This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

रजिस्ट्रीसं० डी एल ( एन ) 04/0007/2003-05

REGD. No. DL (N) 04/0007/2003-05 भारतकोराजपत्र The Gazette of India

प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक

WEEKLY

सं. 45]

नई दिल्ली, नवम्बर 2 नवम्बर 8 , 2003 , शनिवार कार्तिक 11-17, 1925

No. 45]

NEW DELHI , NOVEMBER 2 NOVEMBER 8 , 2003 , SATURDAY/KARTIKA 11-17, 1925 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)

मंत्रिमंडल सचिवालय नई दिल्ली, 29 अक्तूबर, 2003

Terrorism Act, 2002 ( Act No. 15 of 2002) , the Central Government hereby appoints S/ Shri R. K. Saini , and D. R. Sankhwar , Senior Public Prosecutors , Central Bureau of Investigation , New Delhi as Special Public Prosecutors for conducting prosecution of Regular Case No. RC -4 ( S ) /2002 / SIC . IV/ New Delhi (DFO Sanjay Kumar Sing murder case ) and any other matter connected therewith or incidental thereto investigated or instituted by Delhi Special Police Establishment under the said Act, in the court of competent jurisdiction.

[F. No. 225/1 /2003-DSPE ] SHUBHA THAKUR, Under Secy.

का०आ ० 3162.- केन्द्रीय सरकार एत‌द्वारा आतंकवाद निरोधक अधिनियम, 2002 ( 2002 का अधिनियम सं. 15 ) की धारा 28की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय अन्वेषण ब्यूरो, नई दिल्ली के सर्वश्री आर ० के ० सैनी और डी० आर ० शंखवार, वरिष्ठ लोक अभियोजकों को सक्षम अधिकारिता के न्यायालय मेंनियमितमामला सं० आरसी 4 ( एस ) /2002/एसआईसी-4/नई दिल्ली (डीएफओ संजय कुमार सिंह की हत्या का मामला ) और दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना द्वारा उक्त अधिनियम के अंतर्गत अन्वेषित अथवा संस्थित और उससे संबंधित अथवा आनुषंगिक किसी अन्य मामले के अभियोजक का संचालन करने के लिए वरिष्ठ लोक अभियोजक के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

वित्त मंत्रालय (आर्थिक कार्य विभाग ) (बैंकिंग प्रभाग) नई दिल्ली, 30 अक्तूबर, 2003

[सं० 225/ 1 /2003 - डीएसपीई] शुभा ठाकुर, अवर सचिव

CABINET SECRETARIAT New Delhi , the 29th October, 2003 S.O. 3162. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub -section ( 1 ) of Section 28 of the Prevention of

का०आ० 3163.- भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक अधिनियम, 1934 (1934का 2 ) की धारा 42 की उप - धारा ( 6 ) के खण्ड ( क) के उपखण्ड ( iii ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार 24 सितम्बर, 1993 की अपनी पिछली अधिसूचना सं० 10( 12) /93 3159 GI/2003

(7177) 7178

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: NOVEMBER 8 , 2003/KARTIKA 17, 1925

डेव ० का अतिक्रमण करते हुए उक्त उपखण्ड के प्रयोजन के लिए अब 1 जुलाई , 2003 से केवल उन्हीं प्राथमिक सहकारी बैंकों को वित्तीय संस्थाओं के रूप में अधिसूचित करती है जिन्हें लाइसेंस दिया गया है औरजिनकीमांग और मीयादी देयताएं 250 करोड़ रुपए से कम नहीं हैं ।

[फा.सं. 14-13/2003- एसी] मंगल मराण्डी, अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF FINANCE (Department of EconomicAffairs) (BANKING DIVISION) New Delhi , the 30th October, 2003

S.O. 3163. In exercise of the powers conferredby Sub -clause ( iii ) of clause ( a) of Sub - section (6 ) of Section 42 of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 (2 of 1934) , Central Government, in supersession of the earlier Notification No. 10 ( 12)/ 93 -Dev . dated 24 September, 1993 , notifies that henceforth only such of the primary cooperative banks which are licensed and whose Demand and Time Liabilities are not less than Rs . 250 crores as financial institutions for the purpose of the said Sub -clause , with effect from 1st July, 2003 .

[F. No. 14-13/2003 -AC] MANGAL MARNDI, Under Secy.

(बीमा खंड) नई दिल्ली, 31 अक्तूबर, 2003

का०आ ० 3164.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय जीवन बीमा निगम वर्ग 3 और 4 कर्मचारी ( सेवा के निबंधनों और शर्तों का पुनरीक्षण ) नियम 1985 के नियम 13 के उप नियम ( 2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह निर्धारित करती है कि वर्ग 3 और वर्ग 4 के कर्मचारियों से प्रत्येक को 1 अप्रैल , 2002 को आरम्भ होने वाली और 31 मार्च, 2003 को समाप्त होने वाली अवधि के लिए बोनस के बदले में संदाय , उक्त उप नियम में अन्य उपबंधों के आधीन रखते हुए उसके संबलम के 15 प्रतिशत की दर पर किया जाएगा।

[फा० सं० 2 ( 15 )/96/बीमा- III ] डी० आर ० भल्ला, अवर सचिव (INSURANCE DIVISION) New Delhi , the 31st October , 2003

S.O. 3164. In exercise of the powers conferredby Sub - rule ( 2) of rule 13 of the Life Insurance Corporation of India Class III and Class IV Employees (Revision of Terms and conditions of service ) Rules , 1985 , the Central Government hereby determine that , subject to the other provisions of the said Sub - rule, the payment in lieu of bonus for the period commencing on 1st day of April , 2002 and ending with 31st March, 2003 to every Class III and Class IV employee shall be at the rate of 15 per cent of his /her salary.

[F. No. 2 ( 15) 96/Irs - III ] D. R. BHALLA, Under Secy.

[PART I SEC. 3(ii)] स्वास्थ्यएवं परिवार कल्याण मंत्रालय

(स्वास्थ्यविभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 30 अक्तूबर, 2003

का०आ० 3165.- दन्त चिकित्सक अधिनियम, 1948 (1948 का 16 ) की धारा 10 की उपधारा ( 2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार , भारतीय दन्त चिकित्सा परिषद् से परामर्श करने के बाद एत‌द्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की अनुसूची के भाग -1 में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है अर्थात्:-

उक्त अनुसूची के भाग -1 में क्रम संख्या 50 और उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टियोंके सामने निम्नलिखित प्रविष्टियां जोड़ी जाएंगी, अर्थात्: - 50 हिमाचल प्रदेश विश्वविद्यालय , शिमला

दंत शल्य चिकित्सा में स्नातक बी. डी. एस. (हिमाचल प्रदेश विश्वविद्यालय) यह अर्हता एम. एन. डी. ए. वी. डेन्टल कालेज एवं हास्पिटल, सोलन (हिमाचल प्रदेश ) के बी.डी.एस. छात्रों के संबंध में एक मान्यता प्राप्त दन्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह 4 जुलाई, 2003 को अथवा उसके बाद प्रदान कीगई हो ।

[सं०बी-12017/27-ए/97-पी एम एस ] अवधेश कुमार सिंह, अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (Department ofHealth)

New Delhi , the 30th October, 2003

S.O. 3165. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (2 ) of Section 10 of the Dentists Act, 1948 ( 16 of1948) , the Central Government , after consultation with Dental Council of India, hereby makes the followig further amendments in Part - I of the Schedule to the said Act, namely:-

2.InPart- 1 ofthe Schedule against Serial Number 50 and the entries relating thereto, the following entries shall be added, namely :-

Shimla 50. Himachal Pradesh University,

BDS (Himachal Pradesh University) The dental qualification shall Bachelor of Dental Surgery be recognized qualification in respect ofBDS students ofM.N.D.A. V. Dental Col- lege and Hospital, Solan (H.P. ) when granted on or after 04-07-2003.

[No. V- 12017 /27 -A/97 -PMS ] A. K. SINGH, Under Secy.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: नवम्बर 8 , 2003 /कार्तिक 17 , 1925

7179 उपभोक्तामामले , खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय

(उपभोक्ता मामले बिभाग )

(भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो )

नई दिल्ली, 30 अक्तूबर, 2003

का०आ० 3166.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एत‌द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं:-

अनुसूची

स्थापित भारतीय मानक( कों ) की संख्या

स्थापित तिथि क्रम संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा अतिक्रमित भारतीय मानक अथवा मानकों, यदि कोई हो, की संख्या और वर्ष

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4) 1.

आईएस 1368 : 2003-

आईएस 1368: 1987

2003-01-31 बंधक ( फास्टनर्स )-बाहरी आई.एस.ओ.

मीटरी चूड़ी वाले सिरे के भाग

(चौथा पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 1715 : 2002-

आईएस 1715 : 1986

2002-07-31 2. स्व-धारक टेपर्स- आयाम

(तीसरा पुनरीक्षण)

2003-02-28 आईएस 3025 ( भाग 52) : 2003- जल एवं अपशिष्ट जल के नमूने लेना और परीक्षण (भौतिक एवं रासायनिक) की विधियां

भाग 52क्रोमियम

(पहला पुनरीक्षण)

2003-02-28 आईएस 3025 ( भाग 53) : 2003- जल एवं अपशिष्ट जल के नमूने लेना और परीक्षण

(भौतिक एवं रासायनिक ) की विधियां

भाग 53लौह

(पहला पुनरीक्षण)

2003-02-28 आईएस 3025 ( भाग 54 ) : 2003- जल एवं अपशिष्ट जल के नमूने लेना और परीक्षण (भौतिक एवं रासायनिक ) की विधियां

भाग 54 निकिल

(पहला पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 5023 : 1969

2003-02-28 आईएस 5023: 2003- दांत यूनिट (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 5099: 2003-

आईएस 5099 : 1983

2003-02-28 ऐंठित बरमों की तकनीकी पूर्ति शर्तें

(दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 5228: 2003-

आईएस 5228 : 1969

2003-03-31 एरियल रज्जुमार्ग यात्रियों के परिवहन के लिए

स्थिर पकड़ सहित एक केबल वाले लगातार

संचलन के लिए रज्जुमार्ग के निर्माण की रीति

संहिता

(पहला पुनरीक्षण) 7180

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 8 , 2003 /KARTIKA 17 , 1925

(2)

(1)

आईएस 5591 : 2003- क्लोरोबेन्जीन-विशिष्टि (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

10. आईएस 6689 : 2003- दृढ़ीकृत इस्पात और मार्टेन्साइट स्टेनलैस इस्पात के समानांतर पिन (डोवेल पिनें ) (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

11. आईएस 6712: 2003- ओरथो डाईक्लोरोबेंन्जीन-विशिष्टि (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

12. आईएस 7113: 2003- नहरों के मिट्टी-सीमेंट अस्त्र- रीति संहिता (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

13.

आईएस 7348 ( भाग 1 ) : 2003- दंत पारिभाषिक शब्दावली भाग 1 सामान्य और रोग-विषयक शब्द 14. आईएस 7348 ( भाग 2 ) : 2003- दंत पारिभाषिक शब्दावली भाग 2 दंत सामग्रियां

15.

आईएस 7778 ( भाग 1 ) : 2003- छोटे औजारों की नमूना निरीक्षण की प्रक्रिया भाग 1 ऐंठित बरमें , काउंटरसिंक एवं काउंटरबोरस

(पहला पुनरीक्षण)

16. आईएस 7778 ( भाग 2 ) : 2003- छोटे औजारों की नमूना निरीक्षण की प्रक्रिया भाग 2 रीमर्स (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

17.

आईएस 7778 ( भाग 3 ) : 2003- छोटे औजारों की नमूना निरीक्षण की प्रक्रिया भाग 3 सलीवस , सॉकेटस और एडापटर्स (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

18.

आईएस 7778 ( भाग 4 ) : 2003- छोटे औजारों की नमूना निरीक्षण की प्रक्रिया भाग 4 सकुईंग टैपस, डाइस और नरलिंग औजार (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

19. आईएस 7778 ( भाग 5 ) : 2003- छोटे औजारों की नमूना निरीक्षण की प्रक्रिया भाग 5 मिलिंग कटर्स (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

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

(4)

2003-02-28 आईएस 5591 : 1969

2003-01-31 आईएस 6689 : 1972

2003-01-31 आईएस 6712: 1972

2003-01-31 आईएस 7113 : 1973

2003-03-31

2003-03-31 आईएस 7348 : 1975

2003-01-31 आईएस 7778 ( भाग 1 ) : 1975

2003-01-31 आईएस 7778 ( भाग 2 ) : 1975

2003-01-31 आईएस 7778 ( भाग 3 ) : 1975

2003-01-31 आईएस 7778 ( भाग 4 ) : 1975

2003-01-31 आईएस 7778 ( भाग 5) : 1975 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

7181

भारत का राजपत्र : नवम्बर 8 , 2003/कार्तिक 17, 1925

(1)

(2)

20. आईएस 7778 ( भाग 6 ) : 2003- छोटे औजारों की नमूना निरीक्षण की प्रक्रिया भाग 6 मिलिंग आरबार और एसैसरिस (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

21. आईएस 7778 ( भाग 7 ) : 2003- छोटे औजारों की नमूना निरीक्षण की प्रक्रिया भाग 7 गीयर कटिंग टूल्स और ब्रोचस (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

22. आईएस 7778 ( भाग 8 ) : 2003- छोटे औजारों की नमूना निरीक्षण की प्रक्रिया भाग 8 आरियां

(पहला पुनरीक्षण)

23. आईएस 7778 ( भाग १ ) : 2003- छोटे औजारों की नमूना निरीक्षण की प्रक्रिया भाग 9 सिंगल प्वाइंट ( एच एस एस और कारबाईड टिप वाले ) औजार

(पहला पुनरीक्षण)

24. आईएस 7778 ( भाग 10 ) : 2003- छोटे औजारों की नमूना निरीक्षण की प्रक्रिया भाग 10 कारबाईड टिप्स और इन्डैक्सबल इंसर्टस

(पहला पुनरीक्षण)

25. आईएस 7778 ( भाग 11 ) : 2003- छोटे औजारों की नमूना निरीक्षण की प्रक्रिया भाग 11 कठोर धातु के बर्स

(पहला पुनरीक्षण)

26. आईएस 7910 : 2003- मोनोइथनोलअमीन-विशिष्ट (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

27. आईएस 8346: 2003- दांत शल्यक्रिया का स्टूल (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

28. आईएस 9401 ( भाग 3 ) : 2003- नदी घाटी परियोजनाओं में कार्य मापन की पद्धति ( बांध और सम्बद्ध ढांचे ) भाग 3 घोल अभिपूरण (दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

29. आईएस 9825 : 2003- क्लोरीन कीगोलियां-विशिष्टि (दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

(3)

(4) आईएस 7778 ( भाग 6 ) : 1975

2003-01-31

2003-01-31 आईएस 7778 ( भाग 7 ) : 1975

2003-01-31 आईएस 7778 ( भाग 8 ) : 1975

2003-01-31 आईएस 7778 ( भाग १ ) : 1975

आईएस 7778 ( भाग 10 ) : 1975

2003-01-31

2003-01-31 आईएस 7778 ( भाग 11 ) : 1975

2003-01-31 आईएस 7910: 1975

आईएस 8346 : 1977

2003-02-28

2003-02-28 आईएस 9401 ( भाग 3 ) : 1994

आईएस 9825 : 1993

2003-02-28 7182

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: NOVEMBER 8 , 2003 /KARTIKA 17, 1925

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

(2)

(3)

(4) 30.

2003-02-28

आईएस 10232: 1982

आईएस 10232: 2003- खाद्य पदार्थों के सूक्ष्म जैविकीय परीक्षणों के लिए प्रारंभिक सस्पेंशन एवं डेसीमल डाइल्यूशन तैयार के सामान्य नियम

(पहला पुनरीक्षण)

2003-01-31

आईएस 10512: 1983

31. आईएस 10512: 2003- बिटुमन में मोम का अंश ज्ञात करने की पद्धति-विशिष्टि

(पहला पुनरीक्षण)

2003-02-28

आईएस 10663: 1983

32. आईएस 10663 : 2003- दांत घूर्णी उपकरण- इस्पात और कार्बाइड बर (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

2002-12-31 33. आईएस 12432 ( भाग 3 ) : 2002- स्प्रे प्रयुक्त रोधन का अनुप्रयोग- रीति संहिता भाग 3 पॉलीयूरेथेन/पॉलीआइसोसाइनूरेट

2003-02-28

आईएस 12655 ( भाग 4 ) : 1988

34. आईएस 12655 ( भाग 4 ) : 2003- चिकित्सीय उपयोग के लिए निषेचन ( फाण्ट) उपस्कर भाग 4 इकहरे उपयोग के लिए निषेचन सेट, गुरुत्वफीड

( पहला पुनरीक्षण)

2003-02-28

आईएस 13547 ( भाग 1 ) : 1993

35. आईएस 13547 ( भाग 1 ) : 2003- औद्योगिक रोबोट को चलाने की युक्ति- यांत्रिक इन्टरफेस भाग 1 पट्टियां ( फार्म ए )

(पहला पुनरीक्षण)

2003-02-28 36. आईएस 13550: 2003- सूचना एवं प्रलेखन - शब्दावली (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

37.

