This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

पर्विस्ट्री के डी एल एन ) 04 / 0007 / 2083165UIDAMBOOSTERAUMAL AIGHT TO FREGO NOUL (N) 04/0007/200305

AOOS SAFE OS F sát to 25 noitas2 to ( 8 ) noitase - dua

( ) भारत राजपत्र The Gazette of India ( ٢٤ edio yas bas mengiziver to stolisqus sit n आधिकार से प्रकाशित एक विचार गरिएकी के लीए diwarait bon PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY एक अंग प्राश्एक किरा yasmeetinebionit

ยาว 1ร

SS150E EDITOR DIS

साप्ताहिक कंटका की माँ

WEEKLY

सं. 5 ]

TAUSTASI INEW

नईदिल्ली, जनवरी 25- जनवरी 31 , 2004, पतिवार मास 11 , 1925 DELHI , JANUARY 286.JANUARY 31,200 SATURDAY/MAGHA 5 - MAGHA 11 , 1925 इस भाग में भिन्न पृष्ठ संख्या दी जाती है जिससे कि यह अलग आंकलन के रूप में उखा जा सके उम Separate Paging is given to this Part in order thatthat itit maymay bebe filed as a separate compilation তাপমানিত কথায় তার ১০০০-१०-६० कांही धारखण्ड dua di bass 81 ποίtos ? to ( 1 ) noi ร ว 92 - d2 एक Section

2sivo evitaиги ва гіпотmol edt to 11 nоtрэг 3 Sub - section

If 25 BHK FHE THEMENTS PRLIC, DOIPE AN भारत सरकार के मंत्रालयों ( रक्षा मंत्रालय को छोड़कर ) द्वारा जारी किए गए साविधिक आदेश र अधिना Statutory Orders and Notifications Issued by the Ministries of the Governing dien dai 10 Other manthan the Ministry ofDefence)

vns brus idled wellBRETSJERTLAR 18 ( 2 ) 1.ЭЯ.ОИ

CABINET

oraedt Isitmobion to wont beten o

15A bine adt New Delhi, the 20th Januari , 2004mgitzevni नई दिल्ली, जनवरी, 2004

xercise of the powersiseofthe contained by bi Sub Section (1) of Section's read with Section 6 thể Bệthi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (AZING. 23 of 1346) , the Catfal Govertiment with the consent of the State ५१vemment ofKarnataka vide Notification No. HD 187 PCR 2003 dated 05-09-2003 , hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the thembers ofof Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the State of Karnataka for investigation of offences punishable under Section 120-B read with 420 of IPC , against ( 1 ) Sh . Ashok Muthana, Managing Director, (2) Sh . Bishwajith Ghosh , Incharge of the Corporate Office and (3) Sh: M. Ram Kumar, Asstt . Finance Controller of M/s Fidelity Industries Ltd. , Chennai and any other public servants , or persons in relation to , or in connection with the said offences , and any other offences committed in the course of the same transaction or against t ofthe same facts

का.आ. 221.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्वारा दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना अधिनियम, 1946 ( 1946 का अधिनियम सं. 25 ) की धारा 6 के साथ पठित धारा 5 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, कर्नाटक राज्य सरकार की अधिसूचना सः एचडी 187 पीसीआर *2003 दिनांक 5-9-2003 द्वारा प्राप्त कर्नाटक राज्य सरकार की सहमति से मैसर्स फिडेल्टि इंडस्ट्रिज लि. , चेन्नई के ( 1 ) श्री अशोक मुथाना, प्रबंधनिदेशक ( 2 ) श्री विश्वजीत घोष, इंचार्ज, कारपोरेट ऑफिस और एसनका सहायक वित्त नियंत्रक तथा किन्हीं अन्यलोक ओत्रकों धनानियों के विरुद्ध भारतीय दंड संहिता की धारा 120-बी 215संपठिता धाप 420 के धीमीय अपराधों और उक्त अपराधों से एससीसी यवहार के अनुक्रम में किए गए प्रधी उपचार अन्य अपराधों के अन्वेषण के हित स्थापना के सदस्यों को आक्तुिझा, और эт эг 10 пэглээ 0263 15 अधि‌कारिता का विस्तार सम्पूर्ण करिक्त करात्रीहै 0081 19

226Mi 5738/118/2003 -डी.एस.पी.ई. ]डी एस. पी.ई. ]

। है कि No. 228/ 118/2003 - DOPE]

शुभा ठाकुर, अवर सचिव हिप डि -200 SPER SHUBHA THAKUR, Under Secy.

173 G1/2004ЯТИ ARUNR

(415) [PART II SEC . 3 (ii)] 416

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004 /MAGHA 11 , 1925

NewDelhi, the 20th January, 2004

नई दिल्ली, 20 जनवरी , 2004

S.O. 223. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (8 ) of Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act No. 2 of 1974), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri P.K. Chaube , Advocate , Varanasi as Special Public Prosecutor for conducting case No. RC..7(S)/ 2003/SCR/III/New Delhi ( Murder case of Ms. Madhumita Shukla of Lucknow) in the Court of Special Judicial Magistrate, CBI , Lucknow, Court ofDistrict and Sessions Judge/Additional Sessions Judge , Lucknow and appeals, revisions in the appellate or revisional Court and any other matter concerned therewith or incidental thereto in any otherCourt.

[No. 225/39/2003 - DSPE]

SHUBHA THAKUR, Under Secy.

का.आ. 222.- केन्द्रीय सरकार, आतंकवादी और विध्वंसकारी क्रियाकलाप ( निवारण ) अधिनियम, 1985 ( 1985 का अधिनियम सं. 31) की धारा 11 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के साथ पठित धारा 18 की उपधारा (1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, पंजाब राज्य सरकार से परामर्श करके, एतद्वारा सर्वश्री एस. के. सक्सेना, सी.बी.आई. अभियोजन अधिकारी और राजन मल्होत्रा , अधिवक्ता को मामला सं. आर.सी.1 (एस)/87 एस.आई.यू. - 11/सी.बी.आई./ एस.पी.ई. /एस.आई.सी.- II/ नई दिल्ली के विचारण और पंजाब राज्य में उपर्युक्त अधिनियम की धारा 7 की उपधारा 1 के उपबंध के तहत गठित लुधियाना के अभिहित न्यायालय में उक्त अधिनियम के अंतर्गत दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना द्वारा अन्वेषित अथवा स्थापित और उससे संबंधित अथवा उसके आनुषंगिक अन्यकिसी मामले का संचालन करने के लिए अतिरिक्त लोक अभियोजक नियुक्तकरती है ।

नई दिल्ली, 21 जनवरी , 2004

[सं. 225/ 2/ 2003 - डी.एस.पी.ई. ]

शुभाठाकुर, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 20th January , 2004

का.आ. 224.- केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्वारा दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना अधिनियम, 1946 ( 1946 का अधिनियम सं. 25 ) की धारा 6 के साथ पठित धारा 5 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, छत्तीसगढ़ राज्य सरकार के गृह विभाग की अधिसूचना सं. एफ-4-6-2004/गृह- सी, दिनांक 03-01-2004 द्वारा प्राप्त छत्तीसगढ़ राज्यसरकार की सहमति से भारतीय दंड संहिता 1860 की धारा 120 -बी, 302, 427, 34 सपठित आयुध अधिनियम की धारा 25 , 27 के अधीन पुलिस स्टेशन मोहदाहा पाड़ा, रायपुर में दर्ज अपराध मामला सं. 104/2003 और उसी संव्यवहार के अनुक्रम में किए गए उन्हीं तथ्यों से उद्भूत किन्हीं अन्य अपराध ( धों ) के अन्वेषण के लिए दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना के सदस्यों की शक्तियों और अधिकारिता का विस्तार सम्पर्ण छत्तीसगढ़ राज्य पर करती है ।

[सं. 228/1 /2004- डी.एस.पी.ई. ]

शुभाठाकुर, अवर सचिव S.O. 222. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 18 read with sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 11 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act , 1985 (Act No. 31 of 1985 ) the Central Government after consultation with the State Government of Punjab hereby appoints S/Sh . S.K. Saxena , CВІ Prosecuting Officer and Rajan Malhotra , Advocate as Additional Public Prosecutors for conducting trial ofcase No. RC.1 (S )/87-SIU.II/CBI/SPE/SIC.II/New Delhi and any other matter connected therewith or incidential thereto investigated or instituted by the DSPE under the said Act inthe Designated Court at Ludhiana constituted under the provision of sub - section (1 ) of section 7 of the aforesaid Act in the State of Punjab .

[No. 225/2/2003 -DSPE]

New Delhi , the 21st January, 2004

SHUBHA THAKUR, Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली, 20 जनवरी , 2004

S.O. 224. In exercise of the powers conferredby Sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 5 read with Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 ( Act No. 25 of 1946) , the Central Government with the consent ofthe State Government of Chhattisgarh vide Home Department Notification No. F-4-6-2004/Home -C, dated 03-01-2004 , hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction ofthe members ofDelhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the State of Chhattisgarh for investigation of offence bearing caseNo. 104/2003 registered as PS Mohdaha Para, Raipur under Section 120-B , 302/427/34 of Indian Penal Code , 1860 read with Sections 25 , 27 , Arms Act and any other offence(s) committed in the course of the same transaction arising out of the same facts .

का.आ. 223.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतदद्वारा दंड प्रकिया संहिता, 1973 ( 1974 का अधिनियम सं. 2 ) की धारा 24 की उपधारा (8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए श्री पी .के. चौबे, अधिवक्ता, वाराणसी को विशेष न्यायिक मजिस्ट्रेट, सी.बी.आई. , लखनऊ/सेशन/अतिरिक्त सेशन न्यायाधीश/लखनऊ के न्यायालय में मामला सं. आरसी 7(एस)/2003 सीबीआई/एस .सी.आर. - 3 नई दिल्ली ( मधुमिता शुक्ला हत्या केस ) तथा लखनऊ में अपीलों, पुनरीक्षणों और किसी अन्यन्यायालय मेंअपीलों, पुनरीक्षणों और किसी अन्य न्यायालय में उनसे संबंधित अथवा आनुषंगिक किसी अन्य विषय का संचालन करने के लिए विशेष लोक अभियोजक के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[No. 228/ 1 /2004- DSPE] [सं. 225/39/2003 - डी.एस.पी.ई. ]

SHUBHA THAKUR, Under Secy.

शुभा ठाकुर, अवर सचिव.

417 भारत का राज्चपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[भाग 11- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नईदिल्ली, 21 जनवरी , 2004

2. दिनांक 7/9 फरवरी , 2001 की उक्त अधिसूचना में क्रम सं० 7 से 11 तथा उनसे संबंधित प्रविष्टियों के लिए निम्नलिखित क्रम संख्या और प्रविष्टियां प्रतिस्थाप्रित की जाएंगी, अर्थात्: -

सदस्य

7. श्रीमती रूमा बनर्जी, निदेशक सेवा-इन एक्शन, 36 फर्स्ट मेन, एस टी बेड लेआउट,

कोरमंगला, बंगलौर

सदस्य

8. श्री रवि प्रकाश लेंगर,

पूर्व अध्यक्ष, रोटरी क्लब ऑफ इंडिया,

दास प्रिंटिंग प्रेस, पाटनी बाजार,

ई-1/1 , ऋषि नगर,

उज्जैन ( मध्य प्रदेश)

सदस्य का.आ. 225.- केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्वारा दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना अधिनियम, 1946 ( 1946 का अधिनियम सं. 25 ) की धारा 6 के साथ पठित धारा 5 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, झारखंड राज्य सरकार के गृह विभाग की अधिसूचना सं. 6/सीबीआई -510/2003-5393 दिनांक 13 नवम्बर, 2003 द्वारा प्राप्त झारखंड राज्य सरकार की सहमति से भारतीय दंड संहिता 1860 (1860 का अधिनियम सं. 45 ) की धारा 302, 201 , 436 और 34 के अधीन पुलिस स्टेशन बरियातु, जिला रांची में दर्ज अपराध मामला सं. 86/2003 दिनांक 2 जून, 2003 और उपर्युक्त अपराधों से संबंधित अथवा संसक्त प्रयत्नों, दुष्प्रेरणों और षडयंत्र तथा उसी संव्यवहार के अनुक्रम में किए गए उन्हीं तथ्यों से उद्भूत किन्हीं अन्य अपराधों के अन्वेषण के लिएदिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना के सदस्योंकी शक्तियों और अधिकारिता का विस्तार सम्पूर्ण झारखंड राज्य पर करती है ।

9. डॉ० कुंडीदल्वी, प्रिंसिपल, सी टी आई डी, मुम्बई

[सं. 228/101 /2003- डी.एस.पी.ई. ]

सदस्य

10. श्रीमती मंजुला पाटनकर,

शुभा ठाकुर, अवर सचिव

रोशनी, रामकृष्ण आश्रम, रामकृष्णपुरी , ग्वालियर ( मध्य प्रदेश )

New Delhi , the 21st January, 2004

सदस्य

11. श्री भूषण पुनानी,

कार्यपालक, ब्लाइंड मेन्स एसोसिएशन,

वस्त्रपुरं, अहमदाबाद

3. गैर सरकारी सदस्यों का कार्यकाल दो वर्ष के लिए या किसी नव- गठित न्यास के साथ निधि विलयित होने की स्थिति में, ऐसे गठन की तारीख को, जो पहले हो, होगा ।

4. सभी शर्तें वही रहेंगी ।

[फा. सं. 19-13/2003 - डी डी-1 ]

आर. राधाकृष्णन, उप सचिव

MINISTRY OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT

S.O. 225. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 5 read with Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act , 1946 (Act No. 25 of1946) , the Central Government , with the consent ofthe Government of Jharkhand , Department of Home vide Notification No. 6/CBI-510/2003-5393 dated 13th November, 2003, hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole State of Jharkhand for investigation of crime case No.86/2003 dated 2nd June, 2003 registered at Police Station Bariatu, District Ranchi under Sections 302, 201 , 436 and 34 ofthe Indian Penal Code , 1860 (Act No: 45 of 1860) and attempts , abetments and conspiracy in relation to or in connection with the offences mentioned above and any other offences committed in the course of the same transaction or arising out of the same facts .

New Delhi , the 22nd January, 2004 [No. 228/101 /2003 -DSPE]

SHUBHA THAKUR, Under Secy .

सामाजिक न्याय और अधिकारिता मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 22 जनवरी, 2004

S.O. 226. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 4 of Schedule ' B ' of the Notification dated 11 August, 1983 (F. No. 12-2/82-HW- III) in the matter ofthe National Handicapped Welfare Fund (re- named as National Fund for People with Disabilities ), the Central Government hereby constitutes the Board of Management of the National Fund for People with Disabilities with immediate effect and for that purpose makes the following amendments to the Notification No. 19-3 /92 - DD - 1 dated 7/9 February , 2001.

2. In the said Notification dated 7/9 February, 2001 for serial number 7 to 11 and the entries relating thereto, the following serial number and entries shall be substituted, namely:-

का.आ. 226.- राष्ट्रीय विकलांग कल्याण निधि ( जिसका विकलांग व्यक्तियों के लिए राष्ट्रीय न्यास के रूप में पुनः नाम रखा गया है ) के मामले में दिनांक 11 अगस्त, 1983 की अधिसूचना (फा० सं ० 12-2/82 - एच डब्ल्यू-3 ) की अनुसूची " ख " की धारा 4 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा विकलांग व्यक्तियों के लिए राष्ट्रीय न्यास के प्रबंधन बोर्ड का गठन करती है और उस प्रयोजन के लिए दिनांक 7/9 फरवरी , 2001 की अधिसूचना सं ० 19- 3/92-डी डी-1 में निम्नलिखित संशोधन करती है । 418

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31, 2004 /MAGHA 11, 1925

[PART HSEC. 3 ( ii )]

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(Department of Revenue)

7. Srnt . Ruma Banerjee, Dinestor / Member Seva - In- Action, 36 , 1st S.T.Bed Layout ,

Koramangala, Bangaloreves 3 ts ? * FFFFFF Doperator *************

Tisu ie New Delhi, the 7th January 2005

Member

Fis a P STAMP S

জলছে

8. Shri Ravi Prakech Langer, Farmer Chairman , Rotary Club of India. Das Printing Press, Pani Bazar , E -V , Rishi Nagar Ujjain (M.P. )

Member

2. Dr. Kunda Dalvi , Principal , CTID, Mumbai .

...Member

10. Smt . Manjula Patankar , ROSHNI, RamakrishnaAshrama , Ramakrishnapuri , Gwalior (M.P.).

11. Shri Bhushan Punani , ..Member

S.O.227m exercise ofthe powers conferted by dause (b) of sub- section ofSection 9 of the Indian StampActed 899 (2 of 1899) , the Conpal Government hereby permits Bank inmited,Mumbai to pay consolidated stampduty ofrupees three crore sixty four lakh seventy six thousand seven hundred seventyyTive only chargeable on account ofthe stamp duty of unsecured redeemable Bonds (Oct 2000 Issue) in the wature of debentures aggregaung torupees fourhundred mighty six crore thirty five lakh seventy thousand only, to be issued by the said Bank.

[ NO.1 /2004 - STAMP /F. No. 33 / 66 /2003 - ST ] Executive Director , Blind Men's Association, Vastrapur, Ahmedabad .

১৪ সালে R. G. CHHABRA, Under Secy .

की नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी 2004 55 0.2 και το ο ποίτοok dew best 2010 ( 1 ) no 3. The tenure of non - official members shall be for two years or in the event of the fund being merge with a newly constituted Trust , the date of such constitution , whichever is earlier .

D ) 0101 DA Spildetali spitol Inisoge idle

का.आ. 228. भारतीय स्टाम्प अधिनियम, 1899 ( 1899 का same . 4. All other terms and conditions will re nain the

2 ) की धारा 9 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियोंतया का [F. No. 19-13 /2003 -DD- I]

R. RADHAKRISHNAN, Dy. Secy.

वित्त मंत्रालय

(राजस्व विभाग)

प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीस सरकार प्रवद्द्वारा, यू टी आई बैंक लिमिटेड अहमदाबाद:कोः मात्र प्रहात्तर लाख रुपये का ससेकिन स्टाम्प शुल्क:: अदा करने की अनुमति प्रदान करती है, जो उक्त बैंक द्वारा जारी किए जानें वाले मात्र एक सौ करोड़ रुपये के समग्र मूल्य के 001 से 012 तक की विशिष्ट संख्यासंख्या वालेवाले अरअसुरक्षित अपरिवर्तनीय गौण ऋण पत्रों पर स्टाम्प शुल्क के कारण प्रभार्य

आदेश

DR02 /2004- स्टाम्प/फा. सं. 33/ 1/2004 - बिक नई दिल्ली , 7 जनवरी , 2004

करनाआयजी छाबड़ा, अवर सचिव

13424-0324 ORDER

स्टाम्प

New Delhi , the 9th January, 2004

BRIEF TESTAMPS smar का.आ. 227.- भारतीय स्टाम्प अधिनियम, 1899 ( 1899 का 2 ) की धारा 9 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा आई सी आई सी आई बैंक लिमिटेड, मुम्बई को मात्र तीन करोड़ चौंसठ लाख छियत्तर हजार सात सौ पचहत्तर रुपये का स्टाम्प शुल्क अदा करने की अनुमति प्रदान करती है, जो उक्त बैंक द्वारा जारी किए जाने वाले मात्र चार सौ छियासी करोड़ पैंतीस लाख सत्तर हजार रुपये के समग्र मूल्य के ऋणपत्रों के स्वरूप में वर्णित असुरक्षित विमोच्य बंधपत्रों ( अक्तूबर , 2003 निर्गम ) पर स्टाम्प शुल्क के कारण प्रभार्य है ।

S.O. 228. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) of sub - section ( 1) of Section 9 of the Indian StampAct, 1899 (2 of 1899 ), the Central Government hereby permits UTI Bank Limited , Ahmedabad to pay consolidated stampduty ofrupees seventy fivfive lakh only chargeable on account of the stamp duty on unsecured non -convertible subordinated Debentures bearing distinctive numbers from 001 to 012 aggregating to rupees one hundred crore only, to be issued by the said Bank.

[सं. 1 /2004- स्टाम्प/फा. सं. 33/66/2003 - बि.क. ]

CLIFFONO: 2/2004-STAMP/F . No. 33/1 /2004-ST]

R.G. CHHABRA, Under Secy.

आर. जौ. छाबड़ा, अवर सचिव 4194

ΕΠΙΕNAD JHT

भारत का राजपत्र वालवरी 39, 2004 मΗ ΑΚ2510

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ] )

TTAXI CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TOMS प्री केन्द्रीय प्रत्यक्ष कर बोर्ड

New Delhi , the 5th January 2004 .

नई दिल्ली, 15 जनवरी, 2004 নि করল্লার কোটরে

SO229 oft is notified for general informationthat enterprise/industrial undertaking , listed at para (3 ) below has been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of Section?1A(230 ) 06hbolincontestract, 1961 , read with rule 2E of the Income tax Rules, 1962 , for the assessment years 2002-2003 , 2003-2004 and 2004-2005.

का.आ. 229. - सर्वसाधारण की जानकारी केके लिए यह अधिसूचित किया जाता है कि केन्द्र सरकार आयकर नियमावली, 1962 के नियम 25 के साथ पठित आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 की धारा 10(23- छ) के प्रयोजनार्थ कर निर्धारिण वर्ष 2002-2003 , 2003- 2004 और 2004-2005 के लिए मीचे सैगमेंइल्लिखित उद्यम/औद्योगिक उपक्रम को अनुमोदिद करती है ।

2. The approval is subject to the condition that :- nodos210 (b ) sausio 10 sonsuzlug

et non692 169 enterprise /industrigt undertakinatiwibber 2. यह अनुमोदन इस शतक अधीला है। किर

staconform to and comply with the provisions ofos Απoν Section 10739) of the Income tax Aad buisherwith sule 28 of the Income tax Bules 1992sibni to ०७२ म औधोगिक उपक्रम आकार निर्मर्मावली, 1962 (25 ) bns के नियम 25 के साथ पठित आयकर अधिनिवर्ष 1961

कौं धारा 10 ( 23 छ ) के उपबंधों के अनुरूप होगा और laq ) the Connal Government in Wididawun watne approval fibthe lenterpristindariar umidorisa उनका अनुपालन करेप 1 21 голий sibat

dire austaldagio boiroq a not sibul to stato

AnoER-Tipoto wish on eit witીછ (a) ceases to carry on infrastructure facility; or (ii ) केन्द्र सरकार यह अनुमोदन वार्षिस ले लेगों यदि उद्यम/औद्योगिक उपक्रम:- उद्यम

(b) fails to maintain books of account and get (क) अवसंरचनात्मक सुविधा को जारी रखना बंद कर देती है;है; अथवा

Yoseob suchaccounts audied by an accountant as required by Sub-rate (7) of Rule 2E of the Income-tax Rules , 1962; or

fails to furnish the audit report as required

by Sub- rute (7) ofRulle ZE offthethe Income-taxInco (ख ) खाता बहियों का रख-रखाव नहीं करता है तथा आयकर नियमावली, 1962 के नियम 2ङ के उपनियम ( 7) द्वारा यथा अपेक्षित किसी लेखाकार

minी डिलोहारा ऐसे खाकें पकी लोखा परीक्षा नहीं कराल है;

The enterprise/industrial undertaking approve899e Bhan Mobile Linited,He

FormerlyMis IT Mobile Ltd. Bangalore their project of providing Cellular Mobile

(5 ) 1 oferephone Service in Punjab vide Licence No. रकम आयकर नियमावली, 1962 के नियम 2ङएड के उप द्वारीद्वारा यथा अपेक्षित लेखा परीक्षा रिपोर्ट प्रस्तुत नहीं करती

1842-65 (A995 - VAS dated 26th December, 1995

F. No. 205/36/2002 Triod wah

OF AM/s Bharti Mobile Ltd, is also petified for 2012022 their project of providing Cellular Mobile 91

Services in Kamataka and Andhra Pradesh on

new vide Ministry of Finance BARASvgentofo

baisted Revenue GBPT's notification 9/2003 10 3. अनुमोदित उद्यम औद्योगिक उपक्रम है । मैसर्स,भारती मोबाईल लि. ,लि. , एच -5 /12 , महरौली रोड, नई दिल्ली-110030 (पूर्व नामित मैसर्स जे.टी. मोबाइल लि. , बंगलौर ) कोलाइसेंस से. 842-65( ए)/95 -ची ए एसदिनांक 26 दिसम्बर, 1995 के तहत पंजाब मेंसैल्यूलर मोबाइल दूरभकि सेवा उपलब्ध कराने की उनकी परियोजना के लिए ( फा. सं. (2 ) dated 1601-2003 (F 10,296 /6 /2000 ITASIOSA 205/36/2002-आयकर नि.- II ) ।

91 [NotificationNo. 21 /2004/ No 36/ 20024тарм sibul to ansi

AnPirector Acerit

१७) ८०.६-८००८( सार्थिक कार्यविभाग )

नई दिल्ली चवही 2004

4. मैसर्स भारती मोबाईल लि. , को वित्त मंत्रालय, राजस्व विभागी केन्द्रीय प्रत्यक्षकर बोर्ड की अधिसूचना सं. 83/2003 दिनांक 16-04-2003 के तहत कर्नाटक और आंध्र प्रदेश में सैल्यूलर मोबाईल सेवा उपलब्ध कराने की इनकी परियोल के लिए भी अधिसूचित किया जाता है ( फा. सं. 205 /6/2000- आयकर नि.- II ) । :smmoto mempel)

[ अधिसूचना सं. 21 / 2004/फा, सं. 205/36/2002-

संगीता गुप्ता, निदेशक ( ओयकर नि.- II )

का.आ. 230.- भारतीय स्टेट बैंक अधिनियम, 1955 ( 1955 का 23 ) की धारा 20 की उपधारा 3 ( क ) और उपधारा (4 ) के साथ पठित धारा 19 के खंड (ब) के अनुसरणे में, केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय रिजाबी बैंक से परामर्श वीरके एतद्द्वीस, श्री रामीण पांडे, चार्टर्ड एकाउंटेंट, 6, आगमेर रोड, ज्या 30200 को अपिस्सूषमा आरीक 420

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/ MAGHA 11 , 1925

किए जाने की तारीख से तीन वर्षों की अवधि के लिए भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के केन्द्रीय बोर्ड में निदेशक नामित करती है ।

[फा. सं. 8/3/2003-बीओ-I ( 1 ) ] रमेश चन्द, अवर सचिव (Department ofEconomicAffairs) (BankingDivision) New Delhi, the 23rd January, 2004

S.O. 230. In pursuance of clause ( d) of Section 19 readwith Sub- section 3 ( A) and Sub- section (4) of Section 20 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1955 ), the Central Government, in consultation with the Reserve Bank of India, hereby nominates Shri Rajiv Pandey, Chartered Accountant and resident of " Pandey Chamber " , 6 Gopal Bari,Ajmer Road, Jaipur- 302001 as a director ofthe Central Board of State Bank of India for a period of three years with effect from the date of notification .

[No.8/3/2003-B.O.1 ( 1 ) ] RAMESH CHAND , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 23 जनवरी , 2004

का.आ. 231.- भारतीय स्टेट बैंक अधिनियम, 1955 (1955 का 23 ) की धारा 20 की उपधारा 3 ( क ) और उपधारा (4 ) के साथ पठित धारा 19 के खंड (घ ) के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक से परामर्श करके , एतद्वारा , श्री पीयूष गोयल, चार्टर्ड एकाउंटेंट, 75, अंबर, सियोन ( पश्चिम ) , मुम्बई -400022 के निवासी को अधिसूचना जारी किए जाने की तारीख से तीन वर्षों की अवधिके लिए भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के केन्द्रीय बोर्ड में निदेशक नामित करती है ।

[फा. सं. 8/3/2003- बीओ -1 ( 2 ) ] रमेश चन्द, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 23rd January, 2004

S.O. 231. In pursuance of clause (d) ofSection 19 read with Sub - section 3 (A) and Sub- section (4) ofSection 20 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1955 ), the Central Government, in consultation with the Reserve Bank of India, hereby nominates Shri Piyush Goyal , Chartered Accountant and resident of 75 , Amber, Sion (West) , Mumbai -400022 as a director of the Central Board ofState Bank of India for a period of three years with effect from the date of notification.

[F. No. 8/3 /2003 -B.Ο.Ι(2)]

RAMESH CHAND , Under Secy.

विदेश मंत्रालय

(सी. पी. वी. प्रभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 7 जनवरी , 2004

का.आ. 232.- भारतीय राजनयिक कौंसली अधिकारी ( शपथ एवं शुल्क) अधिनियम 1948 ( 1948 का 49 वां ) को धारा 2 के अंक

[PART II SEC. 3 ( ii) ] (क) के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा भारत का राजदूतावास, बुएनोस आइरेस में श्री जोनसन, सहायक के स्थान पर श्री एस जेम्स जेकोब , सहायक को7-1-2004 से सहायक कौंसली अधिकारी का कार्य करने हेतु प्राधिकृत करती है ।

[सं. टी-4330/01 /2004] उपेन्द्रसिंह रावत, अवर सचिव ( कौंसुलर ) MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS (C.P.V. Division)

New Delhi, the 7th January, 2004

S.O. 232. In pursuance ofclause (a) ofthe Section 2ofthe Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Oaths and fees) Act, 1948 (41of 1948), the Central Government hereby authorise Shri S. James Jacob, Assistant in the Embassy of India, Buenos Aires to perform the duties of Assistant ConsularOfficer wise Shri Johnson Eappen with effect from 07-01-2004.

[F. No. T. 4330/01/2004] U. S. RAWAT, Under Secy. (Cons . ) वाणिज्य और उद्योग मंत्रालय

(काणिज्य विभाग)

नईदिल्ली, 13 जनवरी, 2004

का.आ. 233.- केन्द्रीय सरकार निर्यात (क्वालिटी नियंत्रण और निरीक्षण ) अधिनियम, 1963 ( 1963 का 22 ) की चारा 17 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, शुष्क मत्स्य निर्यात ( क्वालिटी नियंत्रण और निरीक्षण ) नियम, 2002 का संशोधन करने के लिए निम्नलिखित नियम बनाती है, अर्थात्:-

1. ( 1 ) इननियमों का संक्षिप्त नाम शुष्क मत्स्यनिर्यात ( क्वालिटी नियंत्रण और निरीक्षण ) संशोधन नियम, 2003 है ।

(2) ये राजपत्र में प्रकाशन की तारीख को प्रवृत्त होंगे । 2. शुष्क मत्स्यनिर्यात (क्वालिटी नियंत्रण और निरीक्षण ) नियम, 2002के नियम 9 के उप नियम ( 5 ) का लोप किया जाएगा ।

[फा. सं . 6/5/2000- ई आई एण्ड ईपी ] राज सिंह, उप सचिव

टिप्पण:-मूल नियम का. आ. 1376( अ ) , तारीख 30 दिसम्बर , 2002के अधीन भारत के राजपत्र, भाग II, खंड 3 , उप खंड (ii ) प्रकाशित किए थे ।

MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY (Department ofCommerce)

NewDelhi , the 13th January, 2004

S.O. 233. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 17 of the Export ( Quality Control and Inspection) Act, 1963 (22 of 1963 ), the Central Government hereby makes the following rules to amend the Export of Dried [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/ माघ 11 , 1925

Fish (Quality Control and Inspection) Rules, 2002, namely:-

1. ( 1) ThoseRules may be called the Export ofDried Fish (Quality Control and Inspection) Amendment Rules , 2003.

(2)They shall come into force from the date oftheir publication in the Official Gazette.

2. In the Export of Dried Fish (Quality Control and Inspection) Rules , 2002, in rule 9, the sub- rule (5) shall be omitted.

[F. No. 6/5/2000-ΕΙ & EP] RAJ SINGH, Dy. Secy.

Note

: The Principal rules were published in the Gazette of India, in Part II , Section 3 , Sub -section (ii) vide S. O. 1376(E) dated the 30th December , 2002.

विद्युत मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 5 जनवरी, 2004

का.आ. 234.-केंद्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम , 1976 के नियम 10 के उप- नियम (4) के अनुसरण में पावरग्रिड कॉरपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , गुडगांव तथा भाखड़ा ब्यास प्रबंध बोर्ड, चंडीगढ़ के नियंत्रणाधीन निम्नलिखित कार्यालयों को, जिसके 80 प्रतिशत कर्मचारीवृंद ने हिंदी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है , एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करती है :

1. पावरग्रिड कॉरपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , ज्वालामुखी इन्कलेव, शक्तिनगर, जिला-सोनभद्र ( उ. प्र. ) , पिन-23122 ।

2. पावरग्रिड कॉरपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , अब्दुल्लापुर सब स्टेशन, भम्भोली,

3. पावरग्रिड कॉरपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , 400/220 के . वी. उप- केन्द्र, मकान नं. 352, सैक्टर-19, कैथल - 1360271

4. वित्तीय सलाहकार एवं मुख्य लेखाधिकारी, भाखड़ा ब्यास प्रबंध बोर्ड, चंडीगढ़ ।

5. मुख्य अभियंता/ब्यास बांध, भाखड़ा ब्यास प्रबंध बोर्ड, तलवाड़ा।

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

421 MINISTRY OF POWER

NewDelhi , the 5th January, 2004

S.O. 234. In pursuance of Sub- rule (4) ofRule 10 ofthe Official Language (use for official purposes ofthe union) Rules , 1976 the Central Government hereby notifies the following offices of Public Sector Undertakings under theadministrative control ofPowergrid Corporation of India Ltd., Gurgaon and Bhakhra Beas Management Board, Chandigarh, the staff whereof have acquired 80% working knowledge ofHindi :

1. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd., Jwalamukhi Enclave , Shakti Nagar, Distt. Sonebhadra (U. P. ), Pin-231222.

2. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , Abdullapur Sub -station, Bhamboli .

3. PowergridCorporation of India Ltd., 400/220 KV Sub-station, HouseNo. 352, Sector- 19, Kaithal- 136027 .

4. Financial Advisor & Chief Accounts Officer, Bhakhra Beas Management Board, Chandigarh.

5. Chief Engineer/ Beas Dam , Bhakhra Beas Management Board, Talwara.

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

नई दिल्ली, 15 जनवरी, 2004

का.आ. 235.- केंद्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम, 1976 के नियम 10 के उप- निवम (4) के अनुसरण में पावरग्रिड कॉरपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , गुड़गांव तथा भाखड़ा ब्यास प्रबंध बोर्ड, चंडीगढ़ के नियंत्रणाधीन निम्नलिखित कार्यालयों को, जिसके 80 प्रतिशत कर्मचारीवृंद ने हिंदी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है , एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करती है :

1. पावरग्रिड कॉरपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , पटियाला ।

2. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , 400/220 के . वी . सब-स्टेशन, जी. टी. रोड, करतारपुर, जालंधर, पंजाब ।

3. उप मुख्य अभियंता, पाँग विद्युत गृह परिमंडल, भाखड़ाव्यास प्रबंध बोर्ड (विद्युत खंड ) , तलवाड़ा टाउनशिप । 422

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY - 200FMACARII , 1925

[PART II SEC. 3 (ii ) ]

समय प्रसंस्करण उद्योग मंत्रालय भाखड़ाविद्युत गृह परिमंडल

आदेश

भाखड़ा व्यास प्रबंध बोर्ड

baina to rioqui ont bello edom 29ЯТ ( 1 ) . asini inamba ई दिल्ली, 24 जमवली, 2000 )

lic

stu ( poinu

(विद्युत खंड), नंगल टाउनशिपे तहसील आनंदपुर साहिब

विषयः फल उत्पाद आदेश , 1955 के अन्तर्गत लाइसेंस मंजूर ० कारणे लिएशक्तियों का प्रस्थायीन iausio pronto garwoliotech

4. उप मुख्य अभियंता, जिला रोपड़ ( पंजाब )

5. अधीक्षण अभियंता,

35------????? Ray?????????

नहर विद्युत गृह परिमंडल,

भाखड़ा ब्यास प्रबंध बोर्ड ( विद्युत खंड ) , नंगल टाउनशिप,

तहसील आनंदपुर साहिब, जिला रोपड़ ( पंजाब ) ।

का.आ. 236.- फल उत्पाद आदेश, 1955 के खण्ड 2 ( छ) द्वीस निदेशक एक एड बी पी को प्रदान की भई शक्तियों की प्रयोग करते हुए और केंद्रीय सरकार के अनुमोदन से, उक्त आर्दश के 5 (2) में वर्णित फल और सब्जी उत्पादों के निर्माताओं के लिए सभी श्रेणियों के लीसिस मेजर करने की शक्ति तत्काल प्रभाव से और अगले आदेशों तक एत‌द्वारा निम्नलिखित अधिकारियों को प्रत्यायोजित की

335714 [सं. 11017/1/2004-हिन्दी]

noiiosa- dua, & noites ? JL109 ni sibal وممث

अजय शंकर, संयुक्त सचिव

उत्तरी क्षेत्र उपनिदेशक ( एफ एंड वीवी पी) , नई दिल्ली New Delhi, the 15th January, 2004md

उपनिदेशक (राहक एड बी पी ) , कोलकाता

पूर्वीक्षेत्र

उपछिदेशक (एफ एंड की पी), मुम्बई

पश्चिमी क्षेत्र

दक्षिणी क्षेत्र उपनिदेशक (एक एक श्रीपी) हैल

- उपर्युक्त प्रस्पोथोजन द्वारा उपर्युक्त अधिकारी,ऊपर उल्लिखित अधिकार क्षेत्र के लिएत्लाइसेसिंगअधिकारी हो

S.O. 235. In pursuance of Sub- rule (4) ofRule 10 ofthe Official Language (use for official purposes of the union) Rules , 1976 the Central Government hereby notifies the following offices of Public Sector Undertakingsunder the administrative control of Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , Gurgaon and Bhakhra Beas Management Board , Chandigarh, the staff whereof have acquired 80 % working knowledge ofHindi ;

10/6 ( 1 ) 2002एफ रेड वी पी ] কামাস केি व्यवहार, निर्देशक एएफ एडकी पी)

છ- TERRRRRRRR F FOOD PROCESSING INDUSTRIES MINISTRY OF FOOD

1. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , T Patiala.

2.Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. ,

New Delhi , the 1st January, 2004 400/220KV Sub - station ,

G. T. Road, Kartarpur , Jalandhar ,

Sub: Delegation of powers for grant of licence under the Fruit Products Order , 1955- Punjab.

3. Deputy Chief Engineer,

Pong Power House Circle , ( A)

Bhakhra Beas Management Board

(Power wing) , Talwara, Township ন কে উদ্যোকে

4. Deputy ChiefEngineer ,

Bhakhra Power House Circle,

S.O. 236.- 1mxercise of the powers conferred on the Director (F& VP ) by clause of the Fruit Products Order 1955 and with the approval of the Central Government , the powers to grant licences for all categories for manufacture ofFruitand Vegetable Products mentioned in clause 5 (2) of the said order are hereby delegated to the under mentioned officers with immediate effect and until furtherorders :-

Bhakhra Beas Management Board

(Power Wing) , Nangal Township ,

Area of Jurisdiction LicensingOfficer Tehsil Anandpur Sahib ,...

Deputy Director (F & VP), New Delhi

Northern Region

Distt. Ropar (Punjab ).

Eastern Region Deputy Director (F & VP) , Kolkata 5. Superintending Engineer , ১০ কি.মি

Deputy Director ( F & VP) , Mumbai

Western Region

Canal Power House Circle,

Bhakhra Beas Management Board ,

Deputy Director (F & VP) , Chennai

Southern Region

(Power Wing) , Nangal Township ; πει σε ε

Tehsil Anandpur Sahib ,

Distt . Ropar (Punjab) .

2. By virtue of the above delegation , the above- mentioned officers will be Licensing Officers for the area of their jurisdiction as mentioned above .

[No. 11017/ 1 /2004-Hindi ]

[No. 10/6 ( 1)/2001 - F & VP] AJAY SHANKAR, Jt . Secy .

K. K. VYAWAHARE, Director (F & VP) 423 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत काराजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

कोयला मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 22 जनवरी, 2004

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

स्पष्टीकरण- इस धारा के अर्थान्तर्गत यह आपत्ति नहीं मानी जायेगी किकोई व्यक्ति किसी भूमि में कौयला उत्पादन के लिये स्वयं खमन संक्रियाएं करना चाहता है और ऐसी संक्रियाएं केन्द्रीय सरकार या किसी अन्य व्यक्ति को नहीं करनी चाहिए ।

का.आ. 237.- केंद्रीय सरकार ने कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन एवं विकास ) अधिनियम, 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 4 की उपधारा (1) के अधीन जारी की गई, जो भारत के राजपत्र, भाग- II खण्ड-3 , उपखण्ड ( ii ) तारीख 26-4-2003 में प्रकाशित की गई थी भारत सरकार के कोयला मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्यांक का.आ. 1253 तारीख 21-4-2003 द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट परिक्षेत्र की भूमि में, जिसका माप 1463.433 हेक्टर ( लगभग) है, कोयले का पूर्वेक्षण करने के अपने आशय की सूचना दी थी,

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार का यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त भूमि में कोयला अभिप्राप्त है

अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 7 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए इससे संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित 1463.433 हेक्टर (लगभग ) माप की भूमि में और उस पर के सभी अधिकारों का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की सूचना देती है ।

(2) उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन प्रत्येक आपत्ति सक्षम अधिकारी कोलिखित रूप में की जायेगी और सक्षम अधिकारी आपत्तिकर्ता कोस्वयं सुने जाने का या विधि व्यवसायी द्वारा सुनवाई काअवसर देगा और ऐसी सभी आपत्तियों को सुनने के पश्चात् और ऐसी अतिरिक्त जांच , यदिकोई हो, करने के पश्चात्जो वह आवश्यक समझता है, वह या तो धारा 7 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन अधिसूचित भूमि के या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के संबंध में एक रिपोर्ट या ऐसी भूमि के विभिन्न टुकड़ों या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के संबंध में आपत्तियों पर अपनी सिफारिशों और उसके द्वारा की गई कार्यवाही के अभिलेख सहित विभिन्न रिपोर्ट केन्द्रीय सरकार को उसके विनिश्चय के लिए देगा ।

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

टिप्पण 1 : इस अधिसूचना के अंतर्गत आने वाले क्षेत्र के रेखांक सं. ई.सी.एल. सी.एच.यू.वी./मौजा/04 तारीख 4-8-2003 काः उप आयुक्त, जिला-गोड्‌डा एवं पाकुड़ ( झारखंड ) के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक, 1 , काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता-700001 के कार्यालय में या निदेशक तकनीकी ( संचालन ) , ईस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड, सेंकटोरिया, डाकघर- दिशेरगढ़ , जिला- बर्दवान (प. बंगाल) पिन कोड सं. 713333 के कार्यालय में निरीक्षण किया जा सकता है ।

टिप्पण 3: केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला नियंत्रक, 1 , काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता-700001 को अधिनियम के अधीन सक्षम प्राधिकारी नियुक्तकिया है ।

टिप्पण 2: कोयला धारक क्षेत्र (अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम, 1957( 1957 का 20 ) की धारा 8 के उपबंधों की ओर ध्यान आकृष्ट किया जाता है, जिससे निम्नलिखित उपबंध है:-

अनुसूची

ब्लाक 1 एवं 2

चुपरबीटा ब्लाक ( राजमहल कोलफील्डस्)

टिप्पणियां

थाना जिला

ब्लाक .

थाना सं.

मौजा/ग्राम का नाम

क्रम सं.

क्षेत्र हेक्टेयर में (लगभग)

(8)

(6)

(7)

(3)

(4) (5)

(1) (2)

152.640

भाग

प्रथम

चोटापुरो सं.

गोड्डा

सुन्दर पहाड़ी

भाग

92.790

गिरीडीह सं.

गोड्डा

सुन्दर पहाड़ी

173 GI /2004-2 424

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] (1) (2) (3)

(4) (5) (6)

(7)

(8)

(प्रथम जारी)3 पीपर जोरीया सं.

37.100

गोड्डा

भाग

सुन्दर पहाड़ी

4 मीर चैतारी सं.

भाग

89.400

गोड्डा

सुन्दर पहाड़ी

पोखरिया सं.

भाग

53.624

गोड्डा

सुन्दर पहाड़ी

खेरासोल सं.

103.272

भाग

गोड्डा

सुन्दर पहाड़ी

बरा धामनी सं.

47.120

भाग

गोड्डा

सुन्दर पहाड़ी

माकोमादगी सं.

1.142

भाग

गोड्डा

सुन्दर पहाड़ी

द्वितीय

जोरधीया सं.

359.856

भाग

लिटीपाड़ा पाकुड़

425 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

ब्लाक संख्या 1

मौजा - छोटापुरा थाना संख्या 8 , थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी , जिला गोड्डा

1 (भाग ) , 2 ( भाग) , 3( भाग) , 4 (भाग) , 5,

10, 11 ( भाग ) ,

6(भाग) , 7 (भाग) , 8 , 9,

21 , 23 ,

20 (भाग ) , 22, 26 ,

24, 25, 27, 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34, 35 , 36, 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42, 43 , 44 , 45 , 46, 48, 49 , 50 , 51 ,

47,

52, 53 , 54, 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64, 65, 67 , 68 , 69 ,

66,

70 , 71 , 72 ,

75 , 76 , 77 , 78 ,

73 , 74,

79 , 80, 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85, 86 , 87, 88 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92 , 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98 , 99 , 100 , 101 , 102, 103 , 104 , 105, 106 , 107 ,

111 ,

108 , 109 , 110 , 112, 113 , 114 , 115 , 116 , 117 , 118 , 119 , 120 , 121 , 122, 123 , 124 , 125 , 126, 127, 128 , 129 , 131 ,

133 ,

130,

132 ,

134 , 135 , 136 ,

139 , 140 , 141 ,

137,138 ,

142, 143 , 144, 145 , 146 , 147 , 148 , 149 , 150 , 151 , 153 ( भांग) ,

152,

154, 155, 156(भाग) , 157(भाग) , 158 (भाग) , 208 ( भाग) , 209( भाग) , 210 ( भाग) , 211 , 213 ( भाग) , 214, 215 , 216, 217 , 218 , 219 , 220, 221 ( भाग ) , 222 , 223 , 224 , 225 , 226 , 227 , 228 , 229, 230 , 231 , 232, 233 , 234 , 235, 236 , 237 , 238 , 239, 240 , 241 , 243,

242, 244, 245 , 246 , 247 , 248 , 249 , 251 ,

250 , 252 , 253 , 254 , 255 , 256 , 257, भाग) ,

258 ( 261 (भाग) , 262(भाग) , 263, 264, 265, 266, 267 (भाग) , भाग ) ,

268 (

270 , 271 ,

269 ,

272, 273 , 274, 276, 277 ,

275,

281 ,

278 , 279 , 280 , 282 , 283 , 284 , 285 , 286, 287 , 288 , 289 , 290 , 291 , 292, 294 , 295 , 296 ,

293 ,

297 ,

301 ,

298 , 299 , 300 , 302 , 303 , 304 , 305 , 306 , 307 , 308 , 309 , 310, 311 , 312 , 313 , 314, 315 , 316 , 317 ,

321 ,

318 , 319 , 320 ,

322, 323 , 324 , 325 , 326 , 327, 328 , 330 , 331 ,

329,

332, 333 , 334 , 335 , 336, 337 , 338 , 339 , 341 ,

340 , 342, 343 , 344 , 345 , 346, 347 , 348 , 349 , 350 , 351 ,

353 ,

352,

354 , 355 , 356 , 357 , 358 , 359 , 360 , 361 , 362 , 363 , 364 , 365 , 366 , 367 , 368 , 369 , 370 , 371 , 372, 373 , 374 , 375 , 376 , 377 , 378 , 379 , 380 , 381 , 382 , 383 , 384 , 385 , 387 , 389 ,

386 , 388 , 390 , 391 , 392 , 393, 394 , 395 , 396, 397 , 398 , 399 , 400 , 403 , 404,

401, 402,

406 ,

408 ,

405, 407 , 409 , 410 , 411 , 412, 413, 414 , 415 , 416, 417 , 418 , 421 ,

419 , 420 ,

422, 423 , 424 , 425 , 426 , 427 , 428 , 429 , 430 , 431 , 432, 433 , 434 , 435 , 436 , 438 , 439 , 440 ,

437,

441 , 442 , 443 , 444 , 445 , 446 , 447 , 448 ,

451 ,

449 , 450 ,

452 , 453 , 454 , 456, 457 , 458 , 459 ,

455,

460 , 461 , 463 ,

462, 464 , 465 , 466, 467, 468 , 469, 470 , 471 , 472, 475 , 476,

473, 474,

477 , 478 , 479 , 480 , 481 , 483 ,

482, 484, 485 , 486 , 487 , 488 , 489 , 490 , 491, 492 , 493 , 494, 495 , 496, 497 , 499 , 500 ,

498 ,

501 , 502 , 503 , 504 , 505 , 506 , 507 , 508 , 509 , 510 , 511 , 512 , 513 , 514 , 515 , 516 , 517 , 518 , 519 , 520 , 521 , 522 , 523 , 524 , 525 , 526 , 527, 528 , 529 , 530 , 531 , 532 , 533 , 534, 535 , 536, 537 , 538 , 539 ,

541 ,

540,

542, 543 , 544, 546 ,

545, 547 , 548 , 549 , 550 , 551 , 552, 553 , 554 , 555 , 556 , 557 , 559 , 560 ,

558 ,

561 , 562, 563 , 564 , 565 , 566 , 567 , 568 , 570 , 571 ,

569 ,

572 , 573 , 574, 575 , 576, 577 , 578 , 579 , 580, 581 , 582 , 583 , 584 , 585 , 587 , 588 ,

586 ,

589 , 590, 591 , 593 ,

592 , 594 , 595, 596 , 597, 598 , 599 , 600 , 601 , 602 , 603 , 604 , 605 , 606 , 607 , 608, 609 , 610, 611 , 612 , 613 , 614, 615 , 616 , 617 , 618 ,

621 ,

619 , 620 , 622 , 623 , 624, 625 , 626 , 627 , 628 , 629 , 630 , 631 , 632 , 633 , 634, 635 , 636 , 637 , 638 , 639 , 640 , 641 , 642 , 643 ,

646,

644, 645 , 647 , 648 , 649 , 650 , 651 , 652, 653, 654, 655 , 656 , 657 , 658 , 659 , 661 ,

660 , 662 , 663 , 664 , 665 , 666, 667 , 668 , 669 , 670 , 672 , 673 ,

671 ,

674 , 675 , 676 , 677 , 678 ,

681 ,

679 , 680 ,

683 ,

682, 684, 685, 686 , 687 , 688 , 690 , 691 ,

689,

692 , 693 , 694, 695 , 696 , 697 , 698 , 699 , 701 ,

700 , 702 , 703 , 704 , 705 , 706 , 708 ,

707 ,

709 ,

711 ,

710 ,

712 , 713 , 714 ,

716 ,

715 , 717 , 718 , 719 , 721 ,

720 , 722 , 723 , 724 , 725,726,727 , 728 , 729 , 730 , 731 , 732 , 733 , 734 , 735 , 736 , 737 , 738 , 739 , 740 , 741 , 742 , 743 , 744, 746 ,

745 ,

748 ,

747 , 749 , 750 , 751 , 752, 753 , 754, 755 , 757 ,

756, 758 , 759 , 760 , 761, 762 , 763 , 764 , 765 , 766 , 767 , 768 , 769 , 770 , 771 , 772 , 773 , 774 , 775 , 776 , 777 , 778 , 779 , 780 , 781 , 782 , 783 , 784 , 785 , 786 , 787 , 788 , 789 , 790 , 791 , 792, 793 , 794 , 795 , 796 , 797 , 798 , 799 , 800 , 801 , 802 , 803 , 804 , 805 , 806 , 807 , 809 , 810 , 811 ,

808 ,

812 , 813 , 814 , 426

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/ MAGHA 11 , 1925

816 , 817 , 818 , 819 , 820 , 821 , 822 , 823 , 824 , 825 , 826 , 827 , 828, 829 , 830, 831 , 832, 815 ,

834 , 835 , 836 , 837 , 838 , 839 , 840 , 841 , 842 , 843 , 844 , 845 , 846, 847, 848 , 849, 823 ,

851 , 852 , 353 , 854, 855 , 856 , 857 , 858 , 859 , 860 , 861 , 862, 863 , 864, 850.

