This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

REGD . No. DL (N)-04/0007/2003-05 रजिस्ट्रीसं०डी एल (एन ) 04/0007/2003-05

भारत का राजपन The Gazette of India

प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक

WEEKLY

सं. 8 ]

नई दिल्ली, फरवरी 15 फरवरी 21 , 2004, शनिवार/माघ 26 फाल्गुन 2, 1925

No. 8] NEW DELFIL, FEBRUARY 15 FEBRUARY 21 , 2004, SATURDAY/MACHA 26-PHALGUNA 2, 1925 इस भाग में भिन्न पृष्ठ संख्या दी जाती है जिससे कि ग्रह अलग संकलन के रूप में रखा जा सके Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation

भाग-खण्ड 3-उप-खण्ड (ii)

PART II-Section 3-Sub-section (ii )

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

(Other than the Ministry of Defence)

मंत्रिमंडल सचिवालय

नई दिल्ली, 9 फरवरी, 2004

का. आ. 370.-केन्द्रीय सरकार एंत‌द्वारा 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 सं. एचडी 201 पीसीआर 2003 दिनांक 30-09-2003 द्वारा प्राप्त कर्नाटक राज्य सरकार की सहमति से श्री एम.एन. चिन्नय्या, वायरमैन ( इलैक्ट्रिकल ) , सहायक अभियंता का कार्यालय , टेलीकॉम इलैक्ट्रिकल सब - डिविजन -2, भारत संचार निगम लि. , बंगलौर एवं लोक सेवकों अथवा व्यक्तियों के विरुद्ध भारतीय दंड संहिता, 1860 ( 1860 का अधिनियम सं. 45 ) की धारा 120 - बी सपठित धारा 419 और 420 तथा भ्रष्टाचार निवारण अधिनियम , 1988 ( 1988 का अधिनियम सं. 49 ) की धारा 13 ( 2 ) सपठित धारा 13 ( 1 ) ( डी) के अधीन दंडनीय अपराधों और उपर्युक्त अपराधों में से एक अथवा अधिक से संबंधित अथवा संसक्त प्रयत्नों, दुष्प्रेरणों और षडयंत्र तथा उसी संव्यवहार के अनुक्रम में किए गए अथवा उन्हीं तथ्यों से उ‌द्भूत किसी अन्य अपराध और अपराधों के अन्वेषण के लिए दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना के सदस्यों की शक्तियों और अधिकारिता का विस्तार सम्पूर्ण कर्नाटक राज्य पर करती है । [सं. 228/89/2003 - डी.एस.पी.ई. ]

शुभा ठाकुर, अवर सचिव

CABINET SECRETARIAT

New Delhi , the 9th February, 2004

S. O. 370. In exercise of the powers confer! dbv Sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 5 read with Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 ( Act No. 25 of 946 ) , the Central Government with th . consent of State Government ofKarnataka , vide Notification No. HD 201 PCR 2003 dated 30-9-2003 , hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction ofthe members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the State of Karnataka for investigation of offences against Shri M. N. Chinnaiah, Wireman ( Electrical ) Office of the Assistant Engineer , Telecom Electrical Sub-Division - II , 440 G1/2003

(681) 682

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

[PART II -SEC. 3 (ii ) ] Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited , Bangalore and other public servants or persons under section 120 -B read with 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code , 1860 ( Act No. 45 of 1860) and Section 13 (2) read with 13 ( 1 ) (d ) ofPrevention of Corruption Act. 1988 ( Act No. 49 of 1988 ) and attempts , abetments and conspiracy in relation to or in connection with one or more of the offence mentioned above and any other offence and offences committed in the course of the same transaction or arising out of the same facts .

[No. 228/89/2003 -DSPE] SHUBHA THAKUR, Under Secy.

वित्त मंत्रालय (आर्थिक कार्य विभाग ) (बैंकिंग प्रभाग ) नई दिल्ली, 4 फरवरी , 2004

का. आ. 371.- राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबंध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध ) स्कीम, 1970 के खंड 3 के उपखंड ( 1 ) , खंड 5 , खंड 6 , खंड 7 और खंड 8 के उपखंड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम, 1970 की धारा 9 की उपधारा (3 ) के खंड ( क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक से परामर्श करने के पश्चात् श्री ए. के. खंडेलवाल , जो इस समय बैंक ऑफ बड़ौदा में कार्यपालक निदेशक हैं, को उनके कार्यभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से 31-3-2008 तक अर्थात् उनके अधिवर्षिता की आयु प्राप्त करने की तारीख तक या अगला आदेश होने तक, इनमें से जो भी पहले हो, देना बैंक के अध्यक्ष व प्रबंध निदेशक के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[फा.सं. 9/10/2003- बी.ओ.- I ] रमेश चन्द, अवर सचिव

MINISTRY OF FINANCE (Department of Economic Affairs ) (Banking Division )

NewDelhi, the 4th February, 2004

S. O. 371. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of Sub - section ( 3 ) of Section 9 of the Banking Companies ( Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 , read with sub -clause ( I' ) of clause 3 , clause 5 , clause 6. clause 7 and sub- clause ( 1 ) of clause 8 of the Nationalised Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme. 1970, the Central Government, after consultation with the Reserve Bank of India, hereby appoints Shri A.K. Khandelwal, Executive Director, Bank of Baroda as Chairman and Managing Director, Dena Bank for the period from the date of his taking charge and upto 31-03-2008 i.e. the date of his attaining the age of superannuation or until further orders . whichever event occurs carlier.

[F. No. 9/ 10/2003 -B.O. -1 ]

RAMESH CHAND , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 5 फरवरी, 2004

का. आ. 372.- राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबंध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध ) स्कीम , 1980 के खंड 3 के उपखंड ( 1 ) , के साथ पठित बैंककारी कंपनी (उपक्रमों काअर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम , 1980 की धारा 9 की उपधारा।उपधारा ( 3 ) (ज) एवं ( 3 - क) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्‌द्वारा श्री एम.एल. मेहता, 5 केशव विहार, गोपालपुरा मार्ग, जयपुर-302018 को अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए ओरियंटल बैंक ऑफ कामर्स में अंशकालिक गैर - सरकारी निदेशक के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[फा. सं. 9/17/2000- बी.ओ.-I ]

रमेश चन्द, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 5th February, 2004

S. O. 372. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub -section ( 3 ) ( h) and (3 - A) of Section 9 of the Banking Compa- nies ( Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings ) Act, 1980 , read with sub-clause ( 1 ) of clause 3 , of the Nationalised Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme, 1980 , the Central Government , hereby nominates Shri M. L. Mehta . 5 Keshav Vihar , Gopalpura Road, Jaipur -302018 as part - time non - official Director of Oriental Bank of Commerce for a period ofthree years from the date of notification .

[F. No. 9 / 17/2000-B.O. - 1 ]

RAMESH CHAND , Under Secy.

683 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2 , 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

राजस्वविभाग केन्द्रीय प्रत्यक्ष कर बोर्ड नई दिल्ली, 6 फरवरी , 2004

(आयकर )

का. आ. 373.- सामान्य जानकारी के लिए यह अधिसूचित किया जाता है कि केन्द्र सरकार द्वारा अधोलिखित संगठन को उसके नाम के सामने उल्लिखित अवधि के लिए आयकर नियमावली , 1962 के नियम 6 के साथ पठित आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( ii ) के प्रयोजनार्थ " संघ " श्रेणी के अन्तर्गत निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन अनुमोदित किया गया है :-

(i) अधिसूचित संघ अपने अनुसंधान कार्यकलापों के लिए अलग लेखा बहियों का रख - रखाव करेगी;

( ii ) अधिसूचित संघ प्रत्येक वित्तीय वर्ष के लिए अपनी वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान गति विधियों की वार्षिक रिटर्न प्रत्येक 31 मई को अथवा उससे पहले सचिव, वैज्ञानिक और औद्योगिक अनुसंधान विभाग ' टेक्नोलॉजी भवन ' न्यू महरोली रोड, नई दिल्ली-110016 को प्रस्तुत करेगी;

(iii ) अधिसूचित संघ केन्द्र सरकार की तरफ से नामोद्दिष्ट निर्धारण अधिकारी को आयकर की विवरणी प्रस्तुत करने के अतिरिक्त अपने लेखा परीक्षित वार्षिक लेखों की एक प्रति तथा अपने अनुसंधान कार्यकलापों, जिसके लिए आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अन्तर्गत छूट प्रदान की गई थी, के संबंध में आय एवं व्यय खाते की लेखा परीक्षा की भी एक प्रति संगठन पर अधिकार क्षेत्र वाले ( क ) आयकर महानिदेशक ( छूट ) 10 मिडिलटन रो , पांचवा तल, कलकत्ता -700071; ( ख ) सचिव, वैज्ञानिक एवं औद्योगिक अनुसंधान विभाग तथा ( ग ) आयकर आयुक्त/आयकर निदेशक ( छूट ) को प्रत्येक वर्ष 31 अक्तूबर को अथवा उससे पहले प्रस्तुत करेगी ।

क्रम सं.

अवधिजिसके लिए अधिसूचना प्रभावी है अनुमोदित संगठन का नाम

1-4-2002 से 31-3-2005 1.

मैसर्स अरविन्द मेडिकल रिसर्च फाउंडेशन, 1 , अन्ना नगर, मदुरै-625020

-( i ) उपर्युक्त शर्त ( i ) " संघ " के रूप में श्रेणीबद्ध संगठन पर लागू नहीं होगी ।

टिप्पणी:

(ii ) अधिसूचित संघ को सलाह दी जाती है कि वह अनुमोदन के नवीकरण के लिए तीन प्रतियों में और पहले ही अधिकार क्षेत्र वाले आयकर आयुक्त/आयकर निदेशक ( छूट ) के माध्यम से केन्द्र सरकार को आवेदन करें । अनुमोदन के नवीकरण के लिए आवेदन पत्र की तीन प्रतियां सचिव, वैज्ञानिक और औद्योगिक अनुसंधान विभाग को सीधे भेजी जाएंगी ।

[अधिसूचना सं. 42/2004/फा.सं. 203/27/2003- आयकर नि.- II ]

संगीता गुप्ता, निदेशक ( आयकर नि.- II )

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES

New Delhi , the 6th February, 2004

(INCOME TAX)

S. O. 373. It is hereby notified for general information that the organisation mentioned below has been approved by the Central Government for the period mentio ed below, for the purpose of clause ( ii ) of sub -section ( 1 ) of section 35 of the Income tax Act , 1961 read with Rule 6 of the Income tax Rules , 1962 under the category "Association " subjectto the following conditions :-

(i) The notified organization shall maintain separate books of accounts for its research activities ;

(ii) the notified Association shall furnish the Annual Return of its scientific research activities to the Secretary. Department of Scientific & Industrial Research , Technology Bhawan ' , New Mehrauli Road . New Delhi - 110016 for every financial year on or before 3 Ist May ofeach year ;

( iii) The notitied Association shall submit, on behalf of the Central Government , to ( a) the Director General of Income tax (Exemptions ) , 10 Middleton Row, 5th Floor, Calcutta - 700071 , (b ) the Secretary, Department of Scien- tific & Industrial Research , and (c) the Commissioner of Income -tax/Director of Income - tax ( Exernptions ) having jurisdiction over the organisation , on or before the 31st October each year , a copy of its audited Annual Accounts and also a copy of audited Income & Expenditure Account in respect of its research activities for which exemption was granted under sub - section ( 1 ) of section 35 of Income - tax Act , 1961 in addition to the return of income tax to the designated assessing officer.

684

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] S.No. Name of the organisation approved

Period for which notification is effective 1.

1-4-2002 to 31-3-2005

M/sAravind Medical Research Foundation, 1. Anna Nagar, Madurai -625020

Notes: Condition ( i ) above will not apply to the organization categorized as " Association" .

(ii) the notified Association is advised to apply in triplicates as well in advance for renewal of the approval, to theCentral Government through the Commissioner of Income -tax/Director of Income -tax (Exemptions ) hav- ing jurisdiction. Three copies of the application for renewal of approval shall also be sent directly to the Secretary. Department of Scientific and Industrial Research.

[Notification No. 42/2004 /F.No . 203/27/2003 -ITA. - II ]

SANGEETA GUPTA, Director (ITA.II )

नई दिल्ली, 6 फरवरी , 2004

(आयकर)

का. आ. 374.- सामान्य जानकारी के लिए यह अधिसूचित किया जाता है कि केन्द्र सरकार द्वारा अधोलिखित्त संगठन को उसके नाम के सामने उल्लिखित अवधि के लिए आयकर नियमावली , 1962 के नियम 6 के साथ पठित आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( iii ) के प्रयोजनार्थ " संघ " श्रेणी के अन्तर्गत निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन अनुमोदित किया गया है:-

(i ) अधिसूचित संस्था अपने अनुसंधान कार्यकलापों के लिए अलग लेखा बहियों का रख - रखाव करेगी;

( ii ) अधिसूचित संस्था प्रत्येक वित्तीय वर्ष के लिए अपनी वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान गति विधियों की वार्षिक रिटर्न प्रत्येक 31 मई को अथवा उससे पहले सचिव , वैज्ञानिक और औद्योगिक अनुसंधान विभाग ' टेक्नोलॉजी भवन ' न्यूमहरोली रोड, नई दिल्ली-110016 को प्रस्तुत करेगी;

(iii ) अधिसूचित संस्था केन्द्र सरकार की तरफ से नामोद्दिष्ट निर्धारण अधिकारी को आयकर की विवरणी प्रस्तुत करने के अतिरिक्त अपने लेखा परीक्षित वार्षिक लेखों की एक प्रति तथा अपने अनुसंधान कार्यकलापों, जिसके लिए आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अन्तर्गत छूट प्रदान की गई थी, के संबंध में आय एवं व्यय खाते की लेखा परीक्षा की भी एक प्रति संगठन पर अधिकार क्षेत्र वाले , ( क ) आयकर महानिदशेक ( छूट ) 10 मिडिलटन रो , पांचवा तल , कलकत्ता -700071 , ( ख ) सचिव, वैज्ञानिक एवं औद्योगिक अनुसंधान विभाग तथा (ग ) आयकर आयुक्त/आयकर निदेशक ( छूट ) को प्रत्येक वर्ष 31 अक्तूबर को अथवा उससे पहले प्रस्तुत करेगी ।

क्रमसं. अनुमोदित संगठन का नाम

अवधिजिसके लिए अधिसूचना प्रभावी है 1 .

1-4-2001 से 31-3-2004

मैसर्स एकादमी आफ संस्कृत रिसर्च मेलकोट-571431 मंड्या जिला, कर्नाटक

टिप्पणी: -( i ) उपर्युक्त शर्त ( i ) " संघ " के रूप में श्रेणीबद्ध संगठन पर लागू नहीं होगी।

( ii ) , अधिसूचित संघ को सलाह दी जाती है कि वह अनुमोदन के नवीकरण के लिए तीन प्रतियों में और पहले ही अधिकार क्षेत्र वाले आयकर आयुक्त/आयकर निदेशक ( छूट ) के माध्यम से केन्द्र सरकार को आवेदन करें । अनुमोदन के नवीकरण के लिए आवेदन पत्र की तीन प्रतियां सचिव, वैज्ञानिक और औद्योगिक अनुसंधान विभाग को सीधे भेजी जाएंगी ।

[अधिसूचना सं . 43/2004/फा.सं. 203/69/2002- आयकर नि. ॥ ]

संगीता गुप्ता, निदेशक ( आयकर नि.- II ) New Delhi , the 6th February, 2004

(INCOME TAX)

S. O. 374.--It is hereby notified for general information that the organisation mentioned below has been approved by the Central Government for the period mentioned below, for the purpose of clause ( iii ) of Sub- section( 1 ) of section 35 of the Income tax Act . 1961 read with Rule 6 of the Income tax Rules , 1962 under the category " Institution " subject to the following conditions:

(i) The organization shall maintain separate books of accounts for its rescarch activities:

(ii) The notified Instiution shall furnish the Annual Return of its scientific research activities to the Secretary. Department of Scientific & Industrial Research , Technology Bhawan ' , New Mehrauli Road . New Delhi - 110016 for every financial year on or before 31st May ofcach year;

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

685 भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2 , 1925

( iii) The notified Institution shall submit, on behalf ofthe Central Government, to (a) the Director General of Income tax (Exemptions) , 10 Middleton Row, 5th Floor, Calcutta-700071 (b ) the Secretary, Department of Scicatific & Industrial Research, and (c) the Commissioner of Income tax/Director of Income tax (Exemptions) havingjuris- diction over the organisation, on or before the 31st October each year, a copy of its audited Annual Accounts and also a copy of audited Income & Expenditure Account in respect of its research activities for which exemption was granted under Sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 35 of Income tax Act , 1961 in addition to the return of income tax to the designated assessing officer.

S.No. Name of the organisation approved

Period for which notification is effective 1.

1-4-2001 to 31-3-2004

M/ sAcademy of Sanskrit Research Melkote-571431 , Mandya District , Karnataka

Notes: (i) Condition ( i) above will not apply to the organization categorized as " Association" .

( ii) The notified Institution is advised to apply in triplicates as well in advance for further renewal of the approval, to the Central Government through the Commissioner of Income tax/Director of Income tax (Exemp tions) havingjurisdiction .Three copies of the application for renewal of approval should alsobe sent directly tothe Secretary, Department of Scientific and Industrial Research.

[Notification No. 43/2004/F.No. 203/69/2002 -ITA. - II]

SANGEETA GUPTA, Director ( IТА. -П)

नई दिल्ली , 6 फरवरी, 2004

(आयकर)

का. आ. 375.- सामान्य जानकारी के लिए यह अधिसूचित किया जाता है कि केन्द्र सरकार द्वारा अधोलिखित संगठन को उसके नाम के सामने उल्लिखित अवधिके लिए आयकर नियमावली , 1962 के नियम 6 के साथ पठित आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( ii ) के प्रयोजनार्थ " संघ " श्रेणी के अन्तर्गत निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन अनुमोदित किया गया है:-

( i ) अधिसूचित संघ अपने अनुसंधान कार्यकलापों के लिए अलग लेखा बहियों का रख - रखाव करेगी;

( ii ) अधिसूचित संघ प्रत्येक वित्तीय वर्ष के लिए अपनी वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान गति- विधियों की वार्षिक रिटर्न प्रत्येक 31 मई को अथवा उससे पहले सचिव, वैज्ञानिक और औद्योगिक अनुसंधान विभाग ' टेक्नोलॉजी भवन' न्यूमहरोली रोड, नई दिल्ली -110016 को प्रस्तुत करेगी;

(iii ) अधिसूचित संघ केन्द्र सरकार की तरफ से नामोद्दिष्ट निर्धारण अधिकारी को आयकर की विवरणी प्रस्तुत करने के अतिरिक्त अपने लखा परीक्षित वार्षिक लेखों की एक प्रति तथा अपने अनुसंधान कार्यकलापों, जिसके लिए आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अन्तर्गत छूट प्रदान की गई थी, के संबंध में आय एवं व्यय खाते की लेखा परीक्षा की भी एक प्रति संगठन पर अधिकार क्षेत्र वाले ( क ) आयकर महानिदशेक ( छूट ) 10 मिडिलटन रो , पांचवा तल, कलकत्ता -700071 , ( ख ) सचिव, वैज्ञानिक एवं औद्योगिक अनुसंधान विभाग तथा (ग ) आयकर आयुक्त/आयकर निदेशक ( छूट ) को प्रत्येक वर्ष 31 अक्तूबर को अर्थवा उससे पहले प्रस्तुत करेगी।

क्रम सं. अनुमोदित संगठन का नाम

अवधिजिसके लिए अधिसूचना प्रभावी है

1-4-2002 से 31-3-2005

1. मैसर्स शेरे इंडिया, घानापुर विलेज , मेडचल मंडल आर. आर. जिला-501401 आन्ध्र प्रदेश

टिप्पणी:-( i ) उपर्युक्त शर्त ( i ) " संघ " के रूप में श्रेणीबद्ध संगठन पर लागू नहीं होगी ।

( ii ) अधिसूचित संघ को सलाह दी जाती है कि वह अनुमोदन के नवीकरण के लिए तीन प्रतियों में और पहले ही अधिकार क्षेत्र वाले आयकर आयुक्त/आयकर निदेशक ( छूट ) के माध्यम से केन्द्र सरकार को आवेदन करें । अनुमोदन के नवीकरण के लिए आवेदन पत्र की तीन प्रतियां सचिव , वैज्ञानिक और औद्योगिक अनुसंधान विभाग को सीधे भेजी जाएंगी ।

[अधिसूचना सं. 44/2004/फा.सं . 203/112/2003-आयकर नि.- II ]

संगीता गुप्ता, निदेशक ( आयकर नि.- II ) New Delhi , the 6th February, 2004

(INCOME TAX)

S. Q: 375. It is hereby notified for general information that the organisation mentioned below has been approved by the Central Government for the period mentioned below, for the purpose of clause ( ii ) of Sub- section( 1 ) of Section 35 ofthe [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] 686

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

Income tax act , 1961 read with Rule 6 of the Income tax Rules , 1962 under the category " Association " subject to the following conditions:-

(i) The organization shall maintain separate books of accounts for its research activities;

(ii) The notified Association shall furnish the Annual Return of its scientific research activities to the Secretary, Department of Scientific & Industrial Research, 'Technology Bhawan ' , New Mehrauli Road , New Delhi - 110016 for every financial year on or before 31st May of each year;

(iii) The notified Association shall submit , on behalf of the Central Government , to (a) the Director General of Income tax (Exemptions) , 10 Middleton Row, 5th Floor, Calcutta -700071 , (b ) the Secretary, Department of Scien- tific & Industrial Research, and (c) the Commissioner of Income tax Director of Income tax (Exemptions ) having jurisdiction over the organisation, on or before the 31st October each year , a copy of its audited Annual Accounts and also a copy of audited Income & Expenditure Account in respect of its research activities for which exemption was granted under Sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 35 of Income tax Act, 1961 in addition to the return of income tax to the designated assessing officer.

Period for which notification is effective S.No. Name of the organisation approved

1-4-2002 to 31-3-2005

1. M/ sShare India, Ghanapur Village, Medchal Mandal , R.R. Distt. 501401 A.P.

(i ) Condition ( i ) above will not apply to the organization categorized as " Association " .

Notes :

(ii) The notified Association is advised to apply in triplicates as well in advance for renewal of the approval , to the Central Government through the Commissioner of Income tax/Director of Income tax (Exemptions ) having jurisdiction. Three copies of the application for renewal of approval shall also be sent directly to the Secre- tary, Department of Scientific and Industrial Research.

[Notification No.44/2004 /F.No . 203/ 112/2003 -ITA. - II]

SANGEETA GUPTA, Director (ITA. - II)

नई दिल्ली, 6 फरवरी, 2004

(आयकर )

का. आ. 376.- सामान्य जानकारी के लिए यह अधिसूचित किया जाता है कि केन्द्र सरकार द्वारा अधोलिखित संगठन को उसके नाम के सामने उल्लिखित अवधि के लिए आयकर नियमावली , 1962 के नियम 6 के साथ पठित आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खंड (II) के प्रयोजनार्थ " संस्था " श्रेणी के अन्तर्गत निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन अनुमोदित किया गया है: -

(ii ) अधिसूचित संस्थाप्रत्येक वित्तीय वर्ष के लिए अपनी वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान गति- विधियों की वार्षिक रिटर्न प्रत्येक 31 मई को अथवा उससे पहले सचिव, वैज्ञानिक और औद्योगिक अनुसंधान विभाग ' टेक्नोलॉजी भवन ' न्यूमहरोली रोड, नई दिल्ली-110016 को प्रस्तुत करेगी;

(iii ) अधिसूचित संस्था केन्द्र सरकार की तरफ से नामोद्दिष्ट निर्धारण अधिकारी को आयकर की विवरणी प्रस्तुत करने के अतिरिक्त अपने लेखा परीक्षित वार्षिक लेखों की एक प्रति तथा अपने अनुसंधान कार्यकलापों, जिसके लिए आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अन्तर्गत छूट प्रदान की गई थी, के संबंध में आय एवं व्यय खाते की लेखा परीक्षा की भी एक प्रति संगठन पर अधिकार क्षेत्र वाले ( क ) आयकर महानिदेशक ( छूट ) 10 मिडिलटन रो, पांचवां तल, कलकत्ता -700071 , ( ख ) सचिव , वैज्ञानिक एवं औद्योगिक अनुसंधान विभाग तथा ( ग ) आयकर आयुक्त/आयकर निदेशक ( छूट ) को प्रत्येक वर्ष 31 अक्तूबर को अथवा उससे पहले प्रस्तुत करेगी ।

अवधिजिसके लिए अधिसूचना प्रभावी है क्रम सं. अनुमोदित संगठन का नाम

13-8-2002 से 31-3-2004 1. मैसर्स भारतीय संस्कृति दर्शन ट्रस्ट, विश्व शान्ति धाम , बाघोली, टेल- हवेली, जिला-पुणे-412207

टिप्पणी:- अधिसूचित संस्था को सलाह दी जाती है कि वह अनुमोदन के नवीकरण के लिए तीन प्रतियों में और पहले ही अधिकार क्षेत्र वाले आयकर आयुक्त/आयकर निदेशक ( छूट ) के माध्यम से केन्द्र सरकार को आवेदन करें । अनुमोदन के नवीकरण के लिए आवेदन पत्र की तीन प्रतियां सचिव , वैज्ञानिक और औद्योगिक अनुसंधान विभाग को सीधे भेजी जाएंगी ।

[अधिसूचना सं. 45/2004/फा.सं. 203/ 115 /2003- आयकर नि.- II ]

संगीता गुप्ता, निदेशक ( आयकर नि.- II ) [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

687

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

New Delhi , the 6th February, 2004

(INCOME TAX)

S. O. 376. It is hereby notified for general information that the organisation mentioned below has been approved by the Central Government for the period mentioned below, for the purpose of clause (ii ) of Sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 35 ofthe Income tax Act, 1961 read with Rule 6 of the Income tax Rules , 1962 under the category " Institution " subject to the following conditions :-

(i) The notified Institution shall maintain separate books of accounts for its research activities;

( ii) The notified Institution shall furnish the Annual Return of its scientific research activities to the Secretary, Department of Scientific & Industrial Research, "Technology Bhawan ' , New Mehrauli Road, New Delhi - 110016 for every financial year on or before 31st May of each year;

(iii) The notified Institution shall submit, on behalf ofthe Central Government, to ( a) the Director General of Income tax (Exemptions ), 10 Middleton Row, 5th Floor, Calcutta-700071 , (b) the Secretary, Department of Scientific & Industrial Research , and (c) the Commissioner of Income tax/Director of Income tax (Exemptions ) havingjuris- diction over the organisation, on or before the 31st October each year, a copy of its audited Annual Accounts and also a copy of audited Income & Expenditure account in respect of its research activities for which exemp- tion was granted under Sub- Section ( 1 ) of section 35 of Income tax act, 1961 in addition to the return of Income tax to the designated assessing officer.

Period for which notification is effective S.No. Name of the organisation approved

13-8-2002 to31-3-2004

M/s. Bhartiya Sanskriti Darshan Trust, Vishwa Shanti Dham , Wagholi , Tal -Haveli , Dist. -Pune-412207

Note: The notified Institution is advised to apply in triplicates as well in advance for futher renewal of the approval , to the Central Government through the Commissioner of Income tax/Director of Income tax (Exemptions ) having jurisdiction. Three copies of the application for renewal of approval should also be sent directly to the Secretary, Department of Scientific and Industrial Research .

[Notification No. 45/2004 /F.No . 203 / 115 / 2003 -ІТА.II]

SANGEETA GUPTA, Director (ITA.II )

नई दिल्ली, 6 फरवरी , 2004

(आयकर)

का. आ. 377.-सामान्य जानकारी के लिए यह अधिसूचित किया जाता है कि केन्द्र सरकार द्वारा अधोलिखित संगठन को उसके नाम के सामने उल्लिखित अवधिके लिए आयकर नियमावली , 1962 के नियम 6 के साथ पठित आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( ii ) के प्रयोजनार्थ " संस्था " श्रेणी के अन्तर्गत निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन अनुमोदित किया गया है :-

( i ) अधिसूचित संस्था अपने अनुसंधान कार्यकलापों के लिए अलग लेखा बहियों का रख - रखाव करेगी;

( ii ) अधिसूचित संस्थाप्रत्येक वित्तीय वर्ष के लिए अपनी वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान गति - विधियों की वार्षिक रिटर्न प्रत्येक 31 मई को अथवा उससे पहले सचिव, वैज्ञानिक और औद्योगिक अनुसंधान विभाग ' टेक्नोलॉजी भवन ' न्यूमहरोली रोड, नई दिल्ली-110016 को प्रस्तुत करेगी;

( iii ) अधिसूचित संघ केन्द्र सरकार की तरफ से नामोद्दिष्ट निर्धारण अधिकारी को आयकर की विवरणी प्रस्तुत करने के अतिरिक्त अपने लेखा परीक्षित वार्षिक लेखों की एक प्रति तथा अपने अनुसंधान कार्यकलापों , जिसके लिए आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अन्तर्गत छूट प्रदान की गई थी, के संबंध में आय एवं व्यय खाते की लेखा परीक्षा की भी एक प्रति संगठन पर अधिकार क्षेत्र वाले (क) आयकर महानिदशेक ( छूट ) 10 मिडिलटन रो, पांचवां तल, कलकत्ता-700071 , ( ख ) सचिव, वैज्ञानिक एवं औद्योगिक अनुसंधान विभाग तथा ( ग ) आयकर आयुक्त/आयकर निदेशक ( छूट ) को प्रत्येक वर्ष 31 अक्तूबर को अथवा उससे पहले प्रस्तुत करेगी । क्रम सं. अनुमोदित संगठन का नाम

अवधिजिसके लिए अधिसूचना प्रभावी है 1.

1-4-2003 से 31-3-2006 मैसर्स मुल्जी भाई पटेल सोसायटी फॉर रिसर्च इन नेफ्रो- यूरोलोजी, डा. विरेन्द्र देसाई रोड, नाडियाड-387001 ( गुजरात )

टिप्पणी: -(i ) उपर्युक्त शर्त ( i ) " संघ " के रूप में श्रेणीबद्ध संगठन पर लागू नहीं होगी ।

( ii ) अधिसूचित संस्था को सलाह दी जाती है कि वह अनुमोदन के नवीकरण के लिए तीन प्रतियों में और पहले ही अधिकार क्षेत्र वाले आयकर आयुक्त/आयकर निदेशक ( छूट ) के माध्यम से केन्द्र सरकार को आवेदन करें । अनुमोदन के नवीकरण केलिए आवेदन पत्र की तीन प्रतियां सचिव, वैज्ञानिक और औद्योगिक अनुसंधान विभाग को सीधे भेजी जाएंगी ।

[अधिसूचना सं.46/2004/फा.सं. 203/118/2003- आयकर नि.- II ]

संगीता गुप्ता, निदेशक ( आयकर नि.- II ) 688

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004 /PHALGUNA 2. 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) |

New Delhi , the 6th February, 2004

(INCOME TAX)

S. O. 377.--It is hereby notified for general information that the organisation mentioned below has been approved by the Central Government for the period mentioned below, for the purpose ofclause ( ii ) of Sub- section ( I ) of Section 35 of the Income tax Act, 1961 read with Rule 6 of the Income tax Rules , 1962 under the category " Institution" subject to the following conditions:--

(i) The organization shall maintain separate bocks of accounts for its research activities;

(ii) The notified Institution shall furnish the Annual Return of its scientific research activities to the Secretary, Department of Scientific & Industrial Research, ' Technology Bhawan ' , New Mehrauli Road, New Delhi - 110016 for every financial year on or before 31st May of each year;

(iii) The notified Association shall submit, on behalf of the Central Government, to (a ) the Director General of Income tax (Exemptions) , 10 Middleton Row, 5th Floor, Calcutta- 700071 , (b) the Secretary, Department of Scien- tific & Industrial Research, and (c) the Commissioner of Income tax/Director of Income tax (Exemptions ) having jurisdiction over the organisation, on or before the 31st October each year, a copy of its audited Annual Accounts and also a copy of audited Income & Expenditure account in respect of its research activities for which exemption was granted under Sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 35 of Income tax Act , 1961 in addition to the return of income tax to the designated assessing officer.

Period for which notification is effective S.No. Name of the organisation approved

1-4-2003 to 31-3-2006 M/s. Muljibhai Patel Society for Research in Nephro -Urology, Dr. VirendraDesai road, Nadiad -387001 (Gujarat )

Notes: (i ) Condition ( i) said not apply to the organization categorized as " Association " .

( ii) the notified Institution is advised to apply in triplicates as well in advance for further reneval of the approval. to the Central Government through the Commissioner of Income tax/Director of Income tax ( Exemptions ) having jurisdiction .Three copies of the application for renewal of approval should also be sent directly to the Secretary, Department of Scientific and Industrial Research.

[Notification No. 46/2004/F.No . 203/ 118/2003 -ΙΤA.II ]

SANGEETA GUPTA, Director ( ITA.II)

आदेश

नई दिल्ली , 10 फरवरी , 2004

का. आ. 378.- चूंकि संयुक्त सचिव, भारत सरकार को स्वापक औषधों तथा मनः प्रभावी पदार्थ अधिनियम , 1988 के गैर कानूनी अवैध व्यापार की रोकथाम के लिए खंड 3 के उपखंड ( 1 ) के अधीन विशेष रूप से शक्ति प्राप्त है , अतः उक्त उप खंड के अंतर्गत फा. सं. 801/ 16/2003/ पिट एन डी पी एस दिनांक 30-10-2003 के अधीन आदेश जारी के संदर्भ में निदेश है कि श्री राम नारायण पुत्र श्री भीरू लाल धाकड़ को स्वापक औषधों की पूर्ति में शामिल होने के फलस्वरूप नजरबंद तथा केन्द्रीय कारागार, इन्दौर ( म.प्र. ) में हिरासत में रखा जाए ।

2. चूंकि केन्द्रीय सरकार यह समझती है कि उपर्युक्त व्यक्ति फरार होने वाला है या अपने आपको छिपाता है जिसके कारण आदेश का पालन नहींहोना है ।

3. अतः अब उक्त अधिनियम के खंड 8 के उप खंड ( 1 ) उपवाक्य ( ख ) द्वारा निश्चित की गई शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त व्यक्ति को सरकारी गजट में इस आदेश के प्रकाशन के 10 दिनों के भीतर

श्री एल.पी. ओझा,

निरीक्षक/जांच अधिकारी,

अधीक्षक ( निवारण ) का कार्यालय,

केन्द्रीय स्वापक ब्यूरो , निवारण तथा आसूचना प्रकोष्ठ,

महालवाड़ा, रतलाम ( म. प्र. )

केसामने प्रस्तुत करें ।

[फा. सं. 801/16/2003/पिट एन डी पी एस ]

बी. आर. शर्मा अवर सचिव 689 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

ORDER

New Delhi , the 10th February, 2004

S. O. 378. Whereas the Joint Secretary to the Government of India , specially empowered under Sub-section ( 1 ) of Section3 ofthe Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act , 1988 issued order F. No. 801 / 16/2003 -PITNDPS dated 30-10-2003 under the said Sub - section directing that Shri Ram Narayan S/o Shri Bheerulal DhakadR/o Village Riyawan, Tehsil , Jaroa, Distt . Ratlam ( M.P. ) be detained and kept in custody in the Central Jail. Indore with a view to preventing him from engaging in supply of Narcotic Drugs:

2. Whereas the Central Government has reason to believe that the aforesaid person has absconded or is concealing himself so that the order cannot be executed;

3. Now, therefore , in exercise of powers conferred by clause (b) of Sub -section ( 1 ) of Section 8 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby directs the aforesaid person to appear before Shri L.P. Ojha, Inspector/Investigating Officer. Office of the Superintendent (Preventive), Central Bureau of Narcotics , Preventive & Intelligence Cell , Mahalwada, Ratlam (M.P. ) within 10 days ofthe publication ofthis order in the official Gazette.

[F. No. 801/16/2003 PIT NDPS ]

B. R. SHARMA, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली , 10 फरवरी , 2004

का. आ. 379.- भारतीय स्टेट बैंक अधिनियम, 1955 ( 1955 का 23 ) की धारा 21 क के साथ पठित धारा 21 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ग ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक से परामर्श करने के पश्चात्, निम्नलिखित व्यक्तियों को इस अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के पूर्वोत्तर स्थानीय बोर्ड में सदस्य के रूप में नामित करती है:-

व्यवसाय

पता

नाम

क्रम सं

प्रथम तल, 229 , जोर बाग , नई दिल्ली

सुश्री जोथनपरी हराशेल

शोधकर्ता वं परामर्शदाता, जनजातीय विकास सनदीलेखाकार

श्रीसंजय कुमार दास

संजय कुमार दास एंड कं. ,

चार्टर्ड एकाउंटेंट्स, जसवन्त रोड,

पानबाजार, गुवाहाटी-781001

[फा. सं. 8/2/2003- बी.ओ .1( 7) ]

रमेश चन्द, अवर सचिव

NewDelhi , the 10th February, 2004

S.O. 379. Inexercise of the powers conferred by clause (c ) of Sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 21 , read with Section 21 A ofthe StateBank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1955 ) . the Central Government , in consultation with the Reserve Bank of India. hereby nominate the following persons to be a member of the North Eastern Local Board of the State Bank of India for a period of three years from the date of notification:--

Name

Address

Occupation

Sr. No.

1. Ms.Zothanpari Hrahsel IstFloor, 229, Jor Bagh, NewDelhi

Research Scholar and Consultant inTribal Development

Chartered Accountant 2. Shri Sanjoy KumarDas Sanjoy K. Das & Company.

Chartered Accountants , Jashwanta Road.

Panbazar, Guwahati - 781001

[F. No. 8/2/2003 -Β.Ο.Ι (7) ] RAMESH CHAND . Under Secy. 440G1/04-2 691)

[PART 11-SEC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2. 1925

नई दिल्ली 10 फरवरी , 2004

का.आ. 380.- भारतीय स्टेट बैंक अधिनियम , 1955 ( 1955 का 23 ) की धारा 21 क के साथ पठित धारा 21 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( ग) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय स्किर्व बैंक से परामर्श करने के पश्चात्, श्री जितेन परमानन्ददास मोदी . उद्यमी, 111 - ए, पैराडाइस अमार्टमेंट्स , नेषियन सी रोड, मुम्बई-400006 को इस अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अषधि के लिए भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के मुम्बई स्थानीय बोर्ड में सदस्य के रूप में नामित करती है ।

[सं. एफ-8 /2/2003- बीओ-1 (6 ) ]

रमेश चन्द, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 10th February, 2004. Jonus têm đi hát S.O. 380. In exercise of the powers conferredby clause (c) of Sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 21 read with Section 21A ofthe State Bank of India Act 1955 ( 23 of 1955) , the Central Government, in consultation with the Reserve Bank ofludia . hereby nominate Shri Jiten Parmananddas Mody, Industrialist. A Paradise Apartments, Nepeansen Road, Mumbai- 400006 to be a member of the Mumbai Local Board of the State Bank of India for a period of three years from the ckite of notification.

[F. No. 8 /2/2003 -B.O.1 ( 6 ) ] RAMESH CHAND , Under Secy

नई दिल्ली. 10 फरवरी, 2004

का.आ. 381.- भारतीय स्टेट बैंक अधिनियम, 1955 ( 1955 का 23 ) की धारा 21 क के साथ पठित धारा 21 की उपधारा ( 1) के खण्ड (ग ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय रिज़र्व बैंक से परामर्श करने के पश्चात्, निम्नलिखित व्यक्तियों को इस अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के लखनऊ स्थानीय बोर्ड में सदस्य के रूप में नामित करती है

पता

व्यवसाय

क्रम सं. नाम

प्रोफेसर

1. डा. प्रभाकर झा

डीजी/जी-2 . तुलसीदास कालोनी. बीएचयू,

वाराणसी-221005

प्रोफेसर, कृषिशास्त्र 2. डा. अरविन्द कुमार

जी.बी. पंत कृषि एवं प्रौद्योगिकी विश्वविद्यालय, पंतनगर-263195 ( उत्तर 5 ( उत्तर प्रदेश )

प्रधानाचार्य, ला माटींनियर 3 सुश्री फरीदाअब्राहम

प्रधानाचार्य, ला मार्टीनियर सर्ल्स कालेज.

गर्ल्स कालेज, लखनऊ

मोती महल मार्ग, लखनऊ-226001

[ सं. एफ 8 /2/ 2003- बीओ-1 ( 5 ) ]

रमेश चन्द, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 10th February, 2004

S.O. 381. In exercise of the powers conferred by clanseclanse ( c )( c ) ofof Sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 21 , read with Section 21A of the State Bank of India Act . 1955 (23 of 1955 ) , the CentralGovernment in consultation with the Reserve Bank of India. hereby nominate the following persons tobe a member of the Lucknow Local Board of Nie State Bank of Audi: lovea period of three years front the date of notification

Address

Occupettion

Name

Sr. No.

Professor

1 Dr. Prabhakara Jha

DG/G - 2 . Tulsidas Colony, BHU , Varanasi - 221005.

anat Prolessor Agronomy 2 Dr. Arvind Kuniar

G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology , Pantnagar- 263195 (CUP )

3. Ms. Farida Abrahan

Pribental, M. Girls College . Lucknow.

Principal , LaM. Girls College , Moti Mahal Mary Lucknow - 226001

[ F. No. 8/2/ 2003-3.0.1 ( 5 ) |

RAMESH CHAND , Under Secy .

891 भारत का राजपत्र फेरवरी 21 , 2002 / कल्गुिन 2, 19

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, १४ फरवरी 2004

काभा:382. भारतीय स्टेट बैंक अधिनियम, 1955 ( 1955) का(23 ) की धारा २ त कर के साथ प्रक्ति प्राप द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय रिज़र्व बैंक से परामर्श करने के पश्चात असुमेरे लाल गोबस सेवानिवृत प्रोफेसर, लोक प्रशासन, मकान नं, 185 , सैक्टर 16, चण्डीगढ़ -160015 को इस अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन देव की अवधि के लिए भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के चण्डीगढ़ स्थानीय बोर्ड में सदस्य के रूप में नामित करती है

оновні моς πωπ2το του

8/292003- बीओ -1 ( 4 ) ] रमेश चन्द, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 10th February 2004

S.O. 382. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (c) of Sub - section(1 ) of Section 21 , read with Section 21.A ofthe State Bank of India Act , 1955 (23 of 1955 ) , the Central Government, in consultation with Reserve Bank of India , hereby nominates Dr. Sumer LafGoel, Retired Professor of Public Administration , H. No. 185 , Sector - 16 , Chandigarh - 160015 to be a member of the Chandigarh Local Board of the State Bank of India for a period of three years from the date of notification,

JF. No. 8 /2/2003-B.O.1 (4)] RAMESH CHAND Under Secr

नई दिल्ली, 10 फरवरी , 2004

का.आ. 383.- भारतीय स्टेट बैंक अधिनियम , 1955 ( 1955 का 23 ) की धारा 21 क के साथ पठित धारी 21 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के'खण्ड (ग ). द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार , भारतीय रिज़र्व बैंक से परामर्श करने के पश्चात् श्री सहित संचाल दास, अधिवक्ता और कर सलाहकार, नुआपारा डाकखाना भवानीपटना, जनपदः कालाहांडी 766001- (उड़ीस्स ) को इस अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के भुबनेश्वर स्थानीय बोर्ड में सदस्य के रूप में नामित करती है ।

[सं. एफ 8/2/2003- बीओ-1 ( 3 ) ]

रमेश चन्द, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 10th February, 2004

S.O. 383, In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (c ) of Sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 21. read with Section 21A ofthe State Bank of India Act , 1955 (23 of 1955 ) , the Central Government , in consultation with the Reserve Bank of India . hereby nominates Shri Shakti Ranjan Das , Advocate and Tax Consultant. At Nuapara PO Bhawanipatna Dist : Kalahandi- 766001 (Orissa ) to be a member of the Bhutianeshwar Local Board of the State Bank of India for a period of tired years from the date of notification oft to moi loi baimabosita off to root dot molto a stanon

понтоніна to orsh of той 2100 ( somit to bonag IF. No. 8/2/2003 -B.Ο. 1 (3 ) ]

abbA

RAMESH CHAND, Under Secy.

Drobauid to omsoth

16.42

नई दिल्ली 10 फरवरी 2004

केखण्ड ( ग ) क्रा,आ. 384 भारतीय स्टेट बैंक अधिनियम , 1955, ( 1955 का २३ ) की, धारा 21 क के साथ पठित धारा 21 की उपधारा (1 ) के स द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक से परामर्श करने के पश्चात्, निम्नलिखित व्यक्तियों को इस अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के भोपाल स्थानीय बोर्ड में सदस्य के रूप में नामित करती है :-

व्यवसाय

पता

क्रम स. नाम

लघुस्तरीय उद्यमी 1. श्री शलभ शर्मा

प्लाट नं. 7, नुपुर कुंज , ई-3 ,

अरेरा कालोनी, भोपाल-16.

सनदी लेखाकार

के फूल चौक, श्री राजकुमार अग्रवाल आर, कुमार अग्रवाल एंड के गोडबोले भवन,भवन, प्रथम तल, अंजलि होटल কসকে সামনে রে dro

के निकट, रायपुर ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) 492001

[सं. एफ 8/ 2/2003- बीओ-1 ( 2 ) ]

रमेशं चन्द, अवर सचिव 692

[PART II SBC. 3(ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

New Delhi , the 10th February, 2004

S.O. 384. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (c) of Sub -section ( 1 ) of Section 21 , read with Section 21A ofthe State Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1955) , the Central Government , in consultation with the Reserve Bank of India, hereby nominate the following persons to be a member of the Bhopal Local Board ofthe State Bank of India for a period of three years from the date of notification :-

Sr. No.

Name

Address

Occupation 1. Shri Shalabh Sharma

Owner of Small Scale Industry

PlotNo. 7, Nupur Kunj , E-3 , Arera Colony,

Bhopal-16

2. Shri Raj Kumar Agarwal

Chartered Accountant

R. Kumar Agarwal & Co. , Phool Chowk, GodboleBuilding, 1st Floor, NearAnjali Hotel, Raipur (C.G)-492001 .

[F. No. 8/2/2003 -Β.Ο. 1 (2) ]

RAMESH CHAND, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 10 फरवरी , 2004

का.आ. 385.- भारतीय स्टेट बैंक अधिनियम, 1955 ( 1955 का 23 ) की धारा 21 क के साथ पठित धारा 21 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ग) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक से परामर्श करने के पश्चात्, निम्नलिखित व्यक्तियों को इस अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के अहमदाबाद स्थानीय बोर्ड में सदस्य के रूप में नामित करती है:-

क्रम सं.

नाम

पता

व्यवसाय

सनदीलेखाकार

1. श्री संजय दलसुखभाई शाह " इशवस्यम ", स्टैंडर्ड चार्टर्ड बैंक की गली में, उमाशंकर जोशी रोड, अहमदाबाद-380006

प्रबंधन परामर्शदाता 2. श्री एस. पदमनाभन

पदमनाशील बंग्ला, 30 , विश्रामबाग सोसायटी, सेनापति बापत रोड, पुणे -411016

[सं. एफ 8/2/2003- बीओ -1 ( 1 ) ]

रमेश चन्द, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 10th February, 2004

S.O. 385. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (c) of Sub -section ( 1 ) of Section 21 , read with Section 21A ofthe State Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1955) , the Central Government , in consultation with the Reserve Bank of India, hereby nominate the following persons to be a member of the Ahmedabad Local Board of the State Bank of India for a period of threeyears from the date of notification :-

Name

Sr. No.

Address

Occupation

Chartered Accountant 1. Shri Sanjay Dalsukhbhai Shah

"Ishavasyam" , in the lane of Standard Chartered Bank, Umashankar Joshi Road , Ahmedabad-380 006.

2. Shri S. Padmanabhan

Management Consultant

Padmanasheel Bungalow, 30 , Vishrambagh Society, Senapati BapatRoad, Pune-411016.

[F. No. 8/2/2003 -Β.Ο. Ι ( 1 ) ]

RAMESH CHAND , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 10 फरवरी , 2004

का.आ. 386.- भारतीय स्टेट बैंक अधिनियम, 1955 ( 1955 का 23 ) की धारा 21 क के साथ पठित धारा 21 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ग ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक से परामर्श करने के पश्चात्, श्री बदरूज्जमान खान , अधिवक्ता, आजाद रोड, हजारीबाग डाकखाना, पुलिस स्टेशन व जन्पद हजारीबाग-825301 को इस अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के पटना स्थानीय बोर्ड में सदस्य के रूप में नामित करती है ।

[सं. एफ 8/2/2003- बीओ -1 ( 8 ) ]

रमेश चन्द, अवर सचिव 693 भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21, 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

NewDelhi , the 10th February, 2004

S.O. 386. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (c) of Sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 21 , read with Section 21A ofthe State Bank ofIndia Act, 1955 (23 of 1955 ) , the Central Government, in consultation with the Reserve Bank of India, herebynominates Shri Badruzzaman Khan, Advocate , Azad Road, Hazaribag P.O. P.S. and Distt .Hazaribag -825301 to boa member of the Patna Local Board of the State Bank of India for a period of three years from the date of notification.

[F. No. 8/2/2003 -B.O. -4 (8)]

RAMESH CHAND , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली , 10 फरवरी , 2004

का.आ. 387.- भारतीय स्टेट बैंक अधिनियम, 1955 ( 1955 का 23 ) की धारा 21 क के साथ पठित धारा 21 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ग) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक से परामर्श करने के पश्चात्, निम्मलिखित व्यक्तियों को इस अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के तिरूवनंतपुरम स्थानीय बोर्ड में सदस्य के रूप में नामित करती है :-

पता

नाम

क्रम सं.

मुख्य कार्यपालक अधिकारी, 1. श्री राजीव वासुदेवन

टेक्नोपार्क, त्रिवेन्द्रम

5-ए, स्काईलाइन सिंफनी अपार्टमेंट्स,

वाजुधाकौड, त्रिवेन्द्रम -695014

" जकिंथ", कौडियार रोड,

2. श्री के. पी. एस. मेनन

तिरुवनंतपुरम-695003

भारत के भूतपूर्व राजदूत और सेवानिवृत्त विदेश सचिव, भारत सरकार

[सं. एफ 8/2/ 2003- बीओ-1 ( 9 ) ]

- रमेश चन्द, अवर सचिव

NewDelhi, the 10th February, 2004

S.O. 387. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (c) of Sub -section (1 ) of Section 21 , read with Section 21A ofthe State Bank of India Act , 1955 (23 of 1955) , the Central Government, in consultation with the Reserve Bank of India, hereby nominates the following persons to be a member ofthe Thiruvananthapuram Local Board ofthe State Bank of India for aperiod of three years from the date of notification :-

Address

Name

Occupation Sr.No.

CEO,Technopark, 1. Shri Rajiv Vasudevan

Trivandrum.

5-A, Skyline Symphony Apartments , Vazuthacaud, Trivandrum -695014.

FormerAmbassador of 2. Shri K.P.S. Menon

"Jacinth" Kaudiyar Road, Thiruvananthapuram-695003 .

Indiaand retired Foreign Secretaryto Government ofIndia.

[F. No. 8/2/2003 -Β.Ο. -1 (9)]

RAMESH CHAND, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 11 फरवरी, 2004

का.आ. 388.- राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबन्ध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध ) स्कीम, 1980 के खण्ड 3 के उपखण्ड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कंपनी (उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम, 1980 की धारा 9 की उपधारा ( 3 ) के खण्ड ( ग ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्‌द्वारा श्री एस. सी. अग्रवाल , प्रभारी अधिकारी भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक , लखनऊ को तत्काल प्रभाव से एवं अगले आदेश होने तक कुमारी उमा सुब्रमणियम, क्षेत्रीय निदेशक , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक भोपाल के स्थान पर पंजाब एंड सिंध बैंक के निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है ।

[सं. एफ 9/2/2004-बीओ-1 ]

रमेश चन्द, अवर सचिव

NewDelhi , the 11th February, 2004

S.O. 388. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (c) of Sub- section (3 ) of, Section 9 , of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer ofUndertakings ) Act, 1980 , read with sub-clause ( 1 ) ofclause 3. of the Nationalised Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme, 1980, the Central Government , hereby nominates Shri S..C. Agarwal, O- in-Charge, Reserve Bank of India , Lucknow as a Director ofPunjab and Sind Bank with immediate effectand. until further orders vice Kum. Uma Subramaniam, Regional Director, Reserve Bank of India, Bhopal .

[F. No. 9/2/2004-B.O. -I]

RAMESH CHAND , Under Secy.

694

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 21 , 2004 /PHALGUNA 2 , 1925

[PART II-SEC 3 (11) ]

नई दिल्ली, 12 फरवरी , 2004

का.आ. 389.- भारतीय स्टेट बैंक अधिनियम , 1955 ( 1955 का 23 ) की धारा 21 क के साथ पठित धारा 21 की उपक्षात ( 1 ) के खापड ( ग ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक से परामर्श करने के पश्चात् श्री कुलदीप कुमार द्रबू, सनदीलेखाकार, सी-1 /23, कुतुब एंक्लेव, डीएलएफ सिटी-1 , गुड़गांव -122002 ( हरियाणा) की इस अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के नई दिल्ली स्थानीय बोर्ड में सदस्य के रूप में नामित करती है ।

[सं. एफ 8/2/ 2003- बीओ -1 ]

रमेश चन्द, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 12th February, 2004

S.O. 389. In exercise of the powers conferredby clause (c ) of Sub -section ( 1 ) of Section 21 , read with section 21A ofthe State Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1955) , the Central Government , it consultation with Reserve Bank of India, hereby nominates Shri Kuldeep Kumar Drabu Chartered Accountant , C- 1/23 , Qutab Enclave, DLF City- 1 , Gurgaon- 122002 (Harvana ) to be a member of the New Delhi Local Board of the State Bank of India for a period of three years from the date of notification.

[F. No. 8/2/2003 -B.O . I ] RAMESH CHAND, Under Secy

( राजस्व विभए rot

सेन्ट्रल इकॉनामिक इन्टेलीजेन्स ब्यूरो

आदेश

नईदिल्ली, 12 फरवरी , 2004

का.आ. 390.-अतः संयुक्त सचिव, भारत सरकार जिन्हें विदेशी मुद्रा संरक्षण और तस्करी निवारण अधिनियम , 1974 ( 1974 का 52) की धारा 3 को उपधारा ( 1 ) के अन्तर्गत विशेष रूप से शक्ति प्रदान की गई है, ने उक्त उपधारा के अधीन अन्देश फाइल सं. 673/ 28/2003- सी.यू.एस. VIII , दिनांक 30-9-2003 को जारी किया और यह निर्देश दिया कि श्री एम. कार्तिकयन, निवासः फ्लैट सं. ०१ द्वितीय तल, सरयू अपार्टमेन्टस , सं . 15/7, गणपथी गली , रोयापेटा, चेन्नई -600014 को निरुद्ध कर लियालिया जाएजाए औरऔर केन्द्रीयकेन्द्रीय कुत ताकि उसे भविष्य में विदेशी मुद्रा के संवर्धन के प्रतिकूल किसी रीति से कार्य करने से निवास्ति करने की दृष्टि से रोका जा सके।

रहो गया है या स्वयं को छिपा रखा है जिससे यह आदेश 2. अतः केन्द्रीय सरकार के पास यह विश्वास करने का कारण है कि पूर्वोक्त व्यक्ति फरार हो गया है निष्पादित नहीं किया जा सकता ।

3. अतः अब उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 7 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के खरङ्ग ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्ति का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीत सरकार एतद्‌द्वारा पूर्वोक्त व्यक्ति को यह निर्देश देती है कि वह शासकीय राजपत्र में इस आदेश प्रकाशित होते के 7 दिन के भीतर पुलिस आयुक्त, चेन्नई के सम्मुख उपस्थितहो।

[फ्न. सं. 673/25/2003- सी.यू.एसः VIII ] एन. राजागोपालन, अवर सचिव ( कोफेपांसा )

(Department ofRevenue)

CENTRAL ECONOMIC INTELLIGENCE BUREAU

ORDER MASTER ४६ BE.T

New Delhi , the 12th February, 2004

S.O. 390. Whereas the Joint Secretary to the Government of India , specially empowered under Süb - section (1 ) of Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act) 1974 (52 of 1974) issued order F.No. 673/25 / 2003 -Cus . VIII dated 30-9-2003 under the said sub - section directing that Shri M. Karthikeyan , R/ o Flat No. 9, II Floor, Sarayu Apartments , No. 15/7, Ganapathy Street, Royapetta, Chennai -600014 be detained and kept in custody inthe Central Prison , Chennai with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the augmentation of foreign exchange in future.

