.B. Pawar

3,000 33. S.N. Tore

3,000 34. Y.S. Naik

3.000 35. Y.G. Rodkar

3,000

3,000 36. M.K. Paranjape

3,000 37. M.N. Bandekar

38. P.J. Rane

3,000

3,000 39. B.G. Dalvi

40. D.B. Varak

3,000

3,000 41. D.M. Chikongiri

3,000 42. A. R. Shetkar

3,000 43. D.A. More

3.000 44. D. A. Misal

3,000 45. M.1 . Bastawadi

3,000 46. S.K. Dluri

-3,000 47. K.V. Hule

3,000 48. R.V. Keluskar

3,000 49. D.Y. Gosavi

3,000 50. R.G. Gosavi

3,000 51. V.N. Mamalekar

3,000 52. N.J. Gawade

3,000 53. K.G. Arondekar

3,000 54. R.S. Korgaonkar

3,000 55. G.S. Vengurlakar

3,000 56. H.V. Kambale

3,000 57. P.V. Joshi

87,000 Total Rs .

1,71,000 Grand Total Rs .

6246

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22 , 1925

नई दिल्ली, 22 अगस्त, 2003

का ०आ ० 2612. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मै. जी. एन. अग्रवाल के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , मुंबई नं. 2 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 11/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है. जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 18-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [ सं. एल-29011/86/2002- आईआर( विविध) ] बी. एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 22nd August , 2003

S. O. 2612. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 11/2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court. Mumbai No. 2 as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s G. N. Agarwal and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 18-8-2003.

[No. L -29011 /86/2002 - IR (M) ] B. M. DAVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2) AT MUMBAI

PRESENT :

S. N. SAUNDANKAR

PresidingOfficer

Reference No. CGIT -2/ 11 of 2003 EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF M / S . G.N. AGARWAL, MARGAO , GOA

TheKarta,

M/ s . G. N. Agarwal ,

Anand Bhawan, Station Road ,

Margao , Goa,

F/ s.

THEIR WORKMEN

The General Secretary, United Mine Workers Union , Shetve Sankul , 3rd Floor ,

Tisk Ponda, Goa .

APPEARANCES :

For the Employers : Mr. B. B. Naik , Representative

For the Workmen

Mr. P. Gaonkar,

Representativc

Camp : Goa, Dated , the 9th July, 2003

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]

AWARD

The Government of India , Ministry ofLabour by its Order No. L - 29011 / 86 / 2002 / IR( M) dated 20-02-2003 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub - section 2 ( A) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 have referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether M / s . G.N. Agarwal , Margao , Goa is the employer in respect of workmen mentioned in the list of workmen ( Annexure ' A' and 'B ' ) submitted by the United Mine Workers Union , Goa ? If so , whether the action of the management ofM/s . G.N. Agarwal in refusing employment to these workmen w.e.f. 11-3-2002 is legal and justified? If not , to what relief the workmen are entitled ?" ANNEXURE'A'

Name of the workers employedbyM/ s . G.N. Agarwal- Bimbal- Mine

Sr. No. Name of the workmen Designation 1 2

1. Santosh Naik

Welder

2. Ramdas Desai

Operator

3. Sachin Desai

Gen.Operator

Electrician 4. Dilip Priolekar

5. Prashant Khedekar

Supervisor 6. Ankush Desai

Pump-Operator 7. Ashok Naik

Drill-Helper 8. Manohar Gaonkar

Operator

9. Jaspal Singh

Operator

10. Mangaldas Chari

Gen.Helper 11. Balu Gurav

Gen.Helper 12. Dhondu Athawadkar

Helper

13. Dhondu Tato

Pump-Operator

Store- Keeper 14. Premanand Khandeparkar

15. Premand Desai

Helper

16. Babu Manppo

Helper

17. Thakao Redkho

Helper

18. Bhago Pandermiplii

Labour

19. Parsha Bhonsle

20. Parshuram Bhonsle

Labour

21. Muttappa Bhonsle

22. Suresh Wadar

Labour

23. Raja Dhotherekar

24. Balkrishna Gaonkar

Labour

25. Rajendra Velip

Labour

26. Ambro Labhor [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Electrician 27. Sanjay Mamlekar

Driver

28. Prakash Naik

Driver

29. Parshuram Wadar

Driver

30. Ramesh Narvenkar

Driver

31. Kumar Arumugam

32. Nilesh Prabhu

StoreKeeper 33. Prakash Desai

Operator

MineMate 34. Hemant D. Naik

35, P.A. Suresh

Operator

36. Narayan Kesarkar

Operator 37. Balu Chikoti

W/L Operator

Labour

38. Hanumanth Bhonsle

Labour

39. Rammanna Bhonsle

Labour

40. Laxman Patil

ANNEXURE-' B'

Name of the workers emplyed by M/s. G.N. Agarwal-

Bimbal-Mine

Sr. No. Name of the workmen Designation

Welde

1. Santosh Naik

2. Ramdas Desai

Operator 3. Sachin Desai

Gen.Operator

Electrician 4. Dilip Priolekar

5. Prashant Khedekar

Supervisor 6. Ankush Desai

Pump -Operator 7. Ashok Naik

Drill-Helper 8. Manohar Gaonkar

Operator

Operator 9. Jaspal Singh

Gen.Helper 10. Mangaldas Chari

11. Balu Gurav

Gen.Helper 12. Dhondu Athawadkar

Helper

13. Dhondu Tato

Pump -Operator 14. Premanand Khandeparkar Store -Keeper 15. Premand Desai

Helper

16. Babu Manppo

17. Thakao Redkho

Helper

18. Bhago Pandermishal

Labour

19. Parsha Bhonsle

Labour

20. Parshuram Bhonsle

Labour

21. Muttappa Bhonsle

Labour

22. Suresh Wadar

Labour

23. Raja Dhotherekar

Labour

24. Balkrishna Gaonkar

Labour

25. Rajendra Velip

Labour

26. Ambro Labhor

Electrician 27. Sanjay Mamlekar

6247

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22 , 1925

28. Nilesh Prabhu

StoreKeeper 29. Prakash Desai

Operator

Mine Mate 30. Hemant D. Naik

31. P.A. Suresh

Operator

32. Narayan Kesarkar

33. Balu Chikoti

W/L Operator

Labour

34. Hanumanth Bhonsle

Labour

35. Rammanna Bhonsle

Labour

36. Laxman Patil

2. On receipt of notices both the parties appcared and vide purshis (Exhibit -7 ) pointed out that the dispute has amicably been settled , and therefore , it be disposed of.

Hence , the order :--

ORDER

Reference stands disposed of as settled vide purshis (Exhibit-7).

S.N. SAUNDANKAR, Presiding Officer BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2 AT MUMBAI Reference No. CGIT - 2/ 11 of 2003

M/ s . G. N. AGARWAL F...Employer/Party I

V/s.

THEIR WORKMEN

..Workman/Party II MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOUR .

The workmen submits that the dispute between the parties was settled amicably and now there is no dispute exist.

In view of above submission the party submits that no dispute award be passed in the matter.

ForParty I (B. B. Naik)

ForParty II

Date: 09-07-2003 .

(P. GAONKAR )

Gen. Secretary Place:Vasco - da gama, Goa.

नई दिल्ली, 22 अगस्त, 2003

का०आ ० 2613.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मै. ओ.एन. जी.सी. लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , मुंबई नं. 2 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 188/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-8-2003 कोप्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-30012/ 26/99 - आई ० आर० ( विविध ) ]

बी० एम ० डेविड, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 22nd August . 2003 S. O. 2613. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Govemment hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 188/99 ) 6248

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22, 1925

of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum-Labour Court. Mumbai No. 2 as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/s . ONGCLtd. , and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 22-8-2003 .

[No. L- 30012/26/99 -IR(M) ]

B. M. DAVID , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 2 , MUMBAI

PRESENT :

S.N. SAUNDANKAR , Presiding Officer .

REFERENCE NO . CGIT - 2/ 188 af 1999 EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LIMITED

The Regional Director (MRBC), Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited, Vasudhara Bhavan , Bandra ( E) , MUMBAI -400051 .

V/ s .

THEIR WORKMEN

The Secretary General , Petroleum Employees Union , Tel-Rasayan Bhavan, Tilak Road . Dadar, Mumbai -400014.

APPEARANCES :

For the Employ er : Mr.G.D. Talreja, Representative .

For the Workmen

Mr. Jaiprakash Sawant, Advocate.

Mumbai, dated , 6th June , 2003

AWARD PART- II

By the Interim Award dated 20-2-2002 this Tribunal held that thedomestic inquiry conducted against the workman Kamat was as per the Principles of Natural Justice and the findings of the Inquiry Officer are not perverse. Consequently under Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act this Tribunal has to consider whether the punishment oftermination imposed on the workman is legal andjustified inthe context of the action of the management .

2. Workman Kamat who was working as Cleaner Grade- 11 in the service of the company was terminated w.e.f. 27-6-1994 on holding domestic inquiry for unauthorised absenteeism from 16-8-1991 10 14-8-1992 and the said charge found proved. It is the contention of workman that he was sick and therefore he could not attend the duty during the above said period and that he was not allowed

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii) ] tojoin the duty later on . On the other hand managements contention is that workman remained absent without intimation disrupting the smooth working of Transport Section which amount to misconduct under the Discipline and Appeal Rules , 1976 for which the punishment of termination is adequate which has been imposed on the workman. It is further contended that the past record of the workman was blemished for which he was punished with stoppage of five increments for his absence and that a penal interest was recovered for non- utilisation of house loan amount . It is contended that considering the past record, length of service and the gravity of proved charge, the punishment imposed is proportionate .

3. On the quantum punishment workman Kamat filed his affidavit in lieu of Examination in Chief ( Exhibit- 29) and closed evidence vide purshis (Exhibit - 34) and in rebuttal , Manager ofthe company Mr. Bhatti filed affidavit (Exhibit- 36) and closed oral evidence vide purshis (Exhibit -40 ) .

4. Workman filed written submissions (Exhibit -43 ) and the management (Exhibit - 44) . On going through the record, written submissions and hearing the Learned Counsels, I record my findings on the following issues for the reasons mentioned below:

Issues

Findings

Action is not legal and proper.

3. Whether the action of the management of ONGCLtd. , in terminating the services of C.D. Kamatw.c.f. 27-6-1994 islegal andjustified.

4. If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to ?

Asper order below.

REASONS

5. So far power under Section 11 - A is concerned their Lordships of Supreme Court in Mithilesh Singh V/ s. Union of India & Ors . 2003 SCC L & S 271 clearly observed:

"The scope of interference with punishment awarded by Disciplinary Authority under Section 11 - A of the Industrial Disputes Act is very limited and unless the punishment appears to be shockingly disproportionate , the court cannot interfere with the same."

It isfurther observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court that it is for the employce concerned to show how the penalty was disproportionate to the proved charges . In Regional Manager, U. P. SRTC, Etawah & Ors. V/s. Hoti Lal andAnr. 2003 SCC (L & S) 363 Their Lordships observed:

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/भाद्र 22, 1925

14-8-1992 and even considering the past record, the fact that he put about 11 years of service , he is of advanced age and as seen from the record he was facing family disputes in the light of the decision supra , to my view , punishment oftermination is rather harsh, disproportionate and that it needs to be interfered with under the provisions of Section 11 -A ofthe Industrial Disputes Act and that the reduction to the lowest grade i.e. Cleaner Grade - III w.e.f. 27-6-1994 without back wages would be the adequate and proper punishment instead of termination and therefore the same needs to be imposed . Consequently workman will have to be reinstated however without back wages . Issue No. 3 & 4 are answered accordingly and hence the order:

ORDER

The action of the management of ONGC Ltd. in terminating the services of Mr. Kamat . Cleaner Grade - II w.e.f. 27-6-1994 is harsh and disproportionate therefore not legal andjustified and that punishment of reduction to the lowest grade i.e. Cleaner -Grade - III is adequate and the same is imposed upon him instead punishment of termination. Consequently management is directed to reinstate the workman Kamat in service however without any back wages .