866 , 867 , 863 , 869 , 870 , 871 , 872 , 873 , 874 , 875 , 876 , 877 , 878 , 879, 880, 881 , 882 , 865 ,

896, 897,898 , 899 , 900 ,

895,

864 , 885 , 386 , 887 , 888 , 889 , 890 , 891 , 892 , 893 , 894,

83,

916 , 917, 918 ,

915 ,

903 , 904 , 905 , 906 , 907 , 908 , 909 , 910 , 911 , 912 , 913 , 914 ,

901 , 902 ,

920 , 921 , 922 , 923 , 924 , 925 , 926 , 927 , 928 , 929 , 930 , 931 , 932 , 933, 934, 935, 936 , 919 ,

938 , 939 , 940 , 941 , 942 , 943 , 944 , 945 , 946 , 947 , 948 , 949 , 950 , 951 , 952 , 953 , 954 , 937 ,

958 , 959 , 960 , 961 , 962, 963 , 964, 965 , 966 , 967 , 968 , 969 , 970, 971 , 972 , 955 , 956 , 857 ,

974 , 975 , 976 , 977 , 978 , 979 , 980 , 981 , 982 , 983 , 984 , 985, 986 , 987, 988 , 989, 990 , 33 ,

994 , 995 , 996 , 997 , 998 , 999 , 1000 , 1001 , 1002 , 1003 , 1004, 1005 , 1006 , 991 , 992 , 993 ,

1020 , 1008 , 1009 , 1010 , 1011 , 1012 , 1013 , 1014 , 1015 , 1016, 1017 , 1018, 1019, 1007 ,

1034,

1028 , 1029 , 1030 , 1031 , 1032, 1033 , 1022 , 1023 , 1024 , 1025 , 1026 , 1027 ,

1021 ,

1046, 1047 , 1048,

1045 ,

1043 , 1044 ,

1042,

1039 , 1040 , 1041 ,

1038 ,

1036 , 1037 ,

1035 ,

1062,

1058 , 1059 , 1060 , 1061 ,

1057,

1054 , 1055 , 1056 ,

1053 ,

1050 , 1051 , 1052 ,

1049 ,

1076 ,

1074 , 1075 ,

1069 , 1070 , 1071 , 1072 , 1073 ,

1068 ,

1064, 1065 , 1066 , 1067 ,

1063 ,

1089 , 1090 ,

1083 , 1084 , 1085 , 1086 , 1087 , 1088 ,

1078 , 1979 , 1080 , 1081 , 1082,

1077,

1104,

1103 ,

1101 , 1102,

1099 , 1100 ,

1095 , 1096, 1097 , 1098 ,

1094 ,

1092 , 1093 ,

1031,

1105

मौजा गरीडीह थाना संख्या 9 , थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी , जिला - गोड्डा

21 , 22 ( भाग ) , 23 ,

17 (भाग) , 18 , 19 , 20 ,

भाग) , 11 ( भाग ) , 15 (भाग ) ,

3 , 4, 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 (

1 (भाग ) ,

46,

37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43, 44 , 45, 25, 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 ,

24,

69 , 48 , 49, 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54, 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62, 63 , 64 , 65 , 66, 67, 68, 47 ,

71 , 72, 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82, 83 , 84, 85, 86 , 87 , 88, 89, 90, 91 , 92, 70 ,

111 , 94, 95 , 96 , 97 , 98 , 99 , 100 , 101 , 102, 103 , 104, 105 , 106, 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 , 93 ,

123 , 124 , 125 , 126 , 127, 128, 129,

122 ,

113 , 114, 115 , 1. , 117 , 118 , 119 , 120 , 121 ,

112 ,

142, 143 , 144 , 145, 146, 147,

141 ,

131 , 132 , 133 , 134 , 135 , 136 , 137,138 , 139 , 140 ,

130,

164, 165 , 149, 150 , 151 , 152 , 153 , 154 , 155 , 156 , 157 , 158 , 159 , 160, 161 , 162, 163 ,

148 ,

167, 168 , 169 , 170 , 171 , 172, 173 , 174 , 175 , 176 , 177 , 178 , 179 , 180 , 181 , 182, 183 , 166 ,

201 , 185 , 186 , 187 , 188 , 189 , 190 , 191 , 192 , 193 , 194 , 195, 196 , 197 , 198 , 199 , 200 , 184,

219 , 203 , 204 , 205 , 206 , 207 , 208 , 209 , 210 , 211 , 212 , 213 , 214 , 215 , 216, 217 , 218 , 202 ,

221 , 222 , 223 , 224 , 225 , 226 , 227 , 228 , 229 , 230 , 231 , 232, 233 , 234, 235 , 236 , 237 , 220 ,

239, 240 , 241 , 242 , 243 , 244 , 245 , 246 , 247 , 248 , 249 , 250 , 251 , 252, 253 , 254 , 255, 238 ,

273 , 257 , 258 , 259 , 260 , 261 , 262 , 263 , 264 , 265 , 266 , 267 , 268 , 269 , 270 , 271 , 272 , 256 ,

291 ,

290 ,

283 , 284 , 285, 286, 287 , 288 , 289 ,

282 ,

275 , 276 , 277 , 278 , 279 , 280 , 281 ,

274 ,

302 , 303 , 304, 305 , 306, 307 , 308 , 309, 293 , 294 , 295 , 296 , 297 , 298 , 299 , 300 , 301 ,

292,

324, 325, 326 , 327, 311 , 312 , 313 , 314 , 315 , 316 , 317 , 318 , 319 , 320 , 321 , 322 , 323 ,

310,

338 , 339 , 340 , 341 , 342, 343 , 344 , 345 ,

337 ,

329 , 330 , 331 , 332, 333 , 334 , 335 , 336 ,

328 ,

360 ,

359 , 361 , 362, 363 ,

358 ,

347 , 348 , 349 , 350 , 351 , 352 , 353 , 354 , 355 , 356, 357 ,

346,

380 , 381 ,

379 ,

365, 366 , 367 , 368 , 369 , 370 , 371 , 372 , 373 , 374 , 375 , 376 , 377 , 378 ,

364,

392, 393 , 394 , 395 , 396, 397 , 398 , 399 ,

391 ,

333 , 384 , 385 , 386 , 387 , 388 , 389 , 390 ,

382,

416, 417,

408 , 409 , 410 , 411 , 412, 413 , 414, 415,

401 , 402 , 403 , 404, 405 , 406 , 407 ,

400 , 427/ भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/ माघ 11 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

418 , 419, 420 , 421 , 422 , 423 , 424 , 425 , 426, 427 , 428 , 429, 430, 431 , 432, 433 , 434, 435 , 436, 437, 438 , 439, 440 , 441 , 442 , 443 , 444 , 445 , 446 , 447 , 448 , 449, 450 , 451 , 452, 453 , 454, 455, 456 , 457 , 458 , 459, 460 , 461 , 462, 463 , 464, 465 , 466, 467, 468, 469, 470, 471 , 472, 473 , 474, 475 , 476 , 477 , 478 , 479, 480 , 481 , 482, 483 , 484 , 485, 486, 487, 488, 489, 490, 491 , 492, 493 , 494, 495, 496, 497 , 498 , 499, 500 , 501 , 502, 503, 504, 505, 506, 507 , 508 , 509 , 510 , 511 , 512 , 513 , 514 , 515 , 516 , 517 , 518 , 519 , 520 , 521 , 522, 523 , 524, 525, 526, 527 , 528 , 529 , 530 , 531 , 532, 533 , 534, 535 , 536 , 537 , 538 , 539 , 540, 541 , 542, 543, 544, 545 , 546 , 547 , 548 , 549 , 550 , 551 , 552 , 553 , 554 , 555,556 , 557 , 558 , 559 , 560, 561 , 562, 563 , 564 , 565 , 566 , 567 , 568, 569, 570 , 571 , 572 , 573 , 574, 575, 576 , 577 , 578 , 579 , 580 , 581 , 582 , 583 , 584, 585, 586, 587, 588 , 589 , 590 , 591 , 592, 593 , 594, 595 , 596 , 597 , 616 , 617 , 618 , 619 , 620 , 621 , 622 , 623 , 624 , 625 , 626, 627 , 628 , 629 , 630 , 631 , 632, 633 , 634, 635 , 636 , 637 , 638 , 639 , 640 , 641 , 642, 643 , 644, 645 , 646, 647, 648, 649 , 850 , 651 , 652, 653 , 654 , 655 , 656 , 657 , 658 , 659 , 660 , 661 , 662, 663 , 664 , 665, 666 , 667 , 668 , 669 , 598 , 599 , 600 , 601 , 602, 603 , 604 , 605 , 606 , 607 , 608 , 609 , 610 , 611 , 612 , 613 , 614 , 615 , 670 , 671 , 672, 673 , 674 , 675 , 676 , 677 , 678 , 679 , 680 , 681 , 682 , 683, 684, 685, 686 , 687, 688 , 689 , 690 , 691 , 692, 693 , 694 , 695 , 696, 697 , 698 , 699, 700 , 701 (भाग) , 702 (भाग) , 703, 704, 705 , 706 , 707 , 708 , 709 , 710 , 711 , 712, 713 (भाग ) , 714(भाग) , 716(भाग) , 717, 718, 719, 720 (भाग) , 721 , 722, 723 , 724 , 725 , 726, 727 , 728 , 729 , 730 , 731 , 732, 733 , 734 , 735 , 736 , 737, 738 , 739 , 740 , 741 , 742, 743 , 744, 745, 746 , 747 , 748 , 749 , 750 , 751 , 752 , 753 , 754 , 755 , 756, 757 , 758 , 759 , 760 , 761 , 762 , 763 , 764, 765 , 766 , 767 , 768 , 769, 770 , 771 (भाग) , 772, 773 , 774 , 775(भाग) , 777 (भाग) , 778 (भाग) , 780 (भाग) , 781 (भाग) , 782 (भाग) , 783, 784, 785(भाग) , 787 (भाग) , 788 , 789, 790 (भाग) , 791 (भाग) , 795 (भाग) , 796 (भाग) , 797, 798 (भाग) , 799 (भाग) , 800 (भाग ), 805(भाग) .

i मौजा पीपर जोरीया थाना संख्या 10, थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी, जिला गोड्डा

13 ( भाग) , 26(भाग) , 27 , 28, 29, 30 , 31 (भाग) , 32(भाग ) , 34(भाग) , 36 (भाग ) , 37, 38, 39 , 12 (भाग ) ,

42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48 , 49, 50, 51 (भाग) , 52(भाग ) , 53, 54, 55, 56, 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 40, 41,

63 , 64 , 65, 66, 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74, 75 , 76, 77 , 78 , 79, 80 , 81 , 82, 83 , 61 , 62 ,

87, 88 , 89, 90, 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 95 , 96, 97 , 98, 99 , 100, 101 , 102, 103, 104, 84, 85, 86 ,

106 , 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 , 111 , 112, 113 , 114, 115 , 116, 117 , 118 , 119 , 120 , 121 , 122 , 105 ,

132, 133 , 134 , 135, 136, 137,138 , 139, 140 , 123, 124, 125 , 126, 127 , 128 , 129 , 130 , 131 ,

156, 157 , 158, 141 , 142, 143 , 144 , 145, 146, 147 , 148 , 149 , 150 , 151 , 152, 153 , 154, 155,

174 , 175, 176 , 159 , 160 , 161 , 162, 163 , 164 , 165 , 166 , 167 , 168 , 169 , 170 , 171 , 172 , 173 ,

187 (भाग ) , 188 (भाग) , 189 , 190, 191 , 192 , 177 , 178 , 179 , 180, 181 , 182, 183 , 184, 185, 186,

194(भाग ) , 195(भाग) , 207 , 221 (भाग ) , 223 (भाग) , 224(भाग ), 234(भाग) , 235 (भाग) , 193 (भाग ) ,

237 , 238 , 239 , 240 , 241 , 242(भाग) , 243, 244, 245 , 246, 247 , 248, 249, 250 , 251 , 236(भाग) ,

255 , 256, 257 , 258 , 259, 260 (भाग ) , 261 , 262, 263, 264, 265 , 266 , 267 , 268 , 252, 253 , 254 ,

277 , 278 , 279, 280, 281 , 282, 283 , 284, 285, 286, 269 , 270 , 271 , 272, 273 , 274 , 275 , 276,

290 , 291 , 292, 293 , 294, 295 , 296, 297 , 298 , 299, 300, 301 , 302, 303 , 304, 287, 288, 289 ,

308 , 309 , 310 , 311 , 312 , 313 , 314, 315 , 316 , 317 , 318 , 319 , 320 , 321 , 322, 305, 306, 307 ,

324 , 325 , 326 , 327 , 328 , 329, 330 , 331 , 332 , 333 , 334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 339, 340, 323 ,

342, 343 , 344 , 345 , 346, 347 , 348 , 349 , 350, 351 , 352, 353 , 354, 355, 356 , 357 , 358 , 341 ,

360 , 361 , 362, 363 , 364 , 365 , 366 , 367 , 368 , 369 , 370 , 371 , 372, 373 , 374 , 375, 376. 359, 428

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/ MAGHA 11 , 1925 [PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )] मौजा- मीरचैतारी थाना संख्या 11 , थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी, जिला - गोड्डा

11 (भाग) , 12 (भाग ) , 13 , 14, 15 ,16, 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22, 23 , 24 , 25, 26, 27 , 28 , 29, 30 , 31 , 32(भाग) , 52(भाग) , 53( भाग ) , 54 (भाग ) , 56,

55, 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62, 63 , 64, 65

(भाग) , 66

(भाग) , 67, 68, 69, 71

70, ( भाग) , 72( भाग) , 75, 76 (भाग) , 77, 78 , 80 ,

79, 81 , 82, 83 , 84, 85, 87 ,

86, 88 , 89 , 91 ,

90 , 92, 93 , 95 ,

94,

97,

96, 98, 99 , 100, 101 , 102 , 103 , 104, 105, 106 , 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 , 111 , 113 ,

112, 114, 115 , 116, 117, 118 , 119 , 120, 121 , 122, 123 , 124, 125, 126 , 127 , 128 , 129 , 130 , 131 , 132, 133 , 134, 135, 136 , 137,138 , 139 , 140 , 141 , 142, 143, 144, 145 , 146, 147, 148 , 149 , 150, 151 , 152, 153 , 154, 155, 156, 157 , 158 , 159, 160 , 161, 162, 163 , 164, 165 , 166 , 167 , 168 , 169 , 170, 171 , 172 , 173 , 174 , 175 , 176, 177, 178 , 179 , 180 , 181 , 182 , 183 , 184, 185 , 186 , 187 , 188 , 189, 190 , 191 , 192 , 193, 194, 195 , 196 , 197 , 198 , 199 , 200 , 201 , 202 , 203 , 204, 205 , 206, 207, 208 (भाग ) , 209 ( भाग) , 211 ( भाग) , 242(

भाग ) , 243 (भाग ) , 244(भाग) , 245, 246 , 247 , 248 , 249, 250 , 251 , 252, 253 , 254

(भाग) , 255, 256, 257 , 258 , 259 , 260 , 261 , 262, 263 , 264 , 265 , 266, 267 , 268 , 269 , 270 , 271 , 272 , 273 , 274, 275 , 276 , 277 , 278 , 279 , 280 , 281 , 282 , 283 , 284, 285, 286 , 287, 288 , 289 , 290 , 291 , 292, 293 , 294 , 295 , 296 , 297 , 298 , 299 , 300 , 301 , 302, 303 , 304, 305 , 306 , 307 , 308 , 309 , 310 , 311 , 312 , 313 , 314, 315 , 316 , 317 , 318 , 319 , 320 , 321 , 322, 323 , 324, 325, 326 , 327 , 328, 329 , 330 , 331 , 332 , 333 , 334, 335, 336, 337 , 338 , 339 , 340, 341 , 342, 343 , 344, 345 , 346, 347 , 348 , 349 , 350 , 351 , 352, 353 , 354, 355 , 356, 357 , 358 , 359 , 360, 361 , 362 , 363 , 364, 365 , 366 , 367 , 368 , 369 , 370 , 371 , 372 , 373 , 374, 375 , 376 , 377 , 378 , 379 , 380 (

भाग) , 382(

भाग) , 383 (भाग) , 384, 385, 387 ,

386, 388 , 389 , 390 , 391 , 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398 , 399 , 400 , 401 , 402 , 403, 404 , 405 , 406, 407 , 408 , 409 , 410 , 411 , 412, 413 , 414, 415 , 416, 417, 418 , 419 , 420 , 421 , 422, 423 , 424 , 425 , 426 , 427 , 428 , 429 , 430, 431 , 432, 433 , 434, 435 , 436 , 437, 438 , 439 , 440 , 441 , 442 , 443 , 444 , 445 , 446, 447 , 448 , 449 , 450 , 451 , 452, 453 , 454, 455 , 456, 457 , 458 , 459 , 460 , 461 , 462, 463 , 464, 465, 466 , 467, 468 , 469, 470, 471 , 472 , 473 , 474, 475 , 476 , 477 , 478 , 479 , 480 , 481 , 482, 483 , 484, 485 , 486( भाग) , 487, 488 , 489 , 490, 491 , 492, 493 , 494, 495 , 496 , 497, 498 , 499 , 500 , 501 , 502, 503 , 504, 505, 506 , 507 , 508 , 509 , 510 , 511 , 512 , 513 , 514, 515 , 516 , 517 , 518 , 519 , 520 , 521 , 522, 523 , 524 , 525 , 526 , 527 , 528 , 529 , 530 , 531 , 532 (भाग ) , 533 , 534, 535, 536(

भाग) , 537( भाग) , 538 (भाग ) , 539 ( भाग) , 540 (भाग) , 541 ( भाग ) , 542 (

भाग ) , 543 (भाग) .

मौजा - पोखरिया थाना संख्या 12 , थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी , जिला गोड्डा

49(भाग) , 50 (भाग) , 51 (भाग) , 56, 57 (भाग ) , 58 (भाग) , 59(भाग) , 60, 61 , 62 , 63 , 64, 65, 67,

66, 68 , 69, 70 , 71 , 72, 73, 74, 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82, 83 , 84, 86 ,

85, 87, 88 , 90 ,

89 , 91 (भाग ) , 92, 93 (भाग) , 94 (भाग) , 95( भाग) , 96, 97, 98 , 99 , 100 , 101 , 103 ,

102, 104 , 105 , 106 , 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 , 111 , 112 , 113 ,

115 ,

114, 116 , 117 , 118 , 119 , 120 , 121 , 122 , 123 , 124, 125, 126, 127 , 128 , 129 , 130 , 131 , 132, 133 , 134, 135 , 136 , 137 , 138 , 139 , 140 , 141 , 142, 143, 145 ,

144, 146 , 147 , 148 , 149 , 150 , 151 , 152, 153 , 154, 155 , 156, 157 , 158 , 159, 160 , 161, 162 , 163 , 164, 165 , 166 , 167 , 168 , 169 , 170 , 171 , 172 , 173 , 174 , 175 , 176 , 177 , 178 , 179, 180 , 181 , 182 , 183 , 184 , 185 , 186, 187 , 188 , 189 , 190 , 191 , 192, 193 , 194, 195, 196 , 197, 198 , 199 , 200 , 201 , 202 , 203 , 204( भाग ) , 205 , 206, 207, 208 , 209, 210 , 211 , 212, 213 , 214, 215 , 216 , 217 , 218 , 219 , 220 , 221 , 222 , 223 , 224, 225 , 226, 227 , 228 , 229 ( भाग) , 230, 429 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

231 (भाग ) , 232( भाग) , 234(भाग) , 241 (भाग) , 242(भाग ) , 243 , 244 , 245 , 246, 247 , 248 , 249, 250, 251 , 252 , 253 , 254 , 255 , 256 , 257 , 258 , 259 , 260 , 261 , 262 , 263 , 264 , 265, 266, 267, 268 , 269 , 270 , 271 , 272 , 273 , 274 , 275 , 276 , 277 , 278 , 279 , 280 , 281 , 282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 287 , 288 , 289,, 290 , 291 , 292, 293 , 294 , 295 , 296 , 297 , 298 , 299, 300, 301 ( भाग) , 302(भाग) , 303(भाग) , 304( भाग) , 305, 306 , 307 , 308 , 309 , 310 , 311 , 312 , 313 , 314, 315 , 316, 317, 318 , 319, 320, 321 , 322, 323 , 324 , 325, 326 , 327 , 328 (भाग) , 329(भाग) , 334(भाग) , 335(भाग) , 336(भाग) , 337 , 338, 339, 340, 341 (भाग) , 351 ( भाग ) , 352, 353 , 354(भाग) , 388(भाग):

मौजा - खेरासोल थाना संख्या 13 , थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी, जिला - गोड्डा

60(भाग) , 61 ( भाग ) , 64, 65, 66, 67, 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72(भाग) , 73 (भाग) , 83(भाग) , 85(भाग) , 86, 105 , 106 , 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 , 111 , 112 , 113 , 114 , 115 , 116 , 117 , 118 , 119 , 120 , 121 , 122, 123, 124 , 125 , 126 , 127 , 128 , 129, 130 , 131 , 132 , 133 , 134, 135 , 136 , 137 , 138, 139 , 140 , 177, 178 , 179 , 180 , 181 , 182 , 183 , 184, 185 , 186 , 187 , 188 , 189 , 190 , 191 , 192, 193 , 194 , 231 , 232, 233 , 234, 235 , 236 , 237 , 238 , 239 , 240 , 241 , 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247 , 248, 249, 250, 251 , 252 , 253 , 254 , 255 , 256 , 257 , 258 , 259 , 260 , 261 , 262, 263 , 264, 265, 266, 267, 268 , 269 , 270 , 271 , 272, 273 , 274 , 275 , 276, 277 , 278 , 279 , 280 , 281 , 282 , 283 , 284 , 87(भाग) , 88 , 89 ( भाग) , 93 ( भाग ) , 94(भाग) , 95, 96, 97, 98, 99(भाग) , 100 , 101 , 102 , 103 , 104, 141, 142 , 143 , 144 , 145 , 146 , 147 , 148 , 149 , 150 , 151 , 152, 153 , 154, 155 , 156 , 157 , 158 , 159, 160 , 161 , 162 , 163 , 164 , 165 , 166 , 167 , 168 , 169 , 170 , 171 , 172, 173 , 174 , 175 , 176 , 195, 196 , 197 , 198 , 199 , 200 , 201 , 202 , 203 , 204, 205 , 206, 207 , 208 , 209, 210 , 211 , 212, 213, 214 , 215 , 216 , 217 , 218 , 219 , 220 , 221 , 222 , 223 , 224 , 225 , 226 , 227 , 228 , 229, 230, 285 , 286 , 287 , 288 , 289 , 290 , 291 , 292, 293 , 294 , 295, 296 , 297 , 298 , 299 , 300 , 301 , 302, 303, 304 , 305 , 306 , 307 , 308, 309, 310 , 311 , 312 , 313 , 314 , 315 , 316 , 317, 318 , 319 , 320, 321 , 322 , 323 , 324, 325 , 326, 327 , 328 , 329 , 330, 331 , 332 ( भाग) , 333(भाग) , 334(भाग) , 335, 336, 337 , 338 , 339 , 340 , 341 , 342, 343 , 344 , 345 , 346 , 347, 348 , 349 , 350 , 351 , 352, 353 , 354, 355, 356, 357 , 358 , 359 , 360 , 361 , 362, 363 , 364 , 365 , 366 , 367 , 388 , 369 , 370, 371 , 372, 373 , 374 , 375 , 376 , 377 , 378 , 379 , 380, 381 , 382 , 383 , 384 , 385 , 386 , 387 , 386 , 389 , 390, 391 , 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397 , 398 , 399 , 400 , 401 , 402, 403, 404, 405 , 406 , 407, 408, 409, 410 , 411 , 412, 413 , 414(भाग) , 415 , 416, 417 , 418 , 419, 420 , 421 , 422, 423, 424 , 425, 426 , 427 , 428 , 429 , 430 , 431 , 432, 433 , 434, 435 , 436 , 437 , 438 , 439 , 440 , 441 , 442, 443, 444, 445 , 446 , 447 , 448 , 449 , 450 , 451 , 452, 453 , 454, 455 , 456 , 457, 458 , 459,460, 461, 462, 463 , 464, 465, 466, 467 , 468, 469 , 470 , 471 , 472, 473 , 474, 475, 476, 477 , 478, 479, 480 , 481 , 482, 483 , 484 , 485 , 486 , 487 , 488 , 489 , 490 , 491 , 492, 493 (भाग) , 494(भाग) , 496(भाग) , 498(भाग) , 499 , 500 , 501 , 502, 503 , 504, 505, 506 ( भाग) , 507 (भाग) , 508(भाग) , 509, 510 , 511 , 512 , 513 , 514 , 515 , 516 , 517 , 518 , 519, 520, 521 ( भाग) , 522(भाग) , 523 , 524, 525, 526, 527 , 528 , 529 , 530 , 531 , 532, 533 , 534 , 535 , 536 , 537 , 538 , 539 , 540 , 541, 542(भाग) , 543(भाग) , 544(भाग) , 577 (भाग) , 578 , 579, 580(भाग) , 581 , 582, 583 (भाग) , 584(भाग) , 598(भाग) , 600(भाग) , 614( भाग) , 615( भाग) , 682 ( भाग) , 683 ( भाग) , 684, 685, 686, 687, 688, 689, 690, 691 , 692, 693 , 694 , 695 , 696, 697, 698 , 699 , 700 , 701 , 702, 703 , 704, 705, 706 , 707 , 708 , 709, 710 , 711 , 712 ( भाग) , 713(भाग) , 714, 715( भाग) , 732(भाग) , 733, 734 , 735 , 736 , 737(भाग) , 738 (भाग) , 740 (भाग) , 741 , 742(भाग) , 743(भाग ) , 748 (भाग) , 749 (भाग) , 795(भाग) , 796 (भाग) , 797(भाग) .

430

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004 /MAGHA 11 , 1925 [PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) ] मौज़ा - बरा धामनी थाना संख्या 7 , थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी , जिला गोड्डा

24, 25, 1 , 2, 3 , 4, 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15, 16, 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22, 23, 26, 27, 28 , 29 , 30, 31 , 32, 33 , 34, 35, 36 , 37 , 38 , 39, 40 , 41 , 42, 43 , 44, 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52, 53 , 54, 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82, 83 , 84( भाग) , 85(भाग) , 86( भाग) , 87(भाग) , 88 (भाग) , 89 (भाग) , 91 (भाग) , 92, 93 , 94, 95 (भाग) , 96(भाग) , 97(भाग) , 98(भाग) , 297 (भाग) , 298 , 299(भाग ) , 305(भाग) , 306 , 307 ( भाग) , 310 ( भाग ) , 311 (भाग) , 312 ( भाग ) , 313 (भाग ) , 314 (भाग ) , 315, 316, 317 , 318 , 319 , 320 , 321 , 322 , 323 , 324, 325 , 326 , 327 , 328 , 329 , 330 , 331 , 332 , 333 , 334, 335 , 336, 337 , 338 , 339 , 340 , 341 , 342 , 343 , 344, 345 , 346 , 347 , 348 , 349 , 350 , 351 , 352 , 353 , 354 , 355 , 356 , 357 , 358 , 359 , 360 , 361 , 362, 363 , 364 , 365, 366, 367 , 368 , 369 , 370 , 371 , 372, 373 , 374, 375 , 376 , 377 , 378 , 379 , 380 , 381 , 382, 383, 384, 385( भाग) , 386(भाग) , 388 (भाग ) , 389 ( भाग) , 390 ( भाग) , 393 ( भाग) , 394( भाग ) , 395(भाग) , 397 (भाग) , 398 ( भाग) , 399 ( भाग) , 445(भाग) , 446 , 447 , 448 , 449, 450 , 451 , 452, 453 , 454, 455 , 456, 457 , 458, 459 , 460 , 461 , 462, 463 , 464 , 465 , 466, 467 , 468 , 469 , 470 (भाग) , 471 , 472 , 473 , 474 , 475 , 476 , 477 (भाग) , 478 (भाग) , 504 (भाग) .

मौजा - माको मादगी थाना संख्या 16, थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी, जिला - गोड्डा

16 (भाग) एवं 19 (भाग) .

ब्लाक संख्या 2

मौजा जोरधीया , थाना संख्या 1 , थाना लिटीपाड़ा, जिला पाकुड़

17 (भाग ) , 1 (भाग) , 2 (भाग ) , 5(भाग) , 7 (भाग) , 8 (भाग ) , 9 , 10 (भाग ) , 12, 13(भाग) , 14, 15(भाग) , 16,

18(भाग) , 19 , 20 ( भाग) , 21 ( भाग) , 22, 23, 24(भाग) , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34, 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43, 44, 45 , 46 , 47 , 48, 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54, 55 , 56 , 57, 58 ,

81 , 82, 83 , 84, 85 , 86, 87 , 88 , 89 , 90, 91 , 92 , 93 , 94, 95 , 96 , 97 , 98 , 99, 100 , 101 , 102 , 103 ,

121 , 104 , 105 , 106 , 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 , 111 , 112, 113, 114 , 115 , 116 , 117 , 118, 119, 120 ,

135,

153 ,

171 , 172, 173 , 174 , 175 , 176 , 177 , 178 , 179 , 180 , 181 , 182, 183 , 184 , 185 , 186 , 187 , 188 , 189 , 190 , 191 , 192 , 193 , 194 , 195 , 196 , 197 , 198 , 199 , 200 , 201 , 202 , 203, 204, 205, 206 , 207 , 208 , 209 , 210 , 211 , 212 , 213 , 214 , 215 , 216 , 217 , 218 , 219 , 220 , 221 , 222 , 223 , 224 , 225 , 226, 227 , 228 , 229 , 230 , 231 , 232 , 233 , 234, 235 , 236 , 237 , 238 , 239 , 240 , 241 , 242, 243 ,

261 ,

279 , 59, 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74, 75, 76, 77 , 78 , 79 , 80, 122, 123 (भाग) , 124( भाग) , 125( भाग ) , 126 (भाग) , 127 , 128 , 129 , 130 , 131 ( भाग) , 133 , 134, 136, 137 , 138 , 139 , 140 , 141 , 142, 143 , 144, 145 , 146 , 147 , 148, 149 , 150 , 151 , 152, 154(भाग) , 156, 157 , 158 , 159 , 160 , 161 , 162 , 163 , 164 , 165 , 166 , 167 , 168 , 169 , 170 , 244, 245 , 246 , 247 , 248 , 249 , 250 , 251 , 252 , 253 , 254 , 255 , 256 , 257 , 258 , 259 , 260 , 262, 263 , 264 , 265 , 266 , 267 , 268 , 269 , 270 , 271 , 272 , 273 , 274 , 275, 276 , 277 , 278 , 280 , 281 , 282, 283 , 284, 285, 286 , 287 , 288 , 289 , 290 , 291 , 292 , 293 , 294, 295 , 296 , 297 , 298 , 299 , 300 , 301 , 302, 303 , 304, 305 , 306 , 307 , 308 , 309 , 310 , 311 , 312, 313 , 314, 315 , 316 , 317 , 318 , 319 , 320 , 321 , 322 , 323 , 324 , 325 , 326 , 327 , 328 , 329 , 330 , 331 , 332, 333 , 334 , 335 , 336 , 337 , 338 , 339 , 340 , 341 , 342 , 343 , 344, 345 , 346 , 347 , 348 , 349 , 350 , 351 , 352, 353 , 354, 355, 356 , 357 , 358 , 359 , 360 , 361 , 362, 363 , 364 , 365 , 366 , 367 , 368 , 369 , 370 , 371 , 372 , 373 , 374 , 375 , 376 , 377 , 378 , 379 , 380 , 381 , 382 , 383 , 384, 385 , 386 , 387 , 431 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

388 , 389 , 390 , 391 , 392 , 393 , 394 , 395 , 396 , 397, 398 , 399, 400 , 401 , 402, 403 , 404, 405, 406, 407 , 408 , 409 , 410 , 411 , 412 , 413 , 414 , 415 , 416 , 417 , 418 , 419 , 420 , 421 , 422, 423 , 442 , 443 , 444 , 445 , 446 , 447 , 448 , 449 , 450 , 451 , 452, 453 , 454 , 455, 456, 457, 458 , 459, 478 , 479 , 480 , 481 , 482 , 483 , 484 , 485 , 486 , 487, 488 , 489 , 490 , 491 , 492, 493 , 494 , 495, 546 (भाग ) , 547 , 548 , 549 , 550 , 551 , 552 , 553 , 554 , 555 , 556 , 557 , 558 , 559 , 560 , 561,562 , 617 , 618 , 619 , 620 , 621 , 622 , 623 , 624 , 625 , 626 , 627 , 628 , 629 , 630 , 631 , 632 , 633 , 634, 635, 636 , 637 , 638 , 639 , 640 , 641 , 642 , 643 , 644 , 645 , 646, 647, 648 , 649 , 650 , 651 , 652, 689 , 690, 691 , 692, 693 , 694 , 695 , 696 , 697 , 698 , 699, 700 , 701 , 702 , 703 , 704 , 705 , 706, 707 , 708 , 709 , 710 , 711 , 712 , 713 , 714 , 715 , 716 , 717 , 718 , 719 , 720 , 721 , 722 , 723 , 724, 725 , 726 , 727 , 728 , 729 , 730 , 731 , 732 , 733 , 734 , 735 , 736 , 737 , 738 , 739 , 740 , 741 , 742 , 743, 744 , 745 , 746 , 747 , 748 , 749 , 750 , 751 , 752, 753 , 754 , 755 , 756 , 757 , 758 ,

424, 425 , 426 , 427 , 428 , 429 , 430 , 431 , 432 , 433 , 434 , 435 , 436, 437, 438 , 439, 440, 441 , 460 , 461 , 462 , 463 , 464 , 465 , 466 , 467 , 468 , 469 , 470 , 471 , 472 , 473 , 474, 475 , 476 , 477, 496, 497 , 498 , 499 , 500 , 501 , 502 , 503 , 504 , 505 , 506 , 507 , 508 , 509 , 510, 511 (भाग) , 513 (भाग ) , 514 ( भाग ) , 515 , 516 , 517 , 518 (भाग ) , 522 (भाग) , 523 , 524 ( भाग) , 525 (भाग ) , 526 (भाग) , 563 , 564 , 565 , 566 , 567 , 568 , 569 , 570 , 571 , 572 , 573 , 574 , 575 , 576 , 577 , 578 , 579, 580 , 581 , 582 , 583 , 584 , 585 , 586 , 587, 588 , 589 , 590 , 591 , 592 , 593 , 594, 595 , 596 , 597 , 598 , 599, 600 , 601 , 602, 603 , 604, 605, 606 , 607 , 608 , 609 , 610 , 611 , 612, 613 , 614 , 615, 616 , 653 , 654, 655 , 656 , 657 , 658 , 659 , 660 , 661 , 662, 663 , 664, 665 , 666, 667 , 668 , 669, 670. 671 , 672 , 673 , 674 , 675 , 676 , 677 , 678 , 679 , 680 , 681 , 682, 683 , 684 , 685 , 686 , 687 , 688 , 759 , 760 , 761 , 762 , 763 , 764 , 765 , 766 , 767 , 768 , 769 , 770 , 771 , 772, 773 , 774 , 775 , 776 , 777 , 778 , 779 , 780 , 781 , 782 , 783 , 784 , 785 , 786 , 787 , 788 , 789 , 790 , 791 , 792 , 793 , 794 , 795 , 796 , 797 , 798 , 799 .

मौजा - चोटा मुरजोड़ा, थाना संख्या 2, थाना लिटीपाड़ा, जिला पाकुड़

1 (भाग ) , 11 (भाग ) , 12(भाग ) , 13 (भाग) , 14 (भाग) , 16(भाग) , 17 (भाग ) , 18 (भाग) , 19 (भाग ) , 20 (भाग ) , 46(भाग ) , 47(भाग ) , 51 ( भाग ) , 59 ( भाग ) , 60( भाग ) , 61 (भाग ) , 62( भाग ) , 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68 , 69, 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74, 75 , 76, 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82, 83 , 84, 85 , 86, 87 , 88 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92, 93 , 94, 95 , 96 , 97, 98 , 99 , 100 (भाग) , 101 ( भाग ) , 102(भाग ) , 103, 104, 105 , 106 , 107 , 108 , 109 , 110, 111 , 112 , 113 , 114 , 115 , 116 , 117 , 118 , 119 , 120 (भाग) , 124(भाग) , 125 (भाग) , 126(भाग) , 127 , 128 , 129 , 130 , 131 , 132 , 133 , 134 , 135 , 136 , 137 , 138 , 139 , 140 , 141 , 142,

160 ,

176, 177 (भाग) , 178 (भाग ) , 179 ( भाग ) , 180 ( भाग) , 181 (भाग ) , 182(भाग) , 183 (भाग ) , 184(भाग ) , 185 (भाग) , 186(भाग) , 187 (भाग) , 188 (भाग) , 189, 190 , 191 , 192 , 193, 194, 195 , 196 , 197, 198 , 199, 200 ,

218, 201 , 202 , 203 , 204 , 205 , 206 , 207 , 208 , 209 , 210 , 211 , 212 , 213 , 214 , 215 , 216 , 217 ,

254 , 237 , 238 , 239 , 240 , 241 , 242 , 243 , 244, 245 , 246 , 247 , 248 , 249 , 250 , 251 , 252 , 253 ,

272 ,

290 ,

308 ,

326 , 143, 144, 145 , 146 , 147 , 148 , 149 , 150 , 151 , 152 , 153 , 154 , 155 , 156 , 157 , 158 , 159 , 161 , 162 , 163 , 164, 165 , 166 , 167 , 168 , 169 , 170 , 171 , 172, 173(भाग ) , 174, 175 , 219 , 220 , 221 , 222 , 223 , 224 , 225 , 226 , 227 , 228 , 229, 230 , 231 , 232 , 233 , 234 , 235 , 236 , 255 , 256 , 257 , 258 , 259 , 260 , 261 , 262 , 263 , 264 , 265 , 266 , 267 , 268 , 269, 270, 271 , 273 , 274 , 275 , 276 , 277 , 278 , 279, 280 , 281 , 282 , 283 , 284 , 285 , 286, 287, 288 , 289, 291 , 292 , 293 , 294 , 295 , 296 , 297 , 298 , 299 , 300 , 301 , 302 , 303 , 304 , 305 , 306, 307 , 309, 310 , 311 , 312 , 313 , 314 , 315 , 316 , 317 , 318 , 319 , 320 , 321 , 322 , 323 , 324 , 325, 327 , 328 , 329 , 330 , 331 , 332 , 333 , 334 , 335 , 336 , 337 , 338 , 339, 340 , 341 , 342, 343 , 344, 345, 346 , 347 , 348 , 349 , 350 , 351 , 352, 353 , 354, 355 , 356 , 357 , 358 , 359, 360 , 361 , 362, 173Gl /2 し、 432

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925 [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii )] 363 , 364 , 365 , 366 , 367, 368 , 369 , 370 , 371 , 372, 373 , 374, 375, 376, 377, 378 , 379 , 380 , 381 , 382 , 383 , 384 , 385 , 386 , 387, 388 , 389, 390 , 391 , 392 , 393 , 394, 395 , 396, 397 , 398 , 399 , 400 , 401 , 402 , 403 , 404, 405 , 406 , 407 , 408 , 409, 410 , 411 , 412 , 413 , 414, 415 , 416, 417, 418 , 419 , 420 , 421 , 422, 423 , 424 , 425, 426 , 427 , 428 , 429, 430 , 431 , 432, 433 , 434 , 435, 436 , 437 , 438 , 439 , 440 , 441 , 442, 443 , 444, 445 , 446 , 447 , 448 , 449 , 450 , 451 , 452 , 453, 454, 455 , 456 , 457 , 458 , 459 , 460 , 461 , 462 , 463 , 464, 465 , 466 , 467 , 468 , 469, 470 , 471, 42, 473 , 474 , 475 , 476 , 477 , 478 , 479 , 480 , 481 , 482 , 483, 484 , 485, 486 , 487, 488 , 489, 490 , 491 , 492 , 493 , 494, 495 , 496 , 497 , 498 , 499, 500 , 501 , 502, 503 , 504, 505 , 506 , 507 , 508 , 509 , 510 , 511 , 512 , 513 , 514, 515 , 516 , 517 , 518 , 519 , 520 , 521 , 522 , 523 , 524 , 525, 526 , 527 , 528 , 529 , 530 , 531 , 532 , 533 , 534, 535 , 536 , 537 , 538 , 539 , 540 , 541 , 542, 543, 544 , 545 , 546 , 547 , 548 , 549 , 550 , 551 , 552 , 553 , 554, 555 , 556 , 557, 558 , 559, 560 , 561 , 562, 563 , 564 , 565 , 566 , 567 , 568 , 569 , 570 , 571 , 572 , 573 , 574 , 575 , 576 , 577 , 578 , 579 , 580 , 581 , 582, 583 , 584 , 585 , 586 , 587 , 588 , 589 , 590 , 591 , 592, 593 , 594, 595, 596 , 597 , 598 , 599 , 600 , 601 , 602, 603 , 604, 605 , 606, 607 , 608, 609 , 610 , 611 , 612, 613, 614 , 615, 616 , 617 , 618 , 619 , 620 , 621 , 622 , 623 , 624, 625, 626 , 627 , 628 , 629, 630 , 631 , 632, 633 , 634 , 635 , 636, 637 , 638 , 639 , 640 , 641 , 642, 643 , 644, 645, 646 , 647, 648 , 649, 650 , 651, 652 , 653 , 654, 655 , 656 , 657 , 658 , 659 , 660 , 661 , 662, 663 , 664 , 665 , 666 , 667, 668 , 669 , 670. 671 , 672 , 673 , 674 , 675 , 676 , 677 , 678 , 679 , 680 , 681 , 682, 683 , 684, 685, 686 , 687, 688 , 689 , 690 , 691 , 692 , 693, 694, 695, 696, 697, 698 , 699 , 700 , 701 , 702 , 703 , 704 , 705 , 706 , 707 , 708 , 709 , 710 , 711 , 712 , 713 , 714 , 715 , 716 , 717 , 718 , 719 , 720 , 721 , 722 , 723 , 724 , 725 , 726 , 727 , 728 , 729 , 730 , 731 , 732 , 733 , 734, 735 , 736 , 737 , 738 , 739 , 740, 741 , 742 , 743 , 744 , 745 , 746 , 747 , 748 , 749 , 750 , 751 , 752 , 753 , 754 , 755 , 756 , 757 , 758 , 759 , 760 , 761 , 762 , 763 , 764 , 765 , 766 , 767 , 768 , 769 , 770 , 771 , 772, 773 , 774, 775, 776 , 777, 778 , 779 , 780 , 781 , 782 , 783 , 784 , 785 , 786 , 787 , 788 , 789 .

मौजा बड़ा मुरजोड़ा, थाना संख्या 3 , थाना लिटीपाड़ा, जिला- पाकुड़

2(भाग) , 3 , 4, 5, 6, 7 (भाग) , 8 ( भाग ) , 9, 10 , 11 , 12 , 13(भाग ) , 14(भाग) , 15, 16, 17 , 18 (भाग) , 220, 221 , 222 , 223 , 224 , 225 , 226 , 227 , 228 , 229 , 230 , 231 , 232 , 233 , 234, 235 , 236, 237 , 238 , 239 , 240 , 241 , 242 , 243 , 244, 245 , 246, 247 , 248, 249 , 250 , 251 , 252 , 253 , 254 , 255 , 21 (भाग) , 22, 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28, 29 (भाग) , 30, 31 (भाग) , 35( भाग) , 36(भाग) , 37(भाग) , 56( भाग) , 57 ( भाग ) , 58 ( भाग) , 59, 60, 61 , 62, 63 , 64, 65, 66( भाग) , 68 (भाग) , 69 (भाग ) , 70 , 71 , 72, 73 , 74, 75 , 76, 77, 78 , 79, 80, 81 , 82, 83 , 84( भाग ) , 92(भाग) , 93 (भाग) , 94(भाग) , 95 (भाग) , 96, 97 , 98 ( भाग ) , 99 ( भाग ) , 100 ( भाग ) , 101 , 102, 103 , 104 , 105 , 106 , 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 , 111 , 112, 113 , 114 , 115 , 116 , 117 , 118 , 119 , 120 , 121 , 122, 123 , 124 , 125 , 126 , 127 , 128 , 129 , 130 , 131 , 132 , 133 , 134 , 135 , 136 , 137, 138 , 139 , 140, 141 , 142, 143 , 144, 145, 146, 147 , 148, 149 , 150 , 151 , 152 , 153 , 154 , 155 , 156 , 157 , 158 , 159 , 160 , 161 , 162, 163 , 164 , 165 , 166 , 167 , 168 , 169 , 170 , 171 , 172 , 173 , 174 , 175 , 176 , 177 , 178 , 179 , 180 , 181 , 182 , 183 , 184, 185 , 186 , 187 , 188 , 189 , 190 , 191 , 192 , 193 , 194, 195 , 196 , 197 , 198 , 199 , 200 , 201 , 202, 203 , 204 , 205 , 206 , 207 , 208 , 209, 210 , 211 , 212, 213 , 214, 215 , 216 , 217 , 218 , 219 , 256, 257 , 258 , 259 , 260 , 261 , 262 , 263 , 264, 265 , 266, 267 , 268 , 269, 270 (भाग) , 271 (भाग ) , 272, 273 , 274 , 275 , 276 , 277 , 278, 279 , 280, 281 , 282, 283 , 284, 285 , 286 , 287 , 288 , 292 (भाग ) , 293 ( भाग ) , 294 (भाग ) , 300 (भाग ) , 313 ( भाग) , 316 (भाग ) , 317 (भाग ) , 318, 319, 320 , 321 (भाग) , 326 (भाग ) , 327 (भाग) , 328 (भाग) , 329, 330 , 331 , 332, 333 , 334, 335, 336 , 337 , 338 , 339, 340 , 341 , 342 , 343 , 344 , 345 , 346, 347 , 348 , 349 , 350 , 351 , 352 , 353 , 354, 355(भाग ) , 356(भाग) , 359 ( भाग ) , 360 , 361 , 362 , 363 , 364 , 365 , 366 , 367 , 368 , 369, 370 , 371 , 372 , 373 , 433 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

374, 375, 376 , 377 , 378 , 379 , 380 , 381 , 382, 383 , 384 , 385 , ' 386 , 387 , 388 , 389 , 390 , 391 , 392, 393 , 394, 395 , 396 , 397 , 398, 399, 400, 401 (भाग) , 410(भाग) , 411 (भाग) , 412, 413, 414, 450(भाग ) , 451 , 452, 453 ( भाग) , 454(भाग) , 455(भाग) , 456(भाग) , 457, 458, 459(भाग ) , 460 (भाग) , 415, 416 , 417 , 418 , 419, 420 , 422(भाग) , 423 (भाग) , 424(भाग) , 425 (भाग) , 432(भाग) , 449(भाग) , 464(भाग) , 465, 466, 467 , 468 , 469, 470 , 471 , 472 , 473 , 474 , 475, 476, 477 , 478 , 479, 480 , 481 , 482 , 483 , 484, 485 , 486 , 487 , 488 , 489 , 490 , 491 , 492, 493 , 494 , 495, 496, 497 , 498 , 499 , 500 , 501 , 502, 503 , 504 , 505, 506, 507 , 508 , 509 , 510 , 511 , 512 , 513 , 514, 515 , 516 , 517 , 518 , 519 , 520 , 521 , 522 , 523 , 524 , 525 , 526 , 527 , 528 , 529 , 530 , 531 , 532 , 533 , 534, 535, 536 , 537 , 538 , 539, 540 , 541 , 542, 543 , 544, 545 , 546 , 547 , 548 , 549 , 550 , 551 , 552 , 553 , 554 , 555 , 556 , 557 , 558 , 559, 560 , 561 , 562 , 563 , 564, 565 , 566, 567(भाग) , 568(भाग) , 569 , 570 , 571 , 572 , 573 , 574 , 575, 576 , 577 , 578 , 579 , 580 , 581 , 582 , 583 , 584 , 585 , 586 , 587 , 588 , 589 , 590 , 591 , 592 , 593 , 594 , 595 , 596 , 597 , 598 , 599 , 600 , 601 , 602 , 603, 604 , 605 , 606, 607 , 608 , 609 , 610 , 611 , 612 , 613 , 614 , 615 , 616 , 617 , 618 , 619 , 620 , 621 , 622 , 623, 624 , 625 , 626 , 627 , 628 , 629 , 630 , 631 , 632 , 633 , 634 , 635 , 636 , 637 , 638 , 639 , 640 , 641, 642 , 643 , 644 , 645 , 646 , 647 , 648 , 649 , 650 , 651 , 652, 653 , 654 , 655 , 656 , 657 , 658 , 659, 660, 661 , 662 , 663 , 664, 665 , 666 , 667 , 668 , 669 , 670 , 671 , 672 , 673 , 674, 675 , 676 , 677, 678 , 679 , 680 , 681 , 682, 683 , 684, 685 , 686 , 687 , 688 , 689 , 690 , 691 , 692 , 693 , 694 , 695, 696 , 697 , 698 , 699 , 700 , 701 , 702 , 703 , 704 , 705 , 706 , 707 , 708 , 709 , 710 , 711 , 712 , 713 , 714, 715 , 716 , 717 , 718 , 719 , 720 , 721 , 722, 723 , 724 , 725 , 726, 727 , 728 , 729 , 730 , 731 , 732 , 733 , 734, 735 , 736 , 737 , 738 , 739 , 740 , 741 , 742 , 743 , 744 , 745 , 746 , 747 , 748 , 749 , 750 , 751 , 752 , 753 , 754 , 755 , 756 , 757 , 758 , 759 , 760 , 761 , 762 , 763 , 764, 765 , 766 , 767 , 768 , 769, 770( भाग) , 771 , 772, 773( भाग) , 774(भाग) , 778( भाग) , 786( भाग) , 787(भाग) , 790(भाग) , 791 , 792 , 793 , 794 , 795 , 796 , 797 , 798 , 799 , 800 , 801 , 802 , 803 , 804, 805 , 806 , 807, 808 , 809 , 810 , 811 , 812 , 813 , 814, 815 , 816 , 817 , 818 , 819, 820 , 821 , 822(भाग) , 823 (भाग) , 824 (भाग ) , 825 (भाग) , 826, 827 (भाग) , 828 (भाग) , 829, 830, 831 (भाग) , 907 (भाग) , 915(भाग) , 916 (भाग) , 917 (भाग) , 918 , 919 , 920 , 921 , 922 (भाग) .

मौजा - सिमलोंग , थाना संख्या 4 , थाना लिटीपाड़ा, जिला पाकुड़ 8 (भाग) , 9 (भाग ) , 10(भाग) , 12(भाग) , 13 , 14, 15 , 16, 17 , 18, 19, 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26, 27, 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32, 33, 34(भाग) , 35(भाग) , 36, 37(भाग) , 39(भाग ) , 40 (भाग) , 44(भाग) , 45(भाग) , 46, 47, 48( भाग) , 49, 50, 51 , 52, 53 , 54, 55, 56, 57, 58(भाग) , 59 ( भाग) , 60 (भाग ) , 61 , 62, 63 , 64, 65, 66, 67, 68(भाग ) , 69 (भाग ) , 71 (भाग) , 72(भाग) , 73, 74(भाग) , 75, 76 , 77 , 78(भाग) , 79 (भाग) , 80 (भाग) , 82 (भाग) , 92(भाग) , 93 (भाग) , 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100 (भाग) , 126(भाग ) , 127 (भाग) , 128 (भाग) , 129 (भाग) , 130( भाग ) , 131 (भाग) , 132 (भाग ) , 174 (भाग ) , 200 (भाग ) , 201 (भाग) , 209 (भाग) , 210 , 211 , 212 , 213 , 214 , 215 , 216 , 217 , 218 , 219 (भाग) , 220 (भाग) , 221 (भाग) , 226(भाग ) , 227 (भाग ) , 233 (भाग) , 234, 235, 236 , 237 , 238 , 239, 240 , 241 , 242, 243 , 244, 245 , 246 , 247 (भाग) , 248 (भाग ) , 249 (भाग) , 250, 251 , 252, 253 (भाग) , 255 (भाग ) , 256(भाग) , 258 , 259 , 260 , 261 , 262, 263 (भाग ) , 264(भाग ) , 265 (भाग ) , 266 (भाग) , 276 (भाग) , 277 , 278 (भाग) , 279(भाग ) , 281 , 282, 283 , 284 , 285, 286 (भाग) , 287 (भाग) , 288, 289, 290, 291 , 292, 293 , 294, 295 (भाग) , 303 ( भाग) , 304, 305, 306, 307 (भाग) , 308 (भाग) , 309 (भाग) , 310 , 311 , 312, 313 , 314, 315, 316, 317 ( भाग ) , 318 , 319, 320, 321 (भाग) , 322 (भाग) , 325(भाग) , 331 (भाग) , 332, 333(भाग) , 334, 335 , 336, 337, 338 , 339 , 340 , 341 , 342, 343 , 344, 345 , 346 , 347 , 348 , 349 , 350, 351 , 352, 353 , 354, 355, 356, 357 (भाग) , 364, 365, 366 , 367 , 368 , 369 , 370 , 371 , 372 , 373 , 374 , 375 , 376, 377 , 378 , 379 , 380 , 381 , 382 , 383 , 384, 385, 386 , 387 , 388 , 389 , 390 , 391 , 392 , 434

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004 /MAGHA 11 , 1925

393 , 394 , 395 , 396 , 397, 398 , 399, 400( भाग) , 401 , 402 , 403 , 404, 405 , 406 , 407, 408 , 409 , 410, 411 , 412, 413 , 414 , 415 , 416 , 417 , 418 , 419 , 420 , 421 , 422 , 423 , 424, 425 , 426 , 427 , 428 , 429 , 430 , 431 , 432 , 433 , 434, 435, 436(भाग) , 437 ( भाग) , 438(भाग ) , 439( भाग) , 440 , 441 , 442, 443 , 444(भाग) , 449(भाग) , 450, 451 , 452( भाग) , 462(भाग) , 463(भाग) , 464 (भाग) , 465 , 466, 467, 468 , 469 , 470 , 471 , 472 , 473 , 474(भाग) .

मौजा - अमरबीटा , थाना संख्या 7 , थाना लिटीपाड़ा, जिला पाकुड़

1 (भाग) , 112 ( भाग) , 113 (भाग) .

मौजा वास बीता, थाना संख्या- 8 , थाना लिटीपाड़ा, जिला- पाकुड़ 1(भाग) , 2, 3 , 4(भाग) , 5( भाग) , 7( भाग) , 8 ( भाग) , 9(भाग) , 68(भाग) , 69(भाग) , 70, 71 , 72, 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84, 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92, 93 , 94, 95 , 96, 97 , 98 , 99 , 100 , 101 , 102 , 103 , 104 , 105 , 106 , 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 , 111 , 112 , 113 , 114 , 115 , 116, 117 , 118 , 119 , 120 , 121 , 122 , 123 , 124 , 125 , 126 , 127 , 128 , 129 , 130 , 131 , 132, 133 , 134(भाग) , 135, 136 , 137 , 138 , 139 , 140 , 141 , 142, 143 , 144, 145 , 146 , 147 , 148 , 149 , 150 , 151, 152, 153 , 154 , 155 , 156 , 157 , 158 , 159 , 160 , 161 , 162 , 163 , 164 , 165, 166 , 167 , 168 , 169 , 170 , 171 , 172 , 173 , 174 , 175 , 176 , 177 , 178 , 179 , 180 , 181 , 182 , 183 , 184 , 185 , 186 , 187(भाग) , 188, 189 , 190 , 191 , 192 , 193 , 194 , 195 , 196(भाग) , 197 ( भाग) , 198 ( भाग) , 206 , 207 , 208 , 209 .

मौजा मारगो , थाना संख्या 9 , थाना लिटीपाड़ा, जिला पाकुड़

1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7( भाग) , 9 ( भाग ) , 15( भाग) , 16( भाग) , 17 , 18(भाग) , 101 (भाग) , 102( भाग) , 103 , 104, 105 , 106 , 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 , 111 .

मौजा चोटा चटकम , थाना संख्या 10 , थाना लिटीपाड़ा, जिला पाकुड़

352(भाग) , 355 , 356 , 357 , 358 , 359, 360 , 361 , 362, 363 , 364 , 365 , 366 , 367 , 368 , 369 , 370 , 371 , 372 , 373 , 374 , 375 , 376 , 377 , 378 , 379 , 380 , 381 , 382 , 383 , 384 , 385 , 386 , 387 , 388 (भाग) , 389 ( भाग) , 402( भाग ) , 403(भाग) .

मौजा- धोवपाहाड़ , थाना संख्या 26 , थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी, जिला- गोड्डा

1 ( भाग) , 2 , 3 , 4, 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14, 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19, 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24, 25, 26. 27 ( भाग ) , 28 , 29, 30( भाग) , 31 , 32, 33 ( भाग) , 34( भाग) , 35(भाग) , 36( भाग) , 37( भाग) , 38 (भाग) , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45, 46(भाग) , 47( भाग) , 48 ( भाग ) , 49, 50 , 51 , 52, 53 , 54, 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64, 65, 66, 67(भाग ) , 68, 69(भाग) , 74( भाग) , 75( भाग) , 76 , 77 , 78, 79 ( भाग) , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85( भाग) , 94( भाग) , 95, 96 (भाग) , 97, 98 , 99, 100 (भाग) .

मौजा लाडा पाथर , थाना संख्या 27 , थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी, जिला - गोड्डा

72 ,

95 , 3 (भाग) , 4 , 5 , 6, 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14, 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19, 20 , 21 , 22, 23, 24, 25 , 26 , 27, 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34, 35 , 36 , 37, 38, 39 , 40 , 41 , 42, 43 , 44, 45, 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50, 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67, 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 73 , 74 , 75, 76, 77, 78 , 79 , 80 , 8.1 , 82, 83 , 84, 85, 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92, 93 , 94, 96, 97 , 98 , 99 , 100 , 101 , 102 , 103 , 104 , 105 , 106 , 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 , 111 , 112 , 113 , 114 , भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

435 115 , 116 , 117 , 118 , 119 , 120 , 121 , 122 , 123 , 124, 125 , 126, 127, 128 , 129 , 130 , 131 , 132 (भाग ) , 133 (भाग) , 134(भाग ) , 135 , 136, 137 , 138 , 139 , 140, 141 , 142, 143 , 144, 145, 146, 147 , 148 (भाग) , 150( भाग ) , 151 (भाग ) , 156 (भाग) , 161 , 162, 163 , 164, 165 (भाग ) , 166 (भाग) , 246(भाग ) , 247 (भाग ) , 248(भाग) , 249, 250 , 251 , 252, 253 , 254, 255 , 256 , 257 ( भाग) , 258 (भाग) , 259(भाग) , 260 (भाग ) , 261 (भाग ) , 286 , 287 , 288 , 289, 290, 291 , 292 , 293 , 294 , 295 , 296 , 297 , 299, 310 (भाग) .