2003-03-31 आईएस 13730 ( भाग 0/अनु. 5) : 2003- विशेष प्रकार के कुंडलन तारों की विशिष्टि भाग ० सामान्य अपेक्षाएं अनुभाग 5 काँच तन्तु गुम्फित रेज़िन अथवा वार्निश संसेचित , अनावरित अथवा इनैमलित आयताकार ताँबे का तार

2003-03-31

आईएस 13731 : 1993

38. आईएस 13731: 2003- मालधारक आधान आधान उपकरण आँकड़ाविनियम ( सी ई डी ई एक्स) सामान्य संप्रेषण कोड (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

2003-02-28

आईएस 14173 ( भाग 1 ) : 1994

39 . आई एस 14173 ( भाग 1 ) : 2003- पहचान पत्र जारीकर्त्ता की पहचान भाग 1 संख्यांकन तंत्र ( पहला पुनरीक्षण) [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : नवम्बर 8 , 2003/ कार्तिक 17 , 1925

7183 (1)

(2)

(3)

(4) 40.

आईएस 14173 ( भाग 2) : 1994

2003-02-28 आईएस 14173 ( भाग 2 ) : 2003- पहचान पत्र- जारीकर्ता की पहचान भाग 2 आवेदन और पंजीकरण प्रक्रिया (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

41.

आईएस 14202( भाग 1 ) : 1995

2003-02-28 आईएस 14202 ( भाग 1 ) : 2003- पहचान पत्र-संपर्क सहित एकीकृत परिपथ भाग 1 भौतिक लक्ष्य (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 14202 ( भाग 2 ) : 1995

2003-02-28 42. आईएस 14202 ( भाग 2 ) : 2003- पहचान पत्र- संपर्क सहित एकीकृत परिपथ भाग 2 संपर्कों का विस्तार और अवस्थिति (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

43.

आईएस 2667 : 19882003-02-28

आईएस 14768 ( भाग 2 ) : 2003- विद्युत संस्थापनके लिए नलिका फिटिंग- विशिष्टि भाग 2 धातु कन्ड्यूट फिटिंग

2003-01-31 44. आईएस 15266: 2003- जल-पोत निर्माण और समुद्र में प्रयोग हेतु संरचनाएं-जल-पोत की आयताकार खिड़की के लिए गर्म कीने वाली काँच फलक

45.

2003-01-31 आईएस 152 : 2003- जिओलाईट डिटरजेन्ट ग्रेड विशिष्टि

46.

2003-02-28 आईएम 15269 : 2003- प्रकाशिकी और प्रकाशिक उपकरण- माईक्रोस्कोप-आवर्धन

47.

2003-02-28 ईएस 15272 : 2003- कारवां के लिये आच्छादन सुरक्षा अपेक्षाएं

48.

2003-01-31 आईएस 15273: 2003- पूरी तरह भौतिक साधनों द्वारा संरक्षित सन्द्रित संतरे का रस - विशिष्टि

49.

2003-02-28 आईएस 15274: 2003- बंधकों के लिए छूटें- काबले , पेंच और ढिबरियों के लिए प्लेन वाशर्स उत्पाद ग्रेड एएवंसी

50.

2003-02-28 आईएस 15281 : 2003- सूचना एवं प्रलेखन अंतर्राष्ट्रीय मानक तकनीकी रिपोर्ट संख्या (अं मारिसं)

51.

2003-01-31 आईएस 15282: 2003- आवधिक पत्रिकाओं की डायरेक्टरी में प्रविष्टियाँ

52.

2003-01-31 आईएस 15284 ( भाग 1 ) : 2003- भूमि सुधार के डिजाइन और संरचना मार्गदशी सिद्धांत भाग 1 पाषाण स्तंभ 7184

[PART I-SEC. 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 8 , 2003 /KARTIKA 17 , 1925

(2)

(1)

(3)

(4)

2003-02-28 53 . आईएस 15286: 2003- संवेदी विश्लेषण- कार्य पद्धति नमूनों को तैयार करने के लिए दिशानिर्देश जिसके प्रत्यक्ष संवेदी विश्लेषण नहीं हैं

54.

2003-01-31 आईएस 15287 ( भाग 2 ) : 2003- लेपित अपघर्षक कण साइज का विश्लेषण भाग 2 बृहत रोड़ी पी 12 से पी 220 तक में कण साइज वितरण ज्ञात करना

2003-02-28 55. आईएस 15287 ( भाग 3 ) : 2003- लेपित अपघर्षक कण साइज का विश्लेषण भाग 3 बृहत रोड़ी पी 240 से पी 2500 तक में कण साइज वितरण ज्ञात करना

2003-02-28 56. आईएस 15288 ( भाग 1 ) : 2003- बंधित अपघर्षक कण साइज ज्ञात करना और उनका वितरण भाग । बृहत रोड़ी एफ 4 से एफ 220 तक

2003-02-28 57. आईएस 15288 ( भाग 2 ): 2003- बंधित अपघर्षक कण साइज ज्ञात करना और उनका वितरण भाग2 स्थूल कण एफ 230 से एफ 1200 तक

2003-02-28 58. आईएस 15289 : 2003- अपघर्षी बृहत कण- स्थूल घनत्व ज्ञात करना

2003-03-31 59. आईएस 15291 : 2003- औद्योगिक रोबोट को चलाने की युक्ति- स्वचालित एण्ड इफैक्टर विनिमेयतंत्र- शब्दावली व लक्षण की प्रस्तुति

2003-02-28 60. आईएस 15295 : 2003- विद्युत प्रतिरोधी वेल्डिंग- वेल्डिग गन्स के लिए समेकित ट्रांसफार्मर

2003-02-28 61.

आईएस 15296 : 2003- औद्योगिक स्वचालन तंत्र समेकित निर्माण तंत्रों की सुरक्षा- आधारभूत अपेक्षाएं

2003-02-28 62. आईएस 15297: 2003- बंधित एब्रेसिब उत्पाद वितरित पोषण चक्रों का अनुमत असंतुलन - परीक्षण

2003-02-28 63. आईएस 15304: 2003- विद्युत निक्षेपन के लिए डाइपोटाशियम हाइड्रोजन फॉस्फेट- विशिष्टि

2003-02-28 64. आईएस 15308: 2003- वायु आकाशीय - इन्सर्ट, सेल्फ लॉकिंग, एम जे चूडी वाले संवृत टाइप, धात्विक सामग्री के, लेपित अथवा अलेपित- आयाम 7185 भारत का राजपत्र : नवम्बर 8 , 2003/कार्तिक 17 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

(3)

(4) (2)

(1)

2003-03-31 65.

आईएस 15309 : 2003-

सीसे के यौगिक ज्ञात करना- ज्वाला अथवा

कार्यस्थल पर वायु-विविक्त सीसा और विद्युत तापीय परमाणु अवशोषण-

स्पैक्ट्रोमीटरी विधि

2003-02-28 66.

आईएस 15310 : 2003-

पंप की हौदी अन्तर्गाही मुख का जलीय डिजाइन- मार्गदर्शी सिद्धान्त

2003-02-28 67.

आईएस 15311 ( भाग 2 ) : 2003-

दाँत घूर्णी उपकरण-शैन्क

भाग 2 प्लास्टिक के बने शैन्क

2003-02-28 68.

आईएस 15313 : 2003-

औद्योगिक प्रयोग के लिए सिलाई मशीन के कंपन मापन की विधि

2003-02-28 69.

आईएस 15315: 2003-

संवेदी विश्लेषण- पद्धति- सुगंध प्रोफाइल पद्धतियाँ

2003-02-28 70.

आईएस 15316 : 2003- संवेदी विश्लेषण- परीक्षण कक्षों के डिजाइन के लिए सामान्य दिशानिर्देश

2003-02-28 71.

आईएस 15317 ( भाग 2 ) : 2003-

संवेदीविश्लेषण- मूल्यांककों के चयन, प्रशिक्षण एवं नियंत्रण के लिए सामान्य

दिशानिर्देश

भाग 2विशेषज्ञ

2003-02-28 72.

आईएस 15318: 2003- ओपन फ्रंट यांत्रिक पावर प्रेस- शब्दावली

2003-03-31 73.

आईएस 15320: 2003- प्राकृतिक गैस-वाहनों के लिए संपीडित ईधन के रूप में प्रयुक्त प्राकृतिक गैस की

गुणता के अभिनाम

इन भारतीय मानकों की प्रतियाँ भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन, १ बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली -110002, क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ , चेन्नई , मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, पटना, पुणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में ब्रिकी हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[सं. केप्रवि/ 13:2]

एम. ए. यू. खान, उप महानिदेशक 3159G1/2003-2 7186

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 8 , 2003/KARTIKA 17, 1925

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

(Department of Consumer Affairs)

( BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS)

New Delhi , the 30th October , 2003

S.O. 3166.- In pursuance of clause (b ) of sub -rule (1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:

SCHEDULE

No. & Year of the

Date of Establishment SI . No.

Indian Standards Established

No.& year of Indian Standards, Ifany, Superseded by the New Indian Standard

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4) 1 .

IS 1368: 2003-

IS1368: 1987

2003-01-31 Fasteners-ends of parts with external ISO metric thread (Fourth Revision)

IS 1715: 1986

2002-07-31 IS 1715: 2003- Self-Holding tapers-- Diamensions (Third Revision)

2003-02-28 IS 3025 (Pt : 52) : 2003- Methods of sampling and test (Physical and Chemical) for water and waste water Part52: Chromium (First Revision )

2002-02-28 IS 3025 (Part .: 53 ) :2003- Methods of sampling and test ( Physical and Chemical) for water and waste water Part53 : Iron

(FirstRevision)

IS 3025 ( Part.: 54) : 2003-

2002-02-28 Methods of sampling and test ( physical and Chemical) for water and wate water Part54: Nickel (FirstRevision )

IS 5023: 2003-

IS5023 1969

2003-02-28 Dental units (First Revision) 7187 भारत का राजपत्र : नवम्बर 8 , 2003 /कार्तिक 17 , 1925

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

(4) (1)

(2)

(3)

2003-02-28 7.

IS5099 : 1983

IS5099: 2003-

Technical Supply conditions for twistdrills

(Second Revision)

2003-03-31

IS 5228 : 1969

IS 5228 : 2003-

Continuous movement

Monocable ropeways withfixedgrips intended for trans- portation of passengers-code ofpractice for construction

(FirstRevision)

2003-02-28

IS5591 : 1969

IS5591 : 2003-

Chlorobenzene-specification

(FirstRevision)

2003-01-31

IS6689 : 1972

IS6689: 2003-

10.

Parellel pins of hardened steel and martenistic stainless

steel (Dowel pins)

(FirstRevision)

2003-01-31

IS6712 : 1972

11.

IS6712 : 2003-

o-Dichlorobenzene-

specification

(FirstRevision)

2003-01-31

IS7113 : 1973

12.

IS7113: 2003-

Soil-Cement lining for

canals-code of practice

(FirstRevision)

2003-03-31 13.

IS7348 (Pt. 1) : 2003-

Dental vocabulary

Part 1 : General and clinical terms

2003-03-31

IS 7348 : 1975

14.

IS 7348 (Pt. 2) : 2003-

Dental vocabulary

Part2: Dental materials

(FirstRevision)

2003-01-31

1S 7778 (Pt . 1 ) : 1975

15.

IS7778 (Pt. 1) : 2003-

Small tools sampling inspection procedures Part, 1 : Twist, drills, countersink and

counterbores

(FirstRevision)

2003-01-31

IS 7778 (Pt. 2): 1975

16.

IS 7778 ( Pt 2) : 2003-

Small tools sampling inspection procedures Part. 2: Reamers (FirstRevision) 7188

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: NOVEMBER 8 , 2003 /KARTIKA 17, 1925

[PART IISEC. 3(ii ) ] (1)

(2)

(3)

(4) 17.

IS7778 (Pt. 3): 1975

2003-01-31 IS7778 (Pt . 3 ) : 2003- Small tools sampling inspection procedures Part. 3: Sleeves , sockets and adaptors (FirstRevision)

18.

IS 7778 (Pt . 4) : 2003-

2003-01-31

IS 7778 (Pt. 4) : 1975

Small tools sampling inspection procedures Part. 4: Screwing taps , diesand knurling tools (FirstRevision)

19.

IS 7778 (Pt . 5) : 2003--

2003-01-31

IS 7778 (Pt. 5) : 1975

Small tools sampling inspection procedures Part. 5: Milling Cutters (FirstRevision)

20.

IS 7778 (Pt . 6) : 2003-

IS 7778 (Pt. 6) : 1975

2003-01-31 Small tools sampling inspection procedures Part. 6 : Milling arbors and accessories (FirstRevision)

21.

IS 7778 (Pt. 7) : 2003-

2003-01-31

IS 7778 (Pt . 7) : 1975

Small tools sampling inspection procedures Part. 7: Gear cutting tools and broaches (FirstRevision)

22.

IS 7778 ( Pt . 8) . 2003-

2003-01-31

IS7778 (Pt. 8) : 1975

Small tools sampling inspection procedures Part. 8: Saws (First Revision)

23.

IS 7778 (Pt. 9) : 2003--

2003-01-31

IS7778 (Pt. 9) : 1975

Small tools sampling inspection procedures Part. 9 : Single point (HSS and carbide tipped) tools (FirstRevision)

24.

IS 7778 (Pt . 10) : 2003-

IS 7778 (Pt. 10) : 1975

2003-01-31 Small tools sampling inspection procedures Part. 10: Carbide tips and indexable inserts (FirstRevision)

25.

IS 7778 (Pt . 11 ) : 2003-

IS 7778 (Pt. 11): 1975

2003-01-31 Small tools sampling inspection procedures Part . 11 : Hard metal burrs (FirstRevision )

HI [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7189 भारत का राजपत्र : नवम्बर 8 , 2003/कार्तिक 17, 1925

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4) 26.

IS7910 : 2003

IS7910 : 1975

2003-01-31 Monoethanolamine-specification

(FirstRevision)

27.

IS8346 : 2003

IS 8346: 1977

2003-02-28 Dental operator's stool

(FirstRevision)

28.

2003-02-28 IS 9401 (Pt. 3) : 2003-

IS 9401 (Pt . 3) : 1994

Method ofmeasurement ofworks in river vally projects (dams and appurtenant structures)

Part3: Grouting

(Second Revision)

29.

IS9825: 2003-

IS 9825 : 1993

2003-02-28 Chlorine tablets-specification

(SecondRevision )

30.

IS 10232: 2003-

IS 10232 : 1982

2003-02-28 General rules for the preparation of initial suspension and decimal dilutions formicrobiological examination of foods

(FirstRevision)

31.

IS 10512 : 2003-

IS 10512 : 1983

2003-01-31 Method fordetermination ofwax content in bitumen- Specification

(FirstRevision)

IS 10663 : 1983

2003-02-28 IS 10663: 2003 Dental rotary instruments-steel and carbide burs

(FirstRevision)

33.

2002-12-31 IS 12432 (Pt . 3): 2002-

Application of spray applied insulation

codeofpractice

Part 3: Polyurethane/

Polyisocyanurate

34.

2003-02-28 IS 12655 (Pt . 4) : 2003-

IS 12655 (Pt. 4) : 1988 .

Infusion equipment

for medical use

Part 4: Infusion sets for single use , gravity feed

(FirstRevision) 7190

[PART II SEC. 3(1 )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 8 , 2003/KARTIKA 17, 1925

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4) 35.

IS 13547 (Pt . 1) : 2003-

2003-02-28

IS 13547 (Pt. 1) : 1993

Manipulating industrial robots- mechanical interfaces Part 1: Plates (Form A)

(FirstRevision)

36.

2003-02-28 IS 13550: 2003- Information and documentation -vocabulary (FirstRevision)

37.

IS 13730 (Pt . 0/ Sec . 5) : 2003

2003-03-31 Specifications for particular types of winding wires Part0: General requirements Section 5 : Glass - fibre braided resin or varnish impregnated , bare of enamelled rectangular copperwire

38.

IS 13731 : 2003-

IS 13731 : 1993

2003-03-31 Freight containers-container equipment data exchange (cedex)- General communication codes

(FirstRevision)

39.

IS 14173 (Pt. 1) : 2003-

2003-02-28

IS 14173 (Pt. 1) : 1994

Identification cards-identification of issuers

Part1: Numbering system

(FirstRevision)

40.

IS 14173 (Pt. 2) : 2003-

2003-02-28

IS 14173 (Pt . 2) : 1994

Identification cards-identification of issuers

Part. 2:Application and registration procedures (FirstRevision)

41 .

IS 14202 (Pt. 1 ) : 2003-

2003-02-28

IS 14202 (Pt. 1): 1995

Identification cards- integrated circruits (s) cards with contacts Part1 : Physical characteristics

(FirstRevision)

42.

IS 14202 (Pt . 2) : 2003-

2003-02-28

IS 14202 (Pt . 2) : 1995

Identification cards- integrated circuits (s) cards with contacts Part 2: Dimensions and location of the contacts (FirstRevision) 7191 [भाग II--खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : नवम्बर 8 , 2003 /कार्तिक 17, 1925

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4) 43.

IS2667 : 1988

2003-02-28 IS 14768 (Pt. 2) : 2003

Conduit fittings for

electrical installations specification

Part 2:Metal conduit fittings

44.

IS 15266 : 2003

2003-01-31 Shipbuilding and marine structures-heated glass

panes for ships' rectangular windows

45.

IS 15267: 2003

2003-01-31 Zeolite detergent

grade-specification

46.

IS 15269 : 2003

2003-02-28 Optics and optical

instruments-microscopes-magnification

47.

IS 15272: 2003-

2003-02-28 Caravan awnings-

safety requirements

48.

IS 15273 : 2003

2003-01-31 Concentra' d orange

juice preserved exclusively by physical

means---specification

49.

IS 15274 : 2003-

2003-02-28 Tolerances for fasteners-

plain washers for bolts, screws and nuts-product grades A and C

50.