S.N. SAUNDANKAR. Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 22 अगस्त , 2003

interference is very limited and restricted to exceptional cases in the indicated circumstances . Unfortunately, in the present case as the quoted extracts of the High Court's order would go to show, no reasons whatsoever have been indicated as to why the punishment was considered disproportionate . Reasons are live links between the mind of the decision taken to the controversy in question and the decision or conclusion arrived at. Failure to give reasons amounts to denial ofjustice . A mere statement that it is disproportionate would not suffice . A party appearing before a court , as to what it is that the court is addressing its mind . It is not only the amount involved but the mental set-up, the type of duty performed and similar relevant circumstances which go into the decision -making process while considering whether the punishment isproportionate or disproportionate . If the charged employee holds a position of trust where honesty and integrity are inbuilt requirements of functioning, it would not be proper to deal with the matter leniently. Misconduct in such cases has to be dealt with iron hands. Where the person deals with public money or is engaged in financial transactions or acts in a fiduciary capacity , the highest degree of integrity and trustworthiness is a must and unexceptionable . judged in that background , conclusions of the Division Bench of the High Court do not appear to be proper. We set aside the same and restore order of the learned Single Judge upholding the order of dismissal .'

का.. आ. 2614.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार पंजाब नेशनल बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 2 , धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 311/1999 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 21-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/139/1999- आईआर ( बी-11 ) ] सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

New Delhi . the 22nd August , 20t03

S. O. 2614. -In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes , Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 311 / 1999 ) of the Central Govemment Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court . Dhanbad . No. 2 as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Punjab National Bank and their workman , received by the Central Governinent on 21-8-2003.

[No. L - 12012/ 139 / 1999 - IR( B - II ) ] C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy . ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL ( NO. 2) AT DHANBAD

PRESENT :

SHRI B. BISWAS. Presiding Officer 6. As stated above , in the domestic inquiry workman Kamat was found guilty for unauthorised absence from 16-8-1991 to 14-8-1992 . Workman in his cross - examination para 9 admits that he had not sent a single letter within this period of one year to the Company . He however had submitted medical certificate on his illness and that he was found fit for work as per the certificate issued by Nair Hospital which finds place in the inquiry report dated 23-10-1992 pg . 11-14/Exhibit - 12 . It is not that workman was not sick . It is settled position of law that penalty imposed must commensurate with the gravity of offence charged and that the Industrial Tribunal should be very careful before it interferes with the order made by the management in discharge of their Managerial functions . It is seen from the record workman was ill during the material period however he failed to inform the same to the company for which the punislunent of termination imposed upon the workman to my view is rather disproportionate . At this juncture , the Learned Representative Mr. Tafreja for the management company inviting attention to the past record submits that admittedly workman was punished for his carlier absence and that because of his absence , the smooth working of the Transport Section was disturbed and therefore severe punishment is warranted . Looking the period of his unauthorised absence i.e. 16-8-1991 to 6250

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22 , 1925

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act, 1947

REFERENCE NO . 311 OF 1999

PARTIES

: Employers in relation to the management of Punjab National Bank and their workman.

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalf of the workman

None

Onbehalf of the employers :

State: Jharkhand

Industry: Banking Dated , Dhanbad, the 1st August , 2003

ORDER

TheGovt . of India , Ministry of Labour, in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d) of the 1.D. Act 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 12812/ 139/ 99 - IR (B - II), dated, the 25th October, 1999 .

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Punjab National Bank . Dhanbad Branch in denial of promotion from sub - staff cadre to Clerical cadre by way of not allowing him to appear in the promotion test ( inspite of issue of call letter in the name of the concerned workman by the Regional Manager , Punjab National Bank , Ranchi to appear in the promotion test for the post of Clerk) is justified ? If not , what relief the concerned workman isentitled ?"

2. In this reference neither the concerned workman/ union appeared before this Tribunal nor took any steps . Management also did not appear in this reference. It is seen from the record that the instant reference was received by this tribunal on 8-12-99 and since then it is pending for disposal . Regd . notices and show cause notices were issued to the workman and the management but inspite of the issuance of notices they failed to turn up . In terms of Rule 11) B of the 1. D. Central Rules 1957 submission of W.S. by the concerned workman within 15 days is a mandatory one . The concerned workman not only violated the said provision of the Rule but also did not consider necessary to give any response to the notices issued by this Tribunal . In natural course the question which will arise is what will be the fate of the reference made by the Ministry for its disposal . The reference is made on the basis of dispute raised by the concerned workman/union. Naturally responsibility rests with the concerned workman union to assist the Court to dispose of the reference in issue on merit . In view of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2002 ( 94 ) FLR 624 it will not be just and proper to pass No dispute' Award when both the parties rermain absent . There is also no scope to answer the reference on merit in absence of any W.S. and available documents .

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] There is no dispute to hold that when any reference is made it is expected to be disposed of on merit but when the parties do not take any step or do not consider even to file W.S. such expectation to dispose of the reference on merit comes to an end. It is not expected that for years together the Court will pursue the matter suo moto with the expectations for appearance of the workman inspite ofthe issuance of registered notices .As per I.D. Act the workman excepting under provisions of Section 2 A is debarred from raising any industrial dispute. The disputes are mainly raised by the Union for their workmen. These unions inspite ofreceiving notices did not care to appear before the Court for the interest of the workman and as a result they have beendeprived of getting any justice . Until and unless the attitude of the Union is changed I consider that this uncalled for situation will persist . Definitely it is the duty of the Court to dispose of the reference on merit but it depends on the cooperation of both sides . Here the record will clearly expose that sufficient opportunities had been given to the workman/union but yielded no result . This attitude shows clearly that the workman side is not interested to proceed with the hearing of the case for disposal onmerit.

Under the facts and circumstances , 1 also do not find any sufficient reason to drag on the case for an indefinite period. Accordingly as there is no scope to dispose of the reference in question on merit , the same is closed .

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 22 अगस्त, 2003

का. आ. 2615.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार शिप बिल्डिंग सेन्टर के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ মি न्यायालय, विशाखापत्तनम के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 8/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-34011/5/2002-आई.आर. ( एम) ]

सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 22nd August , 2003

S. O. 2615. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 8/20103 ) of the Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court . Visakhapatnam as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Ship Bulilding Center and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 22-8-2003 .

No. L-34011/5 /2002 - IR ( M ) | C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy .

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM- LABOUR COURT, VISAKHAPATNAM 6251 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13, 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

PRESENT :

their workman , received by the Central Government on 21-8-2003 .

Shri Y. Dhilleswara Rao , B.A. LL.B. ,

[No. L - 12011/245/ 2000 ) -IR( B - II ) 1 Chairman& Presiding Officer

C. GANGADHARAN. Under Secy.

Dated: 30th Day of July , 2003

ANNEXURE

LT.L.D. No. (C) 8/2003

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT Reference No. L- 34011 /5/2002- IR(M)

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO . 2) , MUMBAI Dated 6-2-2003

PRESENT:

BETWEEN :

The General Secretary

S.N. Saundankar Presiding Officer.

Ship Building Center Civilian

Reference No. CGIT- 2 /31 of 2001 .

Employees Union

EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF SYNDICATE BANK

... Petitioner/Workman

Dno . 59-6-2 / 1 , Nagarala Street Malkapuram, Visakhapatnam - 530011 ( A.P. )

AND

The Project Director,

Ship Building Center

Gadavari Gate

The Deputy Gen. Manager . Syndicate Bank . Zonal Office , Maker Tower E 2nd Floor, Plot No. 85, Cuffe Parade , Colaba, Mumbai -40XXX) S,

Naval Base Post

V/ s .

Visakhapatnam - 530014(A.P. ) ..Respondent/Management

THEIR WORKMEN

ThePresident ,

This is a reference made by Governinent of India Under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d) of Industrial Disputes Acı, 1947 for adjudication of the dispute .

Syndicate Bank Employees Union , through Workman Mr. Vinod Kumar Amin,

1-A, Palm View , Plot No. 8,

Amritvan - 1 , Near Ciba ,

This dispute is coming on for appearance of both the parties but workman and the management are called absent after receipt of the notices sent by this Court ; hence the Court passed the following:

Goregaon (East),

Mumbai -400063

AWARD

APPEARANCES :

Twice issued notices to both sides . Both sides received notices but did not turn up. Reference is closed.

FortheEmployer :

Mr. R. N. Shah , Advocate .

For the Workmen :

Given under my hand and seal of the Court this the 30th day of July, 2003.

Mr. R. D. Bhat , Advocate.

SRI Y. DHILLESWARA RAO , Presiding Officer

Mumbai , dated 28th May, 2003 नई दिल्ली, 22 अगस्त, 2003

AWARD PART-I

TheGovernment of India, Ministry ofLabour by its Order No. L- 12011 /245/2000/IR(B - II ) dated 12-02-2000 in exercise ofthe powersconferredby clause (d) of sub-section ( 1 ) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referredthe following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

का. आ. 2616,- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार सिंडिकेट बैंकके प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 2 , मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 2/31 ऑफ 2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 21-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12011/245/2000-आई ० आर० ( बी.- II ) ] सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

"Whether the action of Syndicate Bank by dismissing Shri Vinod Kumar from the services of the Bank is justified and proper ? If not, then what relief the workmen entitled to? "

New Delhi , the 22nd August , 2003

2. Workman Vinod Kumar Amin was engaged as Clerk in the management Syndicate Bank in the year 1977. Vide Claim Statement (Exhibit -6 ) workman pleaded that he was an active union member and that due to union activities . bank liad grudge against him . It is averred that workman while working as Clerk- cum - Typist in Khar Branch though he had put 22 years unblemished service, he was issued S. O. 2616.In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 2/31 of 2001 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court No. 2 , Mumbai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Syndicate Bank and

2491GI/2003-13 6252

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22, 1925

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii )]

Mumbai and that on 3-5-1993 the said partnership firım opened a Current Account No. 948 witlı Jogeshwari Branch and availed certain credit facilities with the said branch since 1994 and that Habillties aggregating to Rs.58 lacs had caused to the books of the bank without adequate securities to fall back upon. It is averred one of the partners Mr. Kalmadi who is the brother of the workınan, had furnislied address of Goregaon (East ) which is the address of the firui and also residence of the workman and that when the firin approached the bank for sanction of credit facilities workman approached the bank for getting the credit facilities sanctioned and invested in the business of the sald firitu and also involved himself in the maintenance of the books, purchase etc. , which circumstances indicates that the workman floated the said firm with his brother which was against the provisions of the Bi- partite Settlement. It is pleaded Mr. Acharya conducted fair inquiry with the assistance of the Presenting Officer Mr. Prasad and Defence Representative Mr. Kini . It is contended Inquiry Officer with detailed reasons appreciating the evidence recorded the findings , and therefore, the inquiry does not vitiate consequently cannot be interfered by this Tribunal . Bank, therefore , prayed to dismiss the claim of theworkman.

4. By Rejoinder (Exhibit 12) workman reiterated the recitals in the Claiın Statement denying the averments in the Written Statement.