2. Whereas the Central Government has reasons to believe that the aforesaid person has absconded or is concealing himself so that the order cannot be executed, temit be, mossicing 3.Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) of sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 7 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby directs the aforesaid person to appear before the Commissioner ofPolice Chennai within days of the publication of this order in the Official Gazette

[F. No. 673 /25/2003 -Cus. VIII]

N. RAJAGOPALAN, Under Secy: ( COFEPOSA ) 695ea [ भाग खण्ड (ii)

भारत का राजपत्र फरवरी 21, 2004 ( फाल्न ?, 1901 НОЯТТЕХАΟΤΗΤ 1

नईदिल्ली, 12 फरवरी, 2004

का.आ. 391.-अतः संयुक्त सचिव , भारत सरकार जिन्हें विदेशी मुद्रा संरक्षण और तस्करी निवारण अधिनियम, 1974 ( 1974 का 52 ) की धारा है की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अन्तर्गत विशेष रूप से शक्ति प्रदान की गई है, में उक्त उप - बारी के अधीन आदेश फाइल से. 673 / 06 / 2003 -सी.पू.एस. VIII, दिनांक 15-46-2003 को जारी किया और यह निर्देश दिया कि श्री भूपेन्द्र हरगोविन्द ठक्कर, निवासः कमरी से. ०४, पूर्तल, से. 09, अनियमि को-आपरेंटिव होउशिन सोसाइटी, से. उडे, पुरानों फूल गली, भुलेश्वर रोड, मुम्बई-400002' को निरुद्ध कर लिया जाए और केन्द्रीय कारागार, "मुक्की में अभिरक्षा में रखा जाए ताकि उसे भविष्य में विदेशीमुद्रा के संवर्धन के प्रतिकूल किसी रीति से कार्य करने से निवारित करने की दृष्टि से रोमात्र जा सके । 35,

2. अतः केन्द्रीय सरकार के पास यह विश्वांसः चारने का कारण है कि पूर्वोक्त व्यक्ति फरार हो गया है या स्वयं को छिमा राम्रा से पितो यह आदेश निष्पादित नहीं किया जा सकता ।

3. अतः अब उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 7 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ख ) द्वारा प्रदत्तं शक्ति का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद् द्वारा पूर्वोक्तव्यक्ति को यह निर्देश देती है कि वह शासकीय राजपत्र में इस आदेश के प्रकाशित होने के 7 दिन के भीतर पुलिस आयुक्त, मुम्बई के सम्मुख उपस्थितहो ।

[ फा. सं. 673/06/2003 - सी.यू.एस. VIII ] एन. राजागोपालन, अवर सचिव ( कोफेपोसा )

ORDER

-New Delhi, the 12th February, 2004

.אזאדיקאן S.O. 391. Whereas the Joint Secretary to the Government of India, specially empowered under sub-section ( 1) of Section 3 ofthe Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (52 of 1974) issued order F.No. 673 /06/2003 -Cus. VIII dated 15-10-2003 under the said sub - section directing that Shri Bhupendra Hargovind Thakkar , R/o Room No. 8, Ground Floor, No. 9 , Ambadham Co-operative Housing Society, No. 35, Old Phool Galli, Bhuleshwar Road, Mumbai -400002 be detained and kept in custody in the Central Prison, Mumbai with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the augmentation of foreign exchange in future.

10 2. Whereas the Central Government has reasons to believe that the aforesaid person has absconded or is concealing himself sở that the order cannot be executed.

3.Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b ) of sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 7 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby directs the aforesaid person to appear before the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai within 7 days of the publication of this order in the Official Gazette et un idiot wan

απλσος εών [ No6/73/6/2003-03.VIII]

RAJAGOPALAN, Under Secy (COFEPOSA nobie rodnut lim nato pakonuni sfire burold base adi to zauderman eι αποκτος επένollot olt विदेश मंत्रालय

( सी.पी.वी. प्रभाग )

mondani नई दिल्ली, 6 फरवरी , 2004

का.ओ. 392. राजनयिक कौसली अधिकारी ( शपत एवं शुल्क ) अधिनियम, 1948 ( 1948 का नया की धारा के अंक (क ) के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा भारत का राजदूतावास, बगदाद में श्री अनुराग, सहायक के स्थान पर श्री एक क्रे करीर, निजी सहायक को 6-2-2004 से सहायक कौंसली अधिकारी का कार्य करने हेतु प्राधिकृत करती है ।

[संटी+ 4380/01 /2004 ]

उपेन्द्र सिंह रावत, अवर सचिव ( कौंसुलर )

MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS

(C.P.V. Division)

New Delhi , the 6th February, 2004

S.O. 392. In pursuance of the clause (a ) of the Section 2 of the Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Oaths and fees ) Act, 1948 (4 of 1948 ), the Central Governindiht hereby authorise Shri N.K. Karir, PA in the Embassy of India, Baghdad to perform the duties ofAssistant Consular Officer vice Shri Anurag with effect from 6-2-2004.

[No. T-4330/01/2004]

RUS RAWAT, Under Secy.(Cons.) 696

THE GAZETTEOF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21, 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

[PART II Sac. 3(ii) ]

सूचनाऔर प्रसारण मंत्रालय

नईदिल्ली, 28 जनवरी , 2004

का.आ. 393.- चलचित्र ( प्रमाणन ) नियम, 1983 के नियम 3 के साथ पठित चलचित्र अधिनियम, 1952 ( 1952 का 37 ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए और केन्द्रीय फिल्म प्रमाणन बोर्ड के सदस्यों को नियुक्ति से संबंधित पूर्व अधिसूचनाओं के अधिक्रमण में केन्द्रीय सरकार निम्नलिखित व्यक्तियों को अगले आदेशों तक तत्काल प्रभाव से उक्त बोर्ड के सदस्यों के रूप में नियुक्त करती है:-

1. श्री महेन्द्र मोहन

2. श्रीमती मृणाल पांडे

3. श्री जगबन्धु मिश्रा

4. श्री एस.वी. शेखर

5. श्री टी आर जवाहर

6. श्री एल. सुरेश

7. श्री राम कुमार

8 . श्री एस रामनुजम

9. श्री दोलेन्द्र प्रसाद

10. श्री चुक्कापल्ली सुरेश

11. लेफ्टिनेंट जनरल ( सेवानिवृत्त) एम.ए. जाकी 12. श्री श्रीनाथ

13. श्रीमती विजयलक्ष्मी विजय कुमार 14. श्री अशिम मित्रा

15. श्री संजीव गोयनका

16. श्री प्रकाश नारायण सिंह

17. श्री.शांतनु गोगोई

18. श्री राजदत्त मयालू

19. श्री शेखर सुमन

20. सुश्री डॉलीसोही

21. श्रीमती पूनम सिन्हा

22. श्रीमती नीता अम्बानी

23. श्री बेबी अम्पत

24. श्री पट्टानाक्काडु पुरुषोत्तमन

[फा. सं. 809/12/2003-एफ ( सी) ] अंजुलिचिब दुग्गल, संयुक्त सचिव

MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING

New Delhi , the 28th January, 2004

S.O. 393. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 (37 of 1952) read with rule 3 of the Cinematograph ( Certification) Rules , 1983 and in supersession of the earlier Notifications- relating to appointment of members of the Central Board of Film Certification, the Central Government is pleased to appoint the following persons as members of the said Board with immediate effect until further orders :-

1. Shri Mahendra Mohan

2. Smt. Mrinal pandey

3. Shri Jagabandhu Mishra

4. Shri S. Ve . Sekhar

5. Shri T.R. Jawahar

6. Shri L. Suresh

7. Shri Ram Kumar

8. Shri S. Ramanujam

9. Shri Dolendra prasad

10. Shri Chukkapalli Suresh

11. Lt. Gen. (Retd.) M.A. Zaki

12. Shri Srinath

13. Smt. Vijayalaxmi Vijaya Kumar 14. Shri Ashim Mitra

1 15. Shri SanjivGoenka

16. Shri Prakash Narayan Singh

17. Shri Shantanu Gogoi

18. Shri Rajdutt Mayalu

19. Shri Shekhar Suman

20. Ms. Dolly Sohi

21. Smt . Poonam Sinha

22. Smt . Neeta Ambani

23. Shri BabyAmpatt

24. Shri Pattanakkadu Puroshothaman

[F. No. 809/ 12/2003 -F(C) ]

A.C. DUGGAL , Jt. Secy.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

697

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

संचार और सूचना प्रौद्योगिकी मंत्रालय

(दूरसंचारविभाग)

नई दिल्ली , 13 फरवरी , 2004

का. आ. 394.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम 1976 ( यथा संशोधित, 1987 ) के नियम 10( 4 ) के अनुसरण में संचार और सूचना प्रौद्योगिकी मंत्रालय, दूरसंचार विभाग के प्रशासनिक नियंत्रणाधीन निम्नलिखित कार्यालयों को, जिसमें 80 प्रतिशत से अधिक कर्मचारियों ने हिंदी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, एत‌द्वारा अधिसूचित करती है ।

मुख्य महाप्रबंधक दूरसंचार, भारत संचार निगम लिमिटेड, कर्नाटक परिमण्डल, बेंगलूर -560-008

1. केन्द्रीय तार घर, हुबली

2. मंडल अभियंता, प्रतिष्ठापन, हुबली

3. मंडल अभियंता, ओएससी, हुबली

4. मंडल अभियंता, बाह्य, हुबली

5. उपमंडल अभियंता , टैक्स, हुबली

6. उपमंडल अभियंता, इंडोर, हुबली

7. उपमंडल अभियंता, टेलीग्राफ्स, हुबली

8. उपमंडल अभियंता, गोकुलरोड, हुबली

9. उपमंडल अभियंता, अरविंद नगर, हुबली

10. उपमंडल अभियंता, नरगुंद, हुबली

11. उपमंडल अभियंता, कलघटगी , हुबली

12. मंडल अभियंता, फोन्स, धारवाड

13. मंडल अभियंता, ग्रामीण, गदग

14. उपमंडल अधि. , फोन्स, गदग

15. मंडल अभियंता, ग्रामीण, हावेरी

16. विभागीय तारघर, हावेरी

17. उपमंडल अभियंता, हिरेकेरुर

18. उपमंडल अभियंता, राणेबेन्नूर

19. उपमंडल अधि. , फोन्स, राणेबेन्नूर

20. उपमंडल अधि. , टेली, राणेबेन्नूर

21. मंडल अभियंता, कारवार

22. मंडल अभियंता, सिरसी

23. उपमंडल अधि. , जोइडा

24. उपमंडल अधि. , तार कुमटा

25. उपमंडल अधि. , तार, होन्नावार

440 G1/04-3

26. मंडल अभियंता, कुमटा

27. उपमंडल अधिकारी, तार, कारवार

28. उपमंडल अभियंता, फोन्स, कुमटा

29. उपमंडल अभियंता, फोन्स, कारवार

[सं. ई. - 11016/1/2002-रा.भा.]

हरीश चन्द्र जयाल, संयुक्त सचिव MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (Department of Telecommunications) New Delhi , the 13th February, 2004 S. O. 394. In pursuance of rule 10(4 ) ofthe Offi- cial Language (Use for official purposes of the Union), Rules, 1976 (as amended- 1987) , the Central Government hereby notifies the following Offices under the adminis- trative control ofMinistry of Communications and Infor- mation Technology, Department of Telecommunications where more than 80% ofstaff have acquired working knowl- edgeofHindi.

ChiefGeneral Manager, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Lim- ited, Karnataka Circle, Bangalore-560008.

1. Central Telegraph Office ,Hubli

2. Divisional Engineer, Establishment, Hubli 3. Divisional Engineer , OSC, Hubli

4. Divisional Engineer, Outer, Hubli

5. Sub Divisional Engineer , Tax, Hubli

6. Sub Divisional Engineer, Indoor, Hubli 7. Sub Divisional Engineer, Telegraphs, Hubli 8. Sub Divisional Engineer, Gokul Road, Hubli 9. Sub Divisional Engineer, Arvind Nagar, Hubli 10. Sub Divisional Engineer, Nargund,Hubli 11. Sub Divisional Engineer, Calghatagi , Hubli 12. Divisional Engineer, Phones, Dharwar 13. Divisional Engineer, Village, Gadag

14. Sub Divisional Officer , Phones , Gadag 15. Divisional Officer , Village, Haveri

16. Departmental Telegraph Office , Haveri 17. Sub Divisional Engineer, Hirekeroor

18. Sub Divisional Engineer, Ranebenoor 19. Sub Divisional Officer, Phones , Ranebenoor 20. Sub Divisional Officer , Tele , Ranebenoor 21 . Divisional Engineer, Karwar 698

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 21, 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

[PART II - SEC. 3 (ii ) ] 22. Divisional Engineer. Seersi

1 2 3

23. Sub Divisional Officer, Joidha

24. Sub Divisional Officer. Telegram , Kumta

1. श्री पवन कुमार जैन 57, थाउगल बाजार, इम्फाल,

केंद्रीय सरकार द्वारा अधिनियम के अनुच्छेद 4 ( 3 ) ( जे ) के तहत नामित

25. Sub Divisional Officer, Telegram , Honawar

मणिपुर-795 001

26. Divisional Engineer, Kumta

27. Sub Divisional Officer , Karwar

28. Sub Divisional Engineer, Phones , Kumta

2. श्री एस.पी. राधाकृष्णा, 7/171 , नेहरू बाजार,. मदनपल्ली-517 325

29. Sub Divisional Engineer. Phones , Karwar

[No. El 1016/1/2002 (O.L. ) ] HARISH CHANDRA JAYAL, Jt . Secy.

3. श्री टी.के. शिवा बीरप्पा , 7/2, पहली मुख्य सड़ गंगानगर, हेब्बल बिन्नी मिल के पीछे, बेंगलूर-560 032

नागर विमानन मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली , 6 फरवरी , 2004

4. श्री अशोक शर्मा, गांव-जयरामपुर, पोस्ट- धर्मपुर रत्ती, थाना-बीहपुर, जिला- भागलपुर , ( बिहार )

[फा. सं. 25012/56/99 -रेशम ] किरण धींगरा , संयुक्त सचिव

MINISTRY OF TEXTILES

का. आ. 395.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम 1976 के नियम 10 के उपनियम (4)के अनुसरण में , नागर विमानन मंत्रालय के अधीनवर्ती कार्यालय भारतीय विमानपत्तन प्राधिकरण के वरिष्ठ प्रबंधक ( एटीसी ) का कार्यालय , राजकोट हवाई अड्‌डा को , जिसके 80 प्रतिशत से अधिक कर्मचारी - वृन्द ने हिंदी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, अधिसूचित करतीहै ।

New Delhi , the 10th February, 2004 [सं. ई. - 11011 /01 /2000- रा.भा. ] चन्द्रभान नारनौली, निदेशक ( राजभाषा )

S.O. 396. In exercise of powers conferred by Sub- section ( 3 ) (j ) of Section 4 of the Central Silk Board Act. 1948- ( 61 of 1948 ), the Central Government hereby nomi- nates the following persons to serve as members of the Central Silk Board for a period of three years with effect from the date of this notification subject to the provisions of the said Act .

MINISTRY OF CIVIL AVIATION New Delhi , the 6th February, 2004

1. Shri Pawan Kumar Jain, 57, Thaugal Bazar, Imphal,

Nominated by the Central Government under Section 4(3)(j ) ofthe Act

Manipur -795001

2. Shri S. P. Radhakrishna , 7/171 , Nehru Bazar , Madanapalle - 517 325

S.O. 395. In pursuance of sub rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Offical Languages ( Use for the official purposes of the Union) Rules , 1976, the Central Government, hereby noti- fics office ofthe Sr. Manager ( ATC) Rajkot Airport ofAir- portAuthority of India, the public sector undertaking of Ministry of Civil Aviation , whereof, more than 80% staff have acquired the working knowledge ofHindi .

[No. E. - 11011 /01/2000 (O.L. ) ]

C.B. NARNAULI , Director ( OL)

3. Shri T.K. Shiva Beerappa , Ganganagar 7/2 , 1stMain Road , Behind Hebbal Binny Mill, Bangalore - 560032

वस्त्र मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 10 फरवरी , 2004

4. Shri Ashok Sharma, Vill. JairamPur, Post: Dharampur, Ratti , PS -Bihpur, Distt . Bhagalpur (Bihar) .

का. आ. 396.-केन्द्रीय सरकार केन्द्रीय रेशम बोर्ड अधिनियम , 1948 ( 1948 का 61 ) की धारा 4 की उपधारा ( 3 ) ( जे ) के द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, एतद्वारा निम्नलिखित व्यक्तियों को इस अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए केन्द्रीय रेशम बोर्ड के सदस्य के रूप में कार्य करने के लिए उक्त अधिनियम के उपबंधों के अध्यधीन नामांकित करती है ।

[F. No. 25012/ 56/99 -Silk] KIRAN DHINGRA , Jt . Secy.

699 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

उपभोक्तामामले , खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय

(उपभोक्ता मामले विभाग )

भारतीय मानकब्यूरो

नई दिल्ली, 09 फरवरी , 2004

का. आ. 397. भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं:-

अनुसूची

स्थापित तिथि स्थापित भारतीय मानक(कों ) की संख्या वर्ष

क्रम संख्या

और शीर्षक

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

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

31-08-2003

आईएस 397 ( भाग 2 ) : 1985

1. आईएस 397 ( भाग 2) : 2003 उत्पादन के दौरान गुणता नियंत्रण की प्रणाली भाग 2 गुणों और दोषों की गणना के लिये नियंत्रण सारणी

(तीसरा पुनरीक्षण)

31-08-2003

आईएस 397 ( भाग 3 ) : 1980

2. आईएस 397 ( भाग 3 ) : 2003 उत्पादन के दौरान गुणता नियंत्रण की प्रणाली भाग 2 गुणों चरों के लिये नियंत्रण सारणी (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

31-08-2003

आईएस 745 : 1990

3. आईएस 745: 2003 वस्त्रादि- हथकरघे की पलंग की सूती चादरें-विशिष्टि (तीसरा पुनरीक्षण)

31-07-2003

आईएस 951 : 1987

4. आईएस 951 : 2003 हवाई पट्टी पर विमान गिरने पर बचाव की कार्यात्मक अपेक्षाएं (चौथा पुनरीक्षण)

31-08-2003

आईएस 1003 ( भाग 1 ) : 1991

5. आईएस 1003 ( भाग 1 ) : 2003 लकड़ी के दिल्लेदार तथा कांचित शटर-विशिष्टि (चौथा पुनरीक्षण)

31-08-2003

आईएस 1248 ( भाग 2 ) : 1983

6. आईएस 1248 ( भाग 2) : 2003 प्रत्यक्ष क्रियाशील सूचक अनुरूप वैद्युत मापन उपकरण तथा उनके सहायक उपकरण भाग 2 एममीटरों तथा वोल्ट मीटरों की विशेष अपेक्षाएं

(तीसरा पुनरीक्षण)

31-08-2003

आईएस 1248 ( भाग 4 ) : 1983

7. आईएस 1248 ( भाग 4) : 2003 प्रत्यक्ष क्रियाशील सूचक अनुरूप वैद्युत मापन उपकरण तथा उनके सहायक उपकरण भाग 4 आवृति मीटरों की विशेष अपेक्षाएं (तीसरा पुनरीक्षण) 700

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

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

(2)

(3)

(4)

आईएस 1248 ( भाग 6) : 1983

31-08-2003 8. आईएस 1248 ( भाग 6 ): 2003 प्रत्यक्ष क्रियाशील सूचक अनुरूप वैद्युत मापन उपकरण तथा उनके सहायक उपकरण भाग 2 औम मीटरों ( इमपीडेन्स मीटरों ) और कन्डक्टैन्स मीटरों की विशेष अपेक्षाएं (तीसरा पुनरीक्षण)

31-08-2003

आईएस 1248 ( भाग 7) : 1983

9. आईएस 1248 ( भाग 7 ) : 2003 प्रत्यक्ष क्रियाशील सूचक अनुरूप वैद्युत मापन उपकरण तथा उनके सहायक उपकरण भाग 2 मल्टी-फंक्शन उपकरणों की विशेष अपेक्षाएं (तीसरा पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 1923 : 1973

31-08-2003

10. आईएस 1923 : 2003 वस्त्रादि-विद्युतरोधी प्रयोजनों के लिए सूती किनारेदार फीता विशिष्टि (तीसरा पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 1984 ( भाग 1 ) : 1971

31-08-2003

11. आईएस 1984 ( भाग 1 ) : 2003 इंजेक्शन द्रव्यों हेतु शीशियां उपसाधन भाग 1 कांच नली से बनी इंजेक्शन शीशियां ( दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

31-08-2003

आईएस 1984 (भाग 2 ) : 1971

12. आईएस 1984 ( भाग 2 ) : 2003 इंजेक्शन द्रव्यों हेतु शीशियां उपसाधन भाग 2 सांचे में ढले कांच से बनी इंजेक्शन शीशियां ( दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 2285: 1991

31-08-2003

13. आईएस 2285 : 2003 इंजीनियरी माप विज्ञान- मापने का उपस्कर ढलवां लोहे की सतह प्लेटें - विशिष्टि (तीसरा पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 2417 : 1977

31-08-2003

14. आईएस 2417 : 2003 पराश्रव्य अविनाशी परीक्षण में प्रयुक्त शब्दावलियां (दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 2645 : 1975

31-07-2003

15. आईएस 2645: 2003 सीमेंट मोर्टार एवं कंक्रीट के लिए एकीकृत जल-सह यौगिक- विशिष्टि (दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

31-07-2003

आईएस 3398: 1965

16. आईएस 3398 : 2003 पचौली का तेल- विशिष्टि (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 3976 : 1995

31-08-2003

17. आईएस 3976 : 2003 खनिकों के लिए रबड़ कैनवस के संरक्षी' बूट-विशिष्टि (पांचवां पुनरीक्षण) 701 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/ फाल्गुन 2, 1925

(2)

(1)

(3)

(4)

31-08-2003

आईएस 4113 ( भाग 1 ) : 1986

18.. आईएस 4113 ( भाग 1 ): 2003 लोरिंगोस्कोपिक फिटिंग भाग पारम्परिक हुक-ऑन टाइप हैंडल- ब्लेडफिटिंग (दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

31-08-2003

आईएस 4113 ( भाग 2 ) : 1986

19. आईएस 4113 ( भाग 2 ) : 2003 लोरिंगोस्कोपिक फिटिंग भाग 2 बिजली के छोटे बल्ब पारम्परिक ब्लेडोंके लिए पेंच चूड़ियां और सॉकेट (दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

31-07-2003

आईएस 4964 : 1991

20. आईएस 4964: 2003 वस्त्रादि-सादी (सिंगल जर्सी) बुनी (निटेड) सूती बनियान-विशिष्टि (चौथा पुनरीक्षण)

31-10-2003

आईएस 5334: 1981

21. आईएस 5334: 2003 वेल्ड के चुम्बकीय कण द्वारा दोष निकालने हेतु रीतिसंहिता (दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

31-08-2003

आईएस 6234: 1986

22. आईएस 6234: 2003 सुवाह्य अग्नि शामक पानी वाले ( भंडारित दाब ) विशिष्टि (दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

31-07-2003

आईएस 6765 ( भाग 1 ) : 1972

23. आईएस 6765 ( भाग 1 ): 2003 पावर चालित औद्योगिक ट्रक-रेटित क्षमता के अभिनाम के मानदंड तथा क्षमता भाग 1 पावर हाई लिफ्ट ट्रक (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

31-07-2003

आईएस 6876: 1972

24. आईएस 6876: 2003 काँटा उत्थापक ट्रकों की तकनीकी विशेषताएं तथा फार्क आर्म का परीक्षण (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

31-08-2003

आईएस 7327 : 1991

25. आईएस 7327: 2003 इंजीनियरी माप विज्ञान- मापने का उपस्कर- ग्रेनाइट सतह प्लेटें-विशिष्टि (दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

31-08-2003

आईएस 7409 ( भाग 1 ) : 1985

26. आईएस 7409 ( भाग 1 ) : 2003 संवेदनाहारी एवं श्वसन उपस्कर - शंक्वाकर संयोजक भाग 1 कोन तथा सॉकेट (तीसरा पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 7525 : 1974

31-07-2003 27. आईएस 7525 : 2003 कांटा उत्थापी ट्रकों के लिए कांटा वाहक और कांटा आर्म के आरोपण आयाम (पहला पुनरीक्षण) 702

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

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

(2)

(3)

(4)

आईएस 7552: 1974

31-08-2003 28. आईएस 7552: 2003 विशेष स्टैकिंग स्थितियों में संचालित आगे झुक मस्तूल के साथ औद्योगिक ट्रक- अतिरिक्त स्थिरता परीक्षण (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 7553 : 1975

30-09-2003 29. आईएस 7553: 2003 पावर युक्त औद्योगिक ट्रकों के नियंत्रण चिन्ह-विशिष्ट (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 7951 : 1974

31-08-2003 30. आईएस 7951: 2003 वस्त्रादि मशीनरी एवं सहायकांग-आवलन के बीम-सलाइवर, रोविंग तथा यार्न के रंजन के लिए बीम

(दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 8310 : 1977

31-08-2003 31. आईएस 8310 : 2003 सूचना और प्रलेखन-अन्तर्राष्ट्रीय मानक पुस्तक संख्यांकन ( आई एस बी एन ) (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 9469 : 1991 .

31-08-2003 32. आईएस 9469 : 2003 वस्त्रादि-सादा ( सिंगल जर्सी ) बुना ( निटेड) सूती कपड़ा-विशिष्टि (दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 10101: 1982

31-08-2003 33. आईएस 10101: 2003 सूचना और प्रलेखन-अन्तर्राष्ट्रीय मानक श्रृंखला संख्या ( आई एस एस एन) (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 10456 : 1983

31-07-2003 34. आईएस 10456: 2003 सिल्वर जिलेटिन टाइप माइक्रोफार्म के घनत्व के लिए-विशिष्टि (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 11646 : 1986

31-08-2003 35. आईएस 11646 ( भाग I ): 2003 नेत्रहीनों के लिए केन-विशिष्टि भाग 1 सख्त , लम्बी और सफेद (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 11986 : 1986

31-08-2003 36. आईएस 11986: 2003 औद्योगिक वस्त्रादि-अपघर्षणों के लिए बैंकिंग का सूती कपड़ा-विशिष्टि (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 12650 : 1997

31-10-2003 37. आईएस 12650 : 2003 वस्त्रादि-- 50 कि.ग्रा. खाद्यान्न पैक करने के लिए पटसन के बोरे-विशिष्टि ( दूसरा पुनरीक्षण ) 703 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2 , 1925

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4) 38.

30-09-2003

आईएस 13302: 1992

आईएस 13302: 2003 उबड़ खाबड़ मैदान के काँटा उत्थापी ट्रक -स्थिरता परीक्षण

(पहला पुनरीक्षण)

30-09-2003

आईएस 13844: 1993

39. आईएस 13844: 2003 फल और सब्जी उत्पाद-अनुमाप्य अम्लता ज्ञात करना (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

आईएस 13845: 1993

30-09-2003 40. आईएस 13845: 2003 फल और सब्जी उत्पाद- पानी में अविलेय अंश ज्ञात करना

(पहला पुनरीक्षण)

31-08-2003

आईएस 13917 : 1994

41. आईएस 13917: 2003 खान में उदवहन के लिए लढ़दार रस्सियाँ -तकनीकी वितरण अपेक्षाएं

(पहला पुनरीक्षण)

31-08-2003

आईएस 14147 ( भाग I ) : 1994

42. आईएस 14147 ( भाग 1) : 2003 पहचान पत्र-रिकार्ड करने की तकनीक भाग । उच्चित्रण

(पहला पुनरीक्षण)

31-07-2003

आईएस 14147 ( भाग 2 ) : 1994

43. आईएस 14147 ( भाग 2 ): 2003 पहचान पत्र-रिकार्ड करने की तकनीक भाग 2 चुम्बकीय पट्टी- अल्प निग्राहिता

(पहला पुनरीक्षण)

30-09-2003 44. आईएस 15027 ( भाग 3 ) : 2003 सूक्ष्म आलेखी शब्दावली भाग 3 फिल्म प्रक्रमण

30-09-2003 45. आईएस 15027 ( भाग 4) : 2003 सूक्ष्म आलेखी शब्दावली भाग 4 सामग्रियाँ एवं पैकेजिंग

31-07-2003 46. आईएस 15279: 2003 चीनी एवं चीनी उत्पाद- परीक्षण विधि

31-08-2003 47. आईएस 15343 : 2003 सोडिक भूमि उद्धार के लिए प्रेसमड-विशिष्टि

31-08-2003 48. आईएस 15344 : 2003 हरी चाय-विशिष्टि

31-07-2003 49. आईएस 15362 : 2003 उत्प्लव घनत्वमापी निर्धारण-संरचनाओं के प्रयोग द्वारा खुले प्रणालों में प्रवाह- मापन- मिश्रण मापन संरचनाएं 704

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004 /PHALGUNA 2, 1925

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

(2)

(3)

(4) 50.

आई एस 14147 ( भाग 2 ): 1994

31-07-2003 आईएस 15363 ( भाग 1 ): 2003 टेरोटेक्नोलॉजी की मार्गदर्शिका भाग 1 टेरोटेक्नोलॉजी की प्रस्तावना

31-08-2003 51. आईएस 15363 ( भाग 2 ) : 2003 टेरोटेक्नोलॉजी की मार्गदर्शिका भाग 2 तकनीकों और अनुप्रयोगों कीप्रस्तावना

31-07-2003 52. आईएस 15364: 2003 स्वचल वाहन- स्पाट बैठने वाले एम 10 × 1 स्पार्क- प्लग तथा उनके सिलिंडर शीर्ष में फिटिंग

31-07-2003 53. आईएस 15365 : 2003 रंग रोगन के लिए एमिनो रेजिन -विशिष्टि

31-08-2003 54. आईएस 15367 ( भाग 1 ) : 2003 बल्क प्रहस्तन उपस्कर-स्टैंकर (रेल आरोपित) भाग 1 सामान्य अपेक्षाएं

31-08-2003 55. आईएस 15367 ( भाग 2 ) : 2003 बल्क प्रहस्तन उपस्कर-स्टैंकर (रेल आरोपित) भाग 2 क्रेता द्वारा देय आंकड़ा पत्र

31-08-2003 56. आईएस 15367 ( भाग 3 ) : 2003 बल्क प्रहस्तन उपस्कर-स्टैंकर (रेल आरोपित) भाग 3 निर्माता/पूर्तिकर्ता द्वारा देय आंकड़ा पत्र

31-08-2003 57. आईएस 15371 ( भाग 1 ) : 2003 ज्यामितीय उत्पाद विशिष्टियाँ (जी.पी.एस. )-वर्कपीस के मापन द्वारा निरीक्षण तथा मापक उपस्कर भाग 1 विशिष्टि अनुसार अनुरूप होने या अनुरूप न होने के निर्णय नियम

31-08-2003 58. आईएस 15372: 2003 गोलाई का मापन-गोलाई के निबन्धन, परिभाषाएँ और प्राचल

31-08-2003 59. आईएस 15373 : 2003 गोलाई से विचलन का मूल्यांकन करने की विधि- अर्धव्यास में विभिन्नता का मापन

31-08-2003 60. आईएस 15374: 2003 गोलाई से विचलन का मूल्यांकन करने कीविधि- दो व तीन बिन्दु विधि द्वारा मापन 705 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

31-08-2003

आईएस 14147 ( भाग 2 ) : 1994

61. आईएस 15375 : 2003. ज्यामितीय उत्पाद विशिष्टियाँ (जी.पी.एस. )- सतही बनावट: रूपरेखा विधि-फेज सुधार फिल्टर के माप विज्ञान लक्षण

30-09-2003 62. आईएस 15376 ( भाग 1 ): 2003 आस्टॉमी संग्रहण बैग भाग 1 शब्दावली

30-09-2003 63. आईएस 15376 ( भाग 2) : 2003 आस्टॉमी संग्रहण बैग भाग 2 अपेक्षाएं एवं परीक्षण पद्धतियाँ

31-07-2003

आईएस 574 : 1996/ आईएसओ 574 : 1979

64. आईएस 15378 : 2003 वस्त्रादि मशीनरी एवं सहायकांग- बेलनाकार नालियाँ-चीज रंजन के लिए छिद्रदार नालियों के आयाम, छूटें तथा अभिनाम

31-08-2003 65. आईएस 15379: 2003 वस्त्रादि मशीनरी एवं सहायकांग- कताई प्रिपरेटरी एवं कताई मशीनरी हेतु स्टील पिन

31-08-2003 66. आईएस 15380: 2003 संचकित, उठे हुए, उच्च घनत्व फाइबर ( एच डी एफ) के दरवाजों के पल्ले- विशिष्टि

31-08-2003 67. आईएस 15381 : 2003 अग्नि शमन हेतु कम्बल-विशिष्टि

30-09-2003

आईएस 324: 1996/ आईएसओ 324: 1978

68. आईएस 15383: 2003 वस्त्रादि मशीनरी एवं सहायकांग- क्रास वाइंडिंग के लिए शंकु-रंजन में अनुप्रस्थआवलन के लिए प्रयोग होने वाले अर्धकोण 420' वाले शंकुओं के आयाम, छूटें तथा अभिनाम

31-08-2003 69. आईएस 15384: 2003 वस्त्रादि मशीनरी एवं सहायकांग- आवलन के लिए बीम- वस्त्र रंजन के लिए बीम

31-08-2003

आईएस 4057 : 1986 और आईएस 11832: 1986

70. आईएस 15385 : 2003 काष्ठकारी औजार- धातु ढाँचे के बैंच रंदे, रंदा कर्तक तथा लोहा तापी

31-08-2003 71. आईएस 15387 : 2003 प्रतिरोधिता स्पॉट वेल्डिंग- मेल इलैक्ट्रोड कैप

31-08-2003 72. आईएस 15388: 2003 सिलिका फ्यूम- विशिष्टि

440 G1/04-4 706

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

आईएस 4057 : 1986 और

30-09-2003

आईएस 11832: 1986

73. आईएस 15389 : 2003 जी ई डी आई-व्यापक इलेक्ट्रॉनिक प्रलेख अन्तर्विनियम

30-09-2003 74. आईएस 15393 ( भाग 1 ) : 2003 मापन पद्धतियों तथा परिणामों की यथार्थता (वास्तविक एवं परिशुद्ध) भाग 1 सामान्य सिद्धांत एवं परिभाषाएँ

30-09-2003 75. आईएस 15393 ( भाग 3 ) : 2003 मापन पद्धतियों तथा परिणामों की यथार्थता ( वास्तविक एवं परिशुद्ध) भाग 3 मानक मापन पद्धति की परिशुद्धता का मध्यवति मापन

30-09-2003 76. आईएस 15393 ( भाग 4) : 2003 मापन पद्धतियों तथा परिणामों की यथार्थता (वास्तविक एवं परिशुद्ध ) भाग 4 मानक मापन पद्धति की वास्तविकता ज्ञात करने की मूल पद्धति

31-08-2003 77. आईएस 15394: 2003 पेट्रोलियम शोधन कारखानों और उर्वरक संयंत्रों में आग से सुरक्षा- रीति संहिता

30-09-2003 78. आईएस 15397 : 2003 सुवाह्य अग्नि शामक ( भंडारित दाब ) यांत्रिक झाग वाले- विशिष्टि

30-09-2003 79. आईएस 15402: 2003 सिरैमिक रेशे के कंबल उष्मारोधनि-विशिष्टि

31-10-2003 80. आईएस 15410: 2003 पैकेजबंद खनिज जल और पैकेजबंद पेय जल की पैकेजबंदी के लिए धारक- विशिष्टि

31-10-2003 81. आईएस 15417 ( भाग 1 ) : 2003 वस्त्रादि मशीनरी और उपसाधन-रीड भाग 1 डबल- स्प्रिंग बॉल्क के साथ धातु रीड- आयाम और अभिनाम

31-10-2003 82. आईएस 15417 ( भाग 2) : 2003 वस्त्रादि मशीनरी और उपसाधन-रीड भाग 2 प्लास्टिक बधित धातु रीड --आयाम और अभिनाम

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

[सं० के० प्र० वि ०/ 13:2 ]

एस० के ० चौधरी, उप महानिदेशक ( मुहर ) 707 भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन, 2, 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड, 3 ( ii) ]

MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs)

BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS

New Delhi , the 9th February, 2004

S.O. 397. In pursuance of clause (b) of sub - rule (1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:

SCHEDULE

Date of Establishment S1. No.

No. & Year of the Indian Standards Established

No. and Year of Indian Standards , if any, Superseded by the New Indian Standard

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

31-08-2003

1. IS 397 (Pt . 2) : 2003-

IS 397 (Pt . 2) : 1985

Methods for statistical quality control during production Part 2 : Control charts for attributes

(Third Revision)

31-08-2003

IS 397 (Pt. 3 ) : 1980

IS 397 (Pt . 3) : 2003-

Methods for statistical quality control during production

Part3 : Special Control charts by variables (First Revision)

31-08-2003

IS 745 : 1990

3. IS 745 : 2003 Textiles -Handloom cotton led sheets specification (Third Revision)

31-07-2003

IS 951 : 1987

IS 951 : 2003 Functional requirements for crash fire tender forair fields

31-08-2003

IS 1003 (Pt. 1 ) : 1991

IS 1003 (Pt. 1 ): 2003

Timber panelled and glazed shutters specification (Fourth Revision)

31-08-2003

IS 1248 (Pt. 2) : 1983

IS 1248 (Pt . 2) : 2003

Direct acting indicating analogue electrical measuring instruments and their accessories

part 2: Special requirements for ammeters and voltmeters (Third revision) [PART II SEC. 3 (ii) ] 708

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2 , 1925

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

31-08-2003

IS 1248(Pt . 4) : 1983

IS 1248(Pt . 4): 2003

Direct acting indicating analogue electrical measuring instruments and their accessories

Part4: Special requirements for frequency meters

31-08-2003

IS 1248 (Pt . 6) : 1983

IS 1248 (Pt . 6) : 2003

Direct acting indicating analogue electrical measuring instruments and their accessories Part6: Special requirements for ohmmeters (impédance meters) and conductance meters (Third Revision)

31-08-2003

IS 1248 (Pt . 7) : 1983

IS 1248 (Pt . 7): 2003-

Direct acting indicating analogue electrical measuring instruments and their accessories Part7: Special requirements for multi - function instruments (Third Revision)

31-08-2003

IS1923 : 1973

IS 1923 : 2003

10.

Textiles- cotton selvedge tapes for electrical insulation purposes- specification (Third Revision)

31-08-2003

IS 1984(Pt . 1) : 1971

11. IS 1984 (Pt. 1) : 2003-

Injection containers for injectables and accessories Part 1: Injection Vials made of glass tubing (Second Revision)

31-08-2003

IS 1984(Pt . 2) : 1971

12. IS 1984 (Pt . 2 ): 2003

Injection containers for injectables and accessories Part 2 : Injection Vials made of moulded glass (Second Revision)

31-08-2003

IS 2285 : 1991

IS 2285 : 2003-

13.

Engineering metrology measuring equipment - cast iron surface plates- specification (Third Revision) 709 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

(3)

(4)

(1)

(2)

31-08-2003

IS 2417 : 1977

IS 2417 : 2003-

14.

Glossary of terms used in untrasonic non- destructive testing (Second Revision)

31-07-2003

IS 2645 : 1975

15. IS 2645 : 2003-

Integral waterproofing compounds for cement mortar and concrete- specification (Second Revision)

31-07-2003

IS 3398: 1965

16. IS 3398 : 2003

Oil ofpatchouli- specification (FirstRevision)

31-08-2003

17.

IS 3976 : 1995

IS 3976 : 2003

Protective rubber canvas boots for miners-specification (Fifth Revision)

31-08-2003

18. IS 4113 (Pt . 1) : 2003-

IS 4113 (Pt. 1) : 1986

Laryngoscopic fittings Part1 : Conventional hook -on type handle-blade fittings (Second Revision)

31-08-2003

19.

IS4113 (Pt. 2) : 1986

IS4113 (Pt . 2) : 2003

Laryngoscopic fittings Part 2: Miniature electric lamps- screw threads and sockets for conventional blades (Second Revision)

31-07-2003

IS4964: 1991

20.

IS4964: 2003 Textiles-vests , cotton, plain (Singlejersey) knitted-specification (Fourth Revision)

31-10-2003

IS 5334 : 1981

21. IS 5334 : 2003-

n Megnetic particle flaw detection of welds-code of practice (Second Revision)

31-08-2003

IS 6234 : 1986

22. IS 6234 : 2003-

Portable fire extinguisher water type (stored pressure ) specification (Second Revision) 710

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

(3)

(1)

(2)

31-07-2003

23.

IS 6765 (Pt . I ) : 1972

IS 6765 : 2003- Powered industrial trucks-parameters for designation of rated capacity and capacity Part 1 : Powered high lift trucks

(First Revision)

31-07-2003

IS 6876 : 1972 .

24. IS 6876 : 2003-

Technical characteristics and testing of fork arms for forklift trucks (First Revision)

31-08-2003

IS7327 : 1991

25. IS 7327 : 2003- Engineering metrology- measuring equipment- granite surface plates- specification (SecondRevision)

31-08-2003

26.

IS 7409 (Pt. 1) : 1985

IS 7409 (Pt . 1 ) : 2003- Anaesthetic and respiratory equipment- conical connectors Part 1: Cones and sockets (Third Revision)

31-07-2003

IS7525 : 1974

27. IS 7525 : 2003- Mounting dimensions for fork carrirs and fork arms for forklift trucks

31-08-2003 .

IS 7552 : 1974

28. IS 7552 : 2003 Industrial trucks operating in special condition of stacking with mast tilted for ward- additional stability test (FirstRevision)

30-09-2003

IS 7553 : 1975

29. IS 7553 : 2003- Control symbols for powered industrial trucks-specification (FirstRevision)

31-08-2003

IS 7951 : 2003-

IS7951 : 1997

30.

Textile machinery and accessories--beams for windings-beams for dying slivers , rovings and yarns (Second Revision ) 711 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21, 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

(4)

(1)

(2)

(3)

31-08-2003

31..

IS 8310 : 1997

IS 8310 : 2003-

Information and documentation- international standard book numbering ( ISRN)

(FirstRevision)

31-08-2003

32.

IS 9469 : 1991

IS 9469 : 2003-

Textiles fabric, cotton plain ( single jersey) knitted-specification

(Second Revision)

31-08-2003

33. IS 10101 : 2003-

IS 10101 : 1982

Informations and documentation- international standard serial

number ( JSSN)

(FirstRevision)

IS 10456 : 2003-

34.

IS 10456 : 1983

31-07-2003

Density of silver- gelatin type microforms- specification

IS 11646 : 1986

31-08-2003

35. IS 11646 (Pt 1): 2003-

Cane for visually handicapped- specification Part 1: Rigid, long and white

(FirstRevision)

31-08-2003

36.

IS 11986 : 1986

IS 11986 : 2003-

Industrial textiles-cotton backing cloth for abrasives- specification

(FirstRevision)

31-10-2003

IS 12650 : 2003-

IS 12650 : 1997

37.

Textiles-jute bags for packing 50 kg foodgrains-

specification (Second Revision)

30-09-2003

IS 13302 : 1992

38. IS 13302 : 2003-

Rough terrain forklift trucks-stability tests

(FirstRevision)

IS 13844 : 1993

30-09-2003

39. IS 13844: 2003-

Fruit and vegetable products- determination of titratable acidity

(First Revision)

30-09-2003

40. IS 13845 : 2003-

IS 13845 : 1993

Fruitand vegetable products- Determination of water-

insoluble solids (FirstRevision)

31-08-2003

41. IS 13917 : 2003-

IS 13917 : 1994

Stranded wire ropes for mine hoisting-technical delivery

requirements (FirstRevision ) 712

[PART II SEC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

(1)

(4)

(2)

(3)

42.

31-08-2003

IS 14147 (Pt. 1 ): 2003-

IS 14147 (Pt 1 ) : 1994

Identification cards-recording technique Part 1 : Embossing

(FirstRevision)

43.

31-07-2003

IS 14147 (Pt. 2) : 2003-

IS 14147 (Pt 2) : 1994

Identification cards- recording technique Part2: Magnetic stripe-

lowcoercivity (First Revision)

30-09-2003

44. IS 15027 (Pt . 3 ) : 2003-

Micrographics-vocabulary

Part 3 : Film processing

30-09-2003

45. IS 15027 (Pt . 4): 2003-

Micrographics-vocabulary Part 4: Materials and packaging

31-07-2003

46. IS 15279 : 2003-

Sugar and sugar products- methods of test

31-08-2003

47. IS 15343 : 2003-

Pressmud for reclamation of sodic soil-specification

31-08-2003

48. IS 15344 : 2003-

Green tea-specification

31-08-2003

49. IS 15362 : 2003-

Hydrometric determination- flow measurements in open channels using structures- compound gauging structures

31-07-2003

50. IS 15363 (Pt . 1) : 2003-

Guide to terotechnology Part 1 : Introduction to terotechnology

31-08-2003

51. IS 15363 (Pt . 2 ) : 2003-Guide to terotechnology Part 2 : Introduction to techniques and applications

31-07-2003

IS 15364 : 2003-

52.

Automotive vehicles-spark - plug M10 x 1 with flat seating

31-07-2003

53. IS 15365 : 2003-

Amino resins for paints- specification

31-08-2003

54. IS 15367 (Pt. 1 ) : 2003-

Bulk handling equipment- stacker ( rail mounted)

Part 1 : General requirements 713 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

-भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004 /फाल्गुन 2, 1925

(1)

(3)

(2)

(4)

55.

31-08-2003

IS 15367 (Pt. 2): 2003- Bulk handling equipment- stacker (rail mounted) Part2: Data to be furnished by the purchaser

56.

31-08-2003

IS 15367 (Pt. 3) : 2003- Bulk handling equipment- stacker ( rail mounted) Part3 : Data to be furnished by the manufacturer/ supplier

57.

31-08-2003

IS 15371 (Pt. 1) : 2003- Geometrical product specifications (GPS )- Inspection by measurement of workpieces and measurement equipment .

Part1 : Decision rules for providing conformance or non-conformance with specifications

58.

31-08-2003

IS 15372 : 2003- Measurement of roundness- terms , definitions and parameters of roundness

59.

31-08-2003

IS 15373 : 2003- Method for the assessment of deparature from roundness- measurement of variations in radius

31-08-2003

60. IS 15374 : 2003- Method for the assessment of deparature from roundness- measurement by two- and three- pointmethods

31-08-2003

61. IS 15375 : 2003- Geometrical product specifications (GPS)-surface texture: profile method-metrological characteristics ofphase correct filters

62.

31-09-2003

IS 15376 (Pt . 1 ) : 2003-

Ostomy collection bags

Part1: Vocabulary

63.

30-09-2003

IS 15376 (Pt. 2) : 2003- Ostomy collection bags Part 2: Requirements and test methods

440G1/04-5 714

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

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

(1)

(3)

(4)

64. IS 15378 : 2003-

31-07-2003

Textile machinery and accessories-- cylindrical tubes- dimensions , tolerances and designation of perforated tubes for cheese dyeing

65. IS 15379 : 2003-

31-08-2003

Textile machinery and accessories-steel pins for spinning preparatory and spinning machinery

66. IS 15380 : 2003-

31-08-2003

Moulded raised high density fibre (HDF) panel doors- specification

31-08-2003

67. IS 15381 : 2003- Fireblanket-specification

68. IS 15383 : 2003-

30-09-2003

Textile machinery and accessories-cones for cross winding-dimenstions , tolerances and designation ofcones with half angle 4 20 ' for winding for dying purposes

31-08-2003

69. IS 15384 : 2003-

Textile machinery and accessories-beams for winding-dying beams for textile fabrics

31-08-2003

70. IS 15385 : 2003-

Woodworking tooles- metal-bodied branch planes , plane cutters and cap irons

31-08-2003

71 . IS 15387 : 2003-

Resistance spot welding- male electrode caps

31-08-2003

72. S 15388 : 2003-

Silica fume-specification

30-09-2003

73. IS 15389 : 2003-

Gedi-generic electronic document interchange

30-09-2003

74. IS 15393 (Pt. 1 ) : 2003-

Accuracy ( trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results Part 1 : General principles and definitions 715 II- [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2 , 1925

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

75.

30-09-2003

IS 15393 (Pt. 3) : 2003-

Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results Part 3 : Intermediate measures of the precision of a standard measurement method

30-09-2003

76. IS 15393 (Pt. 4) : 2003-

Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and résults

Part4:Basic methods for the determination of the trueness of a standard measurement method

31-08-2003

77.

IS 15394 : 2003- Fire safety in petroleum refineries and fertilizer plants-code of practice

30-09-2003

78. IS 15397 : 2003-

Portable fire extinguisher mechanical foam type (stored pressure)- specification

79. IS 15402 : 2003-

30-09-2003

Ceramic fibre blanket insulation- specification

31-10-2003

80. IS 15410 : 2003-

Containers for packaging ofnatural mineral water and packaged drinking water- specification

31-10-2003

81 . IS 15417 (Pt. 1) : 2003-

Textile machinery and accessories-reeds

Part 1 : Metal reeds with double - spring baulk- dimensions and designation

31-10-2003

82. IS 15417 (Pt. 2) : 2003-

Textile machinery and accessories- reeds

Part 2 : Plastic bound metal reeds- dimensions and designation

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

[No. CMD/ 13 :2 ]

S. K. CHAUDHURY, Dy. Director General ( Marks ) 716

[PART II SEC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

कोयला मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 12 फरवरी, 2004

का. आ. 398.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला धारक क्षेत्र (अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20) (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्तअधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 7 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी भारत सरकार के कोयला मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 2196, तारीख 29 जुलाई , 2003 द्वारा , जो जारी भारत के राजपत्र, भाग II, खंड 3 ( ii ) तारीख 2 अगस्त, 2003 में प्रकाशित की गई थी, उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में यथा वर्णित 186.00 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 459.61 एकड़ ( लगभग) माप वाली भूमि में और ऐसी भूमि पर के सभी अधिकारों और यथा वर्णित 15.25 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 37.68 एकड़ ( लगभग ) माप वाली भूमि में खनन अधिकार के अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की सूचना दीथी;

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

है, कि और केन्द्रीय सरकार का, पूर्वोक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् और महाराष्ट्र सरकार से परामर्श करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया (क ) इससे संलग्न अनुसूची ' क ' में वर्णित 186.00 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 459.61 एकड़ ( लगभग ) माप वाली भूमि के सभी अधिकार, और 1

(ख ) इससे संलग्न अनुसूची ' ख ' में वर्णित 15.25 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 37.68 एकड़ ( लगभग ) माप वाली भूमि में खनिजों के खनन, खदान, बोर करने, उनकी खुदाई करने और तलाश करने , उन्हें प्राप्त करने, उन पर कार्य करने और उन्हें ले जाने के अधिकार अर्जित किए जाने चाहिए ।

अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम, 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) की धारा 9 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, यह घोषणा करती है, कि:-

(क) अनुसूची " क " में वर्णित 186.00 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 459.61 एकड़ ( लगभग ) माप वाली भूमि के सभी अधिकार, और (ख ) अनुसूची " ख " में वर्णित 15.25 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 37.68 एकड़ ( लगभग ) माप वाली भूमि में खनिजों के खनन, खदान, बोर करने, उनकी खुदाई करने और तलाश करने , उन्हें प्राप्त करने, उन पर कार्य करने और उन्हें ले जाने के अधिकार अर्जित किए जाते हैं।

इस अधिसूचना के अधीन अपने आने वाले क्षेत्र के रेखांक सं. सी. - 1 ( ई ) III/जेजेएमआर/709-0803 , तारीख 23 अगस्त, 2003 का निरीक्षण कलेक्टर, चन्द्रपुर ( महाराष्ट्र ) के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक, 1 काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता, पिन-700001 के कार्यालय में या वेस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड ( राजस्व अनुभाग ) , कोल ईस्टेट, सिविल लाईन्स, नागपुर-440001 ( महाराष्ट्र ) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकता है ।

अनुसूची' क'

जूना कुनाड़ा ओ/सी खंड़

माजरी क्षेत्र

जिला चंद्रपुर ( महाराष्ट्र )

[रेखांक सं. सी. - 1 (ई ) III/जेजेएमआर/709-0803 , तारीख 23. अगस्त, 2003 ]

सभी अधिकार:

टिप्पणियां

क्षेत्र हेक्टर में

जिला

तहसील

ग्राम का नाम

क्रम सं.