IS 15281 : 2003-

2003-02-28 Information and documentation international standard technical report. number (ISRN)

51.

IS 15282 : 2003-

2003-01-31 Entries in a directory

ofperiodicals

52.

IS 15284 (Pt. 1) : 2003-

2003-01-31 Design and construction

for ground improvement-guidelines

Part 1: Stone columns

53.

IS 15286 : 2003

2003-02-28 Sensory analysis-

methodology-guidelines for the preparation ofsamples for which direct sensory anslysis is not feasible 7192

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: NOVEMBER 8 , 2003/KARTIKA 17, 1925

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

(2)

(3)

(4) 54.

IS 15287 (Pt . 2 ) : 2003-

2003-01-31 Coated abrasives-grain size analysis Part2: Determination of grain size distribution of macrogrits P12 to P220

55.

IS 15287 (Pt. 3 ) : 2003-

2003-02-28 Coated abrasives- grain size analysis Part3 : Determination ofgrain size distribution of macrogrits P240 to P2.500

56.

IS 15288 (Pt. 2) : 2003-

2003-02-28 Bonded abrasives determination on designation ofgrain size distribution Part1: Macrogrits F 4 to F 220

57.

IS 15288 (Pt 2 ) : 2003-

2003-02-28 Bonded abrasives-determination grain size distribution on designation Part 2: Microgrits F 230 to F 1200

58.

IS 15289 : 2003

2003-02-28 Abrasives micrograins determination ofbulk density

59.

IS 15291 : 2003.

2003-03-31 Manipulating industrial robots - automatic and effector exchange

system - vocabulary and presentation of characteristics

60. IS 15295 : 2003

2003-02-28 Electric resistance welding - intergrated transformers for welding guns

61.

IS 15296: 2003

2003-02-28 Industrial automation system - safety of integrated manufacturing systems - basic requirements

62.

IS 15297 : 2003

2003-02-28 Bonded abrasive products-permissible unbalances of grinding wheels as delivered - testing

63.

IS 15304: 2003-

2003-02-28 Dipotassium hydrogen phosphate for electroplating- specification 7193 भारत का राजपत्र : भवम्बर 8 , 2003 /कार्तिक 17, 1925

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

(4) (1) (2)

2003-02-28 64.

IS 15308 : 2003

Aerospace - inserts ,

F self- locking with Mj threads , closed type, in metallic material, coated or ancoated- dimensions

2003-03-31 IS 15309: 2003

65.

Workplace air -determination ofparticulate load and lead compounds - flame or electro- thermal atomic absorption spectrometric method

66.

2003-02-28 IS 153 10 : 2003

Hydraulic design of pump sumps and intakes-guidelines

2003-02-28 67. IS 15311 (Pt.2) : 2003

Dental rotary instruments shanks Part2: Shanks made ofplastics

2003-02-28 68. IS 15313 : 2003-

Method of test for vibration measurement for industrial sewing machine

2003-02-28 69.

IS 15315 : 2003-

Sensory analysis - methodology -flavour profilemethods

2003-02-28 70.

IS 15316 : 2003-

Sensory analysis - general guidance for the design of test rooms

2003-02-28 71.

IS 15317 (pt.2 ) : 2003-

Sensory analysis-general guidance for the selection, training and monitoring of accessorsPart 2 : Experts

2003-02-28 72.

IS15318 : 2003-

Open front mechanical power presses- vocabulary

2003-03-31 73.

IS 15320 : 2003-

Natural gas designation of the quality of natural gas for use as a compressed fuel forvehicles

Copy ofthese standards are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan, 9, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110002 and Regional Offices : New Delhi , Calcutta, Chandigarh, Chennai , Mumbai and also BranchOffices : Ahmedabad, Bangalore , Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati , Hyderabad, Jaipur , Kanpur , Nagpur, Patna, Pune , Thiruvananthapuram.

[No. CMD/13:2]

M.A.U. KHAN , Dy. Director General (Marits) 3159GI/2003-3 7194

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 8, 2003/KARTIKA 17, 1925

[PART II SBC. 3(ii) ] विद्युत मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 28 अक्तूबर, 2003

(3) Powergrid Corporation of India Limited, 400KV Sub- station, Near Samaypur Village, Ballabgarh.

(4) Powergrid Corporation of India Limited, Northern Region- I, HVDC Terminal, Vidyutnagar (Gautam Budh Nagar), UttarPradesh .

का. आ. 3167.- केंद्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम, 1976 के नियम 10 के उप नियम (4) के अनुसरण में पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , गुडगांव के नियंत्रणाधीन निम्नलिखित कार्यालयों को , जिसके 80 प्रतिशत कर्मचारी - वृंद ने हिंदी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है , एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करती है:

(5) PowergridCorporation of India Limited, 400 KV Sub - station, Shamshabad Road, Post Shaymon , Agra.

( 1 ) पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लिमिटेड, एचवीडीसी स्टेशन , रिहंद नगर,

जनपद : सोनभद्र,

(6) Powergrid Corporation of India Limited, 400/220 KV Sub-station , Mataur, Daurala, Meerut,

उत्तर प्रदेश 231223

[No. 11017 /2/94 -Hindi ] AJAY SHANKAR, Jt. Secy.

रेल मंत्रालय

( 2 ) पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लिमिटेड, उ.क्षे . प्रथम , लोनी- बागपत रोड, मंडौला, गाजियाबाद ।

(रेलवे बोर्ड)

नई दिल्ली, 3 अक्तूबर, 2003

( 3 ) पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लिमिटेड, 400 के.जी. उप केन्द्र, निकट समयपुर गांव, बल्लभगढ़ ।

( 4 ) पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लिमिटेड, उत्तरी क्षेत्र प्रथम, एच.नी.डी.सी टर्मिनल, विद्युतनगर (गौतम बुद्ध नगर) ,

उत्तर प्रदेश ।

का. आ. 3168.-रेल मंत्रालय ( रेलवे बोर्ड ) , राजभाषा नियम, 1976. ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) के नियम 10 के उपनियम ( 2 ) और ( 4 ) के अनुसरण में उत्तर रेलवे के लखनऊ तथा मुरादाबाद मंडलों, दक्षिण मध्य रेलवे के हैदराबाद मंडल एवं मध्य रेलवे के मुंबई मंडल के निम्नलिखित स्टेशनों, जहां 80 % या उससे अधिक अधिकारियों/कर्मचारियों ने हिंदी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है , को एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है:-

उत्तर रेलवे ( लखनऊ मंडल )

(5 ) पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लिमिटेड, 400 के.वी. उप केन्द्र , शमशाबाद रोड. ने. ज्यामों , आगरा ।

क्रमांक स्टेशन

( 6 ) पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लिमिटेड, 400/220 के.वी. उप केन्द्र , मटौर, दौराला,

जैतीपुर स्टेशन

हरौनीस्टेशन

3 .

कटहरी स्टेशन

पिपरसन्ड स्टेशन

[सं.11017/2/94-हिन्दी1 अजय शंकर, संयुक्त सचिव

अमौसी स्टेशन

MINISTRY OF POWER

जाफरगंज स्टेशन

New Delhi, the 28th October, 2003

तुलसीनगर स्टेशन

मेहरावां स्टेशन

मेहगार्वा स्टेशन

5.0.3167 -In pursuance of Sub - rule ( 4 ) of Rule 1 ofthe Official Language (Use for Official Purposes of de Uulon) Rules . 1976 the Central Government hereby Alties the following offices under the control of Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , Gurgaon the staff whereof have 10.

मगरवारा स्टेशन

Acquired 80 % working knowledge ofHindi:

11.

सेवापुरी स्टेशन

12.

कपसेठी स्टेशन

(मुरादाबाद मंडल )

डौसनी स्टेशन

( 1 ) Fowergrid Corporation of India Limited, HVDC Station , Rihand Nagar , aweed: Sonbhadra ( UP ) 12) Powergna Corporation of India Lianted. 1. Loen Bagpat Road,

Mandola. Ghaziabad

लंढौरा स्टेशन [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: नवम्बर 8 , 2003/कार्तिक 17, 1925

3. डंडेरा स्टेशन

4. इकबालपुर स्टेशन 5. चोडियालास्टेशन 6. सुनेहटी खड़‌खड़ीस्टेशन 7. बलिया खेड़ीस्टेशन 8. मोतीचूरस्टेशन

9. रायवाला जंक्शन स्टेशन् 10. कांसरो स्टेशन

11. डोईवाला स्टेशन

12. हर्रावाला स्टेशन

13. लोधीपुर बिशनपुर स्टेशन 14. हकीमपुर स्टेशन

15. कैलसा स्टेशन

16. काफरपुर स्टेशन

17. गढ़मुक्तेश्वर स्टेशन 18. कचेसर रोड स्टेशन 19. पिलखुआस्टेशन

20. डासना स्टेशन

21. फजलपुर स्टेशन

22. बसी किरतापुर स्टेशन 23. हल्दौर स्टेशन

24. मंडीधनौस स्टेशन 25. सिसरकाःस्टेशन

26. आसफपुर स्टेशन

27 . डबतरा स्टेशन

28. करेगी स्टेशन

29. आंवला स्टेशन

30. बशारतगंज स्टेशन 31. यमगंगा स्टेशन

32.

मछस्यिा,स्टेशन

f 33. कुंदरखी स्टेशन

34. सिरसी मखदूमपुर स्टेशन 35. सम्भल हातिमसराय स्टेशन 36. जरगांव स्टेशन

37. गुमथल स्टेशन

38. कटघर स्टेशन

39. दलपतपुर स्टेशम

7193 40. मुण्डापाण्डे स्टेशन

41. शहजाद नगर स्टेशन

42. धमोरा स्टेशन

43. दुगनपुर स्टेशन

14 नगरिया सादात स्टेशन

45. धनेटा स्टेशन

46. भिटौरा स्टेशन

47. परसाखेड़ास्टेशन

48 . कलट्टरबक गंज स्टेशन

दक्षिण मध्य रेलवे ( हैदराबाद मंडल )

1. काचीगुडास्टेशन

2. महबूबनगर स्टेशन

3. सिकंदराबाद स्टेशन

4. कर्नूल टाउन स्टेशन

5. निजाभाबाद स्टेशन

6. मौलाअली डीजल शेड

मध्य रेलवे ( मुंबई मंडल)

1. सतारा स्टेशन

[सं. हिन्दी 2003/रा . भा . 1/12/3 ] आर. आर. भंडारी, सचिव, MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS (RailwayBoard)

NewDelhi , the 3rd October, 2003

S.O. 3168. Ministry of Railways (Railways Board), in pursuance of Sub rules (2) and (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Language Rules , 1976 ( Use for the Official Purposes of the Union) , hereby notify following Stations of the Lucknow and Moradabad Division of Northern Railway, Hyderabed Division of South -Central Railway and Mumbai Division of Central Railways where 80 % or more Officers/Employees have acquired the working knowledge ofHindi:-

Northern Railway (Lucknow Division)

S. No.

Station

1. Jaitipur Station

2. Harauni Station

3. Kathri Station

4. Pipersand Station

5. Amausi Station

6. Jafarganj Station

7. Tulsinagar Station 7196

8. Mehrawan Station

9. Mehgawan Station

10. Magarwara Station

11. Sewapuri Station

12. Kapsethi Station

(Muradabad Division)

1. Dausni Station

2. Landhaura Station

3. Dandhera Station

4. Iqbalpur Station

5. Chodiala Station

6. Sunehti Kharkhari Station 7. Balia Kheri Station

8. Motichur Station

9. Raiwala Jn. Station

10. Kansro Station

11. Doiwala Station

12. Harrawala Station

13. Lodhipur Bishanpur Station 14. Hakeempur Station

15 Kailsa Station

16. KafurpurStation

17. Garhmukteshwar Station 18 KuchesarRoad Station 19. Pilkhua Station

20 . Dasna Station

21. FazalpurStation

22. Basi Kiratpur Station 23. Haldaur Station

24. Mandi Dhanaura Station 25. Sisarka Station

26. Asafpur Station

27.

Dabtara Station

28.

Karengi Station

29.

Aonla Station

30.

Basharat Ganj Station 31.

Ramganga Station

32.

Macharya Station

33.

Kundarakhi Station 34.

SirsiMakhdumpur Station 35.

Sambhal Hatim Sarai Station 36

Jargaon Station

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 8 , 2003 /KARTIKA 17 , 1925

37. Gumthal Station

38. Kathghar Station

39. Dalpatpur Station

40. Munda Pande Station

41. Shahzad Nagar Station

42. Dhamora Station

43. Duganpur Station

44. Nagaria Sadat Station

45. Dhaneta Station

46. Bhitaura Station

47. Parsa Khera Station

48. CllutterbuckGanj Station

South Central Railway (Hyderabad Division)

1. Kachiguda Station

2. Mahbub Nagar Station

3. Secunderabad Station

4. Karnul Town Station

5. Nizamabad Station

6. Maulali Diesel Shed

Central Railway (Mumbai Division)

. 1 . Satara Station

[No.Hindi -2003/OL- 1/12/3 ] R.R. BHANDARI , Secy.

पैट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली , 28 अक्तूबर, 2003

का. आ. 3169.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनोंके लिए प्रयोग ) नियम, 1976 'के नियम 10 के उप नियम (4) के अनुसरण में पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय के प्रशासनिक नियंत्रणाधीन सार्वजनिक क्षेत्र के उपक्रमों के निम्नलिखित कार्यालयों को, जिनके 80 प्रतिशत या अधिक कर्मचारी वृन्द ने हिन्दी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, अधिसूचित करती है: - हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड

1. लोनी टर्मिनल

कदम वाकवस्ती, लोणी कालभोर ता. हवेली, जिला-पुणे -412201

2. इंदौर रिटेल क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय

मांगलियागांव

इंदौर ( मध्य प्रदेश )

3. जबलपुर एलपीजी संयंत्र

पो. बाक्स सं . 34

जबलपुर-482001 [ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7197

भारत का राजपत्र: नवम्बर 8 , 2003/कार्तिक 17, 1925

4. दिल्ली समन्वय कार्यालय तीसरी मंजिल, यूको बैंक बिल्डिंग संसद मार्ग , नई दिल्ली -110001 5. जम्मूक्षेत्रीय कार्यालय-रिटेल एशिया होटल के सामने, गांधीनगर जम्मू

6. जालंधर आईआरडी सूचीपिंड, जालंधर ( पंजाब )

7. मेरठडिपो

वेदव्यास पुरी, परतापुर मेरठ (उ.प्र. )

8. भिटौनी जिपो

भिटौमी-शाहपुरा

जबलपुर-483119 ( मध्य प्रदेश) 9. शकूरबस्ती इंस्टालेशन

रोहतक रोड, शकूरबस्ती

नईदिल्ली-110056

10. ऊसर भराई संयंत्र

ऊसर, एमआईडीसी एरिया अलिबाग , जिला- रायगढ़

11. पुणे रिटेल क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय 1 , आरबीएम मार्ग, पोस्ट बाक्स सं. -90 पुणे-411001

12. मुंबई एलपीजी क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय आर एंड सी बिल्डिंग, भायखला मुंबई -400008

13. मुगलसराय टीओपी अलीनगर, मुगलसराय चंदौली ( उ.प्र. )

14. एलपीजी विभाग, उत्तरी अंचल 11वी मंजिल, टावर -1 , जीवन भारती बिल्डिंग, 124 , इंदिरा चौक, नईदिल्ली-110001

15. बहादुरगढ़ एलपीजी क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय (असौदा रेलवे स्टेशन के समीप) बहादुरगढ़ ,...

जिला झज्जर-124505 ( हरियाणा) 16. बहादुरगढ़ एलपीजी संयंत्र (असौदा रेलवे स्टेशन के समीप ) बहादुरगढ़ ,

जिला झज्जर -124505 ( हरियाणा) 17. पालम एएसएफ पालम एयरपोर्ट, मई दिल्ली-110037

18. उदयपुर आईआरडी उदयपुर- सागर रोड, उदयपुर-313001

19. 'मनकी टीओपी, कानुपर द्वारा , इंडियन आयल कार्पोरेशन लि. पद्मकी, कानपुर

20. पानीपत टीओपी गांव बाहोली जिला पानीपत -132114 ( हरियाणा)

21. दिल्ली क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय ( प्रत्यक्ष बिक्री )

11वीं मंजिल , टावर -1 , जीवन भारती बिल्डिंग , 124., इंदिरा चौक, नई दिल्ली -110001

22. बिजवासन इंस्टालेशन

गांव बिजवासन , पालम नईदिल्ली -110061

23. एलपीजी भराई संयंत्र ग्राम मण्डाना, वाया- केवलनगर

कोटा-32.5003

24. जींद भराई संयंत्र रोहतक रोश, जींद-126 102 ( हरियाणा)

25. आटो केयर सेन्टर नीतिमार्ग, चाणक्यपुरी नई दिल्ली-110021

इंजीनियर्स इंडिया लिमिटेड

26. इंजीनियर्स इंडिया लि. 5, विट्ठल नागराज रोड, ओकलीपुरंम बंगलौर-560052

तेल उद्योग सुरक्षा निदेशालय

27. तेल उद्योग सुरक्षा निदेशालय (पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय) 7वां तल, न्यूदिल्ली हाउस, 27 बाराखम्भा रोड, नईदिल्ली-110001

[सं. 11011 /1 /2003-2004 ( हिन्दी ) ]

सी. पी. सिंह, उप निदेशक ( रा.भा. ) MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS New Delhi , the 28th October , 2003

S.O. 3169.- In pursuance of Sub Rule (4) ofRule 10 ofthe Official Language (Use for official purposes of the 7198

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: NOVEMBER 8, 2003 /KARTIKA 17, 1925

Union) Rules, 1976 , the Central Government hereby notifies the following offices of the Public Sector undertakings under the administrative control of the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas , in which the 80 or more per cent staff have acquired working Knowledge of Hindi:-

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.