5. On the basis of the pleadings preliininary issues were framed at Exlubit- 15 and in that context workman Amin filed affidavit(Exlübit - 16) in lieu of Examination - in - Chief and closed oral evidence vide purshis ( Exhibit - 20). In rebuttal ,Mr. Acharya Chief Manager filed affidavit (Exhibit- 21 ) and the management bank closed oral evidence vide purshis (Exhibit -22) .

charge-sheetdated 23-7-1998 alleging that he had floated the firm M/s. Amigo Industries with one of his brothers as partners only to circuinvent the provision that he cannot be partner and was financially involved in the affairs ofthe firm while in service of the bank thereby committed grave misconduct attracting clause 19.5 of the Bi - partite Settlement. It is averred that because of differences in partners the manufacturing process of the firm was stopped and that though he had not taken any interest in the business of the firm, he was alleged to have involved in the business, which he had replied on 8-9-1998. However not satisfied with the reply the bank initiated domestic inquiry against him through the Inquiry Officer Mr. Acharya . It is contended that the domestic inquiry conducted against him was in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and fairplay and that findings recorded by the Inquiry Officer are perverse . It is contended. Mr. Acharya who was Manager ( IR - Cell ) was active office- bearer of Syndicate Bank Officers Association holding the position as Zonal CouncilMember and that workman being an active union member of the Award Staff, was biased against him. therefore, he had requested the Disciplinary Authority to change the Inquiry Officer Mr. Acharya, however . management turned down his request and thereby prejudice had caused to him. It is further contended that the bank though did not examine the witnesses the Inquiry Officer relied on the documents in connection with those witnesses as if, contents therein were gospel truth . It is pleaded that with undue haste inquiry was completed and that the findings of the Inquiry Officer holding him guilty are not based on the evidence and the documents led before him . consequently, findings are perverse. It is averred that inquiry as a whole vitiates , however, despite that the Disciplinary Authority based on the report dated 8-7-1999 dismissed the workman by the order dated 25-9-1999 . It is contended workman had assailed the said dismissal before the Appellate Authority, however, his appeal was turned down on 6-12-1999. It is contended since the inquiry vitiates the management's action of dismissing the workman is unjustified, and therefore, workman be reinstated in service with full back wages.

6. Workman fited written submissions ( Exhibit - 23 ) and the copies of rulings with ( Exhibit - 24 ) and the management (Exhibit -25 ) with rulings (Exhibit - 26 ). On perusing the record as a whole and the written submissions and hearing the counsels . I record my findings on the preliminary issues for the reasons mentioned below:

Issues

Findings Yes.

1. Whether the domestic inquiry conducted against the workman was against the Principles of Natural Justice?

Yes.

2. Whether the findings of the Inquiry Officer are perverse ? REASONS

3. Management Bank resisted the claim ofworkman by filing Written Statement ( Exhibit - 11 ) contending that workman while working at Nana Chowk Branch carried out business in the name of M/ s . Amigo Industries, and therefore, he was charged vide charge - sheet dated 23-7-1998 for engaging in trade or business outside the scope of his duties under clause 19.5 ( a ) of the Bipartite Settlement and that inquiry was conducted on the charges. h is averred that Inquiry Officer giving sufficient opportunity, by the report dated 8-7-1999 held the workman guilty and that considering the proved grave charges he was dismissed by the order dated 25-9-1999 which was endorsed by the Appellate Authority. It is averred in detail that workman carried on the business in the name of Amigo Industries who were the constituent of Jogeshwari Branch

According to the workman Shri Amin domestic inquiry conducted against him was against the Principles ofNatural Justice and fair play in as much as the Inquiry Officer rejected several relevant questions put to the management witnesses in cross - examination, he has relied 6253 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

Commerce, 2002 ( 3 ) L.L. N. 206. I have gone through the inquiry proceedings filed with lists (Exhibit -9/ 10 /13 ). Since InquiryOfficer Mr. Acharya admittedly without examining the author of the documents relied on assuming genuine andthat according to workman those documents were not genuine . On going through the decision I find force in the submission for Mr. Bhat that apparently Inquiry Officer erred in as much as he arrived at conclusions mainly on the basis of those documents . To my view on this count prejudice had caused to the workman .

on the management witnesses without any corroborative evidence , but was not given adjournments and thereby sufficient opportunity was not given to him and as such he could not defend himself properly. According to workman though the signatories to the documents were not examined documents were relied upon whereby prejudice was caused to him. So far perversity is concemed according to workman, at the relevant time he was working in Khar - Santacruz Muinbai whereas the firm was situated at Tarapur at a distance of about 100 kms . , still the Inquiry Officer held that he had hand in getting the credit facilities sanctioned to Amigo Industries.

8. As regards domestic inquiry Their Lordships of the Apex Court in Sur Enamel and Stamping Works V/s . Their Workmen- 1963 II LLJ SCC pg. 367 ruled that enquiry cannot be said to have been properly held unless:

( 1 ) the employee proceeded against has been informed clearly of the charges levelled against

(2) the witnesses are examined -ordinarily in the presence of the employee in respect of the charges;

(3 ) the employee is given a fair opportunity to cross- examine the witnesses ;

10. On perusal of the inquiry proceedings it is seen workman had repeatedly requested the Inquiry Officer to visit the place/address of the business . Inquiry Officer Mr. Acharya in his cross - examination para 18 clearly admitted that no direct evidence was produced by the bank before him to show that workman was writing books of accounts ofAmigo Industries , still he gave the findings to that effect based on circumstantial evidence. When Inquiry Officer comes to the conclusion on the circumstantial evidence and that there was no direct evidence , grievance put-forth by the workman that his frequent request to visit place/ address of the business was turned down to favour the management finds substance. It is not that the place which workman had requested to visit was far away from Mumbai , consuming much time and expenses . Had Inquiry Officer visited, truth would have come on record however that is lacking and from this point ofview, prejudice had occurred toworkman.

(4) he is given a fair opportunity to examine witnesses including himself in his defence ifhe so wishes on any relevant matter , and

(5 ) the Inquiry Officer records his findings with reasons for the same in his report.

11. According to workman Inquiry Officer Mr. Acharya was the active member of the Officers Association and whereas he being a member of Award Staff, he had grudge and therefore he requested to change the Inquiry Officer but that was turned down . According to him since Mr. Acharya had grudge, onc -sided evidence was accepted that means one sided inquiry was done . This finds support in as much as Acharya admits in cross -cxamination para 20 that he had not referred written briefs given by the workman inthe report. Role of Inquiry Officer is to remain balanced. He has to weigh the evidence considering the pros and cons ofthe matter. His role is slike the unspire to discharge oncrons duty without fear and favour . In this context rules of natural justice do come into play . These rules are not embodied rules . Whether prejudice is caused to the delinquent is to be looked at from the angle ofjustice or of natural justice .The objective of Principles of Natural Justice is to ensure that justice isdone . Justice means , justice between both the parties. The interests of justice enqally demands that the guilty should be punished and that teclmicalities and irregularities which do not occasion failure ofjustice are not allowed to defeat the ends ofjustice. Principles of Justice are but means to achieve the ends of justice, they cannot be perverted to achieve the very opposite end as observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in State Bank ofPatiala & Ors . V/ s . S.K. Sharına 1996 II CLR pg.529 . In this context the question whether in a given 9. Admittedly Acharya Senior Manager of the Bank had conducted the inquiry where Presenting Officer was Mr. Prasad and the workman was defended by Mr. Kini . Workman admitted in cross - examination para 10 that he had fully participated in the inquiry , his defence representative had cross -examined the management witnesses and that he was given time to examine witnesses on his behalf and more over he was supplied copies of the documents relied by the management . The main grievance of the workman is that the Inquiry Officer Mr. Acharya relied on the documents though signatories thereto were not examined thereby prejudice had caused to him. In cross- examination para 19 Acharya admits that letters at page 118/144-146 ( Exhibit - 110 ) were held genuine documents though signatorics thereof were not examined and further clearly admitted that documents which he had taken as genuine at page 118/144 ( Exhibit - 10 ) did not tallyto cach other . At thisjuncture, the Learned Counsel Mr. Bhat urged with force that the charge against the workman must be praved by the management and that workman was not required to prove his innocence and further urged that in the domestic inquiry no documents can be relied upor against the party without giving opportunity to cross- examine the author thereof. For this , he has relied on the decision ofGope Laxmichand Badkani V/ s . Oriental Bank of 6254

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22, 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

must be a reasoned one . The Court then may not enter in to the adequacy or sufficiency of evidence . But where the evidence is annexed to an order sheet and no correlation is established between the two showing application of mind , we are constrained to observe that it is not an enquiry report at all . Therefore , there was no enquiry in this case worth the name and the order of termimation based on such proceeding disclosing non - application of mind would be unsustainable . "

case Principles of Natural Justice have been violated or not is to be found out on consideration as to whether the procedure adopted by the appropriate authority is in accordance with law and whether the authority has acted in good faith. The fact that Inquiry Officer did not refer written brief given by the workman in the report thereby over looked the case of workman itselfto my view is failure ofjustice. Considering all these aspects in the light of the guidelines laiddown in the decision supra , it can safely be said that inquiry as a whole is against the Principles of Natural Justice.

12. So far findings are concerned , according to workman they arę totally perverse . ' Perversity' is that when the findings are such which no reasonable person would have arrived at on the basis of the material before him as pointed out by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Central Bank of India V/ s . Prakaslı Chand Jain . It is obligatory on the Inquiry Officer to analyse the evidence on record for which reliance can be had to Anil Kumar V/s . Presiding Officer and Ors . AIR 1985 SC 1121 para 5-6;

According to Mr. Acharya his findings are based on circumstantial evidence . He has admittedly not visited the place of business . On perusal of the inquiry report field with list (Exhibit - 10 ) dated 8-7-1999 Mr. Acharya held that the workman floated the firm with one of his brothers as partner involving in the affairs of the firm while in service of the bank . It is relevant to note that according to Acharya as seen from his cross - examination para 20 in the charge- sheet there was no allegation that workman had influenced officials for earlier sanction of credit facility to Amigo Industries. When this sort of allegation was not in the charge- sheet , the finding as above is apparently perverse . Onplain reading ofthe inquiry report dated 8-7-99 nowhere finds that Inquiry Officer analysed the evidence and gave detailed reasons with proper application of mind. If considered the report in the light of the decision referredto above , clearly disclosed non - application of mind thereby report is unsustainable . In this context rulings cited by the Learned Counsel Mr. Shah for the bank with list (Exhibit -26) are no avail to the bank in as much as those are on the point of non supply of the documents and reasonable opportunity. Therefore going through the record as a whole it is apparent that domestic inquiry conducted against the workman was in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and fair play and the findings are wholly perverse consequently inquiry as a wholly vitiates .

13. Since the inquiry vitiates , in view of the pleadings onpage 3 (Exlubit - 11 ) to the effect that in the event inquiry held vitiated the management bank be given opportunity to lead evidence to justify its action , going through the settled legal position I find proper to give opportunity to the management to justify its action . Issues Nos . 1 & 2 are answered accordingly and hence the order :

ORDER

"An enquiry report in a quasi -judicial enquiry must show the reasons for the conclusion . It cannot be an ipse dixit of the Enquiry Officer. It has to be speaking order in the sense that the conclusion is supported by reasons. This is too well - settled to be supported by precedent . In Madhya Pradesh Industries Ltd. V/s . Union of India ( 1966) 1 SCR 466 : ( AIR 1966 SC 671 ) this Court observed that a speaking order will at best be a reasonable and at its worst be at least a plausible one. The public should not be deprived of this only safeguard . Similarly in Mahabir Prasad V/ s . State of Uttar Pradesh ( 1971 ) 1 SCR 201 : ( AIR 1970 SC 1302 ) this Court reiterated that satisfactory decision of a disputed claim may be reached only if it be supported by the most cogent reasons that appealed to the authority . It should all the more be so where the quasi- judicial enquiry may result in deprivation of livelihood or attach a stigma to the character . In this case the enquiry report is an order sheet which merely produces the stage through which the enquiry passed . It clearly disclosed a total non application of mind and it is this report on which the General Manager acted in terminating the service of the appellant . There could not have been a gross case of non application of mind and it is such an enquiry which has found favour with the Labour Court and theHigh Court .

Thedomestic inquiry conducted against the workman was not as per the Principles of Natural Justice and the findings of the Inquiry Officer are perverse .

Management is allowed to lead evidence to justify its action.