पटवारी सर्किल संख्यांक

भाग

186.00

भद्रावती

चंद्रपुर

कुनाडा

186.00 हेक्टर ( लगभग )

कुल क्षेत्र:-

या

459.61 एकड़ ( लगभग )

ग्राम कुनाड़ा में अर्जित किए गए प्लॉट संख्यांक:

1/1-1 /2-1 /3-1 /4 , 2 से 11 , 12/1-12/2-12/3-12/4 , 13/1 क, 13/1 ख, 13/2, 13/3, 14/1- 14/2- 14/3 , 15 , 16 , 17/1 , 17/2 , 18, 19 , 20/1 , 20/2 , 20/3 , 21 से 28 , 29/1 , 29/2 , 29/3 , 30/1 , 30/2, 30/3 , 31 से48,49/1 , 49/2 , 50/1-50/ 2 , 51/1 , 51/2, 51/3 , 52 से 55, 66/4 , 71 , 72/ 1 क, 72/ 1 ख , 72/ 2 क, 72/ 2ख , 72/3-72/4, 73, 74 भाग, 75/1-75/2, 76/1-76/ 2 भाग, 78 से 82, 83/1 , 83/2, 84, 85 , 717 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21, 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

86/1-86/2-86/3, 87/1- 87/2, 88 से 91 , 92/1 , 92/2, 92/3 , 93/1 , 93/2, 94/1-94/2 , 95, 96, 97/1 , 97/2, 98 से 102 , 103/1- 103/2, 104से 107, 108/1 , 108/2, 109/1 भाग, 109/2 , 114, 115, 132/1-132/2- 132/3 भाग, 232/1 , 232/2, 234/1-234/2, 236, 237, 238/1- 238/2, 239 से 248, 249 भाग, 250 भाग, 251 से 254, 259, 260, 273, 276 से 281 सड़क, पुरानी आबादी, नाला भाग ।

सीमा वर्णन:

क-ख : रेखा, बिन्दु ' क' से आरम्भ होती है और ग्राम कुनाड़ा से होकर जाती है और प्लॉट संख्यांक 55, 54, 53, 52, 51/3 , 51/2 , 51/1 , 50/1, 50/2 , 49/2 , 49/1,48 , 47 ,46 सड़क, प्लॉट संख्याक 45, 38 , 37, 36, 35 , 34, 33, 32, 29/1 , 29/2 , 28, 27, 26 , 25, 24, 23, 22, 21 , 20/2, 20/1 , 13/ 1 ख, 279, 13/15, 10, 9, 1/1 , 1/2, 1/3, 1/4 , 240, 239, 238/1- 238/2, 259 , 260, 236 की बाहरी सीमा के साथ तथा वर्धा नदी के उत्तरी और पूर्वी किनारों के साथ- साथ होती हुई जाती है और बिन्दु' ख ' परमिलती है ।

खग

: रेखा ग्राम कुनाड़ा से होकर जाती है और प्लॉट संख्यांक 236 , 237, 234/1 , 234/2, 232/2 , नाला की बाहरी सीमा के साथ जाती है और बिन्दु ' ग ' पर मिलती है ।

ग-क

: रेखा ग्राम कुनाड़ा से होकर जाती है, नाला पार करती है, फिर प्लॉट संख्याक 249, 250, 132/1 , 132/2 , 132/3 में से होकर जाती है और प्लॉट संख्यांक 109/1 की बाहरी सीमा के साथ फिर प्लॉट संख्यांक 109/1 में से होती हुई जाती है और प्लॉट संख्यांक 102 , 273, 98, 114, 115, 71 की बाहरी सीमा के साथ जाती है, फिर प्लॉट संख्यांक74 ,76/1 , 76/2 में से होकर जाती है और प्लॉट संख्यांक 76/1 , 76/2, सड़क प्लॉट संख्यांक 66/4, 54 , 55 की बाहरी सीमा के साथ जाती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु'क' पर मिलती है।

अनुसूची 'ख'

जूना कुनाड़ाओ/सी खंड

माजरी क्षेत्र

जिला चंद्रपुर ( महाराष्ट्र )

[रेखांक सं. सी. - 1 ( ई) III/जेजेएमआर/709-0803, तारीख 23 अगस्त, 2003 ]

खनन अधिकार:

क्रम सं. ग्राम का नाम

तहसील

क्षेत्र हेक्टर में टिप्पणियां पटवारी सर्किल संख्या

भद्रावती

15.25

भाग

कुनाड़ा

चंद्रपुर

कुल क्षेत्र:- 15.25 हेक्टर (लगभग)

या

37.68 एकड़ ( लगभग)

ग्राम कुनाड़ा में अर्जित किए गएप्लॉट संख्यांक:

186से 188, 193/1 भाग, 193/2, 228 से 231 , 233, 235, 283 , 284, सड़क भाग ।

सीमा वर्णन:

ख- ग

: रेखा, बिन्दु'ख ' से आरम्भ होती है और ग्राम कुनाड़ा से होकर जाती है और प्लॉट संख्यांक 235 , 233 , 284 , 283 की बाहरी सीमाके साथ- साथ जाती है, सड़क पार करती है और फिर प्लॉट संख्यांक 187, 186 की बाहरी सीमा के साथ जाती है और बिन्दु ' ग ' पर मिलती है ।

ग - घ

: रेखा ग्राम कुनाड़ासे होकर जाती है और प्लॉट संख्यांक 186 , 188, 193/2, 193/1 की बाहरी सीमा के साथ - साथ जाती है , प्लॉट संख्यांक 193/1 में से होकर और सड़क की बाहरी सीमा के साथ- साथ जाती है और बिन्दु'घ ' पर मिलती है । घङ

: रेखा ग्राम कुनाड़ा से होकर जाती है, सड़क पार करती है और सड़क की बाहरी सीमा, प्लॉट संख्यांक 283 , 284 , 228 के साथ- साथ जाती है और बिन्दु ' ङ' पर मिलती है ।.

ङ ख

: रेखाग्राम कुनाड़ासे होकर जाती है प्लॉट संख्यांक 228 , 231 , 233, 235 की बाहरी सीमा के साथ- साथ जाती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु' ख ' पर मिलती है ।

[सं. 43015/8/2002- पी. आर. आई.डब्ल्यू. ]

संजय बहादुर, निदेशक 718

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 21, 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii )]

MINISTRY OF COAL

New Delhi , the 12th February, 2004

S.O. 398.-Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal number published in Part- II , Section 3 , Sub -section ( ii ) of the Gazette of India , dated the 2nd August , 2003 vide S.O. 2196 dated the 29th July, 2003, 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 ) the Central Government gave notice of its intention to acquire the land measuring 186.00 hectares ( approximately ) or 459.61 acres ( approximately) and All Rights in or over such land and land measuring 15.25 hectares ( approximately) or 37.68 acres ( approximately) in Mining Rights as described in the Schedule appended to that notification;

Andwhereas 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 ofMaharashtra , is satisfied that :-

(a) the lands meastiring 186.00 hectares (approximately) or 459.61 acres ( approximately) in All Rights described in Schedule "A" appended hereto , and

(b) the rights to mine , quarry, bore , dig and search for, win, work and carry away minerals in the land measuring 15.25 hectares (approximately ) or 37.68 acres ( approximately) in Mining Rights described in Schedule "B " appended hereto, should be acquired;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 9 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development ) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957), the Central Government hereby declares that-

(a) the lands measuring 186.00 hectares (approximately) or 459.61 acres ( approximately) in All Rights described in Schedule " A " ,

(b) the rights to mine , quarry, bore , dig and search for, win, work and carry away minerals in the land measuring 15.25 hectares ( approximately ) or 37.68 acres ( approximately ) in Mining Rights described in Schedule "B " are hereby acquired.

The plan bearing number C- 1 (E ) III/ JJMR/709-0803 , dated the 23rd August, 2003 of the area covered by this notification may be inspected in the office of the Collector, Chandrapur ( Maharashtra) or in the office ofthe Coal Controller , 1, Council House Street , Kolkata (Pin - 700001 ) or in the office of the Western Coal Fields Limited (Revenue Section) , Coal Estate, Civil Lines, Nagpur -440001 (Maharashtra) .

SCHEDULE "А"

Juna Kunada O/C Block, Majri Area

District Chandrapur (Maharashtra)

[Plan No. C- 1 (E) III/ JJMR/709-0803 dated the 23rd August, 2003]

All Rights

District

Remarks

Tahsil

Name of Village Patwari circle number

Area in hectares

Serial number

Part

Bhadrawati

186,00

1 Kunada

Chandrapur

Total area : 186.00 hectares (approximately) or459.61 acres (approximately) Plot numbers acquired in village Kunada:

1/1-1/2-1/3-1/4, 2 to 11 , 12/1-12/2-12/3-12/4, 13/1A, 13/ 1B, 13/2 , 13/3 , 14/1-14/2-14/3 , 15 , 16, 17/1 , 17/2 , 18, 19 , 20/1, 20/2 , 20/3 , 21 to 28, 29/1 , 29/2 , 29/3 30/1 , 30/2, 30/3, 31 to 48, 49/1 , 49/2, 50/1- 50/2 , 51/1 , 51/2 , 51/3, 52 to 55, 66/4 , 71 , 72/1A, 72/18 , 72/2A, 72/ 2B , 72/3-72 /4 , 73 , 74 part, 75 / 1-75/2 , 76/ 1-76/ 2 part, 78 to 82, 83/1 , 83/2 , 84 , 85 , 86/1-86/2-86/3 , 87/1-87/2,88 to 91 , 92/1 , 92/2, 92/3 , 93/1 , 93/2, 94/1-94/2 , 95, 96, 97/1 , 97/2 , 98 to 102, 103/1-103/2 , 104 to 107, 108/1 , 108/2, 109/1 part, 109/2, 114, 115 , 132/ 1-132/2-132/3 part, 232/1 , 232/2, 234/1-234/2, 236, 237 , 238/ 1-238/2 , 239 to 248, 249 part, 250 part, 251 to 254 , 259 , 260 , 273, 276 to 281 , Road, Old Abadi, Nallah Part.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

719

192 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

Boundary description:-

A-B : Line starts from point ' A' and passes through village Kunada and passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 55, 54, 53, 52, 51/3 , 51/2, 51/1 , 50/1-50/2 , 49/2, 49/1 , 48, 47, 46, Road, plot number 45, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 29/1 , 29/2 , 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21 , 20/2 , 20/1 , 13/ 1B, 279, 13/1A, 10, 9, 1/1-1/2 1/3-1/ 4, 240, 239, 238/1-238/2 , 259 , 260, 236 and passes along the Northern and Eastern bank of Wardha River and meets at point 'B' .

B- C : Line passes through village Kunada and passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 236 , 237, 234/ 1 , - 234/2 , 232/2 , Nallah and meets at point ' C' .

C--A : Line passes through village Kunada, crosses nallah, then passes in plot numbers 249,250,132/ 1-132/2-132/3 and passes along the outer boundary of plót number 109/1 then in plot number' 109/1 and passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 102, 273, 98, 114, 115, 71 then in plot numbers 74, 76/1 , 76/2 and passes along the outer boundary of plot number 76/1 , 76/2 , Road, plot numbers 66/4 54, 55 , and meets at starting point ' A' .

SCHEDULE "B "

Juna Kunada O/C Block, Majri Area

District Chandrapur (Maharashtra)

(Plan No. C - 1 (E) III/ JJMR/ 709-0803 dated the 23rd August, 2003)

Mining Rights

Tahsil

District

Remarks NameofVillage

Serial number

Patwari circle number

Area in hectares

Kunada

Bhadrawati

15.25

Part

Chandrapur

Total area: 15.25 hectares ( approximately) or37.68 acres (approximately)

Plot numbers acquired in village Kunada:

186 to 188 , 193/1 part, 193/2 , 228 to 231 , 233 , 235, 283 , 284, RoadPart .

Boundary description:

B - C : Line starts from point ' B' and passes through village Kunada and passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 235 , 233 , 284, 283 , crosses Road then passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 187, 186 and meets at point ' C' .

: Line passes through village Kunada and passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 186, 188, 193/2 , 193/1 , in plot number 193/1 and passes along the outer boundary of Road and meets at point 'D' . C-D

D -E : Line passes through village Kunada, crosses Road, and passes along the outer boundary of Road , plot numbers 283 , 284, 228 and meets at point 'E' .

E -B : Line passes through village Kunada and pases along the outer boundary of plot numbers 228, 231 , 233, 235 and meets at starting point 'B' .

[No. 43015/8/2002/PRIW] SANJAY BAHADUR, Director

नई दिल्ली, 12 फरवरी , 2004

का. आ. 399.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) की धारा 4 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी भारत के राजपत्र, भाग II , खंड 3, उपखंड ( ii ) तारीख 4 जनवरी , 2003 में प्रकाशित भारत सरकार के कोयला मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्यांक का.आ. सं . 11 , तारीख 24 दिसम्बर, 2002 द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट परिक्षेत्र की भूमि में जिसका माप 190.00 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 469.50 एकड़ ( लगभग ) है , कोयले का पूर्वेक्षण करने के अपने आशय की सूचना दी थी,

और केन्द्रीय सरकार का यह समाधान हो गया है, कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित उक्त भूमि के एक भाग में कोयला अभिप्राय है;

720

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 7 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की सूचना देती है : -

(क) इससे संलग्न अनुसूची ' क' और ' का ' में वर्णित 160.21 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 395.88 एकड़ ( लगभग ) माप वाली भूमि में या उन पर के सभी अधिकार,

(ख) इससे संलग्न अनुसूची ' ख ' में वर्णित 8.12 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 20.06 एकड़ ( लगभग ) मीप वाली भूमि में खनिज़ों के खनन, खदान , बोर करने, उनकी खुदाई और तलाश करने , उन्हें प्राप्त करने, उन पर कार्य करने और उन्हें ले जाने के अधिकार । टिप्पण ( 1 ): इस अधिसूचना के अंतर्गत आने वाले क्षेत्र के रेखांक सं. सी. - 1 ( ई ) III/एफआर/708-0703 तारीख 23 जुलाई, 2003 का निरीक्षण कलेक्टर, नागपुर ( महाराष्ट्र ) के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक, 1 , काउंसिल होठस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता-700 001 के कार्यालय में या वेस्टर्न कोलफील्डस् लिमिटेड (राजस्व विभाग ) कोल इस्टेट, सिविल लाईन्स, नागपुर -440001 ( महाराष्ट्र ) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकता है ।

टिप्पण ( 2 ) : उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 8 के उपबंधों की और ध्यान आकृष्ट किया जाता है, जिसमें निम्नलिखित उपबंध है:-

अर्जनके प्रतिआक्षेप

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

स्पष्टीकरण:- इस धारा के अर्थान्तर्गत यह आपत्ति नहीं मानी जाएगी, कि कोई व्यक्ति किसी भूमि में कोयला उत्पादन के लिए स्वयं खनन संक्रियाएं करना चाहता है और ऐसी संक्रियाएं केन्द्रीय सरकार या किसी अन्य व्यक्ति को नहीं करनी चाहिए ।

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

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

टिप्पण ( 3 ): केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला नियंत्रक, 1 , काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता-700 001 को उक्त अधिनियम के अधीन सक्षम प्राधिकारी नियुक्त किया है, जिसे अधिसूचना संख्यांक का .आ. सं. 2519 तारीख 27 मई, 1983 के द्वारा भारत सरकार के राजपत्र भाग 2 , खंड 3 , उपखंड ( ii ) तारीख 11 जून, 1983 को भारत सरकार के राजपत्र भाग 2, खंड 3, उपखंड ( ii ) में प्रकाशित किया गया है ।

अनुसूची "क"

नया गोंड़ेगांव घाटरोहना विस्तार खंड

नागपुर क्षेत्र

जिला नागपुर ( महाराष्ट्र )

(रेखांक सं. सी. - 1 (ई ) III /एफआर/708-0703, तारीख 23 जुलाई, 2003 )

सभी अधिकार :

टिप्पणी

क्षेत्र हेक्टर में

जिला

तहसील

ग्राम का नाम

क्रम सं.

पटवारी सर्किल संख्या

भाग

62.83

पारसिवनी

घाटरोहना

नागपुर

भाग

13.42

पारसिवनी

नागपुर

2 जूनी-कामठी

76.25 हेक्टर ( लगभग )

कुल क्षेत्र:-

या

188.41 एकड़ (लगभग) 721 भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

ग्रामघाटरोहना मेंअर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लॉट संख्यांक:

53 , 54/1-54/2 , 142/ए, 143/1-143/2-143/3- 143/4, 145 , 147/ 1 ए-147/1 बी-147/1 सी- 147/2ए-147/2 बी-147/3ए- 147/3 बी-147/4 भाग , 148/1 ए- 1- 148/1 ए-2-148/ 1 ए- 3- 148/1 बी- 148/1 बी-1-148/2-148/3 भाग, 149/1-149/2-149/3-149/4- 149/5, 150/1 - ए- 150/1-बी- 150/2-ए-150/2- बी, 151/1-151/2-151/3-151/4-151/5-151/6, 154/1- ए-154/1-बी- 154/2ए-1- 154/2ए-2-154/3बी, 155, 156 ( नाला ) भाग , 157/1 - ए- 157/1- बी- 157/1 - सी-157/1-डी- 157/2 भाग, 162/1ए-162/1 बी- 162/2 , 163/1-163/2-163/3-163/4-ए- 163/4-बी-163/5- ए- 163/5- बी- 163/5-सी

ग्रामजूनी कामठी में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लॉट संख्यांक:

1/1-1 /1 ए- 1-1/ 1 ए-2- 1/2-ए- 1/2-बी-1/3-1/4-1/5 भाग, 2/ए1-2/ए2-2/ए3 , 6 भाग ।

सीमा वर्णन:

क- ख

: रेखा, बिन्दु ' क ' से आरम्भ होती है और ग्राम जूनी कामठी से होकर गुजरती है और प्लॉट संख्यांक 2/ए1-22/ए2-2/ए3 की बाह्य सीमा के साथ - साथ जाती है तथा बिन्दु ' ख ' पर मिलती है ।

ख - ग : रेखा ग्राम जूनी कामठी से होकर जाती है तथा प्लॉट संख्यांक 2/ए1 - 2/22-2/ए३ , 1/1-1/1 ए-1-1/1 ए- 2- 1/2- ए- 1 /2- बी-1/3-1/4-1/5 की बाह्य सीमा के साथ - साथ जाती है तथा प्लॉट संख्यांक 6 में से होकर बाती है और ग्राम जूनी-कामठी और ग्राम धारा की सम्मिलित ग्राम पर बिन्दु ' ग ' पर मिलती है ।

ग - घ : रेखा ग्राम घाटरोहना के प्लॉट संख्या 157/1 ए- 157/ 1 बी 157/1 सी 157/1 डी- 157/2 की बाह्य सीमा के साथ- साथ होकर जाती है प्लॉट संख्यांक 156 नाला से होकर पार करती है और प्लॉट संख्यांक 155, 154/1-ए- 154/1-बी- 154/2ए- 1- 154/2ए-2-154/3- बी, 151/1-151/2-151/3-151/4-151/5-151/6, 143/1-143/2- 143/3-143/4, 162/1ए- 162/1 थी- 162/2 , 163/1-163/2-163/3-163/4-ए- 163/4- बी- 163/5-ए-163/5- बी-163/5 - सी की बाह्य सीमा के साथ-साथ होकर जाती है और बिन्दु ' घ ' पर मिलती है ।

घङच : रेखा ग्राम घाटरोहना के प्लॉट संख्यांक163/1-163/2-163/3-163/4- ए- 163/4- बी- 163/5-ए- 163/5- बी- 163/5- सी, 143/1-143/2-143/3-143/4, 142/ए, 145 की बाह्य सीमा के साथ- साथ होते हुए प्लॉट संख्यांक से होते हुए जाती है 147/1 ए-147/1 बी-147/1 सी- 147/2 ए- 147/2 बी- 147/3ए- 147/3 बी-147/4 में से होकर गुजरती है तथा प्लॉट संख्यांक 54/1-54/2, 53 की बाह्य सीमा के साथ साथ जाती है और बिन्दु ' च ' पर मिलती है ।

च - छ

: रेखा कन्हान नदी के ग्राम घाटरोहना के पूर्वी तट के किनारे के साथ - साथ जाती है और बिन्दु ' छ ' पर मिलती है । छ- ज - झ : रेखा ग्राम घाटरोहना के प्लॉट संख्यांक 54/1-54/2 के बाह्य सीमा के साथ - साथ जाती है और प्लॉट संख्यांक 148/1 ए-1- 148/1 ए- 2-148/1 ए-3- 148/ 1 बी पार करती है और प्लॉट संख्यांक 157/ 1 - ए-157/1-बी-157/1-सी.- 157/1 - ड़ी- 157/2में से गुजरती हुई ग्राम जूनी - कामठी से होते हुए प्लॉट संख्यांक 1/1-1 /1 ए-1-1/ 1 ए- 2-1/2- ए- 1/2- बी- 1/3- 1/4-1 /5 में से होकर जाती है और बिन्दु ' झ ' पर मिलती है ।

झ ञ क : रेखा ग्रामजूनी कामठीके प्लॉट संख्यांक 2/ए1-2/ए2-2/ए3 के बाह्य सीमा के साथ - साथ जाती है और कन्हान नदी के पूर्वी तंट से होती हुई आरंभिक बिन्दु ' क' पर मिलती है।

अनुसूची " क1 "

नया गोंड़ेगांव घाटरोहना विस्तार खंड

नागपुर क्षेत्र

जिला नागपुर ( महाराष्ट्र)

(रेखांक सं. सी. - 1 ( ई ) III/ एफआर/708-0703 , तारीख 23 जुलाई, 2003)

सभी अधिकार:

टिप्पणी

क्षेत्र हेक्टर में

तहसील

क्रम सं.. ग्राम का नाम

पटवारी सर्किल संख्या

भाग

27.23

पारसिवनी

1. घाटरोहना

नागपुर

भाग

8.63

पारसिवनी

नागपुर

जूनी-कामठी

48.10

कामठी

विना

नागपुर

कुल क्षेत्र: - 83.96 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 207.46 एकड़ ( लगभग)

440 G1/04-6 722

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 21 , 2004 /PHALGUNA 2, 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] ग्राम घटरोहना में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लॉट संख्यांक:

नदी भाग

ग्राम जूनी-कामठी में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लॉट संख्यांक:

नदी भाग

ग्राम बिना में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लॉट संख्यांक:

40, 41 , 42, 44ए-44 बी , 45, 46,47 , 48, 49, नदी भाग

सीमा वर्णन:

कट: रेखा, बिन्दु ' क' से आरम्भ होती है और ग्राम जूनी - कामठी से होकर कन्हान नदी को करती हुई ग्राम बिना से गुजरती है तथा कन्हान नदी को पार करती हुई बिन्दु ' ट ' पर मिलती है।

ਟ - ਠ : रेखा ग्राम-बिना से होकर गुजरती है और कन्हान नदी के पश्चिम किनारे के साथ होकर रास्ते के तथा प्लॉट संख्यांक 49, 48, 42, 47, 46, 45, 44ए-44 बी की बाह्य सीमा के साथ होकर कन्हान नदी के पश्चिम किनारे के साथ प्लॉट संख्यांक 41 , 40 की बाह्य सीमा के साथ गुजरती हुई बिन्दु ' ठ ' पर मिलती है ।

ठ - च : रेखा ग्राम-बिना से होकर कन्हान नदी को पार करती है और ग्राम घाटरोहना से गुजरते हुए कान्हन नदी को पार करती है तथा बिन्दु ' च' पर मिलती है ।

च-छ- ज-क: रेखा कन्हान नदी के ग्राम घाटरोहना और जूनी कामठी के पूर्वी किनारे के साथ- साथ होकर गुजरती है तथा आरंभिक बिन्दु ' क ' पर मिलती है ।

अनुसूची"ख"

नया गोंड़ेगांव घाटरोहना विस्तार खंड,

नागपुरक्षेत्र

जिला नागपुर ( महाराष्ट्र )

(रेखांक सं. सी. - 1 ( ई ) III /एफआर/708-0703 , तारीख 23 जुलाई, 2003)

खनन अधिकार :

ग्राम का नाम

क्रम सं.

तहसील

जिला

क्षेत्र हेक्टर में टिप्पणी पटवारी सर्किल संख्या

1. घाटरोहना

पारसिवनी

नागपुर

2. जूनी-कामठी

पारसिवनी

3.38 4.74

भाग भाग

नागपुर

कुल क्षेत्र: - 8.12 हेक्टर ( लगभग )

या

20.06 एकड़ ( लगभग )

कुलजोड़ : अनुसूची ' क' + ' का ' सभी अधिकार

76.25 + 83.96 160.21 हेक्टर (लगभग)

या 395.88 एकड़ ( लगभग) अनुसूची ' ख' = खनन अधिकार = 8.12हेक्टर ( लगभग)

या 20.06 एकड़ ( लगभग)

ग्राम घटरोहना में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लॉट संख्यांक :

148/1 ए- 1-148/1 ए-2-148/1 ए-3- 148/1 बी- 148/ 1 बी-1-148/2- 148/3 भाग , 156 ( नाला ) भाग, 157 /1- ए- 157/1-बी- 157/1-सी- 157/1- डी- 157/2 भाग । [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

723 भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

ग्रामजूनी कामठी में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लॉट संख्यांक:

1/ 1- 1 /1 ए- 1- 1 / 1 ए-2- 1/ 2- ए- 1/2-बी 1/3- 1/4 1/5 भाग , 2/बी।

सीमा वर्णन:

छ-ज-झ : रेखा बिन्दु छ- से आरम्भ होती हैऔर ग्राम घाटरोहना के प्लॉट संख्यांक 148/1 ए-1-148/ 1 ए-2-148/ 1 ए- 3- 148/1 बी- 148/1बी-1-148/2- 148/3 में से होकर गुजरती है तथा प्लॉट संख्यांक 156 नाला से पार करती है और प्लॉट संख्यांक 157/1- ए- 157/1 - बी- 157/1 सी- 157/1-डी- 157/2 से होते हुए ग्राम जूनी कामठी के प्लॉट संख्यांक 1 / 1- 1 / 1 ए- 1- 1/1 ए-2- 1/2- ए- 1/2- बी- 1/3- 1/4 1/5 में से जाती है तथा बिन्दु ' झ' पर मिलती है ।

ज्ञ-अ- छ : रेखा ग्राम जूनी कामठी से होकर प्लॉट संख्यांक 2 /ए 1 2 /ए2- 2 /ए3 की बाह्य सीमा के साथ - साथ कन्हान नदी के पूर्वी किमारे से होते हुए जाती है , फिर ग्राम जूनी - कामठी और घाटरोहन से होते हुए कन्हान नदी के पूर्वी किनारे के साथ- साथ जाती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु' छ ' पर मिलती है ।

[सं. 43015/12/2002- पी ० आर ० आई० डब्ल्यू० ]

संजय बहादुर , निदेशक

New Delhi , the 12th February, 2004

S.O. 399. Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the then Ministry of Coal and Mines (Department of Coal ) No. S.O. 11 dated the 24th December, 2002 issued under Sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and published in Part - II, Section 3 , Sub - section ( ii ) of the Gazette of India , dated the 4th January, 2003 at pages 7 to 8 , the Central Government gave notice of its intention to prospect for coal in 190.00 hectares (approximately ) or 469.50 acres ( approxi mately) of the lands in the locality specified in the Schedule annexed to that notification;

Andwhereas the Central Government is satisfied that coal is obtainable in a part of the said lands described in the schedules appended to this notification ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 7 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby gives notice of its intention to acquire-

(a) all rights in or over the lands measuring 160.21 hectares ( approximately) or 395.88 acres ( approximately ) described in Schedule " A" and ' Al ' appended hereto ;

(b) the rights to mine , quary, bore, dig and search for, win , work and carry away minerals in the lands measuring 8.12 hectares ( approximately ) or 20.06 acres (approximately) described in Schedule "B " appended hereto;

Note 1 : The plan bearing No. C- 1 (E) III/FR/708-0703 dated the 23rd July, 2003 of the area covered by this notification may be inspected in the office of the Collector, Nagpur (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 -440001 (Maharashtra).

Note 2 : Attention is hereby invited to the provisions of Section 8 of the aforesaid Act which provides as follows :-

"8 Objections to acquisition.-

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

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

(2) Every objection under Sub - section ( 1 ) shall be made to the competent authority in writing and the competent authority shall give the objector an opportunity of being heard either in person or by a legal practitioner and shall , after hearing all such objections and after making such further enquiry, 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 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 ofproceedings held by him, for the decision of that Government .

724

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2 , 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] (3) For the purpose of this section , a person shall be deemed to be interested in land who would be entitled to claim an interest in compensation if the land or any rights in or over such land were acquired under this Act. " Note 3 : The Coal Controller, 1 , Council house Street , Kolkata- 700001 , has been appointed by the Central Government as the competent authority under the Act, vide notification number S.O. 2519 dated the 27th May, 1983 , published in Part- II , Section 3 , Sub- section ( ii ) of the Gazette of India, dated the 11th June, 1983 .

Schedule 'A'

New Gondegaon - Ghatrohana ExtensionBlock

Nagpur Area, District Nagpur (Maharashtra)

(Plan No. C -1 (E ) III/ FR/708-0703 dated the 23rd July, 2003).

All Rights

Remarks

District

Tahsil

Area in hectares

Serial number

Name of village

Patwari circle number

62.83

Ghatrohana

Parseoni

13.42

Part Part

Parseoni

Nagpur Nagpur

Juni-Kamptee

Total area: 76.25 hectares (approximately) or 188.41 acres (approximately) Plot numbers to be acquired in village Ghatrohana :

53 , 54/1-54/2 , 142/A, 143 /1-143/2-143/3-143/4, 145 , 147/ 1A- 147/1B- 147/ 1C- 147/2A - 147/2B- 147/3A- 147/3B- 147/4 part , 148/1A- 1-148 /1A-2-148/1A-3-148/1B- 148/ 1B- 1 148/2-148/3 part, 149/1-149/2-149/3-149/4-149/5 , 150/1 - A- 150/1 -B- 150/2- A- 150/ 2 -B, 151/1-151/2-151/3-151/4-151/5-151/6, 154/1 -A- 154/1 -B- 154/2-A-1-154/2 -A-2-154/3B, 155, 156 (nallah)part, 157/1 -A- 157/1 -B - 157/1-C- 157/1 -D- 157/2 part, 162/ 1 -A- 162/1 -B- 162/2, 163/1-163/2-163/3-163/4- A- 163/4-B- 163/5-A- 163/ 5-B- 163/5-C.

Plot numbers to be acquired in village Juni - Kamptee:

1/1-1 / 1A- 1-1 / 1A-2-1/2 - A- 1 /2 -B - 1/3-1/4-1 /5 part , 2/A1-2/A2-2/A3 , 6part .

Boundary description:

A- B: Line starts from point ' A' and passes through village Juni -Kamptee and passes along the outer boundary of plot number 2/A1-2/ A2-2 /A3 and meets at point 'B ' .

B - C: Line passes through village Juni -Kamptee along the outer boundary of plot numbers 2 /A1-2 /A2-2/A3 , 1 / 1-1 / 1A- 1-1/ 1A-2-1/2 -A- 1 /2-B - 1/3-1/4-1 /5 then passes through plot number 6 and meets at common village boundary of villages Juni -Kamptee and Ghatrohana at point 'C' .

C- D: Line passes through village Ghatrohana along the outer boundary ofplot numbers 157 / 1 -A- 157/1 -B- 157/1-C- 157/1 - D- 157/ 2 , then crosses plot number 156 ( nallah) and passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 155, 154/1 -A- 154/1 -B- 154/2A- 1 , 154/2A-2-154/3-B, 151/ 1-151/2-151/3-151/4-151/5-151/6, 143/1-143/2-143/3- 143/4, 162/ 1 -A- 162/ 1 -B- 162/2 , 163/1-163/2-163/3-163/4-A- 163/4-B- 163/5 -A- 163/5 -B- 163/5 -C and meets at point'D' .

D-E-F: Line passes through village Ghatrohana along the outer boundary ofplot mumbers 163 /1-163/2-163/3-163/4- A- 163/4-B- 163/5 -A- 163 /5 -B - 163/5-C, 143/1-143/2-143/3-143/4 , 142/A, 145 then through płot number 147/ 1A- 147/1B - 147/1C- 147/2A- 147/2B- 147/3A- 147/38-147/4 and passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 54/1-54/2, 53 and meets at point ' F' .

F -G: Line passes along the Eastern Bank of Kanhan River of village Ghatrohana and meets at point ' G' .

G-H- I: Line passes through village Ghatrohana along the outer boundary of plot number 54 /1-54/2, through plot number 148 / 1A- 1-148/ 1A -2-148/1A- 3-148/ 1B- 148/ 18-1-148/2-148/3 and crosses 156 (nallah ) , then through plot number 157 /1 - A- 157/1 -B - 157/1-C- 157/1 -D- 157/2 and proceeds through village . Juni -Kamptee and passes through plot number 1 / 1-1/ 1A- 1-1 / 1A-24 1/2 -A- 1/2 -B- 1/3-1/4-1/5 and meets at point ' I' .

I-J-A: Line passes through village Juni -Kamptee along the outer boundary of plot number 2 /A1-2 / A2-2 / A3 and passes along the Eastern Bank of Kanhan River and meets at starting point ' A' .

725 भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

[ भाग II- सष्ठ 3 (ii) ]

Schedule' AI'

NewGondegaon-Ghatrohana ExtensionBlock

NagpurArea,District Nagpur (Maharashtra)

(Plan No. C- 1 (E) III/FR/708-0703 dated the 23rd July, 2003)

AllRights

Reinarks

District

Tahsil

Area in hectares

Serial number

Nameof village

Patwari circle number

27.23

Part

Parseoni

Ghatrohana

Nagpur

8.63

Part

Parseoni

Nagpur

Juni-Kamptee

Part

48.10

Bina

Kamptee

Nagpur

Total area: 83.96 hectares (approximately) or207.46 acres (approximately) Plot numbers to be acquired in village Ghatrohana:

RiverPart.

Plot numbers to be acquired in village Juni -Kamptee:

RiverPart.

Plot numbers to be acquired in villageBina:

40.41, 42, 44A-44B, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, RiverPart.

Boundary description:

A-K: Line starts from point 'A' and passes through village Juni -Kamptee, crosses Kanhan River and then passes through village Bina crosses Kanhan River and meets at point 'K' .

K-L: Line passes through village Bina and passes along the Western Bank of Kanhan River then passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 49, 48, 42, 47, 46, 45 , 44A- 44B and proceeds along the Western Bank of Kanhan River, then along the outer boundary ofplot numbers 41 , 40 then proceeds along the Western Bank of L- F:

Kanhan River and meets at point 'L' . Line passes through village bina crosses Kanhan River and passes through village Ghatrohana, crosses Kanhan River and meets at point 'F' .

F-G-J-A

: Line passes along the Eastern Bank of Kanhan River of villages Ghatrohana and Juni -Kamptee and meets at starting point 'A' .

Schedule 'B'

New Gondegaon-Ghatrohana ExtensionBlock

Nagpur Area, District Nagpur (Maharashtra)

(PlanNo. C-1 (E) III/FR/708-0703 dated the 23rd July, 2003 ).

Mining Rights

Remarks

District

Tahsil

Area in hectares Serial number

Name of village

Patwari circle number

3.38

4.74

Part Part

Parseoni Parseoni

Nagpur Nagpur

13 13

Ghatrohana Juni-Karaptee

Total area: 8.12 hectares ( approximately) or20.06 acres (approximately)

AllRights

GrandTotal-Schedule A + Al

+83.96

76.25

= 160.21 hectares (approximately)

395.88acres (approximately)

ScheduleB

MiningRights

8.12hectares (approximately ) or 20.06

acres (approximately)

726

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

[PART II SEC. 3 (ii) ] Plot numbers to be acquired in village Ghatrohana:

148/1A- 1 , 148/ 1A- 2 , 148/ 1A -3 , 148/ 1B, 148/ 1B- 1 , 148/2, 148/3 part, 156 (nallah) part, 157/ 1 - A, 157/ 1 -B , 157/ 1 -C, 157/1 -D, 157/2part.

Plot numbers to be acquired in village Juni - Kamptee: 1/1-1 /1A -1-1 / 1 A-2-1 /2 - A- 1/2 -B -1/3-1/4-1 /5 part, 2/B.

Boundary description:

G-H-I: Line starts from point ' G' and passes through plot numbers 148/ 1A- 1 , 148/ 1A-2, 148/ 1A-3 , 148/ 1B, 148/1B- 1 , 148/2, 148/3 then crosses plot number 156 ( nallah ) , then through plot number 157/ 1 -A- 157/1 -B - 157/1 -C- 157/ 1-D- 157/2 of village Ghatrohana then through plot number 1 / 1-1 /1A- 1-1 / 1A- 2-1 /2 -A- 1 /2 -B - 1/3-1/4-1 /5 of village Juni -Kamptee and meets at point 1.

I-J-G: Line passes through village Juni -Kamptee and proceeds along the outer boundary of plot numbers 2/A1-2/ A2-2/A3 then proceeds along the Eastern Bank of Kanhan River ofvillage Juni -Kamptee and Ghatrohana and meets at starting point 'G' .

[No. 43015/ 12/2002/PRIW]

SANJAY BAHADUR, Director,

पैट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 5 फरवरी , 2004

का. आ. 400.- तेल उद्योग ( विकास ) अधिनियम, 1974 ( 1974 का 47 ) की धारा 3 की उप - धारा ( 3 ) के खण्ड (ङ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा 5 फरवरी , 2004 ( पूर्वाह्न ) से उनके कार्यकाल की शेष अवधिअर्थात् 31-3-2005 तक या अगले आदेश होने तक या इनमें से जो भी पहले लागू हो, श्री बी. साम बाब , आई.ए.एस. ( एपी: 83 ) निदेशक, पैट्रोलियम एवं प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय को तेल उद्योग विकास बोर्ड का सचिव नियुक्त करती है ।

[सं.जी-35012/2/2003 - वित्त II ] के. पी. के. नाम्बिसन , अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS

New Delhi, the 5th February, 2004

S.O. 400.-. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( e) of Sub - Section (3 ) of Section 3 of the Oil Industry (Development ) Act, 1974 (47 of 1974 ) , Government of India hereby appoints Shri B. Sam Bob , IAS (AP: 83 ) Director, Ministry ofPetroleum and Natural Gas as Secretary, Oil Industry Development Board with effect from forenoon of 5th February, 2004 for the balance period of his tenure i.e. upto 31-3-2005 or until further orders , whichever event takes place earlier.

[No. G-35012/ 2/2003 -FIN. -II] K. P. K. NAMBISSAN, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 13 फरवरी , 2004

का.आ. 401.-जबकि केन्द्रीय सरकार को यह प्रतीत होता है कि लोकहित में यह आवश्यक है कि असम राज्यिक विद्युत परिषद् के नामरूप ताप विद्युत केन्द्र, जिला डिब्रूगढ़ , असम से प्राकृतिक गैस की आपूर्ति के लिये नागामाटी खेरेमीया गाँव से दुवनियाँ गाँव और ए.एस.सी.बी. का एन.टी.पी.एस. से बी.वी.एफ.सी. एल. का नामरूप फैक्टरी तक असम गैस कम्पनी लिमिटेड, दुलियाजान द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछायी जानी चाहिए । और अतः यह प्रतीत होता है कि ऐसी लाइनों को बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए इसके साथ उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार अर्जित करना आवश्यक है ।

अतः अब, पैट्रोलियम ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) की धारा 3 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार उसमें उपयोग का अधिकार अर्जित करने का अपना आशय एतद्वारा घोषित करती हैं ।

उक्त भूमि में हितबद्ध कोई व्यक्ति उस भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिये आपत्ति और सुझाव सक्षम अधिकारी नामतः जिला उपायुक्त डिब्रूगढ़ , असम को इस अधिसूचना की तारीख से 21 दिनों के भीतर कर सकता है ।

और ऐसी आपत्ति और सुझाव देने वाला हर व्यक्ति यह भी बताएगा कि क्या वह अपनी सुनवाई व्यक्तिगत रूप से चाहता है अथवा किसी विधि व्यवसायी के माध्यम से । [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

¥127

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

1 2

4 5 अनुसूची

6 7 राज्य: असम जिला: डिब्रूगढ़ मौजा : जयपुर

2.नं. 1 डाठनीया

मियादी नं. 129

207

218 क्रम गांव का नाम

गाँव

200 0

मियादी नं. 82

दाग नं.

पट्टानं.

क्षेत्रफल टिप्पणी

नं.

मियादी नं . 35

234 0

बीषा कट्टा लूसा

सरकारी

317

00 2

5 6 7

मियादी नं.16 301

012

एकसना

1. नगामाटी खखेरेमीया

139

1 13

मियादी नं . 5

302 0

144 0

सरकारी

एकसता

415

मियादी नं. 1

0 0 4

399 002 मियादी नं. 1

416

सरकारी..

10 17

137 0 114

418

237

मियादी नं. 1

2 4

सरकारी

0 0 6 मियादी नं. 1

0 4

419 0

कुलक्षेत्र

3 14

मियादी नं. 1

421

1 9

3 दिल्ली चाय बागान

313 एन.एल.आर ( सी ) 21

11 422

मियादी नं. 1

0 2 11

313नं. एन.एल.

313 एन.एल.आर( सी ) 22

मियादी नं. 1

423 0 2 17

आर

0 1

313 एन.एल.आर( सी ) 25

424

मियादी नं. 1

0 18

313एन.एल.आर( सी ) 26

मियादी नं. 1

425

4 1

0 0

313एन.एल.आर( सी ) 29

426 0

मियादी नं. 1

2 19

0 1

313एन.एल.आर ( सी ) 3.0

15 427 0

मियादी नं. 1

0 4

1 13 मियादी नं. 1

313 एन.एल.आर( सी ) 31: 0

428 0

313 एन.एल.आर( सी ) 32

312 0

एकसना

1 17

0 1

313एन.एल.आर (सी ) 33

मियादी नं. 77

162 0 1

0 सरकारी

163 0 0

313एन.एल.आर( सी ) 34

मियादी नं. 98 164 0

313 एन.एल.आर( सी ) 20

1 19

मियादी नं. 13

165

1 9

313 एन.एल.आर( सी ) 177

0 2 166 0

मियादी नं. 122

कुलक्षेत्र

2 2 8 मियादी नं. 87

172 1 2 18

409 0 0 10

4. पानी डोरिया नगा

एकसना

मियादी नं. 50 173 0 0 10

गाँव

सरकारी

408 0 2 8 एकसना

174 0

0 6

एकसना

404 0

0 10

9 0

कुल क्षेत्र

एकसना

406 0 0 18 2.नं. 1 डाठनीया

415 0

एकसना

0 3

एकसना

399 0

0 10 गाँव

मियादी नं. 104 180 0

सरकारी

398 0 3 181 0

मियादी नं. 148

1 4

403 9

एकसना

मियादी नं. 156 182 0 1 14

एकसना

407 0

2 8 एकसना

183 0 0 18

2 2 14

कुलक्षेत्र

मियादी नं. 156

184 0

5. सैकिय गाँव

सरकारी

42 0

सियादी नं. 49

4 186 0 1 13

12 मियादी नं. 148

1 6

43 0

0 191 0

मियादी नं . 62

मियादी नं. 40 196 0

2 17

मियादी नं . 63

1 17 सरकारी

197 0 0 11

मियादी नं. 62

0 0 15

46.

मियादी नं. 86 198 0 1 9

सरकारी

31 0

7 सरकारी

199 0 0 6

40 0

मियादी नं. 87

4 246 0

मियादी नं. 86

2 18

56 0

एकसना

1 17 मियादी नं. 8

247 0

एकसना

57 0

0 10 मियादी नं. 17

204 0 0 18

59 0

एकसना

2 मियादी नं. 57

299- 1

0 6

मियादी नं. 83

61 1

0 10 मियादी नं. 16 300 0 2 11

मियादी नं. 19

318. 0 1

मियादी नं. 27

62 0

3 2 मियादी नं . 121 320 0 2 9

एकसना

101 0

0 18 मियादी नं. 175 321 1 0 13

सरकारी

102 0

2 0 मियादी नं. 5

322 0

सरकारी

104 0

सरकारी

323 0 0 7

एकसना

112 0 0 10

मियादी नं. 161 235 0

मियादी नं. 36

500 0 10 400 0 4

एकसना

421 0 0

मियादी नं. 183

कुलक्षेत्र

3 19 मियादी नं. 119 205 1 1 12

[फा. सं. ओ -12016/11/2000- ओएनजी. ( डी- IV ) ] .

मियादी नं. 33 206 0

एन. सी. जाखूप, अवर सचिव 728

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

New Delhi , the 13th February, 2004

[PART II SEC. 3(ii)] Patta No.

Remarks

DAG No.

Area BKL Sl . Name of No. Village

S.O. 401 -Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest for supply of natural gas to the Namrup Thermal Power Station of Assam State Electricity Board in the District of Dibrugarh, Assam pipeline should be laid from Nagamati Kheremia to Downia gaon and NTPS of ASEB to Factory ofM/s BVFCL by Assam Gas Company Limited, Duliajan .

And whereas it appears that for the purpose of laying such pipeline it is necessary to acquire the Right of User in Land described in the schedule annexed hereto .

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

Any person interested in the said land may within 21 days from the date of this notification send objections and suggestions to the laying of the pipeline under the land to the competent authority, namely the Deputy Commissioner, Dibrugarh District , Assam .

And every person making such objections and suggestion may also state whether he wishes to be heard in person or by a legal practitioner.

SCHEDULE

DAG

Area Remarks Patta No.

SI . Name of

BKL

No.

No. Village

139 0 1 13 Annual

144 0 0

Waste Land

00 4

415

P.P. No. 1

1 Nagamati Kheremia gaon

416 1 0 17 P.P. No. 1

418 0

P.P. No. 1

419 0 0

P.P. No. 1

0 1 9 P.P. No. 1 421

422 0

P.P. No. 1

2 11

423 0 217 P.P. No. 1

424

0 18 P.P. No. 1

4 1

425 0

P.P. No. 1

426 0 219 P.P. No. I

0 4

427 0

P.P. No. 1

428 0 0 18 P.P. No. 1

312 0 1 17 Annual

162 0 1 9 P.P. No. 77

163 0 0 6 Waste Land

164

1 19 P.P. No. 98

165 0 1 9 P.P. No. 13

0 3 10 P.P. No. 122 166

2 18

P.P. No. 87 172

0 10

173 0

P.P. No. 50

0 0 6

174

Annual

9 0

Total Area

415 0 0 3 2 No .. 1 Downia Annual

0 4 4 P.P. No. 104 180

goan

0 1

181

P.P. No. 148

114 P.P. No. 156 182 0

Annual

183

0 18

0 9

P.P. No. 156 184

186 0

Waste Land

1 13

0 1 6 P.P. No. 148 191

0 2 17 P.P. No. 40 196

0 0 11

197

Waste Land

198 0 1 9 P.P. No. 86

Waste Land

0 6

199

246 0 218 P.P. No. 86

P.P. No. 8 247 0 1 6

2040 018 P.P. No. 17

299 10

P.P. No. 57

300 0 2 11 P.P. No. 16

P.P. No. 27 318 0 1 4

0 29 P.P. No. 121 320

1 0 13 P.P. No. 175 321

322

0 2 P.P. No. 5

0 0 7

323

Waste Land

0 4

P.P. No. 161 235

4 5

400 0

Annual

0 4 P.P. No. 183 4240

1 12 P.P. No. 119 205 1

P.P. No. 33 206 01 0

207

2 18 P.P. No. 129

200

1 2 P.P. No. 82

0 1

234

P.P. No. 35

0 0

317

Waste Land

0 12

301 0

P.P. No. 16

302 0 0 5 P.P. No. 5

0 2

399

Annual

Wast Land 137 0 1 14

0 0 6 Waste Land 237

TOTALAREA

12 3 14 3 Dilli T.E. 313 313 N.L.R. ( C) 21 0 1 11

22 0 1 15 No. N.L.R. 313 N.L.R. (C)

1 13

25 0

313 N.L.R. ( C)

0 10 .

313 N.L.R. ( C) 26 0

313 N.L.R. ( C) 29 0

1 15 313 N.L.R. ( C) 30 0

1 13 313 N.L.R. (C) 31 0 729 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

Patta No.

DAG No.

Area Remarks BKL

Name of Village

Sl . No.

और सक्षम प्राधिकारी के उक्त अधिनियम की कस 6 'की उपधारा ( 1) के अधीन सरकार को अपनी रिपोर्ट दे दी है,

320 1

Delli T. E. 313 N.L.R.( C)

33 0 1 16

313 N.L.R. (C)

313 No.

0 2

N.L.R.

34 0

313 N.L.R. ( C)

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चय किया है,

0 2

20 0

313 N.L.R. ( C)

0 2

313 N.L.R. ( C ) 177 0

2 2 8

TOTALAREA

010-

Annual

409 0

Pani Downia

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

2 8

408 0

Weste Land

Naga gaon

404 0 0 10

Annual

406 0 0 18

Annual

399 0 0 10

Waste Land 398 0 3

403 0 2

Annual

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उस धारा की उपधारा (4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए निर्देश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख से केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने के बजाय , सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, असम गैस कंपनी लि० मेंहोगा।

407 0 2 8

Annual

अनुसूची

2 2 14

TOTALARRA

राज्य: असम जिला : डिब्रूगढ़ मौजा: खेरेमिया 42 0 4 12

P.P. No. 49

5. Saikya gaon

टिप्पणी

क्षेत्रफल

दाग नं.

क्रम गांव का नाम

पंट्टा नं.

43 0 20

P.P. No. 62

नं.

45 0

बीघा कट्टा लूसा P.P. No. 63

1 17

46 0 0 15

P.P. No. 62

1 .

0 3 17

मियादी पट्टा नं. 78 296

चलाकटकी नं. 1

0 7

31 0

Waste Land

1 7,5

298 0

मियादी पट्टा नं. 52

40 0

P.P. No. 87

0 1

299

मियादी पट्टा नं. 52

560

Annual

117

सरकारी

307

57 0

Annual

0 10

2 8

मियादी पट्टा नं. 85 302

Annual

59 0

61 1 0 10

P.P. No. 83

201 0

एकसना

4 8

99 0

P.P. No. 19

0 17

304 0

एकसना.

62 0

P.P. No. 27

320 0

एकसना

101 0 0 18

Annual

321

2 19

एकसना

Waste Land 102 02 0

0 13

मियादी पट्टा नं. 81 346 0

Waste Land 104 0 1 11

347 0

112 0 0 10

एकसना

Annual

50 0 0 10

P.P. No. 36

4 214.5

कुल क्षेत्रफल

6 3 19

TOTALAREA

104 1

2. चलाकटकी नं. 2

सरकारी

6 [F. No. O- 12016/ 11 /2000 -ONG (D -IV) ]

103

सरकारी

0 9

101 0 3 13

सरकारी

N. C. ZAKHUP, Under Secy.

0 18

सरकारी

10बी 0

नई दिल्ली, 13 फरवरी , 2004

4 0.6

कुल क्षेत्रफल

14 0

0 11

सरकारी

3. जागुन पथार नं. 1

0 11

17 0

सरकारी

011

सरकारी

18 0

4 17

सरकारी

19,1

2 0

2 6

एकसना

2 6

27 0

एकसना

का०आ० 402 -केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पैट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) की धारा 3 उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम एवं प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना सं० का०आ० 1919 तारीख 12 जुलाई, 2003 द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा कीथी,

440 G1/04-7 730

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] गांव का नाम

टिप्पणी

दाग नं.

टिप्पणी

क्षेत्रफल

क्षेत्रफल दांग नं.

पट्टा नं.

पट्टानं.

क्रम नं.

क्रम गांव का नाम नं.

बीघा कट्टा लूसा बीघा कट्टा लूसा

1 17

सरकारी

31 0

6 मियादी पट्टा नं. 33

जागुन पथार नं. १

5. हांजुवा पथार

सरकारी

29 0 2

32 0

6 (जारी)

(जारी)

42 0

सरकारी

8 मियादी पट्टा नं. 10

20 0

0 15

सरकारी

6 21 0

0 11

सरकारी

35 0

सरकारी

4 2 14

कुल क्षेत्रफल

सरकारी

जागुन पथार नं . 2

0 12

सरकारी

1 23 0

0 11

मियादी पट्टा नं. 16

0 18

सरकारी

24 0

एकसना नं. 7

41 0

सरकारी

1 2

एकसना नं. 26

सरकारी

26 0

सरकारी

0 15

सरकारी

45 0

सरकारी

0 0

सरकारी

मियादी पट्टा नं . 36

सरकारी

44 3

1 41

0 10

मियादी पट्टा नं. 2

सरकारी

मियादी पट्टा नं . 2

सरकारी

मियादी पट्टा नं. 13

0 15

सरकारी

95 0

मियादी पट्टा नं. 13

सरकारी

129 0 0

मियादी पट्टा नं. 1

सरकारी

130

52 0

सरकारी

131

1 17

0 13

सरकारी

0 19

मियादी पट्टा नं. 13 132

54 0

सरकारी

135 0

मियादी पट्टा नं . 1

9 2 9 सरकारी

136 0

कुल क्षेत्रफल

137 0

सरकारी

एकसना

गेथुपथार प्रथम

खण्ड

एकसना

141 0

सरकारी

100

एकसना

140

0 18

एकसना नं . 7

4 18

179

एकसना

0 18

189

एकसना नं . 7

0 4

एकसना

191

1 0

191

एकसना नं. 7

197

2 14

एकसना

190 0

एकसना नं. 7

1 17

194

एकसना

सरकारी

1 13

195

मियादीपट्टा नं.

7 4 9

कुल क्षेत्रफल

196 0

एकसना

सरकारी

हांजुवा पथार

1 17

सरकारी

193 0

सरकारी

0 10

2 11

198

एकसाना

19 0

सरकारी

147

0 18

सरकारी

641 1

एकसना

सरकारी

28 0 2

0 15

178 0

एकसना

सरकारी

29 0

8 2

कुल क्षेत्रफल

30 0

सरकारी 731

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

टिप्पणी

क्षेत्रफल

दाग नं .

क्रम गांव का नाम

पट्टा नं.

क्षेत्रफल टिप्पणी

दाग नं.

पट्टा नं.

नं.

बीघा कट्टा लूसा

क्रम गांव का नाम नं.

0 10

सरकारी

8. बी नगाँव डाडूमिया

मियादी पट्टा नं. 25 619

7.ए गेथुपथार द्वितीयं

4 0 0 8

0 0

सरकारी

खण्ड

621

मियादी पट्टा नं. 31

0 620

सरकारी

एकसना

0 4

मियादी पट्टा नं. 11 566

मियादीपट्टा नं. 11

9 0

1 565 0

मियादी पट्टा नं. 73

मियादींपट्टा नं. 80

117

554 0

एकसना

20 0

मियादी पट्टा नं. 56

555

एकसना

1 17

मियादी पट्टा. नं. 56

495

एकसना

मियादी पट्टा नं. 72

मियादी पट्टा नं. 66 496

मियादीपट्टा नं . 24

4 14

मियादी पट्टा नं . 21 486

मियादी पट्टा नं, 50

487

एकसना

मियादी पट्टा नं. 62

मियादी पट्टा नं. 34. 480

सरकारी

494

सरकारी

मियादी पट्टा नं. 54

473

एकसना

सरकारी

मियादी पट्टा नं. 5 474

3 10

मियादी पट्टा नं. 56

मियादी पट्टा नं. 105 475

0 19

मियादीपट्टा नं. 82

0 8

476

मियादी पट्टा नं .68

1 13

42 0

एकसना

380

मियादीपट्टा नं . 5

45 0

1 19

मियादीपट्टा नं. 98

मियादी पट्टा नं. 39 379

2 18

मियादी पट्टा नं. 56

308

सरकारी

एकसना

मियादी पट्टा नं. 60 307 0

293 0

सरकारी

0 19

कुल क्षेत्रफल

280 0

सरकारी

45 0

सरकारी

9. रंगाली पथार

0 10

281

सरकारी

एकसना

मियादी पट्टा नं . 13 547

0 4

सरकारी

मियादी पट्टा नं. 25 375 0

एकसाना

298

मियादी पट्टा नं. 46

50 0

सरकारी

मियादी पट्टा नं . 8 378

58 0

मियादीपट्टा नं. 84

2 19

कुल क्षेत्रफल

मियादीपट्टा नं . 84

478

मियादी पट्टा नं. 62

7.बी गेथुपथार द्वितीय

मियादी पट्टा नं. 136 173

खण्ड

477

मियादी पट्टा. नं. 68

2 17

494

कुल क्षेत्रफल

सरकारी

0 10

0 0

10. लेंगरीजान चाय

मियादी पट्टा नं. 34 480

मियादी पट्टा

बगीचा

मियादी पट्टा

कुल क्षेत्रफल

4 0

मियादीपट्टा

1 17

250

मियादी पट्टा नं. 59

8. ए नगाँव डाडूमिया

0 0

144

सरकारी

251

मियादी पट्टा नं. 58

138

सरकारी

252

मियादी पट्टा नं. 4

0 19

143 2

सरकारी

253 0 0

सरकारी

145 0

सरकारी

मियादी पट्टा नं. 43 254

3-2 11

2 2

कुल क्षेत्रफल

कुल क्षेत्रफल 732

THEGAZETTEOF INDIA: FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

[PART II SEC.3 (ii) ] पट्टा नं. दाग नं.

टिप्पणी

क्षेत्रफल

गांव का नाम

दाग नं.