1. Loni Terminal , Kadam Wakwasti , Loni Kalbhor Taluka; Haveli , Distt . Pune -412201

2. Indore Retail Area Office, Mangaliya Village, Indore(MP)

3. Jabalpur LPG Plant P.Box No. 34 Jabalpur-482001

4. Delhi Coordination Office, 3rd Floor, UCO Bank Building, SansadMarg , New Delhi- 110001

5. Jammu Area Office-Retail Opposite Asia Hotel, Gandhinagar Jammu

6. Jallundhar IRD Suchipind, Jallundhar (Punjab)

7. Mecrut Depot , Vedvyas Puri , Partapur, Meerut (UP)

8. Bhitauni Depot Bhitauni - Shahpur Jabalpur -483119 (MP)

9. Shakurbasti Installation , Rohtak Road , Shakurbasti , New Delhi - 110056

10. Usar Bottling Plant , Usar, MIDC Area, Alibag , Distt . Raigarh

11. Pune Retail Area Office 1 , RBM Marg , Post BoxNo. 90 Pune-411001

12. Mumbai LPG Area Office, R& C Building, Bhaykhala, Mumbai -400008

13. Mughalsarai TOP Alinagar, Mughalsarai , Chandauli (UP)

14. LPG Department, Northern Region 11th Floor, Tower- 1 , Jeevan Bharti Building, 124, Indira Chowk, New Delhi- 110001

15. Bahadurgarh LPG Area Office , (NearAsauda Railway Station) Bahadurgarh , Distt. Jhajjar - 124505 (Haryana)

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ) 16. Bahadurgarh LPG Plant : (NearAsauda Railway Station) Bahadurgarh, Distt. Jhajjar- 124505 (Haryana) 17. Palam A.S.F. PalamAirport NewDelhi - 110037

18. Udaipur IRD Udaipur-SagarRoad, Udaipur-313001

19. Panki TOP Kanpur C/o IndianOil Corportion Ltd. , Panki , Kanpur

20. Panipat TOP Village:Baholi District: Panipat- 132114 (Haryana)

21. Delhi Area Office, (Direct Sale) 11thFloor, Tower - 1 , JeevanBharti Building, 124, Indira Chowk, NewDelhi - 110001

22. Bijvasan Installation, Village:Bijvasan, Palam NewDelhi -110061

23. LPG Bottling Plant Village Mandana, Via-Kewalnagar Kota-325003

24. Jind Bottling Plant Rohtak Road, Jind-126102 (Haryana)

25. Auto Care Centre NeetiMarg, Chanakyapuri , NewDelhi -110021

Engineers India Ltd.

26. Engineers India Ltd. 5,Vitthal Nagraj Road, Okalipuram Bangalore-560052

Oil Industry Safety Directorate

27. Oil Industry Safety Directorate . (Ministry ofPetroleum and Natural Gas) 7th Floor, New Delhi House, 27, Barakhamba Road,, New Delhi -110001

[No. 11011/1/2003-2004 (Hindi ) ] C. P. SINGH, Dy. Director (OL) [भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

7199 भारत का राजपत्र नवम्बर 8 , 2003/कार्तिक 17, 1925

श्रमःमंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 16 सितम्बर , 2003

andworkmarn Smt. Sharmila Chowdhary for adjudication and to prepare an award by exercising of the powers conferred by Clause (D) of Sub- section (4) and Se Section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial DisputesAlet, 1947 on the basis of the following issue

"Whether the action of the management of North Eastern Coalfields Ltd. , Guwahati in stopping Smt . Sharmila Chowdhury, clerkGr. III from duty w.e.f. 20-1-1999 vide their letter dated 19-1-1999 is justified ? If not, to what relief Smt. Sharmila Chowdhury is entitled ?"

का. आ. 3170.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एन . ई.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औधोगिक अधिकरण, गुवाहाटी [ संदर्भ संख्या 6 ( सी)/2001 ] को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीयसरकार को 15-09-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-22012/199/2000- आई आर(सी- II ) ]

एन. पी. केशवन , डैस्क अधिकारी

MINISTRY OF LABOUR

New Delhi, the 16 September, 2003

S. O. 3170. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) the Central Government hereby publishes the award [Ref. No. 6 (c) / 2001 ] of the Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court, Guwahati as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of NEC and their workman , which was receivedby the Centr .Government on 15-09-2003.

[No. L- 22012/ 199 /2000 -IR(C- II)]

N. P. KESAVAN, DeskOfficer

ANNEXURE

LALINDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL , GUWAHATI,

ASSAM

REFERENCE NO. 6(C) OF 2001

PRESENT :

Shri H. A. Hazarika , LL.B. ,

PresidingOfficer, Industrial Tribunal , Guwahati .

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute between:

The Chief General Manager NorthEastern Coalfields .

On receipt of notice issued from this tribunal the parties concerned appeared before this tribunal and submitted their written statements , addl , written statement and documents etc. and contested the matter. The case of the workman briefly from the narration of her written statement is that she was initially absorbed by the management as casual typist . Then she was selected for thepost of typist -ctn-clerk on 13-7-94 for a probational period of six months . The order was conditional that on successful completion of termporary period of six months her services would be regularised in the Grade of typist- cum-clerk. After expiry of probationery period on 28-3-95 shewas treated as regular employee ofNorth East Coalfield. Thereafter on a false pretext a departmental enquiry was initiated by issuing a charge sheet . She defended the enquiry that no false information was intimated by her . She furnish necessary particular that she passed H.S. L.C. examination. The disciplinary authority submit the enquiry report against her violating the principle ofnatural justige. Though she submit representation on 3-2-98 the Chief General Manager dismissed the same vide order dated 12-2-98. Then she preferred appeal before the appropriate authority and the appellate authority passed an order on 24-6-98 whereby she was reinstated for her service w.e.f. 9-5-98. She resume her duty on condition that she would not claim back wages. After six months of resumption ofwork she was stop from working on 20-1-99 until further order vide letter dated 19-1-99 issued by PersonnelManager. She was neither terminated nor allowed to work, Hence against the arbitrary action of the management she raised this industrial dispute before the Regional Labour Commissioner . Though, a conciliation proceeding was initiated the same was failed to settle the dispute.

Coal India Ltd. , Guwahati -5 .

Vs.

Smt. Sharmila Chowdhury.

Date ofAward: 8-9-2003

AWARD

The Govt . of India , Ministry ofLabour , New Delhi vide its notification No. - L- 22012 / 199 /2000 - IR(C - II) dated 12-3-2001 referred this Industrial Dispute arose between the management of North Eastern Coalfields Ltd. , Guwahati

The case of the management in brief is that the workman Smt . S. Chowdhury was appointed in the year 1994 at Shillong W. Coalfield Office as typist-cum Grade III clerk then she was transferred to Guwahati in the year 1995.While her educational certificate was verified as per report of Controller of Assam Higher Secondary Education Council , it was found that her Higher Secondary Education Certificate was forged. The disciplinary action was initiated against her as per departmental rules and she was dismissed from service .

7200

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 8, 2003/KARTIΚΑ 17, 1925

However the appellate of authority allowed her to work for six months without any back wages or any other re lief. She was allowed to resume her duty on condition that her case would be consider by further order if deem fit by the competent authority. Accordingly, she joined in June 1998 , at Calcutta Office and of course on her request she was transferred to Guwahati Office .

Onresumption of duty the management found her performance not satisfactory. She used to remain absent from duties without permission and even she over- written the absent marked in the attendance register by signing over the absent marked . It was prove that her educational certificate was false as she was stopped from service w.e.f. 20-1-1999 vide order dated 19-1-1999.

Heard the argument submitted by Mr. M. Z. Ahmed assisted by Mr. B. Kalita , Ms. B. Dutta, advocaltes. Also heard the argument submitted for the workman Mr. A. Dasgupta assisted by S. Chakraborty, advocate . Perused the evidence ofsolitary M. W. Mr. S. B. Dasgupta. The workman Smt . S. Chaudhury appeared as solitary witness for hearing. They are also cross -examined by the respective advocates .

Onperusal of documents from exhibit 1 to 7 and the evidence in the record, I find the management agitated on the factual as well as on law points.

The factual point has agitated by the management in nut shell that the conduct of the workman concern is not satisfactory as she submitted false educational certificate, secondly that she used to remain absent frequently without permission of the authority. That she tempered the attendance register by signing that she is present covering the absent marked. In support of their contention four attendance register are submitted by the management but it is not proved who over wrote and tempered the attendance register. The attendance register are not examined by any hand writing expert as per procedure.

Hence, I do not like to accept that the attendance register are tempered by the workman herself. As regards foreging of educational certificate it is not proved in the manner as ought to have been. Hence , I could not accept the fact forwarded by the management that the conduct of workman is not satisfactory.

As regards on law points the learned advocate for management hammared much that the workman is not a workman as per law. Heard on these law points and I find she has worked for three terms and on plain counting of the days it will be more than 240 days and documents shows that she was accepted by the management as workman . Admittedly she was appointed as typist -cum- clerk . No disciplinary procedure as regard doing of

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] indiscipline and misconduct is proved in the manner as ought to have been . The relevant enquiry is not proper departmental proceeding.

Under the above fact and circumstances in my opinion the action of the management stopping the workman from 20-1-99 vide letter dated 19-1-99 is not justified . The management is to allow her to work. Accordingly this issue is decided in favour of the workman andagainst the management . I would like to clear here that she will get remuneration from date of her joining after passing this award. For ends of natural justice in my opinion she is not entitled for back wages for the period shewas not worked . Prepare an award accordingly.

H. A. HAZARIKA, Presiding Officer.

नई दिल्ली, 16 सितम्बर , 2003

का.आ. 3171.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एफ. सी. आई. केप्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , चण्डीगढ़ ( संदर्भ संख्या 118/94 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 15-09-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-22012/70/एफ/93 - आई आर( सी- II ) ]

एन. पी. केशवन , डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 16 September, 2003 S. O. 3171 -In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 118/94) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court, Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of FCI and their workman , which was receivedby the Central Government on 15-09-2003.

[No. L-22012/70/F/93 - IR(C- II) ] N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH PRESIDING OFFICER :

Shri S. M Goel

Case No. ID 118/94

KrishanKumar S/ o Jeeta Ram V. P. O. Kaul, District Kaithal-Haryana

.....Applicant

Versus

DistrictManager, FCI,

Kothi No. 16 , Urban Estate , Sector- 13 , Kurukshetra .

..Respondent [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman:

None

Shri Promod Jain For theManagement :

AWARD

(Passed on 25-9-2003 )

Central Govt. vide Notification No. L-22012/70 /F/93- IR ( C - II ) dated 9th of September 1994 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the Management of FCI Kurukshetra in terminating the services of Shri Krishan Kumar son of Jeet Ram , Chowkidar /Watchman w.e.f. 8-3-1990 is just , fair and legal ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled to and from what date ? "

2. Today the case was fixed for evidence of the workman. Case repeatedly called. None has put up appearance on behalf of the workman . On the last two dates of hearing the workman was not present nor any intimation was received on behalf of the workman. It appears that workman is not interested to pursue with the present reference . In view of the above , the present reference is dismissed in default and Central Govt . be informed.

Chandigarh.

25-9-2003

S. M. GOEL, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 15 अक्तूबर , 2003

का. आ. 3172.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार कोचीन पोर्ट ट्रस्ट के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में श्रम न्यायालय, अर्नाकुलम के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 44/98 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 15-10-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-35011/3/98- आई आर( एम ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 15th October, 2003 S. O. 3172.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. 44/98) ofthe LabourCourt, Ernakulam as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial dispute between the management of Cochin Port Trust and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 15-10-2003.

[No. L-35011 /3 /98- IR(M) ] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy. 3159G1 /2003-4

7201

भारत का राजपत्र : नवम्बर 8 , 2003 /कार्तिक 17 , 1925

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM

(In the Labour Court , Ernakulam) (Tuesday, the 16th day of September, 2003) PRESENT :

Smt. N. Thulasi Bai, B.A.LL.B. ,

PresidingOfficer

Industrial Dispute No. 44 of 1998 (Central ) BETWEEN;

The Chairman, Cochin Port Trust, W/Island, Cochin .

And

General Secretary

The workman of the above concern represented by the Cochin Port Workers ' Association , W / Island , Cochine-682 002 .

REPRESENTATIONS :

M/ s. Menon and Pai ,

Advocate,

Ernakulam.

.. For Management Sri K. S. Madhusoothanan,

Advocate ,

Ernakulam.

.. For Union

AWARD

This reference was made by the Central Government asperOrder No. L-35011/3 /98- ( IR(M) dated 17-8-1998, The dispute is between the Cochin Port Trust and the Cophin Port Workers Association represented by its General Secretary. The dispute referred is:

"Whether the action of the managerment of Cochin Port Trust in denying of O.T. beyond 25% of wages and clubbing of Sunday and holiday wages for the computation ofO. T. ceiling to the workers working in certain sections ofCochin Port Trust w.e.f. 10-12-93 is justified. If not, to what relief the workmen are entitled ? "

2. Pursuantto notices issued from this Court the management and union appeared through counsel .

3. No claim statement was filed by the union and it was represented that the petition before the District Labour Officer has to be treated as claim statement . Management filed written statement and the union filed a rejoinder thereafter and the case was pending for evidence. Inspite of repeated chances the union representatives have not turned up to adduce evidence. Today when the case was 7202

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 8 , 2003/KARTIKA 17 , 1925

called union witness and workmen were absent and the union's counsel reported that he has no instruction from the union. Management's counsel was also present . Under the above circumstance I am satisfied that the union is not interested in prosecuting the dispute thereby it can be found that there exists no industrial dispute at present to be adjudicated by this court.

In the result , an award is passed finding that there exists no industrial dispute at present to be adjudicated by thiscourt.

This award will take effect one month after its publication in the Official Gazette.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant , transcribed and typed out by her , corrected by me and passed this the 16thday of September, 2003 .

Ernakulam.

N. THULASI BAI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 16 अक्तूबर , 2003

का. आ. 3173.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार नेहरू साईंस सेन्टर 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 सीजीआईटी-2/198 आफ 99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-10-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42011 /39/99- आई आर( डीयू) ]

बी. एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 16th October, 2003 S. O. 3173.- 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/ 198 of 99) of the Central Govt . Industrial Tribunal, Mumbai , No. II as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Nehru Science Centre and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16-10-2003.

[No. L-42011/39/ 99 - IR(DU)] B. M. DAVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 2 , MUMBΑΙ PRESENT:

S. N. Saundankar,

PresidingOfficer

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii )] Reference No. CGIT -2/198 of 1999 Employers in Relation to the Management of Nehru Science Centre

TheDirector,

Nehru Science Centre ,

Mumbai-400018 .

National Council of Scierce Museums , Dr. E. Moses Road, Worli , V/ s .

Their Workman

VicePresident,

"Shramik",

Sarva Shramik Sanghatana, C/o Bhimrao Kamat, 31, Lokmanya Tilak Vasahat Road No. 3, Dadar(E),

Mumbai.

APPEARANCES :

Forthe Employer : Mr. B. G.GOYAL , Advocate Forthe Workman : Mr. M. B. Anchan Advocate .

Mumbai , Dated 4th August , 2003

AWARD

TheGovernment of India , Ministry of Labour by its Order No. L-42011 /39/99 - IR (DU) dated 16-11-1999 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 disputeto this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management of Nehru Science Centre , Mumbai not to give the employment to the workers namely S/ Shri ( 1) Baburao Nalawade , (2 ) Mahesh Jadhav, (3) Vishwanath Koli , (4) Nitin Kadale , ( 5 ) Prakash Kamble, ( 6 ) Mohamad Bablu , ( 7 ) Hamid Husain , (8 ) Buchayya Aagayya , ( 9 ) Bhimrao Jadhav, ( 10) Mahadev Nagvekar, ( 11 ) Santosh Bhosle , ( 12 ) Sashikant Rajaram, ( 13 ) Laxman Vithal , (14) Vijay Guruji Jadhav, ( 15) Dilip Raghav Raut , (16 ) Avinash Gholap, ( 17 ) Pandurang Khedekar, ( 18) Shailesh Shantaram Kotekar and ( 19 ) Mahadev Sakpal , who were working for them through the contractor, M/s. Bombay Intelligence Security (I ) Pvt . Ltd. , is justified or not ? If not , to what relief, the aforesaid Nineteen workmen are entitled ?" [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

7203 भारत का राजपत्र : नवम्बर 8 , 2003/कार्तिक17, 1925.

2. Vide Claim Statement (Exhibit- 7) President ofthe Sarva Shramik Sanghatana ( hereinafter referred to as Union) pleaded that the management Nehru Science Centre ( for the sake of brevity referred as Centre ) is one of the unit of the National Council of Science Museum (NCSM) which is controlled and aided by the Ministry of Human Resource Development supports and handles the affairs of Centre which is in existence since last 20 years and it has been engaging Class- III/IV workers like Clerks , Sweepers , Mails, Helpers and Security Guards . It is averred that Centre is getting 80 % Government grant for the expenses and besides this , it earns by way of charging various fees for gate entry permits from visitors coming for science exhibitions /science museum, seminar fees , hiring the campus for film shooting etc. For these activities it is contended, Centre is employing more than 80 permanent staff, 20 temporary staff and about 40 workers on so called contract basis . It is contended that workers under reference were engaged for the work of Centre on monthly wages of Rs. 1,946/ - and that the work they were discharging was regular and of permanent nature . It is averred that the Centre situates within 11 acres of land and instead appointing regular and permanent staff to maintain garden, plantation work, cutting of grass , cutting/trimming trees , gardening, animal keeping, sweeping , cleaning the centre etc. engaged the workers through the contractor M/ s. Bombay Intelligence Security. It is the contention of Union that Centre in order to get cheap labour and deprive the workers from the benefit of permanency given contract to another contractor M/s. Central Investigation and Security Limited throwing out the workers under reference on 1-1-1999 unceremoniously and without issuing notice, holding inquiry and paying retrenchment compensation.