Where the disciplinary enquiry affects the livelihood and is likely to cast a stigına and it has to be held in accordance with the principles of natural justice the minimum expectation is that the report

S. N. SAUNDANKAR, Presiding Officer 6255

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13, 2003/भाद्र 22, 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 22 अगस्त, 2003

का० आ० 2617.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सीनियर सुपरिन्टेन्डेन्ट टेलीग्राफ के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक, विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सी जी आई टी/एल सी/ आर/ 168 / 96 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल-40011 /20/91- आई आर ( डीयू) ] बी० एम ० डेविड, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 22nd August , 2003

S. O. 2617.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/ 168/96 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Sr. Supdt . Telegraph and their workman. which was received by the Central Government on 22-8-2003 .

[No. L-40011 /20/91 - IR (DU) ] B. M. DAVID , Under Secy.

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

Case No. CGIT/ LC/R/ 168 /96

Presiding Officer: SHRIR. K. DUBEY 1. Santosh Kumar Seal , S/o Late Ajit Kumar, R/ o F- 54 , Bijli Nagar Colony, MPEB , Govindpura , Bhopal .

2. Ashok Kumar Sen , S/ o Narayan Prasad Sen, R/ 06 / 10 , Ravishankar Nagar, Bhopal.

3. Omprakash Choukscy, S/o G. L. Choukscy, PostalClerk , GPO Bhopal - 1 .

4. D. K. Das ,

S/o Mangal Das , C/o Munna Cycle Service, 100Qr. Labour Colony, B-Sector , Piplani , Bhopal ..

5. Hari Prasad, S/o Devi Ram, Juggi No. 1 , Near Water Tank, Ravishankar Nagar , Bhopal .

6. Johruddin Qureshi , Futta Makbera, Gali No. 2, Cholla Road, Bhopal .

7. Rajesh Kumar Thakur, S/o Bhagwandas , H.No. 107, Kundenlai , Vishwakarma Ke pass Cholla Road, Bhopal .

8. Amrit Lal Durvey, C/ o No. 104/E -A, LIG Saket Nagar, Habibganj , Bhopal .

9. Shrikrishna Prajapati , C/o Santosh Kumar , Qr. No. F/54, Bijli Nagar Colony, MPEB , Govindpura, Bhopal .

10. Foolchand Khatri , S/oBhimraj . H. No. M-59 .. Jila Jamalpura, Bhopal .

11. Ramchand Borre. Qr. No. Janta -38 . Jerneshwar Mandir , Banganga, Bhopal.

12. Roopchand Bagdcy . S/o Tukaram, Qr . No. 7/19 , South T.T. Nagar , Bhopal .

13. Nannulal Silawat , S/o Ramsingh Silawat . Gram: Pandaria , Post Koluwe . Distt. Bhopal.

14. Kunwar Singh Rajpur. Durga Mandir Laxmigang . Galla Mandi , Bedi Berkedi . Bhopal .

Applicants

Versus

The Sr. Supdt..

Telegraph ( Traffic ) . Bhopal Division , Bhopal.

Non - applicant

AWARD

Passed on this 8th day of August , 2003 1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide Order No. L-40011 /20 / 91 / IRDU dated 28-8-96 has referred the following dispute for adjridcation by this tribunal.

"Whether the action of the management of Sr. Supdt. Telegraph Bhopal division, Bhopal in terminating the services of Shri Ashok Kumar Sen and 13 others in legal andjustified. If not , what relief the workmen is entitled for ? " 6256

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22 , 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( 1 ) ]

1. Whether the orders of termination of the services of the applicant workmen were justified and legal ?

2. Whether the workmen are entitled for any relief?

6. Issue No. 1 :

1 2. The Statement of claim filed on behalf of the workmen in brief is that all the workmen were enrolled in the Employment Exchange , Bhopal. Non - applicant sent request to the employment exchange for sponsoring suitable candidates for being appointed as telegraph man. Applicant's name were sponsored by the Employment Exchange. Petitioners passed written test . They were also appeared in the interview. On the basis of written test and interview, the applicant workmen selected for the post of telegraph man by order dated 20-4-85 . It was submitted by the workman that although they were appointed as telegraphman regular vacancy also occured in the cadre but the workmen were shown as daily wages casual employees. Non - applicant has taken undue advantage and paid small amount Rs . 375 per month to each workmen. On 10-2-87 , applicant received an order transferring themas casual mazdoors for digging trenches , pulling cable etc. Their services transferred to the various other departments when the workmen joined their new department, they were told by the officer incharge that there is no vacancy or place for the workmen . AEP ( C ) (CTS) Bhopal by his letter dated 13-2-87 intimated that there was no vacancies for the workmen and therefore workmen could not be accepted to the post to which they were transferred.

Itis not disputed that the applicant's names were called from the Employment Exchange . It is also clear from the papers furnished before the tribunal that the applicant were called for the post of casual labour. It is also not disputed that the applicant worked for more than 240 days in a year for nearly 3 years . It was also not dispute that the services of the workmen were transferred to the different departments vide order dated 10-2-87 and the applicants when they went their new department told by the concerning officials that there is no vacancies available to them . These chain of events shows that the applicant's serviceswere terminated by the brutal and harsh orders of the management . When the applicant worked for 240 days in a year they were entitled under Sec . 25 of I.D. Act for some rights and privileges. It was not pleaded by the management that the services of the applicants terminated due to misconduct or any other fault. Therefore applicants services cannot be terminated without holding proper enquiryor without paying retrenchment amount as provided under Sec . 25 of the I.D. Act.

7. Shri A. K. Saxena came befor the tribunal as management's witness. He was cross - examined at length by the workmen's Advocate. Although this witness filed a lengthy affidavit but in his cross-examination , he admitted that he has no personal knowledge about this case . He never recruited the workmen. He also admitted that he did not examine the documents relating to the appointment of workmen. According to this witness , applicant workmen themselves did not join their new duties and choose to remain absent . This witness cannot help management in any respect.

3. From the sudden termination of applicants, their fight for justice began frist they move to the CAT. After rejection of their petition , I on the technical ground by the CAT, they went before the Honourable High Court . Honourable High Court by the judgement dated 24-9-91 directed that there is a remedy available to the workmen under the 1.D. Act . Applicants applied for a reference by the Central Government Ministry but they were refusedby the Ministry to refers the dispute on various grounds. Applicant workınen again filed another writ petition No. 2002/92 before the Honourable High Court. Honourable HighCourt directed the Union of India to refere the matter to the CGIT. Thus the applicants after their long struggle for justice came before the industrial tribunal. It was requested on behalf of the applicant workmen that the order oftermination of their services are illegal . Applicant workmen are entitled to be reinstated in service with full back wages and all other consequential reliefs .

4. Non - applicant management in its reply submitted that the applicant workmen were employed purely on casual basis looking to the contingency and the needby the management . Their names were called for the purpose of employment on purely casual basis as casual labour. Applicant were never appointed on the post of telegraph man. Workmen's employment were purely only of temporary nature and after completion of their work their services were dispensed with . It was prayed by the non - applicant management that statement of claim filed on behalf ofthe workmen be rejected.

5. The following issues are necessary for the just decision of this case :-

8. Legal position in this case are very clear. In the case of Union of India versus the Presiding Officer, CGIT and another, Honourable High Court on 31-10-2001 held that the workmen performed his duty in 1989 for 369 days and was continuously in service till he was removed illegally on 3-5-90 . The Honourable Supreme Court in MCD versus Praveen Kumar Jain and others , AIR 1999 S.C. 1540 when the casual worker discharged on account of misconduct and the order passed without the conduct of disciplinary proceedings held that the order of termination was violative of Sec. 25( vi ) of I.D. Act. The Honourable Supreme Court in this case set aside the order of termination . The Honourable Supreme Court in Ratan Singh versus Union of India and another, 1998 Vol . 8 , LLJ 714 Supplementary held when the workmen continuously worked for more than 240 days in a year he is entitled to 6257

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13, 2003/भाद्र 22 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

protection under Sec . 25 - F of the I.D. Act it cannot be denied on the ground that he was daily rated worker .

9. It is clear from the legal position and from the facts ofthe case that the services of the applicant workmen were terminated illegally by the non- applicant Therefore it is clear that the order of termination of the service of the workmen issued by the management is illegal and not justified.

10. Issue No. 2 :

As I mentioned while deciding Issue No. 1 , that the services of the applicant workmen were terminated illegally by the non - applicant management therefore applicant workmen are entitled for the reinstatement in service with fullbackwages.

11. As the applicant proves their statement of claim , itis clear that their services terminated illegally. Therefore itisordered that the applicant workmen should be reinstated in their services and the back wages from the date of their termination be paid to them within 3 months of the publication of this award . If the non -applicant management did not comply this order , within the stipulated period then the non - applicant management has to pay 8% interest per year on the amount . Non - applicant management should also bear the cost of workmen in the case including Advocate fees which is fixed as Rs . 2000 if certified.

12. The reference of the Ministry is answered that the action of the management of Sr. Supdt. Telegraph , Bhopal Division, Bhopal in terminating the services of applicant workmen is illegal and justified.

13. The copy of the award be sent to the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour as per rules.

R. K. DUBEY, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 22 अगस्त, 2003

का० आ० 2618.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार आर्डिनेन्स फैक्ट्री के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सी जी आई टी/ एल सी/आर/ 88 /96 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल-14012/4/95- आई आर (डीयू) ] बी० एम ० डेविड, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 22nd August , 2003 S. O. 2618.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/88/96 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court , Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Ordinance Factory and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 22-8-2003.

[No. L - 14012/4/95 - IR (DU) ]

B. M. DEVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Case No. CGIT/LC/R/88/96

PresidingOfficer : SHRIR. K. DUBEY Shri Rajendra Kumar Tiwari , S/o Shri Raghunath Prasad Tiwari , R/ o Shri N.P. Shukla , Advocate Infront of Narsingh Road,

Applicant Sanichara Mohalla , Hoshangabad

Versus

The General Manager, Ordinance Factory, Itarsi.

.......Non applicant

AWARD

Passed on this 8th day of August , 2003 1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide order No. L - 14012/4/95 /IR(DU) dated 27th March , 1996 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal:-

"Whether the action of the management of Ordinance Factory Itarsi in terminating the services ofShri Rajendra Kumar Tiwari isjustified or not ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled to ? " 2. The Statement of claim filed on behalf of the workman in brief is that the workman was appointed as labour-V grade w.e.f. 3-6-82 . He was working sincerely, efficiently and honestly. In Nov. 92 , the workman fell ill and intimation regarding the illness was sent to the department but the department did not take any action . In the applicant's absence the chargesheet was issued and the DEwas conducted on the back of the applicant and by the order dated 9-9-93 . the services of the workman have been terminated . Applicant workman submitted that he did not gave any opportunity of defence. The entire action was takenat the back of the workman. No orders relating to any action of the enquiry were ever received by the workman. It isalso requested by the workman that the punishment imposed upon him is also too harsh because the reasons ofthe absence of workman were beyond his control . It was requested on behalf of the workman that the order of the management- resulting in termination of the workman be declared as illegal and applicant be ordered for the reinstatement with full back wages .

3. Non- applicant in its written statement submitted that the applicant was habitual absentee . Due to the long 6258

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22 , 1925

absence of applicant , workman , departmental enquiry was initiated against him . In every stage of the enquiry, notice and concerning papers were sent to the written address of the applicant . Applicant himself choose to remain absent . It was requested by the non- applicant that the statement ofclaim filedby the workman be dismissed.

4. On 14-9-2001 , this court while deciding the priliminary issue held that the Departmental Enquiry was properly conducted and no prejudice has been caused to him in any manner. Now the only question remains todecide is whether the punishment of termination imposed upon the workman is harsh and service .