पट्टा नं.

टिप्पणी

क्षेत्रफल क्रम गांव का नाम नं.

क्रम नं.

बीबा कट्टा लूसा

बीषा कट्टा लूम 52 0 0 13

11. ( ए ) बालीजान माझी मियादी पट्टा नं. 45

14. डीघला सोनोवाल

0 0 18

मियादी पट्टा नं. 45

गाँव

62 0

मियादीपट्टा नं. 26

जारी

मियादी पट्टा नं. 2018

मियादीपट्टा नं. 7

19 0

0 18

मियादीपट्टा नं. 22

सरकारी

69 0

28 0

मियादी पट्टा नं. 39

सरकारी

70 0

1 0

27 0 1

मियादीपट्टा नं. 11

0 2

मियादी पट्टा नं. 37

मियादी पट्टा नं. 3

76 0

मियादीपट्टा नं. 24

25 0

मिवादी पट्टानं . 47

एकसना

24 0

3 10

भिंबादीपट्टा नं. 31

88 0

3 19

मियादीपट्टा नं. 43

एकासना

0 17

मियादीपट्टा नं. 12

एकासना

9 सरकारी

93 1

94 0

0 9

मियादी पट्टा नं. 12

0 0

सरकारी

109

0 0

एकासना

87 0

मियादीपट्टा नं. 23

0 13

मिबादीपट्टा नं. 14

कुल क्षेत्रफल

मियादीपट्टा नं. 20

100

मियादी पट्टा नं. 10

3 6

11. ( बी ) बलीजान माझी मियादी पट्टा नं. 7

0 17 गाँव

मियादी पट्टा नं. 26 101

62 0

3 19

मियादीपट्टा नं . 26

0 17

मियादी पट्टा नं. 21 102

2 4

मियादी पट्टानं. 21

103

6 59 0 2 0

मियादीपट्टा नं. 2

मियादी पट्टा नं. 22

1 11

मियादी पट्टा नं . 35 104

58 0

मियादीपट्टा नं. 20

105

मियादी पट्टा नं . 17

57 0

मियादी पट्टा नं. 24

2 8

107

मियादी पट्टा नं.48

मियादी पट्टानं . 18

108

मियादी पट्टा नं. 15

3 15

कुल क्षेत्रफल

3 17

मियादीपट्टा नं. 46 109

12. बार्लीजान चाय

2 11

एन. आर.एल. नं . 294

0 2 17

मियादी पट्टा नं. 15. 110

बगीचासत्य-

एन.आर.एल. नं . 294 6

1 नारायण टी.

111

एन. आर.एल. नं . 294 10

मियादी पट्टा नं. 19

0 0 5

कम्पनी लिमिटेड, एन. आर. एल. नं. 294 17

सरकारी

0 0

170

ग्रान्ट नं. 294

1 12

एन.आर.एल. नं. 294 18

175 0

एकसना

एन.आर.एल. एन. आर .एल. नं . 294 20

176

मियादी पट्टा नं. 8

3 11

कुल क्षेत्रफल

3 13

177

मियादी पट्टा नं. 28

13. बालीजान चाय सरकारी

0 16

1 14

178

मियादी पट्टा नं. 28

बगीचा सत्य-

चाय मियादी पट्टा नं . 1 28

मियादी पट्टा नं . 15 180

नारायण टी.

मियादीपट्टा नं. 1

कम्पनी लिमिटेड,

3 12

185

मियादी पट्टा नं. 46

डब्ल्यू, एल,

सरकारी

7 आवेदन नं. 4,

1921/22 प्रथम

कुल क्षेत्रफल

खण्ड एवं द्वितीय

15. नं. 1 बालीजान सरकारी

खण्ड

सरकारी

0 11

कुल क्षेत्रफल

7 0

सरकारी

14 0

3 15

14. डीघला सोनोवाल मियादी पट्टा नं . 6

सरकारी

8 0

0 11

3 15

मियादी पट्टा नं. 25

सरकारी

0 7

0 18

मियादी पट्टा नं. 13

सरकारी

10 0 0 11 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

733

भारत मा राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फालतुम 2, 1925

गांव का नाম

टिप्पणी

दाग नं. क्षेत्रफल

पट्टानं.

क्रम नं

बीघा कट्टा लूसा

15. नं. 1 बालीजान मियादी पट्टा नं. 24

3 13 (ज़ारी)

मियादी पट्टा नं . 33

2 13

मियादीपट्टानं. 3

2 15 एकसना

0 18 मियादी पट्टा नं. 53 12

13 0

6 मियादीपट्टा नं. 16

9 एकसना

4 3 14 कुल क्षेत्रफल

1 सरकारी

203

8 16. नं. 1 पोवाली पथार

202 0 0

7 सरकारी

201

0 सरकारी

200

0 7 सरकारी

1 17 मियादी पट्टा.नं. 21 175

176 1

3 सरकारी

6 मियादी पट्टा नं. 22 177

1 14

143

मियादी पट्टा नं . 42

1 मियादी पट्टा नं. 3

0 3 13 मियादी पट्टा नं. 19 97

83. 0

2 मियादी पट्टानं. 43

मियादी पट्टानं. 25

मियादीपट्टा नं. 25

0 मियादी पट्टा नं. 11

सरकारी

0 0

18 एकसना

17 मियादी पट्टा नं. 30

0. 0 13

मियादी पट्टा नं. 21

47 0

0 18 सरकारी

0 0

9 एकसना

03 17 मियादी पट्टा नं. 21. 55

10 एकचना

02 मियादी पट्टा नं. 56 43

52.

1 8 एकसना

3 कुल क्षेत्रफल

3 17. असोमिया गाँष मियादी पट्टा नं. 198 365

8 मियादी पट्टा नं . 198 367

0 सरकारी

366

370

2 सरकारी

1 मियादी पट्टा नं. 148 371 1

3 मियादी पट्टा नं. 180 374

1 मियादी पट्टा नं. 50 359

दाग नं.

गांव का नाम

पट्टा नं.

क्रम नं.

कहा

2 17 17. असोमियां मिबादी पट्टा नं. 214 452

गांव (जारी) मियादी पट्टा नं. 64 455

456

मियादी पट्टा नं . 4

6 मियादी पट्टा नं . 75 457

3 मियादी पट्टा नं. 140 450

491

मियादी पट्टा नं. 148

0 15 मियादी पट्टा नं. 263 492

सरकारी

497

13 सरकारी

498

2 10 सरकारी

499

1 मियादीपट्टा नं. 7 530

3 मियादी पट्टा नं. 147 537

0 2 0 मियादी पट्टा नं. 109 538

2 19 मियादी पट्टा नं. 210 578

580

सरकारी

0 2

1 17 मियादी पट्टा नं. 21 577

1 मियादी पट्टा नं. 192 581

6 मियादी पट्टानं . 87 582

0 0 18 मियादी प‌ट्टा नं. 203 583

11 मियादी पट्ट्टा नं. 192 584

1 मियादी पट्टा नं. 75 595

1 19 मियादी पट्टा नं. 75 594

1 मियादी पट्टा नं. 182 615

6 मियादी पट्टा नं . 184614

4 मियादी पट्टा नं. 243 613

0 2 10 मियादी पट्टा नं. 245634

0 0 19 मियादी पट्टा नं. 101 635

2 8 मियादी पट्टा नं. 206 633

2 11

मियादी पट्टा नं. 150 631

2 मियादी पट्टा नं. 15 660

5 मिवादी पट्टा नं. 59 373

मियादी पट्टा नं. 234 443

2 मियादी पट्टा नं. 165 632

0 10 मियादी पट्टा नं. 204 576

2 कुल क्षेत्रफल

3 13

18. बालीमोरा पथार मियादीपट्टा नं. 15

9 0

मियादीपट्टा नं. 16

13 0

11 मियादीपट्टा नं. 10

19 0

0 मियादी पट्टा नं. 3

: 20

एकसना

मियादीपट्टा नं. 4 734

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2 , 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] क्रम गांव का नाम .

दाग नं.

टिप्पणी

गांव का नाम

दाग नं. क्षेत्रफल

क्षेत्रफल

पट्टानं.

टिप्पणी नं.

क्रम नं

बीघा कट्टा लूसा

बीघा कट्टा लूसा 50 0

सरकारी

244 0

19. डिरीयाल गाँव

मियादी पट्टा नं. 15

0 7

सरकारी

18. बाली मोरा पथार (जाते )

0 10

(जारी)

मियादी पट्टा नं. 13 243

101 0

2 10

सरकारी

मियादी पट्टा नं. 63 242

सरकारी

102 0

241 0

एकसना .

सरकारी

126

मियादी पट्टा नं. 78 231

0 10

235

मियादी पट्टा नं. 19

मियादी पट्टा नं. 66

142 0

2 सरकारी

239

एकसना

सरकारी

253

मियादी पट्टा नं. 53 143

0 0 15

1 सरकारी

254

मियादी पट्टा नं. 56

2 10

284 0

0 10 मियादी पट्टा नं. 24

मियादी पट्टा नं. 1

मियादी पट्टा नं. 81 285

7 4 3

कुल क्षेत्रफल

286

मियादी पट्टा नं . 60

19. डिरीयाल गाँव सरकारी

सरकारी

287

0 11

सरकारी

1 13

मियादी पट्टा नं. 42 289

सरकारी

290 0

2 11 4 0

0 15

सरकारी

291

मियादी पट्टा नं. 14

0 19

मियादी पट्टा नं . 50

1 1

294

मियादी पट्टा नं. 31

0 2 13

मियादी पट्टा नं. 34

295 1

मियादी पट्टानं . 3

एकसना

मियादी पट्टा नं. 28 296

मियादी पट्टा नं . 14

2 13

मियादी पट्टानं. 61 302

मियादी पट्टा नं, 30

303

एकसना

87 0

0 14

सरकारी

255

सरकारी

83 0

सरकारी

कुल क्षेत्रफल

सरकारी

0 19

80 0

मियादी पट्टा नं. 74

0 18

सरकारी

171

20. हिन्दूगांव

79 0

1 11

एकसना

173 0

मियादी पट्टानं . 3

108 0

सरकारी

0 9

मियादी पट्टां नं . 32 177

सरकारी

109 0

178

मियादी पट्ट्टा नं . 32

114

मियादी पट्टा नं. 75

मियादी पट्टा नं. 22 179

2 13

131

मियादी पट्टा नं . 75

1 7

कुल क्षेत्रफल

132

मियादी पट्टा नं. 70

सरकारी

21. तोरा टोली

0 0 19

133

मियादी पट्टा नं. 20

4 15

मियादी पट्टा नं. 101

134

मियादी पट्टा नं. 55

0 10

4 0

मियादी पट्टा नं . 3

215

मियादी पट्टा नं. 49

1 16

मियादी पट्टा नं . 81

214

मियादी पट्टा नं. 70

47 0

मियादौ पट्टा नं. 98

मियादी पट्टा नं . 32 213

0 11

मियादौपट्टा नं . 98

212 0

मियादी पट्टा नं. 6

0 6

मियादी पट्टा नं . 98

4 मियादी पट्टा नं . 32 211

मियादी पट्टा नं. 98

210 0

1 17 मियादी पट्टा नं. 1

मियादी पट्टा नं. 45

233

4 12 एकसना

मियादी पट्टा नं. 66

245 0

55 0

2 11 मियादी पट्टा नं . 9

मियादी पट्टा नं. 98 735 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

दागनं. क्षेत्रफल टिप्पणी

क्षेत्रफल टिप्पणी

दाग नं.

पट्टा नं.

क्रम गांव का नाम नं.

बीघा कट्टा लूसा

22. कछारी पथार

0 3

1 मियादीपट्टा नं . 98 80

मियादी पट्टा नं. 1081

2 21. तोरा टोली (जारी)

मियादी पट्टा नं . 67

(जारी) , मियादीपट्टा नं. ६

82 0 0

84 0

1 मियादी पट्टा नं. 98

मियादीपट्टा नं. 50

सरकारी

82 0

मियादीपट्टा नं . 96

0 10

सरकारी

83 0

मियादी पट्टा नं. 10

97 0

0 10

0 13

मियादी पट्टा नं. 51

मियादी पट्टा नं . 10

मियादीपट्टा नं. 51 146

सरकारी

220

0 7

मियादी पट्टा नं. 120 135

3 15

मियादी पट्टा नं. 35 100

3 13

मियादी पट्टा नं. 70 145

102

मियादी पट्टा नं. 45

मियादी पट्टा नं. 94 150

2 8

मियादी पट्टा नं . 57. 07

140

0 14

एकसना

144

मियादी पट्टा नं. 4

मियादी पट्टा नं. 118 141

145 0

0 10

मिबादी पट्टा नं. 3

मियादी पट्टा नं. 62 144

3 13

मियादीपट्टा नं. 18 147

165 0

सरकारी

0 7

160

सरकारी

3 10

मियादी पट्टा नं. 56 182

0 10

मियादी पट्टा नं. 43 161

0 6

चाय मियादी पट्टानं . 1 416

162

4 13

मियादीपट्टा नं. 2

2 15

मियादी पट्टा नं. 44 183

3 2

163

मियादी पट्टा नं. 2

चाय मियादी पट्टा नं. 1 415

0 9

147

मियादी पट्टा नं. 50

384

मियादी पट्टा नं . 10

मियादीपट्टा नं. 25 175

चाय मियादी पट्टा नं. 1 385

3 12

मियादी पट्टा नं. 26 176

0 2

386

मियादी पट्टा नं . 97

178

1 9

मियादी पट्टा नं . 9

0 13

मियादी पट्टा नं . 125 387

18 2 12

कुल क्षेत्रफल

388

मियादीपट्टा नं. 97

सरकारी

23. हाफजानपर्वत

2 11

मियादी पट्टा नं. 120 412

चाय बगीचा सरकारी

1 8 411 0

3 10

मियादी पट्टा नं . 2

सस्कारी

81 0

ग्रान्ट नं. 104/101

213 410 0

मियादी पट्टा नं. 2

सरकारी

417 0 0

एन.आर.एल

मियादी पट्टा नं . 1

399 0

0 4

सरकारी

कुल क्षेत्रफल

2 कुल क्षेत्रफल

मियादी पट्टा नं. 44

24. नोगा माटी

खेरेमियाँगाँव

60 0

4 0

0 13 22. कछारी पथार

1 11

एकसना

0 15

एकसना

62 0

1 12

3 13

मियादी पट्टा नं. 21

मियादी पट्टा नं . 73

2 19

मियादी पट्टा नं. 133. 282

मियादी पट्टा नं . 53

1 0

मियादी पट्टा नं. 36 289

एकसना

2 15

50 0

मियादी पट्टा नं. 112 290

मियादी पट्टा नं . 24

0 8

49 0

मियादी पट्टा नं. 64 2910

मियादी पट्टा नं . 22

51 0

1 10

मियादी पट्टा नं. 103 369

मियादी पट्टा नं. 34

2 18

मियादी पट्टा नं. 38 370

मियादी पट्टन नं . 7.

2 19

मियादी पट्टा नं. 74 382

मियादी पट्टा नं. 7

0 0 9

1 13

मियादीपट्टा नं. 64 280

एकसना

58 0

एकसना

4 3

कुल क्षेत्रफल

4 12

71 0

मियादी पट्टा नं . 10

[सं . ओ.-12016/11/ 2000- ओएनजी ( डी- IV) ]

मियादी पट्टा नं. 15

एन. सी. जाखूप, अवर सचिव 736

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

New Delhi , the 13th February, 2004 S.O. 402. Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural GasS.O. 1919 dated 12th July, 2003 under sub section(1) of Section (3 ) ofPetroleum & Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition ofRight ofUser in Land) Act 1962 (50 of 1962) the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in land specified in the schedule appended to that notification for the purpose laying pipeline.

And whereas the Competent Authority has under sub section 1 of Section (6) of the said Act , submitted report to the Government .

And further whereas the Central Government has after considering the said report, decided to acquire the right of user in lands specified in the schedule appended to this notification .

Now, therefore, in exercise of the power conferredby sub section ( 1 ) of the Section (6) of the said Act, the Central Govt. hereby declared that the right of user in the said lands specified in the schedule appended to this notification hereby acquired for laying the pipeline ;

And further in exercise of power conferred by Sub section (4) of that Section, the Central Govt . directs that right ofuser in the said lands shall instead ofvesting in the Central Govt. acts on this date of publication of this declaration in the Assam Gas Company Limited free from encumbrances .

SCHEDULE

State-Assam. Dist. -Dibrugarh . Mouza-Kheremia

Remarks Patta No.

Area BKL

Dag No.

Sl . Name of No. Village

6 78 1 2

P.P. No. 78

3 17 1 Chalakataki

296 0

298

1 7.5 No. I

P.P. No. 52

299

1 15 P.P. No. 52

'Wasteland

307 0 0 6

302 0 2 P.P. No. 85

201 0

2 Anual

304 0

0 17 Annual

320 0 2 7 Annual

2 19

321 0

Annual

346 0

。 13 P.P. No. 81

347

2 Annual

4 214.5 TOTAL AREA

[PART HSBC. 3 (ii) ]

6 7 8

104 1 0 6 2. Chalakataki Wasteland

No. 2

Wasteland 103 2 0 9

101 0 3 13 Wasteland

0 18 Wasteland 10B 0

4 0 6 TOTAL AREA

0 11 3. Jagun Pathar Wasteland

0 0 11

No. 1

Wasteland

0 11 Wasteland

18 0

19 1

4 17 Wasteland

22 0

Annual

2 6

Annual

P.P. No. 33

2 19 Wasteland

0 0 10

P.P. No. 10

20 0 0 15 Wasteland

0 11

21 0

Wasteland

4 214 TOTAL AREA

38 0

Wasteland

Jagun Pathar

13 0

17 4. No. 2

Wasteland

23 0

11 P.P. No. 16

Annual No. 7

0 1 2 Annual No .. 26 25

0 2 15 Wasteland

31 0 1

2 Wasteland

0 10

P.P. No. 36

1 0

10 P.P. No. 2

1 17 P.P. No. 2

P.P. No. 13

0 11 P.P..No. 13

0 0 4

129

P.P. No. 1

130 0 0 4 Wasteland

1 17

131 0

Wasteland

0 19

132 0

P.P. No. 13

0 4

135 0

P.P. No. 1

136 0

Wasteland

137 0

Wasteland

0 0 9

141

Wasteland

0 0 18 Annual No. 7 140

0 0 18 Annual No. 7 189

Annual No. 7 191

01- Annual No. 7 190

77 0 0 18 Wasteland

4 9 TOTAL AREA

7 [ भाग - खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

737 भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/ फाल्गुन 2, 1925

5 6 7 8

6 7

195 0 1 13 17 0 0 10

P.P. No. 95

06. Gethupathar

05 Hajuwapathar Wasteland

1st Part

Annual

196 0 2 4 18 0

Wasteland

0 10

Wasteland 193 0

1 17 Wasteland

19 0 0 15

(Contd.)

198 0 211 Wasteland

1 4

Annual

27 0

Waste land 147 0 0 18 28 0

Wasteland

2 17

641 1 2 7 29 0

Annual

Wasteland

Annual

178

30 0

0 15 Wasteland

Wasteland

31 0

8 2 12

TOTAL AREA

1 6

Wasteland

32 0

619 0 2 10

07( A) Gethupathar P.P. No. 25

33 0 1 8

Wasteland

2nd Part

P.P. No. 31 621 0 0 2 Wasteland

34 0

1 6

Annual

620 0 : 0 2 Wasteland

35 0 1 8

P.P. No. 11 566 0 3 6 Wasteland

36 0

565 01

P.P. No. 73

17 37 0

Wasteland

0 15

Annual

1 17

554

Wasteland

38 0 0 12

Annual

555 0 1 17 Wasteland

39 0 1 6

495

Annual

0 9 40 0

Wasteland

0 18

496 0

P.P. No. 66

3 15

1 2

Wasteland 41 0

486 0

P.P. No. 21

Wasteland

42 0 1 6

Annual

487 0

0 2 45 0 0 15

Wasteland

480

1 13

P.P. No. 34

Wasteland 46 0 0 11

494 0 2 0

Waste land

Wasteland 44 3

Annual

473

2 0 Wasteland

47 0

0 0 18

P.P. No. 5 474

48 0

Wasteland

0 11

P.P. No. 105 475

1 49 0 0

Wasteland

476

P.P. No. 68

8 50 0 0

Wasteland

380 0 2 5

P.P. No. 5

51 0 0

Wasteland

379 0

P.P. No. 39

1 19 Wasteland

52 0 0 15

308 0 3

Waste land

53 0 0 13

Wasteland

307

1 13

P.P. No. 60

54 0 1

Wasteland

293 0

1 7

Waste land

TOTAL AREA

2 9

280 0

Waste land

0 7 97 0 4

06. Gethupathar Annual

Waste land 281 0 0 10 1st Part

Annual

98 0

0 0

P.P. No. 13 547

2 Annual

100 0 0 4

P.P. No. 25 375 0

4 Annual

179 1 4 18

P.P. No. 46 298 1 2 12 Annual

191 0

378 0 0 15

P.P. No. 8

Annual

197 1 214

Annual

194 0 1 17

TOTAL AREA

2 19 440G1/04-8 738

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

[PART II SBC . 3 (ii) ] 1

7 8

6 7 8

0 1

478

07 (B ) Gethupathar P.P. No. 62

P. P.

1 0 0 10

10. Lengrijan

2nd Part

477

1 13

P.P. No. 68

P. P.

4 12

Chabagicha

Wasteland

494

P. P.

4 0 0 6

480

P.P. No. 34

Westeland

144 0 0

1 2

TOTAL AREA

138 0 0

Westeland

9 250 0

P.P. No. 59

1 17

08 (A) Nogaon

143 2

Westeland

0 19 Dhadumia

251 2

P.P. No. 58

Westeland 145

0 10

P.P. No. 4

252

2 0

3 2 11

TOT AREA

Wasteland

253 0 0 4

P.P. No. 43 254 0 1 19

52 0 0 13

11 (A) Balijan Mazi P.P. No. 45

TOTAL AREA

62 0

Gaon

P.P. No. 26

4 12

Wasteland

0 10

0 08(B) Nogaon

P.P. No .. 7

63 1

Dhadumia

4 0

Wasteland

0 8

1 2

69 0

Westeland

Wasteland

6 0 0 10

1 0

Westeland

P.P. No. 11

8.0

P.P. No. 37

P.P. No. 80

9 0

1 13

P.P. No. 24

17 20-0

P.P. No. 56

0 3

1 7

Annual

P.P. No. 56

1 17

88 0

P.P. No. 43

3 19

0 0 3

P.P. No. 72

89 0 2

P.P. No. 12

P.P. No. 24

1 17

93 1

Westeland

2 4

P.P. No. 50

Westeland

109 0

P.P. No. 67

870

P.P. No. 23

0 9

Wasteland

TOTAL AREA

5 4 7

P.P. No. 54

Wasteland

1 2

6 38

11 (B) Balijan Mazi P.P. No. 7

3 10

P.P. No. 56

Gaon

3 19

P.P. No. 26

P.P. No. 82

0 19

42 0

60 0

2 Annual

1 13

P.P. No. 21

P.P. No. 98

0 0 15

P.P. No. 22 59 0 2

P.P. No. 56

2 18

P.P. No. 20

2 2

Annual

2 4

0 2 4

P.P. No. 24

TOTAL AREA

56 0

0 19

P.P. No. 18

2 0

1 0

Wasteland

09. Rangalipathar

3 3 15

TOTAL AREA

Annual

47 0 0 6

48 0 0

Wasteland

NLR No. 294

2 2 11

12. Balijan

Annual

49 0

6 0

3 13

NLR No 294

Chabagicha,

0 0

NLR No 294

Satynarayan

Wasteland

17 0

P.P. No. 84

58 0

NLR No 294

Tea Company

P.P. No. 84

1 12

Ltd. Grant No. 294 NLR No 294 18

59 0

P.P. No. 136 173

NLR

20 0 0 5

NLR No 294

TOTAL AREA

2 17

5 3 11

TOTAL AREA ک

739 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2 , 1925

8 3

6 7 8

4 5

6 7 0

P.P. No. 8 176

8 Wasteland

0 16

14. Dighala

13. Balijan

28 0 0 13

T.P.P. No. 1

Chabagicha,

177 0

Sonowal P.P. No. 28

1 19

P.P. No. 1

Satyarayan

1 14

178 0

P.P. No. 28

Tea Company

180

P.P. No. 15

Ltd. , W.L.

Application

3 12

185

P.P. No. 46

No. 4, 1921/22

1st Part &

0 0 7

Westeland

2nd Part .

TOTAL AREA

1 0 3 8

TOTAL AREA

15. No. 1 Balijan Westeland

3 15

P.P. No. 6

14. Dighała

6 0 0 11

Westeland

0 3

Sonowal

P.P. No. 25

0 7

7 0

Westeland

P.P. No. 13 16

0 18

0 11'

Westeland

0 0 18

P.P. No. 45

0 7

Westeland

18 0 1 16

P.P. No. 20

Westeland

0 0 11

P.P. No. 22

16 04 15

P.P. No.24

0 1 9

P.P. No. 39

3 13

P.P. No. 33

P.P. No. 11

0 213

P.P. No. 3.

P.P. No. 3

2 15

Annual

25 0

P.P. No. 47

0 0 18

P.P. No. 53

P.P. No. 31

13 0 0 6

P.P. No. 76

0 17

Annual

0 0

Annual

TOTAL AREA

4 3 14

94 0

P.P. No. 12

203

16. No. 1 Powali Westeland

0 13

95 0

Annual

0 0 7

202

Westeland

Pathar

0 0 13

P.P. No. 14

0 7

Westeland 201 0

0 0 13

P.P. No. 20

0 7

200 0

Westeland

100 0 0 17

P.P. No. 10

1 17

175 0

P.P. No. 21

0 17

101 0

P.P. No. 26

176

Westeland

0 17

102 0

P.P. No. 21

177 0

P.P. No. 22

103 0 1

P.P. No. 2

143

P.P. No. 42

1 11

P.P. No. 35 104 0

P.P. No. 3

105 0 1

P.P. No. 17

3 13

97 0

P.P. No. 19

107 0 2

P.P. No. 48

P.P. No. 43

108 0

P.P. No. 15

79 1 4 0

P.P. No. 25

109 0

P.P. No. 46

0 5

P.P. No. 25

2 17

110 0

P.P. No. 15

81 0 0

P.P. No. 11

0 1

111

P.P. No. 19

Westeland

170 0 0 7

Wasteland

44 0 0 18

Annual

175 0 0 8

1 17 Annual

P.P. No. 30 740

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

[PART II SBC. 3(ii) ] 4

5 6 7 8

4 5

6 7 8 46 0 0 13

P.P. No. 21

16. No. 1 Powali

1 6

P.P. No. 184 614

17. Asomia Gaon

0 18

Pathar ( Contd. ) Wasteland

2 4

P.P. No. 243 613

Annual

49 0 0 9

0 2

P.P. No. 245 634

10 0

P.P. No. 21

3 17

635

P.P. No. 101

0 19 0

Annual

2 10

633

P.P. No. 206

2 8 43 0 2

P.P. No. 56

P.P. No. 150 631

2 11 Annual

52 0

660 0

P.P. No. 15

2 11 13

TOTAL AREA

3 19

P.P. No. 59

0 5

373 0

365 0 3 12

17. Asomia Gaon P.P. No. 198

0 0 7

P.P. No. 234 443

367 0 0

P.P. No. 198

2 0

P.P. No. 165 632 0

Wasteland 366 1

576

P.P. No. 204

0 10 Wasteland 370 0 1

TOTAL AREA

2 0

P.P. No. 148 371 1

8 0

18. Balimora P.P. No. 15

3 13

3 19

P.P. No. 180 374 0

0 5

P.P. No. 16

pathar

0 1 2

P.P. No. 50 359

13 02 11

P.P. No. 10

P.P. No : 214 452

2 11

19 0 2 0

P.P. No. 3

P.P. No. 64 455 0 1 9

Annual

20 0 2 9 456 0

P.P. No. 4

49 0 4

1 457 0 3 6

P.P. No. 75

50 0

P.P. No. 15

2 0

P.P. No. 140 450

3 13

590 0

Wasteland

7 0

P.P. No. 148 491

3 10

101 0

Wasteland

2 10 P.P. No. 263 492 0 0 15

102 0

Wasteland

2 15 497 0

Wasteland

1 6

126 0

Wasteland

2 19 Wasteland

498 0

P.P. No. 19 63 0 1 17 Wasteland

499 0 2 10

142 0

Wasteland

3 2

P.P. No. 7

530 0

143 0

P.P. No. 53

0 9 P.P. No. 147 537 0 3 8

36 0

Wasteland

0 15 538 0

P.P. No. 109

64 1

2 10

P.P. No. 24

P.P. No. 210 578 0 2 19

TOTAL AREA

7 4 3 Wasteland 580 0 0 2

19. Derial Gaon

1 0 1

Wasteland

P.P. No. 21

577 0 1 17

2 0

Wasteland

0 11

P.P. No .. 192 581 0

3 0

Wasteland

1 2 582 0

P.P. No. 87

1 6

4 0

Wasteland

0 15 P.P. No. 203 583 0

0 18

7 1

0 19

P.P. No. 50

584 0

P.P. No. 192

2 11

2 13

8 0

P.P.. No. 34

P.P. No. 75 595 0

1 17

Annual

1 P.P. No. 75 594 0

1 19

P.P. No. 14

89 0 3 615 0

P.P. No. 182

P.P. No. 30

88 0

1 9 741 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

5 6

Wasteland

0 14

0 1

296 0

19. Derial Gaon P.P. No. 28

19. Derial Gaon

0 2

Wasteland

302 0 2 13

P.P. No. 61

82 0 1

Wasteland

Annual

303 1 1 7 80 0

P.P. No. 74

0 19

0 0 2

Wasteland 255

Annual

1 11

790

TOTAL AREA

0 10 108 0

Wasteland

0 2

171 0 0 18

20. Hindu Gaon Wasteland

Wasteland

109 0 22

P.P. No. 3

173 0

114 0 3 1

P.P. No. 75

P.P. No. 32 177 0 0 9 131 0

P.P. No. 75

2 13

P.P. No. 32 178 0 1 6 132 0

1 7

P.P. No. 70

2 8

P.P. No. 22 179 0

133 0

P.P. No. 20

0 19

1 1 7

TOTAL AREA

134

P.P. No. 55

2 4

21. Taralolee

Wasteland

P.P. No. 49 215

11 0

4 15

Ρ.Ρ. Να. 101

P.P. No. 70 214 0 1

0 0 10

P.P. No. 3

213 0 1

P.P. No. 32'

P.P. No. 81

212 0

P.P. No. 6

P.P. No. 98 47

3 4

0 1

P.P. No. 32 211

P.P. No. 98 51

0 11 210 0

P.P. No .. 1

0 5

P.P. No. 98

52 0 0 6

0 0

233

Annual

54 0 2 4

P.P. No. 98

245 0 1 9

P.P. No. 9

1 17

P.P. No. 45

15 0

Wasteland

244 0

16 0 4 12

P.P. No. 66

243 0 0 10

P.P. No. 13

0 2 11

P.P. No. 98 55

0 0

242

P.P. No. 63

3 4

P.P. No. 98 80 0

Annual

241

0 0

P.P. No. 67 81

231

P.P. No. 78

0 8

P.P. No. 98

235 0

P.P. No. 66

P.P. No. 96

0 8 Annual

239 0

Wasteland

0 10 253 0 0

Wasteland

97 0

P.P. No. 51

0 10

1 11

254 0

P.P. No. 56

P.P. No. 51 146

1 284 0

P.P. No. 1

135 0 0 5

P.P. No. 120

P.P. No. 81 285 0 2 11

P.P. No. 70 145 0

3 13 286 0

P.P. No. 60

150 0 0 5 287 0 2 5

P.P. No. 94

Wasteland

140

0 14

P.P. No. 42. 289 0

Annual

141

0 3 290 0

2 11

P.P. No. 118

Wasteland

144

0 13 291 0

P.P. No. 62

P.P. No. 14

165 0 0 7 294 0 1

Wasteland

P.P. No. 31

295 1

182 0

3 10 P.P. No. 3

0 3

P.P. No. 56- 742

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

4 5 6

0 21. Taralolee

416

T. P.P. No. 1

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

7 8

100

3 15 P.P. No. 35

22. Kachari pathar

183

P.P. No. 44

2 15

0 0 T. P.P. No. 1 415

384 0

P.P. No. 10

2 15

385 0

T. P.P. No. 1

0 2

386

0 2 P.P. No. 97

387 0

P.P. No. 125

13 P.P..No. 97- 388 0

1 2

P.P. No. 120 412

2 11

411 0 3 10 P.P. No , 2

410 0

P.P. No. 2

2 17

417

P.P. No. 1

4 Wasteland 399 0 0 4

1 TOTAL AREA

22. Kachari pathar Annual

5 0

Annual

1 0 P.P. No. 45 102 0 3 4 P.P. No. 57

107

2 8 P.P. No. 4

144

3 4

145 0

P.P. No. 3

0 10

147

P.P. No. 18

3 13

160 0

Wasteland

161 1

P.P. No. 43

0 10

162 0

P.P. No. 2

4 13 P.P. No. 2

163 0 3 2 P.P. No. 50

147 0

9 P.P. No. 25 175 0 2 0 P.P. No. 26 176 0 3 12 P.P. No. 9

178 0 19 TOTAL AREA

18 212

77 0 1 13 Wasteland

23. Hapjanparbat

27 0

P.P. No. 73

3 13

80 0 1 8 Cha-Bagicha

0 1 P.P. No. 53 28. 1

Annual

1 3 12

50 0

P.P. No. 24

5 P.P. No. 22 49 0. 0 3 Wasteland

81 0

Grant No. Wasteland

2 13

104/101 NLR

0 8 Wasteland

TOTAL AREA

1 2

0 0

P.P. No. 44

2 24. Noga -mati

3 P.P. No. 34 51

1 6 P.P. No. 7

54 0

P.P. No. 7-

55 0 0 5 Annual

56 0 1 13 Annual

58 0 1 12

4 P.P. No. 10

71 0

12 P.P. No. 15

77 1 1 6 P.P. No. 10 81 2

1 P.P. No. 5

79 0 0 2

84 0 1 P.P. No. 50

82 0

3 Wasteland

P.P. No. 10

83 ه

1 6 P.P. No. 10 96 0 0 13

220 0 0 Wasteland

7 Kheremia Annual

60 0

0 13 Gaon

Annual

61 0 0 15 P.P. No. 21

62 0

1 12 P.P. No. 133 282 0

2 19

P.P. No. 36 289

1 0

P.P. No. 112 290

2 15

P.P. No. 64 291

0 8 P.P. No. 103 369 0

1 10 P.P.. No. 38 370 1

2 18 P.P. No. 74 382 0 2 19 P.P. No. 64 280 0 Q 9 TOTAL AREA

4 3 0 [No. O- 12016 / 11 /2000 - ONG ( D - IV) ]

N.C. ZAKHUP, Under Secy.

743 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

New Delhi, the 20th February, 2004 नई दिल्ली, 20 फरवरी, 2004

का०आ० 403.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी , और भारत के राजपत्र में प्रकाशित भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना सं ० का ०आ० 529 तारीख 11 फरवरी, 2003. द्वारा उत्तरांचल राज्य में होकर उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य में सहारनपुर से नजीबाबाद तक इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने के प्रयोजन के लिए इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;

S.O. 403. Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and NaturalGas , published in the Gazette of India vide number S.O. 529, dated the Ilth February, 2003 issued under Sub- section (1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines(Acquisition ofRight of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962) , (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), the CentralGovernment declared its intention to acquire the right ofuser in the land specified in the Schedule appended tothis notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation of petroleum products from Saharanpur to Najibabad in the State of Uttar Pradesh through (Uttaranchal ) by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

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

And, whereas, copies ofthe said Gazette notification were made available to the public on 11th March, 2003;

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

And, whereas, the competent authority in pursuance of Sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 6 of the said Act , has submitted his report to the Central Government; और, केन्द्रीय सरकार का उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाना चाहिए;

And, whereas , the Central Government after considering the said report is satisfied that the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification should be acquired;

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

Now, therefore in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub -section ( 1) of Section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that the right of user in the land specified inthe Schedule appended to this notification isacquired;

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह निर्देश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख से केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने के बजाय, सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा ।

And, further in exercise of the powers conferredby Sub-section (4) of section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said land shall instead of vesting in the Central Government, vest, from the date of publication of this declaration, in the Indian Oil Corporation Limited free from all encumbrances.

अनुसूची

जिला हरिद्वार राज्य: उत्तरांचल

तहसील: लक्सर

SCHEDULE

गांव

क्षेत्रफल

District : Haridwar State : Uttaranchal

Tehsil: Laksar

खसरा संख्या

Khasra

Area

Village

आर सेंटीआर

हेक्टेयर

Centiare

No. Hectare Are

शेखपुरी खादर

Sheikhpuri Khadar 13

269

अकोढ़ा मुकरमतपुर

AkodaMukharmatpur 269

295

0151

295

कुडी

Kudi

295

296

01 296

[No. R-25011/2/2003 -OR- 1 ] [संख्या आर-25011/2/2003- ओ.आर. - 1 ]

RENUKA KUMAR, Under Secy.

रेणुका कुमार, अवर सचिव 744

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

[PART II SEC . 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 20 फरवरी , 2004

229 64/2 0 14 41

चुडियाला मोहनपुर

229 64/2 0 06 20

रास्ता

001 34

298

157 000 30

126 0 01 84

बेलकी युसुफपुर

127 0 03

48 117/2 0 07 30

114

0 04 47

114 31/1

00.0

114 33/1 0 00 50 का०आ ० 404.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी, और भारत के राजपत्र में प्रकाशित भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना सं ० का ० आ० 869 , तारीख 11 मार्च, 2003 द्वारा उत्तरांचल राज्य में जिला हरिद्वार से होकर उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य में सहारनपुर से नजीबाबाद तक इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने के प्रयोजन के लिए इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;

114 33/2

001

121 117/2 0 13 50 और, उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 2 अप्रैल , 2003 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं;

152

04 50

396 239/2

खाताखेड़ी

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

363

बचत

सफरपुर

बचत

364

0 02 30

गाहा

374

0 02

271

355

0 05 और, केन्द्रीय सरकार का उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाना चाहिए;

310

19 0 04 10

असिफनगर

33 239/12 0 01 26

0 09

33 239/14

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

70 239/15 0 00

70. 239/16

0 05

129 239/12

166

000

239/3

166

239/4 0 21 और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह निर्देश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख से केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने के बजाय, सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा;

159 281 003

293 275/2 0 02 09 अनुसूची

293 281 000 40 राज्य: उत्तरांचल

जिला: हरिद्वार

368 281

0 03 00 गांव तहसील: रुड़की

चक संख्या

क्षेत्रफल

368 282

000 हेक्टेयर आर सेंटीआर

368 283

50 1

3 4

425 240/3

16 234/3 001 68

सरढेड़ी शाहजहाँपुर

रास्ता

227

50 110

तलहेड़ी

चक

1/2

भगवानपुरचंदनपुर

मार्ग

बिझौली

624

0 36 60

नाली

लंढौरा

1/20 00 05 307 000 08

2/2 0 21 08 261

0 16 86 745. [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

5 3

110

10 000 09 Talhedi

भगवानपुर चंदनपुर- जारी 420

624 0 36

000 18

420

Bijhauli

420

08 25/1 003 60 Landhaura

307

487

92 001 00

261

0 16 86

0 14 41

64/2

ChudialaMohanpur 229

[सं० आर-25011/3/2003- ओ.आर. -1 ]

229

64/2 0 06 रेणुका कुमार, अवर सचिव

72 0 01 34

Rasta

New Delhi , the 20th February, 2004

298

157 0 00

0 01

126

BalekiYusufpur

0 03

127

0 07 30

117/2

0 04

114

31/1

114

33/1

114

33/2

114

0 01 50

0 13

117/2

121

0 04

152

239/2

396

Khata Khedi

S.O. 404. Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, published in the Gazetted of India vide number S.O. 869, dated the 11th February, 2003 issued under Sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962) , (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right ofuser in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation of petroleum products from Saharanpur to Najibabad in the State of Uttar Pradesh through Distt . Haridwar (Uttaranchal) by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited:

363

Bachat

Safarpur

0 02

Bachat 364

And, whereas, copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on 2nd April, 2003;

374 0 02 68

Gaha

355

271

0 05 69 And, whereas , therefore the competent authority in pursuance of Sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 6 of the said Act, has submitted his report to the Central Government ;

310

0 04 10

0 01 26

33 239/12

Asifnagar

0 09 17

33 239/14

And, whereas , the Central Government after considering the said report is satisfied that the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification should be acquired;

0 00 96

70 239/15

70. 239/16

0 05 87

129 239/12

000

166 239/3

32 Now, therefore in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub -section ( 1 ) of Section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification isacquired;

0 21

166 239/4

0 03

159

281

0 02

275/2

293

281

293

368

281 0 03

368 282

And, further in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (4) of Section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said land shall instead of vesting in the Central Government , vest from the date of publication of this declaration, in the Indian Oil Corporation Limited free from all encumbrances .

368

283

SCHEDULE

240/3

425

Tehsil : Roorkee District: Haridwar State : Uttaranchal

Rasta

227

Khasra

Area

Village

Chak

1/2

Bhagwanpur

No. Hec. Are Centiare

Marg

Chandanpur

1/2 000

Nali

234/3 001 68

0 21

2/2

Sarthedi Shajanpur

440G1/04-9 746

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

420

0.00

420 25/1 0 03 60

487

[No. R-25011/3/2003 -OR- 1 ]

RENUKA KUMAR, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 20 फरवरी , 2004

का०आ ० 405.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को यह प्रतीत होता है कि लोकहित में यह आवश्यक है कि उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य में सहारनपुर से नजीबाबाद तक पैट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

और यह प्रतीत होता है कि ऐसी पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक है कि इस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए;

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

उक्तअनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध कोई व्यक्ति, उस तारीख से जितको, भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है , इक्कीस दिन के भीतर उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन या भूमिके नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने के संबंध में लिखित रूप में आक्षेप श्री लोकेन्द्र पाल सिंह , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, सहारनपुर- नजीबाबाद पाइपलाइन परियोजना , के-33 , पल्लवपुरम , फेस -2, मेरठ (उत्तर प्रदेश ) को भेज सकेगा ।

अनुसूची

राज्य : उत्तर प्रदेश तहसील : सहारनपुर जिला सहारनपुर

गांव

क्षेत्रफल

सेंटीआर

हेक्टेयर आर

खसरा संख्या

100

60 गागलहेड़ी अहमतमाल

[सं ० आर-25011/4/2003-ओ.आर. -1 ]

रेणुका कुमार, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 20th February, 2004 S.O. 405. Whereas , it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of Petroleum products from Saharanpur to Nijibabad in the State of Uttar Pradesh , a

[PART II SEC. 3 ( ii )] pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

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

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

Any person, interested in the land described in the said Schedule may within twentyone days from the date on which the copies of this notification, as published in the Gazette of India, are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein or laying of the pipeline under the land to Shri Lokendra Pal Singh, Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Saharanpur -Najibabad Pipeline Project , K-33 , Pallavpuram , Phase - II , Meerut (Uttar Pradesh) .

SCHEDULE

Uttar Pradesh Tehsil: Saharanpur District: Saharanpur State:

Village

Khasra No.

Centiare

Area Hectare Are

100

07 Gagalheri Ahtmal

[No. R-25011/4/2003 -OR- 1 ]

RENUKA KUMAR, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 20 फरवरी , 2004

का०आ ० 406.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पैट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार काअर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी , भारत के राजपत्र में प्रकाशित भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम एवं प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना सं० का ० आ० 1646 तारीख 6 जून , 2003 द्वारा उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य में सहारनपुर से नजीबाबाद तक इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पैट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने के प्रयोजन के लिए इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;

और, उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 20 जून, 2003 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं;

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार का उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में 747 [ भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया. जाना चाहिए;

179

गागलहेड़ीअहत-

180

माल-जारी

239

गागलहेड़ी मुस्तहकम

चौरादेव

634

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

[संख्या आर-25011/7/2003- ओ.आर. - 1 ]

रेणुका कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 20th February, 2004 और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह निर्देश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख से केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने की बजाय , सभी विल्लंग्मों से मुक्त, इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा ।

अनुसूची

उत्तर प्रदेश

तहसील: नकुड़ जिला: सहारनपुर राज्य :

क्षेत्रफल

खसरा

गांव

संख्या

हेक्टेयर आर सेंटीआर

538

पिलखनी

तहसील: सहारनपुर

उत्तर प्रदेश

जिला: सहारनपुरराज्य:

S.O. 406. Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, published in the Gazetted of India vide number S.O. 1646 , dated the 6th June , 2003 issued under Sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962 ) , (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right ofuser in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation of petroleum products from Saharanpur to Najibabad in the State of Uttar Pradesh by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

क्षेत्रफल

गांव

And,whereas , copies ofthe said Gazette notification were made available to the public on 20th June , 2003;

खसरा संख्या

आर सेंटीआर

हेक्टेयर

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

470

दाबकी गूजर हौजखेड़ी

And, whereas , the Central Government after considering the said report is satisfied that the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification should be acquired;

617

दराकोटतला

चाटका

Now, therefore in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that the right ofuser in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification is acquired for laying the pipeline;

गागलहेड़ीअहतमाल

And, further in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub -section (4) of Section 6 of the said act , the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said land shall instead of vesting in the Central Government, vest, from the date of publication of this . declaration, in the Indian Oil Corporation Limited free from all encumbrances .

101

SCHEDULE

104

105

40 Tehsil: Nakur

State : Uttar Pradesh

District: Saharanpur

106

Area

Khasra

Village

Are Centiare

No. Hectare

107

538

Pilkhani

178

02 748

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] Tehsil: Saharanpur District : Sahararipur State : Uttar Pradesh

Village

Khasra No.

Area are

Hectare

Centiare

का50 ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्ति का प्रयोग करते हुए, उस भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय कीघोषणा करती है;

470

Dabki Gujar

HauzKheri

617

DaraKottala

Chatka

Gagalheri Ahtmal

उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध कोई व्यक्ति, उस तारीख से जिसकों, भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है , इक्कीस दिन के भीतर उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन या भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने के संबंध में लिखित रूप में आक्षेप श्री राकेश कुमार सिंह , सक्षम प्राधिकारी, इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, सहारनपुर- नजीबाबाद एक्स्टेंशन पाइपलाइन परियोजना, एस.डी.एम. लक्सर का कार्यालय , तहसील लक्सर, हरिद्वार ( उत्तरांचल ) को भेज सकेगा । 0

अनुसूची

तहसील: लक्सर

जिला: हरिद्वार राज्य उत्तरांचल 0

101

गांव

क्षेत्रफल

104

खसरा संख्या

105

सेंटीआर

हेक्टेयर आर

106

1 2

107

1. कुड़ी

178

693

2. खडंजा कुतुबपुर

179

750/1 00

180

64/2 00

Gagalheri Mustahkam 239

3. खेडी मुबारकपुर

Chaura Dev

4. खेडीखुर्द

634

5. रायसी

[No. R- 25011 /7/2003 -OR- 1 ]

RENUKA KUMAR, Under Secy.

585

नई दिल्ली, 20 फरवरी , 2004

497

551

611

498

का०आ ० 407 केन्द्रीय सरकार को यह प्रतीत होता है किलोकहित में यह आवश्यक है कि उत्तरांचल राज्य में जिला हरिद्वार से होकर उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य में सहारनपुर से नजीबाबाद तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

129

6. भूरनी खतीरपुर

7. अकोढ़ा औरंगजेबपुर 278

और, यह प्रतीत होता है कि ऐसी पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने के प्रयोजनके लिए यह आवश्यक है कि इस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए;

[संख्या आर-25011/28/2002- ओ.आर. - 1 ]

रेणुका कुमार, अवर सचिव अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 749

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 20th February, 2004

S.O. 407. Whereas, it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of petroleum products from Saharanpur to Najibabad in the State of Uttar Pradesh via DistrictHaridwar (Uttaranchal ) , a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

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

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

Any person, interested in the land described in the said Schedule may within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of this notification , as published in the Gazette of India, are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein or laying of the pipeline under the land to Shri Rakesh Kumar Singh, Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Saharanpur -Najibabad Extension Pipeline Project, Office of the S.D.M. Laskar, Tehsil -Laskar, Haridwar (Uttranchal).

SCHEDULE

District: Haridwar State : Uttaranchal Tehsil: Laksar

Area KhasraNo.

Sl.No. Village

Hectare Are Centiare

5 12

1 Kudi

2 Khadanja Kutubpur 693

750/1

64/2 00

3 Khedi Mubarakpur

91 4 Kheri Khurd

5Raisi

ΟΙ

00.

585 00

497 00

551-00

611 00

498

129

6 Bhurni Khatirpur

7 AkodhaAurangzebpur 278

[No. R-25011 /28/2002 -OR- 1 ]

RENUKA KUMAR, Under Secy.

नईदिल्ली, 20 फरवरी, 2004

का०आ० 408.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, पैट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) की धारा 2 के खंड (क) के अनुसरण में, 5 अप्रैल, 2003 को भारत के राजपत्र में प्रकाशित भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 1084 में निम्नलिखित संशोधन करती है , अर्थात्:-

उक्त अधिसूचना की अनुसूची में, स्तंभ 1 में, " श्री एम. एस. मान, जिला राजस्व अधिकारी एवं भूमि अर्जन क्लक्टर , फरीदाबाद " शब्दोंके स्थान पर " श्री शाम लाल तंवर, जिला राजस्व अधिकारी एवं भूमिअर्जन क्लक्टर, फरीदाबाद " शब्द रखे जाएंगे ।

[संख्या आर-25011/22/2001- ओ.आर. - 1 ]

रेणुका कुमार, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 20th February, 2004

S.O. 408 -In pursuance of clause (a) of Section 2ofthe Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right ofUser in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962 ), the Central Government hereby makes the following amendments in the notification of the Government of India in theMinistry ofPetroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 1084 published in the Gazette of India on the 5th April, 2003 Namely:-

Inthe said notification:

In the Schedule , in column 1 , for the words " Shri M.S. Mann , District Revenue Officer -cum- Land Acquisition Collector , Faridabad" , the words "Shri Sham Lal Tanwar, District Revenue Officer-cum- Land Acquisition Collector , Faridabad " , shall be substituted.

[No. R-25011/22/2001 -OR - 1 ]

RENUKA KUMAR, Under Secy.

750

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004 /PHALGUNA 2, 1925

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

the said National Tribunal for adjudication.

नई दिल्ली, 6 जनवरी, 2004

Andwhereas Justice Shri B. P. Sharma relinquished charge of the above said National Tribunal on 31-10-2003:

का.आ. 409.-जबकि केन्द्रीय सरकार का मत है कि एफडीसी लिमिटेड के प्रबंधन तथा समस्त भारत में मेडिकल रिप्रेजेंटेटिव्स के बीच औद्योगिक विवाद मौजूद है :

और जबकि केन्द्रीय सरकार का मत है कि उपर्युक्त विवाद की प्रकृति ऐसी है कि एक से अधिक राज्य में काम कर रहे मेडिकल रिप्रेजेंटेटिव्स ऐसे विवाद से हितबद्ध है , या प्रभावित हैं , और इसका अधिनिर्णयन राष्ट्रीय अधिकरण द्वारा किया जाना चाहिए;

Now, therefore, a National Tribunal is constituted with headquarters at Kolkata with Justice Shri Hrishikesh Banerji as its Presiding Officer and the above said dispute is referred to the said National Tribunal for adjudication with the direction that Justice Shri Hrishikesh Banerji shall proceed in the matter from the stage at which it was left by Justice Shri B. P. Sharma and dispose off the same accordingto-law.

[No. L-51014/3/2000- IR(PG) ] SIMMI CHAUDHARY, Dy. Director

नई दिल्ली, 23 जनवरी , 2004

और जबकि केन्द्रीय सरकार ने औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 7 ( ख ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, श्रम मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या एल -51014/ 03/2000- आईआर (पीजी ) दिनांक 22 मई, 2001 द्वारा एक राष्ट्रीय अधिकरण का गठन किया था जिसका मुख्यालय कोलकाता में होगा और न्यायमूर्ति श्री बी.पी. शर्मा को इसके पीठासीन अधिकारी के रूप में नियुक्त किया था और उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 10 की उप- धारा ( 1 -क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए उक्त औद्योगिक विवाद को अधिनिर्णयन हेतु कनित राष्ट्रीय अधिकरण को संदर्भित किया था ।

और जबकि न्यायमूर्ति श्री बी.पी. शर्मा 31-10-2003 को उपर्युक्त राष्ट्रीय अधिकरण के कार्यभार से कार्यमुक्त हो गए हैं :

का.आ. 410.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार यूको बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण पटना के पंचाट [संदर्भ संख्या 2 (सी) /98 ] को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23 जनवरी , 2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12025/1/2004- आई.आर . ( बी- II ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 23rd January, 2004 इसलिए अब , एक राष्ट्रीय अधिकरण का गठन किया जाता है जिसका मुख्यालय कोलकाता में है और न्यायमूर्ति श्री ऋषिकेश बनर्जी इसके पीठासीन अधिकारी हैं और उपर्युक्त विवाद को अधिनिर्णयन हेतु उक्त राष्ट्रीय अधिकरण को इस निदेश के साथ संदर्भित किया जाता है कि न्यायमूर्ति श्री ऋषिकेश बनर्जी मामले में उस अवस्था से आगे कार्यवाही शुरू करेंगे जिसमें न्यायमूर्ति श्री बी.पी. शर्मा ने उसे छोड़ा था और कानून के अनुसार इसका निपटान करेंगे ।

[ संख्या एल-51014/03/2000-- आईआर (पीजी) ]

सिम्मीचौधरी , उप निदेशक

MINISTRY OF LABOUR

New Delhi , the 6th January, 2004

S.O. 410. In Pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947( 14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the award [Ref. No. 2(c)/98] ofthe Industrial Tribunal Patna as shown in the annexure inthe Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of UCO bank and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 23rd January, 2004.

S.O. 409. Whereas the Central Government was of the opinion that an industrial dispute existed between the management of FDC Ltd. and the Medical representatives all over India:

[No. L- 12025 /1 /2004 - IR(B - II) ] C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL , PATNA And whereas the Central Government was of the opinion that the above dispute was of the nature that Medical Representatives working in more than one State aree interested in , or affected, by sucha dispute and should be adjudicated by a National Tribunal .

Misc. Case No. 2 of 1997 No. 2C of 1998

Shantu Kumar

Complainant

Versus

Shri P. K. Chaturvedi , Divisional Manager , UCO Bank, Maurya Lok Complex, Patna.

Opposite Party And whereas the Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 7 (B) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) constituted a National Tribunal vide Ministry of Labour's Notification No. L- 51014/3/ 2000 - IR(PG ) dated 22nd May, 2001 with headquarters at Calcutta and appointed Justice Shri B. P. Sharma as its Presiding Officer and in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub -section ( 1A) of Section 10 of the said Act, referred the said industrial dispute to 751 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

For the Complainant : Sri B. Prasad, State Secretary, UCO Bank Employees Association .

None.

For the Opposite Party :

PRESENT :

dustrial Dispute Act, 1947( 14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the award [Ref. No. 3(c)/98 ]. ofthe Industrial Tribunal Patna as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in rela- tion to the management of UCO bank and their work- man, which was received by the Central Government on 23rd January, 2004.