It is pleaded by the Union that Government vide notification dated 9-12-1976 had prohibited the engagement ofcontract labour for sweeping, cleaning , dusting, watching the buildingetc, consequently the Centre cannot engage contract labourers in the said category and further averred thatthe work being permanent and perennial in nature and the workers under reference worked for a long period, the Centre being the principal employer , should have absorbed the workmen on regular basis however they have been thrown out. It is contended the centre does not possess registration certificate and the contractor concemed, licence under section 7/12 of the Contract Labour ( Regulation & Abolition) Act and that the so called contract system was a mere camouflage and the so called Contractor is a mere name lender and had procured labour for the Centre from the open market and from this context, it is contended that Centre is the employer of the workers under reference , consequently the action of the Centre not giving the employment to the workers is unjustified and consequently Centre be directed to reinstate all the workers under reference in service with full back wages and continuity of service.

3.Management NSC resisted the claim ofUnion by filing Written Statement (Exhibit - 8) contending that the Centre is a non -profit making Organisation , a scientific research institution and an autonomous body functioning underthe Department of Culture and that since it is hot engaged in commercial/ industrial activity, is not an economic venture or commercial enterprise and hence Centre is not an industry. It is contended that the Centre doesnot produce and distribute services which are intended or meant to satisfy human wants or needs as ordinarily understood and as such it does not fall within the definition of Section 2 ( s ) of the Industrial Disputes Act , consequently, reference is not maintainable . It isfurther averred that the workers under reference are not employees of the Centre and that they were employees of an independent contractor, i.e. Bombay Intelligence Security, for carrying out certain operations as specified in the contract entered into between the Centre and the Contractor, consequently, there is no employer -employee relationship between the Centre and the workers and on this count also the reference deserves to be dismissed. It is the contention of Centre that since the workers under reference were employed by the contractor for carrying out certain jobs thereby there is no privity of contract between the workers and the Centre and since the Contractor has not been added as party, reference is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties . It is contended that since the workers under reference were employed by the Contractor and the dispute is raised by the workers it can be adjudicated by the competent authority under the provisions of the Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act and on this count reference is bad. It is pleaded that the Centre has no independent status and separate entity and it functions under the direct supervision and control of the NCSM which is an autonomous body of which objects are not commercial or profit making and consequently dispute raised cannot be entertained by the Tribunal . It is contended that the Centre had entered into contract with the Contractor on 31-7-1995 and that Contractor had engaged the workers under reference for carrying out the jobs mainly of sporadic/ intermittent nature and that entire supervision and control of these employees engaged by the Contractor was exercised by the Contractor himself which contract expired on 31-12-1998 and that another contractor had engaged the workers to work at different sites but they failed to avail the opportunity for which the Centre is not responsible. It is contended that the provisions of the Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition ) Act 1970 are not applicable to Centre in as much as it did not employ 20 or more contract labourers on any day of the preceding 12 months , therefore qualifying the contract as sham or camouflage made with a view to avoid recruitment of regular workers , is baseless. It is contended that Centre had not engaged any contract labourers for the categories viz . sweeping , cleaning, dusting and watching of building. It is the contention of Centre that contract 7204

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 8 , 2003 /KARTIKA 17, 1925

between the Centre and the Contractor was legal and valid contract and the workers under reference being engageby the Contractor, not concerning to the Centre question of their termination by the Centre does not arise and consequent relief for reinstating them with full backwages is out of question. The Centre, therefore, contended that the Union's claim being devoid of substance , be dismissed with costs in limine.

4. By Rejoinder (Exhibit - 9) Union reiterated the recitals in the Claim Statement denying the averments in the Written Statement further contending that the so called contractor was merely a name lender and an Agent /Broker ofthe principal employer for providing labourers and in thatcontext , the workers under reference are the workers of the Centre and since they were retrenched illegally, deserves to be reinstated. It is contended that Centre had full control over the workers and that the work they were discharging was perennial/permanent in nature.

5. On the basis of pleading Issues were framed at Exhibit 12 and in that context Union filed affidavit in lieu ofExamination - in - Chief of an Ex-employee of the Centre Sadanand Rane (Exhibit- 15 ) and the worker under reference at Serial No. 19 namely Mahadev Sakpal (Exhibit- 18 ) and closed oral evidence vide purshis (Exhibit -27). In rebuttal Mr. Mulani Security and Maintenance Officer ofthe Centre filed affidavit (Exhibit- 28 ) and closed oral evidence vide purshis(Exhibit-32) .

6. Management filed written submission (Exhibit-34) . Heard the Learned Counsel Mr. Anchan for the Union. On hearing the Learned Counsel for the Union and perusing the record as a whole and the written submission of the management, I record my findings on the issues for the reasons mentioned below :

Issues

Findings

Yes.

1. The Nehru Science Centre , Whether Industry as defined Mumbai is an under section 2 (j ) of the Industrial Disputes Act?

As per

order below.

2. Whether the reference is maintainable inview of the provisions of Contract Labour ( Regulation and Abolition ) Act?

3 Whether the Nehru Science Centre , No Mumbai is an employer of the workmen under eference?

Yes .

4. Whether the reference suffers from non -joinder of necessary parties ?

Yes .

5. Whether the action of the management ofNehru Science Centre Mumbai not to

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii)] give employment to the workers S/Shri Baburao Nalawade & Ors . named in the reference who were working for them through the Contractor, M/s . Bombay Intelligence Security (I) Pvt. Ltd. is justified?

6. Ifnot, what relief the concerned workmen are entitled?

As per order below.

REASONS

7. Vide written submissions ( Exhibit - 34) the Management Nehru Science Centre at the outset pointed out that Centre is an educational institution , an autonomousbody functioning in the Ministry of Culture , Government of India and that it is a non - profit making organisation . It is further pointed out that NSC is not engaged in an activity which can be called business , trade ofmanufacture neither from the nature of the organisation nor fromthe character and activity carried out by it canbe said to be an undertaking analogous to business or trade and itis contended that since the Centre is not engaged in commercial/industrial activity, it cannot be described as a economicventure or commercial enterprise . From the written submissions it is pointed out that Centre is an institution discharging Governmental/Sorvering functions and that it is a domestic enterprise with in the commercial enterprise, therefore it is not an ' industry' under section 2(j ) of the Industrial Disputes Act though it may carry out activity of mparting education in a non- formal manner with the help of its employees and it lacks that element which can be said to be analogous to the carrying out a trade or business in as much as it does not produce and distribute services which are intended or meant to satisfy human wants or needs as ordinarily understood. On the other hand the Learned Counsel Mr. Anchan for the management submits that Centre is an industry as it charges fees from the visitors, conducts computer classes by taking huge fees , take lump sum fees by allowing its premises to be used by private visitors/ institutions , takes lump sum amount from the canteen contractors as license fees and that there is an entry fee in case of exhibition and that Centre gets donations from private parties and multinational corporations and that it sells models to other organisation and thereby earns huge money which activities are certainly commercial activity and hence the NSC is an ' industry' .

8. ' Indsurty' as defined under section 2 (j ) of the Industrial Disputes Act is as follows :

(a) " where there is ( i ) systematic activity ; ( ii ) organised by the co -operation between employer and employee (the direct and substantial elelment is chimerical ) ; ( iii) for production and/or distribu- tion of goods and services calculated to satisfy humanwants and wishes (not spiritual or religious 7205 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : नवम्बर 8, 2003/कार्तिक 17 , 1925

but inclusive of material things or services geared to celestial bliss i.e. making on a large scale Prasad or food) primafacie there is an' industry' in that enterprise.

apparent that the Centre is engaged in systematic activity carried on between the employees for the supply and distribution of goods from material services with a view to satisfy human wants and wishes , therefore , squarely falls within the definition of ' industry ' under section 2 (j ) of the Industrial Disputes Act . Issue No.1 is answered in the affirmative .

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

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

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

9. In Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board V/ s . A. Rajappa & Ors . (AIR 1978 SC 548 ) their Lordships laid down three tests for determining whether a particular entity is an ' industry' on or not:

(a) An establishment is an ' industry' it is engaged in (i) systematic activity , ( ii ) organised by co -opera- tionbetween employer and employee , ( iii ) for the production and/or distribution of goods and services calculated to satisfy human wants and wishes.

(b) Absence of profit motive or gainful object is irrelevant .

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

10. The management Centre relied on the decision in Physical Research laboratory V/s K. G. Sharma 1997 I C LR 116 wherein Their Lordships observed:

Physical Research Laboratory - Institution under Government of India's Department of Space- carry- ing on activity of Research not for benefit or use of other. Not engaged in commercial industrial activity is not an ' industry ' within the meaning of section 2 (j ) . "

11. Once it is clear that the NSC is an industry , crucial point crops on as to whether the workers under reference are employees of the Centre and thereafter the question would arise on their retrenchment . Accordingto Union the workers under reference were engaged by M/s . Bombay Intelligence Security (India ) P. Ltd. however , he was a name lender and that the so called contract system was a mere and that the workers under reference in real spisere employees of. the Centre .Management denied the same contending that the workers under reference were engaged by the Contractor and that entire supervision and control on the employees engaged by the Contractor was exercised by the Contractor and that they were paid by the Contractor and that there was no privity of contract between the workers and the Centre therefore employer -employee relationship does not exist . The Learned Counsel Mr. Anchan at this juncture submits that workers worked in the category of Mali and Sweeper for minimum of fourmonths to maximum of 15 years and that they so worked for a long period itself indicates that they work was perennial and permanent in nature and from this angle if we looked the contract smells and indicates that it was a sham made with a view to avoid recruitment of regular workers . He submits relationship of master and servant is a question of factwhich requires to bedetermined consideration of all material and relevant circumstances having a bearing on that, as held in State of U.P. and Anr . V/s . A.N. Singh reported in 1964 9 FLR 238. Their Lordships ofApex Court Steel Authority of India Ltd., V/s . National Union Water Front Workers 2001 III CLR 349 pointed out that the Tribunal has jurisdiction in width to see in detail whether the contract is sham or camouflage. The principle which emerges from the authorities is that the prima facie tests for the determination of the relationship between master and servant is the existence of right in the master to supervise and control the work done by the servant. Not only in the matter of directing what work the servant has to do but also the manner in which he shall do his work and the correct method of approach is to consider whether having record ofthe nature of work there was due control and supervision by the employer. In Chintaman Rao V/ s . State of M.P. AIR 1958 SC 388 Their Lordships observed :-

"There is therefore, a clear cut distinction between contractorandworkman, the identifying mark of latter The Tribunal in the matters of NSC V/ s . P.G. Kelkar Ref. No. CGIT - 2/53 of 1999 by Award dated 1-10-2002 and NSC V/ s . Sarva Shramik Sangh Ref. No. 2/74 of 1998 videAward dated 24-12-2002 held that NSC is an ' industry' . On going through the entire evidence on record and the tests laid down in the Bangalore Water Supply case , it is 7206

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 8 , 2003 /KARTIKΑ 17, 1925

is that he should be under the control and supervision ofthe employer in respect of the details of the work. "

ofthe Centre. It is submitted by the Centre that it did not employ 20 or more contract labourers on any day of the preceding 12 months , consequently provisions of the Act are not applicable to the Centre. On minute perusal of the record it is seen, according to Union itself 19 workers were employed through the Contractor M/ s . Bombay Intelligence Securities, therefore , hardly the above said contention of Mr. Anchan holds water.

The workers under reference viz . Mahadev Sakpal in his cross-examination para 5 admitted that they were employees ofM/s. Bombay Intelligence Securitics India Pvt . Ltd. which had entered into contract with the Centre in the year 1995 . He categorically admitted that one Singh from the Bombay Intelligence Securities used to supervise their work and they were getting wages from the contractor which contract ended in 1998. In cross - cxamination para 7 he has pointed out that the said contractor by the letter dated 29-1-1999 had asked them to report for work at the other establishment. The fact that workers under reference were engaged and paid by the contractor and that on the expiry ofcontract they were asked by the said contractor to report to duty at the other establishment speaks volume .

14. According to the Union workers under reference theywere engaged by the Contractor and thereafter for the same type of work the Centre engaged number of Contractors viz . M/ s . Harsh Constructions, M/ s . Green Thumps etc. It is significant to note that the Centre in clear terms in para 1 (c) of the Written Statement averred that the reference is bad for non -joinder of necessary parties and specific issue on that was framed and in spite of that, Union did not take pain to implead the contractors in the reference. The law as to who are necessary or proper parties to a proceeding is well settled in 1963 AIR SC 786. The necessary party is one without whom no order can be made effectively, the proper authority is one in whose absence the effective order can be made but whose presence is necessary for complete and final decision on the question involving in the proceedings . In the light of the decision' above in the absence of the contractors , though they are necessary party there cannot be a complete and final decision consequently reference suffers from non-joinder ofparties.

12. It is in the evidence that the Science Centre situates within the area of 11 acres . Catching thread of this the Learned Counsel Mr. Anchan submits that admittedly Centre carried out activities of gardening , plantingetc. and that daily many visitors visited the Centre and scatter waste in the premises thereby sweepers/ cleaners /gardeners come into play and that their work does not remain temporary or sporadic in nature and that it become perennial since the workers under reference worked for years together indicates that contractor was a name lender . It is to be noted that Mahadev Sakpal clearly admitted that maintenance of scientific exhibits was carried out by technical staff of the Centre . It is seen from the record there are permanent staffs working in Centre, some of them are experts in the field . It is not that the entire work was given on contract. Mr. Anchan submits that vide notification dated 9-12-1976 Government had prohibited the contract labour for categories like sweeping , cleaning, testimony and watching of building . According to Centre the workers under reference were not engaged in any of the categories stated above in as much as it has its permanent employees . Evidence adduced by the Centre amply corroborates the same.

15. On going through the evidence as a whole it is apparent that the workers under reference were engaged bythe ContractorM/ s. Bombay Intelligence Securities and that their work was being supervised and that they were paidby the Contractor and the Contractor admittedly by the letter dated 29-1-1999 had offered them work in another establishment , itself indicates that there was no privity of contract between the employer Centre and the workers under reference , consequently, employer- employee relationship does not exist . Therefore , question- of retrenchment and giving employment to the workers by the Centre does not arise and in this context , action of the management to that effect is justified consequently workers under reference are not entitled to any relief and the Union's claim being devoid of substance , deserves to be dismissed . Issues are , therefore , answered accordingly and hence the order:

ORDER

Reference stands dismissed being devoid of substance,

S. N. SAUNDANKAR, Presiding Officer 13. Mr. Anchan submits that under the provisions ofthe Contract Labour ( Regulation & Abolition) Act . 1970 employer is required to obtain the certificate of registration from the appropriate Government and the Contractor a valid licence under Section 7/12 of the Act and that if these two conditions are not satisfied or fulfilled , the position would be that the workers employed by the intermediary would be deemed to have been employed by the principal employer. He submits that no registration certificate /licence is produced on record and consequently the workers under reference can squarely be said to be direct employees [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 अक्तूबर, 2003

का. आ. 3174 औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैं. बालाजी मिनरल्स 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 124/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-10-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-29011 /16/2003- आई आर ( विविध ) ]

बी. एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 16th October , 2003

-In pursuance of Section 17 of the S.O. 3174 Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 124/ 2003) of the Central Government IndustrialTribnual-cum- Labour Court Chennai as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s Balaji Minerals and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16-10-2003 .

[No. L-29011 / 16/2003 - IR (M) ]

B. M. DAVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT, CHENNAI Wednesday, the 1st October , 2003

PRESENT : K. JAYARAMAN , PresidingOfficer

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE ΝΟ. 124/2003 (In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) ofSub - section ( 1 ) and Sub - section 2 (A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947) , between the Management ofM/s . Balaji Minerals , Kunnam Village and their workmen .

BETWEEN

:I Party/Claimant TheGeneral Secretary,

Vizhupuram Mavatta Karuppukkal Suraıga Thozhilalar Sangam, Vizhupuram.

7207

भारत का राजपत्र : नवम्बर 8 , 2003 /कार्तिक 17, 1925

AND

M/s . Balaji Minerals ,

: II Party/Management KunnamVillage, Vizhupuram.

APPEARANCE :

Forthe Claimant : None

FortheManagement : M/s Meenakshisundaram ,

Dwarakanathan , M. Suresh & M.R. Pramela , Advocates .

ORDER

The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide Notification Order No. L - 29011 /16/2003 - IR (M) dated 29-07-2003 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :-

"Whether the demand of the union for increase in wages of Rs . 10 / - payment of bonus and payment of wages for seven days when the quarrying operations were stopped against the Management ofGemGranites are legal and justified and if so,to what relief the workman are entitled to?" 2. The matter was taken up on the file of this Tribunal as I.D. No. 124/2003 and notices were issued to both sides . The II Party/Management alone entered appearance through an advocate and none appeared on behalf of the I Party, though the notice has been served onthe I Party/Claimant.

3. When the matter is taken up for enquiry today, the counsel for II Party/Management alone present and there is no representation at all for the I Party/Union , even after issuance of second notice by RPAD . It appears that the I Party/Claimant Union is not interested in pursuing the dispute under reference.