सीमा विवरण

ब्लाक - 1 ( ए 1 - ए18)

ए1 - ए2 यह रेखा जो मौजा चोटापुरो संख्या 8 के थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी, जिला गोड्डा (झारखण्ड) संख्या 221 में ए1 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और मौजा के प्लाट संख्या 210 , 209 , 258 , 261 , 262, 267 , 268 , 153 से गुजरती हुई मौजा चोटापुरो सं ० 8 में प्लाट सं0 158 की पूर्वी सीमा में बिन्दु ए 2 पर मिलती है । ए2 एउ यह रेखा जो मौजा चोटापुरो संख्या 8 में ए2 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर संख्या158 , 157 , 156 एवं प्लाट सं 1 एवं 2 से गुजरती हुई चोटापुरो सं ० 8 के संख्या 01 के बिन्दु ' एउ ' पर मिलती है ।

ए ३ - ए4 यह रेखा जो मौजा चोटापुरो संख्या 8 के संख्या 01 में एउ बिन्दु से शुरु होकर सं 03 , 04 , 07 , 06 , 07,11 से गुजरती हुई मौजा चोटा पुरो संख्या 8 के प्लाट सं 11 में बिन्दु ' ए ' पर मिलती है । ए4 - ए5 यह रेखा जो मौजा चोटापुरो संख्या 8 के प्लाट सं 11 में ए4 बिन्दु से शुरु होकर और प्लाट सं 20 से गुजरती हुई तथा मौजा चोटापुरो सं 8 एवं गरिडीह सं 9 की साझा सीमा को पार करती हुई गरिडीह सं० 9 के प्लाट सं 0 22, 21 , 17, 15 , 10 , 11 एवं 1 से गुजरती हुई और मौजा पीपर जोरिया संख्या 10 एवं गरिडीह संख्या 9 की साझा सीमा में प्रवेश करती हुई और संख्या 24, 26 , 31 , 32, 34, 36 , 13 , 51 , 52 , 193 , 194 , 195 , 198 , 188 , 187 , 235 , 236 , 242 से गुजरती हुई प्लाट संख्या 242 मौजा पीपर जोरिया संख्या 10 में ए5 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ए5 - ए6 यह रेखा जो कि मौजा पीपर जोरिया संख्या 10 प्लाट सं 242 में ए5 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और प्लाट संख्या 243 , 223, 260, 221 से गुजरती हुई और मौजा पीपर जोरिया संख्या 10 एवं मीरचैतारी संख्या 11 के साझा सीमा रेखा में प्रवेश करती हुई , और प्लाट संख्या 11 , 12 , 11 , 32 , 75 , 76 , 72 , 71 , 67 , 66 , 64, 53 , 52, 209, 208 , 211 , 243 , 242 से गुजरती हुई मौजा मीरचैतारी और संख्या 11 के संख्या 254 में ए6 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ए6 - ए7 यह रेखा मौजा मार चैतारी संख्या 11 , सं0 254 में ए6 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और मौजा पोखरिया संख्या 12 एवं मार चैतारी संख्या 11 की साझा सीमा को पार करती हुई और प्लाट संख्या 243 , 242 , 241 , 234 , 232 , 231 , 229 , 59 , 58 , 57 , 55 , 51 , 50 , 49 , 91 , 93 से गुजरती हुई मौजा पोखरिया संख्या 12 के प्लाट संख्या 94 में ए7 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ए7 - ए४ यह रेखा मौजा पोखरिया संख्या 12 में ए7 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और प्लाट संख्या 94 , 95 से गुजरती हुई और मौजा खेरासोल संख्या 13 एवं पोखरिया संख्या 12 की साझा सीमा रेखा में प्रवेश करती हुई प्लाट संख्या 85 , 89 , 90 , 92, 93 , 94 , 83 , 74, 73 , 72 , 60 , 62, 64 , 336 , 542, 544 , 577 , 588 , 584, 597 से गुजरती हुई मौजा खेरासोल संख्या 13 और प्लाट संख्या 531 में ए४ बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ए४ ए१ यह रेखा मौजा खेरासोल सं0 13 , सं 0 531 में ए 8 बिन्दु से आंरभ होकर और प्लाट सं0 698 , 600 , 614 , 522, 521 , 615 , 508 , 507 , 506 , 630 , 498, 496 , 494, 493, 683 , 682, 715 , 713 , 712 , 732 , 738 , 740 , 749 , से गुजरती हुई प्लाट सं0 748 में ए 9 बिन्दु पर मिलती है । 436

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925 [ PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] ए9 - ए 10 यह रेखा मौजा खेरासोल संख्या 13 , प्लाटं संख्या 748 में ए9 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और संख्या 742, 737 , 743 , 755 से गुजरती हुई और गुमानी नदी के पश्चिमी किनारे को पार करती हुई खेरासोल संख्या 13 , प्लाट संख्या 795 बिन्दु में पर मिलती है ।

ए10 ए 11 यह रेखा मौजा खेरासोल संख्या 13 गुमानी नदी प्लाट संख्या 795 में ए 10 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और प्लाट संख्या 795, 796 से गुजरती हुई और गुमानी नदी के पश्चिम किनारे के पार कर प्लाट संख्या 414 में प्रवेश करते हुए और प्लाट संख्या 334, 333 , 332, से गुजरते हुए और पुनः गुमानी नदी को पार करते हुए तथा प्लाट संख्या 124 गुमानी नदी से गुजरती हुई ए 11 बिन्दु पर मिलती है । ए 11 - ए 12 यह रेखा गुमानी नदी एवं मौजा खेरासोल संख्या 13 के प्लाट संख्या में 124 में ए 11 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और गुमानी नदी के पूर्वी किनारे एवं मौजा चोटा मुर जोरा संख्या 2 की साझा सीमा रेखा से गुजरती हुई तथा प्लाट संख्या 46, 47, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 14, 13, 12, 11 से गुजरती हुई फिर गुमानी नदी के पूर्वीतट और मौजा चोटा मुरजोरा संख्या 2 की साझा सीमा रेखा को पार करती हुई गुमानी नदी से होकर प्लट संख्या 388 में ए12 विन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ए12 - ए13 यह रेखा ए 12 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर प्लाट संख्या 301 , 302, 303, 329, 328, 334, 335, 336, 341, 351 , 354 से गुजरती हुई और मौजा पोखरिया संख्या 12 एवं मिरचैतारी संख्या 11 की साझा सीमा रेखा से होकर प्लाट संख्या 485, 486, 543, 542, 541 , 540, 549, 538, 537, 536 से गुजरती हुई और गुमानी नदी के पश्चिम किनारे को पार करती हुई प्लाट संख्या 582 में ए13 विन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ए13 ए 14 यह रेखा जो गुमानी नदी मौजा मारचैतारी संख्या 11 में ए 13 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर गुमानी नदी के प्लाट संख्या 582 गुमानी नदी के पश्चिम किनारे को पार करती हुई इसी मौजा के प्लाट संख्या 382, 383 , 381 से गुजरती हुई तथा पर मिलती है मौजा मारचैतारी संख्या 11 एवं पीपर जोरिया संख्या 10 के साझा सीमा रेखा के बिन्दु 14 पर मिलती हैं ।

ए14 - ए15 यह रेखा ए 14 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर मौजा गरिडिह संख्या 9 में प्रवेश करते हुए, प्लाट संख्या 667, 668, 805 से गुजरती हुई, प्लाट संख्या 668 को पार करते हुए तथा प्लाट संख्या 701 , 714, 713, 716, 720 , 721 , 668 , 814 , 798 , 796, 795 , 791 , 790, 787, 785, 782, 787, 780, 778, 777, 775, 789, 771 से गुजरती हुई और मौजा गरिडिह संख्या 9 एवं बड़ा धामनी संख्या 7 की साझा सीमा रेखा से गुजरती हुई और प्लाट संख्या 89, 91 , 95, 96, 97, 98, 85 से गुजरती हुई मौजा बड़ा धामनी संख्या 7 में ए 15 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ए 15 - ए 16 यह रेखा मौजा बड़ा धामनी संख्या 7, प्लाट संख्या 84 में ए 15 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और प्लाट संख्या 230 , 223 , 232 , 233 की उत्तरी सीमा में से गुजरती हुई, प्लाट संख्या 318, 239, 314, 313 , 312, 311 , 310 , 307 , 305, 304, 303 , 301 , 299 , 297, 385, 386, 388, 389 , 390, 395, 397, 398, 375, 445, 504 से गुजरती हुई मौजा बडा धामनी संख्या 7 के ए 16 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ए16 - ए 17 यह रेखा मौजा बड़ा धामनी के 07 प्लाट संख्या 504 में ए16 विन्दु से शुरू होकर के और प्लाट संख्या 504 से गुजरती हुई ए 17 बिन्दु पर मिलती है । 437 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माष 11 , 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

ए17- ए 18 यह रेखा मौजा बड़ा धामनी संख्या 7 के ए 17 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर प्लाट संख्या 504, 570, 477, 471 , 478 से गुजरती हुई मौजा माको माधगी संख्या 16 की साझा सी रखा मे प्रवेश करती हुई और माधगी संख्या 16 के और प्लाट संख्या 19, 18 , 16 से गुजरती हुई मौजा चोटा पुरो संख्या 8 एवं माको साझा सीमा रेखा से गुजरती हुई और मौजा चोटा पुरो संख्या 8 के प्लाट संख्या 1056 के ए 18 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ए18- ए1 यह रेखा मौजा चोटा पुरो संख्या 8 के प्लाट संख्या 1056 में ए 18 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर प्लाट संख्या 215, 213 , 212 , से गुजरती हुई प्लाट संख्या 221 मौजा चोटा पुरो संख्या, थाना सुन्दर पहाड़ी, जिला गोड्डा 8 में ए 1 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

सीमा विवरण ब्लाक - 2 ( बी 1 बी 27 )

बी1 बी2 यह रेखा मौजा बड़ा धामनी संख्या 7, थाना सुन्दर पहाड़ी , जिला - गोड्डा, प्लाट संख्या 100 के बी1 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर प्लाट संख्या 100 , 101 , 102 , 103 से गुजरती हुई और गुमानी नदी के पुर्वी किनारे को पार करती हुई, प्लाट सं0 1175 से गुजरती हुई और प्लाट संख्या 1161 , 1162, 1165 के दक्षिणी सीमा से गुजरती हुई, गुमानी नदी के दक्षिणी किनारे को पार करती हुई और मौजा - जोरडीहा संख्या 1 में प्रवेश करती हुई , प्लाट संख्या 525 , 526 से गुजरती हुई मौजा जोरडीहा संख्या 1 थाना - लिट्टीपाड़ा, जिला पाकुड़ के प्लाट संख्या में 521 बिन्दु बी 2 पर मिलती हैं । बी2- बी3 यह रेखा मौजा जोरडीहा संख्या 1 के प्लाट संख्या 521 में बी 2 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और प्लाट संख्या 522 , 524 , 518, 514, 513 , 511 , 510, 545 से गुजरती हुई मौजा जोरडीहा सं ० 1 के प्लाट संख्या 545 में बीउ बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

बी3 बी4 यह रेखा मौजा जोरडीहा संख्या 1 प्लाट संख्या 545 में बिन्दु बी3 के से शुरू होकर और प्लाट संख्या 551 , 787 से गुजरती हुई, जोरडीहा संख्या 1 एवं छोटा चटकम संख्या 10 की साझा सीमा रेखा को पार करती हुई प्लाट संख्या 353, 354 के पश्चिमी सीमा से गुजरती हुई और प्लाट संख्या 342, 403 , 402, 488, 402 से गुजरती हुई, मौजा छोटा चटकम संख्या 10 एवं मोरगो संख्या 9 की साझा सीमा रेखा से गुजरती हुई प्लाट संख्या 8, 9, 15, 18 से गुजरती हुई मौजा मारगो संख्या 9 में बी4 विन्दु पर मिलती है ।

बी4- बी 5 यह रेखा मौजा मारगो संख्या 9 में बी4 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और प्लाट संख्या 102 , 101 , 01 से गुजरती हुई, मौजा मारगो संख्या 9 एवं बांसभीटा संख्या 8 की साझा सीमा रेखा को पार करती हुई प्लाट संख्या 187 , 191 से गुजरती हुई बी5 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

बी5 - बी6 यह रेखा मौजा बांसवीथा संख्या 8 में बी5 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर इसी मौजा की प्लाट संख्या 205, 68, 69, 70 एवं प्लाट संख्या 25 के उत्तरी पूर्व किनारे से गुजरती हुई और प्लांट संख्या 9, 8, 4, 5, 1 से गुजरती हुई और मौजा बांशबीटा संख्या 8 एवं जोरडीहा की साझा सीमा रेखा को पार करती हुई और जोरडीहा संख्या 1 के प्लाट संख्या 731 से गुजरती हुई बी6 बिन्दु पर मिलती है । 438

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004 /MAGHA 11 , 1925 [PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii )] बी6- बी7 यह रेखा मौजा जोरडीहा संख्या 01 में बी6 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर मौजा अमरबीथा संख्या 7 एवं जोरडीहा संख्या 1 की साझा सीमा रेखा को पार करती हुई और मौजा अमरबीथा के प्लाट संख्या 1 से गुजरती हुई बी 7 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

बी7 - बी 8 यह रेखा मौजा अमरबीटा संख्या 7 में बी7 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर प्लाट संख्या 1 , प्लाट संख्या 111 की पश्चिमी सीमा से गुजरती हुई, प्लाट संख्या 112 , 113 , 01 से गुजरती हुई मौजा अमरबीथा संख्या 7 में बी8 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

बी8 बी9 यह रेखा मौजा अमरबीथा संख्या 7 में बी 8 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और मौजा बड़ा मुरजोरा संख्या 3 एवं अमरबीथा संख्या 7 की साझा सीमा रेखा में प्रवेश करते हुई , प्लाट संख्या 922 , 920, 917, 918 , 831, 828 , 827, 825, 823 , 822 , 790 , 787, 786, 778, 770, 773, 774, 432, 468 , 567 , 464, 460, 459 से गुजरती हुई प्लाट संख्या 448 में बिन्दु बी9 पर मिलती है ।

बी9 - बी10 यह रेखा मौजा बड़ा मुरजोरा संख्या 3 के प्लाट संख्या 448 में बी9 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर , प्लाट संख्या 455, 453, 450, 424, 422, 410, 411 , 401 , 359, 355, 356 से गुजरती हुई और बड़ा मुरजोरा संख्या 3 एवं मौजा सिमलोंग संख्या 4 की साझा सीमा रेखा को पार करती हुई प्लाट संख्या 37, 38, 40, 35, 34, 45, 48, 69, 68, 67, 72 से गुजरती हुई बिन्दु बी 10 पर मिलती है। बी10 बी11 यह रेखा में मौजा सिमलोंग संख्या 4 के प्लाट संख्या 101 में बी10 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर, प्लाट संख्या 100, 101 , 256, 257, 255 , 253, 249, 247, 248, 257 , 126 , 127, 128 , 132, 133, 174, और 432, से गुजरती हुई मौजा सिमलोंग सं0 4 के प्लाट सं0 558 में बी 11 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

बी11 बी12 यह रेखा मौजा सिमलोंग संख्या 4 के प्लाट संख्या 558 में बी 11 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर प्लाट संख्या 559 में बी 12 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

बी 12 बी13 यह रेखा मौजा सिमलोंग संख्या 4 में बी12 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर , प्लाट संख्या 559, 342, 174, 132, 130, 129, 257, 248 , 247 से गुजरती हुई बी13 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

बी13 बी14 यह रेखा मौजा सिमलोंग संख्या 4 के प्लाट संख्या 247 में बी13 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर , प्लाट संख्या 247, 238 , 227, 226, 220, 221 , 219 , 200 , 201 , 295 , 296, 297, 309, 307 से गुजरती हुई बी14 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

बी14 बी15 यह रेखा मौजा सिमलोंग संख्या 4, प्लाट संख्या 307 में बी14 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर, प्लाट संख्या 308, 303 , 333 , 486, 483, 491 , 492, 481, 436, 437, 438 , 440 , 444, 449, 452, 464, 463, 468, 472, 543, 400, 615 से गुजरती हुई और लादा नदी को पार करती हुई, मौजा सिमलोंग संख्या 4 एवं लादापाथार संख्या 27 की साझा सीमा रेखा पर बी15 बिन्दु पर मिलती है । बी15 बी16 यह रेखा जो साझा सीमा में बी 15 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और मौजा लादापाथार संख्या 27 के प्लाट संख्या 167 166, 165, 156, 151 , 150 , 148, 134, 133 , 247, 256, 257, 258 से गुजरती हुई प्लाट संख्या 261. में बी 16 बिन्दु पर मिलती है । 439 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

बी16 - बी17 यह रेखा जो मौजा लादा पाथार संख्या 27 के प्लाट संख्या 261 में बी18 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और प्लाट संख्या 261 , 260, 310, 300 से गुजरती हुई, लादा पाथार संख्या 27. एवं धोपहाक संख्या 26 की साझा सीमा रेखा से गुजरती हुई और प्लाट संख्या 262, 87, 69, 74, 75 से गुजरती हुई प्लाट संख्या 100 में बी 17 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

बी17 - बी18 यह रेखा जो मौजा धोपहाड़ संख्या 26 के प्लाट संख्या 100 में बी17 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और प्लाट संख्या 100 , 96, 94, 79, 85 से गुजरती हुई बी 18 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

बी18 - बी 19 यह रेखा जो मौजा धोपहाड़ संख्या 26 एवं गुमानी नदी के दक्षिणी किनारे की साझा सीमा रेखा के बी18 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और गुमानी नदी से गुजरती हुई तथा मौजा धोपहाड़ संख्या 26 के प्लाट संख्या 48, 47 , 46, 37, 36, 38, 35, 34, 33, 30, 208 से गुजरती हुई, धोपहारु संख्या 26 एवं मौजा लादा पाथर संख्या 27 की साझा सीमा रेखा को पार करती हुई और गुमानी नदी से गुजरती हुई लादापाथार संख्या 27 के प्लाट संख्या 3 , गुमानी नदी के दक्षिणी तट पर बी19 विन्दु पर मिलती है ।

बी19 बी20 यह रेखा जो मौजा लादापाथार संख्या 27 के प्लाट संख्या 3 में बी 19 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और मौजा लादापाथार संख्या 27 एवं सिमलोंग संख्या 4 के साझा सीमा रेखा से गुजरती हुई, प्लाट संख्या 363 , 357 , 356, 331 , 321 , 322 , 317, 280, 278, 276, 286, 287, 265, 264, 263, 92, 93, 78, 79, 80 से गुजरती हुई मौजा सिमलोंग संख्या 4 में प्लाट संख्या 60 के पश्चिमी किनारे पर बी20 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

बी20 - बी21 यह रेखा बी 20 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर प्लाट संख्या 60, 58, 8,9, 12 से गुजरती हुई और मौजा सिमलोंग संख्या 4 एवं बड़ा मुरजोरा संख्या 3 की साझा सीमा रेखा में प्रवेश करते हुई प्लाट संख्या 326, 328, 321 , 317, 316 से गुजरती हुई बी21 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

बी21 - बी 22 यह रेखा में मौजा बड़ा मुरजोरा संख्या 3 के प्लाट संख्या 317 में बी21 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और प्लाट संख्या 313 , 270 , 271 , 300 , 294, 293, 292, 289 से गुजरती हुई गुमानी नदी में बी22 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

बी22 - बी23 यह रेखा गुमानी नदी में बी22 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और मौजा बड़ा मुरजोरा संख्या 3 एवं छोरासोल संख्या 13 की साझा सीमा रेखा को पार करती हुई तथा मौजा बड़ा मुरजोरा संख्या 3 के प्लाट संख्या 284 , 223 , 101 , 100, 99, 98, 94, 93, 92, 84, 69, 68, 66, 56 से गुजरती हुई बीं23 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

बी23 - बी24 यह रेखा मौजा बड़ा मुरजोरा संख्या 3 के प्लाट संख्या 57 में बी23 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और प्लाट संख्या 58, 29, 42, 37, 38, 35, 31 , 32, 21 , 19, 14, 13, 8, 5, 2 एवं मौजा बड़ा मुरजोरा संख्या 3 एवं छोटा मुरजोरा संख्या 2 की साझा सीमा में प्रवेश करती हुई और प्लाट संख्या 188, 187, 186, 185, 184 , 183 , 182, 181 , 180, 179, 178 , 177, 173 से गुजरती हुई प्लाट संख्या 125 में बि24 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

173 Gl/20044 440

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004 / MAGHA 11 , 1925 [ PART II- SEC. 3 (ii )] बी24 बी25 यह रेखा मौजा छोटा मुरजोरा संख्या 2 के प्लाट संख्या 125 में बी24 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और प्लाट संख्या 126, 125, 120 , 123, 102, 101 , 100, 123, 61 , 60, 58, 59, 51 से गुजरती हुई मौजाछोटा गुरजोरा संख्या 2 के प्लाट संख्या 792 में बी25 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

बी25 बी26 यह रेखा मौजा छोटा मुरजोरा संख्या 2 के प्लाट संख्या 792 में बी25 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और प्लाट संख्या 792 से गुजरती हुई तथा मौजा जोरडीहा संख्या 1 एवं छोटा मुरजोर संख्या 2 की साझा सीमा पार करते हुई और प्लाट संख्या 731 , 154, 270, 131 से गुजरती हुई प्लाट संख्या 270 में बी26 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

बी26 - बी27 यह रेखा मौजा जोरडीहा संख्या 1 के प्लाट संख्या 270 में बी26 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर और प्लाट संख्या 270, 126, 124, 7, 8, 10, 11 , 5 से गुजरती हुई प्लाट संख्या 4 के पूर्वी कोने पर बी27 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

बी27 - बी1 यह रेखा मौजा जोरडीहा संख्या 1 के प्लाट संख्या 4 में बी27 बिन्दु से शुरू होकर , मौजा जोरडीहा संख्या 1 प्लाट संख्या 3, 5, 2 , 13, 15, 17,19, 20, 21 , 24 से गुजरती हुई एवं मौजा जोरडीह संख्या 1 और गरीडीह संख्या 9 की साझा सीमा रेखा प्रवेश करती हुई, गुमानी नदी से गुजरती हुई, मोजां बड़ा धामनी संख्या 7 एवं गरीडीह संख्या 9 की साझा सीमा को पार करते हुई मौजा धामनी संख्या 7 थाना - सुन्दर पहाड़ी, जिला गोड्डा प्लाट संख्या 100 में बी 1 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

[ संख्या-43015/10/2002- पी० आर ० आई ० डब्ल्यू० ] संजय बहादुर, निदेशक

MINISTRY OF COAL

New Delhi , the 22nd January, 2004

S.O. 237.--Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal number S.O. 1253 dated the 21.04.2003 issued under sub -section ( 1 ) of section 4 of the Coal Bearing Area (Acquisition and Development ) Act , 1957, (20 of 1957) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and published in the Gazette of India , in Part II , Section 3 , Sub- section (ii ) dated 26.04.2003 , the Central Government gave notice of its intention to prospect for Coal in 1463.433 hectares ( approximately) of lands in the locality specified in the schedule annexed to that notification .

And, whereas the Central Government is satisfied that coal is obtainable from the said lands ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the power conferred by sub -section ( 1) of section 7 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby gives notice of its intention to acquire the lands measuring 1463.433 hectares ( approximately) and all rights as described in the schedule annexed hereto:

Note 1: The plan bearing number ECL/ CHUB/MOUZA/04 Dated 04.08.2003 of the area covered by this notification may be inspected in the office of the Dy. Commissioner, District, Godda & Pakur (Jharkhand ) ) , or in the office of the Coal Controller, 1 , Council House Street, Kolkata -700 001 , or in the office of the Director Technical ( Operation ) , Eastern Coalfields Limited, Sanctoria , Post Office Dishergarh , Dist. Burdwan ( West Bengal ) . Pin Code Number - 713 333 .

[भाग II- खंण्ड 3 (ii) ]

441

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

Note 2: - Attention is hereby invited to the provisions of Section 8 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development ) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957 ) , which provides as follows: -

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

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

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

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

Note 3 : The Coal Controller, 1 , Council House Street, Kolkata - 700001 , has been appointed by the Central Government as the competent authority under the Act .

Schedule

BLOCK - First and Second

Chuperbhita Block ( Rajmahal Coalfields )

Block

Thana No.

Mouza village

SI . No

Chota Puro No

1st

9 2 Garidih No.

10 3 Piperjoria No.

11 4 Mirchaitari No.

12 5 Pokharia No.

13 6 Kherasole No.

7 7 Bara Dhamni No.

8 Mako -Madgi 16

Remarks

Area Hect.

District

Police station

152.640

Godda

Sundar Pahari

92.790

Godda

Sundar- Pahari

37.100

Godda

Sundar Pahari

89.400

Godda

Sundar Pahari

53.624

Godda

Sundar Pahari

103.272

Godda

Sundar- Pahari

47.120

Godda

Sundar- Pahari

1.142

Godda

Sundar- Pahari 442

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/ MAGHA 11 , 1925 [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii )] 1

2nd

Jordiha No.

Pakur 359.856

1 Littipara

157.840

6 Basbita No.

Pakur 57.720

Littipara

Margo No.

27.260

Littipará

Pakur

16.640

Littipara Pakur

Chota Chatkam No.

Godda

Dhouphar No.

22.856

Sundar

Pahari

Godda

28.710

10 Lada pathar

Sundar

Pahari

Grand Total = 1463.433

1463.433 Hectares . ( approximately )

Block No. 1

Plots to be acquired in Mouza Chotapuro Thana No.8 P.S. Sundarpahari Dist . Godda

1 ( P ) , 2( P ) , 3 ( P ) , 4( P ) , 5, 6 ( P ) , 7 (P ) , 8 , 9, 10, 11 ( P ) , 20( P) , 21 , 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 , 29, 30, 31 , 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49 , 50 , 51 , 52, 53, 54 , 55, 56, 57 , 58 , 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67 , 68 , 69 , 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81 , 82, 83, 84 , 85, 86, 87, 88, 89 , 90 , 91, 92, 93 , 94, 95 , 96 , 97 , 98 , 99, 100, 101, 102 , 103 , 104 , 105, 106 , 107, 108, 109, 110, 111 , 112 , 113 , 114 , 115, 116, 117, 118 , 119, 120, 121 , 122 , 123 , 124, 125 , 126 , 127, 128 , 129, 130, 131 , 132, 133 , 134, 135 , 136,

141, 142,

137,138, 139 , 140,

143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148 , 149, 150 , 151 , 152 , 153(P ) , 154 , 155 , 156( P) , 157(P ) , 158( P) , 208( P ) , 209 ( P) , 210 ( P ) , 211 , 213 (P ) , 214, 215, 216, 217, 218 , 219, 220 , 221 ( P ) , 222 , 223 , 224 , 225 , 226 , 227 , 228, 229 , 230, 231 , 232, 233 , 234 , 235, 236 , 237, 238 , 239, 240 , 241 , 242 , 243 , 244, 245 , 246, 247 , 248 , 249 , 250 , 251 , 252, 253 , 254, 255, 256 , 257 , 258 ( P ) , 261 ( P ) , 262 ( P ) , 263, 264, 265, 266,

268( P) ,

267( P ) ,

269, 270 , 271 , 272, 273, 274, 275, 276 , 277, 278 , 279, 280, 281 , 282, 283 , 284, 285, 286 , 287, 288, 289 , 290 , 291, 292, 293 , 294, 295, 296 , 297 , 298 , 299 , 300 , 301 , 302 , 303 , 304 , 305 , 306 , 307, 308, 309, 310, 311 , 312, 313 , 314, 315, 316, 317, 318, 319, 320, 321 , 322 , 323 , 324 , 325 , 326 , 327 , 328 , 329 , 330 , 331 , 332, 333 , 334, 335, 336, 337, 338 , 339 , 340, 341 , 343 , 344 ,

342,

348, 349 , 350 ,

345, 346, 347,

351 , 352, 353 , 354, 355, 356 , 357 , 358, 359, 361 ,

360 , 362, 363, 364 , 365 , 366, 367, 368 , 369, 370 , 371 , 372, 373 , 374 , 375 , 376, 377, 378 , 379, 380 , 381 , 382, 383 , 385 , 386 ,

384,

387,

390, 391 ,

388, 389,

393 ,

392 , 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399 , 400, 401, 402, 403 , 405, 406 ,

404,

408 , 409 , 410,

407 ,

411 , 412 , 413 , 414, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419 , 420 , 421 , 422 , 423 , 424, 426, 427 , 428,

425,

429, 430, 431 , 432, 433 , 435, 436,

434 ,

438 ,

437, 439, 440, 441 , 442, 443, 444, 447,

445, 446,

449, 450 , 451 ,

448 ,

452, 453 , 454 , 455, 456, 457, 458 , 460, 461,

459,

463,

462, 464,

465, 443 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

486,

507,

528 ,

611,

632,

653,

674 ,

695,

715,

735,

777,

798 ,

818 ,

839 ,

857,858 , 466, 467, 468 , 469, 470 , 471 , 472 , 473 , 474, 475, 476 , 477, 478, 479, 480, 481, 482, 483, 484, 485, 487, 488, 489 , 490, 491 , 492, 493, 494, 495, 496, 497, 498, 499, 500, 501 , 502, 503, 504, 505, 506 , 508, 509, 510 , 511 , 512, 513 , 514, 515, 516, 517, 518 , 519, 520 , 521 , 522, 523 , 524, 525, 526 , 527 , 529 , 530, 531 , 532 , 533 , 534 , 535, 536, 537 , 538 , 539, 540, 541 , 542, 543, 544, 545, 546, 547, 548, 549, 550 , 551 , 552 , 553 , 554 , 555, 556, 557, 558 , 559, 560, 561 , 562, 563 , 564 , 565, 566, 567 , 568 , 569, 570 , 571 , 572 , 573 , 574 , 575 , 576 , 577 , 578 , 579, 580, 581 , 582, 583, 584, 585, 586, 587, 588, 589, 590 , 591 , 592 , 593 , 594 , 595 , 596, 597, 598 , 599, 600, 601 , 602, 603 , 604, 605, 606, 607, 608, 609 , 610, 612 , 613 , 614, 615 , 616 , 617, 618, 619, 620 , 621 , 622, 623 , 624, 625, 626, 627 , 628, 629, 630 , 631 , 633 , 634 , 635 , 636 , 637 , 638 , 639 , 640 , 641 , 642, 643, 644 , 645, 646, 647 , 648 , 649 , 650, 651 , 652, 654 , 655 , 656 , 657 , 658 , 659 , 660 , 661 , 662, 663 , 664, 665 , 666, 667, 668, 669, 670, 671 , 672, 673, 675 , 676, 677 , 678 , 679 , 680 , 681 , 682 , 683 , 684, 685, 686, 687, 688, 689, 690, 691 , 692, 693, 694, 696 , 697, 698 , 699 , 700 , 701 , 702 , 703 , 704 , 705, 706, 707, 708, 709, 710, 711 , 712, 713 , 714 , 716 , 717 , 718 , 719 , 720 , 721 , 722 , 723, 724 , 725 , 726, 727 , 728, 729, 730 , 731, 732, 733, 734, 736 , 737, 738 , 739 , 740 , 741 , 742 , 743 , 744 , 745, 746 , 747 , 748, 749, 750, 751 , 752, 753 , 754 , 755, 756 , 757, 758 , 759 , 760 , 761 , 762 , 763 , 764, 765, 766, 767, 768 , 769, 770, 771 , 772, 773 , 774 , 775 , 776 , 778 , 779 , 780 , 781 , 782, 783 , 784 , 785 , 786 , 787 , 788, 789 , 790, 791 , 792, 793 , 794 , 795, 796, 797 , 799, 800, 801 , 802 , 803 , 804, 805, 806, 807, 808, 809 , 810, 811, 812, 813, 814, 815, 816, 817, 819, 820 , 821 , 822 , 823 , 824, 825, 826, 827, 828, 829, 830, 831, 832, 833, 834, 835, 836, 837, 838, 840, 841 , 842 , 843 , 844, 845, 846 , 847, 848 , 849 , 850 , 851 , 852, 853, 854, 855, 856 , 859, 860, 861 , 862 , 863 , 864, 865, 866, 867, 868, 869, 870 , 871, 872 , 873 , 874, 875, 876 , 877 , 878, 879, 880, 881, 882, 883, 884, 885 , 886, 887,

928 ,

949,

970,

1025,

1041,

1057,

1073 ,

1089, 888 , 889, 890, 891 , 892, 893, 894, 895, 896, 897, 898, 899, 900, 901 , 902, 903, 904, 905 , 906, 907, 908, 909 , 910, 911 , 912, 913, 914, 915 , 916, 917, 918 , 919 , 920 , 921, 922 , 923 , 924, 925, 926, 927, 929, 930, 931 , 932, 933 , 934, 935 , 936, 937, 938, 939, 940, 941 , 942, 943, 944, 945, 946, 947, 948 , 950 , 951 , 952, 953 , 954 , 955, 956, 857, 958 , 959 , 960, 961, 962, 963, 964, 965, 966, 967, 968 , 969, 971 , 972, 973 , 974, 975 , 976, 977, 978, 979, 980, 981, 982 , 983, 984, 985, 986, 987, 988, 989, 990, 991 , 992, 993, 994 , 995, 996, 997, 998 , 999 , 1000 , 1001 , 1002, 1003, 1004, 1005, 1006, 1007 , 1008, 1009 , 1010 , 1011 , 1012, 1013, 1014 , 1015, 1016, 1017, 1018, 1019, 1020, 1021, 1022, 1023 , 1024, 1026, 1027, 1028 , 1029 , 1030, 1031, 1032, 1033 , 1034, 1035 , 1036 , 1037 , 1038 , 1039 , 1040 , 1042, 1043 , 1044, 1045, 1046, 1047, 1048, 1049 , 1050 , 1051 , 1052 , 1053 , 1054, 1055, 1056, 1058 , 1059 , 1060 , 1061 , 1062 , 1063 , 1064 , 1065, 1066 , 1067 , 1068 , 1069 , 1070 , 1071 , 1072 , 1074, 1075 , 1076 , 1077, 1078, 1079, 1080 , 1081 , 1082, 1083 , 1084, 1085, 1086, 1087, 1088, 1090, 1091 , 1092 , 1093 , 1094, 1095, 1096, 1097, 1098, 1099, 1100, 1101, 1102 , 1103 , 1104, 1105.

Plots to be acquired in Mouza Garidih Thana No.9 P.S. Sundarpahari Dist . Godda

56, 57,

83, 84,

108 ,

129,

150 ,

171 , 1 (P) , 3 , 4 , 5, 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10(P ) , 11 (P ) , 15(P ) , 17(P ) , 18, 19 , 20, 21 , 22(P) , 23 , 24, 25 , 26 , 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 ,42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48 , 49, 50, 51 , 52, 53, 54, 55, 58 , 59, 60, 61 , 62 , 63, 64, 65 , 66 , 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73 , 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89 , 90 , 91 , 92 , 93, 94 , 95, 96, 97 , 98, 99, 100 , 101 , 102, 103 , 104, 105 , 106 , 107, 109, 110 , 111 , 112, 113 , 114, 115, 116, 117, 118 , 119, 120, 121 , 122, 123 , 124, 125, 126, 127 , 128, 130 , 131 , 132 , 133 , 134, 135 , 136, 137,138 , 139 , 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148 , 149, 151 , 152 , 153 , 154, 155 , 156 , 157, 158, 159 , 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169 , 170 , 172 , 173 , 174 , 175 , 176 , 177 , 178 , 179 , 180, 181 , 182, 183 , 184, 185 , 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191 , 192,.

444

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004 / MAGHA 11 , 1925 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

213 ,

234 ,

255 ,

276 ,

422,

442,

484,

505,

526 ,

547 , 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201 , 202, 203 , 204, 205 , 206 , 207, 208 , 209 , 210, 211 , 212 , 214, 215 , 216 , 217, 218 , 219, 220 , 221 , 222 , 223 , 224 , 225, 226 , 227 , 228 , 229 , 230 , 231 , 232 , 233 , 235 , 236 , 237 , 238 , 239 , 240 , 241 , 242 , 243 , 244, 245 , 246, 247 , 248 , 249 , 250 , 251 , 252, 253 , 254 , 256, 257 , 258 , 259, 260, 261 , 262, 263 , 264, 265, 266, 267, 268, 269 , 270, 271 , 272 , 273 , 274 , 275 , 277, 278 , 279 , 280, 281 , 282, 283 , 284, 285, 286 , 287, 288 , 289 , 290, 291 , 292, 293 , 294, 295 , 296, 297 , 298 , 299, 300, 301 , 302 , 303, 304 , 305, 306 , 307, 308, 309, 310 , 311, 312, 313 , 314 , 315, 316, 317, 318 , 319, 320 , 321 , 322, 323 , 324 , 325 , 326, 327 , 328 , 329 , 330 , 331 , 332, 333 , 334, 335 , 336 , 337 , 338 , 339 , 340, 341 , 342 , 343 , 344 , 345 , 346, 347, 348 , 349 , 350, 351 , 352, 353, 354, 355, 356 , 357, 358, 359, 360, 361, 362, 363 , 364 , 365 , 366 , 367 , 368, 369 , 370, 371 , 372 , 373 , 374, 375 , 376, 377 , 378, 379, 380, 381 , 382, 383 , 384, 385, 386, 387 , 388 , 389 , 390, 391 , 392, 393 , 394, 395 , 396, 397 , 398, 399 , 400, 401, 402, 403, 404, 405, 406, 407 , 408 , 409, 410, 411, 412, 413 , 414, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 423, 424, 425, 426, 427 , 428, 429, 430, 431, 432, 433, 434, 435, 436, 437, 438, 439 , 440, 441, 443,444, 445,446 , 447, 448 , 449 , 450 , 451 , 452, 453 , 454, 455 , 456, 457 , 458, 459 , 460 , 461 , 462, 463 , 464, 465 , 466 , 467, 468 , 469 , 470, 471 , 472, 473 , 474 , 475 , 476, 477, 478, 479 , 480 , 481 , 482, 483 , 485, 486, 487 , 488 , 489 , 490, 491, 492, 493, 494, 495, 496, 497 , 498 , 499 , 500, 501 , 502 , 503 , 504 , 506, 507, 508 , 509, 510 , 511 , 512 , 513 , 514 , 515 , 516 , 517, 518 , 519, 520, 521 , 522, 523 , 524, 525, 527 , 528 , 529 , 530 , 531 , 532, 533 , 534, 535 , 536, 537 , 538 , 539 , 540, 541 , 542, 543 , 544, 545 , 546, 548 , 549 , 550 , 551 , 552, 553 , 554 , 555, 556 , 557 , 558 , 559 , 560, 561 , 562, 563, 564, 565,

566 , 567 , 568 , 569 , 570, 571 , 572, 573 , 574 , 575 , 576 , 577 , 578 , 579 , 580, 581 , 582, 583, 584, 585, 586, 587 , 588 , 589 , 590, 591 , 592 , 593 , 594, 595 , 596, 597 , 598 , 599 , 600, 601, 602, 603, 604 , 605, 606, 607, 608 , 609 , 610 , 611 , 612 , 613 , 614 , 615, 616, 617, 618 , 619, 620, 621 , 622 , 623 , 624, 625, 626, 627, 628, 629, 630 , 631 , 632 , 633 , 634, 635, 636, 637, 638 , 639, 640, 641, 642, 643, 644, 645, 646, 647, 648, 649 , 650, 651 , 652, 653 , 654, 655 , 656 , 657, 658, 659, 660, 661 , 662, 663, 664, 665, 666, 667, 668, 669, 670, 671 , 672 , 673 , 674 , 675, 676, 677, 678 , 679 , 680, 681, 682, 683, 684,685, 686, 687 , 688, 689, 690, 691, 692, 693 , 694, 695, 696, 697 , 698, 699, 700 , 701 ( P ) , 702( P) , 703, 704, 705, 706, 707 , 708 , 709 , 710 , 711 , 712 , 713 ( P ) , 714 (P ) , 716 ( P ) , 717, 718 , 719 , 720 (P) , 721 , 722 , 723 , 724 , 725, 726 , 727, 728, 729 , 730, 731 , 732 , 733 , 734, 735 , 736, 737, 738, 739 , 740, 741 , 742, 743 , 744 , 745, 746 , 747, 748 , 749, 750 , 751 , 752 , 753 , 754 , 755, 756, 757, 758 , 759 , 760 , 761 , 762, 763 , 764 , 765 , 766, 767, 768 , 769 , 770, 771 ( P ) , 772 , 773 , 774 , 775 (P) , 777(P ) , 778 (P ) , 780(P) , 781 (P) , 782( P) , 783 , 784, 785 (P) , 787( P) , 788 , 789, 790 ( P) , 791 ( P ) , 795 (P ) , 796 ( P ) , 797, 798 (P ) , 799 ( P ) , 800(P ) , 805(P) .

Plots to be acquired in Mouza Piperjoria Thana No.10 P.S. Sundarpahari Dist . Godda

100,

121 ,

142,

183,

251 ,

271 ,

292 , 12 (P ) , 13 ( P ) , 26( P ) , 27, 28, 29, 30 , 31 ( P ), 32(P ) , 34 ( P) , 36( P) , 37 , 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48 , 49, 50 , 51 ( P ) , 52( P ) , 53 , 54, 55, 56, 57, 58 , 59 , 60, 61, 62, 63, 64 , 65, 66, 67, 68 , 69 , 70, 71, 72, 73 , 74, 75 , 76, 77 , 78 , 79, 80 , 81, 82, 83 , 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 101, 102 , 103 , 104 , 105, 106 , 107, 108, 109, 110, 111 , 112, 113, 114 , 115, 116 , 117, 118, 119 , 120, 122, 123 , 124 , 125 , 126, 127, 128 , 129, 130 , 131 , 132, 133, 134 , 135, 136, 137,138 , 139, 140, 141, 143, 144 , 145, 146, 147, 148 , 149 , 150, 151 , 152 , 153, 154, 155 , 156, 157 , 158 , 159, 160, 161 , 162, 163 , 164 , 165, 166 , 167, 168 , 169 , 170, 171 , 172, 173, 174, 175 , 176 , 177, 178, 179 , 180, 181, 182, 184, 185 , 186, 187 ( P ) , 188 ( P ) , 189, 190 , 191 , 192, 193 (P) , 194(P ) , 195 ( P ) , 207 , 221 (P ) , 223 ( P) , 224 ( P) , 234( P ) , 235 ( P ) , 236 ( P) , 237 , 238 , 239, 240 , 241 , 242 (P ) , 243 , 244 , 245, 246 , 247, 248, 249 , 250, 252, 253 , 254 , 255 , 256 , 257, 258 , 259, 260 (P) , 261 , 262, 263 , 264 , 265, 266, 267, 268 , 269, 270, 272, 273 , 274 , 275, 276 , 277 , 278 , 279, 280, 281 , 282, 283 , 284, 285, 286, 287 , 288 , 289 , 290, 291 , 293, 294 , 295 , 296, 297 , 298 , 299 , 300 , 301 , 302 , 303 , 304 , 305 , 306 , 307, 308 , 309 , 310, 311 , 312, 313 , 445 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/ माघ 11 , 1925

314, 315, 316 , 317, 318 , 319 , 320 , 321 , 322 , 323 , 324 , 325 , 326, 327, 328 , 329 , 330, 331 , 332, 333 , 334 , 335, 336, 337 , 338 , 339 , 340, 341 , 342, 343 , 344 , 345, 346, 347 , 348, 349 , 350, 351 , 352, 353, 354, 355, 356, 357 , 358 , 359 , 360, 361 , 362, 363, 364 , 365 , 366, 367, 368 , 369 , 370, 371 , 372 , 373 , 374 , 375, 376 .

Plots to be acquired in Mouza Mirchaitari , Thana No.11 P.S. Sundarpahari Dist . Godda

11 (P ) , 12(P) , 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 , 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32(P) , 52(P ) , 53 ( P ) , 54 ( P ) , 55 , 56, 57 , 58, 59, 60, 61 , 62, 63 , 64 , 65( P) , 66(P ) , 67, 68, 69, 70 , 71( P) , 72(P) , 75 , 76 (P) , 77, 78 , 79, 80, 81, 82, 83 , 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89 , 90, 91 , 92, 93 , 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102 , 103, 104 , 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111 , 112, 113, 114, 115 , 116 , 117, 118, 119 , 120, 121 , 122, 123 , 124, 125 , 126, 127 , 128, 129 , 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135 , 136, 137,138, 139 , 140, 141 , 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147 , 148, 149, 150, 151 , 152, 153 , 154 , 155, 156, 157, 158 , 159 , 160, 161 , 162, 163 , 164, 165 , 166, 167, 168 , 169, 170 , 171 , 172 , 173 , 174, 175, 176, 177 , 178, 179, 180, 181 , 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188 , 189, 190, 191 , 192, 193, 194 , 195, 196 , 197, 198, 199 , 200, 201 , 202 , 203 , 204, 205, 206 , 207 , 208 ( P) , 209( P) , 211 ( P ) , 242( P ) , 243( P) , 244(P ) , 245, 246, 247 , 248, 249, 250 , 251 , 252 , 253 , 254(P) , 255 , 256, 257 , 258 , 259, 260 , 261 , 262, 263 , 264 , 265, 266,

267, 268 , 269, 270, 271 , 272 , 273 , 274 , 275, 276 , 277, 278 , 279 , 280, 281 , 282, 283, 284, 285 , 286 , 287, 288, 289, 290 , 291 , 292, 293 , 294, 295, 296, 297 , 298 , 299 , 300, 301 , 302, 303, 304 , 305 , 306, 307 , 308 , 309, 310, 311 , 312, 313 , 314, 315, 316 , 317, 318, 319 , 320, 321 , 322, 323 , 324 , 325 , 326 , 327 , 328 , 329, 330, 331 , 332, 333 , 334, 335, 336 , 337, 338, 339 , 340, 341 , 342, 343, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349 , 350, 351, 352, 353 , 354, 355, 356 , 357 , 358 , 359, 360 , 361 , 362, 363 , 364, 365 , 366 , 367, 368 , 369, 370 , 371 , 372, 373 , 374 , 375 , 376, 377 , 378 , 379 , 380( P ) , 382(P ) , 383 (P ) , 384, 385, 386 , 387, 388, 389 , 390 , 391 , 392, 393 , 394, 395, 396, 397, 398 , 399 , 400, 401 , 402, 403 , 404, 405, 406, 407, 408 , 409, 410 , 411 , 412, 413 , 414, 415, 416, 417 , 418, 419, 420 , 421 , 422, 423 , 424, 425 , 426, 427 , 428 , 429, 430, 431 , 432, 433, 434, 435, 436, 437, 438, 439, 440 , 441 , 442, 443, 444, 445 , 446 , 447 , 448, 449, 450 , 451 , 452, 453, 454, 455 , 456, 457 , 458 , 459 , 460 , 461 , 462, 463, 464, 465, 466 , 467 , 468, 469 , 470 , 471, 472 , 473 , 474, 475, 476 , 477 , 478 , 479, 480, 481 , 482, 483, 484, 485, 486( P ) , 487, 488, 489, 490, 491, 492, 493 , 494, 495, 496, 497, 498, 499 , 500 , 501 , 502, 503, 504, 505, 506, 507 , 508 , 509 , 510, 511 , 512, 513, 514 , 515 , 516 , 517 , 518 , 519, 520 , 521 , 522, 523 , 524, 525, 526, 527, 528 , 529, 530 , 531 , 532( P ) , 533, 534 , 535 , 536 (P ) , 537( P ) , 538( P) , 539( P ) , 540( P ) , 541 ( P) , 542( P) , 543(P) .

Plots to be acquired in Mouza Pokhoria , Thana No.12 P.S. Sundarpahari Dist . Godda

49(P ) , 50 ( P ) , 51 ( P ) , 56, 57 ( P ) , 58 ( P ) , 59 ( P ) , 60 , 61 , 62, 63 , 64, 65, 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72, 73 , 74, 75 , 76, 77, 78 , 79 , 80, 81 , 82 , 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91 ( P) , 92, 93( P ) , 94( P) , 95( P ) , 96, 97, 98 , 99, 100, 101 , 102 , 103 , 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113 , 114, 115, 116 , 117 , 118, 119, 120 , 121 , 122 , 123 , 124, 125 , 126, 127, 128, 129, 130 , 131 , 132, 133 , 134, 135, 136, 137,138, 139 , 140, 141 , 142, 143, 144, 145, 146 , 147 , 148, 149, 150, 151 , 152 , 153 , 154, 155 , 156 , 157 , 158 , 159 , 160, 161 , 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167 , 168, 169, 170 , 171 , 172, 173, 174 , 175, 176, 177 , 178 , 179, 180, 181 , 182 , 183, 184 , 185 , 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191 , 192 , 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198 , 199 , 200 , 201 , 202, 203 , 204 (P ) , 205, 206, 207, 208 , 209, 210, 211 , 212, 213, 214 , 215, 216 , 217, 218 , 219 , 220 , 221 , 222 , 223 , 224 , 225 , 226 , 227 , 228 , 229 ( P ) , 230 , 231 ( P ) , 232( P ) , 234( P ) , 241 ( P) , 242( P ) , 243 , 244, 245, 246, 247, 248 , 249 , 250 , 251 , 252 , 253 , 254 , 255 , 256, 257, 258, 259, 260 , 261, 262, 263 , 264, 265, 266 , 267, 268 , 269, 270, 271 , 272 , 273 , 274, 275 , 276 , 277 , 278, 279 , 280, 281 , 282, 283 , 284, 285 , 286, 287, 288 , 289, 290, 291 , 292 , 293, 294, 295 , 296, 297 , 298, 299, 300 , 301 ( P ) , 302( P ) , 303( P ) , 304(P) , 305, 306, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311 , 312, 313, 314, 315, 316, 317, 318 , 319 , 320, 321 , 322, 323 , 324 , 325 , 326 , 327, 328( P ) , 329 ( P ) , 334 ( P) , 335 ( P ) , 336( P) , 337 , 338 , 339, 340 , 341 ( P) , 351 ( P ) , 352 , 353 , 354 ( P ) , 388 (P) .

446

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925 [ PART II- SEC. 3( ii) ] Plots to be acquired in Mouza Kherasole Thana No.13 P.S. Sundarpahari Dist . Godda

60( P) , 61 ( P ) , 64, 65, 66 , 67 , 68, 69, 70, 71 , 72(P ) , 73( P ) , 83 ( P ) , 85( P) , 86, 87( P) , 88 , 89( P) , 93( P) , 94( P) , 95, 96, 97, 98, 99(P) , 100, 101 , 102, 103 , 104, 105, 106 , 107, 108, 109 , 110, 111 , 112, 113 , 114, 115, 116 , 117, 118 , 119 , 120, 121 , 122 , 123 , 124 , 125 , 126 , 127, 128, 129 , 130 , 131 , 132, 133 , 134, 135, 136 , 137,138, 139 , 140, 141 , 142 , 143 , 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153 , 154, 155, 156, 157 , 158 , 159, 160, 161 , 162, 163 , 164 , 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171 , 172, 173 , 174 , 175, 176, 177, 178 , 179, 180, 181 , 182, 183 , 184, 185, 186, 187 , 188 , 189, 190, 191, 192, 193 , 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199 , 200, 201 , 202 , 203 , 204 , 205 , 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211 , 212, 213 , 214, 215, 216 , 217, 218, 219 , 220, 221 , 222 , 223 , 224 , 225 , 226 , 227 , 228 , 229, 230, 231 , 232 , 233 , 234, 235 , 236, 237 , 238, 239, 240 , 241 , 242, 243 , 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251 , 252, 253 , 254, 255, 256, 257 , 258 , 259 , 260, 261 , 262, 263, 264 , 265 , 266, 267 , 268 , 269 , 270, 271 , 272 , 273 ,

274 , 275 , 276 , 277 , 278 , 279 , 280 , 281 , 282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 287, 288 , 289, 290 , 291, 292 , 293 , 294 , 295, 296 , 297 , 298 , 299 , 300, 301 , 302, 303 , 304, 305, 306, 307 , 308, 309 , 310 , 311 , 312 , 313 , 314, 315 , 316 , 317 , 318 , 319 , 320, 321 , 322, 323, 324 , 325, 326, 327 , 328 , 329 , 330, 331 , 332 ( P ) , 333 (P ) , 334( P ) , 335 , 336 , 337 , 338 , 339 , 340, 341 , 342, 343, 344 , 345, 346 , 347, 348 , 349 , 350 , 351 , 352, 353 , 354, 355 ; 356 , 357 , 358 , 359 , 360 , 361 , 362 , 363 , 364 , 365, 366 , 367 , 368, 369 , 370 , 371 , 372 , 373 , 374 , 375, 376 , 377, 378 , 379 , 380, 381 , 382, 383 , 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389, 390 , 391 , 392 , 393 , 394, 395, 396 , 397 , 398 , 399, 400 , 401 , 402 , 403, 404, 405 , 406, 407, 408, 409 , 410 , 411 , 412 , 413 , 414 (P ) , 415 , 416 , 417 , 418 , 419 , 420 , 421 , 422 , 423, 424, 425, 426, 427 , 428 , 429, 430, 431 , 432 , 433, 434, 435, 436, 437, 438 , 439 , 440 , 441 , 442 , 443 , 444 , 445, 446, 447, 448 , 449 , 450 , 451 , 452, 453 , 454 , 455 , 456 , 457 , 458 , 459 , 460, 461 , 462, 463 , 464 , 465 , 466, 467, 468 , 469, 470 , 471 , 472 , 473 , 474, 475, 476 , 477, 478, 479 , 480, 481 , 482, 483 , 484, 485, 486,487 , 488, 489, 490, 491 , 492, 493 (P ) , 494 (P ) , 496 ( P) , 498(P) , 499, 500, 501 , 502, 503 , 504, 505, 506 ( P ) , 507 ( P ) , 508 ( P ) , 509 , 510 , 511 , 512, 513 , 514 , 515, 516, 517 , 518 , 519 , 520 , 521 ( P ) , 522 ( P ) , 523 , 524, 525 , 526 , 527 , 528 , 529 , 530 , 531 , 532 , 533 , 534, 535 , 536 , 537 , 538 , 539, 540 , 541 , 542( P ) , 543 ( P ) , 544( P ) , 577( P ) , 578 , 579 , 580( P ) , 581 , 582 , 583 (P) , 584(P) , 598 ( P) , 600( P ) , 614( P ) , 615 ( P ) , 682( P ) , 683 ( P) , 684 , 685, 686 , 687, 688, 689, 690, 691 , 692, 693, 694, 695, 696 , 697, 698 , 699, 700, 701 , 702 , 703 , 704, 705 , 706, 707 , 708 , 709, 710 , 711 , 712 ( P) , 713 ( P ), 714 , 715 (P ) , 732(P ) , 733 , 734 , 735 , 736 , 737 ( P ) , 738 ( P ) , 740 ( P) , 741 , 742 ( P) , 743 ( P ), 748 ( P) , 749 ( P ), 795 ( P ) , 796 ( P ) , 797( P).

Plots to be acquired in Mouza Bara Dhamni Thana No.7 P.S. Sundarpahari Dist . Godda

1, 2, 3 , 4, 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10, 11 , 12, 13 , 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 , 19, 20, 21 , 22, 23 , 24, 25 , 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 , 31 , 32, 33 , 34 , 35, 36, 37, 38 , 39 , 40, 41 , 42, 43 , 44, 45 , 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 , 52 , 53, 54 , 55, 56, 57 , 58 , 59 , 60, 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66, 67, 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72, 73 , 74, 75 , 76, 77, 78 , 79, 80 , 81, 82, 83 , 84(P ) , 85 ( P ) , 86 ( P ) , 87 ( P ) , 88(P ) , 89 ( P ) , 91 ( P ) , 92, 93 , 94 , 95 (P ) , 96 (P ) , 97 (P ) , 98 (P), 297(P) , 298 , 299( P ) , 305 ( P ) , 306, 307 ( P ) , 310( P ) , 311 (P ) , 312 ( P ) , 313 ( P) , 314(P) , 315 , 316, 317 , 318, 319, 320, 321 , 322, 323, 324 , 325 , 326 , 327 , 328 , 329, 330 , 331 , 332 , 333 , 334 , 335, 336, 337, 338, 339, 340, 341 , 342, 343 , 344, 345, 346, 347 , 348, 349, 350 , 351, 352, 353 , 354 , 355, 356, 357 , 358, 359, 360, 361 , 362, 363, 364, 365 , 366 , 367 , 368 , 369 , 370 , 371 , 372 , 373 , 374, 375, 376, 377, 378 , 379, 380, 381 , 382, 383, 384 , 385 ( P ) , 386 ( P ) , 388 ( P ) , 389( P ) , 390( P ) , 393 ( P ) , 394( P ) , 395( P) , 397( P ) , 398 ( P ) , 399( P ) , 445(P ), 446,447, 448, 449, 450 , 451 , 452 , 453 , 454 , 455 , 456, 457, 458, 459, 460, 461 , 462, 463, 464, 465, 466, 467, 468 , 469, 470( P ) , 471 , 472, 473 , 474 , 475 , 476 , 477( P ) , 478 (P) , 504 ( P).

Plots to be acquired in Mouza Mako Madgi Thana No.16 P.S. Sundarpahari Dist . Godda

16 (P) & 19(P) .