[No. L - 12025/ 1 /2004- IR(B -II) ] PRIYA SARAN , PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL , PATNA .

C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

AWARD

ANNEXURE

The 12th January, 2004

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUS- TRIAL TRIBUNAL , PATNA

Misc. Case No. 3 of 1997 This is an application U/s . 33A of Industrial Dis- putes Act, 1947 by the Applicant Sri Shantu Kumar for reinstatement with full back wages .

No. 3C of 1998

Sri Sita Ram Jha

Complainant

Versus

1. Sri M. M. Jawaid, Manager, UCO Bank, Lalbagh , Darbhanga.

2. Sri P. K. Chaturvedi, Divisional Manager, UCO Bank, Mauryalok

Complex, Patna.

....Opposite Parties

For the Complainant: Sri B. Prasad, State Secretary, UCO Bank Employees Association , Patna

: None.

For the Opposite Party

PRESENT :

PRIYA SARAN, PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL , PAΤΝΑ .

AWARD

2. It was urged on worker's behalf that he raised a dispute for the regularisation of his services as a perma- nent peon in the UCO Bank. The management became vindictive on raising the dispute and so terminated the services of the workman . A Misc . Case U/ s. 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act under complaint No. 2 of 97 /No . 2C of 98 was then filed with a prayer of reinstatement. While both the case have been pending, the workman espoused a fresh dispute challenging the termination of his services, which has now been referred by the Govt . to this Tribunal for adjudication. In this circumstances , it appears quite sensible and really reasonable that the workman has prayed for the withdrawal of earlier dis- pute and complaint both . The evidence and the docu- ments on record, if any, do not demand any appreciation or analysis in the circumstances above . As the renewed dispute and reference cover every bit of grievance of the worker I have no hesitation whatsoever to permit the worker withdrawal the dispute/ complaint. The Tribunal thus is not required to answer the reference which stands disposed of as withdrawn.

The 12th January, 2004 PRIYA SARAN , Presiding Officer

This is an applicatión U/ s . 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 by the Applicant Sri Sita Ram Jha for reinstatement with full back wages ."

नई दिल्ली, 23 जनवरी, 2004

का.आ. 411.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार यूको बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण पटना के पंचाट [संदर्भ संख्या 3 ( सी ) /98 ] को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23 जनवरी , 2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12025/1/2004- आई.आर. ( बी II ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 23rd January, 2004

S.O. 411. In Pursuance of Section 17 of the In-

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004 /PHALGUNA 2 , 1925

record, if any, do not demand any appreciation or analysis in the circumstances above. As the renewed dispute and reference cover every bit of grievance of the worker I have no hesitation whatsoever to permit the worker withdraw the dispute/complaint . The Tribunal thus is not required to answer the reference which stands disposed of as withdrawn .

PRIYA SARAN , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 23 जनवरी , 2004

का.आ. 412.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार यूको बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण पटना के पंचाट [संदर्भ संख्या १ ( सी) /98 ] को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23 जनवरी , 2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -12012/394/95 - आई.आर. ( बी II ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 23rd January, 2004 S.O. 412. In Pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the award [Ref. No. 9 (c)/98] of the Industrial Tribunal Patna as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of UCO bank and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 23rd January, 2004.

[No. L - 12012/ 394/95 - IR(B - II ) ]

C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER , INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL , PATNA Reference No. 23 of 1997

No. 9C of 1998

Management of UCO Bank, Mauryalok Complex , Patna and their workman represented by UCO Bank Employees Association , Exhibition Road, Patna.

None.

For the Management :

For the Workman : Sri B. Prasad , State Secretary, UCO Bank Employees Association , Patna PRESENT :

PRIYA SARAN, PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL , PAΤΝΑ .

AWARD

The 12th January, 2004

By adjudication order No. L - 12012/394/95 - IR(B- II) dated 7-1-1997 the Government of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi has referred, under Clause (d) of Sub- section (1 ) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter to be referred to as ' the Act' ) the following dispute between the management of UCO Bank, Mauryalok Complex, Patna and their workman Sri Sita Ram Jha for adjudication to this tribunal :-

"Whether the action of the management of UCOBank in non - regularising the service of Shri Sita Ram Jha is justified? If not, to what relief is the said workman entitled ?" 2. It was urged on worker's behalf that he raised a dispute for the regularisation of his services as a permanent peon in the UCO Bank. The management became vindictive on raising the dispute and so terminated the services of the workman, A Misc . Case U/s . 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act under complaint No. 3 of 1997/No. 3C of 1998 was then filed with a prayer ofreinstatement . While both the cases have been pending , the workman espoused a fresh dispute challenging the termination of his services , which has now been referred by the Govt . to this Tribunal for adjudication. In this circumstance , it appears quite sensible and really reasonable that the workman has prayed for the withdrawal of earlier dispute and complaint both . The evidence and documents on record, if any, do not demand any appreciation or analysis in the circumstances above . As the renewed dispute and reference cover every bit of grievance of the worker I have no hesitation whatsoever to permit the worker withdraw the dispute/complaint . The Tribunal thus is not required to answer the reference which stands disposed of as withdrawn .

3.Award accordingly.

PRIYA SARAN, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 23 जनवरी, 2004

का.आ. 413.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार यूको बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण पटना के पंचाट 753 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

[संदर्भ संख्या 8 ( सी )/98 ] को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23 जनवरी , 2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/245/95 - आई.आर. ( बी II ) ] सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 23rd January, 2004

S.O. 413. In Pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the award [Ref. No. 8(c)/98] of the Industrial Tribunal , Patna as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of UCO bank and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 23rd January, 2004.

[No. L- 12012/ 245 /95 - IR(B - II) ] C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

2. It was urged on worker's behalf that he raised a dispute for the regularisation of his services as a permanent peon in the UCO Bank . The management became vindictive on raising the dispute and so terminated the services of the workman . A Misc . Case u/s . 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act under complaint No. 2 of 97 /No . 2C of 1998 was then filed with a prayer of reinstatement . While both the cases have been pending, the workman espoused a fresh dispute challenging the termination of his services , which has now been referred by the Govt. to this Tribunal for adjudication . In this circumstance, it appears quite sensible and really reasonable that the workman hs prayed for the withdrawal of earlier dispute and complaint both. The evidence and the documents on record, if any, do not demand any appreciation or analyses in the circumstances above . As the renewed dispute and reference cover every bit of grievance of the worker I have no hesitation whatsoever to permit the worker withdraw the dispute/ complaint . The tribunal thus is not required to answer the reference which stands disposed of as withdrawn .

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, PATNA

Reference No. 12 of 1997

3.Award accordingly.

No. 8C of 1998

PRIYA SARAN , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 27 जनवरी, 2004 Management of UCO Bank, Mauryalok Complex, Patna and their workman represented by UCO Bank Employees Association, Exhibition Road, Patna.

None.

For the Management :

For the Workman

Sri B. Prasad, State Secretary, UCO Bank Employee Association, Patna

Present:

का.आ. 4.14.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार दूर संचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय औद्योगिक अधिकरण , जयपुर के पंचाट को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27 जनवरी, 2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

Priya Saran, Presiding Officer , Industrial Tribunal , Patna .

[सं. एल-40011/3/91- आई.आर. (डीयू) ] AWARD

कुलदीप राय वर्मा , डैस्क अधिकारी The 12th January, 2004

New Delhi , the 27th January, 2004 By adjudication order No. L- 12012/ 245 /95 - IR (B - II) dated 30-12-96 the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi has referred, under Clause (d) of Sub- section( 1) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter to be referred to as ' the Act ' ) the followingdispute between the management of UCO Bank, Mauryalok Complex, Patna and their workman Sri Santu Kumar Jha for adjudication to this tribunal:-

S.O. 414. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Industrial Tribunal , Jaipur as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Telecom Deptt . and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 27th January, 2004.

[No. L-40011/3/91 - İR(DU)]

KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer "Whether the action of the management ofUCOBank, Patna in deying - regularisation of services to Shri Santu Kumar is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman isentitled"

440G1/04-10 754

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004 /PHALGUNA 2, 1925 [PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] अनुबंध

केन्द्रीय औद्योगिक न्यायाधिकरण, जयपुर

केस नं. सी.आई.टी. 54/91

रैफरेंस: केन्द्र सरकार , श्रम मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली का आदेश क्र. एल. 40011/3/91- आई.आर. (डी.यू. ) 27-9-91

श्री बुद्धा सिंह व अन्य द्वारा वाईस प्रेसीडेन्ट. बी.एम.एस. 17/161, पुरानी मण्डी, अजमेर ;

...... प्रार्थी

बनाम

एस.डी.ओ. (फोन्स) , अजमेर

अप्रार्थी

उपस्थित

जिस आदेश की प्रति पत्रावली पर प्रस्तुत की गई है । यूनियन का कथन है कि उपरोक्त नोटिस पूरी तरह औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (जिसे तत्पश्चात् अधिनियम संबोधित किया जायेगा ) की धारा 25 (एफ, ए, बी व सी ) के विरुद्ध हैं । उनका कथन है कि ऐसे नोटिसेज़ के जरिये श्रमिक की सेवाएं समाप्त नहीं की जा सकती थी क्योंकि श्रमिकगण ने एक कलैण्डर वर्ष में 240 दिवस से अधिक की सेवा विपक्षी के यहां पूर्ण कर ली थी । उनका यह भी कथन है कि माननीय सर्वोच्च न्यायालय द्वारा पी. एण्ड टी. विभाग को दैनिक वेतन भोगी एवं आकस्मिक श्रमिकों के संबंध में निर्देशित किया था कि विभाग ऐसे कर्मचारियों को 'समायोजित करने की पॉलिसी तैयार करे । यूनियन का यह . भी कथन है इस प्रकार श्रमिकगण को सेवा मुक्त किया जाना भारतीय संविधान के आर्टीकल 10.16 , व 21 की उल्लंघना है, अतः श्रमिकगण गरीब परिवारों से हैं, अतः दिनांक 30-4-88 द्वारा दिये गये नोटिसेज़ को खारिज कर श्रमिकगण को पुनः सेवा में लिया जाकर उन्हें नियमित किया जावे तथा समस्त लाभ दिलाये जायें । पीठासीन अधिकारी: आर.सी. वर्मा, आर.एच.जे.एस.

हुआ। 2. अप्रार्थी की ओर से बावजूद नोटिस के कोई उपस्थित नहीं प्रार्थी की ओर से : श्रीजे.के. अग्रवाल

अप्रार्थी की ओर से : कोई हाज़िर नहीं

दिनांक अवार्ड: 11-12-2003

अवार्ड

3. प्रार्थीगण ने अपने क्लेम के समर्थन में अपने शपथ पत्र प्रस्तुत किये हैं जिसमें सभी श्रमिकगण ने क्लेम के वर्णित तथ्यों को दोहराते हुए अभिकथन किया है कि श्रमिकगण जिस कार्य को सम्पादित कर रहे थे वह स्थाई प्रकृति का है और जब तक विपक्षी संस्थान अस्तित्व में है, तब तक वह कार्य चलने वाला है । उनका यह भी शपथ पत्रों में अभिकथन है कि उन्हें कार्य करते लगभग 4 वर्ष हो गये थे अतः उन्होंने अप्रार्थी से नियमित करने की मांग की, इसी कारण अप्रार्थी ने कार्य होते हुए भी अनुचित श्रम नीति अपनाते हुए व शोषण की नीति अपनाते हुए सेवा से उन्हें पृथक कर दिया । उनका शपथ पत्र में यह भी कथन है कि उन्हें सेवा से पृथक करने से पूर्व अधिनियम की धारा 25 एफ. जी. व एच. के प्रावधानों की पालना नहीं की गई न ही नियम 77 एवं 78 की पालना की गई , साथ ही उन्हें हटाकर नये श्रमिकों को भी अप्रार्थी संस्थान ने कार्य पर लगाया है व श्रमिकगण से कनिष्ठ व्यक्ति उस समय संस्थान में कार्य कर रहे थे , जब प्रार्थी श्रमिकगण की सेवाएं समाप्त की गईं । इस प्रकार उनका कथन है कि चूंकि सभी श्रमिकगण ने प्रत्येक वर्ष में विपक्षी के यहां 240 दिन से अधिक की सेवाएं पूर्ण कर ली हैं, अतः उन्हें समस्त लाभ व पिछले समस्त वेतन सहित सेवा में बहाल किया जावे ।

4. इसके पश्चात् मैंने प्रार्थी के विद्धान प्रतिनिधि की बहस सुनी, पत्रावली एवं इस पर उपलब्ध दस्तावेजों व अन्य सामग्री का अध्ययन व परिशीलन किया ।

1. केन्द्र सरकार, श्रम मंत्रालय, नई दिल्ली द्वारा यह विवाद इस न्यायाधिकरण को अधिनिर्णयार्थ प्रेषित किया गया है । प्रार्थी यूनियन ने स्टेटमैंट ऑफ क्लेम पेश कर अभिकथन किया कि विवाद से संबंधित श्रमिकगण सर्वश्री बुद्धा सिंह, गोपाल, श्रवणसिंह , बाबूमोहम्मद, अनवर हुसैन, बख्तावर, नारासिंह , रामलाल एवं शकूर मोहम्मद अप्रार्थी के यहां कैज़्यूअल श्रमिकों के रूप में कार्यरत थे । यूनियन का कथन है कि विपक्षी संस्थान ने इन श्रमिकों को वर्ष 1985 , 1986, 1987 एवं मई , 1988 की अवधि में कार्य पर रखा था, तथा सभी ने एक वर्ष में 240 दिन से अधिक की सेवाएं सम्पूर्ण कर ली थीं । प्रार्थी यूनियन का अभिकथन है कि विपक्षी द्वारा दिनांक 30-4-88 को श्रमिकगण को एक नोटिस दिया गया जिसमें यह अंकित था कि एक माह बाद उनकी सेवाएं समाप्त कर दी जायेंगी । यूनियन का कथन है कि उपरोक्त अवधि में सभी श्रमिकगण ने 240 दिन से अधिक कार्य किया है । उनकाकथन है कि बुद्धा सिंह ने 368 दिन, गोपाल ने 873 दिन, श्रवण सिंह ने 727 दिन, बाबू ने 911 दिन, अनवर हुसैन ने 387 दिन, बख्तावर सिंह ने 692 दिन, रामलाल कुम्हार ने 1142 दिन विपक्षी संस्थान में कार्य किया है, श्री नारासिंह ने 964 दिन उक्त अवधि में कार्य किया है । यूनियन का कथन है कि श्रमिकगण उक्त नोटिस दिनांक 30-4-81 से आश्चर्यचकित हुए जिसमें यह अंकित किया गया था कि उनकी सेवाएं 1-6-88 से समाप्त कर दी जायेंगी क्योंकि केबिल कार्य समाप्त हो गया है । यूनियन का कथन है कि उपरोक्त श्रमिकगण से कनिष्ठ श्रमिकों को सेवा में रखा गया । यूनियन का यह भी कथन है कि कुछ श्रमिकगण ने उपरोक्त नोटिस को माननीय सर्वोच्च न्यायालय में चुनौती दी और स्थगन आदेश प्राप्त कर लिया

5. प्रार्थी के विद्वान प्रतिनिधि का तर्क है कि चूंकि श्रमिकगण ने अपने साक्ष्य के जरिए यह प्रमाणित किया है कि उन्होंने विपक्षी संस्थान में एक वर्ष में 240 दिवस से अधिक की सेवा पूर्ण कर ली है एवं धारा 25 - एफ, जी व एच अधिनियम एवं नियम 77-78 की पालनाविपक्षी संस्थान द्वारा नहीं की गई है । ऐसे में श्रमिकगण की सेवा मुक्तिप्रारंभ से ही शून्य है और श्रमिकगण पुनः समस्त लाभ व पिछले वेतन सहित सेवा में बहाल होने के अधिकारी हैं । उनका यह [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

755

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

भी तर्क है कि श्रमिकगण की साक्ष्य अखण्डनीय रही है क्योंकि विपक्षी की ओर से खण्डन में कोई साक्ष्य प्रस्तुत नहीं की गई है , ऐसे में यह प्रमाणित है कि श्रमिकगण पुनः समस्त लाभ व वेतन सहित सेवा में बहाल होने के अधिकारी हैं ।

6. मैंने उपरोक्त तर्को पर विचार किया । यह सही है कि श्रमिकगण की साक्ष्य अखण्डनीय रही है और श्रमिकगण ने अपनी साक्ष्य से यह प्रमाणित किया है कि उन्होंने विपक्षी संस्थान में एक कलैण्डर वर्ष में 240दिवस से अधिक कार्य किया है । यह भी प्रमाणित है कि श्रमिकगण द्वारा किया जाने वाला कार्य स्थाई प्राकृतिक का है जिसके विरुद्ध आकस्मिक श्रमिकों की नियुक्ति करना अनुचित श्रम नीति एवं शोषण की तारीफ में आता है । अतः न्यायाधिकरण की राय में श्रमिकगण अपने पूर्व पदों पर पुनः सेवा में बहाल होने के व समस्त पिछला वेतन एवं लाभ प्राप्त करने के अधिकारी हैं क्योंकि श्रमिकगण को सेवा पृथक करने से पूर्व अप्रार्थी द्वारा धारा 25 - ए, जी , एच अधिनियम एवं नियम 77-78 की पालना नहीं की गई है । ऐसे में श्रमिकगण की सेवा मुक्तिप्रारंभ से ही शून्य मानी जायेगी ।

7. उपरोक्त विवचेन के आधार पर प्रकरण में निम्न अवार्ड पारित किया जाता है :

" सब डिवीजनल ऑफीसर (फोन्स) अजमेर द्वारा श्रमिकगण सर्वश्री अनवर हुसैन , श्रवण सिंह , गोपाल पुत्र श्री शन्दिन जी, शक्कूर मोहम्मद, नारा सिंह , बख्तावर सिंह , उस्मान अली, बाबू मोहम्मद को दिनांक 1-6-88 से सेवा पृथक किया जाना अनुचित व अवैध है । श्रमिकगण समस्त लाभ व पिछले वेतन तथा सेवा की नियमितता सहित समस्त लाभ प्राप्त करने के अधिकारी हैं ।

चूंकि श्रमिक श्री बुद्धा सिंह ने शपथ पत्र पेश कर अपने केस को प्रमाणित नहीं किया है अतः वह किसी राहत को प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी नहीं है । "

8. अवार्ड आज दिनांक 11-12-2003 को खुले न्यायालय में लिखाया जाकर सुनाया गया जो केन्द्र सरकार को प्रकाशनार्थ नियमानुसार भेजाजावे ।

आर.सी. वर्मा, पीठासीन अधिकारी नई दिल्ली, 28 जनवरी, 2004

का.आ. 415.-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 कानपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 115/98 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-1-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था। [सं. एल-12012/258/97- आई.आर. ( बी- II ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 28th January, 2004 S.O. 415. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 115/98 ) of the Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court , Kanpur (U.P. ) as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Punjab National Bank and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 27-01-2004 .

[No. L - 12012/258/ 97 - IR(B - II ) ]

C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI SURESH CHANDRA , PRESIDING OFFICER

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT SARVODAYA NAGAR, KANPUR, U.P. Industrial Dispute No. 115 of 1998 In the matter of dispute between :

The President

Punjab National Bank Employees Union , U.P. 13 -A Keshavkunj , Pratap Nagar Agra-10

AND

The Regional Manager Punjab National Bank Regional Office Church Compound, Bhajoria Road, Saharanpur.

AWARD

1. Central Government Ministry of Labour , New Delhi , vide its notification No. L - 12012 /258/ 97-1R(B - II ) dated 29-6-98 has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :- F

/ "Whether the action of the management of Punjab National Bank in denying the enhancement of scale wages from 1/3 to 3/4. to Sh . Anchal w.e.f. 27-3-86 to 23-4-93 is just fair and legal ? If not, what relief he is entitled to and from what date ?"

2. Undisputed facts giving rise to the present controversy are that the workman Sh. Anchal joined the Bank as part time sweeper on 7-8-81 . His scale wages increased to 1/3 scale wages of sub - staff w.e.f. 1-1-84. The 1/3 scale wages of the workman enhariced to 1/2 scale wages w.e.f. 20-3-89 . It is also not in dispute that as per circular no . 772 dated 17-5-84 a settlement was arrived 756

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2 , 1925 [PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ]

Thus the management cannot take any advantage by the law cited by them.

atbetween the management of Punjab National Bank and Union of the employees which was signed by both the representatives of the employer and the employees in the presence of RLC ( C ) New Delhi and is binding on the parties.

3. The case of the workman is that in the newly opened Regional Office at Saharanpur a vacancy of sweeper was filled up on 3/4 scale wages w.e.f. 27-3-86 by making a fresh appointment. The claim of the workman is that at the time of creation of the vacancy the workman was in service and senior to the man appointed and was thus deprived illegally for his promotion to 3/4 scale wages w.e.f. 27-3-86 . When he came to know of it he moved the labour department which resulted in the present reference for adjudication of the industrial dispute as per order of the competent authority.

4. The claim of the workman was contested by the opposite party bank mainly on two grounds that on the newly opened branch and newly created post a fresh appointment was made on the basis of Thikana system prevalent in the area and the claim having been lodged after lapse of 10 years is not entertainable and that the workman is not entitled for any relief as claimed in the present case.

5. Both parties lead oral as well as documentary evidence in support of their respective case .

6. Heard the parties at length through their respective ARs and have gone through the record.

9. Admittedly the contesting parties of the present dispute are bound by the settlement arrived at between them in the year 1984 in presence of RLC (C) New Delhi . The management has categorically accepted that the fresh appointment was made on account of the prevalent Baithaki System when a newly office was opened in the Cantt . area of Saharanpur District. Thus it is apparent that the onus to prove that baithaki - System was in existence is on the management when the appointment was made . The management has not filed any documentary evidence to the effect that any Baithaki System was prevalent those days . Further as per the settlement arrived at and binding on the parties , sub-clause (3) of clause(2) of the agreement, it is provided that those who are working under Thikana System may also be considered for posting on higher wages as and when a vacancyof sweeper arises on the basis of city wise seniority provided that the concerned candidates gives an undertaking to the effect that the bank will be at libertyto appoint any one else at the office and the applicant and his family/ associate would not make any claim of whatsoever nature in respect to this appointment in the office on the basis of Thikana system . Obviously no such undertaking was obtained by the bank from the workman Sri Anchal as such the management has failed miserably toprove the fact of Baithaki/Thikana System prevalent in the area amongst sweeper class or community and the management had obtained a no objection undertaking from the workman before making appointment of a fresh candidate . Further if the Baithaki System or Thikana System, though not proved, was prevalent for the sake of arguments , the management has not taken care of to obtain a no objection undertaking from the workman. Thus the fact of the bank management in appointing some one else instead of considering the candidature of senior sweeper Sri Anchal the concerned workman for upgrading, cannot be held to be just fair and legal . The workman is, therefore, held entitled for the scale wages from 1/3rd to 3/4th w.e.f. 27-3-86 to 23-4-93.

10. The workman, is therefore , held entitled to get the enhanced scale wages as per schedule of the reference order for the period mentioned therein.

7. Stress by the management has been laid down heavily on the ground that the present relief as claimed by the workman is not entertainable as the same is being sought after lapse of 10 years period. In support of their arguments the mangement has relied upon the law reported in 1996 Lab IC page 45 in the case of Balwant Singh versus Labour Court Bhatinda and others wherein the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana has been pleased to lay down that the labour court has jurisdiction to decline the relief of the basis ofbelated claim. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in a case reported in 1998 Lab IC page 1702 in the case ofUPSEB and others versus P.O. Labour Court , wherein the Hon'ble High Court was of the view that the inanagement cannot be taken by surprise after such along time.

11. Reference is answered accordingly against the management bank and in favour of the workman.

SURESH CHANDRA, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 28 जनवरी, 2004

8. In both the laws cited and relied upon by the management the facts are that the workman agitated their claim for illegal termination of their service after expiry of 5 and 8 years respectively. The facts of the case cited above by the management are entirely different from the facts of the case in hand . In the pending case the matter is ofenhancing the scale and not considering the candidature of the workman and instead a fresh appointment made .

का.आ. 416. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार कलकत्ता टेलीफोन्स के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार अधिकरण [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

757 भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

कोलकाता के पंचाट [ संदर्भ संख्या 12/96 ] को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-1-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं . एल -40012/ 13 /95 - आई.आर. (डी.यू. ) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्कअधिकारी

New Delhi , the 28th January, 2004

S.O. 416. In Pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 12/96) of the Central Govt . Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Kolkata now as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Calcutta Telephones and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 28-01-2004.

[No. L-40012/ 13 /95 - IR(DU) ]

KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, AT KOLKATA

Reference No. 12 of 1996

2. Shri Ashutosh Dey, who was appointed a casual workman initiated this reference challenging the management's order terminating the service of the said workman. Such termination, it is alleged was without any reason what-so-ever and was done in contravention of Section 25F of the 1947 Act . The workman avers that he had been working under the Calcutta Telephones with full satisfaction of his superiors and that he had a clean and meritorious record of service of about three years in the Companmy. The Company, however, all on a sudden verbally terminated his service with effect from 07-04-1994 contravaining the mandatory provisions of Section 25F of the 1947 Act. It is stated by the workman that from the date of his appointment, i.e. , 26-08-1991 till the termination with effect from 07-04-1994 he had beencontinuously performing perennial nature ofjob with tool carts under the direct control of the concerned Telecom Officers of the Company. The workman further alleges that the termination of his service with effect from 07-04-1994 is tantamount to retrenchment within the meaning of Section 2(00) of the 1947 Act and that the management also failed to pay retrenchment compensation and/or pay in lieu of notice . Thus, since the workman completed more than 240 days' work preceding the retrenchment, the said action of the management is void and inoperative.

Parties : Employers in relation to the management of Calcutta Telephones AND Their Workmen

Present :

Mr. Justice Hrishikesh Banerji :

Presiding Officer

Appearance:

On behalf of management

:Mr. T. Chowdhury, Advocate.

Onbehalf of Wrokman

: Mr. M. Dutta, Advocate.

State

: West Bengal

Industry

: Telephones .

Dated: 16th January, 2004

AWARD

By Order No. L-40012/ 13/ 95 - IR(DU) dated 24th April, 1996 the Central Government in exercise of its powers under Section 10( 1 ) (d) and (2A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 1947 Act in short) referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management of Calcutta Telephones in terminating the services of Shri Ashutosh Dey is legal and justified ? Ifnot, to what relief the workman isentitled ?"

3. The workman as WW - 1 has stated that he was engaged as a casual worker in 35/36 Exchange of Calcutta Telephones for the purpose of upgradation of telephone lines with effect from 26-08-1991 . He further stated that hisworking hours were from 9/9.30 Α.Μ. to 6/6.30 Ρ.Μ. daily; that he used to sign the attendance register every day and that Bhanu Chowdhury (MW- 2 ) used to maintain the attendance register. He has stated that they were paid monthly wages and that the management terminated his service on 09-08-1994 . He further states that he worked continuously during the period of his service and that he had put in more than 240 days ' service. Stating that he has not been working elsewhere , he prays that he is entitled tobe reinstated in service with back wages. In his cross- examination the workman denied that no attendance register was maintained . The workman also denied that he was engaged by Mr. Bhanu Chowdhury as a casual labour for the first time on 02-12-1991 . He also denied the management's allegation that he did not join the service on 26-08-1991 . He also denied that no work was allotted for him on and from 19-03-1993 and that he only worked for 15 days in December , 1991. He denied the suggestion that he had worked for 22 days in February 1992, 20 days in March 1992, 20 days in April 1992 , 14 days in June 1992 , 14 days in July 1992, 12 days in October 1992, 12 days in November 1992 and 4 days in March, 1993. He denied the management's statement that he worked for 166 days only during the entire period of his service with the Calcutta Telephones from 02-12-1991 to 19-03-1993 .

758

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004 /PHALGUNA 2, -1925 [PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)]

March, 1993 he worked for 4 days when there was a break-down. He worked there from December, 1991 to November, 1992. Such work was performed by him with breaks . In his cross-examination , this witness stated that some of the vouchers were missing and those were not filed in the present proceeding . The witness denied the suggestion that several vouchers had been withheld and suppressed purposely in order to make out a case that the workmanhad worked only for 162 days .

4. It is stated by the management in the written statement that the upgradation work aforesaid was .completed in March , 1993 and the workman was disengaged in March , 1993. It is stated by the management that the workman never worked continuously, nor completed 240 ' days continuous service. He was also not engaged for continuous period of 12 calender months . Since he was engaged to serve a particular purpose of Calcutta Telephones, the workman is not entitled to any relief from this Tribunal by way of reinstatement and back wages . It is also stated that the workman was disengaged in the month of March, 1993 and not on 07-04-1994 as alleged by him.

6. ACG- 17 vouchers and ACE - 2 accounts which have been admitted into evidence on behalf of the management are marked Exts . M- 1 to M- 14. From these vouchers and accounts it appears that the workman performed work for 15 days in December 1991 , 22 days in February 1992 , 20 days in March 1992 , 20 days in April , 1992, 14 days in June 1992 and also for 18 days for which payment was made on 19-06-1992, 14 days in the month of July 1992 and also for 15 days for which payment was made on 14-09-1992, 12 days in the month ofOctober, 1992, 12 days in the month ofNovember 1992 and only for 4 days in the month of March 1993. Thus , the total period of engagement of the workman has been for the period of 166 days .

7. Ext . W-1 is the letter from the workman addressed to the Divisional Engineer ( Telephones ) , Calcutta Telephones . In this letter the workman states that although he completed more than 240 days ' work , his service was terminated without complying with the mandatory provisions of Section 25F of the 1947 Act. He further states that the attendance register kept and maintained by the S.D. O. (P) , produced would show that he completed more than 240 days' work preceding to his retrenchment with effect from 07-04-1994 .

5. MW- 1 , Shri Jayanta Kumar Roy was posted as Junior Telecom Officer in 1991 and 1992 , to 35/36 Exchange . Ashutosh Dey worked under him as casual labour from 02-12-1991 to 14-11-1992 and during this period the workman worked for a total period of 100 days . The said workman was appointed for upgradation work under both Jayanta Kumar Roy and Bhanu Chowdhury who were directly involved in the said work. The work ofupgradation came to an end in November, 1992 and the concerned workman never worked under Jayanta Kr . Roy in 1993 and 1994. In his cross -examination this witness stated that he could not produce any paper for upgradation work as the order was verbal . He further deposed that the papers in the Accounts Department would show the duration of the upgradation work . This witness denied that the workman worked for more than 240 days in 1993 and 1994. This witness also stated that the attendance of the casual workers used to be recorded in the rough notes , which were destroyed after the preparation of the ACG - 17 vouchers . The witness denied that they used to maintain attendance register for the casual workmen . He also denied that the workmen worked from 1991 to 1994 continuously.

8. Mr. Chowdhury appearing for the management referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in AIR 1997 SC 3057 ( Himanshu Kumar Vidyarthi & Ors . v. State of Bihar) Wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as follows :

MW -2 , Shri Bhanu Chowdhury, Junior Telecom Officer of 35/36 Exchange deposed that the workman started working in December, 1991 and worked with breaks upto November, 1992 , the year in which the upgradation work was over. After 1992 the workman was not required to be retained . This witness further stated that the workman was not working continuously during the period of his employment. He worked for 54 days under the said J.T.O. , Bhanu Chowdhury.

MW - 4 , Shri Ranjit Acharya was S.D.O.P. Ultadanga Sub -Division under Manicktala Exchange of Calcutta'Telephones . He deposed that he took charge of upgradation work on 13th February, 1991 and that the job of upgradation was completed in November, 1992 . This witness stated that Ashutosh Dey was a casual worker at Manicktala Exchange and that he was engaged in the work of upgradation . He worked for such upgradation for 162 days . Thereafter in the month of

When the appointments are regulated by the statutory rules , the concept of " industry" to that extent stands excluded. Admittedly, they were not appointed to the posts in accordance with the rules but were engaged on the basis of need of the work. They are temporary employees working on daily wages . Under these circumstances , their disengagement from service cannot be construed to be a retrenchment under the Industrial Disputes Act. The concept of " retrenchment" therefore, cannot be stretched to such an extent as to cover these employees . The learned counsel for the petitioners seeks to contend that in the High Court, the petitioners did not contend that it is a case of retrenchment but termination of their services is arbitrary. Since they are only daily -wage employees [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

759 and have no right to the posts , their disengagement is not arbitrary."

Section 25B of the 1974 Act contains the definition of continuous service as follows :-

"25B . Definition of continuous service-For the purpose of this Chapter-

In AIR 1981 SC 1253 (Mohan Lal v. Management of Bharat Electronics Ltd. ) referred to by Mr. Chowdhury, Ithas been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that before aworkman can complain of retrenchment being not in consonancewith Section 25 - F he has to show that he has been in continuous service for not less than one year under that employer who has retrenched him from service. It has been further held that Section 25B is the dictionary clause for the expression " continuous service" .

( I ) a workman shall be said to be in continuous service for a period if he is, for that period, in uninterrupted service, including service which may be interrupted on account of sickness or authorised leave or an accident or a strike which isnot illegal , or a lock- out or a cessation of work which is not due to any fault on the part of the workman;

(2) where a workman is not in continuous service within the meaning of clause ( 1) for a period of one year or six months , he shall be deemed to be in continuous service under an employer- 7. Mr. Dutta appearing for the workman referred to the decision in 2000 (2) CHN 590. This case is clearly distinguishable in-as -much as the workman in the said case had continuously worked for more than 240 days ; but in the case in hand the workman is found to have worked for 166 days during the period from 1991 to 07-04-1994.

(a) for a period ofone year, if the workman, during a period of twelve calendar months preceding the date with reference to which calculation is to be made, has actually worked under the employer for not less than-

(i ) one hundered and ninety days in the case of a workman employed below ground in a mine; and

(ii) two hundered and forty days, in any other case;

Mr. Dutta also referred to the Supreme Court decision in 1985 - II - LLJ 539 at page 542 where it has been held that Section 25F of the 1947 Act is plainly intended to give relief to reteriched workman and the qualification for such relief is that the workman should be employed in an industry and has been in continuous service for not less than one year under an employer. It has been futher held there that what is continuous service has been defined and explained in Section 25B of the 1947 Act. It was observed in the said decision as follows:

.a workman who is not in continuous service for a period of one year shall be deemed to be in continuous a period of twelve calendar months preceding the date with refrence to which the calculation is to be made, has actually worked under the employer for not less than 240 days .

As the workman worked for 166 days only during the period from 1991 to 19-03-1993 with breaks , it cannot be said that his service during the aforesaid period has been continuous within the meaning of either Section 25B ( 1 ) or 25B (2)(a) ( ii ) of the 1947 Act. The workman, therefore , is not entitled to any retrenchment compensation and notice/notice pay as per Section 25F of the 1947 Act .

The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 1980 -I - LLJ 137 (Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd. v. Gujarat Steel Tubes Mazdoor Sabha) is not applicable to the facts of the present case as it is found from the said decision that the management terminated the services of all the workmen.

9. The decisions reported in 1976 -I -LLJ 478 ( State Bank of India v . N. Sundaramoney) , 1986 -I -LLJ 127 ( Shri H.D. Singh V. Reserve Bank of India) and 1983 - I -LLJ 415 ( Shambu Nath Goyal v. Bank of Baroda & Ors . ) cited byMr. Dutta are not applicable to the facts of the present case.

Mr. Dutta also referred to the Supreme Court decision reported in 1978 - I - LLJ - 322 where it has been held ". In industrial Law, interpreted and applied in the perspective of Part IV of the Constitution , the benefit of reasonable doubt on law and facts , if there be such doubt, must go to the weaker section , labour. "

10. In view of the above, it is held that the action ofthe management of Calcutta Telephones in terminating the services ofthe workman , Shri Ashutosh Dey is lawful and justified and as such the workman is not entitled to any relief.

HRISHIKESH BANERJI , Presiding Officer

Dated, Kolkata,

8. Considering the submission made by the learned Advocates appearing for the parties , I find that the workman had worked only for 166 days during the period of his employment from 02-12-1991 to 19-03-1993. The 16th January, 2004.

760

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

दिनांक: 20-12-2003

नई दिल्ली, 28 जनवरी, 2004

अवार्ड

इस प्रकरण में केन्द्र सरकार से प्राप्त श्रम विवाद (रेफरेंस ) इस प्रकार था कि क्या विपक्षीगण द्वारा अपने भूतपूर्व पार्ट टाईम सर्वेयर सुनील कुमार की दि. 25-5-99 से की गई सेबामुक्ति वैध तथा उचित थी यदि नहीं तो प्रार्थी क्या अनुतोष पाने का अधिकारी है ?

का.आ. 417.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अधीन अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार, दूरदर्शन केन्द्र के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, अजमेर के पंचाट को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को28-1-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -42012/175/2000- आई आर (डी.यू. ) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्कअधिकारी -New Delhi, the 28th January, 2004

S.O. 417. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Industrial Tribunal , Ajmer as shown in annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of Doordarshan Kendra and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 28-1-2004.

[No. L-42012/175/2000- IR(DU) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

उक्त रेफरेंस प्राप्त होने पर प्रार्थी सुनील कुमार ने अपने स्टेटमेंट ऑफ क्लेम दि. 20-3-01 को हमारी न्यायालय में पेश किया था । विपक्षीगण ने क्लेम का जवाब दि. 13-8-01 को पेश किया था । क्लेम के समर्थन में प्रार्थी ने खुद का शप्पथ पत्र दि. 25-1-02 को पेश किया था तथा अधिवक्तागण ने दि. 27-3-02 को उससे जिरह पूरी की थी । विपक्षीगण की ओर से उनके प्रशासनिक अधिकारी के. एस. राठौड़ का शपथ पत्र दि. 19-4-03 को पेश किया गया था एवं दि. 6-9-03 को विपक्षी के उक्त गवाह से प्रार्थी ने अपनी जिरह पूरी की थी । दस्तावेजी सबूत में प्रार्थी ने एक श्रम विभाग की एक पर्ची प्रदर्श डब. 1 दर्शक अनुसंधान अधिकारी के पत्र की फोटो कॉपी प्रदर्श डब. 2 कार्यालय टिप्पणी का कागज प्रदर्श डब. 3 प्रार्थी के वकील द्वारा दिए गए नोटिस कीकॉपी प्रदर्श डब . 4 एवं दर्शक अनुसंधान अधिकारी द्वारा जारी पत्र कीकॉपी प्रदर्श डब . 5 की भांति प्रदर्शित कराए गए हैं । विपक्षीगण की ओर से के.सी. देवरिया के पत्र की फोटो कॉपी प्रदर्श एम -1 तथा रिक्त अधिसूचना पत्र की फोटो कॉपी प्रदर्श एम -2 पेश की है । अनुबन्ध

उभय पक्ष ने इस प्रकरण में अपनी मौखिक बहस के अलावा बहस का लिखित सारांश भी न्यायालय के अनुरोध पर पेश किया है, जो पत्रावली में शामिल है ।

श्रम न्यायालय एवं औद्योगिक न्यायाधिकरण , अजमेर ( राज. ) पीठासीन अधिकारी अतुल कुमार जैन, आर एच जे एस प्रकरण संख्या-सी आई टी आर -01 /01

(केन्द्र सरकार का रेफरेंस पत्र क्र. एल-42012/ 175 /2000 आईआरडीयू नई दिल्ली, दिनांक 30-10-2000 )

प्रार्थी का कहना है कि उसने विपक्षीगण के यहां पार्ट टाईम सर्वेयर के पद पर 19-4-98 से 25-9-99 तक की अवधि में लगातार 525 दिन कार्य किया था तथा विपक्षीगण ने उसे धारा 25 फ औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम की अवहेलना करते हुए दि. 27-9-99 को सेवा से निकाल दिया। प्रार्थी का यह भी कहना है कि उसे हटाने के बाद विपक्षीगण ने छः कर्मचारियों को पुनः उसी कार्य पर उन्हीं शर्तों पर लगाया गया जिन्हें भी बाद में विपक्षीगण ने सेवा से हटा दिया ।

सुनील कुमार पुत्र रामजीलाल ( फरियादी ने जाति व उम्र नहीं बताई है )

निवासी- मकान नं. 1366/28 , भगवानगंज, अजमेर

......प्रार्थी

बनाम

1. निदेशक, जयपुर दूरदर्शन केन्द्र, जयपुर

2. दर्शक अनुसंधान अधिकारी , जयपुर दूरदर्शन, जयपुर

अप्रार्थीगण

विपक्षीगण का कहना है कि प्रार्थी को केवल मात्र आकस्मिक कार्य की आवश्यकता की पूर्ति हेतु निश्चित उद्देश्य एक निश्चित समयावधि हेतु कांट्रैक्ट पर आकस्मिक श्रमिक के रूप में रखा गया था तथा उसे सेवा से हटाना रिट्रेंचमेंट की परिभाषा में नहीं आता है । विपक्षीगण का यह भी कहना है कि कुल दो वर्षों में अजमेर डार्ट रेटिंग का संग्रहण • 33अवसरों पर ही किया गया था अतः प्रार्थी का यह दावा कि उसने सेवाकाल में विपक्षीगण के यहां 525 दिन कार्य किया, पूर्णतः गलत है । विपक्षीगण का कहना है कि सितम्बर 1999 में अजमेर शहर में डार्ट सर्वे बंद कर दिया गया था अतः सभी अंशकालीन सर्वेयरों का प्रार्थी के साथ हीसर्वेक्षण कार्य बंद हो गया था । विपक्षीगण का कहना है कि अजमेर शहर में डार्ट सर्वेक्षण जब शुरु किया गया तब प्रार्थी समझौता अधिकारी केयहां श्रम विवाद दर्ज करवा चुका था अतः प्रार्थी को सर्वेक्षण कार्य के लिए नहीं बुलाया गया था । विपक्षीगण का कहना है कि सर्वेक्षण हेतु उपस्थित: श्री कैलाश शर्मा , एडवोकेट, प्रार्थी की ओर से । श्रीतेजप्रकाश शर्मा, एडवोकेट, अप्रार्थीगण की ओर से ।

1 761 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

इंजिनियरिंग वर्क्स पेश की है जिसमें शपथ पत्र की तस्दीक में खामियां होने पर उस शपथ पत्र को साक्ष्य में नहीं पढ़े जाने के निर्देश दिये गये थे ।

दस रुपये प्रतिदिन पाने वाले एक पार्ट टाईम कर्मचारी को धारा 25एफ औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 का लाभ एक प्रकरण में हमारी न्यायालय में मेरे पूर्वीधिकारी ने दिया थाजिसे भी माननीय राज. उच्च न्यायालय ने एस. बी. सिविल रिट नं. 4001/2002 डिप्टी डायरेक्टर एलीमेंट्री एज्यूकेशन के मामले में दि. 17-2-03 को स्टे कर दिया है ।

चयनित अभ्यर्थी को एक डायरी निर्धारित प्रपत्र में एक सप्ताह में सर्वेक्षण कार्य पूरा किए जाने हेतु एक डायरी दी जाती थी जिसमें वांछित सूचना भरने के बाद सप्ताह के अंतिम दिन सर्वेक्षण डायरी अभ्यर्थी एकत्र करके विपक्षीगण को वापस सौंपते थे । विपक्षीगण का कहना है कि दूरदर्शन विभाग का दर्शक अनुसंधान एकांश पूरे वर्ष आवश्यकतानुसार समय समय पर विभिन्न शहरों एवं क्षेत्रों में सर्वे कार्य कराता रहता है तथा इस कार्य में एक महीने में सिर्फ दो दिनों में चार- पांच घंटे कार्य करना होता था और उसके अनुसार ही अभ्यर्थी को बैंक द्वारा भुगतान किया जाता था । विपक्षीगण का कहना है कि सीजनल कार्य के लिए संविदाके तहत निश्चित अवधि के लिए रखे गए पार्ट टाईम श्रमिक को 240दिन का सेवाकाल होना नहीं माना जाना चाहिए ।

उक्त संपूर्ण विवेचन से यह सिद्धांत सामने आता है कि पार्ट टाईम कर्मचारी को वर्कमैन भले ही मान लिया जावे , 240 दिनों कीगणना के लिए उसने आठघंटे प्रतिदिन के हिसाब से 240 दिन कार्य करना आवश्यक होया हालांकि रविवार व सवैतनिक देय अवकश भी उसके कार्य दिवसों में गिने जा सकेंसे प्रार्थी का कहना है कि उसने तो विपक्षीगण के यहां 525 दिन तक पार्ट टाईम सर्वेयर के रूप में कार्य किया है अतः उसे धारा 25फ औद्योगिक विवाद अधि. 1947 का लाभ दिया जाकर विपक्षीगण के यहांसेवाकाल में पुनः बहाल किया जावे ।

अब हमें वर्तमान प्रकरण में यह देखना है कि क्या प्रार्थी ने इसमें कोई संदेह नहीं है कि पार्ट टाईम काम करने वाला व्यक्ति भी वर्कमैन की परिभाष में आता है , इस संबंध में 1991 ( 2 ) आर एलआर 326 कन्हैयालाल/ स्टेट ऑफ राज. की नजीर प्रार्थी ने हमारे समक्ष पेश की है । उल्लेखनीय है कि उक्त नजीर में पिटीशनर कन्हैयालाल 11 रु. प्रतिदिम के दैनिक वेतन पर प्रतिदिन आठ घंटे की ड्यूटी चतुर्थ श्रेणी कर्मचारी के रूप में राज्य सरकार में देता था । इस प्रकार से उस नजीर में कर्मचारी एक पार्टटाईम कर्मचारी न होकर पूर्णकालिक दैनिक वेतन भेगीकर्मचारी था । उक्त वजह से उक्त नजीर में पार्टटाईम कर्मचारी के अधिकारों की विवेचना विवादित नहीं थी ।

सेवामुक्ति के तुरंत पूर्व एक वर्ष में 240 दिन या अधिक दिनों तक आठ घंटे प्रतिदिन के हिसाब से विपक्षी के यहां कार्य किया है । प्रार्थी ने क्लेम मेंतोकेवल मात्र यह लिखाया है कि उसने 19-4-98 से 25-9-99 की लगभग डेढ़ वर्ष की अवधि में विपक्षी के यहां लगभग 525 दिन पार्ट टाईम काम किया था जिसमें उसे 10/ - रु. प्रति प्रश्नावली की दर से वेतन जरिये चैक दिया गया था । विपक्षी ने अपने जवाब में पृष्ठ 5 पर दूसरे पैरा में यह लिखाया है कि प्रार्थी को दि. 19-4-98 से 25-9-99 के बीच साप्ताहिक आधार पर सर्वेक्षण डायरियां दी गयी थी परंतु उल्लेखनीय है कि साप्ताहिक सर्वेक्षण कार्य में मात्र दो या तीन घंटे का हीवास्तविक कार्य होता है न कि पूरे सप्ताह का और उसी के आधार पर समयसमय पर बैंक द्वारा भुगतान किया जाता रहा है । विपक्षीगण ने पैरा सं. 3 में लिखाया है कि कुल दो वर्षों में डार्ट रेटिंग का संग्रहण कार्य 33 अवसरों पर ही किया गया था अतः प्रार्थी का यह कहना कि उसने उक्त अवधिमें 525 दिन कार्य किया हो, पूर्णतः गलत है । विपक्षीगण ने क्लेम के जवाब के पैरा सं. 16 में अंकित किया है कि अजमेर डार्ट रेटिंग का कार्य महीने में एक दो बार ही संग्रहण होता था इसलिए प्रार्थी को महीने मेंसिर्फ दो दिन तक कुल समय चार - पांच घंटे कार्य करना होता था । पार्ट टाईम कर्मचारी को वर्कमैन तो मामा जा सकता है लेकिनपार्ट टाईम कर्मचारी को धारा 25एफ औद्यौगिक विवाद अधिनियम का लाभ लेने के लिए सेवामुक्ति के तुरंत पूर्व के एक वर्ष की अवधि में 240 दिन तक लगातार कार्य करना प्रमाणित करना होता है । एक दिन सामान्यतः आठ घंटे का माना जाता है । एक व्यक्तिजो रोजाना केवल मात्र एक या दो घंटे काम करता है या एक सप्ताह में केवल मात्र तीन-चार घंटे काम करता है , धारा 25 एफ औद्योगिक विवाद अधि. 1947 का लाभ पाने के लिए एक वर्ष की अवधिमें 240 दिन काअपना सेवाकाल साबित नहीं कर सका है । वैसे भी एक व्यक्ति चार जगह प्रतिदिन दो घंटे के हिसाब सेसाल भर काम करे तो क्या चारों जगह वह परमानेंट हो जाने काअधिकारी हो जावेगा या क्या चारों नियोजकों के खिलाफ उसे धारा 25एफ आई. डी. एक्ट 1947 का लाभ मिल सकेगा ? जाहिर है कि उक्त प्रकार के मामलों में वर्कमैन को धारा 25 एफ औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 का लाभ नहीं मिल सकेगा । औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम में परमानेंट पार्ट टाईम कर्मचारी रखे जाने का प्रावधान नहीं है ।

अब हम इस संबंध में प्रार्थी सुनील कुमार के बयानों तथा विपक्षीगण के गवाह के. एस. राठौड़ के बयानों का अवलोकन करेंगे । जिरह में पृष्ठसं. 2 पर फरियादी सुनील कुमार ने स्वीकार किया हैकिनित्य वह एक अथवा दो घंटे सर्वे का काम करता था तथा फिर घर चला जाता था वह कहता है कि डायरी एक सप्ताह बाद वह दूरदर्शन वालों को दे देता था तथा दूरदर्शन वाले भुगतान का चैक डाक द्वारा भेज दिया करते थे । जिरह में वह कहता है कि वर्ष 1998 में उसने कितनें दिन काम किया उसे पता नहीं है उल्लेखनीय है कि सेवामुक्ति के तुरंत पूर्व के एक वर्ष में 240 दिन या अधिक दिनों तक लगभग आठ घंटे प्रतिदिन कार्य करना साबित करने का सिद्धभार धारा 25एफ औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 का लाभ लेने के लिए प्रार्थी श्रमिक का होता है । इस संबंध में माननीय सर्वोच्चन्यायालय के निम्न निर्णय उल्लेखनीय है । ( 1 ) प्रार्थी ने 2003 ( 4 ) एलएलएन पेज 810 ( राज. ) म्युनिसिपल बोर्ड, भरतपुर/ लेबर कोर्ट, भीलवाड़ा की नज़ीर भी उल्लेखित की है । उक्त नज़ीर पार्टटाईम कर्मचारियों के संबंध में नहीं थी । प्रार्थी ने तीसरी नज़ीर ए. आई. आर. 1982 दिल्ली पेज 220 मैसर्स सुंदर इंड./जनरल

440G1/04-11 762

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] एआईआर 2002 सुप्रीम कोर्ट 1147 रेंज फॉरेस्ट ऑफिसर/स्टेट ऑफ कर्नाटका ( 2 ) एआईआर 1981 सुप्रीम कोर्ट पेज 1253 मोहनलाल बनाम मैनेजमैंट ऑफ भारत इलेक्ट्रॉनिक तथा 2003 एलएल आर सुप्रीम कोर्ट पेज 1 यूपीएई जगदीश प्रसा/कनक आदि ।

तद‌नुसार अवार्ड इस प्रकार पारित किया जाता है कि प्रार्थी सुनील कुमार विपक्षीगण से अपनी सेवामुक्ति दि. 25-9-99 के संबंध में किसी प्रकार का कोई अनुतोष प्राप्त करने का हकदार नहीं है । दिनांक 25-9-99 के बाद विपक्षीगण द्वारा उसे संविदा पर काम नहीं दिया जाना किसी प्रकार से अनुचित या अवैधानिक नहीं था ।

दिनांक 20-12-2003

अतुल कुमार जैन, न्यायाधीश

नई दिल्ली, 29 जनवरी , 2004

का.आ. 418.-औधिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार, साऊथ ईस्टर्न रेलवे 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 आई. डी. नं. 36/2002 ). को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-1-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-41014/01/2004- आई आर ( बी.1 ) ] अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी

NewDelhi , the 29th January, 2004.

S.O. 418. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (I.D. No. 36/2002) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Hyderabad now as shown in annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the, Manageinent of South Eastern Railway and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on28-1-2004.

इस प्रकार हम देखते हैं कि प्रार्थी ने अपने बयान में यह प्रमाणित नहींकिया है कि सेवामुक्त के तुरंत पूर्व की एक वर्ष की अवधि में 240 दिन या उससे अधिक समय तक लगभग आठ घंटे प्रतिदिन विपक्षीगण के यहां कार्य किया है । इस संबंध में विपक्षीगण के गवाह के. एस. राठौर प्रशासनिक अधिकारी , जयपुर दूरदर्शन, जयपुर के बयानों का भी हम अवलोकन करें तो उसमें उक्त गवाह से प्रार्थी पक्ष ने तेरह पृष्ठों की जिरह करने के बावजूद कहीं भी यह साबित नहीं कराया है कि विपक्षी के यहां प्रार्थी ने सेवामुक्ति के तुरंत पूर्व के एक वर्ष में 240 दिन या अधिक समय तक कार्य किया हो या नित्य उसने उक्त अवधि में लगभग आठ घंटे प्रतिदिन कार्य किया हो । इसके विपरीत उक्त गवाह ने जिरह के पृष्ठ नौ पर यह स्पष्ट किया है कि प्रार्थी हफ्ते में केवल दो बार एक अथवा दो घंटे के लिए आता था अतः उसका कार्य दिनों में नहीं गिना जा सकता था । उक्त गवाह ने कहा है कि यह गलत है कि तैंतीस अवसरों पर सात दिन प्रति अवसर कार्य करने से विपक्षीगण द्वारा 231 कार्यदिवसों में कार्य किया गया हो । उक्त गवाह ने अपने बयानों में स्पष्ट रूप से कहा है कि प्रार्थी को सीज़नल/इंटरमिटेंट कार्य के लिए मौखिक संविदा का पार्ट टाईम कार्य के रूप में प्रश्नावलियों का दर्शकों से उत्तर तैयार करवाने के लिए दस रुपए प्रति प्रश्नावली की दर से कार्य दिया गया था तथा उसके कार्यकाल में कुल तैंतीस प्रश्नावलियां दूरदर्शन विभाग ने जारी की थीं इस प्रकार अधिक से अधिक प्रार्थी को 330/- रुपए का भुगतान संभवतः था यदि उसने सभी तैंतीस प्रश्नावलियों के उत्तर दर्शकों से कलेक्ट करके विपक्षीगण के यहां जमा कराये हों । प्रार्थी ने उक्त तथ्य भी साबित नहीं किया है ।

[No. L-41014/01 / 2004- IR(B.1 ) ]

AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE'

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURTAT HYDERABAD

जहां तक विपक्षीगण के गवाह के शपथ पत्र की नियमानुसार तस्दीक का प्रश्न है, विपक्षीगण के शपथपत्र से लंबी प्रार्थी द्वारा की गयी जिरह जो तेरह पृष्ठों में अंकित की गयी है उक्त शपथपत्र. जिरह में विश्वास क्यों नहीं किया जावे , इस संबंध में प्रार्थी कुछ नहीं कह सका है । गवाह के. एस. राठौर का शपथपत्र भी प्रथमतः उचित प्रकार से तस्दीक किया गया प्रतीत होता है ।

PRESENT:

Shri E. Ismail, B.Sc. , LL.B. , Presiding Officer प्रार्थी द्वारा पेश किये गये दस्तावेजात् प्रदर्श डब. 1 लगायत प्रदर्श डब.5 से भी प्रार्थी के तकों को कोई बल नहीं मिलता है ।

Dated the 22nd day of December, 2003

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTEL.C.I.D. NO. 36/2002 (old I.D. No. 12/2001 Transferred from Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Visakhapatnam)

Between:

Sri Dasari Appa Rao,

S/o Lat Perayya,

R/o Totapalem,

Vizianagaram,

उक्त संपूर्ण विवेचन के आधार पर यह कहा जा सकता है कि प्रार्थी सुनील कुमार अपने आपको धारा 25 एफ औद्योगिक विवाद अधि. 1947 के प्रावधानों का लाभ लेने के लिए हकदार होना साबित नहीं कर सका है । विपक्षीगण द्वारा उसे मौखिक संविदा के तहत पीस रेट वर्क दिया जाता था जिसे वह एक सप्ताह में एक या दो घंटे में कार्य करके पूरा कर लेता था । प्रार्थी इस प्रकार अपना 240 दिवस काकार्यकाल नियमानुसार साबित नहीं कर सका है ।

-Petitioner

Vizianagaram District.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

763

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

AND

The Divisional Railway Manager ,

South Eastern Railway,

Waltair,

Visakhapatnam.