4. In view of the above circumstances , the present reference is returned to Ministry for non - prosecution of this dispute . The Central 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 1st October , 2003.)

K. JAYARAMAN , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 16 अक्तूबर, 2003

का. आ. 3175.- 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 7208

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 8 , 2003 /KARTIKA 17, 1925

मुम्बई नम्बर 2 ( संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी -2 /21 /2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 15-10-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं० एल- 22012/324/99- आई आर ( सी एम- II ) ]

एन. पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi , the 16th October, 2003

S.O. 3175 -Inpursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. CGIT -2 /21 Of2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court Mumbai No. 2 as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Food Corporation of India , and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 15-10-2003 .

[No. L-22012/324/99 -IR ( CM - II)]

N. P. KESAVAN , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT :

S. N. SAUNDANKAR ,

PresidingOfficer

Reference No. CGIT- 2 /21 of 2000 .

EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA

Sr, Regional Manager ,

Food Corporation of India, Mistry Bhavan,

Churchgate, Mumbai - 400 020 .

V / s .

Their Workmen

The General Secretary, All India Trade Union of Food Corporaiton Employces & Workers, 4, Tulsi Building , Sai Nagar, Navghar, Vasai (West) , Distt. Thane .

[PART II-SBC. 3( 1) ] APPEARANCES :

FOR THE EMPLOYER : Mr. V. Narayanan , Advocate

FOR THE WORKMEN : Mr. P. N. Ojha, Representative.

Mumbai , Dated 12th August, 2003

AWARD

TheGovernment of India , Ministry ofLabour by its Order No. L -22012/324 /99 - IR (CM - II) dated 24-1-2000 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:

"Whether the action of the management of Food Corporation of India by superseding the workman Shri A. M. Alur in the promotion from Asstt. Grade- I to the Asstt . Manager is justified ? If not, to what reliefthe workman is entitled ? "

2.WorkmanAlur was appointed in the Corporation asGodown Clerk on 10-2-1966. Vide Claim Statement (Exhibit -4) Employees Union averred that junior to Alur were placed above him in the Seniority List by incorrect interpretation of the Award of CGIT, Jabalpur in Reference No. 4 of 1983 dated 6-1-1986 affecting his promotion and monetary benefits . It is averred that workman had opted forAccounts Cadre on 17-7-1969 as per the Head Office Circular dated 25-3-1969 and that he was placed at Serial No. 114 and one Jairam at Serial No. 144. However in the year 1992 one Jairam, who was junior, was placed above the workmanby wrong interpretation of the said Award . It iscontended that because of this anomaly seniors are working under juniors and though many representations pointing the said position made by the Union , Corporation neglecting the same caused monetary loss to workman. It is the contention of Union that the Corporation be directed tocorrect the seniority list by giving monetary benefits to theworkman.

3. Management Corporation resisted the claim of Unionby filing written statement (Exhibit- 5 ) contending that the seniority was correctly prepared . It is contended thatworkman Alur was appointed on 10-2-1966 as Ag - III (Depot) and was promoted as AG-II (Depot) on 16-4-1972 as ad-hoc (provisional) whereas one Jairam was appointed on 14-11-1967 as AG- III (Ministerial) . There were two separate seniority list ofDepot Cadre and Ministerial Cadre. It is averredthat services of Jairam were regularised w.e.f. 2-6-1969 and his seniority was fixed from his regularisation i.e. 2-6-1969 instead of 14-11-1967 and that he was promoted asAG- II (Ministerial) on 12-4-1972 . It is contended that as per the Award of CGIT, Jabalpur , seniority of Jairam was refixed from the date of his initial appointment i.e.

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

14-11-1967 and that he was notionally promoted as AG - II (Ministerial) w.e.f. 28-3-1972 whereas workman Alur was promoted as AG -II (Depot) on 16-4-1972 . Therefore , Jairam was placed senior to workman. According to Corporation. Accounts Cadre was formed in the year 1977 and that seniority list of Depot Cadre as well as Ministerial Cadre was integrated for appropriation/ finalisation of seniority list ofAccounts Cadre andby that list workman was placed at Serial No. 113 in the Cadre of Assistant Grade- II (Accounts) showing the position as on 31-10-1978 whereas one Jairam was placed at Serial No. 143 however by virtue ofAward, the seniority of employees covered under that Award was revised from the initial date of appointment and consequently the seniority of workman came down . It is conternded, by the said Award the panel was prepared and the workman being junior to one Jairam, cannot claim seniority over Jairam. It is contended that employees viz . Jadhav, Rathod since belong to SC community and found eligible their seniority was correctly prepared and that the seniority list since correctly prepared correctly the workman's contention that he was wrongly superseded for promotion is far from truth and therefore union's claim being devoid of substance , be dismissed with costs in limine.

4. By Rejoinder (Exhibit - 6) Union reiterated the recitals in the Claim Statement denying the averments in the Written Statement further contending that Jairam was appointed on 14-11-1967 cannot be placed above in the seniority list when workman was appointed on 10-2-1966 ignoring his seniority.

5. On the basis of pleadings issues were framed at Exhibit- 13 and in that context workman Alur filed affidavit in lieu ofExamination - in -Chief (Exhibit - 16) and the Union closed oral evidence vide purshis ( Exhibit - 17). Joint Managers Mr. Bhattacharya and Udaybhanu filed affidavit (Exhibit- 18/23 ) and Corporation closed oral evidence vide purshis (Exhibit-31).

6. Union filed written submissions (Exhibit -32) and the Corporation (Exhibit - 33 ) along with copies of rulings. Onperusing the record, written submissions and hearing the counsels , I record my findings on the issues for the reasons mentioned below:

Issues

Findings

7209

भारत का राजपत्र : नवम्बर 8 , 2003/कार्तिक 17, 1925

REASONS

7. Admittedly workman Alur was appointed on 10-2-1966 as AG- III (Depot) and one Jairam on 14-11-1967 as AG - III (Minisetrial ) and that by the notification dated 5-2-1977 seniority list ofDepot Cadre as well as Ministerial Cadrewas integrated wherein workman was placed at Serial No. 114 and one Jairam at Serial No. 143. According to workman though he was senior , Jairam was placed above him in the seniority list in the year 1992by wrong interpretation of the Award of CGIT, Jabalpur. It is in the evidence of Joint Managers working in zonal office of the Corporation, seniority of all employees is prepared as per the Award of CGIT, Jabalpur from their initial date of appointment and since Jairam was promoted initially w.e.f. 28-3-1972 against the panel of 1972 he was shown senior to theworkman inthe seniority list in the year 1992. Workman Alur as seen from his cross -examination para 10 is unaware ontheAward ofCGIT, Jabalpur .

As per order below

1. Whether the action of the management of Food Corporation of India by superseding the workman Shri A.M. Alur in the promo- tion from Asstt . Grade - I to the Asstt. Manager is justified ?

2. Ifnotjustified, what relief the workman is entitled to ?

8. So far the panel prepared for seniority list is concerned, admittedly earlier, workman was at Serial No. 114 and Jairam at Serial No. 143 as clearly seen from the cross -examination para 11 of Mr. Bhattacharya . It is to be noted that according to Mr. Bhattacharya panels were prepared for the seniority and it is seen from the evidence ofMr. Udaybhanu seniority list was changed somewhere in the year 1992 however , it was so changed, without the consent of the committee as seen from his evidence cross- examination para- 12 . At this juncture , the Learned Representative Mr. Ozha for the Union urged with force that when workman was senior apparently from his appointment and also in seniority list, how the seniority could be changed in the year 1992 that too without the consent ofthe committee, violating the principles ofnatural justice . Infact , as seen from the evidence of Mr. Bhattacharya and Mr. Udaybhanu both are not in a position to point out as to how as per the Award of CGIT - Jabalpur the seniority list was prepared changing the earlier senior list , all of a sudden. The Learned Counsel for the CorporationMr. Narayanan inviting attention to the written submission contended that , there cannot be comparison of seniority with Jairam and other similarly placed staff . When according to the senior officer of the Corporation Mr. Udaybhanu , seniority list was changed in 1992 without the consent of the committee members , obviously doubt creeps - in, therefore , the principles of natural justice demands to direct the management Corporation to prepare the seniority list, a fresh considering all the relevant factors and in the light of the Award ofCGIT, Jabalpur. In this view of the matter, the issue as regards superseding workman Alur in the promotion at this stage is redundant in as much as on preparing the list afresh , picture would be cleared . Consequently, reference needs to be disposed of giving directions to the management as above . Issues are answered accordingly and hence the order :

As per order below

3159GI/2003-5 7210

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: NOVEMBER 8 , 2003 /KARTIKA 17 , 1925

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

उपस्थित : श्री सुरेंद्र गोयल, प्राथी की यूनियन के प्रतिनिधि । : सुश्री गुरमीत कौर, एडवोकेट, विपक्षी की ओर से Reference stands disposed of :

दिनांक: 30-9-2003

अवार्ड

Management Corporation is directed to prepare seniority list of the concerned , afresh considering the relevant factors and in the light of the Award of CGIT, Jabalpur within three months from today and thereafter consider the aspect of promotion of workman.

S. N. SAUNDANKAR , PresidingOfficer

इस प्रकरण में केंद्र सरकार से प्राप्त रेफरेंस निम्न प्रकार है : - " क्या विपक्षी द्वारा प्रार्थी को मेडिकल आधारों पर रिटायर करने का आदेश दि. 29-1-97 वापस लिया जाना न्यायोचित्त है ? यदि नहीं तो प्रार्थी किस राहत का अधिकारी है ? "

नईदिल्ली, 17 अक्तूबर, 2003

का. आ. 3176. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्रके संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण, अजमेर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सीआईटीआर 08/98 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-10-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं ० एल-41012/258/97- आई आर ( बी -1 ) ]

अजय कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी

NewDelhi , the 17th October , 2003

S.O. 3176. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Centrai Government hereby publishes the Award of the Industrial Tribunal , Ajmer (Ref. No. CITR 08/98 ) now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Railway and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 16-10-2003 .

[No. L-41012/ 258/97- IR (B - 1) 1

AJAY KUMAR Deak Officer

अनुबन्ध

श्रम न्यायालय एवं औद्योगिक न्यायाधिकरण अधर पीठासीन अधिकारी- अतुल कुमार जैन, आरएचजेएस

प्रकरण संख्या-सीआईटीआर 08/98

प्रकरण की पृष्ठभूमि संक्षिप्त में इस प्रकार है कि प्रार्थी गोरेलाल सी.पी.डब. आई ( 5 ) अजमेर के अधीन वरिष्ठ गैंगमैन के पद पर तैनात था । डॉक्टरी जांच में उसे उक्त पद के लिए बी-1 श्रेणी हेतु प्रयोग्य घोषित कर दिया गया परंतु सी-2 श्रेणी के लिए उसे मेडिकली फिट पाया गया । प्रार्थी को विपक्षी ने पहले तो रिटायर कर दिया था परंतु अब प्रार्थी ने मंडल रेल प्रबंधक से सी-2 श्रेणी का पद दिये जाने की "नार्थना की तो मंडल रेल प्रबंधक ने उसे पुनः माली के पद पर सी-2 श्रेणी में नियुक्ति दे दी । प्रार्थी इस भ्रम में था कि वह माली का पद स्वीकार कर लेगा तो उसके बेटे को रेलवे में एवजी नौकरी नहीं मिलेगी । रेलवे में यह प्रावधान है कि किसी कर्मचारी को मेडिकली पूर्णतः सेवा के अयोग्य मानकर रिटायर किया जाये तो उसके एक आश्रित को रेलवे में अनुकंपात्पक नौकरी दी जाती है । नियमों में यह प्रावधान भी है कि बी-1 नौकरी का कर्मचारी यदि बी-1 श्रेणी के लिए मेडिकली अनफिट हो परंतु सी-2 श्रेणी के लिए मेडिकली फिट हो तो उस सूरत में उसके आश्रित को अनुकंपात्मक नियुक्ति नहीं दी जावेगी । प्रार्थी को यह भ्रम रहा कि वह सी-2 श्रेणी का पद छोड़ देगा तो उसके तीसरे लड़के हरिपालसिंह को रेलवे में अनुकंपात्मक नियुक्ति मिल जावेगी । हमें अफसोस है कि प्रार्थी भ्रम में रहा और उसे " माया मिली न राम " । प्रार्थी ने अपने लड़के हरिपालसिंह की नौकरी के लालच में सी-2 श्रेणी का पद भी ठुकरा दिया और प्रार्थी के लड़के को भी नौकरी नहीं मिल पायी । वैसे भी विपक्षी का कहना है कि प्रार्थी के दो लड़के पहले से ही रेलवे में नौकरी में हैं तथा प्रार्थी अपने तीसरे लड़के को भी नौकरी नियमों के विरुद्ध अनुकंपात्मक नियुक्ति देने के लिए रेलवे प्रशासन पर अनुचित दबाव डाल रहा था । विपक्षी का यह भी कहना है कि प्रार्थी की जन्मतिथि 2-3-43 है तथा उस आधार पर मार्च 2003 में प्रार्थी की सुपरएन्यूएशन टेट भी निकल चुकी है ।

केंद्र सरकार, श्रम मंत्रालय का रेफरेंस पत्र क्र. एल-41012/258/97 आई आर बी-1 , नई दिल्ली 19-5-98

प्रार्थी ने दस्तावेजात् प्रदर्श डब. 1 लकायत डब . 14 एवं विपक्षी ने एक दस्तावेज प्रदर्श एम -1 पेश किया है ।

गोरेलाल पुत्र हुकमचंद

(तत्कालीन वरिष्ठ गैंगमैन)

निवासी-गुलाबवाड़ी शक्तिनगर,

अजमेर .....प्रार्थी

बनाय

तथ्यों का सार जो हमारे द्वारा उक्त प्रकार से निकाला गया है , को प्रार्थी गोरेलाल के बयान दि. 10-1-02 तथा विपक्षी के डीलिंग कलर्क लक्ष्मीनारायण मीणा के बयान दि. 19-7-02 से पूर्ण समर्थन मिलता है । फरियादी ने जिरह में स्वीकार किया है कि उसने माली का वैकल्पिक पद नहींलिया वह कहता है कि मंडल रेल प्रबंधक ने उसे माली के पद के लिए ऑफर दी थी लेकिन उसने कहा था कि उसे तो रिटायर कर दो तथा उसके लड़के हरिपाल को नौकरी दे दो ।

मंडल रेल प्रबंधक, अजमेर

: अप्रार्थी [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7211

भारत का राजपत्र: नवम्बर 8 , 2003/कार्तिक 17 , 1925

प्रार्थी के क्लेम का जवाब विपक्षी ने 11-3-99 को पेश किया था तथा सप्लीमेंट्री जवाब विपक्षी ने 29-5-01 को पेश किया था प्रार्थी द्वारा 27-3-00 को एक टिप्पणी हमारी न्यायालय में पेश की गयी थी उसका भी मैंने अवलोकन किया । उभय पक्ष द्वारा अपनी बहस का लिखित सारांश हमारे समक्ष पेश किया गया है उसका भी मैंने अवलोकन किया । प्रार्थी द्वारा अपने तर्क के समर्थन में इंडियन रेलवे एस्टेथिलशयंत दे के अनुच्छेद 2601 लगायत 2615 की फोटो कॉपियां पेश की गयी जिसका भी मैंने अवलोकन किया ।

बी-1 केटेगरी के लिए मेडिकली अनफिट अये जाने पर प्राथों कोदि. 29-1-97को पहली बार सेवानिवृत्ति कर दिया गया था लेकिन 3-2-97 को यह सेवानिवृत्ति आदेश विपक्षी ने वापस ले लिया था इसके बाद 24-2-97 को प्रार्थी को सी-2 केटेगरी में वैकल्पिक पद (गार्ल परनियुक्ति के आदेश जारी किये गये थे ) प्रार्थी ने अपने तीसरे लड़के को भी रेलवे में नौकरी मिल जाने के लालच में माली का पद स्वीकार नहीं किया जिस पर प्रार्थी की इच्छा अनुसार उसे 25-4-97 को उसे पुनःसेवा निवृत्त कर दिया गया था । दि. 2-3-93 प्रार्थी की जन्मतिथि होना विवादित नही है । तदनुसार भी प्रार्थी की रिटायरमेंट एज निकल चुकी है । इस प्रकार प्रकरण के कुल हालात्में प्रार्थी संशोधित सेवानिवृति आदेश दि. 25-4-97 कोरिव्यू कराने का अधिकारी नहींहै । उसका पह क्लेम खारिज होने योग्य है ।

रिणामतः प्रार्थी गौरेलाल का यह क्लेम अप्रर्जी मंडल रेल प्रबंधक, अजमेर के विरुद्ध खारिज किया जाता है । विपक्षी रेल प्रशासन रा गोरेलाल का सेवानिवृत्ति आदेश दि. 29-1-97 लिया जाकर 25-4-47 कोउसे पुनः सेवानिवृत्ति दिये जाने की प्रक्रिया को किसी भी प्रकार से अनुचितया अवैधानिक नहीं कहा जा सकता है । अतः प्रार्थी द्वारा रेफरेंस मेंकोई राहत इस न्यायालय से पाने का अधिकारी नहीं है ।

अतुल कुमार जैन, न्यायाधीश नई दिल्ली, 17 अक्तूबर, 2003

का. आ. 3177. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 174/99 ) कोप्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-10-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल- 12012/181/99-आई आर ( बी- I ) ]

अजय कुमार , डैस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi , the 17th October , 2003

S.O. 3177. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the Award Ref. 174/99 of the Central Government Indus . Tribunal-cum -Labour Court, Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of State Bank of India , and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 16-10-2003 .