5. It is clear from the papers submitted by the management that the applicant was absent from his duty from 1-1-91 upto 1993. It was pleaded on behalf of the workman that in Nov. 92, the workman fell ill . The date of absence pleaded on behalf of the workman was November 92 but he was absent from his duty from Nov. 91. It is also pleaded or submitted by the applicant workman that he fell ill but no medical certificate ever proved by the workman in the tribunal . It is also clear from the DE papers that the notices of the various proccedings of the DE like chargesheet , appointment of Enquiry Officer , date of hearing , report of Enquiry Officer and the final result was sent to the applicant by post . It is addressed but all post returned unserved. Applicant did not explain any reason for the non - serving of post. Normally burden of proving the service of the notices were on the management but if the management sent by post notice to the workman at his permanent address and the notice returned unserved, then it becomes the duty of the workman to explain the non- service of the notice .

6. After the perusal of Departmental Enquiry Papers and evidence of both the parties , it is clear that the applicant is absent from his duty from Nov. 91 , due to the applicant's long unexplained- absence , he was correctly removed from service . Punishment imposed by the management upon the workman seems to me as just and proper.

Therefore it is clear that the termination order of the workman issued by the management is just and proper therefore , the statement of claim filed on behalf of workman is dismissed. Both parties shall bear their cost themselves . Advocate fees is Rs . 1500 if certified.

8. The reference of the Ministry is answered that the action of the management of Ordnance Factory, Itarsi in terminating the services of Shri Rajendra Kumar Tiwari isjustified.

9. Copy of the award be sent to the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour as per rules.

R. K. DUBEY, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 22 अगस्त, 2003

का० आ० 2619.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार नेशनल

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] :

इन्फोर्मेटिक्स्सेन्टर के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों केबीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , भुवनेश्वर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 270/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं ० एल-42012/21 /91- आई आर ( डीयू) ] बी० एम ० डेविड, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 22nd August , 2003

S. O. 2619.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.270/ 2001) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court , Bhubaneswar now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of National Informatics Centre and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 22-8-2003 .

[No. L-42012/21 /91 - IR (DU) ] B. M. DEVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, BHUBANESWAR

PRESENT :

Shri S. K. Dhal , OSJS ( Sr. Branch) Presiding Officer, C.G.I.T. -cum -labour Court, Bhubaneswar

Tr. INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE NO . 270/2001 Date of conclusion of hearing-8th Aug. , 2003 Date of passing Award 11th August , 2003 BETWEEN:

TheManagement of:

1. The Director, National informatics Centre, Sachivalaya Marg, Unit- IV, Bhubaneswar -01 2. The Executive Engineer (Electrical ), C.P.W.D. , Central Electrical Division , Bhubaneswar- 751012

1stParty- Managements

AND

TheirWorkmen Shri Akrura Pradhan, Ex-A.C. Operator, At . NIC, C/o . Surendra Nath Mohanty, Plot N: o . 48/B , Sastrinagar, Bhubaneswar (Orissa) 751001. 2nd Party- Workman APPEARANCES :

Forthe 1st Party- Management No. 1 M/s. Upendra Kumar Samal , Addl . Standing Counsel , Central Govt.

6259 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

For the 1st Party- Management No. 2

M/s.Madhumati Agrawal , Sr. Standing Counsel, Central Govt .

M/s . N.K. Mishra & Associates , Advocates For the 2nd PartyWorkman.

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 dispute for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 42012/ 21 /99 /IR (DU) , dated 19/ 21-07-1999 :

No. 2 was engaged . The 2nd Party was never engaged by the 1st Party -Management No. 1 So , he does not come under the definition of workman under the 1st Party- Management No. 1. When the 2nd Party was not appointed by him the question of termination does not arise . The 1st Party-Management No. 2 in his Written Statement has stated that, they constructed the NIC complex at Bhubaneswar about 15 years back. Some more installations such as Air -conditioning plant , Diesel Generating set for stand by supply etc. commissioned subsequently. So , when hiswork was entrusted to them they called for tender as per specialization criteria from the contractors capable of execution the contracts . The contractors employed unskilled, skilled or highly skilled labourers . The 2nd Party was not appointed by him nor he had worked under his control. So, according to the 1st Party- Management No. 2 the 2nd Party has got no grievance against him.

"Whether the action of the Director, NIC and Executive Engineer (Electrical ) , CPWD , Bhubaneswar , in terminating the services of Shri Akrura Pradhan is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled ?

4. On the above pleading of the parties the follow- ing Issues have been settled.

ISSUES

2. The case of the 2nd party as per his Claim Statement runs thus:

1. Whether the reference is maintainable ?

2. Whether the action of the Director , NIC and Executive Engineer ( Electrical ) , CPWD , Bhubaneswar in terminating the services of Shri Akrura Pradhani is legal and justified?

3. Ifnot , what relief the workman is entitled?

5. No evidence has been adduced on behalf of the parties . It may be stated here that, instead of many adjournments the 2nd Party did not adduce either any oral or documefitary evidence and remained absent .

FINDINGS

ISSUE NO . 1

The Director , National Informatics Centre , ( herein- after called as the 1st Party-Management No. 1 ) has been set up since 1986 at Bhubaneswar. The said center maintains abank of computers for its work and has employed trained personnel to operate the same . The Executive Engineer, Electrical( CPWD ) , ( hereinafter called as the 1st Party- Management No. 2 ) is engaged in the work of civil maintenance of all buildings and premises belonging to the Central Government in each state . The C.P.W.D. has been assigned by the 1st Party - Management No. 1 with the work of repair, running and maintenance of the permanent electrical installations etc. by engaging personnel to man and operate the same. The work is permanent in nature . Without employing regular personnel the work is done on contract basis and the disputant stated to have been initially engaged as AC operator since 20-7-1988 under the 1st Party-Management No. I with some others. He was working under the direct control of the both the 1st Party - Management No. 1 and 2. An Union was formed who submitted a charter of demands regarding grantofbetter service conditions to the workmen including the 2nd party. But unfortunately, without making service regularized the 2nd Party was terminated from service without proper proceeding and that termination amounts to retrenchment within the meaning of Section 2 (00 ) of Industrial Disputes Act . So , he raised the dispute . After failure of conciliation the present reference has been made . The disputant has prayed for reinstatement with full back wages.

6. Both the 1st Party-Management No. 1 and 2 have taken the stand that, the reference is not maintainable because the 2nd Party does not come under the definition ofa workman. According to them the 2nd Party was never appointed by them nor he was working under their direct control . There is also no evidence is that the 2nd Party had received salary / wages from both the 1st Party- Managements . No materials have been placed by the 2nd Party to establish that he is a workman and he was appointed by both the 1st Party-Managements and that he had received payments from them. So , in that case, I agree with the submission made on behalf of both the 1st Party- Managements that the 2nd Party does not come under the definition of workman and so the reference is not maintainble.

ISSUE NO . II

7. No evidence has been placed efther oral or documentary on behalf of the 2nd Party that he was 3. The Ist Party -Management No. 1 and 2 has filed the Written Statement in reply to the Claim Statement. The case of the 1st Party- Management No. 1 is that for the maintenance of the A.C. Plant , the 1st Party - Management

2491 G1/2003-14 6260

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22, 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

Versus

Director General ofWorks ,

CPWD , Nirman Bhawan, NewDelhi .

Management

AWARD

The Central Government in the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L -42012/ 1 /88 -D - II (B) dated 1-2-89 has referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal foradjudication :-

appointed by the 1st Party -Management No. 1 and 2 and that, he had worked under their direct control . So, the question of termination does not arise when no appointment has been made . No letter of termination has been produced by the 2nd Party. Rather, the submission made on behalf of both the 1st Party -Managements that he was a contract labourer can not be ignored in absence of any rebuttal evidence . So , in that case , this Tribunal is of the view that , the question of termination by the Ist Party- Managements does not arise and it can not be said that the action of the Director, NIC and Executive Engineer (Electrical ) , C.P.W.D. , Bhubaneswar in terminating the services of the 2nd Party, Shri Akrura Pradhan is illegal and unjustified.

ISSUE NO . I

"Whether the action of the management of CPWD New Delhi in terminating the services of Shri Lekh Raj workman as muster roll messenger w.e.f. 1-4-87 is justified? If not to what relief, if any, he is entitled to? "

8. In view of my findings given in respect of Issue No. I and II the 2nd Party - Workman is not entitled for any relief.

9. Reference is answered accordingly. Dictated & Corrected by me .

S.K. DHAL, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 22 अगस्त, 2003

का० आ०. 2620.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सी.पी. डब्ल्यू. डी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 17/89 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं ० एल -42012/1/88 -डी- II ( बी ) ]

बी० एम ० डेविड, अवर सचिव

Ncw Delhi , the 22nd Augusı , 2003

S. O. 26210. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 17/89) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court New Delhi now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of ( CPWD ) and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 22-8-2003 .

[No. L -42012/ 1/ 88 -D. II (B) ]

2. The claim of the workman as alleged in his statement of claim is that he was initially engaged as muster roll messenger on 12th December, 1985 through sponsorship from Kamla Market Employment Exchange ; that he continued in service upto 1st April , 1987 and during that period he was given illegal break up in service after every 90days for all practical purposes which was illegal lockout by the management and wrongful and illegal break in service and was given just to deny him the benefits of continuity in service; that he had completed more than 240 days of service in viewof the provisions ofSection 25 -B of the I.D. Act, 1947 on 1-4-1987 . That the workman was neither given one month notice or pay in licu thereof nor paid retrenchment compensation nor he was given any charge sheet indicating any reason for dismissal , that the termination of the workman was illegal and in clear violation of the provisions of sections - 25F, G, H and N of the I.D. Act , 1947; that the juniors to the workman namely Shri Kanwar Singh and many others new hands were subsequently engaged and employed illegally ; that the workman is entitled to reinstatement in his service with continuity and full back wages and all consequential benefits w.e.f. 2-4-87 ; that the submissions and representations made by the workman were all in vain and of no avail . Hence this reference . The workman has prayed for setting aside termination order dated 20-3-87 and his reinstatement in service with full back wages , continuity in service and all consequential benefits w.c.f. 2-4-87 and cost ofthis case.

B. M. DAVID , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL : NEW DELHI Presiding Officer : Shri B.N. Pandey

I. D. No. 17/89

Shri Lekh Raj s /o Khem Chand

through CPWD Staff Union ,

C/o E - 26 ( Old Qrtr ) , Scctor- IV,

3. The claim of the workman has been contested by the management. The appointment of the workman on daily wage basis as Messenger after each 90 days has been , as claimed by the workman, admitted . It has been alleged that the workman was not engaged as a workman although it has been detailed that he was initially appointed as daily wages Messenger through Kamla Market Employment Exchange . It has been denied that his break in service was illegal . It was further alleged that the case of the workman is not governed by the 1.D. Act , 1947 and as such the

Workman

Raja Bazar, DIZ Arca, New Delhi - 110001.

6261

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13, 2003 /भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

total backwages w.e.f. 1-4-87 and all consequential benefits within a period of 30 days after publication of the award . 6. The reference is answered accordingly.

provisions of Section 25 - F be not attracted; That he is not entitled to reinstatement and back wages etc. However, it has been admitted that his services were considered but it could not be accepted too and that the claim of the workman is liable to be dismissed.

Dated: 31-7-2003. B.N. PANDEY, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 22 अगस्त, 2003

का. आ. 2621.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सेन्ट्रल काटेज इण्डस्ट्रीज कार्पोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं. 2, मुंबई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी-2/28 ऑफ 2000) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42012/ 252/99- आई आर ( डी यू) ] बी. एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 22nd August, 2003

S. O. 2621. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. CGIT- 2/ 28 of 2000 ) of the Central Govemment Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court No. 2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Cottage Industries Coprn. of India Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 22-8-2003 .