Respondent

Appearances:

For the Petitioner

Sri M. Siva Prasada Rao Advocate

For the Respondent : M/sBadrinath & Madan Mohan , Advocates

AWARD

that he has worked from 25-6-64, that he was given a memo togo for medical examination that he was not examined, all are false. The genuineness of the documents is hereby denied and than they filed a detailed counter . That as per the observations and suggestions made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court the Railway Board had decided in principle that casual labour may be treated as temporary on completion of 360 days of continuous employment and formulated a scheme under Railway Board letter (No. E. NGII/84 /CL/41 ) dated 1-6-1984 and to those casual labour though not in service as on 1-1-84 but completed the prescribed period of 360 days of continuous employment should be considered for extending the benifit ofemployment.

This is a case taken under Sec . 2A(2 ) of the I.D. Act , 1947 by the Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Visakhapatnam in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble high court ofAndhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 betweeri Sri U. Chinnappa and M/s. CottonCorporation of India and two others and transferred to this court in view of the Government of India , Ministry ofLabour's order No. H - 11026/ 1 /2001 - IR (C - II ) dated 18-10-2001 bearing I.D. No. 12/2001 and renumbered in this Court as L.C.I.D. No. 36/2002 and notices were issued to the concerned parties.

2. That the Petitioner was working as casual Khalasi for a long period of 32 years from 25-6-64 to 13-6-96. As per available documents with the above workman, the workman has worked 286 days continuously from 25-1-1969 to 23-12-1969 and 247 days continuously from 27-1-1967 to 23-12-1967 and similary worked continuously from 25-6-1964 to 13-6-1996 . On 13-6-96 the workman attended before Divisional Medical Officer, S.E. Rly. , Waltair as per instructions of the said Manager vide medical memo etc. But the applicant was not examined by the Medical officer on 13-6-96 . His working days were given as 198 and thus he was not called for medical examination. The same is false . They did not provided him work from 14-6-96. The termination of the workman is void ab initio and illegal . The workman was strong on the date of termination i.e. , 14-6-96 . The workman made oral representation and also written representation dated 29-3-2000 to reconsider the decision but the Management neither reconsidered the case of the workman nor given any reply to the workman. Hence, the Management may bepleasedto order the Management to permit the workman for medical examination for the purpose of regularization of his services and to order the Management for reinstatement of the workman as Khalasi with full back wages upto date with continuity of his service and service benifits in the interest ofjustice.

3. A counter was filed on behalf of the Management stating that the allegations are not true and the Petition is liable to be dismissed in limini . That all the said allegations,

4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court had examined the Railway Board's instructions in Indrapal Yadav's case and a batch of Writ Petitions were disposed by their Lordships on 18-4-85 duly approving the scheme framed by the Railway Board duly modifying the cut off date from 1-1-81 to 1-1-84 and those who were not re -engaged after 1-1-81 . Such casual labour represented by Dakshin Railway Employees Union , TrivendrumDivision filed Write Petition No. 332/86 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. At the time ofhearing of the Writ Petition the Learned Counsel for the Railways hadbrought to the notice of the Hon'ble Supreme Court about the difficulty which will be experienced by the Railway Administration without any time limit for claiming the benefit of the scheme. The Hon'ble Supreme Court appreciated the difficulty expressed by Railway Administration and directed that persons who desires to claim the benefit of the scheme on the ground that they had been retrenched before 1-1-81 should submit their claim to the administration before 31-3-87 and the Railways shall then consider the genuineness of the claim and process them. In view of the same the Railways has issues a letter (No. Estt . Sl . No. 58/87) dated 2-3-87 . Further, the Railway Board vide its instructions dated 21-10-87 had laid down that the casual labour who was found genuine willbe included in a supplementary live casual register and they are to be re -engaged as and when there is casual labour requirement and the services rendered after 1-1-81 as casual labour will be taken into account for the purpose of granting temporary status in accordance with the provisions ofBoard's letter dated 11-9-96. In the instant case, the Petitioner was engaged as casual labour under IOW/VZM for a total period of 198 days during the period from January, 1969 to February, 1970 and then he left the job . As he was pre 81 casual labour he had responded to DRM(P)/WAT notification and after due screening he was enrolled in the supplementary casual register for his future engagement as and when the casual sanction was granted vide AEN/VZM letter No. NÉ/9/60 dated 22-10-91 . In terms ofthe instructions in Estt . Sl . No. 308/87 whenever the re- engagement of the persons of on the supplementary list ofcasual labour is considered the Railway administration [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] 764

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

Ex.M2 shows that he worked from 25-1-69 to 23-2-70 for 198 days . The Doctor has asked vide Ex. W4 for how many days he worked . It is not true to suggest that he gave wrong calculation as per Ex.W5 . He does not know whether he was certified medically fit or unfit.

had to subject them to medical examination . The applicant was referred for medical examination for Bl category. So the Medical Officer asked him the number of days he worked . He was re-directed after furnishing the information. After that the applicant neither attended the office for re- engagement and nor he gave information resulted in the medical examination . Hence , the contention of the Petitioner that he was a casual khalasi for 32 long years is wrong. It is found out that he worked for 198 days from 26-6-69 to 23-12-69 and 27-1-70 to 23-2-70 with breaks and not continuously from 25-6-64 . That the Doctor has directed the Petitioner to admit himself for glass examination due to his eye sight . He was again, directed for medical examination . He was not attended medical examination. Although he was referred for medical examination in 1996 till 2000 neither he gave the result of medical examination nor approached till 2001. Hence, the petition may be dismissed.

9. In the cross examination he deposed that all the documents filed by the Petitioner except Ex . W6 are issued bythe Department Ex. M3 is from 26-1-69 to 23-2-70 for 198 days Ex . W2 shows that he worked from 25-1-69 to 23-2-70 for 286 days. The Doctor has asked vide Ex .W4 as to how many days the Petitioner has worked . It is not true to suggest that they gave wrong calculation as per Ex .W5 in reply to Ex . W4 . He do not know whether he went for medical examination after Ex. W5 . He do not know whether it iscertified that he is medically fit or unfit . They have not filed any document to show that he was declared medically unfit. It is not true to suggest that they have deprived him from regularization.

6. The Petitioner has examined himself as WW1 . that he joined as Khalasi on 25-6-64 in Engineering I.O.W. Department , Vizianagaram on a Salary of Rs . 150/- at that time.Heworked in that capacity for 32 years . On 13-6-1996 hewas called for medical examination vide Ex. Wl . Ex . W2 isthe certificate issued by the medical officer S.E. Railway. The medical authorities denied him medical test as he worked 198 days only under Ex. W3 . Ex. W4 is the record ofservice from 25-6-64 to 23-7-67 . Ex .W5 is record ofservice as casual labour from 26-8-66 to 23-2-1970 . He worked in every year more than 300 days in 12 calendar months and he was not provided any work from 13-6-96 to till date . On his requests the Management stated that after medical test he will be considered . That he made several requests , one such request is Ex. W6. Hence , he may be reinstated and considered for medical examination .

10. Smt D. Rajeshwari , Senior Clerk in the office C.M.S. S.E. Railways, Visakhapatnam deposed that Ex. W5 is prepared on the basis of Ex. M4 . Ex . M6 is a letter by SeniorDivisional Medical Officer that WW1 is medically unfit. WW1 was examined for the first time on 18-6-90 by the Railway Doctor who advised to get the spectacles. It may be correct that WW1 was examined on 13-6-96 . In Ex. W2 the Divisional Medical Officer did not say that he is medically unfit but asked as to how many days he worked. Ex. W3 is the reply to the same. It is not correctto suggest that Ex. M4 was not received by the Department . Ex. M5 was prepared subsequently. WW1 did not affix his thumb impression on it nor he was told that he is medically unfit . It is not true to suggest that Ex . M4 to Ex.M6 are prepared for the purpose of case. The Doctor examined WW1 and gave Ex . M4 and died in a railway accident.

11. This Court send the Petitioner to the Medical superintendent, Regional Eye Hospital , Visakhapatnam who certified on 6-3-2003 that he has examined the Petitioner and after careful examination his vision is normal and he is fit to attend duties .

7. In the cross examination he denied that he worked only for 198 days as casual labour. That the medical examination was refused in 1996. Thereafter he did not attend for medical examination . He denied that he was retrenched in 1991 as casual labour. He denied tbat he was medically unfit and that is why he was not given any employment.

12. It is argued by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Management be directed to permit the workman for medical examination for the purpose of regularization of his services and order for reinstatement ofthe workman as Khalasi with full back wages. According to the workman he has put in service from 1964 to 1996 that he was not provided with work from 1996. He gave a written representation on 29-3-2000 . The workman was drawing a wage of Rs.900/- per month at the time of his termination on 14-6-96 . The workman has proved that he hasworked from 1969 , in 1969-286 days , in 1967-247 days , therefore from the settled principles of law he may be reinstated.

3. Sri V. Seshagiri Rao , examined himself as MW1 and deposed that as per the Hon'ble Supreme Court's Judgement they are following . That the Petitioner never worked continuously 240 days in a year. That he is not entitled for regularization , back wages or any other benefits . He admitted that all the documents filed by the Petitioner except Ex .W6 are given by the Department . He was initially taken in the Department not on 25-6-64. He denied that the Petitioner worked continuously from 64 to 90. Therefore, they have not filed the casual labour register. Itiscorrect that Ex. Wl shows the number of days Petitioner worked as causal labour from 64 to 70. It is correct that 765 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

Therefore I am of the opinion that compensating him with some money would meet the ends ofjustice . Hence, the Respondent is directed to pay him 10 months pay i.e, Rs.9000/- plus Rs . 1000/- towards costs of this case litigation, in total an amount of Rs. 10,000/- within 30 days from the publication of this award failing which he willbe entitled to 12% interest after 30 days from the publication ofthis award.

Awardpassed accordingly. Transmit.

13. The counsel for the Respondent argues that after all what has he proved . Even According to the arguments of the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner he has proved that in 1969 he has done 286 days and in 1967 hehas done 247 days. What about the other working days? Actually according to MW1 he has worked in all from 26-6-69 to 23-2-70 for a period of 198 days. As per the Hon'ble Supreme Court Judgement he submitted an application in the year 1993. The same was processed and he was referred for fresh appointment vide medical memo dated 13-6-96 for Bl category. He was found medically unfit and therefore he was not given thejob.

Dictated to Kum . K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 22nd day ofDecember, 2003.

E. ISMAIL, Presiding Officer

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined

for the Petitioner

Witnesses examined for the Respondent

WWI: Sri Dasari Apparao

MWI : Sri V. Seshagiri Rao MW2 : Smt D. Rajeshwari

Documents marked for the Petitioner

Ex.WI

: Copyofletter for medical examination of WW1 .

ExW2

: Copy of medical certificate issued by Div. Rły.Medical Officer dt: 19-9-96 .

Ex.W3

: Copyofcertificate dt. 27-7-96 that the Petitioner worked for 198 days .

Ex.W4

: Record of service of WW1 from 25-6-64 to 23-7-67.

ExW5

: Record of service of WW1 from 26-8-66 to 23-2-70.

ExW6

: Copy of representation of WW1 before DRM/SERly dt . 29-3-2000.

Documents marked for the Respondent

Ex. MI

: Copy of proceedings for appointment of casual labour.

Ex. M2

: Copy of Ir. for medical examination.

Ex. M3

: Copy of left hand thumb impression ofWWI for the period of engagement ofWW1 .

Ex.M4

: The reverse part of Ex. W3 .

Ex. M5

: Copy of fitness certificate on the basis of Ex . M4 .

Ex M6

: Copy of Ir. No. NA/91/72 dt.

14. It maybe seen that the Ex. Wl is for medical, examination . Ex. W2 the medical officer's letter as to how many days he has worked . Ex. W3 shows that the Petitioner has worked for 198 days which is wrong according to the Petitioner. He has worked for 286 days during 1969 and 247 days during 1967. Even according to WW1 no doubt he says that he worked upto 13-6-96, he could produce evidence ofservice from 1964 to 1970 only. Ex . W4 and Ex . W5 are details ofservice which are as follows : in 1964-52 days, in 1965-46 days , in 1966-29 days , in 1967-247 days, in 1968-142 days , in 1969-286 days and in 1970- 27 days. So it may be seen that actually he was taking advantage of the Hon'ble Supreme Court Judgement and the Management did consider the case of the Petitioner and sent him to medical examination and he was found unfit in eye sight . It was not brought to my notice by either side the proper procedure and mentioned in the letter addressed to the Medical Superintendent, Regional EyeHospital not only to examine the Petitioner but also I should have stated that he was examined by so and so Doctor and his eye sight was found at normal , which, unfortunately 1 have not done . However , it may not effe much, because the Doctor has opined that he is medicall fit his eye sight is normal , it is done by a Professor Ophthalmology who examined him on 6-3-2003 and foun his eye sight normal and fit to join his duty. According to theRespondent's Doctor who examined the Petitioner at first instance by the Respondent's Doctor has died in a railway accident . No doubt , the present examination is in 2003 and that examination was done in 1996. But I find from WWl's deposition that he is aged 54 years as on 17-9-2001 by now he must be 56 years and no purpose would be served by directing the Respondent to take further medical examination and appoint him because at ay the best he may get four more years service and even according to the proof he has worked only upto 23-2-70. Hemust havebeen working some where or other and even according to him he was drawing only Rs.900/- at the time ofhis so called oral termination on 14-6-90 . If he had been provided with a job in 1996 if his eye sight was found normal by the Respondent Doctor he would have had a service of 11 years . As there is no proof that he worked upto 1996 but only proof that he worked upto 23-2-70 .

766

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

नई दिल्ली, 29 जनवरी , 2004

का.आ. 419.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार, स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार लेबर कोर्ट, कोलाम के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या ...... ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-01-2004 प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-12014/01/2004- आई. आर. ( बी-1 ) ]

अजय कुमार, डैस्कअधिकारी NewDelhi, the 29th January, 2004 S.O. 419. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (... ofthe Central Government Labour Court , Kollam now as shown in Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of State Bank of India and their workman , whch was received by the Central Government on 28-01-2004 .

[No. L- 12014/01/2004- IR(B. - 1) ]

AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT, LABOUR COURT, KOLLAM.

PRESENT

Shri K. SasidharanNair. PresidingOfficer

Thursday the 25th Day of September, 2003 / 3rd Aswina, 1925

12/85(C) , CLAIM PETITION NOS . 11/85( C) , 14/85 ( C ) , 15/85 ( C) , 17/85(C) , 24/85( C) , 27/85( C) 2/86(C) , 3/86 (C) And 4/86(C)

Petitioner in C.P. 11/85( C) :

S. Ramachandra Warrier, Clerk -cum--typist,

State Bank of India , Beach Road,

Alleppey-688 012.

Petitioner in C.P. 12/85 ( C) :

D. Mohandas , Dy . Head Cashier , State Bank of India . Beach Road , Alappuzha -688 012 .

Petitioner in C.P. 14/85( C) :

E.P. Raja Rama Sarma, Cashier, StateBank of India , Beach Road .

Alappuzha -688 012 .

Petitioner in C.P. 15/85 (C):

V. G. Sidhardhan, Head Clerk, StateBank of India, BeachRoad,

Alappuzha-688 012.

Now transferredto Agricultural Development Branch , Alleppey)

Petitioner in C.P. 17/85 (C) :

E.P. Raja Rama Sarma, Cashier, StateBank of India, Beach , Road, Alleppey-688 012 .

Petitioner in C.P, 24/85 (C) :

E.P. Raja Rama Sarma, Cashier, StateBank of India, Beach, Alleppey.

Petitioner in C.P, 27/85(C) :

D.Mohandas, Dy. Head Cashier, StateBank of India, Beach, Alleppey

Petitioner in C.P. 2/86 (C) :

K. J. Baby, Messenger,

State Bank of India, Beach,

Alappuzha. (Nowtransferred to State Bank of India ,

Agricultural Development Branch, Edathua) .

Petitioner in C.P. 3/86(C) :

K. J. Baby, Messenger,

StateBank of India, Beach ,

Alleppey.

(Nowtransferred to State Bank of India, Agricultural Development Branch , Edathua) .

Petitioner in C.P. 4/86(C) :

E.P. Raja Rama Sarma, Cashier,

State Bank of India, Beach , Alleppey.

Opposite Party in C.P. Nos. 11/85( C) , 12/85 (C), 14/85(C) , 15/85 (C) , 17/85( C), 24/85 (C) , 27/85(C) , 2/86(C) ; 3/86( C), and 4/86(C) :

TheBranch Manager,

StateBank of India , P. B. No. 1 , BeachRoad,

Alappuzha-688012 .

Representation for the petitioners in C.P. Nos .. 11/85 (C) , 12/85(C) , [ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

767 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/ फाल्गुन 2, 1925

14/85 (C) , 15/85 (C) , 17/85 (C), 24/85 (C), 27/85(C) , 2/86(C) , 3/86 (C) , and 4/86(C) :

Sri . K. Ravu ,

Advocate,

Alappuzha-688 012.

Representation for the Opposite Party in C.P. Nos . 11/85 (C) , 12/85(C), 14/85 (C), 15/85 (C) , 17/85 (C), 24/85 (C) , 27/85 (C) , 2/86(C) , 3/86 (C), and 4/86(C) :

5. In C.P. No. 12/85 (C) , the petitioner would allege that he is employed as Deputy Head Cashier of the opposite party, that his salary for six days from 12-12-1984 to 17-12-1984 was not paid, that he had applied for leave for the above period on medical grounds along with a medical certificate, that the opposite party was bound to grant leave as there was sufficient leave to his credit , that the wage cut on the above days is unlawful and unauthorised and so he prays for directing the opposite party to pay the salary for the said days which he estimates as Rs. 476.23 .

S/Shri K.P. CehllappanNair, V.K. Ram Mohan Das and P.B. Chellappan, Advocates , Alappuzha-688 012.

COMMON ORDER

6. The opposite party would contend that the petition is not maintainable, that the petitioner is not a workman as he is working in a supervisory category and drawing more than Rs. 2,000/- per month, that the applicant remained absent from 12-12-1984 to 21-12-1984 that hedid not apply for leave either before availing leave or during the period of absence or even after joining his duty, that the deduction was effected legally for the days of absence ofthe petitioner from his duties, that the petitioner had not so far applied for leave for the above absented days and so he is not entitled to get any benefits as prayed for..

These are Claim Petitions filed by certain workmen of the CommonOpposite Party under Section 33 C (2 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , for computation of the respective amounts allegedly due to them from the opposite party. Since common questions of law and facts arise in all these claim petitions , they have been takenup jointly and Claim Petition No. 14/85 ( C) has been treated asleading case.

2. In C.P. No. 11/85( C) the petitioner would allege that he is employed as a clerk- cum -typist , that his salary for 20-10-1984 has not been paid, that he had carried out all his normal allotted duties to the best of his mility and still the salary for the above said date was with-held unauthorisedly and so prays for directing the opposite party to pay the said amount which he estimate as Rs . 36.68 .

3. The contentions raised by the opposite party arethat the petition is not maintainable, that the petitioner did not work on 20-10-1984, that the deduction ofwages was effected in accordance with law, that the petitioner had absented from his duty for more than 2 hours on 20-10-1984 on that day, that being a saturday he was ex- pected to work for 4 hours and as he did not attend his work, his salary was deducted for that day and he is not entitled to the wages as claimed.

7. The petitioner has filed a detailed replication alleging that the Assistant Head Cashier post is only post for performing some additional work over and above the duties ofa cashier and his duties are that of a cashier, that his work is not of a supervisory nature , that his leave application for the period from 12-12-1984 to 21-12-1984 was submitted through his relative to the cash officer on 19-12-1984, that if at all the applicant had not applied for leave the opposite party was bound to seek his explanation, that the opposite party did not issue any notice regarding the alleged absence and imposed wage cut without his knowledge, that the opposite party had debited his Savings BankAccount Rs . 317.48 which he later came to understand to be an account of the medical leave sanctioned to the petitioner from 18-12-1984 to 21-12-84, that the opposite party has no authority to debit the Savings Bank account ofthe petitioner without his knowledge and approval , that he had sufficient leave at his credit and had applied for leave with medical certificate and so the deduction of wages for the above dates is illegal and it is part of the coercive tactices adopted by the opposite party to haras and victimise the petitioner for having participated in the strike of the employees during the last month of 1983.

4. The petitioner has filed a detailed replication alleging inter alia that the opposite party had uninterally withheld salary of the day, i.e. on 20-10-1984 as victimisation for his active participation in union activities, that the wage cut on that day was done without the petitioner's knowledge, that the action of the opposite party is in utter disregard of the principles of natural justice, that the petitioner had done his work on 20-10-1984 from 10 am, to 2. p.m. that the allegation of absence from duty for more than 2hours is false and therefore the petitioner prayed for computing the amount due to him as stated in the claim petition.

8. The petitioner is C.P. 14/85 (C) would allege that he is employed as a Cashier of the opposite party that his salary for 4 days i.e. on 10-6-1985, 12-6-1985, 13-6-1985 and 15-7-1985 was unlawfully deducted, that he was acting as teller on those days, that he had carried out all his additional duties unilaterally attached to that seat , that the opposite party had unauthorisedly withheld the salary for the above days and so prays for directing them to pay the said amount which he estimates as Rs. 313.87.

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] 768

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

9. The contentions raised by the opposite party are that the petitioner is not maintainable , that the petitioner did not work on the above days , that he remained absent from duty on those days and so his claims are only to be dismissed.

10. The petitioner has filed a replication alleging inter alia that he had carried out all his allotted duties as teller on the said days , that the action of the opposite party was to harass the petitioner who was the local Secretary ofthe State Bank Staff Union which led the recent staff agitation of the branch , that the petitioner had not absented from duty on any of the above days and that the deduction of his wages is unauthorised and illegal .

was not a typist and he was unable to operate the telex , that this matter was informed to the opposite party, that no facility was made available for doing the above work and though the petitioner was ready to do his work he was not provided with the relevant registers and records, that no notices were issued as contented by the opposite party, that the opposite party had not allotted any work from 14-1-1984, that the change of seat was part ofvictimisation and harassment against the petitioner for having participated in the legal strike , that the opposite party had unauthorisedly and without notice decided to change the designation and then deducted his salary in respect ofthe above period and that the petitloner is entitled to receive the said amount .

14. In C.P. 17/85 (C) the petitioner would allege that he was working as cashier and by virtue of his seniority he was entitledto act as Deputy Cashier/Teller as the permanent posts of Teller and Deputy Head Clerk were lvin vacant, that he was denied acting chance in the cadre r/Head Clerk from 4-7-1984 and thus an average ot ofRs0.50 per day had been unlawfully denied to him and so he prays for computation of the amount due to him from the opposite party. ar

11. The petitioner in C.P. 15/85 (C) would allege that he is employed as Head Clerk , and that he was not paid salary for 21 days from 13-1-1984 to 2-2-1984, that he had been attending duties of Head Clerk, than on 10-1-1984 the opposite party issued an order changing the duties of petitioner and allotted aties of telex head clerk, that the petitioner was carrying out the allotted duties except telex operation and typing which he was not aware and this position was informed to the opposite party in writing on 10-1-1984 , that from 14-1-1984 the opposite party stopped allotting any work and the salary from 13-1-1984 to 2-2-1984 was unauthorisedly withheld and so he claims the said amount which he estimates as Rs . 2254.54 P.

15. The contentions raised by the opposite party are that the petition is not maintainable , that he cannot put forward a claim for benefits of some posts in which he had notworked that the petitioner was paid for the work allotted and done by him, that the claim ifany ofthe petitioner for a higher post cannot be raised in a petition under Section 33 C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act that he was noft for the post of Teller/Deputy Head Clerk and so the opposite party decided not to post him in that post and that the claim is without bonafide and liable to be rejected.

16. The petitioner has filed a replication traversing the contentions raised by the opposite party and reiterating that he was denied the teller post only as victimisation for his participation in the union activities and the agitation of the staffmembers against the opposite party and he was.. purposefully denied the above post against the rules and precedent and so claims the benefits of that post .

17. In C.P. No. 24/85 (C) the petitioner would allege that his wages for six days i.e. on 16-1-1984 , 21-2-1984, 25-2-1984, 16-5-1984, 17-5-1984 and 3-7-1984 were illegally withheld, that he had carried out all his normal allotted duties on the above days and the deduction of wages is unauthorised and so prays for directing the opposite party to pay the wages of the said days which he estimates as Rs.400.

12. The opposite party would contented that the petition is not maintainable, that the petitioner is not entitled for the wages for a period from 13-1-1984 to 2-2-1984 as he had not done the work allotted to him, that the deduction of wages was affected in accordance with law, that the petitioner who was working as Head Clerk (Despatch ) was changed to another seat due to exigencies of service , that though the petitioner accepted that order he remained in the old seat, that on 11-1-1985 and 12-1-1985 the opposite party issued two notices to the petitioner to occupy the new seat allotted to him, that he did not comply with the above directions and did not carry out the work allotted to him , that on 13-1-1985 the opposite party issued another notice requiring him to carry out the work allotted to him , that the said notice was received by him and so it was published in the notice board, that since the petitioner did not do the work allotted to him the functioning of the bank was seriously affected and thereupon the opposite party imposed the wage cut for not performing the allotted work , that the petitioner is not entitled to claim the benefits and his claims are only to be dismissed.

18. The contentions raised by the opposite party are that the petition is not maintainable , that the petitioner was not entitled for the wages of the said six days on account ofthe reason that he had not done the work allotted to him on those days , that if the applicant has any dispute regarding the withholding of the wages on those days 13. The petitioner has filed a detailed replication alleging inter alia that the opposite party had uniterally decided to change the petitioner from his permanent seat ofDespatch/Head Clerk to another seat of head clerk (telex) , that the opposite party had failed to give due notice regarding the change of designation, that the petitioner 769 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

23. In C.P. No. 2/86(C) , the petitioner would allege that he was entitled to washing allowance of Rs . 15/- per month from September 1984 onwards and inspite of repeated demands the opposite party did not pay the sum of Rs . 20/- which include Rs . 5/- as balance of washing allowance for the month of September, 1984 andRs . 15/-for the month of October 1984.

Section 33C( 2 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act cannot be invoked, that on all these days the petitioner had displayed wilful negligence in the performance of duties and had acted detrimental to the interest of the opposite party and did not do the allotted work and was absenting from his seat during working hours and so the deduction of wages onthose days is legal and justifiable.

19. The petitioner has filed a replication alleging that as he had done the work he is entitled to file the petition under Section 33C( 2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, that his wages for the above mentioned six days were deducted unauthorisedly as part of victimisation against him for having participated in the union activities and agitation of employees, that the contention of the opposite party had the petitioner was displaying wilful negligence in the performance ofhis duties is totally false and so he is entitled to get the wages of the said days.

24. The opposite party would ontend that all petty cash amounts are paid as per vouchers submitted by the claimants and such amounts have to be collected from the cash department, that the vouchers submitteti by the petitioner for the amounts claimed in the petition have been passed on31-10-1984 itself and as the petitioner did not approach the opposite party for the said amounts , it was not disbursed that the opposite party had never refused to entertain the legal dues of the petitioner and so the petition is only to be dismissed.

20. In C.P. No. 27/85 (C) the petitioner would allege that he was working as Deputy Head Cashier and on 30-7-1985 a sum of Rs . 317.48 was deducted from his Savings Bank Account after crediting his salary and allowances for the month of July 1985 , that his wages on 9-7-1984 amounting Rs . 78.66 had been unlawfully deducted fromhis salary and so he prays for computation ofthe amount due to him from the opposite party.

25. The petitioner has filed a replication contending that the washing allowance payable to the petitioner had tobe paid with his salary that the opposite party had not paid the eligible washing allowance to the petitioner along with the salary, that the contention of the opposite party that the vouchers submitted by the petitioner was passed by the opposite party, and the contention that the same was not claimed by the petitioner is absolutely false and so the petitioner is entitled to received from the opposite party the above amount.

21. The opposite party would content that the petition is not maintainable , that the petitioner is not a workman, that the deductions alleged to have been made are done legally and as per rules , that the deduction was effected since the petitioner did not work and absented without leave, that the claim for such benefits cannot be raised in apetition under Section 33 (C) ( 2) ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, that he was absent from 12-12-1984 to 21-12-1984 , that since there was no casual leave in his credit the opposite party had to treat the petitioner as absent on loss ofpay from 12-12-1984 to 17-12-1984 and accordingly deduction was effected in his salary and so the petition is only to be dismissed.

26. In C.P. No.3/ 86 (C) the petitioner would allege that his wages of 1-2-1984 , 3-2-1984, 4-2-1984, 25-2-1984, 31-7-1984, 17-9-1984, 18-9-1984, 25-9-1984, 11-10-1984 and 19-10-1984 were deducted and the wages cut imposed on 1-2-1984, 3-2-1984,4-2-1984, 4-2-1984, 25-2-1984 and 31-7-1984 were on days in which he had performed all his allotted duties and on 17-9-1984 and 18-9-1984 he was on leave and on 25-9-1984 he was in the custody of the Police inconnection with a criminial petition lodged by a customer ofthebank under the advice from the opposite party and he had applied for leave on that day and on 11-10-1984 and 19-10-1984 he had to appear before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court , Alappuzha and he applied for leave on those days and the wage cut imposed on those days is illegal and he prays for computation of the amount due to him from the opposite party.

22. The petitioner has filed a replication alleging that he was only an Assistant Head Clerk at the relevant period and so aworkman , that on 9-7-1984 he had been working as acting Teller and he had carried out all his duties , that the opposite party had imposed wage cut on 9-7-1984 alleging that he had not worked on that day which is illegal, that the petitioner did not absent from 12-12-1984 to 21-12-1984 without applying for leave , that he informed about his sickness over telephone on 12-12-1984 itself and subsequently sent a leave application on 19-12-1984 requesting for leave from 12-12-1984 to 21-12-1984 that he submitted medical certificate also while joining duty on 22-12-1984 and that the wage cut from 12-12-1984 to 17-12-1984 or from.18-12-1984 to 21-12-1984 is illegal and so prays for computing the amount due to him from the opposite party.

27. The opposite party would contend that the wage cut and deductions were done in accordance with law, that the petition is not maintainable, that the petitioner did not do his allotted work on 1-2-1984, 3-2-1984, 4-2-1984, 25-2-1984 and 31-7-1984 and so wage cut was effected on those days, that he was not entitled to privilage leave on 17-9-1984 and 18-9-1984 and so his leave application was not sanctioned and deduction of wages was effected on those days, that he was not entitled to avail leave on the basis ofofficial duty on 25-9-1984, 11-10-1984 and 19-10- 1984 and so the wage cut effected on those days also are legal and the petition is only to be dismissed.

440 G1/04-12 770

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2 , 1925

28. The petitioner has filed a replication alleging that he had performed all allotted duties on 1-2-1984 , 3-2-1984.4-2-1984, 25-2-1984 and 31-7-1984 and so he is entitled 10 receive the wages for those days that he had applied for eligible leave on 17-9-1984, 18-9-1984, 25-9-1984, 11-10-1984 and 19-10-1984 and so the action of the opposite party inhaving imposed wage cut on those days is illegal and unjustifiable and so prays for computation of the amount clue to him from the opposite party.

29. In C.P. 4/86( C) the petitioner would allege that he had applied for privilege leave on 30-11-1985 and the opposite party had refused to grant leave and imposed wage cut on that day and so prays for computing the said amount which he estimates as Rs . 87.71 .

30 The opposite party would content that the petition is not maintainable that the petitioner is not a workman, that the claim for privilege leave was unsustainable and so his absence on the said days was treated as leave on loss of pay and deduction of wages is legal and the petition is liable to be dismissed.

31. The petitioner has filed a replication alleging that he is a workman covered by the Sastry and Desai Award, that he was the Secretary and an Executive Committee member of a recognised union and he is entitled to avail privilege leave on more than 2 occasions in a calendar year and so he was entitled to avail privilege leave on 30-11-1985 and the wage cut imposed for that day is illegal and it was as part of victimisation.

32. The common petitioner in C.P. Nos . 14/85 (C ) . 17/85 (C ). 24/85(C ) and 4/86( C) has been examined as PW1 and the common petitioner in C.P. Nos . 12/85 (C) and 27 / 85 (C) has been examined as PW2 and Exhibits Pl to P45 have been marked in evidence on the side of the petitioner . No oral or documentary evidence for the common opposite .

33. The following points arise for consideration in Claim Petition No. 11/85 (C) :

(i) Whether the petition is maintainable?

(ii) To what relief, if any, the petitioner is entitled?

34. Point No. 1 : According to the petitioner he had carried out all his normal allotted duties on 20-10-1984 and his salary for that day, which he estimates as Rs . 36.68 , was unlawfully deducted . The first contention of the opposite party is that a dispute regarding deduction of wages cannot be decided in a petition under Section 33C( 2 ) ofthe Industrial Disputes Act . Since the claim is for wages of the petitioner for the day in which he had attended the office and worked , such a claim is maintainable under Section 33C ( 2 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act . The Point is answered accordingly.

35. Point No. 2.-Admittedly the petitioner was present on 20-10-1984 . It is contended by the opposite party that the petitioner was absent from his duty for more than two hours on the above date and being a saturday he

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii) ] wasexpected to work for 4 hours and as he was not in his seat for 2 hours, wage cut on that day was imposed . In the replication it is stated by this petitioner that no notice was given regarding the alleged wage cut and it was done without his knowledge and he was not given any opportunitybefore such deduction. He has further stated that he was present in the office from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. and didall his allotted duties and all the work allotted was done byhim on 20-10-1984 . PW1 has deposed that the petitioner in C.P. No. 11/85 ( C) was present during office hours on 20-10-1984 and he had done all the allotted duties on that day. There is no cross examination regarding the above version. No evidence is adduced on the said of the opposite party to show that the Petitioner in C.P. No. 11/85 (C ) was absent for two hours and did not do all his allotted duties onthat day. It is further seen that the wage cut on that day was done in an arbitrary manner without affording any opportunityto the petitioner to explain his stand. No notice was given to the petitioner before such wage cut. Therefore I find that the petitioner is entitled to receive from the opposite party the wages of 20-10-1984 which is Rs . 36.68 and his claim is allowable .

36. In C.P. No. 12/85( C) the following points arise for consideration:

(i)Whether the petition is maintainable?

( ii ) To what relief, if any, the petitioner is entitled?

37. Point No. 1 :-According to the petitioner his salary for six days , i.e. from12-12-1984 to 17-12-1984 was not paid and he had applied for leave on medical ground for the above days and so the action of the Opposite Party in imposing wage cut for those days is illegal . The first contention of the opposite party is that the claim being for the wages of the days in which the petitioner did not work cannot be raised under Section 33C( 2 ) ofthe Industrial Disputes Act . From the facts it is found that the petitioner did not attend duty from 12-12-1984 to 21-12-1984 . The opposite party would contend that the petitioner did not apply for leave either before or during the period of absence and so the deduction was effected legally treating his absence as leave on loss of pay. Since the petitioner did not attend the office from 12-12-1984 to 17-12-1984. and no leave application was sanctioned in respect of that period . claimunder Section 33C(2 ) for wages during the said period cannot be worked out under Section 33C( 2 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act . The petitioner as PWI has deposed that his leave application on medical grounds for the period from12-12-1984 to 21-12-1984 was not sauctioned even though there was leave in his credit . The opposite party has every right to grant or refuse the leave application of an employee and a dispute regarding the action of the management in this respect cannot be brought under the above section . Such a dispute needs adjudication . Therefore I find that the petition is not maintainable . The point is answered accordingly.

771 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

38. Point No. 2 :---In view of my finding on Point No. 1 it follows, that the petition is only to be dismissed. The point is answered accordingly.

39. In C.P. No. 14/85 (C) the following points arise

forconsideration :

(i ) Whether the petition is maintainable?

(ii )Whether the petitioner is entitled to the relief as

prayed for?

40. Point No. 1 :-According to the petitioner his salary for 4 days i.e. on 10-6-1985, 12-6-1985, 13-6-1985 and 15-7-1985 have been unlawfully deducted and on those days he was working as teller and carried out all his additional duties attached to that post. The first contention ofthe opposite party is that deduction of wages on those days was for the reason of not doing the work allotted to him on such days and therefore Section 33C(2 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act cannot be invoked for ventillating for the grievance of the petitioner. It is further contended that the petitioner had absent from his duty on those days. The petitioner was a cashier at the relevant period and according to him he had done all the duties allotted to him on the said days when he was acting as the teller. It is seen that the opposite party had imposed wage cut for the above day by taking the stand that the petitioner did not do his allotted duties on such days. Since the petitioner attended on those days , a claim under Section 33C( 2 ) of Industrial Disputes Act is maintainable. The point is answered accordingly.

43. Points (i) and ( ii) :-According to the Petitioner hewas attending the duties of Head Clerk (Despatch) and on 10-1-1984 the opposite party issued an order allotting him the duties of telex head clerk and as he was not knowing telex operation and typing and so he could not carry out the duties of telex operation and this was informed to the opposite party on 10-1-1984 itself and inspite of that the opposite party stopped alloting any work to him and also deducted salary from 13-1-1984 to 2-2-1984 and therefore he claims the amount so deducted. The opposite party would state that the claim for wages forthe above period cannot be brought under Section 33C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. It is further stated that the applicant did not do the duties allotted to him as telex operator from 13-1-1985 and so his wages have been deducted. It is stated by PW1 that the petition is C.P. 15/85 (C) had done all duties except telex operation which he was not aware and he had made a request for exempting him from such work and thereupon no working materials were given to him and his salary was illegally deducted for 10 days . Ext . P44 is the information given by the petitioner to the opposite party stating that he does not know typing or telex operation and so he is not in a position to carry out the duty assigned to him . Ext . P45 is the copy of another letter stated to be given by the petitioner alleging that he was not provided with working materials from 14-1-1984 . From the facts and evidence it is found that the petitioner did not do the duties assigned to him in the post of head clerk/telex operator and inspite of directions given by the opposite party, such duties were not done by him . It is in the above circumstances that the salary of the petitioner was deducted for the period from 13-1-1984 to 2-2-1984 . The correctness or justifiability of the action of the opposite party in having deducted the salary during the above period for the reasons of not doing the duties assigned to the post of telex head clerk to which the petitioner was posted cannot be decided in a claim petition under Section 33C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act and this is beyond the scope of the above Section . The principle of nowork no pay is applicable to the facts of this case and therefore I findthat this claim petition is not maintainable and the petitioner is not entitled to the relief prayed for. The point is answered accordingly.

44. In C.P. No. 17/85 ( C) the following points arise forconsideration:

(i ) Whether the petition is maintainable ?

(ii ) To what relief, if any, the petitioner is entitled ?

41. Point No. 2 : The petitioner as PW1 has deposed that from 4-7-1984 to 9-6-1985 , as he was the senior most cashier he should have been given the teller duty and he was denied such teller duty as an act of victimisation . From the facts and evidence it is found that the petitioner did not carry out the work attached to the teller post . The correctness or justifiability of the action of the management in denying the teller duty to the petitioner cannotbe adjudicated in a claim under Section 33C ( 2 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act. In the evidence the petitioner has categorically stated that he was denied teller duty and the claim in C.P. 14/85 (C) is connected with that duty. From Ext. P9 and P10 it is found that the decision to impose wage cut was taken after giving sufficient opportunity to the petitioner and in that context his claim being a dispute cannot be decided under Section 33C (2 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act . Therefore , I find that the petition is not maintainable and it is only to be dismissed. The point is answered accordingly.

42. In C.P. No. 15/85 (C) the following points arise forconsideration :

(i) Whether the petition is maintainable ?

(ii ) Whether the petitioner is entitled to the relief prayed for ?

45. Points (i ) and ( ii ) :-According to the petitioner while he was working as the Senior most Cashier inthe Alleppey branch he was denied acting chance in the Cadre of Teller /Deputy Head Cashier from 4-7-1984 and even though that post was lying vacant his claim was overlooked and employees junior to him were allotted the duties of teller and thus he was denied the benefits of [PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] 772

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

consequence of such disciplinary proceedings . Eventhough he made complaints regarding the said deduction as seen from Ext . P23 , P24 and P26, the opposite party did not consider the same . From the facts and evidence it is found that the deduction of the salary for the above ' 6 ' days during which the petitioner had done his work was not proper or justifiable . The contention of the opposite party that the petitioner did not do the work allotted to him is not at all substantiate in evidence . There isnothing on record to show that the petitioner did not do thework allotted to him on such days . Therefore, I find that the petitioner is entitled to receive the salary for the above days which is found to be Rs . 400/-, The points are answered accordingly.

48. In C.P. No. 27/85 (C) the following points arise

forconsideration :

naintainable ?

1.Whether t

2. Wheretioner is entitled to the relief prayed for ?

about Rs . 10.50 per day which is attached to the teller post. It is contended by the opposite party that as the claim put forward by the petitioner is for the benefits attached to a post in which the petitioner had not worked, the petition is not maintainable and the petitioner is not entitled to the said benefits . Admittedly the petitioner did not do the work attached to the teller post . The claim is for the benefits attached to the teller post . That being the position, Section 33C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act cannot be invoked for the reason that the legality of such a claim wants adjudication . Whether the denial of teller duty to the petitioner was correct or not cannot be decided in a claim under Section 33C ( 2 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act . The petitioner is stated to have made complaints regarding the denial ofteller post to him and also against alloting of such duties to his juniors as seen from Ext . P14 to P17 . The petitioner has also stated before court that he was denied such duties illegally . But as already observed the correctness or legality of the decision of the opposite party in having denied the teller duty to the petitioner cannot beworked out in a claim under Section 33C (2 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act the petition is found to be not maintainable it is liable to be dismissed . The points are answered accordingly.

46. In C.P. No. 24/85 ( C) the following points arise

forconsideration :

1. Whether the petition is maintainable?

2. To what relief, if any, the petitioner is entitled ?

49. Points (1) and (2) : It is alleged by the petitioner that an amount of Rs . 317.48 was unlawfully deducted on 30-7-1985 and that the wages on 9-7-1984 which is estimated asRs . 78.66 also was unlawfully deducted and he claims the above wages. From the facts and evidence it is seen that the petitioner was absent from 12-12-1984 to 21-12-1984 and according to the opposite party the petitioner did not file any leave application and though the wages for the above period was mistakenly paid, after second cross checking and finding out the mistake, the wages for the above period was deducted and such deduction is legal and cannot be worked out under Section 33C ( 2 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act. It is found that the petitioner was absent during the above period . It is stated by the petitioner that he had given leave application and before filing such application he informed on 12-12-1984 itself about his sickness and requested for leave . Anyhow since opposite party had deducted the wages in respect of the days inwhich the petitioner did not attend the office, either by not granting the leave application or due to not filing any leave appliapplication by the petitioner, a claim under Section33C (2 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act is not maintainable . Ext . P35 to P43 produced in this case are not ofmuch use ofsubstantiate the claim ofthe petitioner. The principle of no work no pay applies to the facts of this case. The correctness or otherwise of either rejecting the leave application or the justifiability of the deduction of wages due to absence cannot be decided in a claim under Section 33C (2) ofthe Industrial Disputes Act. Therefore , I find that the petition is not maintainable and the petitioner is not entitled to the relief prayed for. The points áre answered accordingly.

50. In C.P. No. 2/86 ( C) , the following point arises

forconsideration :

"Whether the petitioner is entitled to receive the sum of Rs . 20/-as prayed for ?"

opposite p 47. The points 1 and 2 : According to the petitioner his wages for six days have been deducted inspite ofthe fact that he had carried out all his normal allotted duties of such days . The opposite party would state that as the petitioner did not do the work on the said six days, his wages for those days were deducted and a claim for wages on the above days cannot be entertained under Section 33C (2 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act. From the facts and evidence it is found that the petitioner had actually worked on all the above six days , i.e. , 16-1-1984, 21-2-1984, 25-2-1984, 16-5-1984, 17-5-1984 and 3-7-1984 . According to the opposite party, since the petitioner did not do the duties allotted to him on those days , his salary was deducted. As it is found that the petitioner was present on all the above days and according to him he did all work allotted to him , a claim under Section 33C (2 ) is maintainable and the merits of the contention of the opposite party that he did not do the work which resulted in denial of salary for those days has to be considered on merits. The petitioner as PW 1 had deposed that the deduction of salary for ' six' days was illegal and on all such days he was present in the bank and done all the duties allotted to him. It is further stated by him that the deduction was made without giving any notice or conducting any enquiry and no authorisation was obtained by the bank manager in connection with such deduction. No evidence is adduced on the side of the opposite party to show that the dedution on the above days was made after giving notice to the petitioner. It appears that no disciplinary action was taken by the opposite party and deduction of salary was made not as a

51. The Point :-The claim in this case is the balance ofthewashing allowance for the month of September 1984 and Rs. 15/- which is the washing allowance for the month ofOctober 1984. The contention of the opposite party is [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

773

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

that the Bank had passed the voucher submitted by the petitioner for the above claim and as the petitioner did not approach the opposite party, the amount was not disbursed. The claim is not disputed by the opposite party. Whatever be the reason for not disbursing or receiving the amount, I findthat the petitioner is entitled to get the above sum and so the petition is only to be allowed.

52. In C.P. No. 3/86 ( C) , the following points arise for consideration:

(i) Whether the petition is maintainable ?

(ii) Whether the petitioner is entitled to receive from the opposite party the amount as claimed ?

53. Points (i) and (ii) :-It is alleged by the petitioner that the wages on 1-2-1984, 3-2-1984, 4-2-1984, 25-2-1984, 31-7-1984, 17-9-1984, 18-9-1984, 25-9-1984, 11-10-1984 and 19-10-1984 were deducted and out of these days , the petitioner had actually performed all his allotted duties on 1-2-1984, 3-2-1984, 4-2-1984, 25-2-1984 and 31-7-1984 and he had applied for leave on 17-9-1984 and 18-9-1984 and on 25-9-1984, 11-10-1984 and 19-10-1984 also , he had applied for leave and inspite of the same, wage cut was imposed illegally on the above days. According to the opposite party the petitioner did not do the allotted works and also he was absent on certain days and was not eligible for leave applied for . The version' of the opposite party that thewage cut effected on 1-2-1984, 3-2-1984,4-2-1984 , 25-2-1984 and 31-7-1984 was for the reason that the petitioner did not do the allotted work has not been substantiated by any evidence . PW1 has deposed that the petitioner had done all the work allotted to him on the above days . There is no cross -examination on the above version of PW1 . As it is found that the petitioner had actuallyworked on 1-2-1984, 3-2-1984, 4-2-1984.25-2-1984 and 31-7-1984, I find that he is entitled to receive the wages for the above period. The wage cut on the above days was not stated to be as a punishment in any disciplinary proceedings . No notice or opportunity was given to the petitioner before effecting the wage cut on the said days. Therefore the petitioner is entitled to receive the wages on the above days which is Rs . 130 /- . Regarding the wage cut effected on 17-9-1984, 18-9-1984, 25-9-1984, 11-10-1984 and 19-10-1984 the claim under Section 33C (2) ofthe Industrial Disputes Act is not entertainable due to the reason that the petitioner has not worked on the above days . Correctness or otherwise of the decision of the opposite party in having not granted the leave application in respect of the above days cannot be considered in a claim under Section 33C( 2 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act. Therefore I find that the petition can be allowed only in part i.e. regarding the wages for 1-2-1984, 3-2-1984, 4-2-1984, 25-2-1984 and 31-7-1984 which is found as Rs . 130/- . The point is answered accordingly.

53. In C.P. 4/86 ( C) the following points arise for consideration:

(1) Whether the petition is maintainable ?

(2) To what relief, if any, the petitioner is entitled ?

54. Points (1 ) and (2) :--According to the petitioner his wages on 30-11-1985 has been deducted and on that day he had applied for privilege leave and as he was the local Secretary and Executive Committee Member of the State Banks ' Staff Union at Alleppey he was entitled to take privilege leave for more than two occasions in a calendar year and the rejection of privilege leave on 30- 11-1985 was illegal . It is contended by the opposite party that the petition is not maintainable and the petitioner was not entitled to get any privilege leave as claimed . From the admitted facts it is clear that the petitioner did not work on 30-11-1985 . The decision of the opposite party regarding the claim of the petitioner for privilege leave on that day cannot be challenged under Section 33C ( 2 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act . The correctness or otherwise of the above decision needs adjudication and as such the said dispute is beyond the scope of Section 33C ( 2 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act. Therefore I find that the petition is not maintainable and the claim of the petitioner is only to be dismissed . The points are answered accordingly.

Hence the Claim Peition Nos . 12/85 (C) . 14/85 (C), 15/ 85 (C), 17/85 (C) , 27/85 ( C) and 4/86 ( C) are dismissed and Claim Petition No. 11/85 (C ) is allowed and the opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs . 36.68 ( Rupees Thirty six and Ps . Sixty eight only ) to the petitioner therein and Claim Petition No. 24/85 ( C ) is allowed and the opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs . 400/ - (Rupees Four Hundred only) to the petitioner therein and Claim Petition No. 2/86( C) is allowed and the Opposite Party is directed to pay a sum ofRs. 15/ - (Rupees Fifteen only) to the petitioner therein and the Claim Petition No. 3/86 (C) is allowed in part and the opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs . 130/- (Rupees One hundred and Thirty only) to the petitionertherein.

Pronounced before the open court on this the 25th dayofSeptember, 2003.

K. SASIDHARAN NAIR, Presiding Officer APPENDIX

Witness examined on the side of the petitioner in C.P. Nos. 14/85(c) , 17/85(с) , 24/85 (c) and4/86(c)

PW1 E.P.R.R. Sarma

Witness examined on the side of the petition in C.P. Nos. 12/85(c) and27/85(c)

PW2 Mohandas

Exhibits marked on the side of the petitioner

Ext. Pl Receipt ofTelegram dated 30-11-1985 sent to theBranchManager, S.B.I. , Alleppey.

Ext. P2 Copy of the privilege leave application dated 3-12-1985 .

Ext. P3

Letter dated 19-12-1985 from the Branch Manager, S.B.I. , Alleppey to Sri E.P.R.R. Sarma, Cashier, S.B.I. , Alleppey.

Ext.P4 Copyofletterdated 20-12-1985 from E.P.R.R. Sarma , Cashier, S.B.I. Alleppey to theBranch Manager, Alleppey.

Ext. P5 Postal Receipt No. 373 , dated 21-12-1985.

Ext. P6 Copyofletterdated 23-12-1985 from E.P.R.R. Sarma . Cashier, S.B.I. , Alleppey to theBranch Manager, S.B.I. , Alleppey.

Ext.P7 Receipt ofUnder Certificate of Posting dated 24-12-1985.

774

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

Ext. P8 Photocopy of letter dated 13-7-1984 from E.P.R.R. Sarma , Local Secretary to the Branch Manager , S.B.I. , Alleppey.

Ext. P9 Copyof letter from the Local Secretary to the BranchManager, S.B.I. , Alleppey.

Ext. P10 Copy of letter from E.P.R.R. Sarma, Local Secretary to the Chief Regional Manager, S.B.I. , Regional Office, Thiruvananthapuram.

Ext. P11 One cover addressed to Chief General Manager, S.B.I. , Regional Office , Trivandrum.

Ext. P12 Telegram Receipt sent to C.R.M. Romar , Trivandrum .

Ext. P13 Copy ofmemorandum dated 15-6-85 signed by 46 members addressed to the Regional Manager , S.B.1 . , Regional Office , Region - 1 , Trivandrum.

Ext. P14 Copy of letter dated 4-7-1984 from E.P.R.R. Sarma , S.B.I. , Alleppey to the Branch Manager , S.B.I. , Alleppey.

Ext.P15 Copy of letter from E.P.R.R. Sarma, Cashier, S.B.I. , Alleppey to the Branch Manager, S.B.I. , Alleppey.

Ext. P16 Copy of letter No. LSR 96/84 dated 6-10-84from E.P.R.R. Sarma, Local Secretary, to the Regi Manager , Region - I , S.B.I. , Regional O ivandrum.

Ext. P17 Copy of letter dated 14-8-1984 from E.P.R.R. Sarma , Cashier , A.B.I .. Alappuzha to the Branch Manager, S.B.1 . , Alleppey.

Ext. P18 Copy of letter No. L.S.R. 107/84 dated 10-11-1984 from E.P.R.R. Sarma, Local Secretary, to the Regional Manager , Region-I , S.B.I. , Regional Office , Trivandrum.

Ext. P19 Copy of letter No. LSR. 123/84 dated 17-12-84 from E.P.R.R. Sarma, Local Secretary to the Regional Manager, Region - I , State Bank of India , Regional Office , Trivandrum.

Ext. P20 Copy of letter dated 22-5-1985 from E.P.R.R. Sarma, Cashier , S.B.I. Allappuzha to the Branch Manager, S. B.I. , Allappuzha .

Ext. P21 Copy ofmemorandum dated 15-6-1985 signed by 46 members addressed to the Regional Manager, S.B.I. , Regional Office , Region - I, Trivandrum .

Ext. P22 Copy of letter No. R100 dated 9-2-1984 from E.P.R.R. Sarma, Local Secretary to the Branch Manager , S.B.I. , Alleppey.

Ext. P23 Letter dated 27-3-1984 from E.P.R.R. Sarma , S.B.I .. Alleppey to the Branch Manager , S.B.L.. Alleppey.

Ext. P24 Copy of letter dated 4-7-84 from E.P.R.R. Sarma, Cashier. S.B.I. , Alleppey to the Branch Manager, S.B.I .. Alleppey.

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] Ext. P25 Copy of letter dated 5-7-84 from E.P.R.R. Sarma , S.B.I. , Alleppey to the Branch Manager, S.B.I. , Alleppey.

Ext.P26 Copy of letterdated 19-5-84 from E.P.R.R. Sarma, S.B.I. , Allepey to the Branch Manager, S.B.I. , Alleppey.

Ext. P27 Photocopy of letter No. L.S.R. 62/84 dated 30-6-84 from the Local Secretary, to the BranchManager, S.B.I. , Alleppey.

Ext. P28 Copy of letter dated 10-7-84 from D.Mohandas,Assistant Head Cashier, S.B.I. , Alleppey to the Branch Manager , 8.B.I. , Alleppey.

Ext. P29 Copy of letter dated 2-8-85 from D.Mohandas ,Assistant Head Cashier , S.B.I.. Alleppey to the Manager , Personal Banking Division , S.B.I. , Alleppey.

Ext.P30 Copy of letter dated 2-8-85 from D. Mohandas, Assistant Head Cashier, SBI , Alleppey to the Branch Manager , S.B.I .. Alleppey.

Ext. P31 Postal receipt No. 500.

Ext. P32 Postal Receipt No. 559.

Ext. P33 Photocopy of Postal Acknowledgement .

Ext. P34 Photocopy of Postal acknowledgement .