[No. L - 12012/181 / 1999 -IR (B - I) ]

AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL COVT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LALOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH Presiding Office , Shri S.M. Goel CaseNo. ID. 174/99

Shri Chanchal Singh son of Janak Singh resident of House No. 157, Sector 157, Guru Teg Bahadur Nagar, Jammu (J.&K.) .........Applicant

Vers

TheChiefGeneral Manager, SBI , Local Head Office Sector 17-B, Chandigarh.

TheAsstt.General Manager , (R.III) SBI , Zonal Office, 141- A/D,Gandhi Nagar Jammu (J. & K.)

....Respondents APPEARANCES :

Forthe Workman : Shri R.P. Rana

For theManagement: Shri P.K. Gupta

AWARD

(Passed on 23-9-2003)

The Central Govt . vide notification No. L - 12012/ 181 / 99/IR(B. - I ) dated 13th of August 1999 , has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of SBI represented through its Chief General Manager , LHO, Sector 17 -B, Chandigarh and Asstt. General Manager, 141 -A/D, Gandhinagar Jammu in imposing punishment of dismissal from service upon Shri Chanchal Singh w.e.f 17-11-1987 vide order dated 8-8-1988 is just and legal ? If not what other reliefthe workman is entitled ?

[PART IISBC. 3(1) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 8 , 2003 /KARTIKA 17, 1925

7212

workman. Therefore, this order become final and the act of theft onthepart of the workman involves moral turpitude, therefore , the bank has rightly dismissed the services of the workman and the bank has power to do so. Moreover the workman has not preferred any appeal and he was a convicted person. The argument of the learned counsel for the workman is that dismissal order was not received by the workman has no force in view of the admission of the workman that his address is correct and on that very address show cause notice was sent which was returned unserved . Therefore , this plea has no force that dismissal order was not received . The bank was well within its right to dismiss the service of the workman inview ofhis conviction in the theft case involving moral turpitude.

2.Inthe claim statement it is pleaded by the workman that he joined the bank on permanent post as messenger in the year 1973 and it is further pleaded that due to turmoil the applicant could not join his duties and had to extend the leave as there was no alternative way to reach the branch. It is also pleaded that when he reported back to the branch in the year 1991 , the branch manager did not allow me to join Zonal Office also not allowed me to join the duties. In the year 1998 when I visited the bank I was told that the services of the applicant was dismissed from the bank . No charge sheet was served and also no formal order of dismissal served to the applicant . The action of the bank in dismissing the services of the applicant is arbitrary, therefore , liable to be set aside and the applicant is entitled for reinstatement in the service with full back wages and other benefits.

3. In written statement it is pleaded by the management that the workman committed an offence of theft and was prosecuted and convicted by the Judicial Magistrate Kargil and since the offence committed by the workman involved moral turpitude , therefore , he could not be retained in the service of the bank due to statutory bar imposed under Section 10 of the Banking Regulation Act and the workman was dismissed from service after giving him show cause notice and the dismissal orders were conveyedto him vide ordered dated 21-2-1989 and he was also paid his dues vide cheque dated 28-10-1998 . It is pleaded by the management that the action of the management is fully of legal andjustified and the workman is not entitled to any relief in the present reference and the same deserves rejection.

6. The learned counsel for the workman has further argued that the workman was dismissed from service on 8-8-1988 from back date i.e. 17-11-1987 and thus it is no dismissal order . On the other hand , the learned rep . of the bank has argued that the workman was dismissed from service from the date when the judicial magistrate passed the conviction order against the workman . I have no hesitation in holding that the bank was not right in passing the order from the back date i.e. 17-11-1987 vide order dated 8-8-1988. Therefore , the workman is entitled for the payand other benefits from 17-11-1987 to 8-8-1988 when the order of his dismissal from service was passed. The management is directed to make the payment of his pay and allowance w.e.f. 17-11-1987 to 8-8-1988 . But the workman is not entitled for reinstatement in the service of the bank in view of his conviction by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Kargil on 17-11-1987 . The reference is thus answered accordingly.

4. In evidence the applicant filed his own affidavit . Ex . W1 . In cross - examination he admitted that there was a theft case against him and he was convicted vide judgement Ex.M1. In rebuttal the management produced Shri Ashok Kumar as MWI who filed his affidavit Ex.M4 . He deposed in his cross - examination that show cause notice was sent to the address of the workman which was not received back.

7.The applicant has also filed an LCA No. 28/98 for claimingthepay and allowances w.e.f. 1989 alongwith 18% interest on the ground that he was not served with any dismissal order and he came to know this fact only in the year 1997. Since the LCA No. 28/98 is a corollary of I.D. No. 174/99 and as discussed the above I.D. 174/99 the relief has been denied to him w.e.f. 8-8-1988 , therefore, the claim in the LCA No. 28/98 is also denied to him from 8-8-1988 onward. The copy of this award be placed in LCA No. 28/98 . This award will equally operate in LCA No. 28/98 as an order in LCA 28/98 . Central Govt.be informed.

Chandigarh

23-09-2003

S. M. GOEL, Presiding Officer.

5. I have heard the leamed representatives of the parties and have gone through the record of the case . I also pursued the order of Chief Judicial Magistrate Kargil dated 17-11-1987 vide which the workman was held to be guilty of theft and convicted U/S 380 of the Penal Code and punishment was suspended on the condition that he would fumish a bond of good behavior during the period of probation. It is admitted case of the parties that no appeal against this conviction order was filed by the [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

7213 भारत का राजपत्र : नवम्बर 8 , 2003 /कार्तिक 17, 1925

नई दिल्ली, 17 अक्टूबर, 2003

2.On receipt of notices issued from this court the workman appeared through counsel and the management represented by the Joint Controller, Exchange Control Department, Reserve Bank of India, Kochi and the Manager, ReserveBank of India, Kochi and the Manager, Reserve Bank of India, Kochi and the Manager Reserve Bank of India Trivandrum were appeared through representative.

का० आ० 3178. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय रिजर्ब बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण , अरनाकुलम के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 27/1996 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-10-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल. 12011/3/95- आई आर ( बी-I ) ]

अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 17th October , 2003

S. O. 3178.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award of the Industrial Tribunal Ernakulam now as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Reserve Bank of India and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 16-10-2003 .

[No. L- 12011/3 /95- IR(B -I) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT, LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM

(IN THE LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM) (Tuesday, the 29th day ofJuly, 2003)

Present:

Smt , N. Thulasi Bai . B.A.LL.B.

Presiding Officer Industrial Dispute No. 27 of 1996 ( Central)

Between

The Joint Controller, Exchange Control Department, The Reserve Bank of India, Kochi - 18 .

And

The Workman of the above concern Sri . K. A. Biju, Karuthedath , Ochenthuruth, Kochi . 2. Shri K. P. Dasan , Kizhakkedath, Kumpalanghi , Kochi -7.

Representation : Sri . M.R. Sudheendran, .... For workman Advocate, Ernakulam.

AWARD

This reference made by the Central Government as perorder No. L- 12011 /3 /95 -IR (B -I. ) dated nil . The dispute is between the management of Reserve Bank of India and their workmen Sri K.A. Biju and Sri K.P. Dasan . Thedispute is:

3. The workman filed a claim statement raising the following claims:-Petitioners were working as labourers on dailywages under the first opposit party, that is Reserve Bank of India, Kochi . Initially in 1986 they were engaged through contractors M/ s Silpi Construction for the construction ofstaff quarters . Even after the construction work was over they were retained by the Bank and were engaged for taking settlement reading due to sinkage w.e.f. 4.9.90. Theywere paid wages through contractors during 4.9.90 to 13.1.1991 . The petitioners came under the direct employment ofthe Reserve Bank of India w.e.f. 14.1.1991 and accordingly payment ofwages was also made directly atthe rate ofRs.40/- per day. They were being engaged on all working days and on holidays either of the petitioners used to be engaged and they were even engaged for night duty for which extra remuneration at the rate of Rs . 40/- was being paid . From , 1.9.1991 payment was made by cheque once in a month by calculating wages on daily wages . Thus the petitioners were being engaged from 1990 onwards for doing the work of plumbling, motor operation, noting of settlement reading due to sinkage and tilt reading maintenance of plumbing installations pumps etc. in building, officers quarters and staff quarters , pumping of sewage etc. They were regularly employed Till 4.2.1994 on which date their service was orally terminated. The work for which the petitioners were engaged are still available under the second respondent. In December 1993 the second respondent decided to entrust the work to contractors and invited quotations for carrying out the very same work which the petitioners were performing. Through the petitioners made representations requesting for retention and regularisation, they were terminated. So the petitioners approached the Honourable High Court of Kerla by filing O.P.528/ 94 and W.A. 277/94 which were ended in dismissal directing the petitioners to approach the appropriate forum . Immediately after the judgement in theO.P. the service of the petitioners was terminated. The oral termination of the petitioners amounts to retrenchment . Petitioners are workmen within the meaning of that term defined under Section 2 S of the Industrial Disputes Act . The retrenchment of the petitioners is null and void as it is in violation of Section 25F and H of the Industrial Disputes Act . notice or pay in lieu of notice was given to them . The fact that the work which the petitioners were doing is still available under the management that they required persons to perform the very same work and that they are employing others through contractors without giving opportunity to petitioners are sufficient to find that the management has resorted to unfair labour practice.

" Whether the action of the management of Reserve Bankof India in terminating the services of Sri K.A. Biju and Sri K.P. Dasan w.e.f. 5-2-94 is justified? If not , to what relief they are entitled to ? " 7214

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 8 , 2003/KARTIKΑ 17, 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ) The engagement of contract labour itself is illegal . The pertitioners who were in continuous service w.e.f. 14.1.1991 as workman' under the respondents should not have been thrown out without following the procedure laid down in the Industrial Disputes Act . So the workmen prayed for passing an award declaring the termination of service of the petitioners as illegal and directing the management to reinstate the petitioners with back wages and to regularise them in service with all consequential benefits .

4. In the written statement filed by the management following contentions are seen raised - The dispute is not an Industrial dispute within the meaning of Section either section 2K of Section 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act. The petitioners were engaged purely on casual basis for the specific work of tilt/level/ settlement reading in the staff quarters . After completion of the work they cannot be engaged further . The non -engagement of the petitioners due to non - extension of contract by the respondent bank does not amount to retrenchment as it is exempted by Section 2 ( oo) (bb ) of the Industrial Disputes Act . The petitioners were not engaged in the bank on daily basisin accordance with recruitment procedure followed by the bank nor the petitioners had made any application to the bank the bank for wait listing for the post of class IV staff in for appointment . The bank has not made any advertisement for the recuitment in the bank nor the names were called for from the eligible candidates through Employment Exchange . They were not wait listed for any post in the bank threrby they cannot seek relief from the court for continuous in the bank thereby they cannot seek relief from the court for continuance in the bank,

recruitment procedure for engagement of class IV staff in the bank that is peons , sweepers , farask, Mazdoors etc. the management of Class IV in the Bank was being done by inviting applications through Employment Exchange from the candidates fulfilling eligibility criteria for the post and wait list is prepared after the candidates sponsered by Employment exchange are interviewed and found suitable for the post. In the present case no application wasinvited from the general piblic or from the petitioners nor the bank has enquired about the educational or technical qualifications of the petitioners nor any medical examination was done . The petitioners were engaged between 14-1-1991 to 1-2-1994 on certain occasions on daily wage basis mainly for the purpose of tlit reading. They were also allowed to attend some other work like maintainance, plumbing, sanitary repair, pumping of water etc. which were minor works in order to help the petitioner toearn some more money. The petitioners were paid wages at the rate of Rs. 40/ - per day on the days for which they were engaged . As a matter of policy the work of maintainance relating to office and staff quarters is given to contractors for which regular employees were not engaged. So there was no need for the bank to continue the service of the petitioners . The systems of engaging persons on daily wages has been abolish in the bank pursuant to a settlement dated 23-7-1993 entered between recognised trade unions of class IV employees of the Bank and Reserve Bank of India . Thus the petitioner are not workmen and they are not entitled to get any relief from thiscourt. the petitioners were terminated as the work in which they were mainly engaged has been completed thereby the ternmination does not amount to retrenchment . The maintainance work has been awarded to contractors as it does not require regular employee to attend the work. Thus it is clear that the petitioners are not entitled to get any reliefas per the reference. So the management prays for passing an award rejecting the claim of the petitioners.

6. No rejoinder was failed by the workmen and for the purpose of this case evidence adduced from both sides which consists of the testimony of the first workman as WWI and two witnesses for the management as MWS 1 & 2 and Exts. W1 to W4 and M1 to M6 .

7. Thus the points arise for determination are:---

1. Whether Sri . K. A. Biju and K. P. Dasan involved in the present case are workmen as perSection 2 S of the Industrial Disputes Act?

2. Whether the dispute involoved in this case is an industrial Dispute within the purview of the I.D. Act?

3. Whether the termination of service of the above employees amounts to retrenchment as provided in the I.D. Act?

5. Reserve Bank awarded the contract of construction of staff quarters at Kaloor to M/ S Silpi constructions and the construction of staff quarters are almost completed by September 1990. While the contractors were continuing construction work of community hall in the quarters , the columns in the staff quarters had developed some tilt . The rectification oftlit/ sinkage was being attended by the very same contractors M/ sSilpi construction. The petitioners were engagedby the above contractors from 4-9-90 to 13-1-91 . M/ S Silpi construction stopped the work on 13-1-1991 and the bank took over the construction work by itself w.e.f. 14-1-1991 . The petitioners were engaged on daily wages for the specific work of tlit/level reading of columns of Reserve Bank of India staff quarters , Kaloor for a daily wage of Rs . 40/- and they were liable to be terminated on completion ofthe work . Measurement of tlit/level ;/ sinkage were not the regular items of work . The tilt reading was required to be attended only thrice a week that too for 2 to 3 hours a day. Such engagement did not confer any right on the petitioners to get regular employment in the Bank. When the work of tilt reading was complete the contract of engagement was not further extended by the Reserve Bank . The petitioners were not recruited under normal [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : नवम्बर 8 , 2003/कार्तिक 17, 1925

7215 4. Whether the action of the Reserve Bank of India in terminating the service of Sri . K. A. Biju and K. P. Dasan w.e.f. 5-2-1995 is justified?

retrenchment is illegal thereby they are entitled to reinstatement with backwages . It is also claimed by them that since they continued in service for more than 240 days in a year they are entitled to regularisation also.

5. The relief, if any, due to the workers involved in the present case?

8. Points :-The reference relates to termination of service of Sri . K. A. Biju and K. P. Dasan who were attending the work of taking settlement reading due to sinkage , plumbing, motor operation and tilt reading maintenance of plumbing installations , pumps etc. also pumping of sewage in the buildings in officers quarters and staff quarters of Reserve Bank of India , Kochi . Admittedly they were initially engaged by M/s . Silpi construction who was awarded the contract ofconstruction of staff quarters for the Reserve Bank of India at Kaloor, Kochi . The construction of staff quarters was almost completed by September 1990. But the columns in the staff quarters have developed some tilt and its rectification was being attended by M/ s . Silpi constructions and the workers here in were engaged by the contractors from 4-9-1990 to 13-1-1991. On which date M/s. Silpi constructions stopped the work. Thereafter the bank took over the construction work by itself and the present workers were engaged on daily wages w.e.f. 14-191 for the specific work of tilt/ level reading of colts of Reserve Bank of India Staff quarters, Kaloor for a daily wage of Rs . 40/- . It is not disputed that they were attending maintainance/sanitary repair , pumping of water etc. and such engagement continued up to 4-2-1994 . According to the management the per hers were engaged purelly on casual basis for oftilt/ level / settlement reading in the staff quarters don completion ofthe work the petitioner could not be engaged any more thereby it does not amount to retrenchment since it is exempted as per Section 2 ( 00) (bb) of he industrial Disputes Act. It is further contended that the petitioners were not engaged in the bank on daily wages in accordance with recruitment procedure followed by the bank on any application filed by them thereby they are not entitled to get regularisation in the bank. As a matter of policy the maintenance work like plumbing relating to officers and staff quarters was given to contractors thereby the engagement of the workers for the same is not necessary. The engegement of persons on daily wages has been abolished in the bank pursuant to a settlement dated 23-6-1993 between the recognised trade unions of class IV employees and Reserve Bank of India and the petitioners could not be regularised as per the settleinent as they were not wait listed for daily wage employment. Thus according to the management the workers herein are not entitled to get any relief as per the reference . But according to the workers since they were continuously engaged by the management bank w.e.f. 14-1-1991 to 4-2-1994 their disengagement amounts to retrenchment and since the provisions of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act are not complied with, the spec

9. Insupport ofthe argument the workman's counsel relied on the decision reported in 2002 (2 ) KLT S.N. 89 (case No. 104 ) ( Indian Overseas Bank Vs. Industrial Tribunal ) wherein it was ruled that since the employee was working for more than 240 days in a year his termination of service without complying with Section 25F is illegal . Facts of the case in the above decision is not available to consider whether it is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case . Further the employee referred in the decision was a temporary bank employee whereas the workers involved in the present case were not bank employees but they were workers engaged by the bank to carry out certain works in the buildings owned by the bank . It is not disputed that Sri . K. A. Biju and Shri K. P. Dasan, workers involved in the reference, were not recruited by the bank following the Bank's Recruitment procedure . They were not employed against any regular vacancies in the bank and they were not wait listed for considering for temporary engagement or for regular appointment. But they were actually workers of the contractor who was awarded the contract work for the construction of staff quarters at Kochi for the Reserve Bank of India . As the contractors stopped the work on 13-1-1991 the bank directly took over the construction and maintenance work and the present workers were engaged on daily wages w.e.f. 14-1-1991 for the specific work of tilt/level reading of columns of the staff quarters for a daily wage of Rs . 40/- . Since the engagement was for three days in a week , that for 2 to 3 hours per day the workers were engaged for some other maintenance work also so as to provide more benefit to the workers . The above action of the bank was rectified by the head office as per Ext . M6 Fax message dated 29-1-1991 . As per Ext. M6 the two persons were allowed to be engaged at the existing payment of Rs . 40/- per day when their services are required for taking levels andtilt readings of the blocks . It was required not to execute any constract agreement with them . Ext . Ml circular dated 23-7-1988 shows the Bank's procedure to get list of candidates from the Employment Exchange for preparation of waiting list of suitable candidates for filling up the vacancies of class IV employees in the Bank. Ext .M2 is a circular dated 2-5-1995 by which enhanced educational qualifications was prescribed for class IV employees . Ext . M3 is the copy of circular dated 31-5-1988 by which verification of character and antecedents by police was made applicable to candidates for recruitment in class III and IV also . Ext . M4 is the copy of circular dated 16-4-1990 by which conduct of pre - recruitment medical examination was made applicable to candidates to 7216

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 8 , 2003 /KARTIKΑ 17 , 1925

considering the facts and circumstances of the present case it cannot be found that the action of the managment ofReserveBank of India in terminating the services ofSri . K. A. Biju and K. P. Dasan w.e.f. 5-2-94 is unjustified thereby they are not entitled to get any relief as per the reference . Points are answered accordingly.