[No. L -42012/252/ 99 - IR(DU) ] B. M. DAVID , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2, MUMBAI PRESENT :

4. The workman also filed his rejoinder reiterating his earlier versions and denying the contents of the written statement . Besides certain documents workman filed his own affidavit and on the other hand the management filed affidavit of one Sunil Mohan Das, Deputy Director of Administration . They were also cross -examined. None appeared to argue the case before me on behalf of the management, therefore , I heard arguments of the I.D. representative of the workman and also perused the file. The workman has given detail of his appointment and also of his non -working days in para 4 of the statement of claim according to which he was given illegal break w.e.f. 17-3-86 to 23-3-86, 21-6-86 to 23-6-86 , 22-9-86 to 23-9-86 and 24-10-86 to 26-10-86 . Admittedly the workman was engaged on 17-12-1985 and he worked upto 1st April , 1987 with above mentioned notional break with in the period as detailed in para 4 ofthe claim statement which comes to 15 days only in all . Thus it is admitted and also proved beyond all doubt that he completed and worked for more than 240 days in the service of the Management. Therefore, he required protections of provisions of Section 25 -F of the I.D. Act , 1947. Admittedly no notice , notice pay, or any compensation was given before his termina- tion/ retrenchment from his service which was in clear violation of provisions of Section 25F of the I.D. Act. In Ram Kumar Rai Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 1993-11 - LLJ page 1064 it was held by the Hon'ble High Court ofAllahabad that giving artificial break of service is arbitrary and discriminery. Therefore , it cannot be accepted as alleged by the management that workman did not complete 240 days or more before termina- tion/retrenchment of service . I find and hold that the termination/retrenchment of the workman in the instant case was absolutely illegal and in violation of the provisions of Section 25 -F of the I.D. Act . Therefore , the retrench -ment/termination of the work man cannot legally be sustained. As such it is liable to be quashed and is hereby quashed.

S.N. SAUNDANKAR, Presiding Officer. Reference No. CGIT- 2/ 28 of 2000 Employers in relation to the Management of Central Cottage Industries Corporation of India Ltd. , Mumbai General Manager (P &A) , Central Cottage Industries Corporation of India Ltd. , 34, Chattrapathi Shivaji Maharaj Marg, Mumbai-400039 . V/s.

Theirworkmen Shri Premsingh NainsinghBisht, 104/3642 , Tilak Nagar, Chembur, Mumbai -400089 .

5. It is well settled that the burden lies on the Management to prove that after the date of termination/retrenchment the workman was in some gainful employment and in absence of it, it makes the workman entitled to get full back wages alongwith reinstatement in service and all consequential benefits . Therefore, I hold that the action of the Management in the instant case in terminating the services of the workman Lekh Raj w.e.f. 1-4-87 was absolutely illegal and unjustified and the Management has failed to prove that the workman was in some gainful employment after his termination . Hence the workman is entitled to reinstatement in his service with 6262

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22 , 1925

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] APPEARANCES :

For the Employer :

S/Shri C. V. Pavaskar & S.V. Mokashi . Representatives .

submissions (Exhibit -59 ) along with the copies of rulings and the management (Exhibit-60/ 61 ) . On going through the record , written submissions and hearing the counsels Irecord my findings on the following issues for the reasons mentioned below :

For the Workmen :

Issues

Findings Mr. Jaiprakash Sawant, Advocate .

4. Whether the action of the

Mumbai , Dated , the 9th June, 20103

AWARD

PART- II

Yes Management of Central Cottage Industries Corporation of India Ltd. , Mumbai by terminating the services of the workman Mr. Premsingh NainSingh Bisht w.e.f.

24-8-1995 is legal and proper?

5. What relief Mr. Premsingh Nain As per order below. Singh Bisht is entitled to?

REASONS

4. So far powers under Section 11 -A is concerned, Their Lordships of Bombay High Court in USV Ltd. V / s . Maharashtra General Kamgar Union & Anr. 1997 II CLR 312 in para 1 lobserved:

By the Interim Award dated 4-10-2002 this Tribunal held that the domestic inquiry conducted against Premsingh Nainsingh Bisht was as per Principles ofNatural Justice and the findings of the Inquiry Officer are perverse. Consequently as per Section 11 - A of the Industrial Disputes Act this Tribunal has to consider whether the punishment oftermination imposed on the workman is legal and justified in the contest of the action of the management . Workman who was dealing in sales of exclusive Handicraft and Handlooms of the Corporation in Mumbai was terminated by the management based on the proved charge of dishonestly levelled in the charge sheet dated 27-1-1994 for commission of act of misconduct subversive of discipline. To be exact the workman in the Men's Wear Department attending the customers sold vide cash memo. No. 0599072 a pyjama to one A. K. Srivastava bearing a price tag having the description of article as " cape" and that the article was priced at Rs. 260/ - however workman sold the article for Rs . 65/- by changing the price tage to make it appear that it was a discounted item though it was not so and in fact the said pyjama was required to be sold without the discount as it was a new one .

2 As stated above , domestic inquiry is held proper . So far the punishment aspect is concerned , workman Bisht averred that one Srivastava, Assistant Manager was also charged like him and that the said charge was proved however the Disciplinary Authority taking lenient view he was deinoted whereas for the same charge the workman was terminated from the service and thereby he was discriminated. It is his further contention that the punishment imposed on him is harsh and disproportionate . On the other hand, the management contended that past record of the workman was blemished and that he has habit to instigate other workman to go against the management which render his removal for the smooth working and further contended that once he is found dishonest , question of giving lesser or high punishment does not crop up at all in the industry where diligence , integrity and honesty is to be preserved .

3. Workman filed affidavit in lieu of Examination -in- Chief (Exhibit- 55 ) and closed oral evidence vide purshis (Exhibit -56) . Manager of the Corporation Mr. Tirath Singh in rebuttal , filed affidavit ( Exhibit- 57) and closed oral evidence vide purshis (Exhibit -58). Workman filed written

" It goes without saying and legal position appears to be well settled after introduction of Section 1 I -A inthe Industrial Disputes Act that the Labour Court orIndustrial Tribunal or National Tribunal has wide powers to mould and give proper reliefs in case of discharge or dismissal of workman . If an industrial dispute relating to discharge or dismissal of workman is referred to a Labour Court or for that matter to Industrial Tribunal or National Tribunal for adjudication and during the course of adjudication proceedings the concerned Labour Court or Tribunal is satisfied that the order of discharge or dismissal was not justified, such Labour Court or Tribunal has ample power to set aside the order of discharge or dismissal or direct reinstatement of workman on such terms and conditions as it may think fit or may give such reliefs to the workman including award of lesser punishment in lieu of discharge or dismissal as the circumstances of the case may require. However , the power given to the Labour Court or Industrial Tribunal or National Tribunal in Section 11 -A is not inthe nature of unruly horse and cannot be exercised as an appellate forum over the findings given by the disciplinary authority. The power exerciseable by the Labour Court or the Industrial Tribunal or the National Tribunal under Section 11 - A cannot be exercised in an arbitrary manner or in a fanciful way or in a colour of capriciousness . If the disciplinary authority has awarded the punishment of dismissal or discharge commensurate with the gravity of the offence which has been duly proved in the enquiry and neither the enquiry proceedings are vitiated by any error or law nor findings of the gravity of the charge suffer from any error and the award of 6263 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13, 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Rs . 65/-. The Learned Counsel Mr. Pavaskar for the Corporation submits that Industrial Tribunal should be very careful before it interferes with the orders made by the management in discharge of their managerial functions relying on Syndicate Bank Ltd. V/ s . It's Workmen.

5. The Learned Counsel Mr. Sawant for the workman submits that the punishment imposed is disproportionate and discriminative . He submits one Srivastava , Assistant Manager was charge sheeted for the same charge separately however he was not removed. It is relevant to note that said Srivastava was not charged for selling items on discount and that workman had no authority to sell items on discount . Srivastava had put about 25 years service whereas the service of workman was about 12 years .Merely because Srivastava was not removed from service cannot be the circumstance for treating the workman with the same yard stick. It is seen workman manipulated the price mentioned in the tag by dubious means therefore hardly canbe said that workman was discriminated . Accordingto the Manager , Mr. Singh past record of the workman was blemished . Workman himself admits in his cross- examination para 8 that numerous complaints were filed against him by the Showroom In -charge . He was served with the charge sheet dated 3-1-1995 alleging behaving in a disorderly manner with the superviors . No doubt, punishment is the cumulative effect without pointing onc act . Workman is a double graduate who is said to have completed law degree while in service . It is not that he was not aware on the consequences and thereby was some- what innocent . The Learned Counsel Mr. Pavaskar submits thatwhen employer loses confidence particularly in respect of the person who is discharging the office of trust and confidence there can be no justification for directing his reinstatement. He has relied on M/ s . Francis Klein & Co. (P) Ltd. V/s . Their Workmen 1971 II LLJ615 wherein Their Lordships observed :

"Where an employer loses confidence in his employce , particularly in respect of a person who is discharging an office of trust and confidence, there canbe nojustification for directing his reinstatement . The post of a durwan in an industrial concern where valuable property, both manufactured goods and assets , require to be guarded is such a post and when one of his colleagues called on himto assist him in apprehending a thief the refusal to do so is certainly an act which justified the employer in losing confidence in him. "

punishment is commensurate with the gravity of charge. I am afraid the Labour Court or the Industrial Tribunal in exercise of its power under Section 11 -A cannot substitute such just punishment by observing that it is unjustified . The exercise of the powers by the Labour Court or the Industrial Tribunal under Section 11 - A has to be in the nature of the power that may be exercised by any supervisory authority but not as an appellate authority. The exercise of the. power under section 11 - A therefore has to be within its framework and should not exceed its power by passing arbitrary or fanciful orders . Jurisdiction of the Labour Court or of the Industrial Tribunal under Section 11 -A though very wide yet not as wide as the appellate forum, is always circumscribed by the power that may be exercised by supervisory authority. The limitations of the power of the Labour Court or Industrial Court have been explained by the Apex Court from time to time and some of the decisions which require special reference are Indian Iron and Steel Company, ( supra). and Christian Medical CollegeHospital Employees Union, ( supra ). In Indian Iron and Steel Company Ltd. , the Apex Court observedthat power of Industrial Tribunal to interfere with the cases of dismissal of workmen by the management are not unlimited and the Tribunaldoes not act as a Court of appeal and substitute its own judgment for that of the management . The parameters within which such interference could be had by the Labour court or Industrial Tribunal are the lack of good faith on the part of the employer, victimisation or unfair labour practice of the employer or where the management has been guilty of basic error of violation of principles of natural justice or where the finding recorded by the enquiry officer is completely baseless or perverse on the face of the record before the Labour Court or the Industrial Tribunal . In Christian Medical College Hospital Employce's Union , the Apex Cout highlighted that introduction of Section 11 - A in the Industrial Disputes Act docs not confer an arbitrary power on the Industrial Tribunal or Labour Court and the power under Section 11 - A of the Act has to be exercised judicially. The Labour Court or the Industrial Tribunal is expected to interfere with the decision of the management under Section11 - A only when it is satisfied that the punishment imposed by the management was highly disproportionate to the degree of guilt of the workman concerned . The Industrial Court or the Labour Court , therefore , hasto give reasons as to how the punishment imposed by the management is

grossly diproportionate to the degree of the guilt . "

It is significant to note that workman was Salesman where absolute diligence , integrity and honesty need to be preserved and under the circumstance reinstatement of the workman would seriously affect the discipline of the organisation. Considering the past record, the nature of duties performed by workman , the proved charge amounts to misconduct and from this point of view the punishment of dismissal imposed on the workman is not at all It is settled position of law that penalty imposed must be commensurate with the gravity of the offence charged. In the case in hand charge proved was of dishonesty while selling the article priced at Rs. 260/ - for 6264

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22 , 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ]

APPEARANCE :

For the Workman

: None

FortheManagement:

disproportionate and consequently action of the management being legal and justified , workman is not entitled to any relief. Issues are answered accordingly and hence the order:

ORDER

M/ s Sathya Rao & N. Nithianandam, Advocates

The action of the management of Central Cottage Industrics Corporation of India Ltd. , Mumbai in terminating the services of the workman Mr. Premsingh Nainsingh Bisht w.e.f. 24-8-1995 is legal and justified.