447 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

Block NO . 2

Plots to be acquired in Mouza Jordiha Thana No.1 P.S. Littipara Dist . Pakur

1( P) , 2 ( P ) , 5 ( P ) , 7(P ) , 8( P) , 9, 10 (P) , 12, 13(P) , 14, 15(P) , 16, 17( P) , 18(P) , 19, 20(P), 21 (P), 22, 23, 24(P) , 25 , 26 , 27, 28, 29 , 30, 31 , 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50 51 , 52, 53 , 54 , 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71 , 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81 , 82, 83 , 84 , 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91 , 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101 , 102, 103, 104, 105 , 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111 , 112, 113, 114 , 115, 116, 117 , 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123(P), 124(P) , 125 (P ) , 126(P) , 127, 128, 129, 130, 131 (P) , 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151 , 152, 153 , 154 (P) , 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165 , 166 , 167, 168, 169, 170, 171 , 172, 173 , 174 , 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188 , 189 , 190 , 191 , 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201 , 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210 , 211 , 212, 213 , 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221 , 222 , 223, 224, 225 226, 227 , 228 , 229 , 230 , 231 , 232, 233 , 234, 235, 236, 237 , 238 , 239 , 240, 241 , 242, 243, 244, 245,246, 247 , 248 , 249 , 250, 251 , 252, 253 , 254, 255 , 256, 257 , 258, 259, 260, 261, 262, 263, 264, 265, 266, 267, 268 , 269 , 270 , 271 , 272, 273 , 274 , 275, 276, 277, 278 , 279, 280, 281 , 282, 283, 284, 285, 206, 287, 288, 289 , 290 , 291 , 292 , 293 , 294 , 295 , 296 , 297, 298, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303 , 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 309, 310 , 311 , 312 , 313 , 314, 315 , 316, 317 , 318 , 319, 320, 321 , 322, 323, 324, 325 , 326, 327 , 328, 329, 330, 331 , 332 , 333 , 334, 335, 336, 337 , 338, 339 , 340, 341, 342, 343 , 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 351, 352, 353 , 354 , 355, 356 , 357 , 358 , 359, 360, 361, 362, 363 , 364, 365, 366, 367 , 368, 369, 370, 371, 372, 373 , .374 , 375 , 376, 377, 378 , 379, 380, 381 , 382, 383, 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389, 390, 391 , 392, 393 , 394 , 395 , 396 , 397 , 398 , 399 , 400 , 401 , 402, 403 , 404, 405, 406, 407, 408, 409, 410, 411 , 412, 413, 414, 415 , 416 , 417 , 418 , 419, 420 , 421 , 422, 423 , 424 , 425, 426, 427, 428 , 429, 430, 431, 432, 433, 434, 435 , 436 , 437 , 438 , 439 , 440, 441 , 442, 443 , 444, 445, 446 , 447, 448 , 449, 450 , 451, 452, 453 , 454, 455, 456, 457 , 458 , 459 , 460 , 461 , 462 , 463 , 464 , 465, 466, 467, 468, 469, 470, 471 , 472, 473, 474, 475 , 476, 477 , 478 , 479 , 480 , 481 , 482, 483 , 484, 485, 486, 487, 488, 489, 490, 491 , 492, 493, 494, 495, 496, 497, 498, 499, 500, 501 , 502, 503 , 504 , 505, 506, 507 , 508 , 509, 510, 511 ( P) , 513 (P ) , 514( P ), 515, 516, 517, 518( P ) , 522 ( P ) , 523 , 524( P ) , 525( P) , 526( P) , 546 ( P) , 547, 548, 549, 550 , 551, 552, 553 , 554, 555, 556 , 557, 558 , 559 , 560 , 561 , 562 , 563 , 564 , 565 , 566, 567 , 568 , 569 , 570 , 571 , 572 , 573, 574, 575, 576, 577 , 578 , 579 , 580, 581 , 582 , 583 , 584 , 585, 586, 587 , 588 , 589, 590 , 591 , 592, 593 , 594 , 595, 596, 597, 598 , 599 , 600 , 601 , 602 , 603 , 604, 605 , 606, 607 , 608, 609, 610, 611 , 612, 613 , 614, 615, 616, 617, 618, 619, 620 , 621 , 622, 623 , 624, 625 , 626, 627 , 628 , 629 , 630, 631 , 632, 633, 634, 635, 636 , 637, 638, 639, 640 , 641 , 642, 643 , 644 , 645 , 646 , 647 , 648, 649, 650 , 651 , 652 , 653 , 654, 655, 656, 657, 658, 659 , 660, 661 , 662, 663 , 664 , 665, 666, 667 , 668 , 669, 670. 671 , 672 , 673 , 674 , 675 , 676, 677, 678 , 679, 680, 681 , 682, 683 , 684, 685, 686, 687, 688, 689, 690, 691 , 692, 693, 694, 695, 696, 697, 698 , 699, 700 , 701, 702, 703 , 704 , 705 , 706, 707, 708 , 709 , 710, 711 , 712, 713 , 714, 715 , 716 , 717, 718, 719, 720 , 721 , 722, 723 , 724 , 725 , 726 , 727 , 728 , 729 , 730, 731 , 732 , 733, 734, 735, 736, 737, 738 , 739, 740, 741 , 742, 743, 744, 745, 746 , 747 , 748 , 749, 750 , 751 , 752, 753 , 754 , 755 , 756, 757 , 758 , 759 , 760, 761 , 762 , 763, 764, 765, 766, 767, 768 , 769 , 770 , 771 , 772 , 773, 774 , 775 , 776, 777, 778, 779, 780, 781 , 782, 783 , 784, 785, 786, 787, 788, 789, 790, 791 , 792, 793 , 794, 795 , 796, 797, 798, 799.

173 GI/2004-5 448

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004 /MAGHA 11, 1925 [PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] Plots to be acquired in Mouza Chota Murjora Thana No.2 P.S. Littipara Dist . Pakur

1 (P ) , 11 ( P ) , 12( P) , 13 (P ) , 14( P) , 16(P ) , 17 (P ) , 18(P ) , 19(P ) , 20(P ) , 46 (P) , 47( P) , 51 ( P) , 59( P ), 60( P), 61 ( P) , 62( P ) , 63 , 64, 65, 66, 67, 68 , 69 , 70, 71, 72, 73 , 74, 75, 76 , 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91 , 92, 93, 94 , 95, 96, 97, 98 , 99 , 100( P ), 101 (P) , 102(P) , 103 , 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111 , 112, 113 , 114, 115, 116, 117, 118 , 119, 120(P) , 124( P ) , 125( P) , 126 (P) , 127, 128, 129, 130, 131 , 132 , 133 , 134 , 135 , 136, 137, 138 , 139 , 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151 , 152, 153 , 154, 155 , 156, 157 , 158 , 159 , 160 , 161, 162, 163 , 164, 165, 166, 167, 168 , 169 , 170, 171 , 172, 173 (P ) , 174, 175, 176, 177(P) , 178( P) , 179( P) , 180 ( P ), 181 ( P), 182 ( P), 183(P), 184(P), 185(P) , 186(P ) , 187 ( P ) , 188( P ) , 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208 , 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221 , 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228 , 229 , 230, 231, 232, 233 , 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241 , 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251 , 252, 253 , 254, 255, 256, 257, 258, 259, 260, 261 , 262, 263, 264, 265, 266, 267, 268 , 269 , 270 , 271 , 272 , 273 , 274, 275, 276 , 277, 278, 279, 280, 281, 282, 283 , 284, 285, 286, 287 , 288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 309, 310 , 311 , 312, 313 , 314, 315, 316, 317, 318 , 319, 320, 321, 322, 323, 324, 325, 326, 327, 328, 329, 330, 331, 332, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 339, 340, 341, 342, 343, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 351, 352, 353 , 354, 355 , 356, 357, 358, 359, 360, 361, 362, 363, 364, 365, 366, 367, 368, 369, 370, 371, 372, 373 , 374, 375, 376, 377, 378, 379, 380, 381, 382, 383 , 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389, 390, 391, 392, 393 , 394, 395, 396, 397 , 398 , 399, 400, 401, 402, 403, 404, 405, 406, 407, 408, 409, 410, 411, 412, 413, 414, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 427, 428, 429, 430, 431, 432, 433, 434, 435, 436, 437 , 438 , 439, 440, 441, 442, 443, 444, 445, 446, 447, 448, 449, 450, 451 , 452, 453, 454, 455, 456, 457, 458 , 459, 460, 461, 462, 463, 464, 465, 466, 467, 468, 469, 470, 471, 472, 473, 474, 475, 476, 477, 478 , 479 , 480, 481, 482, 483, 484, 485, 486, 487, 488, 489, 490, 491, 492, 493, 494, 495, 496, 497, 498 , 499 , 500 , 501 , 502 , 503 , 504, 505, 506 , 507, 508, 509, 510, 511 , 512, 513, 514, 515, 516, 517, 518 , 519 , 520 , 521 , 522 , 523 , 524 , 525 , 526, 527, 528 , 529, 530 , 531 , 532, 533, 534, 535, 536, 537, 538 , 539 , 540 , 541 , 542, 543, 544, 545, 546, 547 , 548, 549, 550, 551 , 552, 553 , 554, 555, 556, 557, 558, 559 , 560, 561 , 562, 563 , 564 , 565, 566, 567 , 568 , 569 , 570, 571 , 572, 573, 574, 575, 576, 577, 578, 579 , 580 , 581 , 582, 583 , 584, 585, 586, 587 , 588 , 589, 590, 591, 592, 593, 594, 595, 596, 597, 598, 599, 600, 601 , 602, 603, 604, 605, 606 , 607 , 608, 609, 610, 611, 612, 613, 614, 615, 616 , 617, 618, 619 , 620, 621, 622, 623 , 624, 625, 626, 627, 628, 629, 630, 631, 632, 633 , 634, 635, 636, 637, 638, 639, 640, 641, 642, 643, 644, 645, 646, 647, 648, 649, 650, 651, 652, 653, 654, 655, 656, 657, 658, 659, 660, 661, 662, 663, 664, 665, 666, 667, 668, 669, 670. 671, 672, 673, 674, 675, 676, 677, 678, 679, 680, 681 , 682, 683, 684, 685, 686, 687, 688, 689, 690, 691, 692, 693, 694, 695, 696, 697, 698, 699, 700, 701 , 702, 703 , 704, 705, 706, 707, 708, 709, 710, 711 , 712 , 713, 714, 715, 716, 717 , 718 , 719 , 720 , 721 , 722, 723 , 724 , 725, 726, 727, 728, 729, 730 , 731, 732, 733 , 734, 735, 736, 737, 738 , 739 , 740 , 741 , 742 , 743 , 744, 745 , 746 , 747, 748, 749, 750, 751 , 752, 753, 754, 755, 756, 757, 758, 759, 760, 761 , 762, 763, 764, 765, 766, 767, 768, 769, 770, 771, 772, 773, 774, 775, 776, 777, 778, 779, 780, 781 , 782, 783, 784, 785, 786, 787, 788, 789.

Plots to be acquired in Mouza Bara Murjora Thana No.3 P.S. Littipara Dist . Pakur

2( P ) , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7( P ) , S ( P) , 9 , 10, 11 , 12, 13 (P) , 14( P) , 15 , 16, 17, 18( P) , 21 ( P) , 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 , 28, 29( P ) , 30, 31 ( P ) , 35( P ) , 36 ( P) , 37 ( P ) , 56( P ) , 57( P) , 58(P) , 59, 60 , 61 , 62, 63 , 64, 65, 66( P) , 68( P), 69 ( P ) , 70 , 71 , 72, 73 , 74 , 75 , 76, 77, 78, 79 , 80 , 81 , 82, 83 , 84 (P ), 92( P ) , 93( P ) , 94( P ) , 95(P ) , 96, 97, 98 ( P ) , 99 ( P ) , 100(P) , 101 , 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107 , 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 113 , 119, 120 , 121 , 122 , 123 , 124 , 125 , 126 , 127, 128 , 129 , 130, 131, 132, 133 , 134, 135, 136, 137,138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143 , 144, 145, 146, 147, 148 , 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159 , 100, 101 , 162, 163 , 164, 165, 166 , 167, 168, 169, 170, 171 , 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180 , 181 , 182 , 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201 , 202, 203 , 204, 205, 206 , 207, 208 , 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222 , 223, 224 , 225 , 226 , 227 , 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238 , 239, 240, 241 , 242, 243 , 244, 245 , 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251 , 252, 253, 254, [PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)] 449

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

255 , 256 , 257 , 258 , 259, 260 , 261 , 262, 263, 264, 265, 266, 267, 268 , 269, 270( P) , 271 (P ) , 272 , 273 , 274 , 275 , 276, 277, 278, 279 , 280, 281 , 282, 283 , 284, 285, 286, 287, 288 , 292( P) , 293 ( P ), 294 (P ) , 300(P ) , 313 ( P ) , 316( P ) , 317 ( P ) , 318 , 319 , 320 , 321 ( P ) , 326 (P ) , 327( P) , 328( P) , 329 , 330 , 331 , 332 , 333 , 334, 335, 336 , 337, 338 , 339, 340 , 341 , 342, 343, 344 , 345, 346, 347, 348, 349 , 350, 351 , 352, 353 , 354, 355(P ) , 356( P ) , 359 (P ) , 360, 361 , 362, 363 , 364, 365, 366, 367, 368 , 369, 370, 371, 372, 373 , 374, 375, 376, 377, 378 , 379, 380, 381 , 382, 383, 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389, 390, 391 , 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 400, 401 ( P ), 410 ( P ) , 411 (P ) , 412, 413, 414, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419, 420, 422(P) , 423( P) , 424(P) , 425 (P ) , 432 (P ) , 449(P ) , 450 ( P ) , 451 , 452, 453( P) , 454(P) , 455( P) , 456 ( P) , 457, 458, 459( P) , 460( P ), 464 ( P ) , 465, 466,467,468 , 469, 470, 471 , 472, 473 , 474, 475, 476, 477 , 478, 479, 480, 481 , 482, 483, 484,485, 486, 487, 488 , 489 , 490 , 491, 492, 493, 494,495, 496, 497,498, 499 , 500, 501 , 502,. 503 , 504 , 505 , 506, 507 , 508 , 509 , 510 , 511 , 512 , 513 , 514, 515, 516, 517, 518 , 519 , 520 , 521 , 522 , 523 , 524 , 525 , 526 , 527, 528 , 529 , 530 , 531 , 532, 533 , 534 , 535, 536, 537 , 538 , 539, 540 , 541 , 542, 543, 544, 545 , 546, 547 , 548 , 549 , 550 , 551,552, 553 , 554 , 555 , 556 , 557 , 558 , 559 , 560 , 561 , 562, 563 , 564 , 565, 566, 567( P ) , 568 ( P ) , 569 , 570, 571 , 572, 573 , 574, 575 , 576, 577, 578, 579 , 580, 581 , 582, 583 , 584 , 585, 586, 587 , 588 , 589, 590 , 591 , 592, 593, 594 , 595 , 596, 597, 598, 599, 600, 601 , 602, 603, 604, 605, 606, 607, 608 , 609, 610, 611 , 612, 613 , 614, 615, 616, 617, 618, 619, 620, 621 , 622, 623, 624, 625 , 626 , 627, 628 , 629, 630 , 631 , 632, 633 , 634, 635, 636, 637, 638, 639 , 640, 641, 642, 643, 644,645, 646, 647, 648, 649, 650 , 651 , 652, 653 , 654, 655, 656, 657 , 658, 659, 660, 661 , 662, 663 , 664, 665,666, 667, 668, 669, 670, 671 , 672, 673 , 674 , 675 , 676 , 677, 678 , 679, 680, 681 , 682, 683, 684, 685, 686, 687, 688, 689 , 690, 691 , 692, 693 , 694 , 695, 696, 697 , 698 , 699, 700, 701 , 702, 703 , 704, 705, 706, 707 , 708 , 709 , 710, 711 , 712 , 713 , 714 , 715, 716 , 717 , 718, 719 , 720, 721 , 722, 723 , 724 , 725, 726, 727, 728 , 729, 730, 731, 732, 733, 734, 735 , 736, 737 , 738 , 739, 740, 741 , 742, 743 , 744, 745 , 746, 747 , 748, 749, 750, 751 , 752, 753 , 754 , 755, 756 , 757, 758, 759 , 760, 761, 762, 763 , 764, 765, 766, 767, 768 , 769, 770 (P) , 771 , 772 , 773 ( P ) , 774 ( P ) , 778 ( P ) , 786 ( P ) , 787 ( P ) , 790 ( P ) , 791, 792, 793 , 794, 795, 796, 797, 798, 799, 800 , 801 , 802 , 803, 804, 805, 806 , 807, 808 , 809, 810, 811, 812, 813 , 814, 815 , 816, 817 , 818 , 819, 820, 821 , 822( P ) , 823 (P ) , 824( P ) , 825 ( P ) , 826 , 827 ( P ) , 828( P) , 829, 830, 831 (P) , 907 ( P) , 915( P ) , 916( P) , 917(P ), 918 , 919, 920, 921 , 922( P) .

Plots to be acquired in Mouza Simlong Thana No.4 P.S. Littipara Dist . Pakur

8 ( P) , 9(P) , 10( P ) , 12 (P) , 13 , 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 , 22, 23 , 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 , 32, 33 , 34(P) , 35( P ) , 36, 37( P) , 39( P) , 40 ( P ) , 44( P) , 45( P ) , 46 , 47 , 48( P ), 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54, 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 ( P ) , 59 ( P ) , 60 ( P) , 61 , 62, 63 , 64, 65, 66, 67 , 68( P ) , 69 (P ) , 71 ( P ) , 72( P) , 73 , 74( P) , 75, 76 , 77 , 78( P) , 79(P) , 80( P) , 82( P ) , 92 ( P ) , 93 ( P ) , 94 , 95, 96, 97, 98, 99 , 100 (P) , 126 ( P ) , 127 ( P ) , 128 ( P ) , 129( P ) , 130(P) , 131 (P), 132(P), 174( P ) , 200( P ) , 201 ( P ) , 209 ( P ) , 210 , 211 , 212, 213 , 214, 215, 216 , 217, 218 , 219( P ) , 220( P ) , 221 ( P ) , 226 ( P ) , 227 ( P ) , 233 ( P ) , 234 , 235 , 236 , 237, 238, 239 , 240 , 241, 242, 243 , 244, 245, 246, 247(P) , 248 ( P ) , 249( P ) , 250, 251 , 252 , 253 ( P ) , 255( P ) , 256( P) , 258 , 259 , 260, 261 , 262, 263 ( P ) , 264 (P) , 265( P ) , 266 (P ) , 276 (P ) , 277 , 278 ( P ) , 279 ( P ) , 281 , 282, 283 , 284, 285, 286(P ) , 287 (P ) , 288, 289, 290 , 291, 292, 293 , 294, 295 ( P) , 303 ( P ) , 304, 305 , 306, 307 ( P ), 308 ( P ) , 309 ( P), 310 , 311 , 312, 313 , 314 , 315 , 316, 317( P) , 318 , 319 , 320 , 321 ( P ) , 322 ( P ) , 325 ( P ) , 331 (P ) , 332 , 333(P ), 334 , 335 , 336, 337, 338, 339, 340, 341 , 342, 343 , 344, 345 , 346 , 347, 348 , 349; 350, 351 , 352, 353, 354, 355, 356, 357(P ) , 364 , 365, 366, 367 , 368 , 369 , 370 , 371 , 372 , 373 , 374, 375 , 376 , 377, 378 , 379, 380, 381, 382, 383 , 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389 , 390, 391, 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 400( P) , 401, 402, 403 , 404, 405, 406, 407, 408 , 409, 410, 411 , 412, 413, 414, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419 , 420, 421 , 422, 423 , 424, 425 , 426, 427, 428, 429, 430, 431 , 432 , 433 , 434, 435, 436( P) , 437 (P) , 438(P ) , 439 (P) , 440,441 , 442, 443 , 444( P) , 449(P) , 450 , 451 , 452( P) , 462( P ) , 463 ( P) , 464(P) , 465 , 466, 467,468 , 469, 470, 471, 472, 473 , 474 (P) .

Plots to be acquired in Mouza Amarbhita Thana No.7 P.S. Littipara Dist . Pakur

1(P), 112( P) , 113 (P) .

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

450 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

Plots to be acquired in Mouza Bansbhita Thana No.8 P.S. Littipara Dist . Pakur

1 (P ) , 2, 3 , 4 ( P ) , 5 ( P) , 7 ( P ) , 9 ( P ) , 68( P ) , 69( P ) , 70 , 71 , 72, 73, 74 , 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81 , 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88 , 89, 90, 91 , 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98 , 99 , 100, 101 , 102, 103 , 104 , 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111 , 112, 113 , 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121 , 122 , 123 , 124, 125 , 126, 127 , 128 , 129 , 130 , 131 , 132 , 133 , 134( P ), 135 , 136, 137 , 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143 , 144, 145, 146, 147, 148 , 149, 150, 151 , 152, 153 , 154, 155, 156 , 157, 158, 159, 160, 161 , 162, 163 , 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169 , 170, 171 , 172 , 173 , 174, 175, 176, 177, 178 , 179 , 180, 181 , 182, 183 , 184, 185, 186, 187( P ), 188 , 189, 190, 191, 192 , 193 , 194, 195, 196( P) , 197 ( P ) , 198 (P) , 206 , 207 , 208 , 209 .

Plots to be acquired in Mouza Margo Thana No.9 P.S. Littipara Dist . Pakur

1 , 2, 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 (P) , 9 ( P ) , 15 ( P) , 16(P ) , 17, 18(P ) , 101( P) , 102 ( P) , 103 , 104, 105 , 106, 107 , 108, 109, 110 , 111.

Plots to be acquired in Mouza Chota Chatkam Thana No.10 P.S. Littipara Dist . Pakur

352( P ) , 355 , 356 , 357 , 358 , 359 , 360 , 361 , 362, 363 , 364 , 365, 366, 367, 368 , 369 , 370, 371 , 372, 373 , 374, 375 , 376, 377 , 378 , 379, 380 , 381 , 382, 383 , 384, 385, 386, 387, 388( P ) , 389 ( P ) , 402 ( P ) , 403( P) .

Plots to be acquired in Mouza Dhoupahar Thana No.26 P.S. Sundarpahari Dist . Godda

1( P ) , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6, 7, 8 , 9 , 10, 11 , 12, 13 , 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 , 20, 21 , 22, 23 , 24, 25, 26, 27 ( P ) , 28 , 29, 30( P ) , 31 , 32 , 33 ( P ) , 34 ( P ) , 35 (P ) , 36( P) , 37 ( P ) , 38( P) , 39, 40, 41 , 42, 43, 44, 45, 46( P) , 47(P) , 48(P ) , 49, 50, 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56, 57 , 58 , 59, 60, 61 , 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67(P) , 68 , 69( P ) , 74( P ) , 75 (P ) , 76, 77 , 78 , 79 ( P ) , 80 , 81 , 82, 83, 84, 85( P) , 94( P ) , 95, 96 (P ) , 97, 98, 99 , 100(P).

Plots to be acquired in Mouza Ladapathar Thana No.27 P.S. Sundarpahari Dist . Godda

3(P) , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8, 9, 10, 11 , 12, 13 , 14, 15, 16, 17 , 18 , 19, 20, 21 , 22 , 23 , 24, 25 , 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 , 32, 33, 34 , 35 , 36 , 37, 38 , 39, 40, 41 , 42, 43 , 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 , 52, 53, 54 , 55, 56, 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61, 62 , 63 , 64, 65, 66, 67 , 68, 69, 70, 71 , 72, 73, 74 , 75 , 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84 , 85, 86 , 87 , 88 , 89, 90 , 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97 , 98 , 99 , 100, 101 , 102, 103 , 104 , 105, 106, 107 , 108 , 109 , 110, 111 , 112, 113 , 114, 115, 116 , 117, 118 , 119 , 120, 121, 122, 123 , 124, 125 , 126, 127, 128 , 129 , 130, 131 , 132( P ) , 133 ( P) , 134( P ) , 135, 136, 137,138 , 139 , 140, 141 , 142, 143 , 144, 145, 146, 147, 148 ( P ) , 150 ( F ) , 151 ( P ) , 156( P) , 161 , 162, 163 , 164, 165( P ) , 166 ( P) , 246( P ) , 247 (P) , 248 ( P ), 249, 250 , 251 , 252 , 253, 254 , 255 , 256 , 257 ( P ) , 258 ( P ) , 259 ( P) , 260 ( P) , 261 ( P) , 286, 287, 288, 289 , 290 , 291 , 292 , 293 , 294 , 295, 296 , 297 , 299 , 310 (P).

Boundary Description ( Block - 1 ) ( A1 - A18 . )

A1 - A2: Line starting from point Al in mouza Chota Puro No. 8 of P.S. Sundar Pahari.- Dist . Godda. Jharkhand Plot No. 221 and passing through the Plot No. 210 , 209,258 , 261.262.267.268 & 153 meeting at point A2 in the Eastern Boundary of Plot No. 158 in Mouza Chota Puro No. 8 .

A2-A3 Line starting from point A2 in Mouza Chota Puro No. 8 and passing through Plot No.158 , 157.156 and Plot No.1 & 2 and meeting at point A3 in Plot No.1 of Chota Puro No. 8 .

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 31 , 2004/ MAGHA 11 , 1925

451

A3 -A4 : - Line starting from point A3 in plot no . 1 of Chota Puro No. 8 and passing through plot no . 3,4,7,6,7,11 and meeting at point A4 in plot no . 11 of Chota puro no 8.

A4 -A5 : - Line starting from point A4 in plot no. 11 of Mouza Chota puro no. 8 and passing through plot no.20 and crossing the common Boundary line of Mouza Chota Puro no . 8 and Garidih No. 9 and passing through Plot no . 22, 21 , 17, 15 , 10, 11 and 1 of Mouza Garidih no . 9 and entering in the common boundary line of mouza Piparjoria Garidihand10 passing through plot no.24,26,31,32,34,36,13,51,52,193,194,195,198,188 , 187,235,236,242 , and meeting at point A5 in plot no.242 of Mouza Piparjoria no . 10. no . no . 9 and

A5 - A6 : Line starting from point A5 in Mouza Piparjoria no . 10 plot no . 242 and passing through plot no.243,223,260,221 and entering in the common boundary line of Mouza Piparjoria no.10 and Marchaitari no.11 and passing through plot no.11,12,11,32,75,76,72,71,67,66,64,53,52,209,208,211,243,242 and meeting at point A6 in plot no . 254 of Mouza Marchaitari no . 11 .

A6-A7 : - Line starting from pont A6 in Mouza Marchaitari no . 11 plot no . 254 and entering in the common boundary line of Mouza Pokharia no . 12 and Marchatari no.11 and passing through plot no . 243 , 242, 241 , 234, 232 , 231 , 229, 59, 58, 57 , 55, 51 , 50 , 49, 91 , 93 and meeting at point A7 in Southern boundary of plot no.94 in Mouza Pokharia no . 12 .

A7- A8 : - Line starting from point A7 in Mouza Pokharia no . 12 passing from plot no . 94 , 95 , and entering in the common boundary line of Mouza Kherasol no . 13 and Pokharia No. 12 passing through plot no . 85, 89 , 90, 92, 93, 94, 83 , 74, 73,72, 60, 62 , 64, 336, 542 , 544 , 577, 588, 584,597 and meeting at point A8 in plot no.531 of Mouza Kherasol no 13 .

A8 -A9 : - Line starting from point A8 in Mouza Kherasol no . 13 Plot no . 531 and passing through plot no . 698 , 600 , 614, 522, 521 , 615 , 508, 507, 506, 630 , 498 , 496, 494, 493 , 683 , 682 , 715 , 713 , 712 , 732, 738 , 740 , 749, 748 and meeting at point A9 in plot no . 748.

A9 - A10 : - Line starting from point A9 in plot no . 748 in Mouza Kherasol no . 13 and passing through plot no . 742,737,743,755 and crossing the Western Bank of Gumani River and meeting at point A10 in plot nó . 795 of Mouza Kherasol no.13 .

A10 -A11 : - Line starting from point A10 in Gumani River plot no.795 of Mouza Kherasol no . 13 and passing through plot no . 795,796 and crossing the Western Bank of Gumani River and entering in plot no . 414 and passing through plot no.334 , 333 , 332 and again crossing the Gumani river and passing through plot no . 124 , Gumani river and meeting at point All .

A11 -A12: - Line starting from point All plot no. 124 of Gumani river Mouza Kherasol no . 13 and passing through common boundary line and Eastern Bank of Gumani river and Chota Murjora no . 2 and passing through plot no . 46, 47, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 14, 13 , 12, 11 and crossing the common boundary line of Eastern Bank of Gumani river and Mouza Chota Murrjora no. 2 and passing through Gumani river and meeting at point A12 in plot no . 388 .

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

452 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

A12- A13: - Line starting from point A12 and passing through plot no. 301 , 302, 303 , 329, 328 , 334 , 335 , 336, 341 , 351 , 354 and entering in common boundary of Imouza - Pokharia No.12 and Mirchaitari No. 11 and passing through plot No. 485 , 486 , 543 , 542, 541 , 540 , 549, 538 , 537 , 536 and crossing through the Western Bank of Gumani river in plot no . 582 and meeting at point A13:

A13 - A14: - Line starting from point A13 in Gumani river Mouza Marchaitari no.11 and passing through plot no.582 of Gumani river and crossing the Western Bank of Gumani river passing through the plot no . 382, 383 , 381 and meeting at point A14 common boundary line of Mouza Marchaitari 11 and Piparjoria no . 10.

A14-A15 : - Line starting from point A14 entering in Mouza Garidih No. 9 passing through plot no . 667, 668, 805 crossing the plot no . 668 and passing through płot no.701 , 714 , 713 , 716 , 720, 721 , 668 , 814 , 798 , 796, 795, 791 , 790, 787 , 785 , 782 , 787, 780 , 778 , 777 , 775 , 789 , 771 and passing through the common boudary of Mouza Garidih no . 9 and Bara Dhamni no . 7 and passing through plot no . 89, 91 , 95 , 96, 97, 98 , 85 and meeting at point A15 Mouza Bara Dhamni no. 7.

A15 - A16: - Line starting from point A15 in plot no.84 Mouza Bara Dhamani no . 7 and passing through the Northen Boundary of plot no . 230, 223 , 232, 233 and passing through plot no . 318 , 239, 314 , 313 , 312 , 311 , 310, 307 , 305 , 304, 303 , 301 , 299, 297, 385, 386, 388 , 389 , 390, 395 , 397 , 398 , 375, 445 , 504 and meeting at point A16 of Mouza Bara Dhamani no.7 .

A16-A17: - Line starting from point A16 plot no . 504 of Bara Dhamani no . 7 and passing through plot no 504 and meeting at point A17 .

A17 - A18 : - Line starting from point A17 of Mouza Bara Dhamani no.7 passing through plot no . 504, 570 , 477, 471 , 478 and enterign common boundary line of Mouza Mako Madhgi no16 and passing through plot no. 19, 18, 16 of Mouza Mako Madhgi no 16 and passing through common boundary line of Chota Puro no . 8 and Mako Madhgi no 16 and meeting at point A18 in plot no. 1056 of Chota Puro no.8 .

A18 -A1 : Line starting from point A18 plot no . 1056 of Mouza Chota Puro no . 8nad passing through płot no . 215, 213 , 212 and meeting at point Al in plot no.221 of Mouza Chota Puro no . 8 at P.S. Sunder Paharhi , Dist. - Godda .

Boundary Description of Block -2 ( B1 - B27 )

B1 - B2 : Line starting from point B1 mouza Bara Dhamni No - 7 , P.S. Sunderpahari , Dist . Godda , Plot No 100 passing through plot no 100 , 101 , 102 , 103 and crossing the Eastern Bank of Gumani River and passing through Plot No 1175 and crossing the Southern Boundary of plot no 1161 , 1162 , 1165 and crossing the Southern Bank of Gumani River and entering in Mouza Jordiha No - 1 , Passing through plot no 525 , 526 and meeting at point B2 in plot no 521 of Mouza Jordiha no - 1 , P.S. - Littipara, dist. Pakur .

B2- B3: Line starting from point B2 in plot no 521 Mouza Jordiha No- 1 and passing through plot no 522, 524, 518 , 514, 513 , 511 , 510 , 545 and meeting at point B3 in plot no.545 ofMouza Jordiha no - 1 .

453

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925 [PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] B3 -B4: - Line starting from point B3 plot no 545 Mouza Jordiha No - 1 and passing through plot no - 551 , 787 and crossing the common Boundry line of Mouza Jordiha no - 1 and Chota Chatkam no - 10 and passing through Western Boundry of plot no 353 , 354 and passing through plot no 342, 403 , 402 , 488 , 402 and passing through common boundary of Mouza Chota Chatkam no - 10 and Morgo no - 9 and passing through plot no.- 8 , 9, 15 , 18 and meeting at point B4 in Mouza Margo no - 9 .

B4 -B5 : Line starting from point B4 in Mouza Margo no.- 9 and passing through plot no. 102, 101 , 1 and crossing the common boundary line of Mouza Margo no- 9 and Bansbhita no . -8 passing through plot no.187,191 and meeting at point B5 in Mouza Bansbhita no . - 8 .

B5- B6 : - Line starting from point B5 Mouza Bansbitha no - 8 passing through plot no-205 , 68, 69, 70 passing through North East corner of plot no 25 and passing through plot no 9, 8 , 4, 5, 1 and crossing the common boundary line of Mouza Bansbitha no - 8 and Jordiha no - 1 and passing through plot no 731 of Jordiha no- 1 and meeting at point B6 .

B6-B7.:- Line starting from point B6 in Mouza Jordiha no - 1 crossing the common boundary line of Mouza AmarBitha No - 7 and Jordiha No- 1 and passing through plot no 1 of Amarbitha no - 7 and meeting at point B7 .

B7-B8 : - Line starting from B7 in Mouza Amarbitha no - 7, passing through plot no - 1 , Western Boundary of plot no - 111 , Passing through 112, 113 and 1 , meeting at point B8 in Mouza Amarbitha no- 7.

B8 -B9 : Line starting from point B8 in Mouza Amarbitha no - 7 , and entering in common boundary line of Mouza Bara Murjora no - 3 , and Amarbitha no. - 7 , passing through plot no -922 , 920 , 917 , 918 , 831 , 828 , 827, 825, 823 , 822, 790, 787 , 786, 778 , 770 , 773 , 774 , 432, 468 , 567 ,464, 460 , 459 and meeting at point B9 in plot no -448 .

B9 - B10: - Line starting from point B9 in plot no - 448 of Bara Murjora no - 3 , passing through plot no 455 , 453 , 450 , 424, 422 , 410, 411 , 401 , 359 , 355 , 356 and crossing the common boundary line of Mouza Simlong no -4 and Bara Murjora no- 3 , Passing through plotno 37, 38 , 40 , 35 , 34, 45 , 48 , 69, 68 , 67, 72 and meeting at point B10.

B10 - B11 : -Line starting from point B10 in plot no 101 of Mouza Simlong No - 4 , passing through plot no - 100, 101 , 256, 257 , 255 , 253 , 249 , 247, 248 , 257 , 126, 127 , 128 , 132 , 133 , 174 and 432 meeting at point B11 in plot no 558 of Mouza Simlong no -4 .

B11 - B12: -Line starting from B11 in plot no 558 of Mouza Simlong no - 4 and meeting at point B12 in plot no 559.

B12- B13 : -Line starting from point B12 in Mouza Simlong no- 4 , passing through plot no- 559 , 342, 174 , 132 , 130, 129, 257, 248 , 247 meeting at point B13 .

B13 -B14 : -Line starting from B13 plot no 247 of Mouza Simlong no - 4 , passing through plot no- 247, 238 , 227 , 226 , 220 , 221 , 219 , 200 , 201 , 295 , 296, 297, 309 , 307 and meeting at pointB14 .

[ भाग II- स्त्रण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

454 B14 - B15 : -Line starting from point B14 Mouza Simlong no-4,plot no - 307, passing through plot no - 308 , 303 , 333 , 486 , 483,491 , 492, 481 , 436, 437 , 438 , 440 , 444, 449 , 452, 464 , 463 , 468 , 472 , 543 , 400 , 615 and crossing the Lada River and meeting at common boundary of Mouza Simlong no - 4 and Lada Patahar no- 27 at point B15.

B15 - B16: -Line starting from B15 at common boundary point and passing through mouza Ladapathar no - 27 plot no - 167 , 166, 165, 156 , 151 , 150 , 148 , 134 , 133 , 247, 256, 257 , 258, meeting at point B16 in plot no 261.

B16 - B17 : -Line starting from point B16 plot no 261 of Mouza Lada Pathar no - 27 and passing through plot no - 261 , 260, 310 , 300 and passing throgh common boundary line of Mouza Lada Pathar no - 27 and Dhouphar no - 26 and passing through plot no- 262, 67, 69 , 74, 75 and meeting at point B17 in plot no 100.

B17 - B18 : -Line starting from point B17 plot no 100 of Mouza Dhouphar No - 26 and passing throgh plot no - 100 , 96 , 94 , 79 , 85 and meeting at point B18 .

B18 - B19 : -Line starting from point B18 the common boundary point of Mouza Dhouphar no - 26 and Southern Bank of Gumani River and passing through Gumani river and plot no 48, 47, 46, 37 , 36 , 38 , 35 , 34 , 33 , 30, 206 of Mouza Dhouphar no - 26 and crossing the common boundary line of Mouza Ladapathar no -27 and Dhouphar no - 26 and passing through Gumani River and meeting at point B19 on the Southern Bank of Gumani River plot no.3 of Ladapathar no.27 .

B19 - B20 : -Line starting from point B19 plot no - 3 of Ladapathar no - 27 and passing through the common boundary line of Mouza Simlong no-4 and Ladapathar no - 27 passing through plot no - 363 , 357 , 356 , 331 , 321 , 322 , 317, 280, 278 , 276, 286, 287 , 265 , 264 , 263 , 92 , 93 , 78 , 79 , 80 and meeting at point B20 in West corner of plot no - 60 in Mouza Simlong No-4.

B20- B21: - Line starting from point B20 passing through plot no - 60 , 58 , 8, 9, 12 and entering in common boundary line of Mouza Bara Murjora No - 3 and Simlong No -4, passing through plot no - 326, 328 , 321 , 317 , 316 and meeting at point B21 .

B21 - B22: - Line starting from point B21 plot no - 317 of Mouza Bara Murjora no - 3 and passing through plot no - 313 , 270 , 271 , 300 , 294, 293 , 292, 289 and meeting at point B22 in Gumani River .

B22- B23 : - Line starting from Point B22 in Gumani River and crossing the common boundary line of Mouza Bara Murjora no - 3 and Kherasol no - 13 and passing through plot no- 284,223 , 101 , 100 , 99 , 98 , 94 , 93 , 92, 84, 69 , 68 , 66 , 56 of Mouza Bara Murjora no - 3 and meeting at point B23 .

B23 - B24: - Line starting from point B23 in plot 57 of Mouza Bara Murjora No - 3 and passing through plot no - 58 , 29 , 42, 37, 38 , 35 , 31 , 32, 21 , 19, 14, 13 , 8, 5, 2 and entering the common boundary line of Mouza Chota Murjora no - 2 and Bara Muljora no - 3 and passing in plot no - 188 , 187, 186, 185 , 184 , 183 , 182 , 181 , 180, 179, 178 , 177 , 173 of Chota Murjora no - 2 , and passing through common boundary line of Mouza Chota Murjora no - 2 and Gumani River and passing through Gumani River plot no - 122 again crossing the common boundary line of Mouza Chota Murjora no -2 and Gumani River and Meeting at point B24 in plot no - 125 of Mouza Chota Murjora no -2.

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925 [PART II-SEC. 3(ii)] 455

B24- B25 : -Line starting from point B24 Mouza Chota Murjora no -2 plot no- 125 and passing through plot no- 126, 125 , 120, 123 , 102, 101 , 100 , 123, 61, 60, 58, 59, 51 and meeting at point B25 in plot no -792 Mouza Chota Murjora no- 2.

B25 - B26: -Line starting from point B25 plot no - 792 of Chota Murjora No- 2 and passing through plot no -792 and crossing the Common boundary line of Mouza Jordiha no- 1 and Chota Murjora No - 2 and passing through plot no-731 , 154, 270, 131 , and meeting at point B26 in plot no -270.

B26- B27: -Line starting from point B26 plot no - 270 of Mouza Jordiha no- 1 passing through plot no -270, 126, 124 , 7, 8 , 10, 11 , 5 and meeting at point B27 on the Eastern corner of plot no-4.

B27 -B1 : - Line starting from point B27 in Mouza Jordiha no 1 plot no -4 passing through plot no- 3, 5 , 2 , 13 , 15, 17, 19, 20, 21 , 24 of Mouza Jordiha no - 1 and entering in common boundary line of Mouza Jordiha no - 1 and Garideh no - 9 and passing through Gumani River and crossing the common boundary line of Mouza Bara Dhamni no-7 and Garideh no - 9 and meeting at point B1 in plot no- 100 of Bara Dhamni no- 7 P.S. Sunderpaharhi , Dist. -Godda.

[No. 43015/10/2002/PRIW] SANJAY BAHADUR, Director

नई दिल्ली, 22 जनवरी, 2004

का. आ . 238.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला धारक क्षेत्र (अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है) की धारा 7 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधीन जारी भारत सरकार के तत्कालीन कोयला और खान मंत्रालय , (कोयला विभाग ) की अधिसूचना सं. का.आ. 726 (अ ) तारीख 11 जुलाई, 2002 , जो भारत के राजपत्र , भाग 2 , खंड 3 , उपखंड ( ii ) , तारीख 11 जुलाई, 2002 में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में यथा वर्णित परिक्षेत्र की भूमि में, जिसका माप 451.51 हैक्टर ( लगभग) या 1115.72 एकड़ (लगभग) है, खनिजों के खनन, खदान , बोर करने , उनकी खुदाई और तलाश करने, उन्हें प्राप्त करने , उन पर कार्य करने और उन्हें ले जाने के अधिकारों का अर्जन करने के आशय की सूचना दी थी ;

और सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 8 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार को अपनी रिपोर्ट दे दी है ;

और केन्द्रीय सरकार का पूर्वोक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् और महाराष्ट्र सरकार से परामर्श करने के पश्चात यह समाधान हो गया है कि इससे संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित 451.51 हैक्टर (लगभग) या 1115.72 एकड़ ( लगभग ) माप वाली भूमि में खनिजों के खनन, 173 G1/2004-6 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

456 खदान, बोर करने , उनकी खुदाई और तलाश करने, उन्हें प्राप्त करने, उन पर कार्य करने और उन्हें ले जाने के अधिकार अर्जित किये जाने चाहिए ;

अतः , अब केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 9 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, यह घोषणा करती है कि इससे संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित 451.51 हैक्टर (लगभग ) या 1115.72 एकड़ (लगभग) माप वाली भूमि में खनिजों के खनन, खदान, बोर करने , उनकी खुदाई और तलाश करने, उन्हें प्राप्त करने, उन पर कार्य करने और उन्हें ले जाने के अधिकार अर्जित किये जाते हैं ;

इस अधिसूचना के अंतर्गत आने वाले क्षेत्र के रेखांक सं. सी-1 (ई) III / जेजेएनआर/701-1202, तारीख 13 दिसम्बर, 2002 का निरीक्षण , कलेक्टर, यवतमाल (महाराष्ट्र) के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक, 1 , काउंसिल हाऊस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता ( 700001 ) के कार्यालय में या वेस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड, (राजस्व विभाग ) , कोल एस्टेट, सिविल लाईन्स, नागपुर 440 001 (महाराष्ट्र) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकता है ।

अनुसूची

घोन्सा उत्तरी विस्तार खंड

वनी उत्तरी क्षेत्र

जिला यवतमाल (महाराष्ट्र)

(रेखांक सं.सी - 1 (ई ) III /जेजेएनआर/ 701-1202, तारीख 13 दिसम्बर, 2002 )

खनन अधिकारः

ग्राम का नाम

तहसील क्रम सं.

पटवारी सर्कल संख्या

1 उंवरघाट

55 मारेगांव 2 किलोने

55 मारेगांव 3 घोन्सा

41 वनी 4

फुलार

वनी 5 बोर्डा

41 वनी जिला क्षेत्र हैक्टर में टिप्पणीयाँ यवतमाल

114.83

भाग

यवतमाल

8.28

भाग

यवतमाल

218.10

भाग

यवतमाल

16.82

भाग

यवतमाल

93.48

भाग

कुल क्षेत्रः- 451.51 हैक्टर (लगभग) या

1115.72 एकड़ (लगभग) THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925 [PART II- SEC. 3 (ii) ] 457

ग्राम उंबरघाट में अर्जित किये गये प्लॉट संख्यांकः

1/1- 1 /2- 1/3 , 2/1-2/2-2/3-2/4- 2/5, 3/1 क- 3/1ख- 3/1 ग- 3/2-3/3- 3/4- 3/5, 4/1- 4/2-4/3-4/4-4/5 4/6 भाग, 5/1 क- 5/ 1ख- 5/2-5/2क- 5/3-5/3क- 5/4-5/5-5/6, 16 भाग, 17 भाग , 18 , 19/1- 19/2- 19/3, 20/1 क- 20/1 ख- 20/11 20/1 ग2- 20/2क- 20/2 ख- 20/3, 21 /1- 21 / 2क, 22/1- 22/1क- 22/ 1 ख- 22/1 ग- 22/1घ- 22/2 , 23 /1- 23/2.

ग्राम किलोने में अर्जित किये गये प्लाट संख्यांकः

3/1-3/2-3/3क- 3/3ख- 3/4.

ग्राम घोन्सा में अर्जित किये गये प्लॉट संख्यांकः

1 , 2, 3 , 4 , 5 , 6, 7 , 8 /1- 8 /2- 8/3 , 911- 9/2 , 10/1-10/2- 10/3 , 11 , 12/1-12/2- 12 /3- 12/4 , 13/1- 13/2- 13 /3- 13/4 , 14/1- 14/2- 14/3 , 15/1- 15/2, 16, 17/1- 17/2-17/2क, 18 , 19 , 20, 21 , 22/ 1- 22/2- 22/3- 22/4 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 101/1 101 /2- 101/3 , 102/1- 102/2 , 103 , 104 , 105/1- 105 /2- 105/3 , 106, 107, 108 , 109, 110 , 113/1113/2 , 123 , 124, 125 /1- 125/2 , 126, 127 , 128/1- 128/2 , 129 , 130 , 131 , 132 , 133 /1- 133/2 , 134, 135 , 136, 137/ 1- 137/2 , 138 , 139 , 140, 141 , 142, 143 /1-143 /2 , 144, 145, आबादी (गावठान) , सड़क भाग, नदी भाग.

ग्राम फुलार में अर्जित किये गये प्लॉट संख्यांकः

2 भाग, 22/1- 22/ 1 क- 22/2- 22/3- 22/4- 22/4क भाग, 23/1- 23/2 भाग, 24/1- 24/2- 24/3-24/4-24/5- 24/6- 24/7 .

ग्राम बोर्डा में अर्जित किये गये प्लॉट संख्यांकः 240 भाग.

सीमा वर्णनः

क-खः रेखा ' क ' बिन्दु से आरम्भ होती है और ग्राम घोन्सा से होकर प्लॉट संख्यांक 107 की बाहरी सीमा के साथ-साथ गुजरती है, सड़क पार करती है और प्लॉट संख्यांक 128 /1- 128/2 , 127 , 123 , 124, 125 /1-125 /2 की बाहरी सीमा के साथ- साथ गुजरती है, विदर्भ नदी पार करती है और प्लॉट संख्यांक 8/ 1- 8/2- 8/3 की बाहरी सीमा के साथ- साथ गुजरती है फिर प्लॉट संख्यांक 3/1- 3/2-3/ 3 क- 3 /3ख- 3/4 की बाहरी सीमा के साथ साथ ग्राम किलोने से [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

458 होकर गुजरती है फिर ग्राम किलोने और उंबरघाट , जगलोन और उंबरघाट ग्रामों की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा के साथ- साथ गुजरती है और ग्राम उंबरघाट से होकर प्लॉट संख्यांक 5/ 1 क- 5/ 1 ख- 5/2-5/ 2क- 5/3-5/3क- 5/4-5/5-5/6 की बाहरी सीमा के साथ-साथ गुजरती हुई आगे बढ़ती है , प्लॉट संख्यांक 4/1-4/2-4/3- 4/4-4/5-4 /6 , 17 , 16 में से होती हुई गुजरती है और बिन्दु ' ख ' पर मिलती है ।

ख-ग-घः रेखा ग्राम बोर्डा से होकर प्लॉट संख्यांक 240 में से होती हुई गुजरती है, फिरं ग्राम फुलार से होते हुए प्लॉट संख्यांक 2 , 23/1- 23/2 , 22/ 1- 22/1 क- 22/2- 22/3- 22/4- 22/4क में से होती हुई आगे बढ़ती है फिर प्लॉट संख्यांक 22/1-22/ 1 क-22/2- 22/3- 22/4- 22/4क, 24/1-24/2-24/3- 24/4- 24/5-24/6-24/7 की बाहरी सीमा के साथ-साथ गुजरती है और सी.बी.ए. अधिनियम की धारा 9 ( 1 ) के अधीन घोन्सा ब्लॉक के लिये का.आ. संख्या 2973 , तारीख 18/10/1994 द्वारा पहले ही से अर्जित की क्षेत्र विद्यमान रेखा के साथ- साथ गुजरती है और बिन्दु ' घ ' पर मिलती है ।

घ कः रेखा ग्राम घोन्सा से होकर प्लॉट संख्यांक 25, 22/1- 22/2- 22/3- 22/4 , 17/1- 17 /2-17 /2 क की बाहरी सीमा के साथ-साथ गुजरती है, सड़क पार करती है, और प्लॉट संख्यांक 16, 12/1-12/2- 12/3- 12/4 की बाहरी सीमा के साथ-साथ गुजरती है , विदर्भ नदी पार करती है , फिर प्लॉट संख्यांक 145, आबादी (गावठान) , 144 , 104 , 103 , 102/1- 102/2, 101 /1- 101/2-101/3 की बाहरी खीया के साथ- साथ गुजरती है , और सी.बी.ए. अधिनियम की धारा 9 ( 1 ) के अधीन धोन्सा ब्लॉक के लिये का.आ. संख्या 2973 , तारीख 18/10/1994 द्वारा पहले ही से अर्जित क्षेत्र की विद्यमान रेखा के साथ-साथ गुजरती है तथा प्लॉट संख्यांक 110, 113/1- 113/2 , 107 की बाहरी सीमा के साथ -साथ गुजरती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु ' क' पर मिलती है ।

[संख्या-43015/4/2000- पी ० आर ० आई ० डब्ल्यू० ]

संजय बहादुर, निदेशक [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

459

New Delhi , the 22nd January, 2004

S.O. 238.-Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the then Ministry of Coal and Mines (Department of Coal ) number S.O. 726 (E) dated the 11th July, 2002 , issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of section 7 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development ) Act , 1957 (20 of 1957) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and published in Part - II , Section - 3 , Sub- Section (ii ) of the Gazette of India, dated the 11th July, 2002, the Central Government gave notice of its intention to acquire the rights to mine , quarry bore , dig and search for win work and carry away minerals in the lands measuring 451.51 hectares (approximately ) or 1115.72 acres (approximately) in the locality as described in the Schedule appended to that notification .

And whereas the competent authority in pursuance of section 8 of the said Act has made his report to the Central Government .

And whereas the Central Government after considering the report aforesaid and after consulting the Government of Maharashtra is satisfied that the rights to mine , quarry, bore, dig and search for win work and carry away minerals in the lands measuring 451.51 hectares ( approximately) or 1115.72 acres (approximately) described in the` Schedule appended hereto should be acquired ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of section 9 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that the rights to mine , quarry, bore, dig and search for win work and carry away minerals in the lands measuring 451.51 hectares ( approximately) or 1115.72 acres (approximately ) described in the Schedule appended hereto are hereby acquired;

The pian bearing number . C - 1 (E) III/ JJNR/ 701-1202 dated the 13th December , 2002 of the area covered by this notification may be inspected in the office of the Collector, Yavatmal (Maharashtra) or in the office of the Coal Controller , 1 Council House Street , Kolkata (Pin 700 001 ) or in the office of the Western Coalfields Limited (Revenue Department) , Coal Estate , Civil Lines , Nagpur - 440 001 (Maharashtra) .

Schedule

Ghonsa Northern Extension Block

Wani North Area

District Yavatmal ( Maharashtra )

( Plan No. C - 1 ( E ) III / JJNR/ 701-1202 dated the 13th December , 2002)

Remarks Mining Rights :

District

Tahsil

Area in hectares

Name of village

Serial number

Patwari circle number

Part

114.83

Yavatmal

55 Maregaon

Part Umbarghat

8.28

Yavatmal

55 Maregaon

Kilone

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

460 3 . Ghonsa

41 Wani

Yavatmal

218.10

Part 4. Fular

41 Wani

Yavatmal

16.82

Part 5 . Borda

41 Wani

Yavatmal

93.48

Part

Total area : 451.51 hectares

(approximately)

1115.72 acres

(approximately) Plot numbers acquired in village Umbarghat :-

1 / 1-1 / 2-1 /3 , 2 / 1-2/ 2-2/ 3-2/ 4-2 /5 , 3 / 1A- 3 / 1B- 3 / 1C- 3 /2-3/3-3 /4-3 / 5 , 4/ 1-4 /2-4/3-4/4- 4/5-4/ 6 part , 5 / 1A- 5 / 1B - 5 / 2-5/ 2A- 5 /3-5 /3A- 5/4-5/5-5/ 6, 16 part , 17 part, 18, 19/ 1-19/2- 19/3 , 20/1A- 20/1B - 20/1C1-20/ 1C2-20/2A- 20/2B- 20/3 , 21/1-21 /24, 22/1-22/ 1A- 22/ 1B- 22/1C- 22/ 1D- 22/2 , 23/1-23/ 2 .

Plot numbers acquired in village Kilone : -

3/1-3/ 2-3 /3A- 3/3B- 3/4 .

Plot numbers acquired in village Ghonsa : -

1 , 2, 3 , 4, 5 , 6, 7, 8 /1-8/2- 8/3 , 9/1-9/2, 10/1- 10/2- 10/3 , 11 , 12/1-12/2-12/3-12/4, 13/1- 13/2-13 /3-13/4, 14/1- 14/2-14/3 , 15/1- 15/2, 16, 17/1- 17/2-17/2A, 18 , 19, 20 , 21 , 22/1- 22/2-22/3-22/4, 23 , 24, 25, 101/1101/2-101 /3 , 102/1102/2 , 103 , 104 , 105 /1-105/2- 105/3 , 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 113/1113/2, 123, 124, 125/1-125/2 , 126 , 127 , 128/1-128/2 , 129, 130, 131 , 132, 133 /1- 133/2, 134, 135, 136, 137/1-137/2 , 138 , 139 , 140, 141 , 142 , 143/1-143/2, 144 , 145 , Abadi ( Gaothan ) , Road part , River part .

Plot numbers acquied in village Fular : -

2 part . 22/ 1-22 / 14- 22 / 2- 22/3- 22/4- 22/4A part , 23 / 1- 23/2 part, 24/1-24/2-24/3-24/4- 24/5-24/6-24/ 7 .

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004 /MAGHA 11 , 1925

461

Plot numbers acquired in village Borda: -

240 part .

Boundary description : -

A-B :

Line starts from point ' A' and passes through village Ghonsa , along the outer boundary of plot number 107 , crosses road , and passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 128/1- 128/2 , 127 , 123 , 124 , 125/ 1- 125/2 , crosses Vidarbha river and passes along the outer boundary of plot number 8 / 1-8 /2- 8/3 , then passes through village Kilone along the outer boundary of plot number 3 / 1-3/2-3/3A- 3/3B 3/4 , then passes along the common village boundary of villages Kilone and Umbarghat , Jaglon and Umbarghat and proceeds through village Umbarghat along the outer boundary of plot number 5/ 1A- 5 / 1B - 5 /2-5 /2A- 5 /3-5 /3A- 5 /4-5 /5-5/6, in plot numbers 4/ 1-4/2-4/3- 4/4-4/5-4/6, 17 , 16 and meets at point ' B ' .

B - C -D : Line passes through village Borda in plot number 240 , then proceeds through village Fular in plot numbers 2, 23/1- 23/2 , 22/1-22/ 1A- 22/2-22/3-22/4- 22/4A , then passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 22 / 1- 22 / 1A- 22/2-22/3-22/4-22/4A, 24/1-24/2-24/3-24/4-24/5-24/6-24/7 and along the existing line of area already acquired under section 9 ( 1 ) of CBA Act for Ghonsa Block vide S.O. No. 2973 dated 18/10/1994 and meets at point ' D' .