Ext. P35 Copy of letter dated 10-7-84 from D.Mohandas, Assistant Head Cashier, S.B.I .. Alleppey to the Branch Manager , S.B.I .. Alleppey.

Ext. P36 Copy of letter No. LSR 62/84 dated 30- 6-84from the Local Secretary to the Branch Manager , S.B.I. , Alleppey.

Ext. P37 Copy of letter dated 19-12-84 from D. Mohandas , Assistant Head Cashier, S.B.I.. Alleppey to the Branch Manager , S.B.I. , Alleppey.

Ext. P38

D. Copy of letter dated 2-8-85 from Mohandas , Asstt. Head Cashier, S.B.I .. Alleppeyto the Manager. Personal Banking Division, S.B.I. , Alleppey.

Ext.P39 Copy of letter dated 2-8-85 from D. Mohandas , Assistant Head Cashier , S.B.I .. Alleppey to the Branch Manager , S.B.I.. Alleppey.

Ext. P40 Postal Receipt No. 559 .

Ext.P41 PostalReceipt No. 560 .

Ext. P42 Postal Acknowledgement

Ext. P43 PostalAcknowledgement

Ext. P44 Copy of letter dated 10-1-84 from V.G. Sidhardhan , Head Clerk to the Branch Manager, S.B.I. , Alleppey.

Ext.P45 Copy of letter dated 18-1-84 from V.G. Sidhardhan . Head Clerk , S.B.I. , Alleppey to the Accounts Manager . Accounts Department . S.B.I. , Alleppey .

775 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

नई दिल्ली, 29 जनवरी , 2004

2. An application has been filed onbehalf of Shti G.D. Bhayade , the Loading Supervisor that the dispute betweenthe parties has been amicably settled . The workman has been re -instated by order dated 9th May, 2003. The workman has filed a copy of the order dated 9th May, 2003. It is made part of record of this case along with the application filed on 29-12-2003 the opposite counsel has noobjection.

का.आ. 420.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार, एयर इंडिया लि० के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार, औद्योगिक अधिकरण I, मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 63/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-01-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -11012/35/2003- आई. आर. ( सी-1 ) ]

एस ० एस० गुप्ता, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 29th January, 2004

3.Accordingly now no dispute survives as the workman has been reinstated . The reference is thus answered by stating that in view of the order 9th May, 2003 passed by the Air India, the workman has been reinstated. The dispute does not survive. No costs .

S. C. PANDEY, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 29 जनवरी, 2004

S.O. 420.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 63/2003) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court I, Mumbai now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of Air India Ltd. and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 26-01-2004.

[No. L- 11012/35/2003 - IR(C- 1 ) ]

का.आ. 421.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947(1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार, यूनाईटेड वेस्टर्न बैंक लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में लेबर कोर्ट, सांगली के पंचाट [ संदर्भ संख्या रेफ ( आई० डी० ए० ) नं ० 90/97 ] को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-01-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था। S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

[सं . एल -12012/ 171/96- आई. आर. ( बी-1 ) ]

अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 29th January, 2004 ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, NO.1 AT MUMBAI

PRESENT:

SHRI JUSTICE S. C. PANDY, PresidingOfficer Reference No. CGIT -63 of 2003

PARTIES:

S.O. 421. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award [Ref. ( IDA) No. 90/97] of the Labour Court, Sangli now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of United Western Bank Ltd. and their workman , which was received bythe Central Government on 28-01-2004.

AirIndia Ltd. , AND Their workman Shri G. D. Bhayade

APPEARANCES :

[No. L- 12012/ 171 /96- IR (B- 1 ) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

For theManagement :Shri Kumar Vaidyanathan, Advocate

For the Workmen

BEFORE SHRI P. S. NARKAR PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT, SANGLI : Shri Jai Prakash Sawant, Advocate

Ref. (IDA) No. 90/97

State

: Maharashtra

Mumbai, dated this the 29th day of December, 2003 AWARD

Management of the United Western Bank Ltd. having its Head Office at 172/4, Raviwar Peth, Shivaji Circle, Satara-415001 I Party

AND

Shri Raju Sudam Nikalaje

1. This is a reference under Clause ( d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub-section ( 2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( the Act for short) The terms ofreference as per Schedule are as follows:

...IIndParty

Mahunagar, New Balaji Nagar, Aurangabad

" क्यामैं एअर इंडिया लिमिटेड मुंबई के प्रबंधतंत्र द्वारा दिनांक 6-4-1999 से श्री जी०डी० भायाडेए लोडिंग सुपरवाइजर को सेवा से बर्खास्तकिया जाना विधिवत्, न्यायसंगत एवं उचित 'है ? यदि नहीं तो कर्मकार किस राहत के पात्र हैं ? "

Inthe matter ofreinstatement with continuityofservice and full back wages .

776

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

APPEARANCES:

Shri D. G. Dhigale , Advocate for Ist Party Shri S. N. Inamdar, Advocate for IIndParty

AWARD

(Date:8-1-2004)

1. The Chief Labour Commissioner (C) , New Delhi has forwarded this reference under clause (d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub- section 2A ofSection 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for adjudication over the following demand of the IInd party.

DEMAND

Whether the action of the management of the United WesternBank Ltd. , Satara in terminating the service of Shri Raju Sudam Nikalaje , ex -peon , Ichalkaranji Main Branch w.e.f. 2-6-93 is legal and justified ? If not, what relief the workman is entitledto .

2. Record shows that IInd party is absent on several dates and even today also. Issues were framed in 2001 and Reference is kept for passing order on Ex. 1 on 18-6-02 . It appears Ilnd party is not interested in proceeding further in the matter. Hence this reference is rejected for non- substantiation and in default of the IInd party with no order as to cost. Award accordingly.

Sangli

Dated: 8-1-2004

P. S. NARKAR, Presiding officer नई दिल्ली, 29 जनवरी, 2004

का.आ. 422.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार, दूर संचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में, औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय हैदराबाद नं ० 1 के पंचाट को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को29-01-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

.[सं. एल-40011 /7/95- आई. आर. ( डीयू) ] कुलदीपराय वर्मा, डैस्कअधिकारी New Delhi , the 29th January, 2004

S.O. 422. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Industrial Tribunal , No. I, Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of Telecom Deptt. and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 29-01-2004.

[No. L-40011 /7/95 -IR (DU) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

[PART II-Sec. 3(ii) ]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- I ANDHRA PRADESH, HYDERABAD

PRESENT:

Shri S. Bhujanga Rao , B.Sc. , B.L. , Industrial Tribunal -I

Dated: 30th day ofDecember, 2003 Industrial Dispute No. 85 of 1995

BETWEEN:

....Petitioner G. V. Subbaiah, S/o G. P. Venkataiaha, C/o Shri N. Anjaneyulu, T.O. C. Telephone , Exchange, Vinukonda-522647 GunturDistrict,

AND

TheTelecom District Engineer, Ananthapur-515050

....Respondent

APPEARANCES :

Sri C. Suryanarayana, Advocate for the Petitioner

Sri R. S. Murthy, Advocate for the Respondent

AWARD

TheGovernment of India by its Order No. L-40011/7/ 95- IR (DU) , dated 27-11-1995 made a reference to this Tribunal under Sub - section ( 1 ) ( d) and 2 (A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for adjudication ofthe Industrial Dispute as to whether the action of the Management, Telecom District Manager, Ananthapur is justified in terminating the services of G. V. Subbaiah, a workman herein with effect from 1-7-1986 . If not to what relief is he entitled to ?

The averments of the claim statement filed by the petitioner workman in brief are as follows:---

The petitioner workman was employed in Guntakal Sub-Division for 51 days during January and February 1982 as perMemo No. E.42/82-83 dated 9-12-1983 issued by the Sub-DivisionOfficer , Telecom, Guntakal. He was employed in construction work. On completion of the construction work the workman was sent to Tadipatri Sub - Division and the S.D.O.T. Tadipatri formerly selected the workman for appointment as casual mazdoor in his Sub-Division with effect from March, 1982 vide his letter No. E. 39/82-83 dt . 22-12-1984 showing the workman and five others who were also formerly recruited but on different dates as casual mazdoors . The workman was employed in Tadipatri Sub- Division with effect from March, 1982. While he was so employed, S.D.O. Guntakal issued a formal letter No. E. 41/86-87 dated 19-5-1986 showing the names of seven casual mazdoors including the workman herein and informed theEmployment Officer, Employment Exchange, Anantapur that they were recruited on different dates shown against 777 भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

their names in the said letter dated 19-5-1986 . During 1982 theworkinan was employed for 246 days , during 1983 he was employed for 249 days , during 1984 he was employed for 165 days , during 1985 for 183 days, during 1986 for only 59days.

offact the petitioner himself stopped attending work and the allegation that his services were terminated is incorrect and invented for the purpose of present case. It is further contended that the Petitioner was engaged for 51 days from January, 1982 to February, 1982 in Guntakal Sub- Division in the beginning. He was sponsored by the Sub- Divisional Officer Telecom, Tadipatri , the date ofselection being March, 1982, and that the petitioner was sponsored bythe Sub-Divisional Officer, Guntakal the date ofselection being 1-1-1982.

The working days particulars submitted by the petitioner workman are verified from the official records and the comperative statement is given below:

Year

Days rticulars as verified from the official records

Daysparticulars as submitted by the applicant

246

1982

233

249

1983

167

1984

183

1985

1986

After June, 1986 the workman was retrenched from service for no valid or justifiable reasons . He was not given any notice nor given any notice period wages or other compensation at the time of retrenchment. The retrenchment is thus caused violation of mandatory provisions of Chapter V-A of the I.D. Act and therefore ab initio void. The workman approached the authorities several times for reinstatement but without success . At that time , he did not know that he is entitled to protection under the I.D. Act and therefore he did not raise any dispute against the illegal retrenchment . But as soon as he became aware of the rights , he raised the industrial dispute . The Peti workan prays for declaration that his services habeen illegally terminated and that the termination is retrenchment which is void ab initio and therefore the workman is entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service through without back wages for the period from 49-1986 to the date on which he was obliged to raise industrial dispute before the Assistansabour Comissioner Hyderabad on 19-6-1997 and that he is entitled to protection of his seniority as casual mazdoor in Anantapur Telecom District with all consequential and incidental benefits including absorption in the regular establishment as regular mazdoor in Group-D Cadre and for grant of temporary status pending for regularisation as per D.O.T's Order No. 269-10/89-STN, dt. 7-11-1989 and award may be passed accordingly.

19 M Further, the petitioner did not work in the months of April, May 1984, June 1984 and also from October , 1985 to 1986 and from July 1986 onwards the petitioner did not turn up for duty. The allegation that the petitioner has approached the officers of the Respondent after July, 1986 is incorrect and false . That after a gap of several years he moved the Labour Department and pondent has participated in the conciliation proc held by the Asst. Labour Commissioner ( Central ) Hyderabad . The Petitioner was working in purely temporary nature of works on adhoc basis and the said person cannot claim any employment on permanent basis as a matter of right, and his claim for regularisation or for some status in the Respondent does not arise.

3. The Respondent Management filed counter denying material allegations made in the claim statement and put the petitioner to strict proof of the same. This respondent however contended that the Respondent Department, is Providing Telecommunication service to the general public and is not carrying on its activities on commercial basis but it is only on service motive basis , and it cannot be termed as industry. The respondent, further contended that the Labour Department . Industries Department , Factories Departmentetc. , have not required the Respondent Department Officers to obtain the licence/ the registration certificates for the purposes of the respective labour welfare enactments like I.D. Act , A.P. Shops and Establishments Actetc. Thus the office of the Respondent is neither an industry nor a factory. Hence the provisions of the I.D. Act are not applicable to the Respondent . Therefore the present I.D. is not maintainable before this Tribunal .

Ifisfurther contended that this Respondent believe the same to be true that the petitioner who was working on daily rated basis as a casual mazdoor in the Respondent, having procured a lucrative and attractive assignment left the employment for his better prospects during the year 1986 and that he is gainfully employed and also engaged himself in other profitable avocations all these years and as such he has not evinced any interest to claim his employment for several years . It is submitted that the petitioner is making an attempt to procure the Government job after a gap of several years without there being any reasonable claim . Hence the petitioner is not justified in raising the present dispute and that he is not entitled to anyrelief.

4. Basing on the pleadings of both the parties, the Chairman the then of this Tribunal framedthe following It is further contended that at no time the Respondent have terminated the services of the petitioner workman either on 1-7-1986 or on any other day. Thus the question of his reinstatement into service with back wages , all the attendant benefits , continuity of service and absorption into the regular establishment does not arise. As a matter

440 G1/04-13 778

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii )]

intermittently in 1982 for a total period of 246 days in different works and at different places. Similarly, the petitioner worked on muster rolls at different places in Guntakal Sub -Division from 1982 to June 1986. He was engaged in 1983 for 233 days, in 1984 for 167 days . in 1985 for 183 days , and upto 30th June , 1986 for 59 days . The workman thereafter was not engaged after the completion ofthe work . The workman also was not interested in the work and he never approached for any work except filing the complaint before the Assistant Labour Commissioner in 1994. Thus the petitioner abandoned his duty. Therefore. the question of retrenchment of the petitioner does not arise and in fact there is no retrenchment. The petitioner, is therefore not entitled for reinstatement with continuity of service.

point for consideration " whether this Tribunal has got jurisdiction to adjudicate this dispute. " After hearing both parties , the Chairman the ther of this Tribunal , basing on the decision of the Apex Court , ne Sub- Division Inspector and eight others Vs. Theyyam Joseph etc. (AIR 1996 S.C. 1271) held that Telecom Department is not an ' industry' to fall within the definition of Section 2(j ) of the I. D. Act and hendę rejected the reference on the ground that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the dispute. Aggrieved by the said Award, the petitioner workman preferred a Writ Petition No. 20325/96 before the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh . His Lordship Justice D. Prakash Rao by an orderdt. 2-9-2002 set aside the award dt. 4-9-96 passed by this Tribunal holdintg that the Telecom Department held to be an industry and remanded the matter to this Tribunal for conducting fresh inquiry after giving notice and opportunity to both sides and pass an order accordingto law.

5. After receipt of records from the Hon'ble High Court, the case was restored to file . Notices were issued to both parties and both the parties appeared through their Advocates.

6. The Petitioner -workman was examined as W.WI and got rnarkedExs . W1 to W9 . On behalf of the Respondent Management M. W1 was examined and Exs . M1 to M4 were marked.

7. Now the points that arise for consider ( 1 ) whether the respondent management terminated the services of the petitioner as contended by the petitioner ? If so ( 2) whether the action of the Managementor Telecom, Anantapur is justified in terminating the series of the workman G. V. Subbaiah with effect from 1-7-1986 . If so , to whatrelief ?

10. The then Chairman of this Tribunal in the previous awardt 9-1996 made in this industrial dispute, rejected the rele holding that Telecom Department is not an ' industry ' within the meaning of Section 2 (j ) of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 and as such this Tribunal has nojurisdiction to entertain the dispute. Aggrieved by the said Award, the petitioner preferred Writ Petition No. 20325 of 1996 on the file ofHon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh and the Hon'ble High Court relying on thecision reported in G.M.T.G.T.R. vs A. Srinivas Rao ( All 1998 S.C. 656) held that the department of Telecom is an ' industry ' and allowed the Writ Petition and set aside the Award directing this Tribunal to conduct a fresh enquiry. The Respondent has not placed any material to come to a conclusion that the Telecom Department is not an ' industry' .Therefore the findings of the Hon'ble High Court that the Telecom Department is an ' industry ' holds good . Therefore, the contention of the Respondent that the Telecom Department is not an industry is not sustainable .

8. The contention of the petitioner is that he was employed as casual mazdoor in Tadipatri Sub -Division Telecom with effect from March, 1982. During 1982 the petitioner workman was employed for 246 days, during 1983 he was employed for 249 days , during 1984 he was employed for 165 days , during 1985 he was employed for 183 days and during 1986 he was employed for 59 days . AfterJune , 1986 the workman was retrenched from service for no valid orjustifiable reasons without giving any notice or notice period wages at the time of retrenchment . The retrenchment is, therefore, in violation of mandatory provisions of Chapter V- A of the I.D. Act and as such is illegal and ab initio void. The Petitioner is, therefore, entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service.

11. The Petitioner as W.W.1 has stated that he worked as casual mazdoor in Telecom Department, Guntakal Sub-Division , Anantapur Division for 51 days in January and February, 1982. Thereafter he was shifted to newly established Tadipatri Sub - Division where he worked from 1982 till 1986. Exs . W1 to W5 corroborates the above evidence of W.W1 Infact, the Respondent has admitted that W.WI was engaged as casual mazdoor in Telecom Department for 246 days in 1982 , 233 days in 1983 , 167 days in 1984, 183 days in 1985 and 59 days in 1986, but contended that the petitioner was engaged intermittently in specified work for specific period and the intermittent engagement of the petitioner came to an end with the completion of the said work and the expiry of the period.

12. Though the Petitioner contended that he worked continuously , during his cross examination as W. W1 , has categorically admitted that his engagement as casual mazdoor is based on specific work orders . He categorically stated that he was engaged in Sub - Division , Nuziveedu for laying cables , that after completion of that work there 9. On the other hand , the contention of the Respondent Management is that the Respondent Department is neither an industry nor a factory and provisions of the I.D. Act are not applicable to the Respondent-Department. Therefore , the present industrial dispute is not maintainable before this Tribunal . The Respondent further contended that the petitioner worked 779 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

was dis -engagement, that he was engaged in Guntakal Sub- Division for laying overhead lines between Vidapanakallu to Guntakal which was based on specific work order, and thatafter completion of that work, he was engaged in other works at Thadipathri and surrounding villages basing on specific work orders. Ex. W5 the book maintained by the petitioner also shows that the petitioner worked intermittently in different works and at different places i.e. , forspecific period for specific work. In view of the above facts and circumstances , it is established that the petitioner worked as casual mazdoor on daily wages for specific works for specific periods from 1982 upto 30th June , 1986 intermittently but not continuously as contended by the petitioner.

Labour Commissioner in the year 1994. W.W1 did not adduce any evidence as to when and how he approached the authorities for work. It is suggested to W.W1 that he never approached Respondent Management and enquired about availability of work and that he was not re-engaged as he did not approach the management for work upto 1994. In view of the above facts and circumstances , the inconsistent interested and un-corroborative testimony of W.W. 1 is not believable . There is no cogent evidence on record to show that W.W. 1 approached the authority, for work after June, 1986 till 1994. M. W. 1 has stated that after June, 1996, the Petitioner never approached the Mustering Officer for providing him work and that the Petitioner (W, W. 1 ) never represented to either Mustering Officer or higher authorities at any time against his alleged termination. If really W. W.1 approached the Officials for providing him work andthey refused to admit him on the plea that there is break in his service, he would not have waited till 1994 without proceeding against the Management.

13. The contention of the Petitoner is that he was retrenched from 1-7-1986 without any notice or payment of compensation contrary to Section 25 -F of the I.D. Act and as such he is entitled for reinstatement with continuity of service.On the other hand the contention ofthe Respondent isthat after June , 1986 the Petitioner was not engaged after completion ofwork, as there was no work. The petitioner also did not turn up for work from July, 1986. He never approached the Mustering Officers for providing him work. The Petitioner was never retrenched nor terminated from July, 1986. That apart, there is no retrenchment within the meaning of Section 25 -F of the Industrial Disputes Actas the engagement of the petitioner at all times was on daily wages , for specific period, for specific work . The petitioner is therefore not entitled to any relief as sought for by the Petitioner.

16. In view ofthe above facts and circumstances , the contention and the evidence of W.W1 that he approached the officers of W. W1 , for work, after June , 1986 etc. , is an after thought and it cannot be believed . On the other hand, the contention of the Respondent that the petitioner was also not interested in the work and that he never approached for any work, appears to be true . Under these circumstances , the submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner at para 7 of the written arguments is not sustainable and the ruling ofthe apex court in SCOOTERS INDIA LTD . vs. M. MOHAMMAD YAKUB ( 2001 LLR 54 S.C. ) cited by the learned counsel is not applicable to the facts of the present case .

14. W.W1 during his chief examination has stated that after June , 1996 all works were stopped and no mazdoor was employed. In the month of July, 1996 he visited Sub- Divisional Office , Tadipatri , to enquire whether there was any work and he was told that there was no work and that he would be informed as and when there was work for them. But the management did not call him for work. On the other hand his junior was appointed. When he questioned the Management as to why he was not employed though he was head mazdoor , they replied that there was work for onlysix members . Out ofsix persons employed one is junior tohim. Then he raised dispute before the Assistant Labour Commissioner(Central ) Hyderabad.

ion of ise. I t in. 17. It has been established that the petitioner claimant was engaged on muster rolls on daily ages for specific works and for specific periods from 19 to Juhe, 1986,depending on availability of work. In suches there is no retrenchment of workman within the mining of Section 2(00) of the I.D. Act and as such the compliance of Section 25 -F of the I.D. Act doe am fortified in this view by the decision ofthe HARYANA STATE F.C.C.W. STORE LTD . vs. R AND ANOTHER (2002 II , LLJ- 1153 ) wherein Supreme Court observed that the engagement/ appo oftheRespondent workman was for a specific purpo foraparticular period. Then disengagement on the comp ofthe purpose and expiry of the period , was in terms o contract of service and therefore not ' retrenchment ' withn themeaning ofSec . 2 (oo) of the I. D. Act.

18. In HIMANTHU KUMAR AND OTHERS . vs. STATE OF BIHAR & OTHERS ( II - LLJ , 1998 page 50) the Hon'ble Supreme Court held " When a recruitment is regulated by statutory rules , the concept of industry to that extent stands excluded , the disengagement of temporary employees on daily wages cannot be construed as retrenchment. "

15. In the claim statement, it has been stated that W.W1 approached the officers several times , but they refused to admit him to duty on the plea that there is break in his service. But the evidence of W.W1 is inconsistent with the above plea in the claim statement. Except the interested testimony ofW. W1 , there is no evidence to show that W.W1 approached the officials of the Respondent, for work, in the month ofJuly, 1996 or at any point oftime after June , 1996. During his cross examination W.W1 has admitted that he did not represent to the authorities concerned, inwriting at any point of time , after 1986, upto the complaint vide Ex. W.7 given by him to the Assistant 780

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

Documents marked for the Petitioner:

Ex. W1 9-12-82 Memo issued by S.D.O. Telecom. , Guntakal .

Ex. W2 22-12-84 Letter of S.D.O. Telecom ; Tadipatri to the Employment Officers , Cuddapah/Vijayawada/ Anantapur.

19. It is true that during some years , workman worked for 240 days . The mere fact of working for 240 days does notentitle the workman to claim regularisation. I am fortified by a decision of the Supreme Court in MADHYAMIK SIKSHA PARISHAD , U.P. vs. ANIL KUMAR MISRA (AIR 1994 S.C. 1638 ) wherein the Supreme Court held that attributing status of workman under Industrial Disputes Act to persons completing 240 days of work is not proper such duration ofwork does not create right to regularisation.

Ex. W3 18-5-85 Letter S.D.O. Telecom , Guntakal to the EmploymentOfficer , Anantapur.

Ex. W4 Carbon copy of the letter sent to W. W.1 by the S.D.O.T. Tadipatri .

Ex. W5 Working days particulars Note Book .

Ex. W6

13-6-94

Copyofthe complaint made to the A.L.C. (C ) Hyderabad by the petitioner .

Ex. W7 Xerox copy ofreply given by S.D.O.T. Guntakal toEx. W6.

Ex. W8 Xerox copy of the Minutes of conciliation proceedings.

Ex. W9 Xeroxcopy ofthe conciliation report submitted by A.L.C. to Government of India.

20. The contention of the Respondent and the evidence ofM. W.1 is that the petitioner workman raised the industrial dispute after lapse of 9 years when the claim has become stale and the policy of not engaging any casual labour has come into force . Vide Exs . Ml to M3 the DOT ND Lr. No. Dt. 31-3-1985, 22-6-1988 and 12-2-1999. Не, further, stated that the Respondents have , as a matter of policydiscontinued engagement of casual labourers at all times for all purposes except for a period of 60 days and the provisions of para 193 of P& T Manual Vol . X engaging casual labour has become a closed establishment for all purposes thereby leaving no scope for engagement of the petitioner . the above evidence of M. W.1 is unchallenged as there is no cross examination of the above material .

Documents marked for the Respondent:

Ex.Ml Xerox copy of the D.G.P. & T. Lr. dt . 30-3-85 regarding engagement of casual labour.

Ex. M2 Copy of D.O.T. New Delhi Lr. No. 270-6/84- SGT Dt . 22-6-88 regarding casual labour recruitment.

Ex.M3

21. In view of ban of engagement of casual labour from 12-2-1999 except for a period of 60 days, such an engagement exceeding 60 days has become closed establishment and the provision ofthe Industrial Disputes Act are not attracted to the closed establishments as per the decision of the apex court in HARIPRASAD SIVASHANKAR SUKLA v. A.D. DIVELKAR (AIR 1957 S.C. 121 ) and also in Sathis Gupta's case reported in 1980(3 ) S.C.C. 340 .

Copy of office memorandum dt. 12-2-1999 regarding engagement of casual labour ban- . regarding.

Ex.M4 Copy of Rules regarding the destruction of accounts records pertaining to the accounts audited by the Indian Audit Department. 22. Having regard to the facts and circumstances discussed above , I have no hesitation to hold that the Respondent is justified in terminating the services of the workman G. V. Subbaiah .

नई दिल्ली, 29 जनवरी , 2004

23. In the result an Award is passed holding that the action of the Management of Telecom; Anantapur is justified in terminating the services of the workman G.V. Subbaiah with effect from 1-7-1986. Hence the reference is answered accordingly.

का.आ. 423.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार, दूर संचार विभाग के प्रबंधपत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 166/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-01-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था । Dictated to the Senior Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected by me, given under my hand and the seal of this Tribunal , this the 30th day of December , 2003 .

S. BHUJANGA RAO , Industrial Tribunal - I

[सं.एल -40012/260/99- आई. आर. ( डी.यू. ) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी Appendix ofEvidence

New Delhi, the 29th January, 2004 Witnesses Examined

for the Petitioner :

Witnesses Examined forRespondent :

W.W.1 G.V. Subbaiah M.W.1 S. M. Hussain ( on affidavit)

S.O. 423. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act . ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref . No. 166/2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/` Labour Court, Hyderabad now as shown in the Annexure [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

inthe Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation tothe Management of Telecom Deptt . and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 29-01-2004.

[No. L-40012/260/99 -IR (DU)]

KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

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

Dated the 31st day of December, 2003 INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 166/2002 (Old L.D. No. 51/99 transferred from Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Visakhapatnam) BETWEEN:

Sri T.S. Chakravarthi, "Sreenivas Sharadanagar" , St. No. 4, Ramalayam, Anakapalle-531001.

AND

1. The Sub-Divisional Offic

Telecommunications ,

Chodavaram-531036.

VisakhapatnamDistrict.

2. TheGeneral Manager

Telecommunications , Deptt. ofTelecommunications ,

Andhra Circle , TelecomDistrict,

DabaGardens,Visakhapatnam - 530020.

3. TheDivisional Engineer,

Telecommunications ,

Maintenance-5,

781

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

transferredto this Tribunal in view ofGovernment ofIndia. Ministry ofLabour's Order No. - 11026/ 1 /2001 -IR(C.II) dated 18.10.2001 bearing No. ITID. 51/99 , The reference is.

SCHEDULE

"Whether the termination of services of Sri T. S. Chakravarthi . Ex-casual mazdoor w.e.f. 24-2-96 by the Management of Telecommunications , Visakhapatnam is legal and justified? If not,to what reliefhe is entitled ?"

The reference is renumbered in this Tribunal as I.D. No. 166/2002 and notices were issued to the parties.

..Respondents

Anakapaile- 531001 . VisakhapatnamDistrict.

Appearances:

For the Petitioner :M/sA. V. Sambasiva Rao & A.S. Ramasarma, Advocates For the Respondent : M/ s M. Ramkoti , & M. Madhava Rao, Advocates

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry ofLabour by its orderNo. L -40012/260/99 - IR (DU) dated 18.11.1999 referred the followingdispute under Section 10 (1 )(d) of the I.D. Act . 1947 for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court , Visakhapatnam between the management of Telecommunications and their workman which has been 2. The brieffacts as mentioned in the claim statement are: That the Petitioner has worked from February, 1984to December. 1985 continuously and the Management stopped giving work from 1993 till the date of illegal termination on 24-2-96 . The entire service was continuous and unblemished. The Management without following the provisions contemplated in law terminated the services of the workman which is illegal , arbitrary and bad. He was served with anotice under memo number A- 20 /95-96 , dated 23-1-96. It was alleged that the working days between 1-2- 84 to 31-12-85 submitted by this workman are in genuine and hence, the workman has willfully cheated the Department by submitting in genuine days to gain employment in this division. Hence , his services were terminated by giving one month notice under section 25 -F ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The said notice is submitted. A representation was given. He approached the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad and challenged the said orders vide OA No.258/96 . The Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal passed an order on the admission stage itself on 23-2-96. So the orders of the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad are submitted as document No.3 . As there is no response from the Management the workman approached the Assistant Labour Commissioner (C ) , Visakhapatnam . He conducted joint meetings and there is no meeting point hence, he referred the matter to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour , which in turn has made a referenceto. This Hon'ble Tribunal . The representation submitted to theAsstt Labour Commissioner (C ) is document No.4.

3. That the Management suppressed muster rolls register and other important documents and invented the order of termination. The Management invented the misconduct against the workman. If it really so he should have been issued with a charge sheet and his explanation should have been called for and domestic enquiry should have been conducted according to the rules of the Management by giving opportunity under principles of natural justice. The way in which the Management has terminated his services in harmoniously. Hence , it is prayed to set aside the retrenchment order dated 24-2-96. and pass an Award in favour of the workman directing the Management to reinstatement into service , continuity 782

THEG ZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2 , 1925

of service with full back wags and all attendant benefits.

4. A counter was filed that the telecom Department is not an industry . A casual mazdoor is not an employee and engagement and dis -engagement is according to availability ofjobs . It is need based only. The dismissal is not retrenchment. He misrepresented that he worked as casual mazdoor from 1-1-84 to 31-12-85 under one Sri Ch . Venkata Rao , L.I (T) and Sri P. Joga Rao , S.I. , who had not at all worked at Narasipatnam . The muster roll numbers quoted by the claimant in the eleven certificates filedby him have been verified by the Assistant Chief Accounts Officer(Works & Budget) and found that except the 6 muster rolls i.e. , 302/13 , 305/20 , 306/11 , 313/1 , 1817/17 , and 1817/16 all the rest of muster roll numbers were not at all issued by theManagement and his name was not found in these six muster rolls and the work particulars and certificates produced by him are spurious and not genuine . The Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad by its order conferred liberty on the Management to give effect to the retrenchment order , if the work particulars filed by the workman are found tobe false . The claimant has resorted to this dispute just to fall within the purview of the instructions of the Chief General Manager , Telecom, Hyderabad issued in February, 1993 vide TA/RE/20-2/ RLGS/CORR and claim regularisation on the pretext ofhis continuance after 31-3-85 in pursuance of the said purpose he gained employment in Chodavaram sub -division by producing bogus certificates. That C.C.S. (CCA) rules do not apply to casual mazdoors as per rule 3 ( 1 ) (C) and as such the claimant is not entitled to claim a full fledged disciplinary enquiry. Hence, the petition may be dismissed.

5. The Petitioner examined himself as WW1 and deposed that he worked as casual mazdoor from 1993 to 1996. He was given a notice of termination on 23-1-96. That the allegation that he did not work is false. Hence , he may be reinstated with back wages , continuity of service etc.

6. In the cross exammation he deposed that he filed OA No.2:58/96 questioning the retrenchment notice and also for the consequential relief of reinstatement with all benefits . He does not know the result of the Judgement on OA . It is not true to suggest that, that the Central Government rules does not apply to casual mazdoors for engagement or dis - engagement . He has not received any letter dated 23-1-96 issued by SDO . He denied that he has filed fake documents .

7. The Management examined Sri U. Ramakrishna, SDE( Legal ) who worked as commercial officer ( Central ) , Visakhapatnam - 16 . The Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal . Hyderabad directed them to check whether

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii )] Chakravarthy has worked for 353 days from 1-2-84 to 31-12-85 . Accordingly, they got it checked by Vigilance Department that he has brought the original muster rolls from December, 1984 to July, 1985. That name of Chakarvarthy was not there during the said period . He marked Ex.M1 to M8 . The Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , further directed that the claim of the Petitioner is not genuine the retrenchment order can be enforced and the matter was also brought to the notice of the Assistant Labour Commissioner ( C) , Visakhapatnam during the conciliation proceedings . A copy of the letter is also supplied to the petitioner along with other relevant documents . Hence , the retrenchment orders are correct .

8. In the cross -examination he deposed that all facts as mentioned in the counter. That after receipt ofthe retrenchment order the workman approached the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad. The Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad directed the Management to verify the records for the period from 1-2-84 to 31-12-85 . After receipt of the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad directions the Management ve said peri Admini Manag AGM(A The records pertaining to the above ipt of the Hon'ble Central al , Hyderabad orders the file to Vigilance wing and fied by theVigilance Officer . While thereport beforethe AEM(Admn. ) The Workman approached the Assistant Labour Commissioner ( C) , the Management appeared and submitted remarks Ex. M8 . The Management has not given any notice by serving Vigilance report and calling exaplanation from the Petitioner. From their case filethere are no documents with regard to Vigilance wing enquiry port and depositions as those documents areconfidential .

9. It is argued by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that even if as per the orders of the Hon'ble CentralAdministrative Tribunal , Hyderabad in OA No.258/ 96 a Vigilance report is called for then, the copy of the Vigilance report should have been given and the explanation ofthe Petitioner should have been called for. Firstly, there was no enquiry. It is something different to retrench a person on the ground that there is no work but it issomething different to retrench him on the ground that hehasgiven some fabricated document . When some stigma is attached, principles of natural justice require that he should be asked to face enquiry. He should be given a charge sheet when all that is not done even when the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad, ordered to check the details it does not mean that the said checking would be done behind the back of the Petitioner . Hence , the dismissal is illegal and the Petitioner may be reinstated with all back wages.

783 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

Award passed. Transmit.

Dictated to Kum. K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 3 1st day of December, 2003 ..

E. ISMAIL, PresidingOfficer

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for the Witnesses examined for the Petitioner: Respondent:

WWI : Sri T.S. Chakravarthy MWI : Sri U. Ramakrishna

Documents marked for the Petitioner 10. The Learned Counsel for the Respondent argued that having selected forum of Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad inOA No. 258/96 and the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad directed on 23-2-96 itself at the admission stage held as follows , " in view of the above, the following direction is given: R5 should check the details given by the applicants in regard to their working during the period 1-2-84 to 31-12-85 and if it is found to be ingenuine the retrenchment order can be enforced" . And they have undertaken that exercise and again found that the details furnished by the Petitioner between 1-2-84 to 31-12-85 are not genuine. Hence, there is nothing more to be done and the reference maybe ordered in favour of the Respondent .

NIL

Documents marked for the Respondent

Ex.MI : Copies of muster rolls from Dec. 1984 to July, 1985

Ex.M2: Muster roll for Decem 1984

Ex.M3 : Muster roll for February, 1985

Ex.M4: Muster roll for March 1985

Ex.M5: Muster roll for May, 1985

Ex.M6: Muster roll for June, 1985

Ex.M7: Muster roll for July, 1985

Ex.M8 : The office copy ofLr No. ALC / 8 ( 13 ) & ( 14 )/98 12of the Telecom Department dated 5-2-99.

नई दिल्ली, 29 2004

का.आ. 424.-औद्योगिकविवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार, दूर संचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबंध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 172/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-01-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -40012/259/ 99- आई. आर. ( डी.यू. ) ]

कुलदीप राय वर्मा , डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 29th January, 2004

S.O. 424. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 172/ 2002) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court Hyderabad now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of Telecom Deptt . and their workman, which wasreceivedby the Central Government on 29-01-2004 .

[No. L-40012/259/99 -IR (DU) ] 11. It may be seen that when the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad has given a Judgement as stated above , this Court cannot again give a separate directionbut however in view of the categorical admission byMW1 that there are no papers or documents in his case file ofthe Vigilance enquiry and depositions etc. and he is not aware whether the Management before preparing comer called for the vigilance report. No doubt the Management has marked certain documents , MRs from Decembem 1984 till July, 1985 , Ex.Ml to M8 . But, still the principles ofnaturustice have to be followed . Hence, I am of the opinion that the Management can be directedto check the details given by the Petitioner about his working between 1-2-84 to 31-12-85 and if the Vigilance winggives areport, they haveto issue a notice along with the Vigilance report and call for his explanation and after considering his explanation, then only the retrenchment order will become final . according, the reference is ordered as follow : The action of the Management in terminating the serices of Sri T. S. Chakravarthy, ex-casual mazdoor w.e.f. 24-2-96by the Management ofTelecommunications , Visakhapatnam is not legal and justified . However, he is not entitled for any reinstatement or back wages and the Management is directed to verify wheher the Petitioner has worked between 1-2-84 to 31-12-85as directed by the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad OA No. 258/96 by order dated 23-2-96 at the admission stage only and if it is found that hehas notworked and filed fake documents then he should be issued a notice calling for his explanation along with a copyofVigilance report and ifhis explanation is not found satisfactory and if it is found that he has not worked from 1-2-84 to 31-12-85 then the retrenchment order can be enforced. If it is found otherwise that is, he has worked from 1-2-84 to 31-12-85 , then he should be reinstated and paid future wages only. He will not be entitled for back wages. The Management should complete the exercise of calling for Vigilance report issuing a notice calling for his explanationwithin three months from the publication of this Award, failing which the Petitioner has to be taken back into service as casual employee without back wages.

KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer [PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] 784

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

transferred to this Tribunal in view of Government of India, Ministry of Labour's Order No. H- 11 026/ 1 /2001 - IR( C. II) dated 18.10.2001 bearing No. 47/1999 . The reference is,

SCHEDULE

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

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

Dated the 31stday of December, 2003

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 172/2002

"Whether the termination of services of Sri B. Venkata Reddy. ex -casual mazdoor w.e.f. 24-2- 96 by the Management ofTelecommunications , Visakhapatnam is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief he is entitled ?"

(Old L.D. No. 47/99 transferred from Industrial Tribunal -cum - Labour Court , Visakhapatnam)

The reference is renumbered in this Tribunal as I.D. No. 172/2002 and notices were issued to the parties .

BETWEEN:

Sri B. Venkata Reddy,

Petitioner

C/o B. Appalaswamy,

Narasayyapeta,

Gandhinagar School ,

Chodavaram-531036 .

AND

The Sub -Divisional Officer, Telecommunications ,

Chodavaram -531036.

Visakhapatnam District.

The Divisional Engineer,

Telecommunications ,

2. Maintenance- 5,

2.The brief facts as mentioned in the claim statement are: That the Petitioner has worked from February, 1984 to December , 1985 continuously and the Management stopped giving work from 1993 till the date of illegal termination on 24-2-96: The entire service was continuous and unblemished. The Management without following the provisions contemplated in law terminated the services of the workman which is illegal , arbitrary and bad. He servedwith a notice under memo number A-20/95-96, dated 23-1-96. It was alleged that the working day between 1-2-84 to31-12-85 submitted by this we han are ingemuine and hence , the workman has wilfully cheated the Departmentby submitting ingenuine days to gain employ- ment in this division. Hence , his services were terminated by giving one month's notice under Section 25 - F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Anakapalle-53100

VisakhapatnamDi

3. The General Manager,

Telecommunications, Deptt. ofTelecommunications, Andhra Circle , Telecom District, Daba Gardens ,Visakhapatnam - 530 020.

Respondents

APPEARANCES :

For the Petitioner : M/sA. V. Sambasiva Rao & A.S. Ramasarma , Advocates

For the Respondent : M/s M. Ramkoti , & M. Madhava Rao, Advocates

The said notice is submitted . A representation was given.He approached the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad and challenged the said orders vide OA No. 258/96 . The Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal passed an order on the admission stage itself on 23-2-96. So the orders of the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad are submitted as document No. 3 . As there is no response from the Management the workman approached the Assistant Labour Commissioner ( C) . Visakhapatnam. He conducted joint meetings and there is no meeting point hence , he referred the matter to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour , which in turn has made a reference to this Hon'ble Tribunal . The . representation submitted to the Assistant Labour Commissioner (C) is document No. 4.

AWARD

3. That the Management suppressed muster rolls register and other important documents and invented the order of termination. The Management invented the misconduct against the workman. If it is really so he should have been issued with a charge sheet and his explanation should have been called for and domestic enquiry should have been conducted according to the rules of the The Government of India , Ministry of Labour by its order No. L-40012 / 259 / 99 - IR(DU ) dated 29.10.99 referred the following dispute under Section 10(1) ( d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal -cum - Labour Court , Visakhapatnam between the management of Telecomrnunications and their workman which has been 785 भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

OA. It is not true to suggest that that he has written a letter that he was sick and cannot work in the year 1984. He denied that he has filed fake documents .

Management by giving opportunity under principles of natural justice . The way in which the Management has terminated his services inharmoniously. Hence, it is prayed to set aside the retrenchment order dated 24.2.96, and pass an Award in favour of the workman directing the Management to reinstatement into service , continuity of service with full back wages and all attendant benefits.

7. The Management examined Sri U. Ramakrishna, SDE(Legal ) who worked as commercial officer ( Central ) , Visakhapatnam- 16. The Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad directed them to check whether Venkatareddy has worked for 636 days from 1-2-82 to 31-12-85 . Accordingly, they got it checked by Vigilance Department that he has brought the original muster rolls from March , 1984 to October, 1985. That name of Venkatareddy was not there during the said period. He marked Ex . Ml to M13 . The Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , further directed that the claim of the Petitioner is not genuine , the retrenchmerit order can be enforced and the matter was also brought to the notice oftheAssistant Labour Commissioner (C) , Visakhapatnam during the conciliation proceedings . A copy of the letter isalso supplied to the Petitioner along with other relevant documents. The office copy maintained by the telecom Department is Ex. M 14. Hence , the retrenchment orders arecorrect.

4. Acounter was filed that the telecom Department is not an industry. A casual mazdoor is not an employee and engagement and disengagement is according to avail- ability ofjobs . It is need based only. The dismissal is not retrenchment. That the Petitioner entered intojob in Feb- ruary, 1993 at Chodavaram Sub -Division within the juris- diction of Management by misrepresenting that he worked as casual mazdoor from 1-2-84 to 31-12-85 under one Sri K. Atchanna , S.I (T) , Narasipatnam. It was a sub - division at that time. Theworkman was given work in February, 1993 on his representation that he was in continuous engage- ment as a casual mazdoor. After 31-3-1985 as per the work particulars and certificates furnished by him, the workman himself has addressed a letter in January, 1986 that he has fallen sick and could not work after 31-12-85. So it is not correct that the Management stopped him from working as alleged. On verification of the certificates and the work particulars of the MRs it is found that the workman did not work under Sri K. Atchanna during the said period as al- leged and the work particulars and certificates produced by him are spurious and not genuine . The workman re- sorted to such kind of misconduct, fraud and misrepresen- tation only to gain engagement and seek regularisation. The Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad by its order dated 23-2-96 made in OA No.258/96 conferred liberty on the Management to give effect to the retrench- ment order, if the work particulars filed by the workman are found to be false . The termination of the workman after giving one month notice and offer of the amount payable under 25 F though not necessary in this case it was given . Therefore, thetermination does not suffer from the vice of anydiscrimination. Having elected the remedy under Ad- ministrative Tribunal Act - I , the workman is not entitledto resort under the I.D. Act for a remedy. Hence, the petition may be dismissed.

8. In the cross examination he deposed that after receipt ofthe retrenchment order the workman approached theHon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad. TheHon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad directed the Management to verify the records for the period from 1-2-84 to 31-12-85. After receipt of, the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad directions the Management verified the records pertaining to the above said period. After receipt of the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad orders the Management sent the file to Vigilance wing and AGM (Admn.). Itwas verified by the Vigilance Officer. While the report is pending before the AGM (Admn . ) the workman approached the Assistant Labour Commissioner ( C ) , the Management appeared and submitted remarks Ex. M14. The Management has not given any notice by serving Vigilance report and calling explanation from the Petitioner. From their case file there are no documents with regard to Vigilance wing enquiry report , in his enquiry report and deposition as those documents are confidential .

5. The Petitioner examined himself as WW1 and deposed that he worked as casual mazdoor from 1993 to 1996. He was given a notice of termination on 23-1-96 . That the allegation that he did not work is false . Hence , he may be reinstated with back wages , continuity of service etc.

9. It is arguedby the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that even if as per the orders of the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in QA No.258/ 96 a Vigilance report is called for then , the copy of the Vigilance report should have been given and the explanation of the Petitioner should have been called for. Firstly, there was no enquiry. It is something different to retrench a person on the ground that there is no work but it is something different to retrench him on the ground that 6. In the cross -examination he deposed that he filed OA No. 258/96 questioning the retrenchment notice and also for the consequential relief of reinstatement with all benefits . He does not know the result of the Judgement on

440 G1/04-14 786

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

he has given some fabricated document. When some stigma is attached, principles of natural justice require that he should be asked to face enquiry. He should be given a charge sheet when all that is not done even when the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad, ordered to check the details it does not mean that the said checking would be done behind the back of the Petitioner. Hence, thedismissal is illegal and the Petitioner may be reinstated with all back wages .

10. The Learned Counsel for the Respondent argued that having selected forum of Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad in OA No 258/96 and theHon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad directed on 23-2-98 itself at the admission stage held as follows , " in view of the above, the following direction is given: R5 should check the details given by the applicants in regard to their working during the period 1-2-84 to 31-12-85 and if it is found to be ingenuine the retrenchment order can be enforced" . And they have undertaken that exercise and again found that the details furnished by the Petitioner between 1-2-84 to 31-12-85 are not genuine . Hence, there is nothing more to be done and the reference may be ordered in favour of the Respondent.

11. It may be seen that when the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad has given a Judgement as stated above , this Court cannot again given a separate direction but however in view of the categorical admission by MWI that there are no papers or documents in his case fie of the Vigilance enquiry and depositions etc and he is netware whether the Management before preparing Counter called for the Vigilance report . No doubt the Management has marked certain documents , MRs from Mac : 1984 till October, 1985 , Ex. Ml toM13 . But, still the p. inciples of natural justice have to be followed. Hence, I am of the opinion that the Management can be directed to check the details given by the Petitioner about his working between 1-2-84 to 31-12-85 and if the Vigilance wing gives a report , they have to issue a notice along with the Vigilance report and call for his explanation and after considering his xplanation , then only the retrenchment order will become inal. Accordingly, the reference is ordered as follows : The action of the Management in terminating the services of Sri B. Venkata Reddy, ex - casual mazdoor w.e.f. 24-2-96 by theManagement of Telecommunications , Visakhapatnam is not legal and justified . However, he is not entitled for any reinstatement or back wages and the Management is directed to verify whether the Petitioner has worked between 1-2-84 to 31-12-85 as directed by the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad OA No.258 / 96 by order dated 23-2-96 at the admission stage only and ifitis found that he has not worked and filed fake documents then he should be issued a notice calling for his explanation

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] along with a copy of Vigilance report and if his explanation is not found satisfactory and if it is found that he has not worked from 1-2-84 to 31-12-85 then the retrenchment order can be enforced. If it is found otherwise that is, he has worked from 1-2-84 to 31-12-85, then he should be reinstated andpaid future wages only. He will not be entitled for back wages . The Management should complete the exercise of calling for Vigilance report issuing a notice calling for his explanation within three months from the publication of this Award, failing which the Petitioner has to be taken back into service as casual employee without back wages . Awardpassed. Transmit.

Dictated to Kum . K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 31st day of December, 2003 .

E. ISMAIL, Presiding Officer Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for thePetitioner:

Witnesses examined for theRespondent:

MW1 : Sri U. Ramakrishna WW1: Sri B. Venkat Reddy

Documents marked for the Petitioner Ex.W1: Copy of Order in OA No 258/96 of Hon'ble CAT. Hyderabad

Documents marked for the Respondent Ex.MI: Muster roll for March 1984

Ex.M2: Muster roll for April 1984

Ex.M3: Muster roll for May 1984

Ex.M4: Muster roll for June 1984

Ex.M5 : Muster roll for July 1984

Ex.M6 : Muster roll for September 1984

Ex.M7: Muster roll for March 1985

Ex.M8 : Muster roll for May 1985

Ex.M9: Muster roll for June 1985

Ex.M10 : Muster roll for July 1985

Ex.MII : Muster roll for August 1985

Ex.M12 : Muster roll for September 1985

Ex.Ml 3 : Muster roll for October 1985

Ex.M14: The office copy of Lr No ALC/8 ( 13 ) & ( 14)/98 12 of the Telecom Department dated 5-2-99.

787 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

AWARD

नईदिल्ली, 29 जनवरी, 2004

TheGovernment of India, Ministry of Labourby its order No. L-40012 / 63 / 2002 - IR (DU) dated 3-9-2002 referred the following dispute under section 10( 1 ) (d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 for adjudication to this Tribunal between the employers in relation to the Management of BSNL and their workman .

SCHEDULE

का.आ. 425.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार, दूर संचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबंध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 282/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-01-2004 प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-40012/63/2002- आई. आर. (डी.यू. ) ]

कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्कअधिकारी

New Delhi , the 29th January, 2004

"Whether the action of the management of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. , Hyderabad in not providing employment to Smt . E. Narasamma, ex-casual labour with effect from November, 2001 is justified? Ifnot, to what relief the applicant is entitled?"

This reference was registered as Industrial Dispute No. 279/2002 and notices were issued to the parties..

S.O. 425. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref . No. 282/2002 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court Hyderabad now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of Telecom Deptt . and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 29-01-2004.

[No. L-40012/63/2002-IR(D.U . ) ]

KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT : -Shri E. Ismail , B. Sc . , LL. B. ,

2. The brief facts as stated in the petitioner are: That the Petitioner was appointed in 1988 as a sweeper in the category of class IV, at the time of shifting the office from Triveni Complex to Doorsanchar Bhavan, Since then, she has been working continuously even on Sundays and holidays and she used to work for 12 hours a day. That she was being paid Rs . 14/ -per day which was enhanced toRs . 22/-, 35 /-, 55/-, 60/-etc . In the year 2001 her wages were Rs . 80/- per dey. She was receiving wages along with other regular employees every months . That on 16-9-91 the Respondent Management paid Rs . 3019/- towards wage arrears for the period 5-2-86 to 31-7-91 and obtained endorsement of the Petitioner. Without regularizing her services she was continued in minimum wages for 13 long years.

PresidingOfficer

Dated the 12th day of January, 2004

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NΝΟ . 282/2002

Between

Smt .E. Narasamma,

H. No. 6-1-976 , Jagirdar Bada,

Khairatabad Post ,

Petitioner

Hyderabad- 500004.

AND

The Chief General Manager Telecom, BSNL , Nampally Station Road , Abids ,

Respondent

Hyderabad-500 001.

APPEARANCES:

M/s . K. Srinivasa Murthy, C.

For the Petitioner :

3. It is submitted that she along with another employee who was also similarly placed made several oral requests to the Respondent to regularize their services and topay salaries on par with regular employees . However, the Respondent put a deaf ear to their requests . Finally when the then Communication Minister Hon'ble Sri Ram Vilas Paswan paid a visit to inaugurate a telephone exchange at Madhapur , Hyderabad, they had put forth their grievances and requested him for regularization of their services . He directed the Management to consider their grievances and regularize their services and pay salary onpar with regular employees . Aggrieved by the request made by the Petitioner to the Hon'ble Minister the Respondent had started harassing the Petitioner and finally on 1st November, 2001 he asked the Petitioner not to attend the Respondent Company without assigning any reason or written order or without following the provisions of law.

Vijaya Shekar Reddy, R.G. Hariprasad, V. Umadevi , Prasad, VijayVenkatesh , M. Praveen &

Suresh , Advocates

For the Respondent : Sri . R.S. Murthy, Advocate.

4. That the Petitioner has put in 11 years of unblemished service and she was orally terminated on 1-11-2001 without following the provisions of law. That inspite of persuasion of Conciliation Officer the Respondent Management did not agree to provide 788

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

employment to the Petitioner and since the Petitioner and the Respondent has divergent views, hence , the conciliation proceedings ended in failure , hence , the reference . She is out ofemployment and there is no source of livelihood . That the provisions of Sec . 25 F were simply brushed aside . Hence , the termination is void ab initio . That the sort of engagement for short spell is adopted only with an intention to mask the real nature ofwork and to avoid regularization . This is not in tune with the Directive Principles of the State Policy and various decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court . That the Respondent has established the master and servant relationship by virtue of paying the wage arrears for the period from 5-2-86 10 31-7-91. Hence , she may be directed to be reinstated with full backwages, continuity of service with consequential regularization together with all other attendant and consequential benefits and to pay on par with regular employees.

5. A counter was filed stating that it becomes necessary or the Respondent office to engage contingent/casual labour due to absenteeism and ban on filling up of Group ' D ' posts and the said contingent/ casual labour engaged on daily wages and their continuance and otherwise is dependent on the availability of work and the engagement for more than 240 days does not confer any right on them for continuity and regularization as they are not engaged against any specific post , the provisions of I.D. Act including Sec . 25 F have no application as per the settled law. That the engagement of the Petitioner from 1988 as claimed by her could not be verified as per retention schedules stipulated in Appendix to P & T FHB Vol . III . That the Petitioner as such was not given any specific appointment order and her engagement if any was intermittent depending upon the avilability of work. That the certificates relied upon by the Petitioner are not relevant as they are not issued by the competent authority apart from being vague as they are not supported by any appointment orders . The Petitioner is put to strict proof in this regard . That she was engaged on contingent basis intermittently in absence of regular Group ' D ' staff for sweeping, cleaning dusting and to supply water to the staff and officers during the summer season . There was no harassment . The question of termination does not arise. Hence, the petition may be dismissed.

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] during 1991-240 days, during 1992-151 days , from 1-1-93 to 30-6-93-126 days . On 1-7-2000 vide Ex. W4 she gave representation for regularization. Her representation was forwarded by AGM on 26-7-2000 vide Ex.. W5 together with that of Smt . P. Vijaya Lakshmi stating that they have completed 240 days . Ex. W6 was written where the Assistant General Manager has requested the Principal General Manager, Telecom to furnish the sanctioned strength and vacancies for conversion of part time casual labourers working into full time casual labourers . In reply to Ex. W6, Ex. W 7 was sent on 19-4-2001 by Assistant Director General (Personnel IV) stating that there is aban on engagement . That several casual labourers who has put in 2 years to 8 years service were regularized and their past services rendered as labourers were also competent vide Ex . W. 13. She was scolded as she approached the Hon'bleMinister. They scolded as to why she approached the Ministers and asked her not to come . Ex. W12 is the photo showing her with the Minister. That she may be reinstated in permanent Group ' D ' service . She was not given any notice or pay in lieu thereof.

7. In the cross examination she deposed that she joined in the Department in 1988 at the behest of her cousin. She has not given any appointment order . She was paid in ACG-17 . She do not remember the month in which she joined. She was paid on ACG from April , 1990 , she used to sign in the rills of the casual labour for whom payment used to be made. All the exhibits submitted by her were given by Sri Yadagiri , AD (Admn. ) Some casual labourers were regularized in 1992. She did not represent in 1992 . She represented in 1993 and 1994. She denied that she was engaged in summer months and as and when work is available and that too for few hours and never worked for 240 days continuously in any year. She was sweeping only one floor at Triveni Complex . There were other sweepers for other floors . She denied that she approached the Minister on her own accord . She is 38 years old now. She denied that there is no violation of Sec . 25F.