In the result, an award is passed finding that the action of the managment of Reserve Bank of India in terminating the services of Sri . K. A. Biju and Sri K. P. Dasan w.e.f. 5-2-94 is justified thereby the workers are not entitled to get any relief as per the reference.

This award will take effect one month after its publication in the Official Gazette.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant , transcribed and typed out by her, corrected by me and passed this the 29th day of July, 2003.

Ernakulam.

N. THULASI BAI, PresidingOfficer APPENDIX

Witness Examined on the side of the Management: MW1- Sri . N. Schachala MW2-Sri . Ravi . R. Shenoy. Witness examined on the side of the workman:

WW1-Sri . Biju .

Exhibits marked on the side of the Management:-

Ext . M1-Bank's circular dated 23rd July, 1988 regarding notification of vacancy to Employment Exchange.

Ext. M2-Bank's circular 2nd May, 1995 regarding enhancement ofqualification .

Ext. M3-Bank's circular dated 31st May 1988 regarding verification of charactor.

Ext.M4-Bank's circular dated 16th April 1990 regarding Medical examination.

Ext.M5-Memorandum of settlement dated 23rd July 1993 between the Board and Worker's Federation .

Ext. M6-Telex message No. Rd . 5209 dated 29th January 1991 regarding settlement and tilt reading.

Ext. marked the side of the workman:

Ext. W1-Photocopy of Judgement ofW.A. No. 277/1994 ofKerala High Court .

Ext.W2-Photocopy of schedule of amount received from theBank.

Ext. W3-Quotation issued by the Bank .

Ext. W4 Quotation issued by the Bank dated 31-1-98 various posts in the bank . Ext . M5 is the copy of memorandum of settlement dated 23-7-1993 entered between the management of Reserve Bank of India and all India Rserve Bank Workers Federation representing the workers by which it was agreed to discontinue the arragement or practice of engaging persons on daily wages purely ontemporary and adhoc basis in class IV in various cadres . It was argued by the workmen's counsel that since the present workers were working under the Bank for more than 2 years at the time of settlement their claim for regularisation also can be construed in accordance with Ext . M5 . But the above claim of the counsel cannot be allowed as the temporary and casual labourers referred in Ext. M5 were workers who were wait listed for consideration to temporary work and casual work by following the recruitment procedure of the work. The propriety of Ext . M5 settlement was upheld by the Honourable Supreme Court in the decision in Civil Appeal No. 7407/199 in M.G. Datania & Others Vs. Reserve Bank of India & Others . Disengagement of temporary employees working on daily wages who were engaged on the basis of need of work cannot be construed as retrenchment under the I.D. Act is the position referred by the Honourable Supreme Court in the decision reported in AIR 1997 S.C. 3657 (Himanshu Kumar Vidyardhi Vs. State of Bihar) . It is also ruled by the Honourable Supreme Court that engagement of employees on daily wages without advertising or sending requisition to Employment Exchange and not following the selection process or the relevant rules of procedure amounts to back door entry. The bank being a statutory body is bound to adhere to the rules for making appointment . Without undergoing selection process the petitioners cannot claim any regularisation. Those who enter through back door can be shown exit through back door . ( Vinesh Kumar Vs. N.C.T. ofDelhi and others) . It is evident from Exts . W3 and 4 that the maintenance work, plumbing and sanitary installations , pumping operations , taking settlement and tilt reading ofblocks in staff quarters etc. are being carried out through contractors by inviting competitive tenders . Thebank is within its authority in the matter ofengegement ofcontract labourers in carrying out the work as it is not prohibited under the contract labour ( Regularisation and Abolition) Act, 1970. In view of the earlier referred decisions rendered by the Honourable Supreme Court the decisions cited by the workman's counsel which was rendered by the High Court of Rajasthan , High Court of Punjab and Haryana and High Court of Madhya Pradesh have no application in the present case . So also the decision report in ( 1985 ) 2 S.C.C. 136 has no application in the facts and circumstances of the present case . As the workers involved in the present case were engaged for attending a specific work in the quarters and office building owned by the bank they cannot be treated as employees of the Bank thereby workmen coming within the purview of the Industrial Disputes Act . So their disengagement cannot be treated as retrenchment under the I.D. Act . Thus [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 17 अक्टूबर, 2003

का० आ० 3179. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 57/1998 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-10-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल.-12011/11/97- आई. आर. (बी- I ) ]

1217

भारत का राजपत्र : नवम्बर 8 , 2003/ कार्तिक 17 , 1925

JMG. Scale - I on current account seat one person who was having a withdrawl dated 20-10-92 signed by Laljit Singh on this account AGR5 came to the workman advising that he had been sent by shri Vipan Vats and wanted that he be helped in getting the payment of the said withdrawl . The applicant recorded the name of Vipan with lead pencil in his scrole , and since his scrole was already closed so the applicant requested Mrs. Swarn Kanta Arora who was officer incharge of saving Bank seat to pass the voucher and get the payment made . On 20-11-1992 the customer Laljit Singh reported to the bank on 21-10-92 that some-

अजय कुमार, डेस्कअधिकारी

New Delhi , the 17th October, 2003 S. O. 3179. - In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref No. 57/98 ) of the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of StateBank of India and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16-10-2003 .

[No. L - 12011 / 11 /97 -IR(B -I) ]

AJAY KUMAR , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRALGOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH PresidingOfficer : SHRI S. N. GOEL

CASE NO . ID 57/98

Suraj Parkash Trikha C/ o General Secretary, SBI Staff Congress , H. N. 1304 , Sector - 22 -B , Chandigarh.

Applicant

Versus

The Regional Manager, State Bank of India, R. I. Zonal OfficePunjab , Sector - 17 , Chandigarh.

APPEARANCES :

FOR THE WORKMAN: Shri J. G. Verma

FOR THE MANAGEMENT : Shri V. K. Sharma

AWARD

(PASSED ON 9-10-2003 )

The Central Govt . vide notification No. L - 12011 / 11 / 97 - IR(B.1 ) dated 4th of March 1998 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the Regional Manager, State Bank of India, Regional Office , Sector - 17 , Chandigarh dismissal of services of Shri Suraj Parkash Trikha from the bank w. e . f. 7-8-96 is justified or Not? Ifso , what reliefthe workman is entitled to ? "

2. Inthe claim statement it is pleaded by the workman that on 21-10-1992 the workman was officiating as officer 3159GI/2003-6

body had fraudulently withdrawn the payment of Rs . 25,000/ -from his account . The applicant was on leave and the official of the bank name to his residence and advised him about the fraudulent payment and he then that the payment was receivedby one Sh. Harnam Singh. Because of his statement the Branch Manager and the Secretary of the Union cooked up a story of heaving found the said withdrawal from the pocket of the applicant after about one month of the payment . After Inquiry by Laljit Singh it revealed that Harnam Singh fraudulently withdrew the money from the account of Laljit Singh . The said Laljit Singh also informed the bank that it had been found that Money was withdrawn by his servant who had paid back the money through the workman and same was deposited in the bank. The Management conducted the inquiry against the workman into the charges vide chargesheet dated 24-4-93 . The Inquiry Officer Sh . K. P. Sharma conducted the inquiry in utter disregard to the law and procedure ofdepartmental inquiry which was against the principle of Natural Justice . The inquiry officer had, not givenproper opportunity for the defence of the workman .

The inquiry officer also did not consider the pleadings of the workman. The findings arrivedat by the Inquiry Officer were not based on any evidence or document . The applicant pleaded that the inquiry be quashed and workmanbe directed to be reinstated with full backwages and other benefits .

3. The Management has pleaded in Written Statement that the applicant himself had fraudulently withdrawn the amount from the account of Laljit Singh forging the signatures of the account holder and lateron deposited the amount under by his own signatures in the account of Laljit Singh on 3-12-1992 . The enquiry officer had conducted the enquiry in fair and proper manner and in accordance with the principle of natural justice. The disciplinary authority also gave show cause notice to the workman for the proposed punishment and the appellate authority also dismissed the appeal of the workman after considering all the points raised by the workman . The punishment imposed upon the workman was also reasonable and the workman is not entitled to any relief and reference deserves rejection.

4. The management has also placed on file the complete record of the enquiry proceedings and other 7218

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 8 , 2003 /KARTIKΑ 17, 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

AIR 1984 S. C. 1805 Rajender Kumar Kindra Vs. Delhi Admn .

AIR 1985 S. C. 1121 Anil Kumar Vs. Presiding Officer.

related documents . Both the parties have also placed on record their affidavits in support of their respective pleadings . As the workman has challenged the correctness of the enquiry proceedings and fairness of the same , arguments were heard on the fairness of the enquiry proceedings conducted by the enquiry officer.

2000 (4) RSJ 512 Kumaon Mandal VikasNigam Vs.Girja Shankar Pant andOthers.

It isfurther argued on behalf of the workman that during the enquiry the guilt of the workman was not proved and this Tribunal is competent to consider the findings of fact recorded during the enquiry proceedings .

7. I have given thoughtful consideration to the arguments of the learned representatives of both the parties and have also gone through the complete enquiry proceedings . The enquiry officer had conducted the enquiry in detail and the applicant has not drawn may attention to any proceeding where by I may hold that the enquiry officer had not allowed him the opportunity to prove his innocence. He was allowed to cross -examine the witnesses of the management. He was also allowed to produce his own witnesses and documents an evidence, enquiry which were examined and cross -examined during the enquiry proceedings . The workman was given show cause notice before the punishment and his appeal was also decided after considering all the submissions of the workman. Therefore, I have no hesitation in holding that the enquiry officer had conducted the enquiry in fair and proper manner and the principle of natural justice were not infrigned in the conduction of the enquiry proceedings.

5. The learned counsel for the workman has argued that the enquiry officer had conducted the enquiry in partial manner and not in accordance with the principle of natural justice . The workman was not allowed proper and fair opportunity to defend himself. The learned counsel for the workman has also argued that the enquiry officer gave his findings without considering the material and evidence on record and the findings of the enquiry officer are perverse . The learned counsel argued that the fraud was committed by the servant of the account holder and the workman had nothing to do with the withdrawl of Rs . 25000/ - The learned counsel has also argued that the said account holder Laljit Singh also filed his affidavit to this effect in this Tribunal stating therein that his servant Harnam Singh had forged his signatures and withdrew an amount of Rs . 25000 / from his account and Suraj Parkash Trikha was innocent . On the other hand the learned representative of the management has argued that the enquiry was conducted by the bank in a fair and proper manner and the workman was afforded full opportunity of defence during the enquiry proceedings . The charge of fraud was proved against the workman during the enquiry proceedings . The show cause notice of the proposed punishment was also given to the workman and the appellate authority also considered all the pleadings of the workman before dismissing his appcal . The learned representative further argued that the affidavit now filed in this Tribunal is of no value as it is an after thought and there is no explanation as to why this witness was not presented by the workman during the enquiry proceedings. The learned counsel for the management has also referred the following case laws:

1999 AIR S. C. 625 Apparel Export Council Vs. A. K. Chopra .

8. The argument of the learned counsel for the workman that the account holder now has filed his affidavit station therein that it was his servant who fraudulently withdrew Rs. 25000/- for his account and the applicant Suraj Parkash Trikha is innocent, can not be of any help to the applicant as the same can not be considered during the proceedings in this Tribunal as this Tribunal can not sitin as peal over the findings of fact arrived at during the enquiry proceedings . The workman had not produced this witness during the enquiry proceedings and his affidavit inthis Court is of no help , therefore , I find no merit in the argument of the learned counsel for the workman.

1996 AIR 1232 State of Tamil Nadu Vs. S. Subramaniam.

2001 Lab . IC 2671 A Ballah David Vs. Central Bank of India .

It is further argued on behalf of the management that once a finding of fact based on appreciation of evidence are recorded the court may not interfere with those factual findings unless it finds that the recorded findings were based eithere on no evidence or that the findings were wholly perverse.

9. The learned counsel for the workman has further argued that in the circumstances of the present case , the penality of dismissal from service is very harsh and disproportionate to the gravity of the misconduct and this Tribunal should interfere with the punishment aspect of this case. The Ho'ble Supreme Court in the case ofUCO Bank Vs. Hardev Singh decided on 18-2-2002 has held that one expect the higher standard of honesty and intergrity and to say that the embezzlement is not intentional would be gross understatement, the least to that the decision of the High Court to direct reinstatement was uncalled for. Thus taking into consideration the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court the intereference of this Tribunal U / s11 -A is uncalled for.

6. The learned counsel for the workman also relied on the following case laws ;

7219 भारत का राजपत्र : नवम्बर 8 , 2003 /कार्तिक 17 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

10. In view of the discussion made above , I find no merit in the present reference and the same is returned against the workman . Central Govt .be informed.

Chandigarh.

(44 व 45 धारा के सिवाय जो पहले की 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 केरल राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे , अर्थात्:-

9-10-2003

S.M. GOEL, PresidingOfficer

"जिला त्रिशूर के मुकुन्दपुरम तालुक के तोट्टिपाल और वरांदरा- पिल्लीके अधीन आने वाले क्षेत्र" ।

[सं. एस-38013/37/03- एस.एस. - 1 ] संयुक्ताराय, अवर सचिव नई दिल्ली, 21 अक्तूबर, 2003

New Delhi , the 21st October , 2003 का० आ० 3180.- कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम , 1948 (1948का 34 ) की धारा-1 की उप धारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा 01 नवम्बर , 2003 को उस तारीख के रूप में नियत करती है, जिसको उक्त अधिनियम के अध्याय- 4 (44 व 45 धारा के सिवाय जो पहले की 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 केरल राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे , अर्थात् -

S. O. 3181. 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 Ist November, 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 of Kerala namely:-

" जिला तथा तालुक कोट्टयम के राजस्व ग्राम करूकाचल के अधीन आने वाले क्षेत्र" ।

"Thottippal and Varandarapilly in Mukundapuram Taluk of Thrissur District " .

.एस-38013 / 38/03 - एस एस -1 ] संयुक्ता राय, अवर सचिव

[No. S- 38013/37/2003 -SS.I ] SANJUKTA RAY, Under Secy.

(उत्प्रवास प्रभाग )

New Delhi , the 21st October , 2003

नई दिल्ली, 28 अक्तूबर, 2003

का० आ० 3182 केन्द्रीय सरकार, एत‌द्वारा , उत्प्रबास अधिनियम, 1983 ( 1983 का 31 ) की धारा -3 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, श्रम मंत्रालय में श्री मनोज कुमार सिंह, केन्द्रीय सचिवालय सेवा संवर्ग के अनुभाग अधिकारी को 13 अक्तूबर, 2003 ( अपराह्न ) से उत्प्रवास संरक्षी- II , दिल्ली के रूप मेंनियुक्तकरती है ।

S. O. 3180.- In exercise of the powers conferredby Sub - seran ( 3 ) of Section 1 of the Employees ' State Insu 1148 ( 34 of 1948 ) the Central Government hero.. eats the 1st November , 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 of Kerala namely:--

[सं. एस-13011/1/2003 - उत्प्रवास ] अशोली चलाई , अवर सचिव

(Emigration Division)

"The areas within the Revenue village ofKarukachal inKottayam Taluk & District " .

New Delhi , the 28th October , 2003 [No. S-38013/38/2003 - SS.IJ SANJUKTA RAY , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली , 21 अक्तूबर, 2003

S. O. 3182. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 , Sub-section ( 1 ) of the Emigration Act , 1983 (31 of 1983 ) , the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, Section Officer of the CSS cadre of Ministry ofLabour , as Protector ofEmigrants - II , Delhi with effect from 13th October, 2003 (Afternoon) .

[No. S- 13011/1 /2003 -Emig . ] ASHOLI CHALAI , Under Secy.

का० आ० 3181.- कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम, 1948 (1948का 34 ) की धारा -1 की उप धारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा 01 नवम्बर, 2003 को उस तारीख के रूप में नियत करती है, जिसको उक्त अधिनियम के अध्याय-4

১

Printed by the Manager , Govt . of India Press , Ring Road , Mayapuri , New Delhi - 110064 and Published by the Controller of Publications , Delhi - 110054.