D-A:

Line passes through village Ghonsa along the outer boundary of plot numbers 25, 22/1-22/2-22/3- 22/4 , 17 /1-17 /2-17/2A, crosses road , and passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 16, 12/ 1-12/2- 12/3- 12/4 , crosses Vidarbha river , then passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 145 , Abadi ( Gaothan) , 144, 104, 103 , 102/1102/2 , 101/1 101 /2-101 /3 , and along the existing line of area already acquired under section 9 ( 1 ) of CBA Act for Ghonsa Block vide S.O. No. 2973 dated 18/10/1994 , and passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 110, 113 / 1-113 /2 , 107 and meets at starting point `A` .

[No. 43015/4/2000/PRIW] SANJAY BAHADUR , Director 462

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] उपभोक्तामामले, खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय

(उपभोक्ता मामले विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 21 जनवरी, 2004

का०आ० 239.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट तथा माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7) और उपधारा (8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स फाइव स्टार वेइंग सिस्टम्स , 12 साई नगर, एकता नगर के समीप नानक रोड, देवपुर, धुले- 424001 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता वर्ग 3 वाले " यूएफ डब्ल्यूटी " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित, अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण (टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " फाइव स्टार " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2003/ 332 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृतमापी भार सेल आधारित प्रकार का तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 10 कि.ग्रा. औरन्यूनतम क्षमता 40 ग्रा . है सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 2 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आद्येयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आद्येयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

सीलबन्दी: स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को सील बन्द करने के अतिरिक्त, कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबन्दी कीजाएगी ।

आर, कन्द्राय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मांडल के इस अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से विनिर्मित जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है । उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे हो मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि. ग्रा. से 2 ग्राम तक " ई" मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) की संख्या और 5 ग्रा . या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान अंतराल ( एन ) की संख्या सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 ×10 *, 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 के , के हैं, जिसमें के धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक 'या शून्य के समतुल्य है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 (68)/2001 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 463 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/ माघ 11 , 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs)

New Delhi , the 21st January,2004

S.O. 239. Wheras the Central Govemment, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Mea- sures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of the self- indicating, non - autmatic , (Table top type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " FWT" series of medium accuracy (Ac- curacy class III ) and with brand name " Five Star" (here referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Five Star Weighing Systems , 12, Sai Nagar , Near Ekta Nagar, Nakana Road , Deopur, Dhule- 424001 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2003/332 ;

The said Model (See the figure given below ) is a strain guage load cell based type weighing instrument with amaximum capacity of 10kg and minimum capacity of 40g . The verification scale interval (e) is 2g. It has a tare device with a 100 percent substractive retained tare effect . The light emitting diode display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 - Hertz altemate current power supply;

Sealing : In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing shall also be done to prevent the opening of the machine for fraudulent practices .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section ( 12 ) of the Section , 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50kg and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for 'e ' value of 100mg to 2g and with number of verfication scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k , k, being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which, the said approved Model has been manufactured.

[No. WM- 21 (68)/2001 ]

P.A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director , Legal Metrology 173 GI/2004-7 464

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/ MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 21 जनवरी , 2004

का०आ ० 240.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट तथा माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्तंमॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स फाइव स्टार वेइंग सिस्टम्स, 12, साई नगर, एकता नगर के समीप नानक रोड, देवपुर, धुले- 424001 द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग 2 ) वाले " एफ एस पी " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित, अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " फाइव स्टार " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2003/ 333 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृतमापी भार सेल आधारित प्रकार का तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 60 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 250 ग्रा. है सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई ) का मान 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आद्येयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आद्येयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

और , केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के इस अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से विनिर्मित जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है । उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 1 मि. ग्रा. से 50 मि ग्राम तक " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 5,000 तक के रंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) की संख्या और 100 मि ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान अंतराल ( एन ) की संख्या सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. से ऊपर और 300 कि. ग्रा. के रेंज की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई" मात्र 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 * , के हैं, जिसमें के धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 68 ) / 2001 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 465 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31, 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 21st January, 2004

S.O. 240. Wheras the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Mea- sures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issue and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of, the self- indicating, non- automatic, (Plate form type) weighing instrument with digital indication of " FSP" series of High accuracy (Accu- racy class II ) and with brand name " Five Star ' (here referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/ s Five Star Weighing Systems 12 , Sai Nagar, Near Ekta Nagar, Nanaka Road, Deopur , Dhule- 424001 and which is assigned the approvalmark IND/09/2003/333;

The said Model (See the figure given below) is a strain guage load cell based type weighing instrument with amaximum capacity of 60kg and minimum capacity of 250g . The verification scale intercal (e) is 5g. It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The light emitting diode display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 - Hertz alternate current power supply ;

Sealing : In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing shall also be done to prevent the opening of the machine for fraudulent practices .

Further , in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- section ( 12 ) of the Section 36 of the Act said Section, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity ranging from above 50kg to 300kg and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 5,000 for ' e ' value of 1mg to 50mg and with the number of verfication scale interval (n) in the range of 5000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10% , 2× 10k or 5× 10k , k, being a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which, the said approved Model has been manufacture .

[No. WM- 21 (68 )/2001 ]

P.A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director , Legal Metrology 466.

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II SEC. 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 21 जनवरी , 2004

का०आ० 241.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट तथा माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स फाइव स्टार वेइंग सिस्टम्स, 12 साई नगर, एकता नगर के समीप नानक रोड, देवपुर, धुले- 424 001 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग 3 ) वाले " एफ एस डब्ल्यूई " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित, अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( बहु भार सेल तुला चौकी ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " फाइव स्टार " है ( जिसे इसमें उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2003/334 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बहु भार सेल आधारित प्रकार का तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 20 टन और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई ) का मान 5 कि. ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के इस अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से विनिर्मित जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल काविनिर्माण किया गया है । उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 कि. ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मान अंतराल (एन ) की संख्या सहित 50 टन से 100 टन रेंज की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई" मान 1 × 10 के, 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 के हैं , जिसमें के धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 68 )/2001 ]

पी . ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 467 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31, 2004/माष 11 , 1925

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 21st January , 2004

S.O. 241. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Mea- sures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- sections (7 ) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of the self- indicating, non - automatic , (Multi load cell weigh bridge type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " FSWE " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class III) and with brand name "Five Star " (here referred to as the said model ) , manufac- turedby M/s Five Star Weighing Systems , 12, Sai Nagar , Near Ekta Nagar , Nakana Road, Deopur , Dhule- 424 001 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2003/334;

The said Model (See the figure given below) is a multi load cell based type weighbridge with a maximum capacity of 20 tonne and minimum capacity of 100 kg. The verification scale interval (e ) is 5kg . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent substractive retained tare effect. The light emitting diode display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 volts and 50 - Hertz alternate current power supply;

Sealing : In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing shall also be done to prevent the opening ofthe machine for fraudulent practices .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section ( 12) of the Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make and performance of same series with maximum capacity ranging from 5 tonne to 100 tonnes and with number of verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 5kg or more and with ' e' value 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k, or 5 × 10k , k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM- 21 (68)/2001 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director , Legal Metrology 468

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART IISEC . 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 21 जनवरी , 2004

का०आ० 242.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट तथा माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स फाइव स्टार वेइंग सिस्टम्स, 12, साई नगर, एकता नगर के समीप नानक रोड, देवपुर, धुले- 424001 द्वारा विनिर्मितं मध्यम यथार्थता ( पृथार्थता वर्ग 3 ) वाले " एफ एस डब्ल्यूई " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित, अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( तुला चौकी के लिए संपरिवर्तन किट) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " फाइव स्टार " है ( जिसे इसमें उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2003/335 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृतमापी भारसेल आधारित प्रकार का तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 20 टन और न्यूनतम क्षमता . 100 कि.ग्रा. है सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 5 कि. ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आद्येयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आद्येयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

सीलबन्दी: स्टाम्पिग प्लेट को सील बन्द करने के अतिरिक्त, कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए भी सील बन्दीकी जाएगी ।

124

125

126

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के इसअनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से विनिर्मित जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है । उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तौलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 कि. ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई" मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) की संख्या सहित 50 टन. से 100 टन रेंज की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले है और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 हैं, जिसमें के धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 68 ) /2001 ]

पी० ए० कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 469 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31, 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 21st January, 2004

S.O. 242. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights andMea- sures(Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- sections ( 7 ) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of the self- indicating, non-automatic , (conversion kit for weigh bridge type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " FSWE " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class III ) and with brand name " Five Star ' (here referred to as the said model) , manufac- tured by M/s . Five Star Weighing Systems , 12, Sai Nagar , Near Ekta Nagar , Nakana Road, Deopur, Dhule- 424001 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 2003 /335;

The said model (see the figure given below) is a strain gauge load cell based type weighing instrument with amaximum capacity of 20 tonne and minimum capacity of 100 kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 5kg. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent substractive retained tare effect . The light emitting diode display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 volts and 50 - Hertz alternate current power supply;

Sealing : In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing is done to prevent the opening of the machine for fraudulent practices.

12330

24.31

$25

126

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section ( 12) of the Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make and performance of same series with maximum capacity ranging from above 5 tonne to 100 tonnes and with number of verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for 'e' value of 5kg or more and with ' e ' value 1x 10k , 2 x 10k or 5x10k , k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which , the said approved Model has been manufactured .

[F. No. WM- 21 (68)/2001 ]

P.A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director , Legal Metrology 470

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 21 जनवरी, 2004

का०आ० 243.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60) तथा बाट तथा माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा (8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स डिगी वे इलेक्ट्रानिक्स वेइंग सिस्टम, 100 , गोकुल पार्क सोसायटी, कांस के पास, मणि नगर ( पू. ), अहमदाबाद-382445 द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग 2 ) वाले " पी डब्ल्यू- II" श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक , अस्वचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तौलन उपकरण ( प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " प्री सी - वे " है ( जिसे इसमें उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2003/356 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृतमापी प्रकार का भारसेल आधारित अधिकतम क्षमता 11 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 50 ग्रा. है, तोलन उपकरण है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 1 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

सीलबन्दी: स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को सील बन्द करने के अतिरिक्त, कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबन्दी की जाएगी । PRECI -WEIGH

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के इस अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 1 मि. ग्रा. से 50 मि. ग्रा. तक " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन'मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि. ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान अंतराल (एन) की संख्या सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 के हैं , जिसमें के धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य है ।

[ फा. सं . डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 111 )/2001 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 471 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

11 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

New Delhi, the 21st January, 2004

S.O. 243. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority , is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights andMea- sures(Approval of Models ) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the saidAct, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of, the self- indicating, non- automatic , (Table top type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " PW- II " series of High accuracy (Accu- racy class II ) and with brand name " PRECI - WEIGH" (here referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s Digiweigh Electronics Weighing System , 100, Gokul Park Society, Near Kans , Mani Nagar (E) , Ahmedabad -382445 andwhich is assigned the approval mark IND /09/2003/356;

The said model (see the figure given) is a strain gauge load cell based type weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 11kg and minimum capacity of 50g . The verification scale interval (e) is 1g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The light emitting diode display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 volts and 50 - Hertz alternate current power supply;

Sealing: In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing shall also be done to prevent the opening machine for fraudulent practices .

PRECI WEIGH

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section (12) of the said section, Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make and⚫ performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 50000 for 'e' value of Img to 50mg and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of5000 to50,000 for ' e ' value of 5mg or more and with ' e' value lx 10k , 2 x 10k , or 5x10% , k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materiais with which , the said approved Model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 (111 )/2001 ]

P.A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director, Legal Metrology 173 Gl /20048 472

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 21 जनवरी, 2004

का०आ० 244.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल (नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट तथा माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शंक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स डिगी वे इलेक्ट्रानिक्स वेईंग सिस्टम, 100, गोकुल पार्क सोसायटी , कांस के पास, मणि नगर ( पू. ) , अहमदाबाद -382445 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता वर्ग ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " पी डब्ल्यूटी -20" श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित, अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल प्रकार) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " पी सी-वे " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2003/ 357 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृतमापी प्रकार का भारसेल आधारित अधिकतम क्षमता 20 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 40 ग्राम है । तोलन उपकरण है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 2 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयवुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयंतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

सीलबन्दी: स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को सील बन्द करने के अतिरिक्त, कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए भी सील बन्दी की जाती है ।

और , केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त गॉडल के उस अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के जैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि. ग्रा. से 2 ग्राम तक " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) की संख्या और 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान अंतराल ( एन ) की संख्या सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 * या 5 × 10 * के हैं, जिसमें ' के' धनाक था ऋणायक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 111 )/2001 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान

1 473 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 21st January, 2004

S.O. 244. Wheras the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority , is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of the self- indicating, non -automatic , (Table type) weighing instrument with digital indication of " PWT - 20 " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class III ) and with brand name " PRECI - WEIGH " (here referred to as the said Model ) , manufacturedby M/ s. Digiweigh Electronics Weighing System , 100 , Gokul Park Society, Near Kans , Mani Nagar(E) , Ahmedabad- 382445 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 / 2003 /357;

The said Model (see the figure given below ) is a strain gauge type load cell based type weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 20kg and minumum capacity of 40g . The verification scale interval (e) is 2g . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The light emitting diode display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 volts and 50 hertz alternate current power supply.

Sealing : In addition to sealing the stamping plate, sealing is also done to prevent the opening machine for fraudulent practices .

PREC - WEIGH

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50kg and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 100mg to 2g and with the number of verfication scale interval(n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1x 10k, 2x10 or 5 × 10k , k, being a positive. or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which, the approved Model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 (111 )/2001 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 474

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004 /MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II- SEC . 3( ii )]

नई दिल्ली, 21 जनवरी , 2004

का०आ० 245.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट तथा माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स डिगी वे इलेक्ट्रानिक्स वेईंग सिस्टम, 100 , गोकुल पार्क सोसायटी, निकट कंस मणि नगर ( पू० ) , अहमदाबाद -382445 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता वर्ग ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " पी डब्ल्यू पी " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित, प्लेट फार्म टाइप, अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " प्रसी- वे " है ( जिसे इसमें उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2003/358 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल (नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृतमापी भारसेल आधारित टाइप तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई) का मान 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्पक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के इस अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान अंतराल ( एन ) की संख्या 50 कि. ग्रा. से 300 कि. ग्रा. तक की रेंज की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 ×10 , 2 × 10 * या 5 × 10 के के हैं, जिसमें ' के' धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 111 )/2001 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक मापं विज्ञान 475 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004 माघ 11 , 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

NewDelhi, the 21st January, 2004

S.O. 245. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- section (7 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of the self- indicating, non- automatic , (Plat form type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " PW- P- 30 " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class III ) and with brand name " PRECI- WEIGH " (herein referred to as the Model) , manufactured by M/s . Digiweigh Electronics Weighing System, 100 , Gokul Park Society, Near Kans , Mani Nagar (E) Ahmedabad- 382 445 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/2003/358 ;

The said model ( figure given below) is a strain gauge load cell based type weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 30kg and minimum capacity of 100g . The verification scale interval (e) is 5g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The light emitting diode display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 volts and 50 Hertz alternate current power supply .

practices. Sealing: In addition to sealing stamping plate , sealing is done to prevent the opening machine for fraudulent Further , in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section ( 12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make and performance of same series with maximum capacity ranging from 50 kg upto 300kg " and with number of verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value 1 x 10% , 2 x10kor5x10*, 'k' being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved Model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 ( 111 )/2001 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 476

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/ MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3(ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 28 अक्तूबर, 2003

का०आ० 246.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट तथा माप मानक ( मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स एलेक्स इलेक्ट्रानिक्स, " गोपालकुंज " गली नं. 6, शिवाजी नगर, सावरकुण्डला-364515 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता वर्ग ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एई टी -108 " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " ब्लूस्टार " है ( जिसे इसमें मॉडल कहा गया है) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2003/427 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदने प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृतमापी प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 10 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 20 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई ) का मान 1 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 बोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

और , केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के इस अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से विनिर्मित जिससे अनुमोदित माडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है । उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि. ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक " ई " मान के लिए और 100 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) की संख्या और 5 ग्रा. या उस से अधिक के " ई" मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान अंतराल ( एन ) की संख्या सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 के , 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 के है , जिसमें के घनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य है।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 139 )/2001 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 477 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi, the 28th October , 2003

S.O. 246. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 ( 60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections ( 7 ) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of the self- indicating, non- automatic , ( Table type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " AET 108 " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class III ) and with brand name "BLUE STAR" (here referred to as the said Model) , manufactured by M/s .AlexElectronics , " Gopal Kunj " Street No. 6, Shivaji Nagar, Savarkundla -364 515 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2003/427;

The said model ( see the figure given below) is a strain gauge load cell based type weighing instrument with amaximum capacity of 10 kg and minimum capacity of 20 g. The verification scale interval (e) is lg. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The light emitting diode display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 - Hertz alternate current power supply;

Sealing: In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing shall also be done to prevent the opening machine for fraudulent practices .

Further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 12) of the Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg and with number of verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg to 2 g and with number of verification scale interval ( n ) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5 g or more and with ' e ' value 1 × 10 , 2 × 10kor 5 × 10%, k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero, manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 ( 139)/2001 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY , Director, Legal Metrology 478

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004 /MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 28 अक्तूबर, 2003

का०आ ० 247.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट तथा माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा (7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स एलेक्स इलेक्ट्रानिक्स, " गोपालकुंज " गली नं. 6, शिवाजी नगर, सावरकुण्डला-364515 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " ए ई टी-401 " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित, अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " ब्लूस्टार " है ( जिसे इसमें मॉडल कहा गया है) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2003/428 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है;

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृतमापी प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा . है । सत्यापन मापमाल अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 5 ग्रा . है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

सीलबन्दी: स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को सील बन्द करने के अतिरिक्त, कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबन्दी कीजाएगी ।

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के इस अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से विनिर्मित जिससे अनुमोदित माडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है । उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 10 ग्रा. या उस से अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए और 500 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (एन ) की संख्या 50 कि. ग्रा. से ऊपर 300 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 * या 5 × 10 है, जिसमें के घनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 139)/2001 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 479 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 28th October, 2003

S.O. 247. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- sections (7 ) and (8 ) of Section 36 ofthe saidAct, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of the self- indicating, non -automatic , (Plat form type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " AEP 401 " series of medium accигасу (Accuracy class III ) and with brand name " BLUE STAR" (herein referred to as the said model ), manufactured byM/s. Alex Electronics, " Gopal Kunj " Street No. 6 , Shivaji Nagar , Savarkundla- 364 515 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /2003/428;

The said model ( see the figure given below ) is a strain gauge load cell based type weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 30 kg and minimum capacity of 100 g .The verification scale interval (e) is 5 g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The light emitting diode display indicates the weighing resuk. The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternate current power supply;

Sealing : In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing shall also be done to prevent the opening machine for fraudulent practices .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 12 ) of the Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make and performance of same series with maximum capacity ranging above 50 kg upto 300 kg and with number of verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 10 g or more and with ' e ' value 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k , k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 ( 139)/2001 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director, Legal Metrology 173 GI/20049 480

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

श्रम मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 31 दिसम्बर , 2003

का. आ. 248.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार इण्डियन ऑयल कार्पो ० लि० के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबंध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में श्रम न्यायालय, अजमेर के पंचाट को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 31-12-2003 कोप्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल. 30012/80/98- आई.आर. (एम ) ]

बी० एम ० डेविड, अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF LABOUR

New Delhi , the 31st December , 2003 S.O. 248. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award of the Labour Court , Ajmer as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Indian Oil Corp. Ltd. and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 31-12-2003 .

[No. L- 30012/80/98 - IR(M) ] B. M. DAVID, Under Secy.

अनुबंध

श्रम न्यायालय एवं औद्योगिक न्यायाधिकरण, अजमेर (राज० )

पीठाधीन अधिकारी: अतुल कुमार जैन, आरएचजेएस प्रकरण संख्या- सी आई टी आर 06/99

[केन्द्र सरकार का रेफरेंस पत्र क्र ० एल -30012/80/98 - आई आर (अस्पष्ट) दिनांक28-1-1999]

दिलावर अब्बास पुत्र सुलतान अब्बास उम्र 34 वर्ष (जाति नहीं बतायी गयी )

निवासी- रेलवे फाटक के सामने, ब्यावर रोड, दौराई, जिला-अजमेर ( राज ० )

.प्रार्थी

बनाम

इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, जरिये सीनियर डिपार्टमेंट (डिपो ) , मैनेजर , दौराई, जिला-अजमेर

अप्रार्थी उपस्थित: श्री चंदनसिंह, एडवोकेट, प्रार्थी की ओर से ।

श्री बी० एस ० रत्नू, एडवोकेट ( जयपुर ) अप्रार्थी की ओर से ।

[PART II-SEC . 3(ii) ] दिनांक: 8-12-2003

अवार्ड

इस प्रकरण में केन्द्र सरकार से दि० 13-4-99 को एक श्रम विवाद (रेफरेंस ) निम्न प्रकार प्राप्त हुआ था -

" क्याविपक्षी द्वारा फरवरी 1997 से प्रार्थी की सेवायें समाप्त किया जाना विधिवत एवं न्यायोचित है ? यदि नहीं तो प्रार्थी किस राहत का पात्र है ?"

उक्त रेफरेंश के क्रम में दि० 15-4-99 को प्रार्थी ने अपना स्टेटमेंट ऑफ क्लेम पेश किया था । विपक्षी ने क्लेम का जवाब 30-10-99 को पेश किया था । क्लेम के समर्थन में साक्ष्य में प्रार्थी ने खुद का हलफनामा पेश किया था जिन पर 28-7-01 को विपक्षी ने उससे जिरह की । विपक्षी की ओर से गवाडान् स्टीफन तथा रामेश्वर दयाल के शपथ पत्र पेश हुए थे जिनसे प्रार्थी ने क्रमशः दि० 18-5-02 तथा 15-3- 03 को जिरह की है । दस्तावेज/फोटो कॉपी दस्तावेजात् सबूत में प्रार्थी ने फोटोकॉपी दस्तावेजात् प्रदर्श डब. 1 लगायत डब . 14 पेश किये हैं । विपक्षी ने किसी प्रदर्श दर दस्तावेज अंकित नहीं कराया है लेकिन इंडियन ऑयल कॉरपोरेशन में नियुक्तियों के लिए आवेदन पत्र का छपा हुआ प्रोफॉर्मा न्यायालय के अवलोकनार्थ पेश किया है, जो फाइल में शामिल है । प्रकरण में मैंने उभय पक्ष की बहस अंतिम दि० 15-11-03 को सुनी थी । इसके पश्चात् उभयपक्ष ने रिकॉर्ड पर रखे जाने हेतु अपनी बहस कालिखित सारांश भी न्यायालय के अनुरोध पर पेश किया है जो भी पत्रावली में शामिल है, प्रकरण में हमारा विवेचन नीचे वर्णित है:-

क्लेममें प्रार्थी ने अंकित किया है कि उसे 25-4-85 को विपक्षी नेखलासी के कार्य हेतु नौकरी पर रखा था । प्रार्थी का कहना है कि उक्त पद पर स्थाई काम करने के लिए उसने लिखित में भी आवेदन पत्र बाद में दिया था । प्रार्थी का कहना है कि बाद में प्रार्थी ने टैंकर ड्राईवर का लाइसेंस भी परिवहन विभाग से प्राप्त कर लिया था । प्रार्थी का कहना है कि उसने रजिस्टर्ड डाक से विपक्षी को टैंकर ड्राईवर के पद पर स्थाई करने काअनुरोध पत्र भेजा था जिस पर विपक्षी के स्थानीय कार्यालय ने उसके नौकरी से संबंधित पत्र, रजिस्टर व पेमेंट वाउचर आदि दिल्ली भेज दिये थे । प्रार्थी का कहना है कि वर्ष 1990 तक प्रार्थी विपक्षी के यहां नियमित रूप से टैंकर ड्राईवर का कार्य करता रहा तथा मासिक भुगतान करता रहा और फिर विपक्षी ने प्रार्थी के स्थाई पद एवं वेतन लाभ की मांग को देखते हुए प्रार्थी को धारा 25 एफ एवं 25 जी आई० डी० एक्ट, 1947के प्रावधानों का उल्लघंन करते हुए सेवामुक्तकर दिया । प्रार्थी का कहना है कि सेवामुक्ति के तुरंत पूर्व के एक वर्ष में उसने विपक्षी के यहां 240दिन से अधिक लगातार सेवायें दी थीं तथा विपक्षी ने उससे कनिष्ठ कर्मचारियों रामनिवास , हेमराज तथा नरेश को स्थाई पद देते हुए स्थाई पद का वेतन लाभ भी दे रखा है । प्रार्थी का कहना है कि फरवरी 1997 से उसे सेवामुक्त करके विपक्षी ने श्रम कानूनों का उल्लंघन किया है तथा फरवरी 1997 से निर्णय होने तक का उसने 70 रु ० प्रतिदिन के हिसाब से उसका वेतन भी विपक्षी से दिलवाये जाने की मांग की है । विपक्षी ने क्लेम का जवाब पेश करके विपक्षी ने कहा है कि प्रार्थी को उन्होंने कभी- कभी अपने यहां दैनिक वेतनभोगी कर्मचारी के रूपमें नियुक्ति नहीं दी थी । विपक्षी का कहना है कि प्रार्थी ने तो केवल मात्र कुछ दिनों के लिए वर्ष 1990 में कैजुअल टैंकर ट्रक ड्राईवर का 481 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

पेटपालती रहे जबकि उसके एक बीबी व चार बच्चे हों, यह कथन प्रथमतः अस्वाभाविक प्रतीत होता है । उक्त कथन से प्रतीत होता है कि प्रार्थी झूठा कथन करने का आदी है । पेमेंट वाउचर की फोटो कॉपियां प्रदर्श डब ० 1 लगायत डब० 4 को प्रार्थी ने प्रमाणित नहीं कराया हैपरन्तु उन्हें सही मान लिया जाये तो भी इनसे केवल मात्र 20 (बीस) दिन प्रार्थी की कैजुअल टैंकर ट्रक ड्राईवर के रूप में ड्यूटी के 70 रु ० के हिसाब से 1400 रु ० का भुगतान किया जाना इनसे प्रमाणित होता है । बीस दिन तथा 240 दिन दोनों में भारती अंतर होता है । बीस दिन ड्यूटी देने मात्र से यह उपधारणा नहीं की जा सकती है कि प्रार्थी ने विपक्षी के यहां सेवामुक्ति के तुरन्त पूर्व एक वर्ष में 240 दिन या अधिक समय तक ड्यूटी दी हो । प्रार्थी द्वारा पेश किये गये अन्य फोटो कॉपी पत्र प्रदर्श डब ० 5 व डब० 6 तथा रजिस्ट्रीकी रसीदें प्रदर्श डब ० 7 में लगाया डब ० 9 भी प्रार्थी का 240 दिन का सेवाकाल प्रमाणित करने में प्रार्थी की कोई मदद नहीं करती है । काम किया था क्योंकि उन दिनों विपक्षी का नियमित टैंकर ट्रक ड्राईवर अवकाश पर था । विपक्षी का कहना है कि प्रार्थी झूठे सबूतों के आधारपर अपना क्लेम लेकर आया है । विपक्षी का कहना है कि प्रार्थी ने इंडियन ऑयल कारपोरेशन जैसी बड़ी पब्लिक अंडरटेकिंग में 1985 से 1997 तकअर्थात्बाहर वर्ष तक नौकरी की होती तो वह अपना नियुक्तिपत्र सेवामुक्तिआदेश, अवकाश स्वीकृति के आदेश, एलटीसीस्वीकृति के आदेश बोनस भुगतान की रसीदें बी० एफ० तथा ईएआई की कटौती की रसीदें तथा अपना आईडेन्टिटी कार्ड व मेडिकल कार्ड आदिपेश करकेअपने बारह वर्ष के सेवाकल को भली प्रकार साबित कर सकता था । विपक्षी का कहना है कि सेवामुक्ति के तुरंत पूर्व एक वर्ष में 240 दिन या अधिक का सेवाकाल साबित करने का दायित्व प्रार्थी दिलावर अब्बास का होना 2002 एलआईसी सुप्रीम कोर्ट 987 रेंज फॉरेस्ट ऑफिसर/एस ० टी०छाड़िमणि में वर्णित सिद्धांत के आधार पर भी प्रमाणित होता है। विपक्षी का कहना है कि प्रार्थी ने अपना सिद्धभार पूरा नहीं किया है । माननीय सर्वोच्चन्यायालय ने भी उचित नजीर में यह निर्धारित किया था कि श्रमिक के शपथ पत्र पेश कर देने मात्र से उसका 240 दिन कासेवाकाल प्रभावित होना नहीं माना जा सकता है एवं इस संबंध में प्रार्थी को वेतन भुगतान के कागजात् एवं सेवाभिलेख आदि से अपना कथन साबित करना चाहिए । विपक्षी का दूसरा तर्क यह है कि प्रार्थी का क्लेम उचित समयावधि में पेश नहीं किया हुआ होने के कारण चलने योग्य नहीं है । इस संबंध में विपक्षी ने एआईआर 2000 सुप्रीम कोर्ट पेज 839 का हवाला दिया है । विपक्षी का कहना है किसीजनल/कैजुअल वर्कर जिसकी सेवायें कार्य पूरा होने पर समाप्त कर दी जाती है, का कार्यपूरा होने पर किया गया टर्मिनेशन रिट्रॅचमेंट की परिभाषा में नहीं आता है जैसा कि 1007 ( 10 ) एससीसी 599 अनिल बाबू राव काना से/कृष्णा सहकारी शक्कर कारखाना लिमिटेड में माननीय सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने भी स्पष्ट किया है ।

विपक्षी के गवाह स्टीफन तथा रामेश्वर दयाल ने बताया है किप्रार्थी ने कैजुअल ट्रक ड्राईवर के रूप में उनके यहां कार्य किया था । इन गवाहों ने प्रार्थी द्वारा पेश की गयी अटेंडेंट शीट्स को अनाधिकृत तथा बनावटी होना बताया है इन गवाहों ने बताया है कि उनके यहां किसी भी कर्मचारी को मौखिक आदेशों के द्वारा नियुक्ति नहीं दी जाती है । इन दोनों गवाहों के बयानों से भी यह साबित होता है कि प्रार्थी एक आधारहीन क्लेम लेकर सामने आया है । इन गवाहोंका कहना है कि इंडियनऑयल कारपर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में नियुक्ति पाने के लिए एवं नियुक्ति के आदेश के सैट प्रोफॉर्मा बने हुए हैं, नियुक्ति आवेदन पत्र तथा नियुक्ति केआदेश के सैट प्रोफार्मा न्यायालय के अवलोकनार्थ विपक्षी ने पेश किये हैं जो पत्रावली में शामिल है । प्रार्थी खुद स्वीकार करता है कि उसने विपक्षी के यहां किसी विज्ञापन के आधार पर नौकरी प्राप्त करने के लिए आवेदन नहीं दिया था । जाहिर है कि प्रार्थी विपक्षी के यहां केवल मात्र इंसीडेंटल अथवा कैजुअल अथवा सीजनल कर्मचारी मात्र रहा होगा ।रेग्युलर ड्राईवर के छुट्टी जाने पर उससे यदा- कदा कुल बीस दिनों के लिए काम विपक्षी ने लिया होगा जिसका भुगतान उसे वाउचर्स प्रदर्श डब ० 1 लगाया व डबं० 4 के द्वारा वर्ष 1990 में ही कर दिया गया था । वर्ष 1990 की उक्त पर्चियों के आधार पर लगभग सात- आठ साल बाद प्रार्थी अपना बलेम लेकर आया है । जाहिर है कि उसने " तिल को ताड़ " बनाने का असफल प्रयास किया है । प्रार्थी का क्लेम पूर्णतः बेबुनियाद तथा अविश्वसनीय होने के कारण निरस्तनीय है जो एतद्वारा निरस्त किया जाकर अवार्ड इस प्रकार पारित किया जाता है कि प्रार्थी यह साबित नहीं कर सका है किवह विपक्षी का दैनिक वेतनभोगी कर्मचारी हो तथा विपक्षी ने उसे औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम के प्रावधानों का उल्लंघन करते हुए सेवामुक्तकिया हो और तदनुसार प्रार्थी इस रेफरेंस में विपक्षी से कोई राहत प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी नहींहै ।

अतुल कुमार जैन, न्यायाधीश

नई दिल्ली, 31 दिसम्बर, 2003

का. आ. 249.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947

का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार इण्डियन ऑयल कार्पो० लि० के प्रबंधतंत्र के सम्बद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार मैंने उभयपक्ष के तर्क सुने तथा पत्रावली का अवलोकन किया । पहले हम प्रार्थी के शपथ पत्र तथा उस पर की गयी जिरह का अवलोकन करेंगे । प्रार्थी ने जिरह में स्वीकार किया है कि 1990 में उसे ट्रक ड्राईवर के पद पर पदोन्नति का आदेश विपक्षी ने लिखित में नहीं दिया था । प्रार्थी ने पेमेंट वाउचर्स कीफोटो कॉपियां प्रदर्श डब ० 1 , डब० 4 पेश की हैं । प्रार्थी काकहना है कि इन फोटो कॉपियों से संबंधित असल पेमेंट वाउचर्स उसके पास नहीं है । वह कहता है कि यह फोटो कॉपियां उसने खुद ने करवाई थीं याकिसी से करवायी थीं, उसे पता नहीं है । उसने प्रदर्श डब० 9 लगायत डब ० 13 को खुद के हाजरी रजिस्टर्स होना बताया है । उल्लेखनीय है कि किसी पब्लिक अंडरटेकिंग के हाजरी रजिस्टर्स श्रमिक के कब्जे में नहीं आ सकते थे । कॉपी के खाली पृष्ठों पर प्रार्थी ने खुद ने ही अपनी हाजरी भर रखी प्रतीत होती है । मेरा मानना है कि प्रदर्श डब० 9 लगायत डब० 14 के आधार पर प्रार्थी की विपक्षी के यहां ड्यूटी बाबत हाजरी प्रमाणित नहीं होती है । प्रार्थी ने जिरह में स्वीकार किया है कि उसके प्रास विपक्षी द्वारा दिया गया कोई परिचय पत्र नहीं है । प्रार्थी ने यह भी बताया है कि विपक्षी पक्ष वर्ष 1997 में उसे नौकरी से हटाये जाने के बाद उसने अन्यत्र नौकरी करने काकोई प्रयास नहीं किया है । प्रार्थी का उक्त कथन भी प्रार्थी को झूठा होना साबित करता है । चार वर्ष तक शारीरिक रूप से सक्षम व्यक्ति बगैर काम किये, घर बैठा रहे तथा उसकी मां मजदूरी करके उसका 482

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II SEC . 3( ii)]

08-06-1988/26-7-1988 has referred the following dispute earlier to the Tamil Nadu State Industrial Tribunal for adjudication:-

औद्योगिक अधिकरण चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 116/209 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 31-12-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल.- 30012/9/88 /डी III (बी) ]

बी० एम ० डेविड, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 31st December , 2003

"Whether the management of M/s . Indian Oil Corporation Limited , Madras is justified in terminating the services of Shri E. Singaravelu , Mazdoor employed through their contractor Shri Manuel Correya ? Ifnot, what relief the workman is entitled to ?"

S.O. 249. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 116/2003 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Indian Oil Corp. Ltd. and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 31-12-2003 .

[No. L -30012/9/88/D.III (B)] B. M. DAVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Wednesday, the 19th November, 2003

2. The Tamil Nadu State Industrial Tribunal after receving the reference has numbered it as I.D. No. 48/88 and the said Tribunal has issued notices to both parties and both the parties entered appearence through their advocates and filed their respective statements . The Tamil Nadu State Industrial Tribunal after considering the merits ofthe case has passed an Award on 26-5-1995 . Aggrieved bythe said Award , the II Party/Management filed a Writ Petition against the same in the High Court of Madras . The High Court in the Writ Petition No. 17516/95 has set aside the said Award on 24-6-2003 and remitted back the same to the Central Industrial Trubunal to consider the reference in its proper perspective and to pass an appropriate Award. After remand, this Central Industrial Trubunal has numbered the said dispute as I.D. No. 116/2003 and issued notices to both parties and their advocates appeared before thisCourt.

Present : K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer Industrial Dispute No. 116/2003

(TamilNadu Industrial Tribunal I. D. No.48/88)

3. The allegations in the Claim Statement of the Petitioner are as follows :-

(In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2( A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947( 14 of 1947) , between the Management of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. , Madras and their workmen .)

BETWEEN

Sri E. Singaravelu

IParty

And

Ist Respondent II Party/ J Manage-

1. The General Manager , Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. , Chennai

ment

: 2nd Respondent

2. Shri Manuel Correya , IOC Contractor , Chennai

Appearance:

For the Workman

: M/ s. V. Prakash and K. Ramkumar, Advocates.

For the 1st Respondent :M/s. T. S. Gopalan and Co. Advocates .

ThePetitioner/Workman joined the services of the Ist Respondent through the 2nd Respondent in the year 1980 on a daily wage of Rs . 8/- and was continously employed till 15-8-1986 . While so , the Petitioner was terminated from service by an oral order , and hence , he has issued notice to both Respondents , but there was reply for the same. Therefore , he raised an industrial dispute before the conciliation authority and as the conciliation ended in failure , the matter was referred to the Tribunal . The Petitioner was in continuous employment under the Respondent from 1980 and, therefore , he is entitled to the protection under the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. His work was perennial in nature . The 2nd Respondent has no valid licence under the Contract Labour (Abolition & Regulation ) Act and the 1st Respondent has not validly registered as principal employer under the said Act. Hence, the Petitioner is a direct employee of the 1st Respondent . Therefore , the termination of service of the Petitioner without following the mandatory provisions is not legal and it is void ab initio . Hence , he prays for an award in his favour.

For the 2nd Respondent : Mr. A. R. Jagadeesan , Advocate.

AWARD

The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide Notification Order No. L- 30012/9/88 - D.111 (B) dated

4. The Ist Respondent in its Counter Statement contended that this Respondent is a Government of India Undertaking engaging him for storage , distribution and marketing ofpetroleum products. Further , this Respondent 483 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31, 2004/माघ 11 , 1925.

[ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

(i ) " Whether the management of Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Madras is justified in terminating the services of Sri E. Singaravelu employed through the contractor Mr. Manuel Correya?"

(ii ) "To What relief the Petitioner is entitled ?"

Point No. 1 :-

has got four terminals at Madras and all the terminals have pipeline connections and storage tanks by which the product is transferred from one stocking point to another. The pipelines and storage tanks are also subject to damage due to wear and tear . The said repairs to pipelines and storage tanks are given on contract by calling limited tenders . The said job work do not normally last more than one month . The said contract work involves both inside and outside the terminals . The contractor wili bring their own men, tools and equipments for attending the said work. The 2nd Respondent is one of the contractors for the said job work . Admittedly , the Petitioner was engaged by the 2nd Respondent in connection with the contract job undertaken by the latter . This Respondent has no control or supervision over the men brought by the 2nd Respondent . The 2nd Respondent on no date brought twenty workmen and, therefore , no obligation on the part of the 2nd Respondent to take out licence under the provisions of Contract Labour ( Abolition & Regulation) Act . This Respondent has registered as a principal employer and the certificate of registration covers the contractors who have taken out licence under the Contract Labour (Abolition & Regulation ) Act . The job is not a regular and continuous nature and they are intermittent and these jobs used to be allotted to different contractors depending upon their rates quoted in tender. The Petitioner was never engaged by the 1st Respondent . It is only the 2nd Respondent to meet the allegations of the Petitioner . Hence, they pray that the claim may be dismissed.

7. The case of the Petitioner in this case is that he entered into the services of the 1st Respondent Corporation through the 2nd Respondent in the year 1980 on daily wage and he was continuously employed till 15-08-1986 , till hewas terminated orally by the Respondent and the 1st Respondent has not issued any notice of termination and not followed the procedure under Industrial Disputes Act and so on . His further contention is that he was really the workman of the 1st Respondent , even though he entered through the 2nd Respondent as he was doing the work integral to the 1st Respondent industrial process and his work was continuous in nature , hence he is entitled to the benefits under the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act . He further contended that the 2nd Respondent has no valid licence under Contract Labour ( Abolition &. Regulation) Act and the 1st Respondent has not validly registered itself as principal employer and as per the judgement of Division Bench of Madras High Court in the case ofBest & Crompton , he is a direct employee ofthe 1st Respondent. In order to prove his contention, the Petitioner has examined himself as WWI and produced an entry pass issued to him as Ex .WI and the copy of the notice issued by his lawyer to the Respondent as Ex. W2 and the copy of the acknowledgement of the Respondent as Ex . W3 . He has also produced failure report copy submitted by the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central ), Chennai to the

Ministry as Ex . W4.

5. The 2nd Respondent in its Counter Statement contended that the Petitioner was an unskilled workman and employed the Petitioner as an unskilled casual workman for transporting the materials by handcart and cycle rickshaw to work spot and such employment was not a continuous one as claimed by the Petitioner and the Petitioner was not an employee for more than 120 days in a year . This Respondent is not a contractor of 1st Respondent and the 1st Respondent would entrust some small johs like welding , repairing to pipelines . The nature of employment ofthe Petitioner being casual, the Petitioner cannot by any stretch of imagination be deemed to be a permanent employee . Being a joh worker and not employed more than twenty workers , this Respondent does not come under the purview of Contract Labour (Abolition & Regulation) Act for obtaining any licence . On 5-8-1986 the police have interrogated one Mr. Kannan with regard to a theft of article at the installation spot of 1st Respondent. The said Kannan has named the Petitioner as one of the accomplice in that theft and after that date , the Petitioner never turns up for any work at the office of the 2nd Respondent . Since the Petitioner as a casual employee , who has worked less than 120 days in a year , has no right to invoke Section 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Since the Petitioner has abandoned the work, the question ofretrenchment or termination will not arise. Hence , they pray that the claim may be dismissed.

6. Under such circumstances , the points for my

consideration are

8. As against this , the case of the 1st Respondent is that admittedly the Petitioner was an employee under the 2nd Respondent Contractor . The 2nd Respondent was doing joh works on contract and it will not long last more than one month . It is their contention that the Corporation hasregistered itself as principal employer and the certificate ofregistration covers the contractors who were doing the contract work under the 1st Respondent and since the Petitioner was not in employment of the 1st Respondent, there is no question of termination of the services of Petitioner by this Respondent and, therefore , the Petitioner is not entitled to any relief. Further , on the side of the Respondent, the Manager of the Respondent Corporation Mr. M.Sankaranarayanan was examined as MWI and through him, the first Respondent marked four documents namely Ex.M1 to M4 Ex . Ml is the copy ofthe Amendment Certificate issued by Deputy Chief Inspector of Factories under Contract Labour (Abolition & Regulation) Act . Ex.M2 is the letter ofDeputy Chief Inspector ofFactories , Division I and similarly Ex.M3 is also the letter issued by Deputy Chief Inspector ofFactories . Further , in order to prove that the 2nd Respondent employed the contract labourers and the dispute between the contract labour and the contractor has been settled between themselves, he produced a copy 484

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] of Memorandum of Settlement arrived at under section 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) between the 2nd Respondent and one Mr. G. Sekar . The copy of the said settlement was marked as Ex . M4 .

9. As against this , the 2nd Respondent's case is that the Petitioner has worked as unskilled casual employee for transporting the materials to work spot and he alleged that he is not a regular contractor of the 1st Respondent and the1st Respondent will entrust small job works and as and whenhe receive, he will employ skilled /unskilled labourers and since the nature of work being casual , the Petitioner cannot claim any permanent status . It is his further contention that being ajob worker , he does not come under the purview ofContract Labour ( Abolition & Regulation ) Act and at no point of time, he employed twenty persons ormore.

10(1) of the Contract Labour (Abolition and Regulation) Act in respect of the concerned establishment has been issued by the appropriate Govt. prohibiting the employment ofcontract labour in any process, operation or other work ofany establishment andwherein suchprocess operation or other work of establishment, the principal employer intends to employ regular workmen, he shall give preference to erstwhile contract labourers if otherwise found suitable and if necessary, by relaxing the condition as to maximum age appropriately taking into consideration the age of the workmen at the time of their initial employment by the contractor and also relaxing the condition as to academic qualification other than the technical qualification. "

10. In this case , the learned counsel for the Petitioner argued that MW1 , who is the Manager of the 1st Respondent Management has categorically stated that he did not know anything about the contract between the Ist and 2nd Respondents and he has further stated that he has not seen any written contract between them and therefore , if really the 2nd Respondent is a contractor under the 1st Respondent , it must have been produced before the Tribunal and since it was not produced the Tribunal can presume that the alleged contract between the 1st and 2nd Respondent was sham and nominal one and therefore , the Petitioner who is a workman must be deemed to be an employee under the principal employer namely the 1st Respondent .

Therefore, in this case , ifthe Petitioner wants to claim that he is an employee under the principal employer namely the 1st Respondent, he must establish that the contract between the 1st and 2nd Respondents is a mere ruse camouflage to evade the compliance of beneficial legislations . But, in this case , there is not even an iota of evidence to establish that the contract between the 1st and 2nd Respondent is ruse camouflage . On behalf of the 1st Respondent it was further argued that the 1st Respondent has produced documents namely Ex . Ml to M3 wherein it is clearly established that the Ist Respondent has registered its name as principal employer under the Contract Labour (Abolition & Regulation) Act and has also mentioned the contractors for the job works . Under such circumstances , it cannot be said that the contract between the 1st and 2nd Respondent is a camouflage. The learned counsel for the 1st Respondent has further argued that the Andhra Pradesh High Court in 2003 III LLJ 289 ONCG LTD . , RAJAHMUNDRY Vs. N. SATHYANARAYANA & OTHERS held that "ifa contract labour raise a dispute before the Industrial Tribunal with regard to discharge etc. on expiry of labour contract, such dispute also not maintainable before the Tribunal as therewas no relationship ofmaster and servant between the contract labour and the principal employer. " In this case, since the Petitioner has not established that he was continuously engaged by the 1st Respondent from 1980 onwards, he is not entitled to claim the benefits under Industrial Disputes Act .

11. But, on behalf of the 1st Respondent, it was argued that even in STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS VS. NATIONAL UNION WATER FRONT WORKERS & OTHERS reported in 2001 II LLJ 1087 , the Supreme Court has clearly laid down that " there should not be any automatic absorption of contract labourers working in the establishment as regular employees . " It hasfurther held that " if an industrial dispute brought before the Tribunal by any contract labour in regard to conditions of service , the industrial adjudicator will have to consider the question whether the contractor has been interpo.sed either on the ground ofhaving undertaken to produce any given resultfor the establishment orfor supply ofcontract labour for work of the establishment under a genuine contract or is a mere ruse camouflage to evade compliance of various beneficial legislations so as to deprive the workers of the benefit thereunder. If the contract is found to be not genuine but a mere camouflage, the so called contract labour will have to be treated as employees of the principal employer, who shall be directed to regularise the services of the contract labour in the concerned establishment subject to the conditions as may be specified by it for that purpose in the light of para 6 hereunder : -

" if the cotract is found to be genuine and prohibition Notification under Section

12. On behalf of the 2nd Respondent, it was argued that the Petitioner was only a casual unskilled employee and it is not correct to say that he was continuously employed from 1980 onwards , even the job work given by the 1st Respondent is only on intermittent basis and therefore , the employment claimed by the Petitioner is false. It is further contended on behalf of the 2nd Respondent that on 5 : 8.1986 one Mr. Kannan was involved in a theft of articles at the installation spot of the 1s1 Respondent and after being interrogated by the police, Mr. Kannan named the Petitioner [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

as one of the four accomplices for the theft and therefore , the policehave wanted the Petitioner. From that date onwards , the Petitioner has not reported for duty before the Respondent and further it is false to allege that he has been terminated orally by this Resporident from 15.8.96 .

485

Witnesses Examined :

ForI Party/Workman : WW1 Sri E. Singaravelu

ForIl Party/Management : MW1 Sri M, Sankaranarayanan

Documents Marked:

For the 1 Party/Workman:

Ex. No. Date

Description

Nil WI

Xerox copy of the entry pass issued to Petitioner

W2 10.07.87

Copy of lawyer notice issued by Petitioner to Respondents ..

W3 Nil

Xerox copy of the acknowledge- ment of Respondent

W4 16.03.88

Copy of failure of conciliation report

For the II Party/Management :

Ex. No. Date

Description

MI Nil

Xerox copy of the amendment certificate.

M2 29.10.86 Copy of letter from Dy . Chief Inspector of Factories to 1st Respondent .

M3 04.02.86 Copy of letter from Dy. Chief Inspector of Factories to Ist Respondent

M4

04.11.87

But, the 2nd Respondent has not produced any evidence to show that the Petitioner was engaged as unskilled labour only to transport the materials from the 2nd Respondent's place to work spot. Any how, in this case, the Petitioner has not proved that he was continuously employedby the 2nd Respondent for the 1st Respondent's work, I find the Petitioner is not entitled to any relief as claimed by him . In this case, even though the Petitioner has produced an entry pass given by the 1st Respondent , the entry pass related to the Petitioner only mentions the name of the Petitioner and nothing more is mentioned in that document. Further, it is not an identity card issued by the Ist Respondent . Further , the Manager who was examined on the side ofthe 1st Respondent has clearly stated that whoever wanted to enter into the premises of the 1st Respondent, entry pass will be given for a specific period and without the entry pass, no one can enter into the premises of the 1st Respondent. Under such circumstances , I find that by production of Ex . WI , the Petitioner has not established anything for his contention. As argued by the counsel for the 1st Respondent , even if the Petitioner has got any grievance , he can only claim the same before the 2nd Respondent and there is no relationship of master and servant between the 1st Respondent and the Petitioner and therefore, he is not entitled to claim any relief against the 1st Respondent . I find much force in this contention . Since the Petitioner has not established that he was terminated by the 1st Respondent from service as alleged by him and he has not established his relationship as master and servant , I find the Petitioner Sri E. Singaravelu is not entitled to any relief. As such , I find this point against the Petitioner.

Point No. 2:

13. The next point to be decided in this case is to what relief the Petitioner is entitled ?

In view of my finding that the Petitioner Sri E. Singaravelu has not established his relationship of master and servant between him and the 1st Respondent and also in view ofmy finding that the Petitioner was not terminated by the 1st Respondent, as alleged in his Claim Statement , I hold that the Petitioner Sri E. Singaravelu is not entitled to any relief in this case . Ordered accordingly. No Costs .

14. Thus , the reference is answered accordingly .

(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him , corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 19th November, 2003.)

K. JAYARAMAN , Presiding Officer Xerox copy of the Memorandum of Settlement Between 2nd Respondent and Mr. Sekar नई दिल्ली, 31 दिसम्बर , 2003

का. आ. 250.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947

(1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार श्री मै. चक्र सीमेन्ट के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध मेंनिर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 173/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 31-12-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल . 29025/4/2003 आई.आर. (विविध ) ]

बी. एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 31st December,2003

S.O. 250.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 173/2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court , Hyderbad as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M / s . Sri Chakra Cements and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 31-12-2003 .

[No. L-29025/4/2003 - IR(M) ] B. M. DAVID, Under Secy.

486

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

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

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

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

3. He was asked to go to Hyderabad which he could not go as the Intercity express came to Piduguralla at 5.30 PM . Then the Respondent President( Works) Mr. Krishna Reddy scolded him and asked him to submit a resignation which he refused but he was not allowed to work . Hence , hemay be reinstated with back wages , continuity of service and all attendant benefits .

Dated the 28th day of August , 2003

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C.I.D.No .. 173/2003

(Old F.D.No. 275/2000 Transferred from Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court , Guntur)

Between:

4. Today, in the morning nobody came, however, in the evening the Management filed a letter that they have reinstated the Petitioner paying him arrears of wages ofRs . 18,636/- (two installments of Rs . 9,318/ each) and he is now working . He is given continuity of service , for the purpose of retirement benefits .

Sri Bandla Christopher,

S/ o Venkateswara Rao ,

5. The Petitioner also sent a letter that he is working withthe Company , getting his salary etc.

H.No.1-343 , Indiranagar Colony,

Karampudi Mandal ,

Guntur District .

Petitioner

AND

1. The Managing Director ,

Sri Chakra Cements Ltd. ,

6. In view ofthe letter of the company presented by Dy. Manager (Administration ) , Sri K. Moses Kumar personally and in view of the letter by the workman which I believe it to be true the following award is passed : " That the Petitioner shall be reinstated into service and arrears of salaries be given to him and his past services shall be counted for the purpose of retirement benefits" .

Admn . Office.6-3-668/ 10/66,

Durganagar Colony ,

Award passed accordingly . Transmit.

Panjagutta, Hyderabad - 82

2. The Administrative Officer ,

Sri Chakra Cements,

Dictated to Kum. K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her , corrected and pronounced by me on the 28th day of August, 2003 .

Administration Office,

E. ISMAIL, Presiding Officer 6-3-668/10/66,

Durganagar colony,

Appendix of evidence

Panjagutta , Hyderabad -82 .

Respondent

Witnesses examined for

Appearances:

Petitioner

Witnesses examined for the Respondent

For the Petitioner

NIL

: M/sM. Pitchaiah , K. Kalidas & B. Srinivasa Rao , Advocates

For the Respondent : M/ s Y. Sitaramayya & Y. Srinivasa Rao , Advocates

AWARD

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

नई दिल्ली, 31 दिसम्बर , 2003

This case I.D. No. 275/2000 is transferred from Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court , Guntur in view of theGovernrnent of India , Ministry of Labour's order No. H- 11026/ 1 /2001 - IR(C - II) dated 18-10-2001 and renumbered inthis Court as L. C. I.D. No. 173/2003 . This is a case taken under Sec . 2A (2 ) of the I.D. Act, 1947 in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/ s . Cotton Corporation of India and two others .

का. आ. 251.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार श्री चक्र सीमेन्ट के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 174/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 31-12-2003 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं.एल.-29025/4/2003 ( एन ) आईआर (विविध ) ] 2. The brief facts as stated in the petition are : that the Petitioner has joined as courier in the Aswani Enterprises , Hyderabad on 1-9-93 and worked till 30-11-96. He was transferred to the Respondent Company and worked from there from 1-12-96 upto the end ofMarch , 2000.

बी. एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव 487

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 31st December, 2003

W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/s . Cotton Corporation of India and two others.

S.O. 251. in pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 (14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 174/2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum -Labour Court, Hyderbad as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Sri Chakra Cements and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 31-12-2003 .

[No. L-29025/4/2003 (N)-IR (M) ]

B. M. DAVID , Under Secy .

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

2. The brief facts as stated in the Petition are that the Petitioner has joined in the organization of the Management ofSrichakra Cements Ltd. , at Sri Narasimhapuri Karampudi on 10-10-88. He discharged his duties to the utmost satisfaction of the Respondent. That on6-5-2000 the Management issued a show cause notice with some false allegations which was replied by the Petitioner on 9-5-2000 . Without considering the explanation, Management conducted domestic enquiry. Enquiry Report was not supplied to the applicant . Though the charges were not proved still he was dismissed on 12-6-2000 .At any rate the imposition of penalty of removal is disproportionateto the alleged gravity ofthe misconduct. Hence , the Petitioner prays that the Respondent Management may be directed to reinstate the Petitioner with the Management with continuity of service and all other attendant benefits .

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

Dated the 28th day of August, 2003

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C.L.D.No. 174/2003

(Old I.D.No. 287/2000 Transferred from Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Guntur)

Between:

3. Today, the 28th day of August, 2003 when the case was posted none appeared and again in the evening theManagement filed a letter by the Dy. General Manager, whowas present in the Court and filed a letter stating that the Petitioner has been reinstated into service with effect from 1-9-2002 and arrears paid were, Rs. 32,364/- in two instalments each of Rs . 16,182/- and that the Petitioner is now working and given continuity of service for the purpose of retirement benefits .

Sri A. Balaiah ,

Eelctrician, Karampudi,

Petitioner

Guntur District.

AND

TheManagement ,

4. In view of the letter given by the Respondent, the Dy.General Manager (Admn . ) , himselfpersonally and the absence ofthe Petitioner, it is clear that although he received the registered notice yet, he did not choose to appear. Hence, I believe the letter filed by the Respondent and pass the award as follows: "That the Petitioner shall be reinstated into service and arrears of salaries be given to him and his past services shall be counted for the purpose ofretirement benefits" .

Awardpassed accordingly . Transmit.

Sri Chakra Cements Ltd. , Sri Narasimhapuri , Karamapudi , Guntur District.