The Centrral Government, Ministry of Labour vide Notification No. L-29011 /68/2001 - IR (M) dated 07-11-2001 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:-

S. N. SAUNDANKAR, Presiding Officer. नई दिल्ली , 22 अगस्त, 2003

"Whether the action of the management of Neywli Lignite Corporation Ltd. Neyveli is legal and justified in terminating the services of Shri K. Nagarajan ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled ?"

2. The matter was taken up on the file of this Tribunal as I.D. No. 743/2001 and notices were issued to both sides . The workman appeared in person and filed Claim Statement inTamil and the other side also filed Counter Statement .

का. आ. 2622.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार नेवेली लिग्नाईट कार्पो . लिमि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 743/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं ० एल -29011/68/2001- आई आर ( विविध ) ] बी एम डेविड, अवर सचिव

3. When the matter was posted for enquiry, the Petitiner never appeared for enquiry for a long time , but he has written so many letters for his absence . It appears that the Petitioner /Workman is not interested to pursue the matter .

New Delhi , the 22nd August , 2003

4. In view of the above circumstances , the present reference is returned to Ministry for want of prosecution . The Government is informed accordingly.

(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 18th August, 2003 ) .

S. O. 2622. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 743/2001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum - Labour Court , Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Neyveli Lignite Corpn . Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 22-8-2003 .

K. JAYARAMAN , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 22 अगस्त, 2003

[No. L - 29011 /68/2001 - IR (M) ] B. M. DAVID , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Monday, the 18th August , 2003

का. आ. 2623.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947.( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मोटर मेल सर्विस के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, नं० 2 मुंबई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी-2/162 ऑफ 99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-8-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

Present :

[सं ० एल -40012/16/99- आई आर ( डी यू) ] बी० एम ० डेविड, अवर सचिव K. JAYARAMAN , Presiding Officer . Industrial Dispute No. 743/2001

New Delhi , the 22nd August , 2003

[In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause ( d ) of Sub - section ( 1 ) and Sub- section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), between the Management of The General Manager, B & C NLC Ltd. , Neyveli and their workman Sri K. Nagarajan ]

Between:

Sri K. Nagarajan

: 1 Party/Workman

AND

S. O. 2623. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.CGIT - 2 / 162 of 99 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court , No. 2 Mumbai now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Motor Mail Service and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 22-8-2003 .

: II Party/Management

The General Manager , B& C NLC Lid . , Neyveli .

[No. L -40012/ 16/99 - IR(DU) ] B. M. DAVID , Under Secy.

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 2, MUMBAI PRESENT :

S. N. SAUNDANKAR, Presiding Officer.

Reference No. CGIT- 2/ 162 of 1999 EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF DEPARTMENT OF POST The Senior Manager MailMotor Service, D/ o Post, Worli , Mumbai -400018.

V/s.

Their Workmen

Shri S. S. Rajbhar, Tokarashi Baithi Chawl No. 3 , Room No. 16 , Near China Mills, Scwri , Mumbai -400015.

APPEARANCES :

For the Employers : Mr. V. Narayanan , Advocate.

Mr. M. B. Anchan ,

For the Workmen :

Advocate .

Mumbai , Dated , the 4th June , 2003

AWARD

PART-II

By the Interim Award dated 6-12-2001 this Tribunal held that the domestic inquiry conducted against the workman Rajbhar was as per the Principles of Natural Justice and the findings of the Inquiry Officer are not perverse. Consequently as per Section 11 - A of the Industrial Disputes Act this Tribunal has to consider whether the punishment of dismissal imposed on the work man is legal and justified in the contest of the action ofthe management .

2. Workman Rajbhar who was working as Mechanic inMail Motor Service was dismissed on holding domestic inquiry based on the proved charge of production of fake educational certificate while seeking employment though in the verification clause it was made clear at the time of appointment that the information furnished by the candidate proved to be false he shall be terininated at any time, which fall in the category of not maintaining absolute integrity under Rule 14 of CCS ( CCA) Rules, 1965. It is the contention of workman that he belongs to SC community, his native place is U.P. and that no school leaving certificate was issued by the school authority and that he was made scape - goat therefore his dismissal was illegal . Management's contention is that punishment imposed on

6265 the workman is proportionate considering the gravity of serious misconduct committed by him.

3. On the quantum of punishment workman Rajbhar filed affidavit in lieu of Examination- in -Chief (Exhibit- 27 ) and closed oral evidence vide purshis (Exhibit -28 ) . In rebuttal , Mr. Kulkarni , Deputy Manager, Mail Motor Service Department of Posts , Mumbai filed affidavit (Exhibit-29) and closed evidence vide purshis (Exhibit -30).

4. Wokman filed written submission ( Exhibit - 31 ) and management (Exhibit - 32). On going through the record, writtensubmissions and hearing the counsels , I record my findings on the issues for the reasons mentioned below:

Issues

Findings

Yes.

3. Whether the action of the

management of Postal Depart- ment Mumbai by dismissing the workman Rajbhar from his service is legal and justified?

4. Ifnot , what relief the workman is As per order below. entitled to?

REASONS

5. So far power under Section 11 - A is concerned, Their Lordships of Supreme Court in Mithilesh Singh V/s . Union of India & Ors . 2003 SCC L & S 271 clearly observed ;

It is further observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court that it is for the employee concerned to show how the penalty was disproportionate to the proved charges . In Regional Manager, U.P. SRTC, Etawah & Ors . V/s . Hotilal and Anr . 2003 SCC ( L & S ) 363 their Lordships observed :

"It needs to be emphasized that the court or tribunal while dealing with the quantum of punishment has to record reasons as to why it is felt that the punishment was not commensurate with the proved charges . As has been highlighted in several cases to which reference has been made above , the scope for interference is very limited and restrictedto exceptional cases in the indicated circumstances . Unfortunately, in the present case as the quoted extracts of the High Court's order would go to show, no reasons whatsoever have been indicated as to why the punishment was considered disproportionate. Reasons are live links between the mind of the decision taken to the controversy in question and the decision or conclusion arrived at.

[PART II - SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22 , 1925

6266

punishment imposed cannot said to be disproportionate when already department in like cases had terminated the concerned. Looking to the matter from this point of view and in the light of the observation as above , action of the management in dismissing workman Shri Rajbhar is legal and proper; consequently workman is not entitled to any relief. Issues are answered accordingly and hence theorder:

ORDER

The action of the management of Postal Department Mumbai by dismissing the workman Shri S.B. Rajbhar from his service is legal and justified.

S. N. SAUNDANKAR, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 22 अगस्त, 2003

का० आ० 2624.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार मै ० Failure to give reasons amounts to denial ofjustice. A mere statement that it is disproportionate would .. not suffice . A party appearing before a court , as to what it is that the court is addressing its mind. It is not only the amount involved but the mental set -up, the type of duty performed and similar relevant circumstances which go into the decision - making process while considering whether the punishment is proportionate or disproportionate . If the charged employee holds a position of trust where honesty and integrity are inbuilt requirements of functioning, itwould not be proper to deal with the matter leniently. Misconduct in such cases has to be dealt with iron hands. Where the person deals with public money or is engaged in financial transactions or acts in a fiduciary capacity , the highest degree of integrity and trustworthiness is a must and unexceptionable . Judged in that background conclusions of the Division Bench of the High Court do not appear to be proper . We set aside the same and restore order of the learned Single Judge upholding the order of dismisal . "

हेमाद्री सीमेन्टस लि० के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 129/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 18-8- 2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं०-143, 18/8 /03- आई आर ( विविध ) ] बी० एम० डेविड, अवरं सचिव

New Delhi , the 22nd August , 2003

S. O. 2624. -In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 129/2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s . Hemadri Cements Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 18-8-2003 .

[No. - 143,18/ 8/03-1 R (M) ] B. M. DAVID , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

PRESENT :

SHRI E. ISMAIL, Presiding Officer . Dated the 14th July, 2003

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO . L.C.L.D. 129/2002 (Old L.D. No. 190/97 transferred from Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court , Guntur)

BETWEEN:

Shri P. Yedukondalu

S/o Subbaiah , H. No. 228-3-2/2 , M/s. Hemadri Cements Ltd. ,

6. As stated above in the domestic inquiry workman Rajbhar was found guilty for producing fake certificate of his qualification from one school i.e. Koylsa, Ajamgadh though in the verification clause it was made clear at the time of appointment that the information furnished if found false , he shall be terminated at any time. Workman sought employment as Mechanic in 1983 in the Mail Motor Service inthe postal department on the fake certificate . According to Deputy Manager, Mr. Kulkarni for similar cause, employee's viz . Dollas , Shine were terminated. No mitigating circumstances has been placed by workman to show as to how the punishment can be characterized has disproportionate and / or shocking . It is settled position of law that penalty imposed must be commensurate with the gravity of the offences charged and that the Industrial Tribunal should be very careful before it interferes with the order made by the management in discharge of their managerial functions . At this juncture the Learned Counsel Mr. Anchan submits that considering the service put by workman and his dependant , that he belongs to SC community, poor and his past record was unblemished sympathy be shown . The fact that workman ventured to produce a fake certificate itself indicates his criminal motive and therefore hardly such persons deserve sympathy where diligence, integrity and honesty needs to be preserved in the Service. The Learned Counsel Mr. Naryanan urged that being sympathetic to the persons who come before the court; the court cannot at the same time be unsympathetic to the large number of eligible persons waiting for a long time in a long queue seeking employment. The fact that workman sought employment on producing fake certificate, if reinstated would be encouraging the guilty persons neglecting the deserving . The proved charge since amounts to serious misconduct under the CCA rules , the 6267 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13 , 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

Vedadri , Via Jaggaiahpet,

Krishna District ,

अधिकरण, भुवनेश्वर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 382/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-7-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-29011/62/2000- आई आर ( विविध ) ] C/ o T. Seshachalam, Powerpet , Eluru .

बी. एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव

..Petitioner

East Godavari District .

New Delhi , the 24th July , 2003 AND

TheGeneral Manager, M/s . Hemadri Cements Ltd. , Vedadri -521 438 .

Respondent

APPEARANCES :

Sri V. Vithal Prasad, Advocate .

Forthe Petitioner :

S. O. 2625. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 382/ 2001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court , Bhubaneswar as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/s . OMC Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 23-07-2003 .

Sri D. Balaraj , Advocate.

For the Respondent :

AWARD

[No. 29011/62/2000 - IR (M) ] B. M. DAVID , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT, BHUBANESWAR

PRESENT :

Shri S.K. Dhal . OSJS ( Sr. Branch). Presiding Officer , C.G.I.T. - cum-Labour Court , Bhubaneswar.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE NO . 382/2001 This case I.D. No. 190/97 is transferred from Indus- trial Tribunal - cum-Labour Court , Guntur in view of the Government of India , Ministry of Labour's order No. H- 11026/ 1 /2001 - IR ( C-II ) dated 18-10-2001 and renumbered in this Court as L.C.I.D. No. 129/2002 . This is a case taken under Sec . 2A (2) ofthe I.D. Act , 1947 in view of the judg ment of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh re- ported in W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/ s . Cotton Corporation of India and two others.

Dateof Conclusion of the hearing-4th July, 2003

Date of Passing Award-7th July, 2003

Between:

The Management of the Managing Director M/ s . OMCLimited, OMC House,

Bhubaneswar, Orissa - 755 019 . 1stPartyManagement 2. In spite of several adjournments given from 30-10-2002 for vakalat and enquiry of the Petitioner for ten adjournments including 14-7-2003 the petitioner and his would be Counsel were absent. Petitioner is not evincing. any interest since 30-9-2002. There is nothing on recordto support the case of the Petitioner. Hence , a ' Nil Award ' is passed. Transmit.

AND

Their Workmen , represented

Dictated to Kum K. Phani Gori , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 14th day of July, 2003 .

2nd Party -Union E. ISMAIL. , Presiding Officer

through the President , OMC Chrome Zone Employees Union, Jaipur Road, Orissa.