Respondent

Appearances:

Dictated to Kum. K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her , corrected and pronounced by me on this the 28th day ofAugust, 2003 .

Forthe Petitioner : Sri G. Venkaiah, Advocate

E. ISMAIL, PresidingOfficer For the Respondent :

Appendix ofevidence

M/s Y. Sitaramayya & Y. Srinivasa Rao, Advocates

Witnesses examined for the

AWARD

Petitioner

Respondent

NIL

Documents marked for the Petitioner

Documents marked for the Respondent

NIL NIL

This case I.D. No. 287/2000 is transferred from Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Guntur in view of the Government of India, Ministry of Labour's order No. H- 11026/ 1/2001 - IR(C- II) dated 18-10-2001 and renumbered in this Court as L.C.I.D. No. 174/2003 . This is a case taken under Sec. 2A (2) ofthe I.D. Act, 1947 in view ofthe judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in

173 Gl/2004-10 488

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/ MAGHA 11 , 1925

नई दिल्ली, 6 जनवरी , 2004

का. आ. 252.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स यूनाईटेड स्टीवडोरस् एसोसिएशन ऑफ कोचीन (प्रा० ) लि० के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में श्रम न्यायालय , अर्नाकुलम के पंचाट [ संदर्भ संख्या 14/97 ( सी ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल.- 35011/3/96- आईआर ( एम ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 6th January, 2004

S.O. 252.--In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award [Ref. No. 14/97 (C) ] of the Labour Court , Ernakulam as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s . United Stevedores Association of Cochin (P) Ltd. and their workmen , which was receivedby the Central Government on 6-1-2004.

[No. L- 35011/3/96- IR (M) ]

C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM

(IN THE LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM) (Tuesday the 30th day of September , 2003 )

Present:

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

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 14 OF 1997 (CENTRAL) BETWEEN The President .

M/ s . United Stevedores Association of Cochin (P) Ltd. Indira Gandhi Road, Willingdon Island, Cochin-3 .

AND

The workman of the above concern Sri . George Johnson, Foliayparambil, 1/28 , Ferry Road, Axheekal . P.O. For Vypin- 682510

Representations .

ForManagement

Sri . V. B. Jinnan , : Advocate , Ernakulam

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] M/ s. V. J. Mathew & Co.:

ForWorkman Advocate,

Ernakulam

AWARD

Thisreferencewas made by the Central Governrnent asper letter No. L - 35011 /9 /96- IR (Misc .) dated 17-3-1997. The dispute is between the management of United Stevedores Association of Cochin ( P) Ltd. and Cochin Stevedores Agents and their workman . The dispute referred is:

"Whether the action of the managerment of United Stevedores Association of Cochin (P) Ltd. in declining absorption of Mr. George Johnson as Forernan from the ' C' Category list as per the Memorandom of settlement under Section 12 (3 ) of the I.D..Act, 1947 dated 8-10-82 isjust, proper and legal ? If not, to what relief the workman concerned is entitled ? " 2. On the receipt of notices issued from this court the workman and managerment appeared through counsel .

3. Workman filed a claim statement raising the following claims :-United Stevedores Association is an association formed by the Stevedores of Cochin Port . Consequent to decasualisation of Foremen , Assistant Foremen , Supervisors , Assistant Supervisors working under the Stevedores and Steamer Agents a pool was set up for the workers at the Cochin Port and an Administrative Committee has been constituted for running the same which is known as U.S.A. pool . 2nd Management is the President of Cochin Steamer Agents Association representing various Steamer Agents in the Cochin Port . On8-10-1982 a memorandum of settlement has been arrived at by which the strength of Foremen was fixed as 70 that is 30 + 40. The list of Foreman and Assistant Foreman were categorised as A, B and C - list as per the settlement . The workman Sri . George Johnson was serial No. 18 in the C- list and he is entitled to get next appointment as Foreman due to the retirement of Sri . K. J. John a Foreman in the month of July , 1995. The management failed to appoint the workman in terms of the settlement. So the workman issued 2 registered notices to the administrative officer of the pool requesting to make his appointment as a foreman. But the officer has not taken any steps to comply the request or to make his appointment as a foreman . No reply was also issued . During September, 1995 another Foreman Sri. Arther also retired and the workman is entitled to get absorbed in the main list. Though the workman made representation to the union the union also has not taken any steps to get his name included in the main list. So the workman prays for passing an award directing the. management to appoint him as Foreman from the C - list and also compensation for the losses and damages caused due tothe delay.

489 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

ofhis father as WW1 and Exts . W1 to W6 . Copy of Ext . W2 and originals of W -4 (a) , W4 ( b ) and W6 were produced by the management .

6. Thus the points arise for determination are :

1. Whether the reference is maintainable ?

2. Whether the workman is entitled to be absorbed as Foreman under the management of United Stevedores Association from the C-category list as per the memorandum ofsettlement dated 8-10- 1982?

3. Whether the action of the management in declining absorption is just , proper and legal?

4. The relief, if any, to which the workman is entitled?

7. Point No. 1 : This reference was made by the Central Government in respect ofthe illegality ofthe action ofthe management in declining absorption of the workman as Foreman from the C - category list as per the Memorandum of Settlement dated 8-10-1982 . The reference appears to be made at the instance of the workman in his personnel capacity. In the written statement filed by the management it is contended that the reference is bad in law as it is a case of individual dispute and there was no denial of employment . As per Section 2 A of the I.D. Act where employer discharges , dismisses , retrenches or otherwise terminates the service of an individual workman, any dispute or difference between that workman and his employee in respect of such discharge , dismissal , retrenchment or termination shall be deemed to be an industrial dispute notwithstanding that no other workman nor any union of workmen is a party to the dispute . In the present case the claim of the workman is that the management declined to absorb him as Foreman from the C-category list as per the memorandum ofsettlement dated 3-10-1981 , which amounts to denial of employment. Whether the declining of absorption amounts to discharge or termination is a mattor to be determined by this court. Asthe claim ofthe workman is that such declining amounts to denial of employment or rather discharge from service the maintainability of the reference is not affected due to non-joining of a union to represent the workman in the reference . Thus it can be found that the reference is maintainable .

3A. In the written statement filed by the management following contentions are seen raised:-The reference is not maintainable since an individual dispute is raised in which there was no denial of employment . The U.S.A. pool referred inthe claim petition was formed by virtue of 3 settlement dated 8-10-1982 , 8-11-1982 and 8-12-1982 . The first and 3rd settlement were arrived at by the steamer employer and 4 unions representing the workers and the second settlement was arrived at by the steamer agents and 4 unions representing the workers . The pool commenced functioning from 1-2-1983 . From 15-2-1995 there was no category of Assistant Foreman as all the incumbents of the category were upgraded to the post of Foreman by virtue of a bilateral settlement arrived at in February, 1995. The settlement dated 8-10-1982 does not confer anyunqualified right to the workman to consider his name for the post ofForeman . The name of the workman was included in the C- list which was only the waiting list ofAssistant Foreman . From the terms of settlement itself it is clear that the list was intended only to maintain over flow requirement and the persons in that list was entitled to get wages for the work done and for no other benefits . Due to rationalisation introduced by the Government and by the port authority the work opportunity of Foreman has been drastically reduced and the present working days available to Foreman is 2 to 3 days in a month . As the name ofthe workman was in the waiting list maintained for over flow requirement the absorption of the workman arises only in accordance with the work requirement. Due to rationalisation there is no adequate work opportunity evenfor the regular workers there is no necessity for filling up vacancies in the main list by including workers from the waiting list. The workman was never in the rolls ofthe management thereby he has no right for appointment . No worker which is a party to the settlement in question has made a claim for the workman . There was no employer- employee relationship between the workman and the respondents thereby he is not entitled to get any claim as per the reference . The letter dated 22-10-91 was a letter relating to appointment made in the then circumstances and the same has no relevance as far as the claim at present. Further by virture of the bilateral settlement dated 15-2-1995 all the incumbents in the main list in the category of Assistant Foreman were upgraded to the post of Foreman. The parties to the settlement dated 8-10-1982 were parties to the subsequent agreement dated 15-2-1995 thereby it superceded the earlier agreement . So the management prays for passing an award rejecting the claim ofthe workman .

4. Workman filed a replication reiterating the claims inthe claim statement and traversing the contentions raised in the written statement .

8. Points 2 to 4: Admittedly a memorandum of settlement was arrived at on 18-10-1982 in the dispute between Forman and Assistant Forman represented by 4 unions and the Stevedores represented by the United Stevedores Association . As per the settlement the Foreman and Assistant Foreman whose names are furnished in the main list A1 , A2, A3 , A4 and B1 and B2 will be enlisted in a pool . A waiting list containing the names of Assistant 5. For the purpose of this case evidence adduced from the workman's side which consists of the testimony 490

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II- SBC, 3 (ii)] Foreman is also attached with the Settlement and the persons mentioned in the Waiting list were required to made the overflow requirement and filling up of vacancies in the category of Assistant Foreman. It was made clear that the persons in the waiting list are not entitled to the benefits under the settlement and they are entitled only to wages for the days they have actually worked. As per the settlement the vacancy in the category of Foreman in the list A1 , A2, A3 , or A4 shall be filled by the senior most Assistant Foreman from the B- 1 list and he shall be promoted as Foreman and his pay shall be appropriately fixed in the scale of pay of foreman and he shall continue to get the minimum guarantee wage of 21 days in a month. The process of filling up vacancies in the category of Foreman shall continue as above till all the Foreman in B- 1 list are promoted and thereafter the Assistant Foreman included in B- 2 list shall be promoted as Foreman according to their seniority and vacancies as and when arising in the category ofAssistant Foreman shall be filled from the category of Assistant Foreman from C- list according to their seniority in order to ensure that the totalnumber of Assistant Foreman in B- 1 and B-2 list shall be maintained at 40. The Assistant Foreman so absorbed from C- list shell get a minimum guarantee wage of 12 days in a month . It is not disputed that the workman was serial No. 18 in the C- list prepared as per the settlement dated 8- 10-1982. According to the workman 17 persons in the C- list were promoted to the post of Foreman and the workman was the next person to be absorbed . But he was not absorbed in spite of repeated demands and hence he moved for the present reference. Ext . W6 is the copy of a letter dated 4-10-1991 seems to be issued by the Cochin Steamer Agents Association to the Administrative Officer of United Stevedores Association Private Limited Administrative Committee forpooling wherein it is stated thatthe procedure of filling the vacancies from the pool- ing obviously irrelevant in the light of the substantial decrease in the work opportunities availbaie for the pool personnel . In the reply to the above letter, the copy of which is marked as Ext . W5 , the United Stevedors Association had claried that as per the momorandum of settlement dated 8-10-1982 it is obligatory on the part of the pool administration to maintain the strength of Foreman/Assistant Foreman at 70 (30-40)-and along with the settlement a C- list of persons in waiting list was also maintained enabling to fill up the vacancy as and when occur , ensuring the strength at 70 at all time. Any decrease or increase inwork opportunity available for the category ofthe Foreman/ Assistant Foreman has no material relevance in keeping up the above strength . It was also clarified that taking into consideration the very filxibile nature ofthejob opportunities in the category of Foreman/Assistant Foreman the strength fixed at 70 , as a matter of fact is being found in sufficient. Ext . W5 is dated 22-10-1991 . According to the management the circumstances existed in 1991 as referred in Ext . W5 is not available at present to be analysed in favour of the

workmen as due to rationalisation introduced by the Government andthe port authorities the work opportunity ofForeman has been drastically reduced and the present working days available to Foreman is 2 to 3 days in a month thereby there is no chance for providing absorption from the C- list which was only a waiting list to satisfy the overflow requirement. It is further contended by the management that the parties to the settlement dated 8-10-1982 had entered into a subsequent agreement on 15-2-1995 which superceded the earlier settlement. It Is admitted by the workman that the union has not taken any steps in the matter of his absorption which may be due to the subsequent settlement. In the present case as important aspect to be referred is the non -appearance of the workman before court to depose In support of his claim. His father was examined as WW1 on the strength of Ext. Wl power ofattorney. Though WW1 claimed that his son , theworkman involved in the present case, is at present residing at Bombay and trying for a job by residing in a relatives residence , in the course of cross examination he admitted that his son has not turned up for giving evidence in the present case on the fear of loss of the present job available at Bombay. He would admit that his son alone is aware ofthe reason for not taking the dispute by the union. WWI was working in a Stevador Company K.B. Jacob and Sons and the first management is the Association of somany such Stevedors . WW1 would admit that at present only 2 to 3 Stevedor companies alone are working. WWI has admitted that the workman was in the list till 1995 and by that time the job opportunity was unstantially reduced thereby he left Kochi in 1996 and went to Bombay in search ofjob. After his departure to Bombay during 1996 he never come tothe pool and worked there . He would admitbefore court that at present the persons from overflow C - list are not deputed for work in the port and it is due to absence of job opportunities . That is why WWI has admitted that the managements have not denied employment to the workman but there is no job opportunity to engage the employees from the waiting list . Thus from the evidence ofWWI itself it can be found that the management has not denied employment to the workman but he could not be engaged due to absence of job opportunity . The workman being a person included in the waiting list provided as per the settlement of 1982 his only claim can be for engagement as per overflow requirement and to get wages for the same. The workman has no case that the juniors in the C- list were provided absorption to the post of Foreman. Considering the changed circumstances in the nature of work at the Port and the subsequent settlement entered between the unions and management it cannot be found that the action of the management is declining absorption of the workman as Foreman from the C-category list is just and improper and illegal . So the workman is not entitled to get any reijef as per the reference. Points are answered accordingly.

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31, 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

১ In the result, as award is passed finding that the action of the management of United Stevedors Association of Kochi Private Limited in declining absorption of Mr. George Johnson as Foreman from the C- category list as per memorandum of settlement dated 8-10-1992 is just, proper and legal thereby the workman is 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 30th day ofSeptember , 2003.

Ernakulam .

N. THULASI BAI , Presiding Officer

APPENDIX

Witness Examined on the side of the Management-Nil Witnes examined on the side of the workman : WW1- Sri P. B. George .

Exhibits marked on the side of the Mangement : -Nil Exhibits marked on the side of the workman :-

Ext, W1 Special power of Attorney.

Ext. W2 Photo Copy of Memorandum of settlement arrived at under section 12(3 ) of I.D. Act .

Ext. W3 Photo copy of list of foremen and Asst. Foreman .

Ext . W4 Copy of letter dated 7-6-94 by George Johnson to the Administrative Officer .

Ext . W4(a) Copy of letter dated 14-7-95 by Sri . George Johnson to the Administrative Officer .

Ext . W4( b) Copy of letter dated 4-8-95 by Sri . George Johnson to the Administrative Officer .

Ext. W5-Copy of letter dated 22-10-1991 by the Administrative Officer to the president , Cochin Steam Agents Association.

Ext. W8 Letter dated 4-10-1991 by the President , Cochin Steamer Agents Association to the Administrative Officer , USA (P) Limited.

नईदिल्ली, 8 जनवरी , 2004

का. आ. 253.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार हाडोती क्षेत्रीय ग्रामीण बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मक्कारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण , कोटा के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 19/96 )

491

को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 8-1-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/135/95- आईआर ( बी-1 ) ]

अजय कुमार , डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi, the 8th January , 2004

S.O. 253. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 19/96) of the Industrial Tribunal , Kota now as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Hadoti Rural Gramin Bank and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 8-1-2004.

[No. L- 12012/135 /95 - IR (B -I) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

अनुबंध

न्यायाधीश , औद्योगिक न्यायाधिकरण/केन्द्रीय/कोटा/राज.

पीठासीन अधिकारी:

श्री मणि शंकर व्यास, आर.एच.जे.एस.

निर्देश प्रकरण क्रमांक औ.न्या. केन्द्रीय/-19/96 दिनांक स्थापित: 29-8-96

प्रसंग: भारत सरकार, श्रम मंत्रालय , नई दिल्ली के आदेश सं. एल-12012/135/95- आई.आर. (बी ) दिनांक 13-8-96

निर्देश अन्तर्गत धारा 10 ( 1 ) ( घ ) औद्यो. विवाद अधिनियम, 1947

मध्य

रामगोपाल यादव पुत्र श्री चौथमल यादव मु. पौ . नेता तहसील पीपल्दा जिला कोटा ।

-प्रार्थी श्रमिक

एवं

प्रबन्धन, हाड़ौती क्षेत्रीय ग्रामीण बैंक, प्रधान कार्यालय , झालावाड़ रोड़ , कोटा।

-अप्रार्थी नियोजक

उपस्थित

प्रार्थी श्रमिक की ओर से प्रतिनिधि श्री आर.एस. शर्मा

अप्रार्थी नियोजक की ओर से प्रतिनिधि श्री नवीन शर्मा

अधिनिर्णय दिनांक: 19-12-2003 492

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/ MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 (1) ] अधिनिर्णय

भारत सरकार , श्रम मंत्रालय , नई दिल्ली के उक्त प्रासांगिक आदेश दिनांक 13-8-96 के जरिये निम्न निर्देश/विवाद, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( जिसे तदुपरान्त " अधिनियम " से सम्बोधित किया जावेगा ) की धारा 10 ( 1 ) ( घ ) के अन्तर्गत इस न्यायाधिकरण को अधिनिर्णयार्थ सम्प्रेषित किया गया है :-

" क्या प्रबन्धन, हाड़ौती क्षेत्रीय ग्रामीण बैंक, प्रधान कार्यालय, झालावाड़ रोड़, कोटा द्वारा अंशकालीन कर्मकार श्री रामगोपाल यादव पुत्र श्री चौथमल यादव की सेवाएं दिनांक 22-12-85 से समाप्त करने की कार्यवाही उचित एवं वैध है ? यदि नहीं तो . सम्बन्धित कर्मकार किस अनुतोष का हकदार है ? "

गया, कुछ भी नहीं बतलाया गया है । चूंकि प्रार्थी पूर्णतया अंशकालीन दैनिक वेतन भोगी आकस्मिक श्रमिक था, इस कारण वह कोई कानूनी प्रक्रिया पालन करवाने का अधिकारी नहीं है । उसे जब भी कार्य पर लगाया गया, उसका भुगतान किया जा चुका है । यह भी स्वीकार्य नहींहै कि उसे कार्य से हटाया गया हो । प्रार्थी कोई नोटिस, वेतन, मुआवजा आदि प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी नहीं है । आगे अभिकथित कियां गया है किप्रार्थी ने जिला ग्रामीण विकास अभिकरण के माध्यम से साईकिल दुकान हेतु 6000 रु. का ऋण प्राप्त करने हेतु जो आवेदन किया था उसमें अपनी वार्षिक आय 3000 रु. अंकित की है । प्रार्थी ने अप्रार्थी बैंक से 4000 रु. ऋण की राशि 5-2-88 को प्राप्त की है तथा वांछित दस्तावेज अप्रार्थी बैंक के पक्ष में सम्पादित किये हैं जिस कारण वह इसके विपरीत कथन करने से एस्टोप्ड है । अन्त में प्रार्थना की गयी है कि प्रार्थी, अप्रार्थी नियोजक से किसी प्रकार का कोई अनुतोष प्राप्त करने काअधिकारी नहीं है और उसका क्लेम सव्यय निरस्त किया जावे । 2. निर्देश/विवाद, न्यायाधिकरण में प्राप्त होने पर पंजीबद्ध उपरान्त पक्षकारों को सूचना विधिवत रूप में जारी की गयी ।

5. साक्ष्य में प्रार्थी ने स्वयं का शपथ- पत्र प्रस्तुत किया है , जबकि अप्रार्थी नियोजक की ओर से श्री ओमप्रकाश गुप्ता, शाखा प्रबन्धक को परीक्षित करवाया गया है । उभयपक्ष की ओर से प्रलेखीय साक्ष्य भी प्रस्तुत की गयी है जिसका यथा समय उल्लेख किया जावेगा ।

6. उभयपक्ष के विद्वान प्रतिनिधिगण की बहस सुनी गयी जो बहस मुख्यतः उनके द्वारा प्रस्तुत अपने-अपने अभ्यावेदनों के अनुरूप ही रही है, पत्रावली व अभिलेख पर उपलब्ध साक्ष्य व सामग्री का ध्यानपूर्वक परिशीलन किया गया ।

3. प्रार्थी श्रमिक रामगोपाल यादव की ओर से क्लेम स्टेटमैन्ट प्रस्तुत कर संक्षेप में यह अभिकथित किया गया है कि उसे प्रबन्धक, हाड़ौती क्षेत्रीय ग्रामीण बैंक, कोटा की शाखा ग्राम गेता तह. पीपल्दा जिला कोटा ( जिसे तदुपरान्त " अप्रार्थी नियोजक/बैंक " से सम्बोधित किया जावेगा ) द्वारा दि. 21-11-83 को चतुर्थ श्रेणी कर्मचारी के पद पर शाखा गेता में नियुक्त किया गया था जहां उसने 18-5-85 तक लगातार कार्य कर लिया था, तदुपरान्त उसे बिना किसी सूचना व नोटिस के सेवा से हटा दिया गया जिसका विरोध करने पर उसे पुनः 15-7-85 को सेवा में रख लिया गया और 21-12-85 को पुनः नौकरी से निकाल दिया गया । प्रार्थी ने उक्त अवधि में नियोजक के यहां निरन्तर 240 दिन तक की सेवायें पूर्ण कर ली थीं जिसका प्रमाण- पत्र भी उसे नियोजक द्वारा जारी किया गया है । इसके अतिरिक्त उसे सेवा से निकाले जाने के समय उससे कनिष्ठतम श्रमिक कार्यरत थे और वरिष्ठतासूची का प्रकाशन नहीं कर पहले आये बाद जाये सिद्धांत की अवेहलना की गयी है । इसके अतिरिक्त उसे सेवा से निकाले जाने के बाद अन्य श्रमिकं कुंजबिहारी व रामबाबू को नियोजित कर लिया गया जबकि प्रार्थी को ऐसा अवसर प्रदान नहीं किया गया जोकि अनुचित श्रम आचरण है । इस प्रकार अप्रार्थी नियोजक द्वारा अधिनियम की धारा 25- एफ , जी व एच का उल्लंघन किया गया है । अन्त में प्रार्थना की गयी है कि उसे उक्त प्रकार से अप्रार्थी नियोजक द्वारा सेवा से निकाला जाना अनुचित एवं अवैध घोषित करते हुए, पिछले सम्पूर्ण वेतन व समस्त सेवा लाभों सहित सेवा में पुर्नस्थापित किये जाने का अनुतोष प्रदान किया जावे ।

4. अप्रार्थी नियोजक की ओर से उक्त क्लेम का जवाब प्रस्तुत करते हुए यह अभिकथित किया गया है कि यह स्वीकार्य नहीं कि प्रार्थी को 21-11-83 से च. श्रे. कर्मचारी के पद पर बैंक शाखा , सेवा पर नियुक्त किया गया हो, बल्कि उक्त शाखा में समय - समय पर कार्य की आवश्यकता होने पर अंशकालीन दैनिक वेतन भोगी श्रमिक के रूप में उसे काम पर रखा जाता है । यह भी स्वीकार नहीं है कि उसे 18-5-85 कोनौकरी से निकाला गया हो, प्रार्थी द्वारा ऐसा कोई आदेश नहीं बतलाया गया है । प्रार्थी ने किस आदेश क्रमांक से 15-7-85 को सेवा में रखा व किस आदेश व अधिकारी द्वारा उसे 21-12-85 को सेवा से निकाला

7. विद्वान प्रतिनिधि प्रार्थी का कथन है कि प्राथी ने अप्रार्थी के अधीन 21-11-83 से 21-12-85 तक चतुर्थ श्रेणी कर्मचारी के पद पर कार्य किया था और इस अवधि में एक कलेण्डर वर्ष में 240 दिन पूर्ण कर लिये थे जिसे हटाने से पूर्व अधिनियम की धारा 25 - एफ. जी. एच केप्रावधानों की पालना नहीं की गयी । प्रार्थी से सम्बन्धित समस्त अभिलेख अप्रार्थी द्वारा पेश नहीं किया गया है इसलिए उसके विरुद्ध प्रतिकूल उपधारणा ली जानी चाहिए । खण्डन में विद्वान प्रतिनिधि अप्रार्थी का कथन है कि प्रार्थी की ओर से यह विवाद लगभग 9 वर्ष बाद समझौता अधिकारी के यहां उठाया गया था और न्यायाधिकरण ने यह विवाद लगभग 11 वर्ष बाद आया है । प्रार्थी को कभी भी चतुर्थ श्रेणी कर्मचारी के पद पर नियुक्तिनहीं दी गयी । अंशकालीन कर्मचारी के रूप में कुछ समयके लिए रखा गया था, लेकिन प्रार्थी से सम्बन्धित अभिलेख बहुत पुराना होने से बैंक में उपलब्ध नहीं है । प्रार्थी को उसके कथनानुसार भी भुगतान पी. एण्ड एल . से नगद पर्ची पर किया गया था । यह अभिलेख पुराना होने से संभवतया नष्ट कर दिया गया है । प्रार्थी ने स्वयं माना है कि उसकी हाजिरी रजिस्टर में नहीं होती थी इसलिए अन्य कोई ऐसा अभिलेख जो स्थायी प्रकृति का है , बैंक के कब्जे में नहीं है । प्रार्थी ने कभी भी किसी कलेण्डर वर्ष में 240 दिन पूर्ण कार्य नहीं किया । प्रार्थी को अंशकालीन कर्मचारी के रूप में कुछ समय के लिए आवश्यकतानुसार रखा गया था और प्रार्थी स्वयं ही काम पूर्ण होने पर कार्य छोड़कर चला गया था । प्रार्थी का क्लेम एकमात्र देरी के आधार पर भी निरस्त किये जाने योग्य है । प्रार्थी ने अपने क्लेम के समर्थन में कोई दस्तावेजी साक्ष्य नहीं जुटाईहै । एक कलेण्डर वर्ष में 240 दिन पूर्ण किये जाने का तथ्य प्रार्थी को 493 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

प्रमाणित करना था, लेकिन यह तथ्य दस्तावेजी साक्ष्य के अभाव में प्रमाणित नहीं है । अतः प्रार्थी किसी प्रकार का कोई अनुतोष प्राप्त करने काअधिकारी नहीं है । अपने तर्क समर्थन में न्यायदृष्टांत " ए.आई.आर. 2002एस.सी. 1147 - रेन्ज फोरेस्ट ऑफिसर बनाम एस.टी. हाडीमनी " को पेश किया गया है ।

ग्रामीण बैंक द्वारा जारी करना बताया गया है, पेश किया गया है, लेकिन यह प्रमाण- पत्र जिसने जारी किया, उसकी साक्ष्य न्यायाधिकरण में नहीं हुई है, ना इस प्रमाण- पत्र पर हाड़ौती क्षेत्रीय ग्रामीण बैंक का कोई डिस्पेच नम्बर अंकित है । जब प्रार्थी को 22-12-85 को सेवा से हटा दिया गया था , ऐसी स्थिति में 21-9-94 को यह प्रमाण-पत्र जारी किये जाने का क्या आधार था, यह स्पष्ट नहीं है । यह प्रमाण- पत्र विश्वास उत्पन्न करने वाला नहीं है और ना प्रार्थी द्वारा प्रमाणित किया गया है । इसके अतिरिक्त प्रार्थी ने कोई दस्तावेज नियुक्ति अथवा हटाने सम्बन्धी भी पैश नहीं किया है । प्रार्थी ने स्वयं स्वीकार किया है कि उसकी हाजिरी रजिस्टर में नहीं होती थी । प्रार्थी से सम्बन्धित कोई भी अभिलेख उसके द्वारा तलब नहीं करवाया गया है व अप्रार्थी के गवाह ने तो स्पष्ट रूप से कहा है कि प्रार्थी से सम्बन्धित अभिलेख बैंक में उपलब्ध नहीं है । प्रार्थी नेअपने विवाद को लगभग 9 वर्ष की देरी के बाद उठाया है जिसका भी कोई संतोषजनक स्पष्टीकरण उसके द्वारा नहीं दिया गया है, अतः विश्वसनीय दस्तावेजी साक्ष्य के अभाव में मात्र प्रार्थी के शपथ-पत्र के आधार पर प्राथी द्वारा एक कलेण्डर वर्ष में 21-11-83 से 21-12-85 तक 240 दिन का कार्य किया जाना सिद्ध नहीं माना जा सकता । न्यायदृष्टांत " ए.आई.आर. 2002 एस.सी. 1147- रेन्ज फोरेस्ट ओफिसर बनाम एस.टी. हाडीमनी " में यह निर्धारित किया गया है कि प्रार्थी का शपथ- पत्र, एक कलेण्डर वर्ष में 240 दिन पूर्ण किये जाने के तथ्य को सिद्ध करने के लिए पर्याप्त नहीं है क्योंकि यह कथन प्रार्थी द्वारा स्वयं के पक्ष में किया गया है जो किसी भी रूप में प्रमाण का स्थान नहीं ले सकता । उक्त न्यायदृष्टांत को यदि हस्तगत मामले पर लागू करें तो शपथ-पत्र के अलावा अन्य कोई विश्वसनीय दस्तावेज प्रार्थी द्वारा एक कलेण्डर वर्ष में 240 दिन पूर्ण किये जाने के सम्बन्ध में अभिलेख पर नहींहै, अतः प्रार्थी यह प्रमाणित करने में असफल रहा है कि उसने एक कलेण्डर वर्ष में 240 दिन का कार्य पूर्ण कर लिया था । 9 वर्ष की देरी प्रार्थी के कथन को अविश्वसनीय मानने का एक और सुदृढ़ आधार है । जहां तक अधिनियम की धारा 25 - जी व एच के उल्लंघन का प्रश्न है, प्रार्थी ने इस सम्बन्ध में भी कोई विश्वसनीय साक्ष्य पेश नहीं की है और अप्रार्थी ने स्पष्ट रूप से कहा है कि अप्रार्थी बैंक में चतुर्थ श्रेणी कर्मचारी पद कीस्वीकृति दिस . 91 में मिली है, इससे पहले कभी किसी कर्मचारी को नियमित नियुक्त नहीं किया गया था । अतः अधिनियम की धारा 25 -जी व एच की अवहेलना अप्रार्थी द्वारा किया जाना भी प्रमाणित नहींहै ।

10. उपरोक्त विवेचन के आधार पर निष्कर्ष यह निकलता है कि प्रार्थी एक कलेण्डर वर्ष में 240 दिन की सेवायें पूर्ण किये जाने के तथ्य को प्रमाणित नहीं कर पाया है , ना यह प्रमाणित कर पाया है कि उसे अप्रार्थी द्वारा 22-12-85 से अनुचित एवं अवैध रूप से सेवा से हटाया गया था; अतः प्रार्थी किसी प्रकार का कोई अनुतोष प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी घोषित होने योग्य नहीं है ।

8. उभयपक्ष की साक्ष्य का विवेचन किया जाना उचित प्रतीत होता है : - प्रार्थी रामगोपाल ने अपने बयानों में, स्टेटमेन्ट आफ क्लेम के तथ्योंकी पुष्टि की है तथा प्रतिपरीक्षा में यह बताया है कि उसने समझौता अधिकारी के यहां सबसे पहले प्रार्थना-पत्र6-10-94 को दिया था । दि. 21-11-83 को उसे 6 रु. रोज पर काम पर रखा गया था । मुझे पता नहींकि उस समय प्रतिपक्षी शाखा में चपरासी के लिए स्वीकृत पद था अथवा नहीं। मेरे पास कहीं भी यह लिखा हुआ नहीं है कि मैंने किस- किस महीने में कितने कितने दिन काम किया । बैंक वालों ने वेतन दिया उसमें लिखा हुआ है । यह बात सही है कि मेरा हाजिरी रजिस्टर में नाम नहीं था । मुझे पी . एण्ड एल. पर्ची पर नगद पैसे देते थे । मुझे यह पता नहीं किस -किस तारीख को कितने पैसे दिये। मुझे नौकरी पर रखते समगध कोई नियुक्ति- पत्र नहीं दिया और ना ही 21-12-85 को नौकरी से हटाने का कोई पत्र दिया । मुझे 18-5-85 को श्री बी.पी. गुप्ताजी ने हटाया था । यह सही है कि मैंने 18-5-85 को नौकरी से हटाने के बारे में श्रम विभाग समझौता अधिकारी के यहां लिखित में कोई प्रार्थना-पत्र नहीं दिया था । आगे यह भी कहा है कि मेरे अलावा प्रतिपक्षी के यहां और किसी ने काम नहीं किया । यह कहना गलत है कि मैंने स्वयं का धन्धा करने के लिए अपने आप नौकरी छोड़ दी हो । यह सही है कि उसने प्रतिपक्षी बैंक के यहां अपनी साईकिल की दुकान के लिए 20-1-88 को ऋण प्रार्थना- पत्र दिया था । मैंने यह ऋण पांच वर्ष की अवधिके लिए लिया था । ऋण से सम्बन्धित दस्तावेज प्रदर्श एम. 1 है । यह सही है कि मेरे द्वारा 94 तक ऋण न चुकाने पर मुझे नोटिस भी भेजे गये थे । अप्रार्थी के गवाह श्री ओमप्रकाश गुप्ता, शाखा प्रबन्धक ने अपने बयानों में बताया है कि 21-12-85 को शाखा प्रबन्धक बी.पी. गुप्ता थे । जो अब बैंक में नहीं हैं तथा बैंक में ऐसा कोई दस्तावेज नहीं है जिससे यह पता लगे कि रामगोपाल प्रार्थी को बैंक की सेवा में दि. 21-12-85 या 18-5-85 को पृथक किया गया हो अथवा 21-11-83 को नियुक्ति दी हो । प्रतिपक्षी बैंक की शाखा में चतुर्थ श्रेणी कर्मचारी एक पद की स्वीकृति दिस. 91 में मिली है , इसरो पूर्व पानी भरने व झाडू निकालने के लिए आवश्यकतानुसार अंशकालीन दैनिक वेतन भोगी श्रमिक की सेवाएं प्राप्त करते थे । प्रतिपरीक्षा में इस गवाह का कथन है कि प्रार्थी के केस से सम्बन्धित रिकार्ड देखकर आया है, परन्तुवर्तमान में रिकार्ड उपलब्ध नहीं है । व्यक्तिगत जानकारी के हिसाब सेप्राथी ने डेली वेजेज के हिसाब से पार्ट टाईम काम किया है, लेकिन कितने दिन काम किया, यह मैं नहीं बता सकता। मुझे प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू, 2 से डब्ल्यू. 7 के बाबत कोई जानकारी नहीं है ।

परिणामतः भारत सरकार, श्रम मंत्रालय , नई दिल्ली द्वारा सम्प्रेषित निर्देश/विवाद का अधिनिर्णयन कर इस प्रकार उत्तरित किया जाता है कि चूंकिप्रार्थी श्रमिक रामगोपाल पुत्र श्री चौथमल यादव , अप्रार्थी नियोजक प्रबन्धन, होड़ौती ग्रामीण बैंक, प्रधान कार्यालय , झालावाड़ रोड, कोटा केअधीन एक कलेण्डर वर्ष में 240 दिन की सेवायें पूर्ण किये जाने के 9. सर्वप्रथम इस तथ्य पर विचार करना है कि क्या प्रार्थी ने 21-11-83 से 21-12-85 के मध्य 240 दिन कार्य एक कलेण्डर वर्ष में पूर्ण कर लिया था ? इस सम्बन्ध में प्रार्थी की ओर से दस्तावेज प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू. 1 की फोटोप्रति जोकि वर्ष 1994 में शाखा प्रबन्धक, हाड़ौती 494

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

Representations :

M/s . B.S. Krishnan , : For Management

Advocate,

तथ्य को प्रमाणित नहीं कर पाया है , ना यह प्रमाणित कर पाया है कि उसे अप्रार्थी द्वारा 22-12-85 से अनुचित एवं अवैध प्रकार से सेवा से हटाया गया था, अतः प्रार्थी श्रमिक किसी प्रकार का कोई अनुतोष अप्रार्थी नियोजक से प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी नहीं है ।

Emakulam .

Sri .Ashok Shenoy,: ForWorkman

इस अधिनिर्णय को समुचित सरकार को नियमानुसार प्रकाशनार्थ भिजवाया जावे ।

Advocate,

Ernakulam

मणिशंकर व्यास, न्यायाधीश

AWARD

नई दिल्ली, 8 जनवरी , 2004

Thisreference was made hy the Central Government as per Order No.L- 12012/267/95 - IR (B.I.) dated 11-3-1997. The dispute is between the management of Federal Bank Limited, Aluva and its workman Sri . K.S. Narayanankutty. The dispute referred is:

"Whether the action of the management of Federal Bank Ltd. is justified, proper and legal ?

का. आ. 254.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मै. फेडरल बैंक लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार श्रम न्यायालय , इरनाकुलम के पंचाट [ संदर्भ संख्या आई.डी.सं. 12/97(सी ) ] को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 8-1-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

1. In dispensing with the services of Shri . K. S. Narayanankutty w.e.f. 4-9-1992.

[सं. एल-12012/267/95- आई आर ( बी-1 ) ]

अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी

2. In engaging the temporary workmen in various spells . If not to what relief the workman is entitled ?"

New Delhi , the 8th January, 2004

In the dispute the management is represented by the Chairman , M/s . Federal Bank Limited, Aluva and the workman is represented by the General Secretary, Federal Bank Staff Union .

2. On receipt of notices issued from this court the union and management appeared through counsel .

S.O. 254. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award [Ref. No. 1.D. No. 12/97 (C)] of the Central Government Labour Court , Ernakulam now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employres in relation to the management of M/s . Federal Bank Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 8-1-2004.

[No. L- 12012/267/95 -IR (B - I) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM

( IN THE LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM)

(Wednesday, the 20th day of October , 2003 )

Present : Smt. N. Thulasi Bai , B.A.LL.B. , PresidingOfficer

Industrial Dispute No. 12 of 1997 ( Central)

Between

The Chairman , M/ s . Federal Bank Limited , Head Office, Alwaye

And

3. The union filed a claim statement and the management filed a written statement raising their respective pleadings . Thereafter a rejoinder was filed by the union and the case was pending for evidence . Management produced documents of their own and some documents as directed as per a petition filed by the union. Though the workman appeared on some postings he could not be examined due to want of time and also due to the inconvenience of the management's counsel . Thereafter the workman was consecutively absent . Today the case was posted for evidence with an order of ' no further time ' . Then the union's counsel made an oral application for adjournment which was rejected by this court since more than sufficient opportunity was given to the union to adduce evidence and as 1 am satisfied that the union is not interested in prosecuting the dispute . Under the above circumstances an award can be passed finding that there exists no industrial dispute at present to be adjudicatedby this court.

The workman of the above concern represented by the General Secretary, Federal Bank Staff Union , No.2, Champion Buildings , Bank Junction , Aluva

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

495 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

AWARD

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

The Central Government in the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L- 12012/363/94- IR. B- II dated 21-4-95 has referredthe following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :-

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed and typed out by her, corrected by me and passed this the 20thday of October, 2003 .

ERNAKULAM

N. THULASI BAI , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 8 जनवरी , 2004

"Whether the action of the Management of Punjab National Bank, New Delhi in dismissing Shri Satish KumarMittal , Clerk-cum- Typist from service w.e.f. 12-1-93 is legal and justified? If not, what relief is the said workman entitled to ?"

का. आ. 255.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार पंजाब नेशनल बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 52/95 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीष सरकार को 8-1-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/363/94- आई आर ( बी-11 ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 8th January, 2004

S.O. 255. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 52/ 95) of the Central Government Industrial - cum- Labour Court, New Delhi as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employer in relation to the management of Punjab Nationai Bank and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 8-1-2004

[No. L-12012/363/94- IR (B- II ) ]

C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM- LABOUR COURT, NEW DELHI

Shri B.N. Pandey, PresidingOfficer

I.D. No. 52/1995

Shri Satish Kumar Mittal ,

BU-267, Pitampura,

New Delhi - 110034 .

Versus

1. The Chairman ,

2. In brief facts ofthe case as allegedby the workman in his claim statement are that he was working in the Punjab National Bank as a clerk -cum- typist since Fourth June, 1984 and his work and conduct was all along very good; that unfortunately under his mental and domestic circumstances certain irregularities resulting a loss of Rs. 34,000/-to the bank were caused for which he was charge sheeted vide charge sheet dated 30-11-91 and 18-1-92. He did not dispute the allegations levelled against him and admitted the same with a request to forgive him by taking lenient view . He also made good the loss to the bank by depositing entire amount of alleged loss but the bankdid not consider his request and punished him with dismissal from bank service without notice w.e.f. 12-1-93 vide RegionalManager's order . He also made an appeal to the Appellate Authority ice . Zonal Manager but in vain. That the punishment awarded to him was shocking, disproportionate, extreme and resulted in aneconomicdeath to him; that he is a young man having a small daughter and he has already undergone a lot of mental agony and is extremely at the stage of starvation as it is not possible for him toget anyjob elsewhere; that the dismissal from service is very harsh and for the ends ofjustice he could have been awarded a lessor punishment than that of dismissal from service; that even in number of cases the Punjab National Bank itselfhas reduced purilshment of dismissal from service to stoppage of annual increments or warning etc. The workman has also cited cases of Hanuman Pershad, Rajiv Sahai , Shri Chander Kishore, Rattan Singh, Rajinder Kumar etc.whowere awarded punishment of dismissal from service but later on they were reinstated in service after awarding lessor punishment like stoppage in increments etc.; that the workman approached various authorities of the bank for redressal ofhis grievance but in vain and later on raised this dispute and has prayed for quashing the dismissal order and reinstatment in bank's service with consequential benefits after awarding lessor punishment.

Punjab National Bank ,

Bhikaji Cama Place,

Workman/Petitioner

New Delhi.

2. The Regional Manager , North Delhi ,

Punjab National Bank,

9 -A, Antriksh Bhawan ,

K.G. Marg,

3. The claim of the workman has been contestedby the management by way of filing a written statement . In the written statement it has been inter - alia alleged that theworkman committed serious irregularities in calculating interest in O.D. Accounts and the difference ofamount i.e. the difference in the actual amount and the calculated amount of interest was misappropriated by him for which New Delhi .

Management/ Opposite Parties

173 GI/2004-11 496

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

he was charge sheeted ; that in his reply to the charge sheet he admitted the allegations contained in the charge sheet; that he not only admitted charges but also repaid entire amount defrauded by him; that during enquiry proceedings also the workman accepted the charges . Accordingly he was found guilty and later on punished by punishment of dismissal . His appeal was also dismissed. That the punishment of dismissal was awarded for the acts ofhismis- conduct which were of serious nature, therefore, the workman does not deserve lenient view and his claim deserves to be dismissed..

4. The workman also filed rejoinder to the written statement of the management reiterating his earlier versions . He added that he was under depression and the alleged irregularities were committed by him on account of depression and not was of his conscious act.

5. Both the parties filed documentary evidence and also filed affidavits . The management filed affidavit of Shri Rajiv Bhalla (Ext . M. W. 1/1 ) who was also cross-examined. On the other hand the workman filed his own affidavit as Ex . W.W. 1/1 and was also cross - examined by the Management .

6. I have heard Id. counsel for the parties , considered their subrnissions and perused the file.

7. The Id . counsel for the workman has not challenged validity of the enquiry proceedings . However, he vehemently contended that the action of the management was arbitrary , prejudicial and against the principles ofjustice and equity in as much as awarding the punishment of dismissal from service without considering the previous records and conduct of the delinquent employee , his confessional statement from the very beginning and extenuating circumstances of the case. He added that the alleged amount was a petty amount of Rs . 34,000/ - only which was on the basis of mis-wrong calculation of interest for which the employee has fairly explained and admitted his mistakes under the circumstances disclosed by him . According to his mistakes occurred due to his mental depression and prevailing family circumstances . Moreover he had also made good the alleged loss . He also submitted that in various cases the management itself had quashed dismissal of various employees and reinstated them after awarding petty punishment by way of taking lenient view which is admitted by the management .

8. It is worth to be mentioned that the workman at the first opportunity came forward to admit the alleged misconduct having repented for his action and also deposited amount of Rs . 34,000/- and thereby made good the loss caused to the bank. In spite of admission ofmis- conduct , the bank constituted enquiry and even in enquiry workman admitted the charges again. This shows the reformative attitude of the workman . His conscience did

[PART II SEC. 3( ii) ] not permit him to conceal the fact of alleged mis - conduct forever. In the first available opportunity itself, workman came forwarded to admit the charges which itself indicates that the workman had reformed himself and has a clear conscience. A temporary venture of temptation led to committing misconducts , and the workman came forward to admit his conduct itself and his feeling of repentance itself is a punishment to his conscience and indicative of hisreformative attitude.

9. Para 19.6 ofthe 1st Bi-partite Settlement provides various punishments aich may be awarded to an employee found guilty of gross- misconduct . The punishment of dismissal without notice is the extreme penaltywhich in other terms amount to economic death of the employee. It also provides punishment of warning, censor, adverse remarks , find, stoppage of increments and meredischarge. Para 19.12(C) ofthe 1st Bi - partite Settlement further provides that in awarding punishment by way of disciplinary action the authority concerned shall take into account gravity of the misconduct, previous record if any ofthe employee and any other aggravating or extenuating circumstances that may exist . So it is not that in every casesofgross- misconduct, punishment of dismissal must be awarded . The punishing authority has to award punishment which must be proportionate to the nature of misconduct and previous records and conduct of the employee . Each case has to be decided on its own fact and circumstances .

10. Section 11 - A ofthe I.D. Act, 1947 empowers this Tribunal /Labour Court to give appropriate relief in case of discharge or dismissal of workman. It lays down that :

"Where an industrial dispute relating to the discharge ordismissal of a workman has been referred to a Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal for adjudication and , in the course of the adjudication proceedings the Labour Court , Tribunal or National Tribunal, as the case may be, is satisfied that the orderofdischarge or dismissal was not justified , it may, by its award, set aside the order of discharge or dismissal and direct re - instatement of the workman on such terms and conditions, if as it thinks fit, or give such other relief to the workman including the award of any lessor punishment in lieu of discharge or dismissal as the circumstances of the case may require.

Provided that in any proceeding under this section the Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal , as the case maybe, shall rely only on the materials on record and shall not take any fresh evidence in relation to the matter ."

11. In the case of R.M. Parmar Vs. Gujarat Electricity Board reported in 1983 -Vol . ( 1st) LLJ Page 261 , a Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court ofGujarat while examining भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

the scope and object of the Section11 - A of the I.D. Act , 1947 also laid down certain principles which are reproduced hereunder:

"No doubt, the statute does not pescribe guidelines for the exercise of these powers . All the same, the Labour Court is required to decide the question on principle and on germane considerations without being influenced by irrelevant factors . "

"An employee facing a proceedings which could result in his economic death has a right to contest and resist it. He is not bound to admit the charges, or to plead guilty in order to enable him to invoke the jurisdiction of the Court u/s 11 -A to reduce the penalty. No such condition was engrafted by the Legislative and the Labour Court could not amend the statute by introducing such a rider. That he is ultimately found guilty at the departmental proceeding does not necessarily mean that he was in fact guilty.But even ifhe is in fact guilty ofthe charge levelled against him , he has the right to invoke the powers ofthe Labour Court u/s 11 - A for reduction of the penalty . The provision itself postulates a finding of guilt warranting a punishment recorded after a contest and empowers the Labour Court to reduce the punishment all the same . Since the power can be exercised even after he is found guilty at the conclusion of the inquiry , where is the compulsion to plead guilty . To say that power can be exercised only provided an employee pleads guilty and throws himself at the mercy ofthe Labour Court is to rewrite (in fact virtually to repeal ) the Provision . Claiming reduction of penalty is his right and not something for which the employee has to beg ofthe Labour Court on banded knees , and folded hands. Insisting on this as a pre- condition for exercise of powers u/s II -A, the Labour Court has abdicated its jurisdiction altogether and scuttled the purpose and policy of the Legislature. Thus there is no - effective exercise of powers u/s II - A. This is one reason why the matter requires to be remanded for a fresh decision in accordance with law uninfluenced by the circumstances that he did not plead guilty."

12. The principles laid down are hereunder:

1. There is widespread unemployment in our country and it is difficult to secure a job to earn enough to keep body and soul together unlike in developed countries .

2. The States does not provide social benefits like unemployment allowance to enable a discharged employee to sustain himself and his family to some extent, as is being done in the developed countries .

3. In imposing punishment on an erring employee an enlightened approach informed with the demands of the situation and the philosophy

497 and spirit of the times requires to be made . It cannot be a matter of the ipse dixit of the disciplinary authority depending on his whim orcaprice.

4. Be it administration of criminal law or the exercise of disciplinary jurisdiction in departmental proceedings , punishment is not and cannot be the." end" in itself. Punishment for the sake of punishment cannot be the motto . Whilst deliberating upon the jurisprudentially dimension the following factors must be considered :

(i) In a disciplinary proceeding for an alleged fault ofan employee punishment is imposed not in order to seek retribution or to give vent to feeling ofwrath.

(ii) The main purpose of a punishment it to correct the fault of the employee concemed by making him more alert in the future and to hold out a warning to the other employees tobe careful in the discharge of their duties so that they do not expose themselves to similar punishment . And the approach to be made in the approach parents make towards an erring or misguided child .

(iii) It is not expedient in the interest of the administration to visit every employee against whom a fault is established with the penalty of dismissal and to get rid of them. It wouldbe counter productive to do so for it would be futile to expect to recruit employees who are so perfect that they would never commit any fault.

(iv) In order not to attract the charge of arbitrariness it has to be ensured that the penalty imposed is commensurate with the magnitude of the fault . Surely one cannot rationally or justly impose the same penalty for giving a slap as once would impose for homicide.

(v) When different categories of penalties can be imposed in respect of the alleged fault one ofwhich is dismissal from service , the disciplinary authority perforce is required to consult himself for selecting the most appropriate penalty from out of the range ofpenalties available that can be imposed, having regard to the nature , content and gravity of the default , Unless the disciplinary authority reaches the conclusion that having regard to the nature, content and magnitude of the fault 498

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

committed by the employee concerned it wouldbe absolutely unsafe to retain him in service the maximum penalty of dismissal cannot be imposed . If a lesser penalty can be imposed without seriouslyjeopardizing the interest of the employer the disciplinary authority cannot impose the maximum penalty of dismissal from service . He is bound to ask his inner voice and rational faculty why a lesser penalty cannot be imposed.

(vi) It cannot be overlooked that by and large it is because the maximum penalty is imposed and total ruination stares one in the eyes that the employees concerned is obliged to approached the Court and avail ofthe costly and time consuming machinery to challenge in desperation the order passed by the disciplinary authority. Ifa lesser penalty was imposed, he might not have been obliged to take recourse to costly legal proceedings which result in loss of public time and also result in considerable hardship and misery to the employee concerned .

(vii) When the disciplinary proceedings end in favour of the employee the employer has often to pay back wages say for about 5 years without being able to take work from the employee concerned. One the other hand , the employee concerned would have had to suffer economic misery and mental Forture for all these years . Even the misery ofbeing obliged to remain idle without work would constitute an unbearable burden . And when the curtain drops every one is left with a bitter taste in the mouth . All because extreme penalty of dismissal or removal is imposed instead of a lighter one .

(viii) Every harsh order of removal from service creates bitterness and arouses a feeling of antagonism in the collective mind of the workers and gives rise to a feeling of class conflict. It does more harm than good to the employer as also to the Society.

(ix) Taking of a petty article by a worker in a moment of weakness when he yields to a temptation does not call for an extreme penalty of dismissal from service . More particularly when he does not hold a sensitive post of trust (pilferage by a cashier or by a store keeper from the stores in his charge , for instance , may be viewed with seriousness) . A worker brought up and

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] living in an atmosphere of poverty and want when faced with temptation , ought not to , butmay yieldto it in a moment ofweakness . Itcannot be approved, but it can certainly beunderstood particularly in an age when even the rich commit economic offences to get richer and do so by and large with impunity . (And even tax evasion or possession of black money is not considered to be dishonourable by and large) .A penalty of removal from service is therefore not called for when a poor worker yields to a momentary temptation and commits an offence which often passes under the honourable name of kleptomania whencommitted by the rich.

13. The Management relied on the case ofBahadur V.K. Vs. State Bank of India, 2000 II LL,J Page 76 rendered byHigh Court of Allahabad. In this case the employee did not come forward to admit the charges and also the employee also underwent full enquiry, though proceeded ex-parte. It was case of an officer and the provisions of OfficersRegulations were involved. The Officer employee filedawrit petition in the High Court under article 226 and itwas not an industrial dispute . Therefore, the judgement would not be of any help to the Management . The Management also relied on the case of Disciplinary Authority-cum-Regional Manager & Others Versus Nikunja Bihari Patnaik, JT 1996 ( 4) SC 457. The Hon'ble Supreme Court was dealing with a case of officer and under the Officers Discipline andAppeal Regulations and involving the interpretation of Regulation 24 and Regulation 3. It is not a case falling under section 11 - A of I.D. Act, 1947. The amount involved was substantial and moreover spreading over long period involving large number of transactions . Therefore, this case would not apply to the facts of the present case . The Management also relied on the case of Syndicate Bank Vs. Bakthar Singh , 2001 Vol . - II LLJ 143 Delhi High Court . The employee had filed a writ petition against the order of dismissal and the Court was concerned only with the sole issue of the scope of judicial review of the administrative order regarding proportionality of punishment . In this case also, the power of labour court under Section 11 -A ofI.D. Act was not an issue . Therefore, this case also will not be applicable to the facts of the present case. The case of Janatha Bazaar South Kanara Central Co - operative Wholesale Stores Ltd. & Others Vs. Secretary Sahakari Noukarara Sangh and Others-2000- II-LLJ 1395 ( S.C.) relied upon by the Management is also based on different footings as it is a case of full enquiry regarding breach of trust and not based on admission of fault, hence it cannot be applied in the instant case.

14. What all the law requires isjudicious application ofmind andjustification for interference with the punishment awarded. The reasonings advanced in the present case are [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

sufficient enough to interfere with the punishment in the given facts and circumstances of the case .

15. It is apparent that the Disciplinary Authority did not apply his mind at all to Clause 19.12(C) of the 1st Bipartite Settlement and mechanically passed the order of dismissal . The very object of having such a clause is to consider the aspects mentioned and thereafter only to decide the appropriate punishment.

16. It is specifically pleaded in the statement of claim of workman that in large number of cases the bank has reduced punishment of dismissal from bank's service to stoppage of annual graded increments or warnings etc. for misconducts of misappropriation of money. The instances have been given and the case of such persons are , Shri HanumanPrashad , Shri Rajiv Sahai , Shri Chander Kishore, Shri Rattan Singh, Shri Vinod Kumar , Shri Rajinder Kumar, Shri Mohan Lal, Shri Subash , etc, who were dismissed, but later on reinstated after reduction of the punishment to stoppage of increments . The charge sheets and orders of punishments have been placed on records by the bank. These facts have not been disputed by the bank, but only contention advanced is that the different disciplinary authority have given different punishments though the charges served were almost similar to each other and the cases were considered in the light of the individual facts . The fact remains is that the bank has recalled/modified the punishments of dismisal to one of stoppage of increments even in the cases of misappropriation ofmoney including huge amounts . Further, in the above cases of employees , the apology was tendered at the stage of proposal of punishment of dismissal . Whereas the workman in this casecame forward in the first available opportunity to accept his misdeeds and not contested the enquiry and also repented for his conducts, as stated above . Therefore, I am satisfied that it is clear that the disciplinary authority has not exercised his powers judiciously in imposing the punishments vide order dated 12-1-93 . For the same reasons theorder ofAppellate Authority dated 18-10-93 is also not sustainable . I , therefore , set aside the orders of dismissal from service ofthe workman dated 12-1-93 and 18-10-93 of the Disciplinary and Appellate authority in exercise of powers vested under Section 11 - A of Industrial Act, 1947 .

499

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

18. Award is given accordingly.

: BADRI NIWAS PANDEY, Presiding Officer Dated: 5-1-04

नई दिल्ली, 8 जनवरी, 2004

का. आ. 256.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा. को. को. लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण II, धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 35/96 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 7-1-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/110/95- आईआर ( सी- I ) ]

एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi, the 8th January, 2004

S.O. 256. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 35/96) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court II , Dhanbad now as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 7-1-2004.

[No. L-20012/ 110/95 -IR(C- I)]

S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO . 2) AT DHANBAD Present : B. Biswas , Presiding Officer Inthe matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1 )(d) ofthe I.D. Act, 1947

Reference No. 35 of 1996

PARTIES : Employeres in relation to the management of Mohuda Area of M/s . BCCL and their workman .

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalfofthe workman : None

Onbehalfofthe employers : Mr. H. Nath , Advocate State: Jharkhand

17: The next question is what should be the appropriate punishment in this case ? Having regards to the facts and circumstances of the case , in my considered view, it would be appropriate and reasonable to impose the punishment of stoppage of three increments with cumulative effect and denying of full back- wages till date ofthe Award in view of long lapse of time and also fault of the workman which will serve the ends ofjustice with the said punishment, the workman is , therefore , entitled to be reinstated in service with continuity of service and all other consequential benefits of seniority, pay- revision, etc. Parties shall bear their own cost .

Industry: Coal 500

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] Dhanbad, the 23rd December , 2003 .

AWARD

The Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 )( d) of the I.D. Act , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 20012/ 110/ 95 - IR ( Coal- I ) , dated, the 11th/ 12th March, 1996.

SCHEDULE

"Whether the demand of the Union for the refund of deducted amount from the wages of S/ shri Rishi Saw , TipperDriver and Ram Prasad Roy, Loader working as Driver towards the cost ofNew Pump is justified? If so , to what relief is the concerned workman entitled ?"

2. The case of the concerned workmen accordingto the written statement submitted by the sponsoring Union ontheir behalf in brief is as follows : --

allegations which the sponsoring Union asserted in the written statement submitted on behalf of the concerned workmen. They submitted that concerned workmen Rishi Saw was deployed in the 2nd shift duty on 17-10-91 from 4 P.M. to 12.00 hours while workman Ram Prasad was deployed in 3rd shift duty started from 12.00 hours to 8 A.M. of 18-10-91 . They submitted that during the said period of their duties two hydraulic pumps were stolen from Tipper No. BPR- 5904 and BIQ4059 worth ofRs . 40,000/- due to negligence of duty on their part . Accordingly they were charge - sheeted . As the reply given by the concerned workmen was not satisfactory domestic enquiry was started against them by order of the management. The enquiry officer after holding domestic enquiry submitted his report holidng the concerned workmen guilty to the charges and thereafter considering the report ofthe enquiry officer management passed order to realise Rs . 40,000/- as cost of two hydraulic pumps from the salaries of the concerned workmen in view of gravity ofoffence committed by them . They submitted that punishment which was inflicted on the concerned workmen neither was arbitrary nor violated the principle of natural justice . Accordingy , they submitted prayer to pass award rejecting the claim of the concerned workmen .

3. POINTS TO BE DECIDED

"Whether the demand of the Union for the refund of deducted amount from the wages ofS/shri Rishi Saw, TipperDriver and Ram Prasad Roy , Loader working asDriver towards the cost of New Pump is justified? If so , to what relief is the concerned workmen entitled?"

4. FINDINGS WITH REASONS

They submitted that the concerned workman are employed at Bhurungia Project since long as Driver and loader . They alleged that management illegally and arbitrarily issued two separate chargesheets bearing No. 1183 and 1184 dt . 18-10-91 against the concerned workmned with the allegation ofgross negligence during duty hours and failure to discharge duties during duty hours and for which two new hydraulic pumps of two dumpers were stolen . The concerned workmen submitted their replies to the chargesheet denying the charge brought against them . They disclosed that the concerned workman Rishi Saw , Driver was on duty in2nd shift from 4 P.M. to 12.00 midnight on 17-10-91 while other workman Ram Prasad was on 3rd shift duty from 12.00 hours to 8.00 a.m. of 17-10-91 . They submitted that in course of enquiry it was not ascertained actually in whose duty hours the said two new hydraulic pumps of two dumpers were stolen inspite of the presence of Security guards . Inspite of all these facts management started domestic enquiry against them without accepting their reply and in view of the report submitted by the enquiry officer management awarded punishment for realisation of Rs . 20,000/- from each ofthe concemed workman illegally, arbitrarily and violating the principle ofnatural justice and for which they raised industrial dispute for conciliation which ultimately resulted reference to this Tribunal for adjudication.

It transpires from the record that before taking up hearing of this case on merit it was considered ifdomestic enquiry held against the concerned workmen by the enquiry officer in view of chargesheet issued to them was fairproper and in accordance with the principle of ntural justice or not . The said issue was decided after hearing both sides and it was observed vide order No. 32 dt. 9-1-2003 that domestic enquiry held against the concerned workmen was not fair , proper and in accordance with the principle ofnatural justice and for which opportunitywas given to the management to adduce evidence in course of hearing of this case on merit to establish the charge brought against them . Accordingly at this stage there is no scope to rediscuss the issue on preliminary point .

The concerned workmen accordingly submitted their prayer to pass award directing the management to refund the deducted amount from theirwages.

3. Management on the contrary after filing written statement cum rejoinder have denied all the claims and

5. Here the point for consideration is if the management have been able to substantiate the charge brought against the concemed workmen. From the record it transpires that management issued chargesheet against the concerned workmen for committing misconduct under clause 26-1-11 and 26-1-15 of the Certified Standing Order [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

applicable to the workmen who works under the manage- ment. As per chargesheet Ext. W- 1 the charges brought against the concerned workmen are as follows :-

"Rishi Saw,

TipperDriver,

BhurungiaProject, BCCL

CHARGESHEET

I hereby require you to explain in writing as to why disciplinary action should not be takert against you under certified standing order applicable to the workmenof Bhurungia Project by which you all are governed on account of the following charges :

(a) It has been reported to undersigned at about 9.30 A.M. today i.e. on 18-10-91 by Shri Dhiren Singh, Driver and Shri Gani Nath Saw, Driller working as security guard that during your duty hours 2(Two) Nos . hydraulic pumps one each ofdumperNo. BPR-5904 & BIR4059 were stolen by some miscreants . The approximate cost of material is Rs . 20,000 total cost of the stollen materials are Rs . 40,000/-. The dumpers werekept standing between colliery store and colliery office ofBhurungia Project BCCL .

(b) That all ofyou were on duty at Bhurungia colliery storeand6 No. Pit/colliery officearma inwhich thedumpers were kept standing your duty hours were from 4 P.M. to 12 Mid Night .

(c) The theft of2 Nos . hydraulic pumps oftrippers were stolen due to your gross negligence while on duty and all of you failed to discharge your duties as security guard/driver at colliery store and 6 No. Pit/office area in question where the theft took place.

(d) There was sufficient light at the place where the dumpers were kept standing and the hydraulic pumpwere stolen from the dumpers.

Such gross negligence on your part is extremely serious in nature considering the fact that you were employed as security guard/Driver and your sole duty was to see that theft of company's property did not take place and that the property of the management were protected.

The act of your above constitute serious misconduct on your part under certified standing order 26.1.11 and 15 reads as under:

26.1.11 " Theft , fraud or dishonesty in connection with employers business or property." 26.1.15 " Causing wilful damage to work in progress or to property of the employer.

You are hereby asked to submit your written explanation within 72 hours ofreceipt ofthis charge- sheet, as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against your failing which it will be presumed that you will have nothing to say in this regard."

Sd/-

legible.

"Ram Prasad Rai,

Loader, working as Driver Bhurungia Project, BCCL

501

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

CHARGE SHEET

I hereby require you to explain in writing as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against you under certified standing order applicable to the workmen ofBhurungia Project by which you all are governed on account of the following charges:

(a) It has been reported to undersigned at about 9.30 A.M. today i.e. on 18-10-91 by Shri Dhiren Singh, Driver and Shri Gani Nath Saw, Driller working as Security guard that during your duty hours 2(Two) Nos . hydraulic pumps one each of dumper No. BP R-5904 were stolenby some miscreants . The approximate cost ofmaterial is Rs . 20,000/-. each i.e. total cost of the stolen materials are Rs . 40,000/-. The dumpers were kept standing between colliery store and colliery office ofBhurungia ectBCCL .

(b) That all ofyou were on duty at Bhurungiacolliery store and 6 No. Pit/ colliery office area (in which the dumpers were kept standing) your duty hours were from 12 mid night of 17-10-91 to 8A.M. of 18-10-91 .

(c) The theft of2 ( Two) Nos . hydraulic pumps of tippers were stolen from the dumpers due to your gross negligence while on duty and all of you failed to discharge your duties as security guard/driver at colliery store and 6 No. Pit/office area in question where the theft took place.

(d) There was sufficient light at the place where the dumpers were kept standing and the hydraulic pumps were stolen from the dumpers.

The act of your above constitute serious misconduct on your part under certified standing order 26.1.11 and 15 reads as under :

26.1.11 " Theft , fraud or dishonesty, in connectionwith employers business or property." 26.1.15 Causing wilful damage to work in progress or to the property of the employer .

You are hereby asked to submit your written explanation within 72 hours of receipt of this charge- sheet, as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against your failing which it will be presumed that you all have nothing to say in this regard and nanagement will take further action against all of you as deemed fit.

order. You are suspended forthwith and till further

Sd/- Project Officer/ Agent . Bhurungia Project." 5. It is the specific contention of the management that concerned workman Rishi Saw was depolyed in Second Shiftfrom 4 P.M. to 12.00 mid night on 17-10-91 while another workman Sri Ram Prasad was deployed in 502

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ]

workmenwere on duty other than the concerned workmen on that night and if any F.I.R. was lodged over the incident in question.

third shift duty from just after mid night to 8.00 A.M. of 18-10-91 . They alleged that in course of their duty two hydraulic pumps from Tipper No. BPR- 504 and BIR 4039 worth of Rs . 40,000/- were stolen away . They submitted that the concerned workmen in course of enquiry failed to give any satisfactory explanation how the said two hydraulic pumps were stolen away from the said two tippers while they were on duty and accordingly over the said incident chargesheet was issued to them for committing misconduct . As per the submission of the management over that incident a domestic enquiry was held and as the concerned workmen were found guilty to the charges in view of report submitted by the enquiry officer , order was issued by the Disciplinary Authority to realise Rs . 40,000/- from the salary of each workmen @ Rs . 20,000/ - . Considering the evidence of WW- 1 it transpires that due to Durga Puja their Colliery was closed on 17-10-91 . However, as driver he was placed on emergency duty from the midnightto 8 A.M. of 18-10-91 and in course of that duty he was at the place where the drivers take their sit . He disclosed that about 1.30 A.M. Mahanand Manato and RiganMehera came to him and asked him to call winding engine operator from his house . As the key of the vehicle was laying with Rajak Sahib , Asstt . Colliery, Manager he went to his quarter and asked the night guard to call Rajak Sahib but when he refused to call him he went to the bunglow of Kumar Sahib for the key ofhis vehicle . Kumar Sahib , Sr. Asstt. Colliery Manager handing over the key of the ambulance asked him to bring winding engine operator from his quarter . Therafter along with Mahanand Mahato and Rigan Mehera he went to the quarter of Winding Engine Operator and brought him . He disclosed that thereafter he again started waiting at Drivers place and after completing his duty at 8 A.M. he left for his house.

Hedisclosed that the dumpers of the Colliery were garraged in between the office of the colliery and the godown and at night at least four night guards remained on duty. It is the specific allegation of the workmen that the management illegally held them responsible for theft of two P.I. Pumps and deducted Rs. 20,000/- each from their respective salary.

7. It is to be established that the concerned workmen were also entrusted with duty as security guards in addition to performing their duties as drivers . In course of hearing management have failed to give any satisfactory explanation in relation to the points pointed out above . It is admitted fact that as reply given by the concerned workmen in relation to the chargesheet in question was not sufficient by order of the disciplinary authority domestic enquiry was started against them . It is the contention of the management that the Enquiry Officer after holding the said domestic enquiry submitted his report holding the concerned workmen guilty to the charges brought against them . With utter surprise it has come to my notice that in course ofhearing the management have failed to produce the relevant papers relating to enquiry proceeding. Management also did not consider necessary to examine theEnquiryOfficer in der to establish the report submitted by him . No enquiry report is forthcoming before this Tribunal to consider its legality and validity . As a result of which the concerned workmen had been totally deprived ofnot only to cross - examine the enquiry officer but also to point out which illegality the Enquiry Officer committed in holding them guilty to the charges . Opportunity was given to the management to establish the charges brought against the concernedworkmen incourse of hearing on merit when they failed to substantiate the allegation in course ofhearing on preliminary point. I find no hesitation to say that management have grossly misused the opportunity given to them. Before imposing any punishment onus rest absolutely on the management to substantiate that the concerned workmen were found guilty to the charges brought against them . Facts disclosed in the pleadings cannot be considered as substantive piece of evidence without its corroboration by cogent evidence and for which there is no scope to uphold their finding that the concerned workmenwereguilty and from their salary the price ofthose two hydraulic pumps should be realised .

Asthe management have failed to substantiate the charge brought against the concerned workmen , I find no scope at all to say that they committed any misconduct as per clause 26.1.11 and 26.1.15 and for which realisation of Rs. 40,000/-from their salaries should be treated as illegal arbitrary and in violation to the principle of natural justice.

Inthe result, the following Award is rendered:-

"Thedemand of the Union for the refund of deducted amount from the wages of S/ Shri Rishi Saw, Tipper Driver and Ram Prasad Roy, Loader working as Driver towards the cost of New Pump is justified . Consequently, the concerned workmen are entitled toget the refund of Rs . 20,000/ - each being the cost of two New Pumps from the management."

Themanagement is directed to implement the Award within three months from the date of publication of the Award in the Gazette of India in the light of my observation made above .

6. Considering the evidence of WW- 1 it is seen that the concerned workmen as drivers remained on duty from the 2nd shift duty of 17-10-91 to 8 A.M. of 18-10-91 . It is seen that the two hydraulic pumps from two tippers were stolen away the value of which were Rs . 20,000/- cach. It is seen that night guards remained posted at the places where tippers are garraged . It is the specific contention of WW- I that after joining his 3rd shift duty he went to the place kept for the drivers and on that night he performed the duty as per directions of the management . There is no cross -examination by the management in respect of the facts which WW- 1 disclose in course of his evidence in chief. Before fixing up responsibility upon the concerned workmen it is to be looked into how far they were responsible for the theft of two hydraulic pumps . Before considering this fact onus rest on the management to establish actually at which time the said two pumps were stolen away . It is to be looked into if at the place where the alleged theft was conmmitted these two workmen were posted or not . If any security guard was posted there ? If other

B. BISWAS, Presiding Officer.

503 भारत का राजपत्र : अमवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

SCHEDULE

नई दिल्ली, 8 जनवरी 2004

"KYA BAHUJAN MAZDOOR UNION KI MANG KI SHRI KHUDU MANJHI PROP. MAZDOOR KO BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED BASTACOLLA KSHETRA KE PRAVANDHAN DWARA HALKI SURFACE DUTY PAR TAINAT RAKHA JAYA ? UCHIT HAI ? YADI HAN TO KYA NIRDESH AVASHYAK HAI ?

का. आ. 257.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा. को .को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध मेंनिर्दिष्ट औधोगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- II धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 49/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जोकेन्द्रीय सरकार को 7-1-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/455/2000- आई.आर. ( सी-1 ) ]

एस० एस ० गुप्ता, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 8th January, 2004

S.O. 257. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.49/2001 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court- II Dhanbad now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to themanagement of BCCL and their workman, whichwas received by the Central Government on 7-1-2004.

[No. L-20012/455/2000- IR(C- 1 ) ]

S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

2. In this case none appeared for the workman. Management however, represented through their learned Advocate. In course of hearing learned Advocate for the management submitted that the concerned workman involved in the dispute has already expired and to that effect he has filed a death certificate he also submitted that no substitution petition has also been filed on behalf ofthe workman . Perused the death certificate filed by the management representative and also heard the learned Advocate. Form the record it also transpires that no subsitution petition has been filed. Since the concerned workman has already expired and as no substitutioin petition has been filed on his behalf, at this stage there is no scope to proceed with the case. Accordingly a ' No dispute' Award is rendered and the instant reference is disposed of on the basis of the no dispute Award presuming non -existence of any industrial dispute between the parties .

ANNEXURE

B. BISWAS, Presiding Officer BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (No. 2) AT DHANBAD

नईदिल्ली, 8 अभवरी , 2004

PRESENT:

Shri B. Biswas ,

PresidingOfficer

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

REFERENCE NO . 49 OF 2001

का. आ. 258.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा .को. को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध मेंनिर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- II धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 41/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 7-1-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।...

P Parties

[सं. एल -20012/488/99- आई.आर. (सी-1 ) ] : Employers in relation to the management ofM/ s . BCCL and their workman .

एस० एस० गुप्ता, अवर सचिवः APPEARANCES:

:None

Onbehalf of the workman

NewDelhi , the 8th January, 2004 Mr. U.N. Lal , Advocate.

Onbehalf of the employers :

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal

Dated, Dhanbad, the 22nd December, 2003 .

AWARD

S.O. 258.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Governmenthereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 41/2000) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court II Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to themanagement of BCCL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 7-1-2004.

[No. L- 20012/488/99- IR (C- I)]

S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy TheGovt of India, Ministry ofLabour, in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 (( d) of the D. Act. , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-20012/ 455/2000- I.R. (C- I ) , dated the 29th February, 2001 .

173 GI/2004-12 504

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT:

Shri B. Biswas, PresidingOfficer

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

REFERENCE NO . 41 OF 2000

Parties : Employers in relation to the management ofMahuda Coal Washery of M/s . BCCL and their workman .

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalf of the workman :Mr. N.G. Arun, represen- tative of he workman RCMS.

On behalf of the employers :Mr. B. M. Prasad, Advocate.

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal Dhanbad, the 24th December, 2003 .

AWARD

The Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour , in exercise ofthe powers conferred on them under Section 10( 1 )( d) of the I.D. Act . , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 20012/ 488 /99-1.R. (C - I ) , dated, the 18th February, 2000.

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management ofMohuda Coal Washery W.W.Z. of M/s . BCCL Dhanbad to dismiss Sri Siya Mahto from service on grounds of absence is just and fair ? If not to what relief is the concerned workman entitled?"

2. In this reference a settlement petition has been filed by the parties under their signature . Perused the settlement petition and I find that the terms contained therein are fair, proper and in accordance with the principles ofnatural justice. Accordingly I accept the said settlement and pass an Award in terms thereof which forms part of theAward as annexure .

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer MEMORANDUM. OF SETTLEMENT ARRIVED AT UN- DER SECTION 12(3) OF THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT , 1947 BETWEEN THE MANAGEMENT OF MOHUDA COAL WASHERY UNDER WESTERN WASHERY ZONE M/S.BCCL BEFORE THE REGIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER( CENTRAL), DHANBAD ON 29.8.2003 .

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] PARTIES TO THE SETTLEMENT:

Representing the Management : Representing the Union/ workmen

Sri R.D. Parashar ,

Sri Manan Mallick, Dy.Chief Personnel Manager , Working President, Western Washery/ Zone.

M/ s. BCCL .

Rashtriya Colliery Mazdoor Sangh.

SHORT RECITAL OF THE CASE :

Government of Lama/ Ministry ofLabour vide order No. L-20012/488/99 -IR(C- 1 ) dated 18.2.2000 had referred the dispute about dismissal of Sri Siya Mahato , General MazdoorofMohuda Coal Washery under Western Washery ZONE M/ S.BCCL to the CGIT No.2, Dhanbad for adjudica- tionand so far it has not yet beenadjudicated upon. Both partiestothe dispute Le. management as well as the Union requested the RLC(C), Dhanbad that fresh conciliation may beheld in the said dispute as they want to settle it out of the Tribunal . Both parties were requested to attend this office on29.8.2003 and fresh C.P. were held. Duringthe C.P. after persuation by the RLC(C) , Dhanbad both parties agreed to resolve the dispute on the following terms of settlement:

TERMS OF SETTLEMENT:

Itisagreedby both the parties that:

(1) The management of Mohuda Coal Washery un- der WWZ, M/s.BCCL shall reinstate the work- man Sri Siya Mahato, Ex -General Mazdoor, with immediate effect in the post ofGeneral Mazdoor without any back wages from the date ofdismissal to thedate ofjoining .However, this period willbe counted for the purpose towards continuity of service and forthe purpose ofpayment of gratu- ity.

(2) The Union/workman assured the management that he will not repeat the mistake of absenteeism without following proper procedure.

(3) The Union/workman agreed to submit a petition immediatelybefore the CGIT No. 2, Dhanbadwith- drawing the dispute referred vide Ministry of Labour order No. L - 20012/ 488 /99 - IR (C-1) dated 18-2-2000.

(4) This settlement shall take affect from the date the Union/workman submit the petition for withdrawal ofdispute from the CGIT No.2, Dhanbad.

(5) That the management and Union/both, shall sub- mit their implementation report to the RLC(C), Dhanbadby 30th September ,2003.

SignedBy:

Representing the management: Representing the Union/Workman :

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

505

भारत का राजपत्र: जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

Sd/-

R.D. Parashar,

(MananMallick)

Working President.

Dy. ChiefPersonnel Manager .

Beforeme:

Sd/-

(A.N. MEHROTRA)

REGIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CEN- TRAL) DHANBAD .

Witnesses :

1. Siya Mahto

2. B. Mohati

Dhanbad, dated the 29th August 2003 .

नई दिल्ली, 8 जनवरी 2004

का. आ. 259.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सी.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण II धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 94/97 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 7-01-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/192/96- आईआर ( सी-1 ) ]

एस ० एस ० गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 8th January, 2004

S.O. 259. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 94/97) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court II Dhanbad now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of CCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 7-01-2004.

[No. L-20012/192/96- IR(C-I ) ] S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy .

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT:

Shri B. Biswas ,

PresidingOfficer

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

REFERENCE NO. 94 OF 1997

Parties : Employers in relation to the management ofRajrappa Colliery of. M/s . CCL and theirworkman.

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalf of the workman :

cate. Mr. K. Chakravorty,Advo- Onbehalf ofthe employers :

Advocate . Mr. D. K. Verma, State: Jharkhand

Industry: Coal Dhanbad, the 24th December , 2003

AWARD

TheGovt . of India, Ministry of Labour , in exercise ofthe powers conferred on them under Section 10( 1 )(d) of the I.D. Act . , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 20012/ 192/96- I.R. (C - I) , dated, the 27th August, 1997 .

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Rajrappa Colliery ofCCL, P. O. Rajrappa, Distt . Hazaribagh in terminating the Services ofShri Naresh Rabidas w.e.f. 23-3-1995 is justified? If not , to what relief is the concerned workman entitled?"

2. The case of the concerned workman according to WrittenStatement submitted by him in briefis as follows :-

He submitted that he was a permanent workman under the management since long with unblemished record of service. He alleged that management issued a false and frivolous chargesheet against him on 22-7-94 for his alleged absence from dutyw.e.f. 9-5-97. He submitted that inspite ofgiving reply to the said charge sheet management refused to accept the same and started domestic enquiry against him . He disclosed that the enquiry officer without giving him any opportunity to defend his case illegally and arbitrarily submitted his report holding him guilty to the charges , and relying on the same Disciplinary authority violating the principle ofnatural justice dismissed him from his service . He submitted that even after passing the order of dismissal he presented representation to themanagement to reinstate him in service but to no effect forwhich he raised an industrial dispute before ALC(C)Hazaribagh for conciliation which ultimately resulted reference to this Tribunal for adjudication .

Heaccordingly, submitted his prayer to pass awardwith adirection to the management to reinstate him in service setting aside the order of his termination.

3. Management on the contrary after filing written statement-cum - rejoinder have denied all the claims and allegations which the concerned workman 506

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

w.e.f. 23-3-1995 is justified? If not, to what relief is the concerned workman entitled ?"

5. FINDINGS WITH REASONS

Ittranspires from the record that before taking up hearing ofthe case on merit it was considered if domestic enquiry held against the concerned workman by the Enquiry Officer in view of charge sheet issued to him was fair proper and in accordance with the principle ofnatural justice or not. The said issue was decided after hearing bothsides and it was observed in order No. 22dt. 17-7-2002 that domestic enquiry held against the concerned workman by the Enqquiry Officer wss fair proper and in accordance with the principle of natural justice. Accordingly at this stage there is no scope to rediscuss that issue again.

6. Here the point for consideration is if the management have been able to establish the charge brought against the concerned workman or not and if it is proved in that case whether the concerned workman is entitled to get any reliefunder Section 11A of the I.D. Act in the matter of punishment imposed on him by the DisciplinaryAuthority.

asserted in his written statement . They submitted thatthe concerned workman developed the habit of absenting from his duties without permission and without satisfactory cause . They submitted that during the period ofthree years i.e. from November , 1991 to October, 1994 the concerned workman put his attendance of only 317 days . For the rest of the days he remained himself absent without permission and intimation given to the management. They further disclosed that prior to 1991 chargesheet was issued to him for committing misconduct on the ground of absentism and his service was terminated by letter dt . 1-9-90 , After his order of dismissal he made an appeal before the management to reinstate in service and committed to mend his conduct henceforth. In view of such prayer management with a view to give him a chance for his rectification in future reinstated in service with effect from 5-3-91 . They alleged that inspite of his reinstatement in service the concerned not only ignored to mend his habit but also started absenting himself from duty without prior permission or giving intimation to the authority . They submitted that with effect from 9-5-94 he started himself absent from duty without prior intimation to the management and for which finding no other way they on 22/26-7-94 issued chargesheet to him for committing misconduct on the ground of absentism without permission or intimation . In response to that chargesheet concerned workman submitted his reply but as the reply given by him was far from satisfactory management decided to start domestic enquiry against him and for which appointed N. Ram , Dy. Personnel Manager as Enquiry officer . They further submitted that during enquiry proceeding concerned workman personalły appeared and defended his case with the help of co- workers Sri Bhim Mahato . It has been submitted by themthat full opportunity was given to him to defend his case . During hearing of said enquiry proceedings . After completion of the said enquiry the Enquiry officer submitted his report holding the concerned workman guilty to the charges brought against him . The disciplinary authority thereafter, considering the report and all other aspect dismissed the concerned workman from his service vide Order dt.. 23-3-95 . They submitted that no illegality either wascommitted or any arbitrary decisions was taken in dismissing the concerned workman from is service .

Accordingly, management submitted prayer 10 pass award rejecting the claim of the concerned workman.

4. POINTS TO BE DECIDED

"Whether the action of the management of Rajrappa Colliery of C.C.L. , P. O. Rajrappa, Distt. Hazaribagh in terminating the services of Shri Naresh Rabidas

7. It is admitted fact that management issued chargesheet to the concerned workman vide letter dt . 22/ 26-7-94 for committing misconduct on the ground of absentism with effect from 9-5-94 . Management submitted that the said charge sheet was issued to him as the concerned workman started himself absenting from duty from 9-5-94 unauthorisedly for more than 10 days without any permission and information and also without showing any sufficient cause the chargesheet during evidence of MW- 1 was marked as Ext . M -2 which clearly speaks that from 9-5-94 till date of issuance of chargesheet 22/26-7-94 the concerned workman remained himselfabsent from duty without prior permission , or giving information to the management . It is the contention of the workman that after receipt ofthe chargesheet he submitted his reply wherein he explained the ground of his absence and in support of his contention he also submitted medical certificate but instead of accepting the same management started domestic enquiry against him and the enquiry officer illegally, arbitrarily and violating the principle of natural justice submitted his report holding him guilty to the charge. The enquiry report during evidence of MW- 1 was marked as Ext . M -4/ 1 . He during his evidence admitted about Perusal of the medical certificate produced by the management during hearing of the enquiry proceeding . The said medical certificate was submitted by the concemed workman to the managament while he submitted his reply to the chargesheet issued by Dr. Ajit Kumar, MBBS which speaks that the concerned workman Naresh Rabidas was under his treatment from 5-5-94 to 28-9-94 for infective Hepatitis and was advised rest. Excepting production of medical certificate the concerned workman in course ofhearing neither examined the said doctor nor 507 भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii ) ]

his claim and obviously the enquiry officer did not consider to give importance to the medical certificate submitted by the concerned workman . It is clear that the concerned workman remained himself unauthorised absent from duty with effect from 9-5-94 till the date of issuance of chargesheet . Such unauthorised absence amounts to misconduct and the management legally entitled to issue charge sheet as per provision laid down in the Standing Order applicable to the workmen workunder them. After careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances discussed above I hold that the management have been able to substantiate the charge brought against the concerned workman for committing misconduct by him .

8. Now the point for consideration is ifthe concerned workman is entitled to get any relief in relation to punishment imposed on him by the management under Section 11A ofthe I.D. Act. Section 11A ofthe I.D. Acts speaks as follows :-

"Where an industrial dispute relating to the discharge or dismissal of a workman has been referred to a Labour Court, Tribunal or national Tribunal for adjudication and in the course of the adjudication proceedings , the Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal, as the case maybe , is satisfied that the order of discharge or dismissal was ot justified, it may, by its award set aside the order of discharge or dismissal and direct reinstatement of the workman on such terms and conditions , if any , as it thinks fit, or give such other relief of the workman including the award of any lesser punishment in lieu of discharge or dismissal as the circumstances of the case may require ."

9. Therefore as per provision of Section 1 IA it is to betaken into consideration whether punishment imposed upon the concerned workman was justified in relation to misconduct committed by the concerned workman . Considering the materials on record there is no dispute to hold that the concerned workman contineously remained himself absent from his duty with effect from 9-5-94 unauthorisedly and without giving any intimation.to the management and as a result of which management was compelled to issue chargesheet for committing misconduct on the ground of absentism.

Further allegation of the management is that prior to 1991 over similar allegation the concerned workman was dismissed in service as he made an appeal to give him opportunity to mend his conduct in future . It is the specific allegation of the management that instead of mending his conduct the concerned workman înaintained the same habitin the matter of enjoying unauthorised leave without prior permission or intimation to the management . They alleged that during the period from November, 1991 to October, 1994 i.e. during the period of three years the concerned workman worked under the management for produced a single prescription issued by him to substantiate the genuinity of his claim . It is seen that the concerned workman started himself absenting from duty with effect from 9-5-94 while as per medical certificate it shows that owing to his illness he remained under treatment of the said doctor from 5-5-94. It is not the case of the concerned workman that he was absent from duty with effect from 5-5-94. Therefore , there is sufficient reason to believe that in the midst of ailment he performed his duty from 5-5-94 to8-5-94. No satisfactory evidence is forthcoming on the part ofthe workman why he was prevented from informing the management about his ailment before he started himself absenting from duty. It is the specific allegation of the management that this was not the solitary occasion when the concernedworkman remained himself absent from duty unauthorisedly . They submitted that during the period of three years started from November, 1991 to October , 1994 the concerned workman in all remained on duty for 317 days and for his rest period of the said three years he remained himself absent unauthorisedly . They further submitted that prior to 1991 for committing misconduct on the ground of unauthorised absence his service was terminated bythe management by letter dt. 1-9-90 . However , as the concerned workman made an appeal for giving him opportunity to mend his conduct, management considered his appeal sympathetically and reinstated him in service with effect from 5-3-91 . It is the specific allegation ofthe management that the concerned workman instead of mending himself misused the previlege given to him grossly . The attendance sheet for the period from November, 1991 to October, 1994 will definitely support the claim of the management how continuously for years together the concerned workman unauthorisedly remained himself absent from duty inspite of his reinstatement in service by the management after his termination. It is seen that the enquiry officer did not take cognizance to the medical certificate submitted by the concerned workman for the unauthorised absence from duty during the period in question . It is seen that excepting medical certificate the concerned workman could not produce any other cogent paper to substantiate his claim . In course of hearing before this Tribunal the concerned workman got ample scope to substantiate his ground of absence by adducing cogent evidence but he did not consider necessary to do so.Here production of a medical certificate ipso facto does not establish that a person was actually lying ill until and unless the same is supported by other cogent evidence . I have already discussed above that in the midst of his illness the concerned workman performed his duty from 5-5-94 to 8-5-94 . Accordingiy he got ample scope to inform the ground of his ailment annexing necessary medical papers but he did not do so for the reason best known to him . As the onus rests on the concerned workman he cannot avoid his responsibility to establish the same . Į find no hesitation to say that the concerned workman inspite of getting ample scope has failed to substantiate 508

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004 /MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)]

धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 53/96 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 7-01-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/137/95- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ]

एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 8th January, 2004 317 days and he enjoyed unauthorised leave for the rest period . Denying this allegation the concerned workman did not consider necessary to adduce any evidence . Therefore , it is clear that not only on this occasion but also on another occasion he was dismissed from his service over same allegation . It is also clear that inspite of his reinstatement in service in view of appeal made by him to mend his conduct he did not show his diligance to be duty full in discharging his duties .

S.O. 260. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 53/96) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court II , Dhanbad now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 7-01-2004.

[No. L- 20012/ 137/95 - IR(C- I)]

S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy .

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 2 , DHANBAD

Inthe matter of a reference under Section 10( 1 ) ( d)(2A) ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

Reference No. 53 of 1996

Employers in relation to the management of Sudamdih Area ofM/S . B.C.C. Ltd.

AND

Their Workmen.

Present: Shri B. BISWAS ,

PresidingOfficer

Therefore , it is clear that the concerned workman was in the habit of enjoying unauthorised leave . It should be borne into mind that one of the yardstick for prosperity and proper growth of the Industry is to maintain discipline by the workman indiscipline act of a workman definitely will affect in production of the industry which not only will invite weekness of the industry but also ist will affect economic growth of the country . Here in the instant case the concerned workman was in the habit of enjoying unauthorised leave without giving any intimation of the management . It is seen that inspite of counmitting misconduct the management gave him opportunity to mend himself but he has grossly misused the same . Therefore , if the conduct of the concerned workman is taken into consideration it will expose clearly that he ignored the management in maintaining proper discipline in the industry. It is seen that inspite of committing misconducts repeatedly he raised the industrial dispute challenging the order of dismissal passed by the management . Accordingly , in view of the facts and circunstance discussed above onus definitely rested on him to clisprove the allegations brought against him by the management . It is seen that in course of hearing inspite of giving full opportunity the conerned workman has failed to justify his claim .

Appearances:

For the Management

: Shri S.N. Sinha, Advocate .

Forthe Workman

: Shri S.C. Gour , Advocate. Accordingly, after careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances I hold that there is no just ifiable ground to reconsider the order of punishment issued against him by the management applying the provision as laid down under Section 11A of the I.D. Act.

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal In the result, the following award is rendered :---

Dated, Dhanbad, the 22nd December , 2003 .

AWARD

"The action of the management of Rajrappa Colliery of CCL , P. O. Rajrappa, Distt . Hazaribagh in terminating the Services of shri Naresh Rabidas w.e.f. 23-3-1995 is justified ? Consequently , the concerned workman is not entitled to get any relief. "

B. BISWAS , PresidingOfficer

नई दिल्ली, 8 जनवरी, 2004

By Order No. L- 20012/ 137 /95 - I.R. ( Coal - I ) dated 30-4-96/1-5-96 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) ofSub - section ( 1 ) and Sub - section (2A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

का. आ. 260.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 19447 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा.को.को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- II ,

"Whether the Union is justified in demanding in 1993, employment for Smt. Manomati Majhian as a dependent of Late B. Shamboo Manjhee who died in 1983 ? And, whether the management of Sudamdih Colliery of M/ s BCCL is justified in denying 509 [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31, 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

employment to Smt. Manomati Manjhian? It not, to what relief is she entitled ?"

2.The case ofthe petitioner/workman according to thewritten statement submitted by the sponsoring Union onher behalf, in brief, is as follows:

The sponsoring union submitted that B. Shamboo Manjhi was a permanent piece - rated Loader under the management. They submitted that the said workman while on duty met with an accident on 27-9-1983 and he was unter treatment of different B.C.C.L. Hospitals being referred by the management of Sudamdih Colliery. They further submitted that as a result of injury sustained by that workman, B. Shambhoo Manjhi, he died on 16-11-1933 . They further submitted that the wife ofB. Shamboo Manjhi pre-deceased him. At the time of hisath he left behind two minor dependant daughters without any source of income . As the daughter was hardly about ten years old at the time of his death she submitted an application through her uncle to the management for her employment on her attaining the age of majority as per clause 9.4.2 of N.C.W.A. They disclosed that in spite of receiving that application the management did not give any reply. However, the said daughter, Kumari Manomati Manjhian after attaining her majority submitted fresh application with all relevant papers for her employment under the management in the year 1991. They alleged that though the management assured her for her employment on different occasions did nothing and forwhich she raised an industrial dispute before the A.L.C. (C) for conciliation through sponsoring union which ultimately resulted reference to this Tribunal for adjudication.

no scope for consideration ofemployment of a dependant ten years after the death of an employee .As no right exists , the question of keeping the right in abeyance and demanding employment at any time according to the circumstances and new situation does not and cannot exist . Accordingly , the demand of the union for employment of Smt . Manomati Majhian describing her to be the daughter of late B. Shamboo Manjhi in the year 1993 is without any merit and the same is liable to be summarily rejected . They submitted that B. Shamboo Manjhi was a piece- rated miner /loader at Patherdih Colliery and after his transfer from that colliery to Sudamdih Shift Mine, he became very much irregular in attending to his duties and voluntarily abandoned his services with effect from 22-9-1983 . Therefore , he was not on the roll ofthe company from the date of voluntary abandonment and the management struck off his name from the company's roll with effect from 3-10-83 . They submitted further that no dispute was ever sponsored on his Dehalf by any union relating to the striking off his name on the ground of voluntary abandonment and the action ofthe management stood legal and justified and the aforesaid workman left his employment with his own accord and volition . As the aforesaid workman was not on the roll of the company at the time when the sponsoring union raised demand for employment of his dependant claiming his death in November , 1983 is without any merit and the same is liable to be summarily rejected. They further submitted that they are not aware if the concerned lady was the daughter of late B. Shamboo Manjhi or that she was a minor during the time of his death in the year 1983. It appears that late B. Shamboo Manjhi was not having any issue and the interested persons hatched out a plan to induct the concerned lady/workman into the employment of the company describing her as daughter of late B. Shamboo Manjhi . Accordingly, the present case has been made out solely with the idea of getting the concerned lady inducted into the employment of the management with the help of litigation. In view ofthe facts stated above the management submitted their prayer to pass award rejecting the claim of the sponsoring union.

POINTS TO BE DECIDED

4. "Whether the Union is justified in demanding in 1993 , employment for Smt. Manomati Majhian as a dependant of Late B. Shamboo Manjhee who died in 1983 ? And, whether the management ofSudamdih Colliery of M/s . B.C.C.L. , is justified in denying employmet to Smt . Manomati Manjhian ? Ifnot, to what relief is she entitled? "

FINDING WITH REASONS

5. It transpires from the record that the petitioner/ workman in order to substantiate her claim examined two witnesses including herself.

3. The Management, on the contrary , after filing written statement -cum -rejoinder have denied all the claims and allegations which the sponsoring union asserted in thewritten statement on behalf of the concerned workman/ petitioner. They submitted that the petitioner/workman raised her demand long after the death of her father and for which she has been debarred for any remedy for obtaining employment under the management . They submitted that the dependant of employees working in the Public Sector Undertaking cannot be conferred with any right to demand for employment on any ground and it is at the option of the management, a dependant may be provided employment purely on compassionate ground and the said employment on compassionate ground is always considered at the time ofdeath of a workman and in favourable circumstances a dependant may be provided employment to save the family from starvation or financial hardship, as after the death ofearning member ofthe family suffers from various problems . They submitted that ifno such circumstance exists for providing compassionate employment at the time of death of an employee , there is 510

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii) ]

It is seen that the concerned B. Shamboo Manjhi was discharged from the hospital on 3-11-83 but he succumbed to his injury on 16-11-83 . Therefore, it is clear that said B. Shamboo Manjhi could not regain from his ailment. The plea taken by the management in para 6 of the written statement to the effect that said B. Shamboo Manjhi voluntarily abandoned his services w.e.f. 22-9-83 finds no basis at all if the discharge certificate (Ext. W- 2) is taken into consideration . No evidence is forthcoming on the part of the management to show that the discharge certificate issued by the Medical Officer , Central Hospital, Dhanbad, was false and manufactured . No evidence is also forthcoming on the part of the management before this Tribunal to show that B. Shamboo Manjhi abandoned his service . It is the contention of the sponsoring union thatimmediately after the accident ofB. Shamboo Manjhi the manage at sent him to BCCL hospital for his treatment . No evidence is forthcoming on the part of the management that on 27-9-83 the said B. Shamboo Manjhi was not on duty. Therefore , if the discharge certificate is taken into consideration there is sufficient reason to believe that the management has taken false plea in order to evade the claim ofthe petitioner /workman . It is really shocking to note that when a workman was on duty sustained injury to his person for the cause and interest of the management, the management practically washing out their hands not onlydenied such accident but also intended to put a stigma on him taking the plea that the said workman had abandoned his services . Such act of the management , I should say, exceeded all the limits of humanity.

Considering the evidence of the petitioner /workman as well as WW - 2 and considering the facts discussed in the pleadings of both sides there is no dispute to hold that B. Shamboo Manjhi was a permanent piece - rated Loader at Sudamdih Colliery under the management . It is the specific claim of the petitioner/workman that B. Shamboo Manjhi met with an accident on 27-9-83 while he was on duty and after the said accident the management referred him to B.C.C.L. Hospital for his treatment . It is her further contention that B. Shamboo Manjhi succumbed to hisinjury on 16-11-83 . It is the contention of the petitioner/ workman that within six months after the death of her father she submitted application to the management through her uncle for lher future employment, as she was only ten years old at that time and she had no source of income to maintain her livelihood independently when her mother pre- deceased her father , B. Shamboo Manjhi . As the managementdid not reply to her application , after attaining her majority she submitted representation to the management for her employment. But the management taking different plea not only killed time but also refused to provide employment to her . On the contrary , from the submission of the management it transpires that while B. Shamboo Manjhi was posted at Sudamdih Shaft Mine he was very much irregular in attending duty and voluntarily abandoned his services w.e.f. 22-9-1983 . Accordingly he was not on the roll of the company from the date of his voluntary abandonment and his name was struck off from the company's roll w.e.f. 3-10-83 . Apart from taking this plea the management further submitted that the claim for employment has come into existence after ten years of the death of the said workman and for such long delay in placing such demand the petitioner/ workman is not entitled to get any relief. The third plea which the management has taken is that they casted doubt about the claim of the petitioner/workman for employment being the daughter of B. Shamboo Manjhi . They alleged that the sponsoring union hatched up a conspiracy with a view to induct the workman/petitioner into employment of the company describing her as daughter of B. Shamboo Manjhi . They disclosed that actually B. Shamboo Manjhi had no issue at all . WW- 2 during his evidence relied on the discharge certificate ofB. Shamboo Manjhi issuedby the Medical Officer of the Central Hospital , Dhanbad. The said discharge certificate during his evidence was marked Ext. W- 2 . From this discharge certificate it transpires that B. Shamboo Manjhi was under treatment at Central Hospital, Dhanbad from 27-9-83 to 2-11-83 . According to the sponsoring union the said B. Shambhoo Manjhi mėt an accident while he was on duty on 27-9-83 and he was removed to the hospital for his treatment . Discharge certificate speaks clearly to the effect " Injury repaired on 4-10-83 . Wound healed but structure in the middle of neck causing difficulty in breathing . X- ray-Air passage intact. "

6. It has been alleged by the management that B. Shamboo Manjhi had no issue . WW- 1 , on the contrary , during her evidence disclosed that B. Shamboo Manjhi was her father and after his death she submitted an application for her employment on compassionate ground as per provision of law. But the management refused to provide employment to her . During cross - examination of thiswitness I failed to find out any material relying on which there is scope to rest suspicion about her claim as daughter of B. Shamboo Manjhi . The management in course ofhearing had ample scope to produce the service- sheet of the concerned workman wherein he declared his family members but with utter surprise it is noticed that they did not consider necessary to produce the same or any other relevant paper in order to uphold their contention . WW-2 during his evidence disclosed that the management issued an account Payee cheque in favour of Kumari Manomati Majhian on 31-10-95 amounting to Rs . 15,000/- in connection with Life Cover Scheme . The copy ofthe said cheque during her evidence was marked Ext . W-4. This withness disclosed that the payment in relation to Life Cover Scheme is given to the dependent if the employee dies while in service . I have considered the xerox copy ofthe same cheque ( Ext : W-4) which speaks clearly that a sum of Rs . 15,000/- was issued to Kumari Manomati Majhian vide Cheque No. CS/1-475729 dated 31-10-95. The 511

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[भाग II-खण्ड 3(ii) ]

eight years after the death of the father of the petitioner/ workman and in support of such delay she has assigned reasons very clearly. It is seen that the petitioner/workman wasabsolutely minor when her father died. It will be seen that immediately after attaining her majority she submitted her representation to the management for her employment. As per clause 10-4-2 of N.C.W.A. the employment of one dependent of the workman will be considered by the management if the said workman dies in harness . Considering the facts on record it is clear that the petitioner/ workman was not only dependent to her father but she was minor. She had no source of any income to maintain hør livelihood. Her mother also predeceased her father . Actually she had to depend on others for her livelihood. No evidenceon the part of the management is forthcoming to contradict the claim of the petitioner /workman. From my discussions above I find no hesitation to say that the imagement in order to evade their responsibility to give employment tothe petitioner /workman havetaken different pleas in amost unjust and improper way. It is clear thatB. ShambooManjhi , father ofthe petitioner/workman while discharging his duties for the cause of the management met with an accident and sustained serious injury to his person and ultimately succumbed to his injury. If humanitarian ground is taken into consideration I should saythat it was moral duty of the management to stand by the side ofthe bereaved family for their survival . Actually by issuing a cheque amounting to Rs . 15,000/- under Life Cover Scheme the management has finished their duties and thereby washed their hands and for which taking different phase they did not hesitate to ignore the claim of the petitioner /workman . They did not consider necessary to settle the petitioner/workman who is helpless lady in life by giving employment.

くぱ

management denied the petitioner/ workman as the daughter of deceased B. Shamboo Manjhi . I have failedto understand when they have denied Kumari Manomati Majhian as daughter of B. Shamboo Manjhi why they issued a Cheque amounting to Rs . 15,000/- in her favour being dependent of the deceased under the Life Cover Scheme. No satisfactory explanation on the part ofthe management could be produced in course of hearing. It is seen that the management this way or that way intended todenythe claim ofthe petitioner /workman being daughter ofdeceasedB. Shamboo Manjhi lest any employment is giventoher under provision of clause 9-4-2 of N.C.W.A. It is the contention of the petitioner/workman that within six months after the death of her father she submitted representation to the management for her future employment on compassionate ground under clause 9-4- 2. of N.C.W.A. on attaining her majority as she not only was dependent on her father but also had no source of income to maintain her livelihood independently . It is seen from her evidence that her mother predeceased her father. Therefore, she was alone in the family of her father when father died as a result of accident which occurred in discharging ofhis duty on 27-9-83 . The petitioner/workman further submitted that after attaining her majority shè submitted several representations to the management for her employment but the management did not pay any hoed to her appeal . During evidente of WW- 2 the representations given by the petitioner/workman were markedExts . W-3 , W- 3 / 1 and W- 3 /2 respectively, first of such representations was filed on 21-11-91 while other two representations were filed on 15-2-92 and 5-8-1992 respectively. In the written statement she disclosed that at the time of death of her father she was about ten years old. Her father died on 16-11-83 . Accordingly on 20-11-91 there was sufficient scope to presume that the said petitioner/workmanjust attained her majority. The petitions which the petitioner /workman submitted were duly receivedby the management affixing official seal . Therefore there is no scope to say that the petitioner/workman has takenfalse plea about submission ofrepresentation to the management for her employment. In no circumstance there isscope tosaythat after ten years of death of the deceased workman, B. Shamboo Manjhi , the petitioner /workman submitted such representation .

8. After careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances I find sufficient reasons to hold that the management illegally and arbitrarily violating the principle ofnatural justice and also ignoring humanitarian aspect refused the claim of the petitioner/workman . As the management is a Government Undertaking Organisation that does not mean that they should not show their minimum humanity to settle a helpless young girl in life who lost her father due to an accident while he was engaged in discharging the duties of the management. Accordingly , I should say that such delay of eight years in filing representation to the management for employment should not in any case be considered as inordinate delay in refuting employment of the petitioner /workman.

9. In the result, the following award is rendered the demand of the union in 1993 for employment of Smt . Manomati Majhian as a dependent of Late B. Shamboo, Manjhi who died in 1983 is justified and the action of the management ofSudamdih Colliery ofM/s . BCCL in denying employment to Smt. Manomati Majhian is not justified. The management is directed to provide employment to 7. Now, the point for consideration is if for such delay in filing representation the petitioner/ workman's claim should be ignored or not . The learned advocate for the management in course of hearing relied on the decisions reported in 2003 (99) F.L.R. 337 , 2003 (98 ) F.L.R. 856, 2003(99) F.L.R. 533, 2003 Lab. I.C. 3148. I have carefully considered all the decisions referred to above . Their Lordships of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the decisions reported in 2003 (99) F.L.R. 337, and 2003 L.I.C. 3148 rejected the claim for appointment as such claims were placed long years after the death of the deceased . Here in the instant case the claim has been placed in the year 1991 i.e. about

173 Gl /2004-13 512

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

: Forworkman

Sri . V.R. Kesavan Kaimal ,

Advocate,

MarketRoad,

the petitioner/workman after proper verification/ identification as the daughter ofB. Shamboo Manjhi within threemonths from the date of publication ofthe " Award" in the Gazette of India .

Cochin-35.

AWARD

B. BISWAS, PresidingOfficer

नईदिल्ली, 9 जनवरी, 2004

This reference was made as per Order No. L - 12012/ 144/2002 - I.R. (B- II ) dated 17-12-2002. The dispute is between the management of Canara Bank and their workman Shri . T.R. Suresh Kumar . The Dispute referred is:

का. आ. 261.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार केनरा बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में श्रम न्यायालय, अर्नाकुलम के पंचाट [ संदर्भ संख्या 25/2002 ( सी ) ] को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 08-1-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

"Whether the punishment of discharge of service with service/ terminal benefits imposed by the management ofCanara Bank on Shri . T.R. Suresh Kumarisjust and legal ? If not, what are the relief is the disputant entitled to ?"

[सं. एल-12012/144/2002- आई आर ( बी- II ) ] सी. गंगाधरान, अवर सचिव

NowDelhi, the 9th January, 2004

SO . 261. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award [Ref. No. 25/2002(C)] ofthe Labour Court, ERNAKULAM as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management ofCanara Bank and their workmen, received bythe CentralGovernment on 08-01-2004.

2. On receipt of notices issued from this court both the workman and management appeared through counsel and the case was pending for filing claim statement by the workman . Inspite of repeated chances the workınan has not cared to file claim statement. During the last posting and todaywhen the case was called both sides were absent and no claim statement was filed by the workman. Hence , 1 am satisfied that the workman is not interested in prosecuting the case thereby an award can be passed finding that there exists no industrial dispute at present to be adjudicated by this court .

[No. L- 12012/144/2002 -IR (B- II)]

C.GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM

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

(Inthe Labour Court, Ernakulam)

Passed this on the 28the day of October , 2003 .

(Tuesday, the 28th day ofOctober, 2003)

Ernakulam

PRESENT:

N. THULASI BAI , Presiding Officer Smt. N. Thulasi Bai, BALL.B.

नई दिल्ली, 12 जनवरी 2004

PresidingOfficer Industrial Dispute No. 25of 2002 (Contani )

BETWEEN:

The Deputy General Manager , Canara Bank. Staff Section(W) CircleOffice, Trivandrumm

AND

का. आ. 262.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भारत ओवरसीज बैंकलि० के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध मेंनिर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, चैन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई ०डी० सं० 53/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-1-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था। Theworkman ofthe allove concern Sii . T.R. Sureshkumar, S/o Raman Nair, Karthika East, Othara P.O. , Thiruvalla.

[सं. एल-12012/61/2002- आई आर ( बी -1 ) ] अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी REPRESENTATIONS

: For Management

Sri. Kallora,

New Delhi , the 12th January, 2004 Advocate,

Ernakulam,

S.O. 262. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 53/2002) Kochi-17.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

513

2. After the receipt of the reference, it was taken on file as I.D. No. 53/2002 and notices were issued toboth the parties and both the parties entered through their advocates and filed their respective Claim Statement and Counter Statement..

of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Chennai now as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Bharat Overseas Bank Ltd. and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 12-1-2004 .

[No. L- 12012/61 /2002 -IR (B-1)]

3. The allegations in the Claim Statement of the Petitioner are briefly as follows :-

AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFPRE THE CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT, CHENNAI

Wednesday, the 10th December, 2003

PRESENT

: K. Jayaraman, Presiding Officer

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO . 53/2002

(Inthe matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) ofSub -section ( 1 ) and Sub - section 2(A) of Section 10 ofthe IndustrialDisputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), between theManagement of Bharat Overseas Bank Ltd. and their workman Sri M. Kumaran)

BETWEEN:

Sri M. Kumaran

: I Party/Workman

AND

1. The General Manager, Bharat Overseas Bank Ltd. , Chennai .

: II Party/Management

2. The Branch Manager, : Bharat Overseas Bank Ltd. , Mysore Branch, Karnataka.

APPEARANCES :

For the Petitioner

: M/ s. Balan Haridas/

R. Kamatchi Sundaresan

Advocates

For the Management : M/s . T.S. Gopalan& Co. Advocate

The Petitioner submitted an application to the Ist Respondent bank for any suitable job and brought to the notice of the 1st Respondent about his outstanding performance in the sports and other things . After consideringthe same, the Respondent appointed him as a messenger and the Petitioner was asked to go and work in Mysore branch of the Respondent/Bank . As such , the Petitionerjoined duty on 2-8-99 in Mysore branch which was yet to commence its operation and it was started its activities on 22-8-99. The Petitioner was working in the said branch to the utmost satisfaction of his superiors and the Respondent/Bank has informed the Petitioner that his services wouldbe regularised in due course, as such it is satisfied with the performance ofthe Petitioner. His name was also included in the panel of temporary sub-staff. However, strangely, the 2nd Respondent on 12-11-2000 terminated the services of the Petitioner. The Petitioner immediately contacted the 1st Respondent in person and there also hewas informed that his services are not required any longer and his services had been terminated. The Petitioner hasworked for more than 240 days within a period of 12 calendar months . Therefore, the termination of his service by the Respondent/Management amounts to retrenchment . However, the Respondents are not complied with the mandatory provisions of Industrial Disputes Act before terminating the services ofthe Petitioner . Therefore, the termination is void ab initio. The temporary messengers who have joined subsequent to the Petitioner are still working . However , the Petitioner had been denied employment. Further after terminating the services ofthe Petitioner fresh hands have been recruited by the Respondent . Therefore , the termination is against the provisions of Section 25G and 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and amounts to hostile discrimination . Hence, the Petitioner prays for reinstatement in service with full back wages , continuity of service and all other attendant benefits .

AWARD

TheCentralGovernment, Ministry of Labour vide Notification Order No. L- 12012/61 /2002 - IR(B - I ) dated 30-05-2002 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :-

"Whether the action of the management of Bharat Overseas Bank Ltd. in terminating the services of Shri M. Kumaran, Messenger with effect from 12-11-2000 isjustified ? Ifnot, what reliefthe workman isentitled?"

4. As against this, in the Counter Statement the Respondent has alleged that with regard to sub- staff there is no direct recruitment for the last several years in the Respondent/Bank . The bank used to have a panel of temporary sub- staff and whenever any vacancy arises for the post ofa permanent sub- staff, the temporary sub- staff willbe considered and in view ofthe branches being located in13different States and some ofthem being far away from thehead office, in order to prevent any back door entry of temporary sub - staff getting into regular service, the Respondent/Bank has issued circular advising the branches [PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

514

days in 12 calendar months immediately prior to his termination. Hence, he has been terminated from service as mentioned in the Claim Statement . The allegation of the Respondent by leaving Mysore the Petitioner denied himself the opportunity of employing him as temporary sub-staff is without any substance . Since the Respondent having terminated the services of the Petitioner in summary fashion, without complying the provisions of section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, has now shifted the blame against the Petitioner. Therefore, he prays that an Award may be passed in terms of his prayer in the Claim Statement.

6. In these circumstances , the points for my determination are :-

(i) "Whether the action of the management of BharatOverseas Bank Ltd. in terminating the services of the Petitioner w.e f. 12-11-2000 is justified?"

(ii) "To what relief the workman is entitled?"