APPEARANCES :

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for the Petitioner :

theRespondent : Witnesses examined for Shri Saroj Ranjan Pattnaik Office- in-charge, Legal , OMC . None.

NIL

For the 1st Party- Management . For the 2nd Party- Union

Documents marked for the Petitioner

AWARD

NIL

Documents marked for the Respondent

NIL

नई दिल्ली, 24 जुलाई, 2003

TheGovernment of India in the Ministry of Labour, in exercise of Powers conferred by Clause ( d ) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub -section 2 ( A) of Section 10 of the In- dustrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) have referred the follwing dispute for adjudication vide their Order No. L -29011/62/2000/IR (M) , dated 22-3-2001:

"Whether the action of the Management of Orissa Mining Corporation . Bhubaneswar by regularizing Junior employees into non - permanent cadre instead of senior employees ( involved in the dispute ) like का. आ. 2625.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947. का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मै ० ओ ० एम ० सी० लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक

2491 Gl /2003-15 6268

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003/BHADRA 22 , 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] S. Shri Amulya Kumar Rout , Om Prakash Mohanty, Bhagaban Natia, Krushna Chandra Biswal , Gouri Sen, and Kamal Sanmasi is proper and justified ? If not , what relief the disputants are entitled to?"

2. The case of the 2nd Party may be stated in brief:-

into non -permanent cadre instead of senior em- ployees ( involved in the dispute like , S/ Shri Amulya Kumar Rout , Om Prakash Mohanty, Bhagaban Natia , Krushna Chandra Biswal , Gouri Sen, and Kamal Sanmasi is proper and justified?"

2. If not, to what relief the disputants are entitled?

There are six disputants who have claimed to have joined in their posts on the following dates which are stated herein below:-

24-12-1990

Shri A.K. Rout , Elect . Attend .

2. Shri Om Prakash Mohanty, Elect. Attend. 24-12-1990

3. Shri Bhagaban Natia , Elect . Attend. 05-11-1990

4. Shri K.C. Biswal , Mali Helper 16-03-1988

5. It may be stated here that, after filing of the rejoin- der and settlement of Issues , when the case was posted for adducing either oral or documentary evidence the 2nd Party remained absent and did not take any step. The 1st Party- Management has not adduced any oral evidence but he hasplaced their case before this Tribunal by filing a sepa- rate written note of argument .

FINDINGS

5. Shri Kamal Sanmasi , Fitter Helper 24-11-1989

ISSUE NO . I

05-10-1987

6. Smt. Gouri Sen, Canteen Attend .

According to them the workmen are entitled the fa- cilities as per the direction of the Government of Orissa basing on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court like Casual Leave , Sick Leave , Earned Leave for I day for every 20 days of work , Bonus as per Bonus Act , House Rent Allowance , Liveries as per eligibility, Special Advance , Festival Advance , Field Camp Allowance etc. After being regularized the above workmen are entitled to the monthly salary and other service benefits but the 1st Party -Man- agement has denied to provide those facilities for which representation was made to the Ist Party -Management who did not consider. So, they raised a dispute and after failure of conciliation the present reference has been made . The Claim Statement has been signed by the President of the Union who has prayed 10 issue direction to the Ist Party- Management declaring that their action as illegal .

6.Admittedly, the dispute has been raised by the disputants who have been represented through theirUnion . So , the initial burden lies on the Union to convince this Tribunal by placing materials either oral evidence or docu- mentary evidence to support their case that the action of the 1st Party-management by regularizing junior employ- ees into non -permanent cadre instead of senior employees (disputants) is improper and unjustified but unfortunately no materials have been placed before this Tribunal . On the other hand, the 1st Party-Management has filed number of documents in support of their stand. In absence of any materials in support of the case of the 2nd Party it can be said that the action of the 1st Party - Management of Orissa Mining Corporation , Bhubaneswar, by regularizing junior employees into non -permanent cadre instead of senior employees ( involved in the dispute) like S/ Shri Amulya Kumar Rout, Omprakash Mohanty, Bhagaban Natia, Krushna Chandra Biswal , Gouri Sen and Kamal Sanmasi is improper and unjustified. Hence , this issue is answered accordingly. No claim has been made in the claim state- ment in this regard .

ISSUE NO. II

7. In view ofmy findings given in respect of Issue No. I , the 2nd Party-disputants are not entitled for any relief.

8. Reference is answered accordingly.

Dictated& Corrected by me .

S. K. DHAL, Presiding Officer 3. The Ist Party -Management has filed their Written Statement . The main stand of the 1st Party- Management is that some other workmen standing on the same footing had approached the Hon'ble High Court for similar relief while disposing of the said Writ Application , the Hon'ble Court refused to grant any relief. So , the present workman standing on the same footing are not entitled for any relief. In Para- 13 of the Written Statement it has been further averred that, the disputants have filed writ applications in the Hon'ble High Court on same ground and for same relief so the present reference is not maintainable . Prayer has been made by the Ist Party - Management to this Tribunal to answer the reference by recording a finding that the workmen are not entitled for any relief.

नई दिल्ली , 4 सितम्बर , 2003

4. On the above pleadings of the parties , the follow- ing Issues have been settled.

ISSUES

1. " Whether the action of the Ist Party -Manage- ment of Orissa Mining Corporation , Bhubaneswar by regularizing junior employees

का.आ. 2626.- कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम, 1948 (1948 का 34 ) की धारा-1 की उप धारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार एत‌द्वारा 01 अक्तूबर, 2003 को उस तारीख के रूप में नियत करती है, जिसको उक्त अधिनियम के अध्याय -4 (44 व 45 धारा के सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रवृत्त हो चुकी है ) 6269

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 13, 2003/ भाद्र 22, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

"Areas comprising the Revenue Village of Singampunari of Thiruppathur Taluk in Sivagangai District"

अध्याय -5 और 6 [ धारा 76 की उप धारा ( 1 ) और धारा -77, 78 , 79 और 81 के सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रवृत्त की जा चुकी है ] के उपबन्ध केरल राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे , अर्थात्:-

"ज़िला तथा तालुक तिरूवनन्तपुरम में राजस्व ग्राम -चेरूवक्कल के अधीन आने वाले क्षेत्र" ।

[No. S-38013/30/2003 -SS-I ] K. C. JAIN , Director नई दिल्ली, 5 सितम्बर, 2003 [सं. एस -38013/29/03- एस एस-1 ] के.सी. जैन , निदेशक New Delhi , the 4th September, 2003

का०आ० . 2628.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय एन. ई. सी. एल. प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण गुवाहाटी (संदर्भ संख्या 3 ( सी) 003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 4-9-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल -22012/108/2002- आईआर ( सी एम- II ) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 5th September, 2003 S.O. 2626. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- section ( 3 ) of Section 1 of the Employees ' Statc Insurance Act , 1948 ( 34 of 1948 ) the Central Government hereby appoints the 1st October , 2003 as the date on which the provisions of Chapter IV (except Sections 44 and 45 which have already been brought into force ) and Chapter V and VI [ except Sub- section ( i ) of Section 76 and Sections 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 ofKerala namely:-

"Cheruvakkal in Trivandrum Taluk and District , "

[No. S -380 13 /29/2003 -SS - I ] K.C. JAIN , Director

S.O. 2628. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 3 (C)003 of the Industrial Tribunal Guwahati as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of NECL, and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 4-09-2003 .

नई दिल्ली, 4 सितम्बर, 2003

[No. L -22012/ 108 /2002 - IR ( CM - II) ] S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

OFFICE OF THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL , ASSAM: GUWAHATI

Reference No. 3 (C)003

PRESENT :

का.आ. 2627.- कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम, 1948 (1948 का 34 ) की धारा-1 की उप धारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा 01 अक्तूबर, 2003 को उस तारीख के रूप में नियत करती है, जिसको उक्त अधिनियम के अध्याय -4 (44 व 45 धारा के सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रवृत्त हो चुकी है ) अध्याय -5 और 6 [ धारा -76 की उप धारा ( i ) और धारा -77, 78 , 79 और 81 के सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रवृत्त की जा चुकी है के उपबन्ध तमिलनाडु राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे , अर्थात्: -

Shri H. A. Hazarika, PresidingOfficer, Industrial Tribunal , Guwahati .

"जिला सिवगंगै के तालुक तिरूपतूर में राजस्व ग्राम-सिंगमपुनारी के अधीन आने वाले क्षेत्र" ।

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute between: TheManagement of Northern Eastern Coal Fields , Margherita , Distt. Tinsukia , Assam

AND

[सं. एस-38013/30/03- एस एस-1 ] के.सी. जैन, निर्देशक New Delhi , the 4th September, 2003

Theirworkman Sri Nandeshwar Saikia AWARD

TheGovt . of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi vide its Notification No. L - 22012 / 108 /2002-( IR- ( CM - II ) dated 18-12-02 referred this Industrial Dispute arose between the Management of Coal India Ltd. and their workman Sri Nandeshwar Saikia . Under section 10 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 .

The same is registered by this Tribunal being Reference No. 3 ( C ) / 03 and taken up the proceeding for adjudication on the basis of following issues :-

S.O. 2627.- In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub -section ( 3 ) of Section 1 of the Employees ' State Insurance Act, 1948 ( 34 of 1948 ) the Central Government hereby appoints the 1st October, 2003 as the date on which the provisions of Chapter IV ( except Sections 44 and 45 which have already been brought into force ) and Chapter V and VI [ except Sub- section (i ) of Section 76 and Sections 77 , 78 , 79 and 81 which have already been brought into force) ofthe said Act shall come into force in the following areas in the State of Tamil Nadu namely:-

6270

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 13 , 2003 /BHADRA 22 , 1925

अतः अब, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 2 के खण्ड ( ढ़ ) के उप- खण्ड ( 6 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त उद्योग को उक्त अधिनियम के प्रयोजनों के लिए तत्काल प्रभाव से छः मास की कालावधि के लिए लोक उपयोगी सेवा घोषित करती है ।

"Whether the action of the management of Coal India Ltd. , North Eastern Coal Fields Ltd. in terminating the services of Sh . Nandeshwar Saikia w.e.f. 31-8-94 instead of regularising his services is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief he is are entitled to? "

[फा. सं. एस -11017/ 2/ 2003 - आई आर ( पी एल ) ] जे. पी. पति, संयुक्त सचिव

New Delhi , the 5th September, 2003 On 11-8-2003 the management is represented by Ld. Advocate Mr. Biswajit Kalita . None present for workman. Parused previous orders passed by me in this proceeding. Heard L.d. Advocate Mr. Kalita on parusal of record it appears that the workman concerned is not at all interested to proceed with the proceeding as such I feel at present there is no dispute between the parties .

Under the above fact and circumstances for ends of justice I think it would be just if the procceding is ended by passing no dispute award . Prepare the Award accordingly to sent it to Govt. Concerned .

S.O. 2629.-Whereas the Central Government is satisfied that the public interest required that the services in the Processing or Production of Fuel Gases ( Coal Gas , Natural Gas & the like) which is covered by item 29 of the First Schedule to the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , should be declared to be a public utility service for the purposes of the said Act .

H.A. Hazarika, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 5 सितम्बर, 2003

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

[No. S- 11017/2/2003 - IR (PL) ] J. P. PATI , Jt. Secy.

का. आ. 2629.-केन्द्रीय सरकार संतुष्ट है कि लोकहित में ऐसा अपेक्षित है कि ईंधन गैसों ( कोयला गैस, प्राकृतिक गैस और ऐसी अन्य) के प्रसंस्करण एवं उत्पादन में लगे उद्योग में सेवाओं को जिसे औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की प्रथम अनुसूची की प्रविष्टि 29 के अन्तर्गत निर्दिष्ट किया गया है, उक्त अधिनियम के प्रयोजनों के लिएलोक उपयोगी सेवाएं घोषित किया जाना चाहिए ।

Mayapuri , New Delhi - 110064

Printed by the Manager , Govt. of India Press, Ring Road , and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi - 110054.