Point No. 1 :

7. The admitted facts of the case ars the Petitioner Sri M. Kumaran was appointed as messenger in the Respondent/Bank at Mysore branch from 2-8-1999 and his name was empanelled in the panel oftemporary messengers in the Respondent/Bank under original ofEx . Wl . He had been working continuously from the date at Mysore. While so, on 12-11-2000 when a permanent messenger has been posted at Mysore branch of the Respondent/Bank, the Petitioner was informed that as and when leave vacancy arises , his services would be utilised .

8. In this case, the Petitioner alleged that he was terminated from service from 12-11-2000 and no notice of termination was issued to him and no compensation was given to him prior to the termination and therefore , his termination is void ab initio and as such he should be reinstated . As against this , on behalf of the Respondent it is contended that the Petitioner's name is still in the panel oftemporary messengers list and he left Mysore abruptly and ifhe had continued in the employment at Mysore , he would have been provided with temporary service and therefore , the allegation that Petitioner has been terminated from service is a false one .

that no temporary sub - staff should be engaged for more than 216 days in a year and even if by accident or by omission any person has been engaged for a continuous period of one year and thereafter, he ceased to be engaged and such cessation of engagement cannot be said to be termination of employment from the services ofthe bank nor such cessation of employment can be said to be termination of employment so as to fall within the scope of section 2 (oo ) of Industrial Disputes Act. With regard to the Petitioner , he was engaged by the Branch Manager of theMysore from 2-8-99 to 12-11-2000 after giving break in service. It is , therefore , submitted that the entire cause of action for the present dispute arose in Karnataka and therefore, this Tribunal have no jurisdiction to adjudicate the present Industrial Dispute . Nodoubt, the Petitioner wasappointed as a temporary sub - staff from 2-8-99. When the permanent sub - staff was posted in the branch, it did not mean that the Petitioner forfeited his claim for engagement as a temporary sub - staff against leave vacancies ofpermanent sub - staff. But for the rea uns best known to the Petitioner left Mysore and came down to Chennai . The Respondent has not terminated the engagement of Petitioner after posting of a permanent staff atMysore branch . There was contingency for continuous engagement of the Petitioner as temporary sub - staff. But he would have been continued as temporary sub -staff, had he continued in Mysore as and when regular sub- staff had gone on leave. It is the Petitioner who by leaving Mysore denied himself the opportunity of employing him as temporary sub -staff. Even before the conciliation officer, the Respondent has submitted that the Petitioner could get an opportunity for temporary sub - staff as and when permanent sub staff goes on leave , but the Petitioner for the reasons best known to him declined the same . As such , there is no termination of employment of the Petitioner on 12-11-2000 because the Petitioner was not there to employ him in the 1st Respondent/Bank. Therefore , it is denied that there was any termination of employment. The Petitioner alone was responsible for situation in which he had placed himself and he cannot make any grievance against the bank . The provisions of Chapter VB of the Industrial Disputes Act and Section 25N are not applicable to the 1st Respondent . Hence, the Respondent prays that the claim may be dismissed .

9. In this case , the Petitioner has examined himself asWW1 and marked 6 documents as Ex . Wl to W6 and on the side of the Respondent/Management one Mr. B.R.Prabhakar , Chief Manager (Personnel ) was examined as MW1 and 7 documents were marked as Ex.Ml to M7 . The witness ofthe Respondent has deposed that the Head Office of the Respondent/Bank will maintain file for temporary panel list for messengers for each branch and if any vacancy ofpermanent post arises in a branch , then the senior most person in the entire panel will be posted inthe permanent vacancy and they have got more than 70 5. Again in reply statement , the Petitioner averred that it is false to allege that local management has employed the Petitioner against the circular of the 1st Respondent . The 1st Respondent bank alone has appointed and included his name in the temporary panel of messengers . Though the Petitioner was working in Mysore his engagement is only with the Respondent/Bank , as such theRegistered and Head Office ofthe Respondent/Bank is atChennai and therefore, this petition is maintainable before this Tribunal . The Petitioner worked continuously from the date of his initial engagement i.e. from 2-8-99 till his termination on 12-11-2000 . Thus , he worked more than 240 [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

515

assuming for argument sake, that the Petitioner has been terminated from service by denial ofengagement, the effect ofan order of reinstatement is merely to set at nought the order ofdismissal of the workman by the employer and to reinstate him in service as if the contract of employment originally entered into had been continuing i.e. to say that the Petitioner in this case is to be reinstated in old service of temporary messenger as before , but in this case, the Petitioner categorically stated that he is not willing to join as a temporary messenger and he wants only permanent status and therefore , this Court cannot order for reinstatement and even this Court comes to a conclusion that there is termination of service of the Petitioner , only compensation can be awarded and further he relied on the rulings reported in 1957 II LLJ 696 SHETTY (SS ) Vs. BHARAT NIDHI LTD . and 2003 I LLJ 700 BASKAR R. & OTHERS VS. AUTO CARE , CENTRE, In the latter case, in a similar situation, the High Court of Madras has upheld the decision of the Labour Court awarding compensation under section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act and the High Court further ordered a fixed sum as compensation . The learned counsel for the Respondent further argued that the Court shall not order for regularising the services of Petitioner on the only ground that he has put in 240 or more days . The Court can note judicial notice of the fact that such employment is sought and given directly for various illegal considerations and in this case , it is an admitted fact that the Petitioner was recommended by one oftheAssistant General Managers who worked in Madras and whose son was taking gym training under the Petitioner. Such gooddeal ofillegal employment market has developed resulting in a now source of corruption and frustration of those who are waiting at the Employment Exchange for years and therefore , in this case the Petitioner is not entitled to any reliefas claimed by him .

branches all over India. It is his further admission that after the year 2000 , three branches were opened by the Respondent/Bank in various places . Taking advantage of this admission , the learned counsel for the Petitioner argued that the Petitioner is the senior most person in temporary panel of messengers and for all these branches , the Petitioner has not been considered for posting in the permanent vacancy and on the other hand, his juniors were posted in the permanent vacancies and therefore , the action ofthe Respondent/Management is discriminatory and it further amounts to unfair labour practice on the part ofthe Respondent/Bank. But , I find there is no substance in this contention because burden of proving the fact that his juniors were posted in permanent vacancy is lying upon the Petitioner . But without producing any material to substantiate his claim , the Petitioner wanted to take advantage of inference to be drawn from the/urgent admission of the MWI . Further , MW1 clearly stated that one Mr. Venkatachalam , who has been posted in a permanent post of messenger at Kancheepuram , was a senior to the Petitioner and only on consideration of the entire facts , the said person has been posted as a messenger in Kancheepuram branch by the Respondent/Bank . Under such circumstances , the contention of the Petitioner that hisjuniors were posted in the permanent post is untenable one . Then the learned counsel for the Petitioner argued that after 12-11-2000 the Petitioner was not offered any employment by the Respondent and therefore , the denial of employment amounts to retrenchment and the Respondent has not followed the mandatory provisions of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act . Therefore , the termination is void ab initio and the Petitioner is entitledto reinstatement and for this he relied on the rulings reported in 1996 ILLN 647 SRIRANGAM CO- OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD . Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, MADURAI ; 1989 I LLN 774 PONNUSWAMY VS. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, COIMBATORE; and 2001 I LLJ 701 VIKRAMADITYA PANDEY Vs. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, LUCKNOW & OTHERS and further argued that ordering for mandatory compensation instead of retrenchment is invalid and even in case, non- reinstatement and non -payment of back wages , the Respondent should specifically plead and establish that special circumstances which warrant the same . But, in this case, the Respondent has neither pleaded nor established thisfact and therefore , the prayer for reinstatement of the Petitioner should be ordered with back wages .

11. I find much force in the contention ofthe learned counsel for the Respondent because even though the Petitioner has asked for reinstatement in his Claim Statement, in his cross examination , he has clearly deposed that he is not interested in casual employment under the Respondent and he wants only permanent status and therefore , after considering the facts that the Petitioner had worked only for one year , two months and 20 days and the circumstances shown in this case, this Court finds that awarding compensation under Section 25F of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 alone will be a fairjustice instead of reinstatement ofthe Petitioner as casual employee . As such , I find the Petitioner Sri M.Kumaran is not entitled to reinstatement but only compensation under Section 25F of the Industrial DisputesAct, 1947 .

Point No: 2:

The next point to be decided in this case is what relief the Petitioner/Workman is entitled to?

10. As against this , learned counsel for the Respondent argued that there is no question of termination of the Petitioner in this case because the Petitioner's name is still in the panel of temporary messengers ofthe Mysore branch of the Respondent/Bank and the Petitioner has left Mysore in which place , his name finds place and therefore , he has not availed the opportunity of being posted in the leave vacancies and therefore, the question of termination or payment of compensation wili not arise at all and even

12. In view of my foregoing findings , I find even though the denial of employment to the Petitioner by the.

516

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II SEC. 3 (ii) ]

M3 21-08-99

Respondent amounts to retrenchment, the Petitioner in this case is entitled only for monetary compensation under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. But, in this case , the Petitioner Sri M.Kumaran has worked only for one year, two months and twenty days , therefore , I find a fixed sum of Rs . 15,000/- willbe fair compensation . As such , the Respondent/Bank is directed to pay the compensation amount of Rs . 15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) to the Petitioner/Workman Sri M. Kumaran within a period of three months from the date ofreceipt of the copy of this Award.

13. The reference is answered accordingly.

(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him , corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 10th December , 2003.)

K. JAYARAMAN , Presiding Officer Witnesses Examined :-----

FortheI Party/Workman : WW1 Sri M. Kumaran For the II Party /Management : MWI Sri B. R. Prabhakar Documents Marked :-

For the I Party/Workman : -

Date

Ex.No.

Description

18-02-2000

Xerox copy of the letter from Respondent/Bank Chennai to Branch Manager , Mysore branch .

W2 20-11-2000 Xerox copy of the representation of Petitioner to General Manager ofRespondent/Bank .

W3 09-02-2001 Xerox copy of the letter from Petitioner to Regional Labour Commissioner (Central ) .

W4 17-08-2001 Xerox copy of the letter from Petitioner to Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) .

07-05-2001

Xerox copy of the letter from Petitioner to Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) .

W6 series

Xerox copy of the certificates of Petitioner .

For the II Party/Management :-

Ex . No. Date

Description

M1 02-08-2001 Xerox copy of the reply filed by the Respondent to Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) .

M2 17-08-99 Xerox copy of the letter from Branch Manager , Mysore to Personnel Department .

Xerox copy of the letter from Personnel Deptt . to Mysore branch .

26-08-99

Xerox copy of the letter from Branch Manager , Mysore to Personnel Department.

M5 28-11-99 Xerox copy ofthe note regarding temporaryMessenger panel. 12-11-99

Xerox copy ofthe circular issued by Head Office to all branches regarding temporary sub-staff.

M7 Nil

Xerox copy of the statement showing particulars of service of Petitioner andwages paid to him.

नई दिल्ली, 12 जनवरी , 2004

का. आ. 263.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार दी साऊथ इण्डियन बैंक लि. , त्रिचुर के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , चैन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई. डी. सं. 94/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-1-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/233/2002- आई आर ( बी- I ) ]

अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 12th January, 2004

S.O. 263. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 94/2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court , Chennai now as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of The South Indian Bank Ltd. , Trichur and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 12-1-2004 .

[No. L- 12012/233/2002- IR(B- I) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT, CHENNΑΙ Wednesday, the 10th December, 2003 Present :

K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO . 94/2002 (Inthe matter ofthe 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 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जनवरी 31 , 2004 माघ 11 , 1925

517 the Management of The South Indian Bank Ltd. , Trichur and their workman Sri B. S. V. Prasad Rao).

BETWEEN

ofdismissal without proper investigation is illegal and per seand not maintainable . Hence, he prays to set aside the order of dismissal dated 29-8-2001 and to reinstate the Petitionerwith backwages.

Sri B. S. V. Prasad Rao

: I Party/Workman

AND

The DeputyGeneral Manager , The South Indian Bank Ltd. , Trichur.

: II Party/Management

ARPEARANCES:

For the Petitioner

: M/ s. S. Venkatesan & Uma Venkatesan, Advocates

For the Management : M/ s . T. S. Gopalan &Co. Advocates .

AWARD

4. As against this , the Respondent contended in the Counter Statement that the findings of the Enquiry Officer are not perverse . The Enquiry Officer has given valid reasons for not accepting the plea of the Petitioner. TheEnquiryOfficer's report is based on the corroboration to evidence tendered by the management witnesses. Irrespective of the past record of service, the misconduct proved against the Petitioner was serious enough to warrant the punishment of dismissal order and hence, the Respondent has passed the order . There is no infirmity in the disciplinary action taken against the Petitioner. The order ofAppellate Authority is fully justified. Hence, it cannot be saidthere is no application of mind in awarding the order of dismissal . Therefore , the Respondent prays that the claim maybe dismissed.

5. In these circumstances , the point for my determination is,-.

The Central Government, Ministry ofLabour vide Notification Order No. L- 12012/233/2002 - IR(B - I) dated 10-10-2002 has referred this industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication . The schedule mentioned dispute is as under :-

"To what relief the Petitioner is entitled."

Point:-

"Whether the order of dismissal imposed upon Sri B. S. V. Prasad Rao by the management ofThe South Indian Bank Ltd. is justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled?"

2. After the receipt of the reference, this Tribunal has numbered it as I.D. No. 94/2002 and notices were issued toboth the parties and both the parties entered appearance through their advocates and filed their respective Claim Statement and Counter Statement.

3. The allegations in the Claim Statement of the Petitioner are briefly as follows:

6. After filing the Gaim Statement, for several hearings, neither the Petitioner nor his counsel on record appeared before this Court for further prosecution and therefore , the Petitioner was set ex - parte and the Respondent was heard and on perusing the affidavit filed by the General Manager (Administration ) of the Respondent/Bank and also perusing the documents filed bytheRespondent Ex. M1 toM9 , I find the order ofdismissal imposeduponthe Petitioner Sri B. S. V. Prasad Rao by the Respondent The South Indian Bank Ltd. is justified. therefore, the Petitioner/Workman is not entitled to any reliefas claimed for . No Costs .

7. The reference is answered accordingly.

(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this daythe 10th December ,2003.)

K. JAYARAMAN, PresidingOfficer

Witnesses Examined:

Oneither side

: None

Documents Marl

For the I Party/Workman

Nil

For the IP Party/Management :

Ex. No. Date

Description

The Petitioner was appointed in the Respondent/ Bank intheplaceofhis father, who became invalidwhile in service on account of paralysis. Subsequently, he was transferred to Chennai under inter- state policy arid was posted toNungambakkam branch . While so , on 4-5-2000, for the alleged happening of misconduct, he was issued with a charge sheet and after not satisfied with the explanation, he was charge sheeted by the Respondent/ Bank and an enquiry was conducted and he was terminated fromthe services of the Respondent/Bank . The findings of the Enquiry Officer are perverse and biased and the punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authoritybased on such findings are not maintainable . Further , the Respondent/Bank has not taken into account of the previous record of service and other extenuating circumstances before imposed the major punishment of dismissal and therefore , the order of dismissal dated 29-08-2001 suffers from serious infirmities and latches and theact ofthe Appellate Authority in confirming the order

M1 19-09-2000 Xerox copy of the charge sheet issued to Petitioner.

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

518

19-10-2000

Xerox copy of the reply given by thePetitioner

22-01--2001

Xerox copy of the letter of I Party to II Party

M4 23/24-1-2001 Xerox copy of the enquiry proceedings

Nil

Xerox copy of the enquiry report M6 11-07-2001 Xerox copy of the comments submitted by Petitioner on enquiry report.

04-08-2001

Xerox copy of the notice of personal hearing.

29-08-2001

Xerox copy ofthe dismissal order.

M9Series

Xerox copy of the documents marked during domestic enquiry .

नई दिल्ली, 14 जनवरी , 2004

का. आ. 264.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मरूधर क्षेत्रीय ग्रामीण बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण व श्रम न्यायालय , जयपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सी. जी. आई. टी. सं. 62/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 14-1-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/273/ 2000- आई आर (बी -1 ) ] अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 14th January, 2004

S.O. 264. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (No. CGIT -62/ 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court , Jaipur now as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Marudhar Kshetriya Gramin Bank and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 14-1-2004 .

[No. L- 12012/273/2000- IR (B-I) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRALGOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR

Case No. CGIT- 62/2000 .

Reference No. L - 12012 /273 /2000 IR(B- I ) dated 17-10-2000

.....Applicant Sh . Mahendra Kumar S/o Sh . Banna Ram , R/ o Satyu, Thesil -Taranagar , Distt. Churu (Raj .).

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

1. The Chairman ,

Marudhar Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Station Road, Churu (Raj .)

.....Non- applicant 2. The Branch Manager , Marudhar Kshetriya Gramin bank, Branch- Satyu , Tehsil- Tranagar, Distt. Churu (Raj .)

Present :

Sh . R. C. Sharma

Presiding Officer :

Sh. D. S. Punia

Forthe applicant :

None

For the non - applicants :

19-11-2003

Dateof award :

AWARD

The Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred under clause D of sub - Sections ( 1 ) & 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Dispuns Act, 1947 (for short 'TheAct' has referred the following industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal which runs as under :-- "Whether the action of the Chairman, Marudhar GraminBank, Head Office , Station Road , Churu in terminating the services of Shri Mahendra Kumar S/o Banna Ram was justified ? If not, what relief the workman is entitled and from what date ? " The workman in his statement of claim has pleaded that he was appointed as 4th class employee by the non- applicant management, who continuously worked up to 14-5-1997, but his service was terminated on 15-5-1997 in violation of Section 25 of the Act . As per his averments he had worked over 240 days in the calendar year preceding to his termination. He has further pleaded that at the time of his retrenchment the junior employees to him were retained by the management in the service in violation of the principle of " First come , last go" . He has urged for his reinstatement in the service with full back wages and other consequential reliefs .

Resisting the claim of the workman , the non- applicants in their written statement have denied that the workman was employed as 4th class employee by the management . Under the additional objections the non- applicants have stated that the workman was engaged off and on, on the need of work to fill the drinking water, to clean the office premise and for distributing the official daks , who was paid the wages on contractual basis.

Onpleadings the following points for determination were frame :-

( 1 ) आया प्रार्थी ने दिनांक 20-8-1995 से 15-5-1997 तक लगातार चतुर्थ श्रेणी कर्मचारी के पद पर दैनिक वेतन पर कार्य किया ?

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

(2) आया अप्रार्थी द्वारा प्रार्थी की सेवा समाप्ति अधिनियम, 1947 की धारा 25 - एफ , जी के प्रावधानों का उल्लंघन कर की गई ?

(3) प्रार्थी किस सहायता को प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी है ?.

On 26-3-2003 a no dispute award was passed in the instant case and since 12-5-2003 , during the proceedings ofhearing workman's application for setting aside the no dispute award, the non - applicants have not put their appearance before this court. The no dispute award was set aside vide order dt. 21-5-2003 ofthis court .

In the evidence, the workman has filed his affidavit and four documents in support of his claim . No evidence could be produced on behalf of the non - applicants on account of their non appearance before the court .

I have heard the Id . representative for the workman and have gone through the record.

The point wise discussion follows as under :-

POINT No. 1 :-

On behalf of the workman it has been contended that he has completed over 240 days in the preceding year to his termination , nut without following the procedure u/ s 25 F ofthe Act, he has been terminated from the service .

So far as the violation under section 25 F of the Act is concerned, to prove his claim the workman in his affidavit has deposed that he was appointed as 4th class employee on20-8-1995 by the non -applicant management who worked upto 14-5-1997 and on 15-5-1997 he was not taken on duty. He has pointed out that neither he was served with one month's notice nor was paid wages in lieu of such notice andthe retrenchment compensation . As per his version he had completed over 240 days with the management.

The workman has relied upon four letters of the management which have been brought on record . Letter dt. 11-1-1997 is addressed by the manager to the Chairman, which indicates the request made by the office to make available a regular messenger on its ' vacant post. It has got no description of the workman's engagement in such capacity in the office . Therefore , it does not support the workman's case.

Second is the letter dt. 22-10-1996 ofthe management which says that the workman has worked for 154 days as the part time messenger , who has been paid the wages worth Rs . 3696/- . Even if it is presumed to be a genuine letter, the stand of the workman that he had worked over 240 days in the preceding year does not stand to be proved on this account alone .

Besides these documents , the workman has also produced the letters dt. 10-4-1996 and 11-4-1996, which are in the form of the progress report ofthe recovery campaign 173G1/04-14

519

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

and amongst other items thereof, it also contains the mention of the workman's name as a daily wager . It does not disclose the working days of the workman in the non- applicant management . It only suggests that on 10-4-1996 and 11-4-1996 he was employed by the non - applicant management as a daily wager .

Onthe basis of the documentary evidence led by the workman the factum of the employment of the workman with the non - applicant management over 240 days could not be proved. No sufficient evidence could be led by the workman to establish this fact. Hence , this point is decided against the workman .

POINT No. 2 :-

Now I am faced up with the next submission made on behalf of the workman that at the time of terminating the workman, the juniors to him were retained in the service by the management .

Ona carefulperusal ofthe claim statement, it appears that although the workman has adopted this stand at para 5 of the claim , but he has not disclosed the names of the junior employees who were retained by the management . Apart it, even in his affidavit at its ' para no . 2 there is only a description of this plea that the junior employees were retained in service , but their names have not been disclosed. Therefore, the plea adopted by the workman is vague and indefinite and no evidence on behalf of the workman could be adduced to prove this stand made on behalf of the workman. Therefore , the submission that the management has acted in violation of Section 25 G is not maintainable and this point is decided against the workman.

POINT No. 3 :-

Forthe forgoing reasons , the workman has not been able to prove his claim that he had worked over 240 days with the management in the preceding year to his termination and that at the time of his termination the junior employees were retained in the service of the management . As such , his claim is liable to be rejected.

Accordingly, the reference is answered in the negative against the workman and it is held that the termination of the workman in question is justified and his claim is rejected . The ex- prate award is passed in the aforesaid terms .

Let a copy ofthe award be sent to Central Government for publication under Section 17 ( 1 ) of the Act .

R. C. SHARMA , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 14 जनवरी, 2004

का. आ. 265.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार इण्डियन रेअर अर्थस लि. , के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार श्रम 520

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004/MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

AWARD

न्यायालय , ईरनाकूलम के पंचाट [ संदर्भ संख्या 7/1995( सी) ] को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 14-1-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[फा. सं. एल-29012/57/94- आई आर ( एम) ]

बी. एम. डेविड , अवर सचिव

Thisreferencewas made by the Central Government as per letter No. L-29012/57/94 - IR (Misc.) dated 2-3-1995 . The dispute is between the management of Indian Rare Earths Ltd. , and their workman Sri . Lalan Varghese. The disputereferred is :

New Delhi , the 14th January , 2004

"Whether the action of the management of Indian Rare Earths Ltd. , in imposing the punishment of reduction of basic pay to the minimum pay scale of Rs . 1355-50-1605-55-2705 from the present basic pay ofRs . 1880/-on Shri Lalan Varghese , Senior Clerk, is justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?"

S.O. 265. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award [No.7 of 1995 (C) ] of the Central Government Labour Court, Ernakulam now as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Indian Rare Earths Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 14-1-2004.

[F. No. L-29012/57/94 -IR (M) ] B. M. DAVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM

(Labour Court, Ernakulam)

(Monday, the 13th day of October, 2003 )

Present:

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

Industrial Dispute No. 7 of 1995 (C)

Between:

The General Manager , Indian Rare Earths Ltd. , Udyogamandal, Kerala- 683 501 .

And

1 1. The Secretary, Indian Rare Earths Employees Association , Indian Rare Earths Ltd. , Udyogamandal- 683 501 , Kerala .

2. Sri . Lalan Varghese , Member of IRE Staff & Workers Union. (No. 2 is impleaded as per order in M.P. 103/95 dated 6-12-95)

Representations:

2. In the reference the workman is represented by the Secretary, Indian Rare Earths Employees Association , Indian Rare Earths Limited, Udyogamandal and the management is represented by the General Manager. After reference Sri . Lalan Varghese , the workman involved, was impleaded in the party array as per order on M.P. 103/95 dated6-12-1995 .On receipt of notices issued from this court the workman and management appeared through Counsel . Workman's counsel filed a petition to treat the conciliation petition as claim statement and the averments in the conciliation statement are briefly stated as follows :- Sri Lalan Varghese the workman involved in the present case is working as a Senior Clerk in the Administrative department of the management. He was associated with two unions in the management establishment, that is IR E Employees Association and IRE ECC Employees Union . On 22-4-1993 Lalan Varghese Being the Vice President of IREECC Employees Union came to the main gate of the management establishment to address the gate meeting conducted by IRE canteen workers . After completing the necessary gate entry formality he entered the company premises to meet the Deputy General Manager (Personnel and Administration) who was the President of IRE Co- operative Society. On that day Lalan Varghese was suspended from service with immediate effect on certain allegations on which explanation was called for. A reply was issued by Lalan Varghese on 26-4-1993 . Without considering the explanation a charge sheet was issued on 5-5-1993 basing on which a domestic enquiry was conducted. The enquiry officer found the workman guilty ofall the charges . Accepting the enquiry report punishment ofreduction ofbasic pay to the minimum ofpay scale from M/ s. Menon & Pai , Advocates Kochi- 18 .

..... For Management

Sri . K. S. Madhusoodanan , Advocate, Niyamakendram, BlueMount Buildings , Banerji Road ,

Kochi -31 .

..... For Union

his current basic pay of Rs . 1880/ was imposed on him . According to the workman the enquiry was not proper thereby the punishment imposed basing on the enquiry report is not sustainable . The workman would deny all the allegations levelled against him in the memo of charge and explained the incident from his view point . It is alleged that no copy of enquiry report was served on the workman before imposing the punishment and no second opportunity was given to explain in respect of the proposed 521 भारत का राजपत्र: जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

punishment . So the workman prays for interference of this court to redress his grievance .

3.Management filed a detailed written statement raising the following contentions: - Sri Lalan Varghese is employed as a senior clerk under the management and is posted at the company's godown at Willingdon Island, Cochin. On 22-4-1993 at about 8.45 A.M. he was found in the main gate ofthe company at Udyogamandal along with some outsiders and under his instigation some outsiders brought by him manhandled Sri . K. R. Prasad, the then Senior General Manager of the company, while he was entering through the main gate ofthe company. When the Assistant Security officer , Sri K. Kathieyan Nair and Sri O.P. Chackochan guard trainee attempted to save the Manager , they were also assaulted using abusive language. At about 8-50 A.M. on the same day he tried to enter into the company premises along with two outsiders and two canteen employees in violation of the objection raised by security personnels . Even though he was posted at the Willingdon Island godown of the company left the work spot without the permission of the management which is clear violation of the rules of the company . Basing on the above he was placed under suspension on 22-4-1993 and was directed to submit his explanation . The workman submitted his explanation on 26-4-1993 denying all the allegations . As the explanation was found as not satisfactory a charge sheet was issued on 5-5-93 . On the basis of the charge sheet an enquiry was held through Sri . Thomas Philip , retired Personnel Manager of Hindustan Insecticides Limited, Udyogamandal . The workman was given full and fair opportunity to defend his case and he was permitted to be assisted by a co - worker . But he did not avail that facility. His request for assistance of an Advocate could not be accepted as the Presenting Officer of the management was not a legally qualified person . The workman was provided sufficient opportunity to cross examine the management witnesses and to adduce his own evidence , both oral and documentary . Copies of documents produced by the management in the enquiry were given to the workman and he was given opportunity to submit his argument . Adjournment were granted whenever asked for and the enquiry was conducted strictly in accordance with the principles of natural justice . On analysing the evidence the enquiry officer found the workman guilty of all the charges levelled against him , the disciplinary authority taking a very lenient view awarded punishment of reduction of the salary to the minimum of the then pay scale though dismissal from service would have been awarded considering the gravity of the charges . As per the provisions of the certified standing orders the workman submitted an appeal to the Appellate Authority on 8-12-1993 which was dismissed after careful consideration. There were no illegality , procedural flaws or irregularities in the enquiry , thereby there is no reason to interfere with the findings of the enquiry officer . The

workman was charge sheeted for instigating outsiders to manhandle Sri . K. R. Prasad, Senior General Manager in front ofthe main gate ofthe company while he was entering to the company for discharging his official duties. In the appeal filed by the workman against the decision of the disciplinary authority it is pleaded that manhandling was done outside the company permises thereby admitted that he had instigated outsiders to manhandle Senior General Manager. The misconduct is proved would amount to a misconduct irrespective ofthe place where the misconduct had taken place. The allegations against the workman were clearlyand specifically mentioned in the show cause notice thereby it was not necessary to issue a separate statement ofallegations . So also the allegation that the charges are vague is without any merit or substance. If the workman did not understand the charges due to its vagueness he couldhave certainly asked for further clarification at the instant of the authorities . His participation in the enquiry without any protest clearly shows that he was fully aware of the nature of the allegations for which enquiry was conducted. The charge sheet is the basic document alleging the misconduct thereby non- mention of any particular action in the show cause notice will not affect the veracity ofthe charge. In the enquiry the workman was given ample opportunity to defend his case and to adduce whatever evidence he had . Under the certified Standing Orders of the Company the Factory Manager is the Disciplinary Authority and he being the victim he happend to be a witness in the enquiry. So no prejudice is cause to the workman and the enquiry is not vitiated due to the fact that the disciplinary authority happened to be a witness . The Enquiry Officer was an impartial outsider who found the workman guilty ofthe misconducts basing on the evidence adduced in the enquiry . There is nothing wrong in taking disciplinary action by the Factory Manager on the basis of the enquiry report though he happened to be a witness in the enquiry. Copy of documents and witness schedule were provided to the workman along with the charge sheet . It is proved through the management witnesses examined in the enquiry that the workman had instigated outsiders to manhandle Sri . K. R. Prasad, Senior Manager of the company. The workman being a trade unlon leader has absolute right to enter into the company premises without the authority or permission from the mariagement or from the concerned security department. At the time of the enquiryconducted against the workman and imposition of punishment ofhim there was no legal requirement to give a copy ofthe enquiry officer's report and to give opportunity to make representation against the findings recorded in the enquiry. Acopy of enquiry report was furnished to the workmanwhen he requested for the same . Considering the seriousness of the misconduct the imposition of punishment of reduction ofpay itself shows that a lenient view was taken by the management in the matter of punishment. As the disciplinary authority confirmed the view taken by the enquiry officer there was no necessity 173 G1/2004-15 522

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004 /MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)] for an elaborate discussion and reasoning in respect ofthe order of punishment . So the mangement prays for upholding the enquiry report and the punishment imposed basing on it . It is further stated that in case it is found that the enquiry is not proper on any ground the management has to be permitted to adduce fresh evidence to substantiate the charges levelled against the workman .

claim that MW1 conducted enquiry strictly following the principles of natural justice by giving sufficient opportunities to the workman to participate in the enquiry and accordingly he participated through out . It is further pleaded that the findings of the enquiry officer are based on evidence on record whereas according to the workman the findings are not supported by evidence.

4. Union filed a rejoinder traversing the contentions raised in the written statement and reiterating the claims in the D.L.O complaint which was treated as claim statement .

5. Since the imposition of punishment on the workman was pursuant to a domestic enquiry the enquiry officer was examined as MWI and Exts . MI and W1 to W5 were marked. No oral evidence was adduced by the workman or the union .

6. Thus the points arisę for determination are :

1. Whether the enquiry conducted through MW1 is valid and proper ?

2. Whether the findings of the enquiry, officer are based on evidence on record ?

3. Whether the punishment imposed warrants interference ?

4. The relief if any due to the workman ?

7. Points 1 & 2 : Six charges were levelled against the

8. In the copy ofD.L.O. complaint which was treated as the claim statement it is claimed by the workman that the enquiry is malafide right from the issue of memo of charges to impugned order . A proceedings are vitiated by procedural irregularities. It is referred in the D.L.O. complaint that the show cause notice dated 23-4-93 was not accompaniedby a statement of allegations, that the charge in the charge memo dated 24-4-93 was very vague, the disciplinary authority himself has appeared as a prosecution witness in the domestic enquiry , that inspite ofwritten request the statement of witnesses were not served to the workman and the findings of the enquiry officer is lacking reasonings and the enquiry report is not based on evidence. It is further explained in the D.L.O. complaint that the main charge against the workman is that under his instigation some outsiders manhandled the SeniorGeneral Manager. Even according to the respondent the alleged incident happened at the main road out side the factory premises thereby initiation of proceedings under the standing order of the company is illegal. So according to the workman the whole proceedings initiated against him under the provisions of the standing orders is illegal and unsustainable as per law. Thus the main ground of attack in the D.L.O. complaint was in respect of illegality of initiation of disciplinary proceedings based on standing orders applicable to the company employees in respect of an incident occured outside the company and there was no specific denial of the incident alleged in the charges. Butin the replication it was specifically pleaded that the enquiry was proceeded in violation of the principles of naturaljustice and there is no pinch of evidence to find the workman guilty as found by the enquiry officer.

workman in respect of which enquiry was conducted through MWI . MWI is the retired personnel Manager of Hindustan Insecticides Limited a stranger to the company. The workman himself was a union official and he participated in the enquiry through out. It is true that he made a request to engage a counsel to assist him in the enquirywhich was not allowed by the enquiry officer, since the presenting officer for the management was not a legal practitioner. To prove the charges levelled against the workmen 12 witnesses were examined and 70 documents were marked from the management's side in the presence of the workman . 10 witnesses were examined and 6 documents were marked from the workman's side in the enquiry. All the management witnesses were cross examined by the workman . On going through the enquiry proceedings available in Ext . Ml file it can be gathered that the adjournments were granted when ever asked for by the workman and the enquiry was conducted suiting the convenience of the workman also . According to the workman sufficient opportunity was not given to him to go through the documents which were within the custody ofthe management for establishing his defence . Though the workman requested to produce certain documents in connection with the previous punishment and sought permission to go thorough it which was denied by the enquiry officer . On the other hand the management would

9. It is true that in the show cause notice issued to theworkman at the first instance there was no allegation of manhandling ofthe Senior General Manager of the company but the allegation was limited to manhandling of Assistant Security Officer and Guards . But in the charge sheet the allegation was that on 22-4-1993 at about 8.45 A.M. Sri K.R. Prasad, Senior General Manager of the company was manhandled in the main gate of the company by some outsiders under the instigation of the workman and used abusive language against him . Sri . Karthikeyan Nair , Assistant Security Officer and Sri . O.P. Chackochan, Guard who came for the rescue of the Senior General Manager were also assualted using abusive language . The workman gave detailed explanation to the charge sheet and enquiry was conducted basing on the charge sheet in which the 523

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

casewas not allowed by the anquiry officer. In respect of the above argument it has to be stated that the nature of evidence to be adduced in a criminal case is entirely different from the nature ofevidence in a domestic enquiry. In a domestic enquiry what the prosecution has to prove isthatwhether a prudent and reasonable man can arrive at the conclusions on appreciating the evidence. The quality ofevidence required in a criminal case is much higher than one required in a domestic enquiry. In a domestic enquiry no question ofany benefit ofdoubt being grantedwhich is available in a criminal case . So the fate of a criminal case in respect ofthe same incident has no much relevance in a domestic enquiry and the finding ofthe enquiry officer . In the incident alleged in the present case some outsiders were also involved against whom no action under the standing orders can be initiated by the company whereas theycould be proceeded against as per the provisions of criminal law. In the present case it is admitted that the workman who was employed as a senior clerk under the management and posted at the company's godown at Willingdon Island, Kochi came to the main gate of the company at Udyogamandal on 22-4-1993 morning, that is after 8 O'clock and before 9 O'clok to address the gate meeting conducted by IRE canteen workers. It is further admitted that the workman delivered his introductory speech and the President of the Union Sri . R.M. Parameswaran was delivering the presidential address and the workman was standing at the other side of the read near a mike when the Senior General Manager Sri . Rajendra Prasad came to the gate to enter into the company. It is also admitted that around 150 persons including local people, canteen workers and regular workers of the companywere present at the meeting place . The fact that the gate meeting was being conducted at the relevant time under the auspicious ofthe union ofwhich the workman is an officebearer is admitted. It is the case of the menngonment that when the Senior General Manager attempted to enter into the company through the gate some persons from the assembly prevented his entry and also manhandled and used abusive language against him. When the Assistant Security Officer Sri . K. Karthikeyan and Sri . O.P. Chackochan, Guard tried to save the manager they were also assaulted and used abusive language against them . So the manager returned to the quarters without making further attempt for the entry into the company. As referred earlier in the D.L.O. complaint the main attempt of the union representing the workman was that as the alleged incident happened at the main gate outside the factory premises the initiation of proceedings under the standing order ofthe company is illegal . But the company gate, the entrance portion and its premises are also company premises thereby the above claim of the union representating the workman is not sustainable. Fruther evenifthe incident has not occurred in the factory premises , if the incident is in connection with the matters of the company it will clearly come within the purview of the workman participated through out. The nature oftheallega- tions and clauses under the certified standing orders basing on which he was charge sheeted were specifically and clearly mentioned in the charge sheet . He had no case in the explanation to the charge sheet and during the course ofenquiry that the charge sheet was vague and he did not understand the same . The allegation of absence of statement of allegation along with the show cause notice also does not merit consideration since the nature of allegations are clearly referred in the show cause notice. As the workman had no allegation in the explanation to the charge sheet or during the course of enquiry about the charge sheet he cannot be heard at present about the validity of the charge sheet . The allegation raised in the D.L.O. complaint was that since the alleged action was occured outside the company premises the action initiated against the workman under the provisions in the standing order of the company is not sustainable . In the present casethe allegation is that the Senior General Manager of the Company was manhandled while he was entering through the main gate of the company . So there is no difficulty to find that it is within the premises ofthe company. Another allegation raised by the workman in respect of the enquiry is that as the disciplinary authority himself acted as a witness in the enquiry , the enquiry is vitiated. The workman was charge sheeted for assaulting Senior General Manager Sri . K.R. Prasad . The show cause notice, charge sheet etc. were issued by the disciplinary authority . Those actions do not preclude the disciplinary authority from giving evidence to support the allegations raised in the charge. It is true that original of Ext . W2 application dated 20-5-93 was issued by the workman to the management for production of documents for his perusal and similar application was filed before the enquiry officer also for perusal of documents which have to be produced by the management and for assistance of lawyer for the conduct of enquiry on which the enquiry officer passed Ext . W1 order dated 29-5-1993 . Basing on Ext . W1 it is alleged by the workman that his request for perusal of documents and engagement of lawyer were refused by the enquiry officer . But it is evident from Ext . W1 that the enquiry officer had considered request ofthe workman in its proper perspective and passed appropriate orders on the same . Similar applications filed thereafter were disposed by the enquiry officer by passing appropriate orders. The management witnesses were examined in the presence of the workman and the documents were marked in his presence. Sufficient opportunity was given to the workman to peruse the documents and to avail time for cross examination of witnesses therafter. It was pointed out by the workman's counsel at the time of argument that the criminal case charge sheeted in respect of the same incident against the workman and others ended in acquittal since the prosecution witnesses have turned hostile before the criminal court and the request of the workman for postponement ofthe enquiry till the disposal of the criminal 524

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004 /MAGHA 11 , 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )]

punishment has no application since the section is applicable only in cases of discharge or dismissal .Thus under these points it can be found that the punishment imposed on the workman is proportionate to the misconduct proved and this court has no jurisdiction to interfere with the quantum of punishment as it is not one of discharge or dismissal and the workman is 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 management of Indian Rare Earths Limited in imposing the punishment of reduction of basic pay to the minimum pay scale from the present basic pay on Sri . Lalan Varghese, theworkman involved in thepresent case isjustifiable and he is not entitled to get any reliefas 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 13th day ofOctober, 2003 .

Ernakulam:

Witness examined on the side of the Management :

MW1 . Sri . Thomas Philip.

Witness examined on the side of Union :

N. THULASI BAI , Presiding Officer APPENDIX Nil

Exhibits marked on the side of Management :

Ext.M1 . File containing enquiry proceedings and reports.

Exhibits marked on the side ofUnion :

Ext. W.1 : Letter dated 29-5-1993 by Thomas Philip , Enquiry Officer to the workman.

Ext. W2 Carbon copy of letter dated 20-5-1993 by Lalan Vargheseto the General Manager.

Standing Orders . That may be the reason for the workman is not pin pointing that aspect in the rejoinder and in the enquiry . The subsequent stand of the union and the workman was one of total denial of the alleged incident of assaulting the manager and the security personnels who tried to protect hirn . The workman , being a union leader , who organised the meeting is responsible to prevent the gathering from involving in any riotous activities. The presence of the workman at the time of incident is admitted. The incident was proved before the enquiry officer to his satisfaction which does not prima facie require interference . The workman being an employee of the company and a union leader, ifhe was innocent in respect of the incident he could have very well prevent or rather attempt to prevent the riotous activities from the part of the gathering in the meeting against a Senior Executive of the company in which he is employed. The absence of such an action from the part of the workman , though he was physically present, itself is sufficient to find his instigation for the incident . As most of the gatherings and other union leaders were not the employees of the factory the company cannot proceed against them under the provisions of the standing order . But they can only be proceeded under the provisions of criminal law , which the company had duly initiated. The result of the criminal action against the strangers and the workman has no bearing in a disciplinary proceedings initiated against an employee under the standing orders applicable to the employees of the company. The workman being a union leader was well conversant with the conduct of enquiry . On going through the enquiry proceedings available in Ext. M1 file it can be clearly found that sufficient opportunity was granted to the workman to participate in the enquiry through out and by availing that opportunity the workman participated also . By affording sufficient opportunity to participate in the enquiry, the principles of natural justice have been complied with in the matter of enquiry. So it can be clearly found that the enquiry conducted in the present casethrough.MW1 is valid and proper . On going through the evidence adduced from both sides in the enquiry, which iselaborare , and the report of the enquiry officer which is. also exhaustive by referring each and every piece of evidence adduced from both sides it can be found that the findings of the enquiry officer are based on evidence on record . Points are answered accordingly .

Ext . W3 . Letter issued by Lalan Varghese to the General Manager, Indian Rare Earth Limited.

Ext. W4. Carbon copy of reply of the letterdt . 29-5-1993 toAdvocate Thomas Philip by Lalan Varghese.

Ext . W5. Copy of letter dated 17-7-93 by Lalan Varghese to the Enquiry Officer Sri . Thomas Philip . नई दिल्ली, 14 जनवरी , 2004

10. Points 3 and 4 : Then the remaining question to be determined is that whether the punishment ofreduction of basic pay to the Minimum Pay Scale is proportionate to the misconduct proved and whether the workman is entitled to get any relief as per the reference . The misconducts proved against the workman are very serious . Considering the misconduct the punishment imposed appears to be proportionate . As the punishment imposed in reduction of basic pay alone , section 11A which give power to this court to interfere with the quantum of

का. आ. 266.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय स्टेट बैंक 525

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

that the employers did not pay salary for the month of Dec. 97 and Jan. 98. He has also alleged that he is unemployed since 25-1-98 and he has requested that the worker be reinstated with back wages .

के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण व श्रम न्यायालय , लखनऊ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई. डी. 172/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 14-1-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -12012/218/2001 - आई आर (बी- I ) ]

अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the i4th January , 2004

S.O. 266. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 172/2001 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court, Lucknow now as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of State Bank of India and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 14-1-2004.

[No. L- 12012/218/2001 - IR(B- 1)] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT LUCKNOW

Present :

SHRIKANT SHUKLA, Presiding Officer

I.D. No. 172/2001

Ref . No. L- 12012/218/2001 /IR( B1) Dt. 26-11-2001

Shri Virendra Kumar S/o Badlu Prasad R/9 E- 1-88 , Dandayal Forum , Todakpur Road , Nobasta, Gallamandi , Kanpur

AND

TheManager, State Bank of India, Branch Juhi , Baushala Crossing, Kanpur Nagar .

AWARD

Opposite Party has denied the claim of the workman that Virendra Kumar was ever employed with the bank. It isalso stated in the written statement that he was never appointed by the Bank Management against any regular or permanent post in the subordinate cadre in any capacity. The management ofbank specifically denied that Virendra Kumar continuously worked as employee of the bank w.e.f. 18-7-89 . It is also stated that since Virendra Kumar was not an employee of the bank, there is no question of his reinstatement and the payment of salary by the Bank asalleged by the worker. The worker has tried to concoct a case so as to pursuade the Tribunal to grant relief in his favour. The management has specifically denied that the worker was even beaten by the Manager or the staff of the Bank . Since he was not appointed by the Bank, the questionofterminating his services by the Bank does not arise. As the workman was not appointed by the bank management the question of payment by the bank management towards the salary of Dec. 97 and Jan. 98 does not arise. It is also stated by the management that the worker is gainfully employed even after 25-1-98 . The Bank management has stated in para 7 of the written statement that the concerned workman might have been engaged by the Local Implementation Committee/Staff Welfare Committee and not against the State Bank of India which is a statutory Bank created under the provisions of the StateBank of India Act, 1955. The concerned Ghoshala branch ofState Bank of India is a small branch of about 12 employees including the Manager and other staff includes messangers in subordinate cadre . In the fact and eircumstances of the case the concerned workman is not entitled to any relief and therefore the reference made by the Central Government deserves to be answered against the concerned workman and in favour of the Bank management . The claim of the concerned workman deserves to be dismissed with costs .

The worker has filed photo state copy of extract of small expenditure note book paper no. 4/18 to 4/418.

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide their Order No. L- 12012/218 /2001 /IR(B- I) dated 26-11-2001 referred following issue for adjudication to this Tribunal ;

The worker has also filed affidavit paper no . 6 in support of his case . Opposite party has filed photo copy ofvouchers alongwith list paper no . 8/4 to 8/320 .

" क्याप्रबन्धक, भारतीय स्टेट बैंक , शाखा जूही गौशाला क्रासिंग कानपुर द्वारा कर्मकार श्री वीरेन्द्र कुमार को दिनांक 25-1-98 से सेवा से निष्कासित करना न्यायोचित है ? यदि नहीं, तो सम्बन्धित कर्मकार किस अनुतोष का हकदार है ? "

The opposite party has filed affidavit of Sri R.S. Agarwal , Asstt . Manager, State Bank of India, Goshala Crossing brarích, Kanpur paper no . 9.

The worker and Sri R.S. Agarwal has been cross examined by the concerned opposite parties .

Parties has also filed the written argument .

The brief fact of the case of the worker is that the worker Virendra Kumar was employed in State Bank of India, branch Gaushala crossing , Juhi , Kanpur Nagar since 18-7-89 to 24-1-98 as temporary employee and when the worker demanded that he should be made permanent in service , he was beaten up and terminated. It is also alleged 526

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 31 , 2004 /MAGHA 11 , 1925

I have gone through the written argument submitted by the parties and perused on record.

Itisadmitted by the worker that Bank did not issue any appointment letter to him . He has also admitted that his name was not forwarded by the Employment Exchange for service in the Bank. He has also stated that he was not interviewed or put to test before his employment .

The worker has categorically replied to a question by the management and has stated that he was working as Canteen Boy . He has also stated that the canteen was in the premises of the Bank . He has also stated that there was a Society of the Bank employees and where used to be election in the Society . Further he stated in the cross examination when he was put onjob Smt . Renu Gupta was the Secretary of and when he terminated the Secretary was Sri S.C. Misra. He has also stated that he was paid Rs. 500/- per month by the Secretary of the Society.

Sri R.S. Agarwal the management witness has answered in cross examination that Virendra Kumar was engaged for preparing Tea , Milk , Sugar , Tea, was arranged and expenditure which was borned by the Local Implementation Committee .

Sri R.S. Agarwal as specifically denied that when Peon used to go on leave , Virendra Kumar was engaged in his place.

Itis, therefore , admitted fact of the worker in the cross examination that he was engaged as Canteen Boy . He has also clearly accepted that when he was engaged the Secretary of the Society was Smt. Renu Gupta . From the evidence of the parties it is clear that the worker was not appointed by the Bank rather he was appointed by the Local Implementation Committee.

The worker representative in his written argument has stated that the worker Virendra Kumar worked continuously for 10 years from 18-7-89 to 24-1-98 in State Bank of India , Goshala Branch , Kanpur . It is also stated in the written argument that when worker insisted for making him permanent he was terminated on 25-1-98 and also he was not paid salary for the month Dec. 97 and Jan. 98 .

Itis also stated in written argument that the statement ofSri R.S. Agarwal should not be taken into consideration as it is of no importance since he took over charge in June , 2002 whereas the dispute pertains to the year 1989-98. It is also stated that the statement of Sri R.S. Agarwal is not true.

The question is whether the worker Virendra Kumar was appointed by the Bank as Canteen Boy . Since it is admitted fact that the worker worked as Canteen Boy the Statement of the workman is " मैं कैन्टीन ब्वाय के पद पर कार्य करता था । कैन्टीन बैंक परिसर में ही थी । बैंक के कर्मचारियों की सोसायटी थी । उसका चुनाव भी होता था । जब मुझे काम पर रखा गया था तो श्रीमती रेनू गुप्ता सोसायटी की सचिव थी । जब निकाला गया तो श्री सतीश चन्द्र मिश्रा सचिव थे

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] मुझे 500 रु . का, चैक महीने में मिलता था चाहे मैं एक दिन, या दसदिन या पूरे महीने काम करूं । रुपया 500/- ( पांच सौ ) का चैक सचिव साहब के हस्ताक्षर से मिलता था । "

From the above statement it is clear that the salary to the CanteenBoy Virendra Kumar was being paid by the Secretary of the Society not by the Bank.

It is also clear from the evidence on record that Virendra Kumar was never issued any appointment letter by the Bank to show that Virendra Kumar was engaged by the Bank. Rather from his own statement it is made out that he was a Canteen Boy and paid salary by the Secretary ofthe Committee of the workers .

No doubt, it is true that the Sri R.S. Agarwal did not work during the period 1989-98 but it can not be said that the facts can not be gathered by who takes the subsequent charge of the Bank Manager. The opposite party has stated in the written argument that the workman tried to concoct the case and did not plead clearly in the pleadings . It is alleged that pleadings are vague and ambiguous because there was no material to support his claim .

This is clear that the worker was engaged as Canteen Boy run by the Local implementation Committee at the branch of State Bank of India . This is well settled that as per the Welfare Scheme of the Bank employees of such canteens are not the employees of the Bank as there is no statutory or contractual obligation or obligations in Shastri Award on thebank to run such canteen to promote canteen facility by providing subsidy. The matter came before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and was decided on 7-4-2000 . The case law is 2000 SC cases ( L & S) 714 State Bank of India and others Vs. State Bank of India Canteen Employees Union , Bengal Circle and others . In the above case, hand book on Staff Welfare activities prepared by the State Bank of India on 8-8-63 is referred. It provides for Staff Welfare Fund and a scheme for creation , conduct and accounting procedure of such funds , and relevant part thereof is also discuss in the said case .

It laid down that Local Implementation Committee should be formed at each branch and also at respective regional offices , local head offices and central office establishment and other offices , if any, to determine the particular welfare activity or activities to be conducted at respective establishment out of funds allotted to them by the Circle Welfare Committee . The canteen employees engaged by the Local Implementation Committee their wages in excess of the subsidy will be bome by the Local Implementation Committee .

Court has held the employees of Canteen which are run at various branches by Local Implementation Committee as per the welfare Scheme framed by State Bank of India would not become employees of the bank as the bank is not having any statutory or contractual obligation or obligations arising under the award to run such canteen .

भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 31 , 2004/माघ 11 , 1925

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

In the circumstances above it could not be said that the workman was at all employee of the Bank or engaged by the Bank. On the other hand from the worker's own evidence it is clear that the worker was not engaged by the Bank from 18-7-89 as alleged by him . So far as his engagement for Local Implementation Committee concerned, Local Implementation Committee is not party of the case and therefore , Secretary of Local Implementation Committee has not come to rebutt the case ofthe worker .

From the vouchers filed by the management, it is made out that the worker has been paid on labour rates on following rates .@Rs . 10/- per day; 14-2-92, 20-2-92, 10-2-92,6-2-92, 15-2-92,2-4-92, 27-4-92, 1-6-92, 2-6-92, 3-6-92,4-6-92,5-6-92, 22-6-92, 26-6-92, 30-11-92, 1-12-92, 2-12-92, 3-3-93,2-3-93, 5-3-93, 11-3-93 , 10-3-93, 12-3-93 , 3-6-93, 3-5-93 , 4-5-93 , 18-5-93, 19-5-93 ,20-5-93, 24-6-93 , 22-6-93,23-6-93,26-6-93, 23-9-93,26-9-93,28-8-93,27-8-93,25-8-93,26-8-93.

The remaining vouchers pertains to misc . purchases like cleaning powder , tea , pitcher and eatable items etc. from the evidence . It is evident that while working as canteen boy some times the worker was engaged for petty labour work for which he was paid , but that engagement as labour shows that he was engaged intermittently and not continuously for 240 days .

From evidence on record , I come to the conclusion that it was a duty of the worker himself to prove that he worked continuously for 240 days in a calander year and he has failed to prove it . On the other hand as from his own statement in his cross examination it is clear that he was a Canteen Boy engeged and paid by the Secretary of Local Implementation committee. I also come to the conclusion that the statement of claim is not truthful statement . He ought to have stated in the statement of claim itself that he was engaged as Canteen Boy and was being paid salary Rs . 500/- per month by the Secretary of the Local Implementation Committee . With the result 1 come to the conclusion that worker himself is not trustworthy and his sole statement that he worked for 10 years in the bank is not relied. With the result 1 come to the conclusion thatsince the worker was not the employee of SBI , Branch Goshala, Juhi kanpur and therefore there is no question of his termination from services on 25-1-98 . The issue is accordingly answered in favour of the management against the workman. The workman is not entitled for any relief. Lucknow

1-1-2004

SHRIKANT SHUKLA, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 20 जनवरी , 2004

का. आ. 267.- कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम, 1948 ( 1948 का 34 ) की धारा 1 की उप- धारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा 01 फरवरी , 2004 को उस तारीख

527 के रूप में नियत करती है, जिसको उक्त अधिनियम के अध्याय-4 (44व 45 धारा के सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रवृत्त हो चुकी है ) अध्याय -5 और 6 [ धारा -76 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) और धारा -77, 78, 79 और 81 के सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रवृत्त की जा चुकी है ] के उपबन्ध तमिलनाडु राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे, अर्थात्:-

" कोयम्बतूर जिला में पोल्लाची तालुक के राजस्व ग्राम-सोलावम्पालंयम , चोलनूर किणतुकडवु, गोतवडि एवं अचिपट्टी के अधीन आने वाले क्षेत्र " ।

[सं. एस-38013/04/2004-एस एस -1 ]

के. सी. जैन, निदेशक NewDelhi , the 20th January, 2004

S.O. 267. In exercise of the powers conferredby Sub- section (3 ) of Section 1 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948) the Central Government hereby appoints the 1st February , 2004 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 Спартет 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 Tamil Nadu namely :-

"Areas comprising the revenue villages of Solavampalayam , Shozhanur , Kinathukadavu Gothavadi and Achipatti ofPollachi Taluk in Coimbatore District " . [No. S- 38013/04/2004-SS- I]

K. C. JAIN , Director.

शुद्धि-पत्र

नई दिल्ली, 19 जनवरी, 2004

का. आ. 268.- भारत के राजपत्र के भाग II , खण्ड-3 के उप-खण्ड ( ii ) में दिनांक 13 सितम्बर, 2003 को प्रकाशित भारत सरकार, श्रम मंत्रालय की दिनांक 04 सितम्बर, 2003 की अधिसूचना संख्या एस -38013/30/2003- सा. सु. 1 , सा. आ. संख्या 2627 पृष्ठ संख्या-6269 में निम्नलिखित संशोधन किए जाएं, नामतः:-

1. " सिंगमपुनारी " के स्थान पर " उत्तर सिंगमपुनारी एवं दक्षिण सिंगमपुनारी" पढ़ा जाये ।

2." गांव " के स्थान पर " गांवों " पढ़ा जाये ।

[सं. एस-38013/30/2003 -एस एस -1 ]

के. सी. जैन , निदेशक

CORRIGENDUM

New Delhi , the 19th January , 2004

S.O. 268. In the Notification No. S38013/30/2003- S.S.1 of the Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour , published inthe Gazette of India , Part- II Section 3 Sub-section ( ii ) dated 13th September, 2003 vide S.O. No. 2627 dated 4th September 2003 at page 6269, the following corrections may be made namely :-

1. For ' singampunari ' read ' North Singampunari and South Singampunari' .

2. For' village ' read ' villages ' .

[No. S- 38013/30/2003 - SS- I ]

K. C. JAIN , Director

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