8. The Respondent examined Sri M. Yadagiri , Assistant Director (Admin. ) in the office of ChiefGeneral Manager Telecom, A.P. , Hyderabad as MW1 who deposed that the petition is misconceived. That she was being engaged as a contingent labour now and then . The engagement at all times was on day to day basis and the said engagement ceased aftercompletion of work . The engagement was intermittently for a period exceeding 240 days is not relevant . There is no retrenchment within the meaning of Sec. 2(oo) of I.D. Act. Hence, the ID may be dismissed.

789

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/ फाल्गुन 2, 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

paid once in a fortnight or once in a month. It is not mentioned in the appointment order any specific period. He said that he cannot assert or deny that she worked continuously for 240 days in each year. That she made representationEx . W4 . So the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that it is proved that it's a fit case for directing reinstatement. So the Counsel submits that the Petitioner may be reinstated with full back wages , continuity of service etc.

She made a representation vide Ex . W4 on 11-7-2000 for regularization . He forwarded the same vide Ex. W5. The AGM has requested DGM vide Ex. W6 to furnish the sanctioned strength and vacancies for conversion ofpart time casual labourers into full time casual labourers. He denied that the Petitioner has worked continuously for 240 days every year. He is not aware whether casual labourers who worked only 2 to 8 years standing were regularized. He had not attended the meeting when the Hon'ble Minister came . But he heard that the Petitioner met him . That no notice of pay in lieu thereof to the Petitioner was paid . The witness added that no notice of pay is necessary for daily wager. He denied that she was victimized as she met the Union Minister.

12. It is argued by the Learned Counsel for the Respondent that the Petitioner was engaged on dailywages basis intermittently due to absenteeism and ban on filling up of regular pests . There is no evidence beside Ex. W2 which shows her engagement upto 1993. Although she claims to have worked upto 1-11-2001. Her engagement never been lasted for more than 240 days at a stitch. The Petitioner claims that she was engaged since 1988 at the same time claimed that she was paid wages from 1986 to 1991. It was as per policy and has no bearing on the claim. The Petitioner was neither terminated nor retrenched: Hence, there is no question of regularization of the Petitioner and there is no proof of engagement beyond 1993 and he relied on various Judgements . He therefore prays thatshe is not entitled for any relief.

10. It is argued by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner was working as sweeper from the year 1988. Ex. W3 shows that the Petitioner worked during the year 1990 for 244 days, during 1991 for 246 days , during 1992 for 247 days and during 1993 for 125 days and not only that Ex. W5 was addressed by Assistant General Manager. The representation of the Petitioner (and also Smt .P. Vijayalakshmi) to verify the records and furnish the particulars of service rendered by the above Petitioners in a detailed report . Similarly, Ex. W6 is also one such. Ex. W7 attention of all is drawn to the fact that there is complete ban on engagement of casual labour w.e.f. 22-6-1988 . Ex. W8 is reference to a letter of all those left out cases of casual labourers . Ex . W9 is also a correspondence . So actually the fact is that in view of her representation to the Hon'ble Minister for Communications Sri Ram Vilas Paswan and Hon'ble Minister Sri Bandaru Dattatreya along with Smt. P. Vijayalakshmi which is evident vide Ex. W12 that this action has been taken and although having worked from 1988 completely deprived from service for a mere fact that she made a representation to the Hon'ble Ministers . He further argues that Ex. W2 is thewage arrears from 5-2-86 to 31-7-91 on 16-9-91 she was paid Rs . 3,186/- In Ex. W4 wherein it shows that she has beenworking regularly, the same is dated 11-7-2000 and if it was not true why should Ex . W5 letter be addressed by the Department enclosing Ex . W4 . So that itself shows that she has been working even on the date 11-7-2000. That Ex. W 9 is the list of left out cases . The Hon'ble Minister Sri B. Dattatreya has also written . Ex . W12 also shows her making a representation to the Hon'ble Ministers. That it is clear that having made representation to the Ministers she incurred the displeasures of the officers and wasultimately asked not to come from 1-11-2001.

13. It may be seen that from Ex . W3 it is very clear that she has worked during the year 1990 for 244 days , during 1991 for 246 days , during 1992 for 247 days and during 1993 for 125 days , during the first half of the year, i.e. , from 1-1-93 to 30-6-1993 for 125 days . Ofcourse, she is unable to produce the record because the record must be available with the Respondent . That she has been asserting that she has been working for the last 10 years . She has met the Ministers and made a representation . Then the Management should have at the outright denied her claim that she is working and should have made it clear if not to the Ministers which is against the decorum, they should have atleast informed the Petitioner that she has not worked from June , 1993 as such she is not entitled for any relief at all . They have not chosen to do so . Even MW1 is unable to assert or deny whether she worked for 240 days in each year from 1988 to 2001. He agrees that she made a representation Ex. W4 dated 11.7.2000 for regularisation and that her representation has been forwarded to AGM, so taken up, in the cross examination turned round and says that she worked only from 1993 . Whether it is a casual employment or a temporary employment, it is clearly established that she has been working since 1988 or rather 1986 as per MWI's own statement till 2001. That simply one cannot be asked orally not to come. Putting two plus two it is very clear that she has been asked not to come in view of her vigorously campaigning her own cause by meeting the Ministers, getting it published in newspapers they smelt that she may cause trouble to them in future and hence her services were dispensed with. Of course , according to the claim 11. That MWI who is no other than Assistant Director, Administration said that they were engaged as contingent labour. That he also agreed that difference of wages were paid from 1986 to 1991 as per Ex. W2 . That she was never retrenched on 1-11-2001 . That her engagement for a period exceeding 240 days is not relevant and that in the cross examination he agreed that the Petitioner was 790

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

statement she has been working as a sweeper . Therefore, I answer the reference as follows: The action of the Management of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. , Hyderabad in notproviding employment to Smt. E. Narasamma, ex-casual labourwith effect from November, 2001 is not justified and the Respondent is directed to employ her as casual labour within 30 days from the publication of this Award. However, she is not entitled for any back wages . The Respondent is directed to consider her giving temporary status and in future even regularization if she fits in all the conditions but her age shall be taken as in the year 1988 because she claims to have been working from 1988. Ifthe Petitioner is not taken into service within 30 days from the publication of this Award, she will be entitled to receive the last wages drawn after 30 days of the publication of thisAward .

Award passed accordingly. Transmit.

Dictated to Kum . K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronouned by me on this the 12th day of January, 2004.

E. ISMAIL, PresidingOfficer Appendixof evidence

Witnesses examined for the Witnesses examined for the Petitioner :

Respondent:

WW1 : Smt . E. Narasamma MW1 : Sri M. Yadagiri Documents marked for the Petitioner ExWI : Copy of wage slip for the month of March, 1991 .

Ex.W2 : Copy of wage arrears slip .

Ex.W3 Copy of certificate Ir. No. TA/ O& M/27-2/92-93 dt. 22-7-93 .

Copy ofWW1's representationdt . 11-7-2000.

Ex.W4

Ex.W5 : Copy of Ir. No. TA/ STB/20-2/Corr/KW/99dt . 26-7-2000.

Ex.W6 Copy of Ir . No. TA/ STB/20-2/ CORR/ 2000/3 dt . 29-9-2000.

Ex.W7 : Copy of Lr . No. 269-94/ 98 -STN - II/Pers . IVdt . 19-4-2001 .

ExW8 Copy of Ir . No. TA/ STB /9-1 /R1gs /KW dt. 26-4-2001.

ExW9 Copy of Ir.No. TA/ STB/20-2 /Genl/2001/dt. 19/20-6-2001 .

Ex.W10 : Copy of Ir. No. TA/ STB/ 20-2/CORR/99-2000/47 dt. 28-6-2000 .

Copy of report No. 8 (02)/ 2002 -E2 dt. 18-2-2002.

Ex.W11 :

ExW12 : Photo of WWI with the Hon'ble Union Minister.

ExW13 : Copy of office memo No. 49014/2/97 -Estt . (C) dt. 8-1-2002.

[PART I SBC. 3(ii)] Documents marked for the Respondent ExM1 : Copy of DGP & TLr. No. 270/6/84- STN New Delhi dt. 30-3-1985 .

ExM2 : Copy ofOffice memo No. 49014/2/86 -Estt (C) dt. 7-6-88 .

Ex.M3 :

ExM4 : Copy ofoffice memo No. 269-4/93-STN-II (Pt. ) dt. 12-2-99 .

ExM5 : Copy of Appendix - 5 reg . destruction of accounts , records etc.

नई दिल्ली, 29 जनवरी, 2004

का०आ० 426.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार, दूर संचार विभाग 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 279/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-01-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-40012/62/2002- आई.आर. (डी.यू. ) ]

कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्कअधिकारी NewDelhi , the 29th January, 2004

S.O. 426. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 279/2002) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court Hyderabad now as shown in the Annexure inthe Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation totheManagement ofTelecom Deptt. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 29-01-2004 .

[No. L-40012/62/2002 - IR(D.U. ) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

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

Dated the 12th day of January, 2004 INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO . 279/2002 Between

Ms.P. Vijayalaxmi ,

H. No. 1-60 , Yaprai ,

Jai Jawahar Nagar Colony post,

Secunderabad -500587 .

Petitioner 791

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन2, 1925

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

AND

The ChiefGeneral Manager Telecom, BSNL, Nampally Station Road, Abids ,

Respondent

Hyderabad- 500001.

Appearances:

theirgrievances and regularize their services and pay salary onparwith regular employees . Aggrieved by the request made by the Petitioner to the Hon'ble Minister the Respondent had started harassing the Petitioner and finally on 1st November, 2001 he asked the Petitioner not toattend the Respondent Company without assigning any reason orwritten order or without following the provisions oflaw.

Forthe Petitioner: M/ s . C. Vijaya Shekar Reddy,

R.G. Hariprasad, P. V. Amarender Reddy, G.V. Ramana, V. Umadevi, Prasad, VijayVenkatesh & Sridar , Advocates

Sri . R.S. Murthy, Advocate .

For the Respondent:

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour by its order No. L-40012/ 62/2002 - IR (DU) dated 14-8-2002 referred the following dispute under section 10( 1 ) (d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 for adjudication to this Tribunal between the employers in relation to the Management of BSNL and their workman .

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action ofthe management ofBharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. , Hyderabad in not providing employment to Smt . P. Vijayalakshmi, ex-casusl labour with effect from November, 2001 is justified ? If not, to what relief the applicant is entitled ?"

4. That the Petitioner has put in 11 years of unblemished service and she was orally-terminated on 1.11.2001 without following the provisions of law. That inspite ofpersuasion of Conciliation Officer the Respondent Management did not agree to provide employment to the Petitioner and since the Petitioner and the Respondent ) divergent views , hence , the conciliation proceedings ended in failure, hence , the reference . She is out ofemployment and there is no source of livelihood . That the provisions of Sec.25 F were simply brushed aside. Hence , the termination is voit ab initio. That the sort of engagement for short spell is adopted only with an intention to mask the real nature ofwork and to avoid regularization. This is not in tune with the Directive Principles ofthe State Policy and various decisions ofHon'ble Supreme Court . That the Respondent has established the master and servant relationship by virtue of paying the wage arrears for the period from 5-2-86 to 31-7-91 . Hence , she may be directed tobe reinstatedwith full back wages, continuity on vice with consequential regularization together with all other attendant and consequential benefits and to pay on par with regular employees .

This reference was registered as Industrial Dispute No. 279/2002 and notices were issued to the parties .

2. The brief facts as stated in the petition are : That the Petitioner was appointed in 1988 as a sweeper in the category of class IV , at the time of shifting the office from Triveni Complex to Doorsanchar Bhavan. Since then, she has been working continuously even on Sundays and holidays and she used to work for 12 hours a day. That she was being paid Rs . 14/- per day which was enhanced to Rs . 22/ -,35 /, -55/-, 60/-etc. In the year 2001 her wages were Rs . 80/- per day. She was receiving wages along with other regular employees every month. That on 16-9-91 the Respondent Management pad Rs . 3186/- towards wage arrears for the period 5-2-86 to 31-7-91 and obtained endorsement of the Petitioner . Without regularizing her services she was continued in minimum wages for 13 long years .

5. Acounter was filed stating that it becomes necessary or the Respondent office to engage contingent/ casual labour due to absenteeism and ban on filling up of Group 'D' posts and the said contingent/casual labour engaged on daily wages and their continuance and otherwise is dependent on the availability ofwork and the engagement for more than 240 days does not confer any right on them for continuity and regularization as theyare not engaged against any specific post, the provisions of I.D. Act including Sec . 25 F have no application as per the settled law. That the engagement of the Petitioner from 1988 as claimed by her could not be verified as per retention schedules stipulated in Appendix to P& T FHB Vol . III That the Petitioner as such was not given any specific appointment order and her engagement if any was intermittent depending upon the availability of work. That the certificates relied upon by the Petitioner are not relevant as they are not issued by the competent authority apart from being vague as they are not supported by any appointment orders . The Petitioner is put to strict proofin this regard. That she was engaged on contingent basis intermittently in absence of regular Group ' D ' staff for sweeping, cleaning dusting and to supply water to the staff and officers during the summer season . There was no harassment . The question of termination does not arise. Hence, the petition may be dismissed.

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

[PART I-SBC. 3 (ii) ]

8. The Respondent examined Sri M. Yadagiri , Assistant Director (Admin) in the office of Chief General ManagerTelecom, A.P. , Hyderabad as MW1 who deposed that the petition is misconceived. That she wasbeing engaged as a contingent labour now and then. The engagement at all times was on day to day basis and the said engagement ceased after completion of work. The engagement was intermittently for a period exceeding 240 days is not relevant. There is no retrenchment within the meaning ofSec . 2(0) (0) of I.D. Act . Hence , the ID maybe dismissed.

9. In the cross examination he deposed that he knows the Petitioner since 1988. The Petitioner's daily wageswere paid once in a fortnight or once in a month. It is not mentioned in the appointment order any specific period. He cannot ask or deny whether she worked continuously for 240 days in each year from 1998 to 2001 . She made a representation vide Ex.W4 on 11.7.2000 for regularization. He forwarded the same vide Ex. W5 . The AGM has requested DGM vide Ex. W6 to furnish the sanctioned strength and vacancies for conversion ofpart time casual labourers into full time casual labourers . He deniedthat the Petitioner has worked continuously for 240 days every year. He is not aware whether casual labourers who worked only 2 to 8 years standing were regularized. Hehad not attended the meeting when the Hon'ble Minister came.But he heard that the Petitioner met him. That no notice ofpay in lieu thereof to the Petitioner was paid. The witness added that no notice ofpay is necessary for daily wager. He denied that she was victimized as she met the UnionMinister.

6. The Petitioner examined herself as WW1 and deposed that she was doing the attender job and sweeping, gardenwork, giving water getting tea etc. She was working from 7 AM and used to stay upto 6.30 PM or 7 PM . That- is a six day week only Sunday was holiday on which days also sometimes she used to attend the office depending on the exigencies of the work also. Ex. Wl is the wage slip for the month ofMarch, 1991. She was paid Rs . 735/- on 1st April , 1991. She was paid wage arrears from 5-2-86 to 31-7-91 on 16-9-91 Rs.3186/-vide Ex . W2 . Ex. W3 dated 22-7-93 shows that during 1990 she worked for 246 days, during 1991-240 days , during 1992-151 days , from 1-1-93 to 30-6-93-126 days . On 1.7.2000 vide Ex. W4 she gave representation for regularization. Her representation was forwardedby AGM on 26-7-2000 vide Ex .W5 togetherwith that of Sint E. Narasamma stating that they have completed 240 days . Ex. W6 was written where the Assistant General Manager has requested the Principal General Manager , Telecomtofurnish the sanctioned strength and vacancies for conversion of part time casual labourers working into **full time casual labourers . In reply to Ex. W6 , Ex. W7 was sent on 19-4-2001 by Assistant Director General (Personnel IV) stating that there is a ban on engagement . That several casual labourers who has put in 2 years to 8 years service were regularized and their past services rendered as labourers were also competent vide Ex.W12 . She was scolded as she approached the Hon'ble Minister and he wrote Ex .W11 . They scolded as to why she approached the Ministers and asked her not to come. Ex . W13 is the photo showing her with the Minister . Ex. W 14 is the letter written byher to theHon'ble Minister Sri Ram Vilas Paswan. Ex.WI 5 isthe Xerox copy of Wartha newspaper dated 26-2-2001 showing that they have met the Minister Again she wrote a letter Ex. W 16 to Sri Ram Vilas Paswan for regularisation on 25-2-2001 . That she maybe reinstated in permanent Grop ' D service' . She was not given any notice or pay in lieu thereof.

7. In the cross examination she deposed that she joined in the Department in 1988 at the behest ofher cousin. She has not given any appointment order . She was paid in ACG- 17 . She do not remember the month in which she joined. She was paid on ACG from April, 1990, she used to sign in the rills of the casual labour for whom payment used to be made. All the exhibits submitted by her were givenby Sri Yadagiri , AD(Admn). Some casual labourers were regularized in 1992. She did not represent in 1992. She represented in 1993 and 1994. She denied that she was engaged in summer months and as and when work is available and that too for few hours and never worked for 240 days continuously in any year. She was sweeping only one floor at Triveni Complex . There were other sweepers for other floors . She denied that she approached the Minister on her own accord. She is 27 years old now. She denied that there is no violation of Sec . 25F.

10. It is argued by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner was working as sweeper from the year 1988. Ex. W3 shows that the petitioner worked duringthe year 1990 for 246 days, during 1991 for 240 days, during 1992 for 251 days and during 1993 for 126days and not only that Ex. W5 was addressed by Assistant General Manager. The representation of the Petitioner (& also Simt .Narasamma) to verify the records and furnish the particulars of service rendered by the above Petitioners in adetailed report. Similarly, Ex. W6 is also one such , Ex. W7 attention ofall is drawn to the fact that there is complete ban on engagement of casual labour w.e.f..22-6-1988. Ex. W8 is reference to a letter of all those left out cases of casual labourers . Ex. W9 is also a correspondence . Ex. W10 shows that Vijay Laxmi has made a representation totheHon'ble Minister. Ex. W11 is a letter ofthe Hon'ble Minister of State for Urban Development and Poverty Elevation, Government ofIndia, New Delhi recommending the case ofVijaya Laxmi . So actually the fact is that in view of her representation to the Hon'ble Minister for Communications Sri Ram Vilas Paswan and Hon'ble Minister Sri Bandaru Dattatreya which is evident vide Ex.W13 that this action has been taken and although having worked from 1988 completely deprived from service for a 793 भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

mere fact that she made a représentation to the Hon'ble Ministers. He further argues that Ex . W2 is the wage arrears from 5-2-86 to 31-7-91 on 16-9-91 she was paid Rs.3,186/-. In Ex. W4 wherein it shows that she has been working regularly, the same is dated 11-7-2000 and if it was not true why should Ex . W5 letter be addressedby the Department enclosing Ex. W 4. So that itself shows that she has beeri working even on the date 11-7-2000 . That Ex. W9 is the list of left out cases . The Hon'ble Minister Sri B. Dattatreya has also written vide Ex. W 11. Ex. W 13 also shows her making a representation to the Hon'ble Ministers . That it is clear that having made representation to the Ministers she incurred the displeasures of the officers and was ultimately asked not to come from 1-11-2001 .

11. That MW1 who is no other than Assistant Director, Administration said that they were engaged as contingent labour . That he also agreed that difference of wageswere paid from 1986 to 1991 as per Ex .W2 . That she was never retrenched on 1-11-2001 . That her engagement foraperiod exceeding 240 days is not relevant and that in the cross examination he agreed that the Petitioner was paid once in a fortnight or once in a month . It is not mentioned in the appointment order any specific period. He said that he cannot assert or deny that she worked continuously for 240 days in each year . That she made representation Ex. W4 . So the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that it is proved that it's a fit case for directing reinstatement . So the Counsel submits that the Petitioner maybe reinstated with full back wage, continuity ofserviceetc.

she has been asserting even vide Ex. W11 on 16-2-2001 that she has been working for the last 10 years . She has met the Ministers and made a representation. Then the Management should have at the outright denied her claim that she is working and should have made it clear if not to the Ministers which is against the decorum , they should have at least informed the Petitioner that she has not worked from June, 1993 as such she is not entitled for any reliefat all. They have not chosen to do so. Even MW1 is unable to assert or deny whether she worked for 240 days in each year from 1988 to 2001. He agrees that she made a representationEx. W4 dated 11-7-2000 for regularisation and that her representation has been forwarded to AGM, so taken up, in the cross examination turned round and says that she worked only from 1993. Whether it is a casual employment or a temporary emploment , it is clearly established that she has been working since 1988 or rather 1986 as per MWl's own statement till 2001 that simply one cannot be asked orally not to come. Putting two plus two it is very clear that she has been asked not to come in view of her vigorously campaigning her own cause by meeting the Ministers , getting it published in newspapers they smelt that she may cause trouble to them in future and hence her services were dispensed with. Of course, according to the claim statement she has been working as a sweeper. Therefore , I answer the reference as follows : The action of the Management of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. , Hyderabad in not providing employment to Smt . P. Vijayalakshmi , ex-casual labour with effect from November, 2001 is not justified and the Respondent is directed to employ her as casual labour within 30 days from the publication of this Award. However, she is not entitled for any back wages. The Respondent is directed to consider her giving temporary status and in future even regularization if she fits in all the conditions but her age shall be taken as in the year 1988 because she claims to havebeenworking from 1988. If the Petitioner is not taken into service within 30 days from the publication of this Award, she will be entitled to receive the last wages drawn after30 days of the publication of this Award.

Awardpassed accordingly. Transmit.

Dictated to Kum. K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by me on this the 12th day ofJanuary, 2004.

12. It is argued by the Learned Counsel for the Respondent that the Petitioner was engaged on daily wages basis intermittently due to absenteeism and ban on filling up of regular posts . There is no evidence beside Ex. W2 which shows her engagement upto 1993. Although she claims to have worked upto 1-11-2001. Her engagement never been lasted for more than 240 days at a stitch. The Petitioner claims that she was engaged since 1988 at the same time claimed that she was paid wages from 1986 to 1991. It was as per policy and has no bearing on the claim. The Petitioner was neither terminated nor retrenched. Hence, there is noquestion ofregularization ofthe Petitioner and there is no proof of engagement beyond 1993 and he relied on various Judgements. He therefore , prays that she is not entitled for any relief.

E. ISMAIL, Presiding Officer

Appendix ofevidence

Witnesses examined for the Petitioner:

Witnesses examined for theRespondent:

MW 1 : Sri M. Yadagiri

WW1: Smt . P. Vijaya Lakshmi

13. It maybe seen that from Ex . W3 it is very clear that she has worked during 1990 for 246 days,, during 1991 for 240 days , during 1992 for 251 days and during 1993 for 126 days during the first half of the year, i.e. , from 1-1-93 to 30-6-1993 for 126 days . Of course , she is unable to produce the record because the record must be available with the Respondent. Ifshe really has not worked beyond 1993 that

440G1/04-15 794

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii)] Documents marked for the Petitioner

Ex. W1:

Copy of wage slip for the month ofMarch, 1991

Ex. W2:

बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 168/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-01-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

Copy ofwage arrears slip

Ex. W3:

Copy of certificate Lr. No. TA/ O & M/27- 2/92-93 dt. 22-7-93

[सं. एल-40012/56/2001- आई. आर. (डी.यू. ) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी Ex. W4:

Copy of WWl's representation dt. 11-7-2000

New Delhi , the 29th January, 2004 Ex. W5:

Copy of Lr. No. TA/ STB/20-2/ Corr /KW 99 dt.26-7-2000

Ex. W7:

Copy of Lr. No. 269-94/98 - STN - II/Pers.IV dt. 19-4-2001

Ex. W8:

Copy of Lr. No. TA/ STB/ 9-1 /Rlgs /KW dt. 26-4-2001

Ex. W9:

S.O. 427. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 168/2002) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court Hyderabad now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of BSNL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 29-01-2004.

Copy of Lr . No. TA/ STB/ 20-2/Genl/2001/ dt. 19/20-6-2001

Ex. W10: Copy of Lr . annexed with representation to Minister Lr . No. 216-38/2001 -Pers - II -BSN dt. 16-2-2001

[No. L -40012/56/2001 - IR(DU) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

Ex. W11: Copy of letter by Hon'bie Minister Sri B. Dattatreya dt. 16-2-2001

Ex. W12: Copy ofLr . No. 269-33 /2002 -P -IVdt.29-5-2002

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

Ex. W13:

Photo of WW1 with the Hon'ble Union Minister

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

Ex. W14:

Dated 22nd day of December , 2003 Copy of representation of WW1 to Hon'ble MinisterSri RamVilaas Paswan

Ex. WL: Copy of ' Wartha ' newspaper cutting dt: 26-2-2001

Ex1

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO . 168/2002 (Old L. D. No. 49/2001 transferred from Industrial Tribunal-cum -Labour Court , Visakhapatnam)

BETWEEN :

Copyof representation of WW1 to Hon'ble Minister Sri Ram Vilaas Paswan dt. 25-2-2001 .

SriY. Yellapa

Documents marked for the Respondent

ExM1:

Copy of DGP & T Lr . No.270/6/ 84 - STN NewDelhi dt.30-3-1985

D. No. 2-27-16, Sree Ramnagar,

EM2:

Petitioner

Anakapalle, Visakhapatnam- 1

CopyofOfficeMemo No. 49014/2/ 86 -Estt(C) dt. 7-6-88

S/oY. Appa Rao , AND

.:M3:

1. The General Manager ,

Ex. M4:

CopyyofOffice Memo No.269-4/93 -STN- II (Pt ) dt. 12-2-99

Ex.M5:

Copy of Appendix - 5 reg . destruction of accounts, records etc.

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. , Telecom District , DabaGardens , Visakhapatnam-530020 .

नई दिल्ली, 29 जनवरी, 2004

Respondents

2. The Divisional Engineer , Coaxial Maintenance, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. , Visakhapatnam -530001.

का.आ. 427.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार , भारत संचार निगम लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के 795 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

Appearances:

Forthe Petitioner : Sri KBala Krishna, Advocate

For the Respondent : Smt D. Venkata Laxmi, Advocate

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour by its order No. L-40012/56/2001 - IR (DU) dated 15-5-2001 referred the following dispute under section 10 (1 ) (d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal -cum - Labour Court , Visakhapatnam between the management of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. , and their workman which has been transferred to this Tribunal in view ofGovernment of India , Ministry of Labour's Order No. H- 11026/1 /2001 - IR(C . II) dated 18-10-2001 bearing No. 49/2001 . The reference is ,

SCHEDULE

the question of integrating the seniority with the seniority offull time casual labour arises , the Telecom Department has prescribed time and again the qualification and the service rendered by part time worker will be converted into full time services at the rate of 2 days of part time service as equal to 1 day of full time service . The verbal termination is calculated to deprive the employee to absorb in the regular establishment after having rendered more than 15½ years long service as full time and part time worker without any break and holidays whatsoever. In other words he had rendered more than 240 days of service regularly and according to the turn in the seniority list of casual mazdoors . Pending absorption in the regular staff, the Petitioner is entitled to grant of temporary status . Verbal termination ofthe aggrieved employee's service is arbitrary and his juniors are converted as full time casual employees and paid accordingly.

"Whether the allegation made by Sri Y. Yellapa, Part time sweeper that his services have illegally terminated by the General Manager, Telecom District, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. , Visakhapatnam and Divisional Engineers , Coazial Maintenance , Bharat Sanchar Nigam, Ltd. , Visakhapatnam w.e.f. 1-7-97 after he rendered service from 1-7-84 is andjustified? Ifnot, what relief the workman is entitled ? "

The reference is renumbered in this Tribunal as I.D. No. 168/2002 and notices were issued to the parties.

4. While the aggrieved employee working hours have been arbitrarily and capriciously reduced to 2 hours aday with consequential reduction in his wage and ultimate verbal termination. Verbal continuation and payment without taking signature on requisite revenue stamp besides not entered his name in muster roll reveals the indifferent attitude in discharge of the Respondent. That when one ofher colleagues Smt , Kanthamma approached the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal under O.A. No. 127/96 . The authorities have requested her to withdraw on 27-1-1997 and continuing her services- He never found wanted in any occasion by the Department from 1-7-84 to 6-7-2000 . Hence, he may be reinstated with back wages etc.

2. After the receipt of the reference and the notices the Petitioner filed claim statement with the following averments : That he was employed as casual mazdoor in the office of the Sub - Divisional Officer, Telecom.under cover of his letter No.E.53 /8688 w.e.f. 1-7-84 and to work on holidays , leave vacancies and part time duty. Though he hails from Relli community the only caste exclusive for attending sanitation jobs . Even though he was employed as casual mazdoor or part time employee his services were utilized in the office being a qualified person . He had performed part time duties two hours a day at the office of A.E. , Coaxial, " Anakapalli and still continuing in the office ofSub -Divisional Officer, Telecom and whenever vacancies existed.

5. A counter was filed . That the Petitioner was permitted to do part time scavenger duty per one hour a day on the representation received by the then part time Scavenger Sri Y. Appa Rao, who is the father of the workman vide letter No.E2/CXL/ ANK/ 92-93 dated 1-10-92 in the office of A. E. Coaxial , Anakapalli , That other allegations are invented for the purpose of this case . That he worked at the office of A.E. , Coaxial from October, 92 to December, 1994 two hours per day and from July, 1995 at the office of A.E. Coaxial at one hour per day but not in the office of SDO , Telecom. The other allegations are denied. It is submitted that only those persons who worked as part time workers prior to 30-3-85 , it is considered as a one time consideration for absorbing the mazdoors as per the Department of Telecommunications , New Delhi orders 69- 10/89/ STN , dated 14-8-98 who worked prior to 1985 and the Petitioner never worked prior to 1985 and hence , the claim of the Petitioner may not be considered . Hence , he is not entitled for any relief.

6. The Petitioner examined himself as WW1 and deposed that he rendered service with the Respondent from 1-7-84 as casual mazdoor on wages of Rs.500/ - at the 3. Since the year 1997 the authorities are verbally utilizing his services and payment made without taking his signature on requisite stamp and stopped entering his name . Juniors converted into full time mazdoors . Grave injustice was caused to him . The authorities incorporating fictitious names in the seniority of full time mazdoors even though he was physically attended the jobs . Consequent to the Hon'ble Supreme Court's Judgement , the stipulation that a full time casual employee have rendered 240 days of service for two years has been revised as one year for regularization and in respect of part time workers , it has been reduced to two years instead of four years . When 796

[PART II-SBC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

does not have any document to show that he was engaged byRespondent and that Department is paying his salary. Hedenied that he is working under a contractor. He denied that his brother did not work prior to 1992 .

9. Sri D. Kameswara Rao , S.D.E. , deposed that he has gone through Ex. Wl which was never issued by the Department. The Petitioner produced Ex. WI before Assistant Labour Commissioner ( C) , Visakhapatnam, Vijayawada, D.E. , Director along with G.M. , Visakhapatnam were made parties . The report ofthe Vigilance Department dated30-10-2000 is Ex. Ml . It says that Ex. Wl is fake and no such file is ever maintained. It is also mentioned in Ex.Ml that no recruitment orders will be given for the back period. Appointment orders would be given prospectively. WW1 was appointed in place of Appa Rao on 1-10-92 as scavenger for one hour daily. He worked upto December, 1994 later on two hours a day from 1-1-95 to July, 1995. Smt . Kantamma's case was different as she fulfilled the norms and guidelines vide Ex . M2 and M3 and further the Petitioner never worked earlier to 1992. Earlier to those who have completed 240 days in a year for three consequtive years are considered for absorption as per Ex.M2 and M3 .

10. In the cross -examination he deposed that he has not accompanied the D.E. in the alleged enquiry about Ex. Wl . Copy of instructions dated 14-8-98 is filed along with counter, it is Ex . M4 . As per Ex. M7 casual workers who are working for less than 4 hours were converted into full time casual labourers .

time of termination i.e. , 6-7-2000 he was drawing Rs.500/-. That he filed the original proceedings of the Management letterNo. E-53/86/88 which may be received as Ex. WI. That he worked uninterruptedly till 30th September, 1992 for more than 240 days in a year and 8 hours per day. Thereafter he was disengaged and unfortunately on application he was given engagement as part time scavenger from 1-10-92 and orders to that effect filed as Ex. W2 . That he was paid wages against the vouchers till the end of July, 1997 and thereafter no record was maintained. But unfortunately, he was continued in service while payments were made against the written vouchers maintained by the Department. Even. otherwise dispensed with effect from 6-7-2000 and on which day he was terminated from service . Copy made available by the Conciliation Commissioner is Ex . W3 .. Thereafter about 770 vacancies in the Andhra circle and even in that score he should have absorbed . Further, he is a member of the Scheduled Caste and his community certificate is Ex. W4 . The termination of service is unceremonious . The Management falsely takes the stand that he never worked. Hence, he may be directed to be reinstated with all the benefits . In the cross examination he denied that Ex. Wl is a fake document and nor issued by theDepartment . It is not true to suggest that the vigilance Department of the Respondent found out that Ex . Wl is fake and there is no file bearing letter No.E- 53/86-88 dt . ANK- 1 . It is not true to suggest that he denied that he was appointed as part time scavenger in place of Sri Y. Appa Rao on representation as per Ex . W2 . He denied that he worked only from 1-10-92 to December, 94 and 1-1-95 to July, 95 and not upto 2000 as scavenger . It is not true to suggest that Smt Shantamma was absorbed as regular employee since she complied with the terms and condition as per the circular dated 14-8-98 . He denied that as he does not come under the circular for regularization hewas not regularized. He admitted that in Ex. W4 his name is over -written and his date of birth was also overwritten. He denied that he never worked from 1984 and he filed Ex .Wl to depose falsely.

7. WW2 is no other than the younger brother of the Petitioner by name Sri Y. Srinivasa Rao, who deposed that WW1 has worked as a scavenger from 1992 to 2000 . He has been working from 7-7-92 . He is doing the work which was earlier done by his brother after his dismissal . He identifies the A.E. , by name Sri H. Krishna Rao present inthe court hallwho is Incharge ofAnakapalli Department. That he knows Y. Appa Rao who is their father and he was removed as mentally handicapped and he brother was appointed on compassionate grounds . WW2 was working even before 1992 in leave vacancies .

8. In the cross-examination he deposed that he cannot say whether there is a contractor to engage him but witness adds his wages are paid by A.E. , monthly. He

11. MW2 was examined who is working as S.D.E. , Anakapalli since 1994. That prior to 1987 they used to engage casual labour . There is a bank from 1987 and they were giving it to contractors . He denied that WW2 and prior to him WWI worked under him . In the cross- examination he deposed that one Appa Rao worked prior to 1987. WW1 was permitted to work in place of Appa Rao fromOctober, 1992. He worked continuously till July, 1995. He does not know whether license is mandatory to the contractor for the contract . He knows that WW1 is the sonofAppa Rao. WW 1 is appointed in place of his father. It is not correct that after WW1 his brother, another son of Appa Rao was appointed by them. According to the circulars those workers appointed before 30-3-85 will be considered for conversion into full time . It is correct that in his file there is a letter from S.D.E. dated 14-8-2000 that Yellayya was working under for one to two hours per day from June, 1995 to July, 95 but it has come to light that he was appointed as casual labour in telephone exchange since 1-1-89 and hence , he was disallowed to work ofcleaning on part time basis and he was disallowed the work of cleaning from 1-8-95 and work is being executed through contractor.

797

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

sum ofRs . 2000 towards cost oflitigation in all Rs . 8000, It shall be paid to the Petitioner within 30 days from the publication of this award failing which he will beentitled to 12% interest p.a. onRs. 8000 after 30 days ofpublication ofthis Award.

Award passed. Transmit.

Dictated to Kum. K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 22nd day of December, 2003.

E. ISMAIL, PresidingOfficer

Appendixof evidence

Witnessed examined for the Petitioner:

Witnessed examined for the Respondent:

WW1: Sri Y. Tellappa

12. It is argued by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner has been working from 1984 andhe relied on 2001 (89) FLRpage 929 Delhi High Court Judgement wherein it was held that, "part time sweeper engaged ondaily wages - would be a workman. He submits that even if it is admitted for argument sake that hewas not appointed in 1984 and that he was working from 1-10-92 only according to them vide Ex.W2 , it is seen that hewas appointedat least from 1-10-92 which is admitted by MW1 that "WW1 was appointed in place of Appa Rao on 1-10-92 as scavenger for one hour daily. He worked uptoDecember, 1994 and later on two hours a day from 1- 1-95 to July, 1995 " . That means he worked atleast continuously from 1-10-92 to July, 95 even according to the Respondent. Therefore , the provisions of Sec . 25F have notbeen followed and therefore, he may be reinstated withbackwages.

MW1 : Sri D. Kameshwar Rao

WW2: Sri Y. Srinivasa Rao MW1 : Sri H. Krishna Rao Documents marked for the Petitioner

Ex. WI : Appointment order of WWI No. E- 53 /86-88 dt: ANK-1

Ex. W2 : Copy of Ir. No. E2/ CXL/ ANK/ 1992-93 dt. 1-10-92

13. It is arguedby the Learned Counsel for the Respondent that the Petitioner have not worked from 1984 is proved wrong because MW1 has categorically stated that Ex. WI has been proved to be bogus. Therefore, he worked onlyfrom 1.10.92. But this man worked onlyupto July, 1995 that too one hour daily. That he has deposed that he never worked before 1992 whereas the case of the Petitioner. That he was terminated on6-7-2000 is absolutely false . Hence, the Petitioner is not entitled for anyrelief.

Ex. W3 : Copy of minutes ofconcilation proceedings dt. 5-12-2000 .

Ex. W4 Copy of community, nativity and date ofbirth certificate ofWW1 .

Documents marked for the Respondent

Ex.Ml : Copy of Ir . Np.X- I/GMTD -VM/Vig/2000/50 dt. 30-10-2000 Vigilance report

Ex.M2 : Copy of 1r.No.269-94 / 98 - STN - II dt . 29-9-2000

Ex.M3 Copy of instructions No.269-13/ 99 - STN.II dt. 16-9-99

Ex. M4 Copy of instructions No.269-10/89 - STN.II dt.14-8-98

Ex. M5 : Copy of list of casual mazdoors to be regularised

Ex.M6 : Lr.No. GMTD -VM/LC/ ALC( C)/YY -PTW/ 2000/12 dt.5-12-2000

Ex.M7 : Copy of instructions No.269-13 / 99 -STN.II dt. 25-8-2000

Ex.MB : Copy of Ir.No.TAV / EST /7-9 / Col.II /91/12 dt. 11-11-91

14. It maybe seen that as per the Delhi High Court Judgement citedby the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner thepart time sweeper engaged on daily wages is a workman as he has worked for more than a year, his services cannot be terminated without complying with mandatory provisions of Sec.25F of the I.D. Act . Hence , the termination is illegal . In the cross examination WW1 has admitted that it is correct that he was appointed on 1-10-92 only as per Ex . W2 . It may be seen that Sri Y. Srinivasa Rao , the Petitioner's younger brother is appointed from 7-7-2002 as he is doing the work on the dismissal ofhis brother. Whether through a contractor or otherwise. So someone has been accommodated inplace ofAppa Rao . Now, according to MW2 there is a ban and they are getting the work done through a contractor .Hence , this is a fit case where in spite of directing reinstatement and then perhaps the Respondent again complying with the Sec. 25F and dismissing the Petitioner and more so whenhisappointment is only proved from 1-10-92 and he has only worked for one year. Therefore , I am of the opinion that a reasonable compensation would meet the ends of justice. According to WW1 himself he was receivingRs . 500 per month. Therefore, the ends ofjustice would be served if he is given a consolidated sum of Rs . 6000 towards consolidated compensation and further a 798

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2 , 1925

नई दिल्ली, 29 जनवरी , 2004

का.आ. 428. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारत संचार निगम लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबंद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या एलसीआईडी-142/ 2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-1-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -40025/4/2004- आई. आर. ( डी.यू. ) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 29th January, 2004

S.O. 428.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. LCID- 142/2001 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court Hyderabad now as shown in annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of BSNL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 29-1-2004.

[No. L-40025/4/2004- IR(DU) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT:

Shri E Ismail , B. Sc. , L.L.B. , Presiding officer Dated the 8th day of December, 2003 INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C.I.D. No. 142/2001 BETWEEN:

Sri G. Babu, S/o G. Uppalaiah, C/o H. No. 2-350/1 , BheemaramVillage,

...... Petitioner Hasanparthy (M), Warangal (D) .:

AND

Telecom District , Warangal ,

The General Manager, TheBharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. , Hanamkonda,

......Respondent District Warangal-506 011 .

APPEARANCES :

For the Petitioner

: M/s . G. Shyam Sundar Rao & V. Srinivas Rao , Advocates For the Respondent

: Sri R.S. Murthy, Advocate

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)]

AWARD

This is a case taken under Sec. 2A(2 ) of the I.D. Act, 1947 in view of the judgement of the Hon'ble Hight Court ofAndhraPradesh reported in W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/s . Cotton Corporation of India and two others .

2. The brief facts as mentioned in the petition are: That the Petitioner worked as N.M.R. daily wage in Respondent's establishment during the period from 1-9-1981 to 31-5-1984 without any break under the control ofSupervisor G. Mosha and J.E. Diwakar, who are under Control of the Respondent Department and during the said Period the Petitioner was also assigned to erect the poles and its lines of telephones at the area of Arepally; Thimmapuram, Sangem, Bhoopalpally and also at Parkal of Warangal District. Apart from the said duties the Petitioner was also assigned under the control of Respondent several duties as and when required under the control of Respondent telephone Department during the said period. Several people who were juniors to him were made permanent .He was made orally terminated from 1-6-1984 , for which he made several representations to the Respondent Department but to no avail . The Petitioner therefore got a legal notice issued through his counsel Sri G. Shyam Sunder Rao, on 13-8-2001 but no response is given. The very termination of the services on 1-6-1984.is void ab initio and therefore he may be taken into service back with all benefits .

3. A counter affidavit was filed challenging the jurisdiction of the Court under Sec . 2 A(2) . That the Petitioner worked purely on temporary basis to cope up with urgent exigencies of work which could not be postponed and are not capable of being completed with regular sanctioned strength. That he is on the assertion that he worked from 1-9-81 to 31-5-84 and the records of the said period have been weeded out by efflux of time as per retention schedules stipulate in Appendix to P&T Financial Handbook Vol . III . That they are not engaging casual labour. The mere completion of one year service on intermittent works would not confer any right for reinstatement and termination of the casual labour on expiry ofthe period ofthe said engagement will not attract the purview of the I.D. Act . He has filed this petition after a lapse of 18 years . Sec . 25F. of the I.D. Act is not applicable. Hence, the petition may be dismissed.

4. The Petitioner examined himself as WW1 and deposed that he worked from 1-1-81 to 31-5-84 continuously on daily wages on Rs . 6.25 ps . wages . That his supervisors were G. Masha and Junior Engineer Diwakar . He made several representations but to no avail and got issued Ex. W1 notice . Ex . W2 is the copy of the Acknowledgement . Ex. W3 is the diary upto 31-3-1984 . He worked for more than 260 days in ayear . Hence , he may be reinstated with back wages . In the cross examination he भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

deposed that he only gave oral representations and did not give anywritten representation.

5. Sri V. Sahodar deposed as WW2 . He said that he also worked from 1-9-81 to 1984 and along with WW1 . He wasalsoterminated orally in 1984. In the cross examination he deposed that he cannot give the exact date of WW1 worked from which year . He denied that he is deposing falsely.

6. TheManagement examined Sri . K. Venkateswarlu, Divisional Engineer (Rural ) as MW1 . He said that the record isdestroyed . That the Petitioner has never worked for 240 days . He was engaged as daily wagers intermittently and was disengaged on completion of work. That he did not claim any relief after June , 1994. There is no record ofany representation ofthe Petitioner for providing employment. The dispute was raised after 19 years . In the cross examination he deposed that it is not true to suggest that he was not engaged at all . That no notice or pay in lieu thereof was given. That he did not represented after 1985. That they received a legal notice..

799 8. It is argued by the Learned Counsel for the Respondent that mere completion of one year service on intermittent terms would not confer for reinstatement Casual mazdoor on expiry ofthe said engagement will not attract the involvement ofthe I.D. Act : The daily wager in absence of his sanctioned post could not make any claim for permanent employment as held in BalwinderSingh Vs. State ofH.P. 1999 ( IILLJ) 1116. The above views were approved by Hon'ble Division Bench of Madras High Court in WA No. 600/96. That he has approached the Court after a lapse of 18 years and the Respondent cannot be expected to keep the muster rolls for 18 years . They were destroyed as per the rules. Hence, the petition may be dismissed.

9. It may be seen that no doubt, the Petitioner has filed Ex. W3 daily attendance book which shows that he worked for several days in a month from 1981 to 1984 and perhaps even completed 240 days in a year. Be that maybe so.He approached this court after a gap of 17 years . No doubt, the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. has held in 2000(2) An. W.R. page 17, where the workman worked from 1977 to 1979 and he approached the court in 1990, it was held that it cannot be denied on the mere ground of delay. It may be seen that here the delay is 17 years and more over itis clear from the pleadings itself that the Petitioner was working as a daily wage worker of specifiedworks . Hence; I am afraid, with all respects to the above Judgement it will notapply to the facts of this case . Hence, the Respondent is deirected that in future if they engage any casual labour or dailywage worker the Petitioner maybe given preference taking his date of initial working as 1-10-81 and taking his age as on 1-10-81 . , except this direction the Petitioner is not enitled for back wages, continuity of service or any other relief.

Award passed accordingly, Transmit.

Dictated to Kum. K. Phani Gowari, Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 8th dayof December, 2003.

E. ISMAIL, PresidingOfficer Appendixofevidence

Witnesses examined for the Witnesses examined for Petitioner.

the Respondent

MW1 : Sri K. Venkateswarlu WW1 : Sri G. Babu

WW2: Sri V. Sahodár

7. It is argued by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that he workedfrom 1-9-81 to 31-5-1984 continuously and he was orally terminated on 1-6-84 although he has worked for more than 240 days every year. He was not given any notice. Sec . 25F was not followed. That the Petitioner could not approach due to poverty and ignorance . He got issued a notice which is Ex. W1 . That the Petitioner established by examining himself as WW1 and another witness as WW2 . That he worked for 240 days.He also relied on the following Judgements . He relied on Mohanlal Vs. Bharat Electricals Ltd. , in AIR 1981 S.C. page 1253 wherein it was held that, " If the retrenchment is ab -initio void, a declaration that the employee continuous tobe in service with all consequential benefits will follow" . In 1998 (4) ALC Secunderabad Club Vs. Addl. Industrial Tribunal wherein it was held that "Termination ofemployee who worked more than 240 days more than 11 months , without issuing notice or paying one month's salary in lieu ofnotice, is illegal " . He also relied on 2000 (2) An. W.R. 17 Hon'ble High Court of A.P. wherein the workman joined the services of the Respondent on 30-4-77 and was terminated on 21-5-79. I.D. 385/90 was raised by him. Hence , delay is not fatal . He also relied on 1997 ALD 665 Double Bench wherein their Lordships held that , " termination of services of workman (Petitioner) by respondent- corporation-Petitioner preferred industrial dispute- rejected by 1st Respondent- Tribunal on the ground of abnormal and inordinate delay-Award challenged- Limitation Act , 1963 not applicable to proceedings under the I.D. Act-Fight not between equals adjudication cannot be denied on technical grounds of delay- Impugned award set aside - Tribunal to proceed and determine the I.D. on merits-Writ Petition allowed " . Hence , he prays that the Petitioner may be reinstated with back wages and continuity of service .

Documents marked for the Petitioner

Ex WI: Copy oflegal noticedt. 13-8-2001

Ex W2: Copy ofacknowledgement ofEx . W2 Ex. W3: Day Attendance Book during October , 81 to 31-3-84

Documents marked for Respondent

Ex M1: Copy ofretention schedules in P&T FHB Vol . III 800

[PART II-Sac. 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

AND

Ex M2: CopyofletterDGP&T No. 270-6-84-STN, dt. 30-3-85

Ex,MB: CopyofletterDGP&T No. 270-6-84-STN, dt. 22-6-88

1.The General Manager, TelecomDepartment, Dabagardens,Visakhapatnam.

Ex.M4:

2.The Sub-Divisional Engineer, Telecom, M. V.P. Colony,

Copy of letter No. 369-4-93 STN- II , (PT) dt. 12-2-99.

....... Respondent

Visakhapatnam.

नई दिल्ली, 29 जनवरी , 2004

APPEARANCES:

For the Petitioner

:Sri M. Venkata Ramana, Advocates

Swamy,

Forthe Respondent

: Sri A.A. Advocate

AWARD

का.आ. 429.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार, दूर संचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबंद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या एलसीआईडी-63/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-1-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-40025/5/2004-आई. आर. (डी.यू. ) ]

कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 29th January, 2004

This is acase taken under Sec. 2A(2) of the I.D. Act, 1947 by the Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court, Visakhapatnam in view of the judgement of the Hon'ble Hight Court ofAndhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/s. Cotton Corporation of India and two others and transferred to this Court in view of the Government of India . Ministry of Labour's Order No. H- 11026/ 1/2001- IR(C- II) dated 18-10-2001 bearing I.D. No. 47/2001 and renumbered in this Court as L.C.I.D. No. 63/2002 and notices were issued to the concerned parties.

S.O. 429. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. LCID- 63/2002 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court , Hyderabad now as shown in the annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Management ofTelecom Deptt. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 29-1-2004.

[No. L-40025/5/2004 - IR(DU) ]

KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT ATHYDERABAD

2. The brief facts as mentioned in the petition are: That the Petitioner worked as casual mazdoor in the Office of Sub-Divisional Officer, Telecom Department, M.V.P. Colony, Visakhapatnam. He joined on 1-7-91 in the office ofA.E. Electrical, Dabagardens , Visakhapatnam, and worked upto 24-6-91 and the thereafter the workman was transferred to J.T.O. , " F " section and till 1998 without any break and he was being paid salary of Rs . 1800/- per month. Buthe fell sick and could not attend to duty till 31-12-98 . After recovered from illness he approached the Management with sick and fit certificate but the Managementdid not take him back.

PRESENT :

SHRI E. ISMAIL, BSc. , LL.B. , Presiding Officer

Dated the 22nd day of December, 2003

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C.LD. 63/2002

3.He submitted that on 10-1-99 he sent a letter to the Management requesting to take him into service but the Management did no give him neither reply nor reinstated him into service . The termination of the workman is illegal, untenable and cannot be justified since the termination is inviolation ofstatutory provisions of the ID Act .

(Old I.D. No. 47/2001 Transferred from Industrial Tribunal- cum -Labour Court , Visakhapatnam)

BETWEEN :

Sri N. Ravi Kumar ,

S/ o Late jagannadha Raju ,

type III CI -4,

Telecom Nagar,

Megadri Peta, Kancherapalem,

Petitioner

4.It is submitted that along with workman some of theworkersby name S/Sri M. Srinivas , I. Swamy, Rambabu and Satyanarayanamurthy have joined in the service and working continuously till today and their services were regularized and also they were paid 5th Wage Revision Commission benefits . The Management did not pay the same to the Petitioner. Hence , he may be directed to be reinstated back with continuity of service and direct the Management to pay 5th Wage Revision arrears .

Visakhapatnam - 8 .

-+ 801

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन 2, 1925

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

works since 4 years deposed that he joined the Department in 1998. He knows the porkman. He foll sick in January, 1996.Again he fell sick in 1998 that he and workman gave representation to the Management on 10-1-98 which is Ex.Ws . The Adenagement after rooiving the said Jotter stated that they will look into the matter. In the cross examination ha denied that the whereabouts of theweckman were not known from 16-2-98 and he is deposing falsely. That he accompanied WW1 and then gave Ex.W5. It is not true that he is deposing falsely,

5. Acotinter was filed stating that he has to prove that he has worked without break till 1998 and that he fell sick from 1-3-98 to 31-12-98 . No such certificate was received by the office and Xerox copies of the said certificate do not show any date of issue also and hance not tenable under law. During the said period he never Antimated to the Management . In fact he was absconded from duty from 16-2-98 . He has absconded from duty for a period of9 months and woke up after three years and filed this petition alleging that he was illegally terminated. It is true that other persons whom the Petitioner has mentioned are still working continuously and they have been paid benefits of5th Pay Commission. That the Petitioner's name could not be included as he has absconded from duty. Therewas still chance for consideration till 26-8-98 , instead he absconded unheard and approached the Hon'ble Tribunal, hence, it may be dismissed with costs.

8. Dr. Sri B.D. Naidu-deposed as WW3 . He identified the Petitioner and deposed that he treated him from back pain from 1-3-98 to 31-12-98 and isstiodexW3 sick certificate. He also issued Ex. W4 fitness certificate . The Petitioner's ailment is deprolapse with schatica. He denied that he issued falsely Ex. W3 and W4 to help WW1 and he never suffered from sickness .

9. Sir U. Ramakrishna, SDE (Legal) , examined himself as MW1 . He deposed that WWI worked in the Department from 1991 to February, 1998 with breaks depending on the availability of work. That he has filed annexure dated 28-6-2000 issuedby CGM, Hyderabad granting temporary status to casual labourers who have completed 240 days as on 1-1-98 . That they have asked all SDOs about such casual employees who have.commpleted 240 days . On 12-3-98 details were furnished for SDE, Visakhapatnam where Petitioner's name is shown at serial No. 5 and inremarks it is written that he is absent from one month hence service could not be obtained. Besides the Petitioner, all the four persons have submitted their agvice records. That they have not received Ex. W5 said to have beenwritten by WW1 . As WW1 absconded and hisservice record could not be obtained, no action can be taken against him.Atpresent there is no policy to appoint casual labour as full time employees . He has not submitted medical certificate nor represented himself or through the union. Hence, the petition is not maintainable.

10. In the cross examination he deposed that it is true that in theManagement's counter it is mentioned that the workman worked continuously from 1991 to 1998 without any break. It is true that in 1998 no notice was issued asking the workman to submit days book. It is true that remaining four workmen are still working and they have been regularized. That they have not issued any notice for his absenteeism as he is a casual employee and no enquiry was also conducted . No notice was given or no pay was paid in lieu thereof. He does not know whether any circular for employing part time workers who work less than4 hours as full time workers .

6. The Petitioner examined himself as WW1 and deposed that he worked as casual mazdoor in the Management organization from 1-7-98 in the office A.E. , (Elec) Dabagardens , Visakhapatnam and worked upto 24-6-91 . Thereafter he was transferred to J.T.O. , F-Section, M.V.P. Colony, Visakhapatnam and worked there continuously without break till February, 1998. His last salary drawn was Rs . 1800/-. Ex . WI is the identity card issuedby the Respondent . ExW2 is the service certificate. Ex. W3 is the sick certificate issued by Dr. V.D. Naidu that hewas sick from 1-3-98 to 31-12-98 . Ex. W4 is the fitness certificate.That he reported for duty along with Ex. W3 and Ex. W4with a letter Ex. W5 . He gave it to Sri Venkateshw Rao, SDE . He asked him to go and he would reconsider. That other like S/Sri Rambabu , M. Srinivasa Rao , I. Swamy andG. Satyanarayana were made permanent. The 5th Pay Commission is effect from 1-1-86 and he was working then. Hewas not given the said payment. He has to receive the same.All others were paid. He discharged his duties without any remarks . He was not paid any compensation and Respondent discharged him. Ex. W6 is the muster roll certificate. From August, 1992 to February, 1993 that he worked on every day of these months that is 212 days . Ex. W8 shows that from 1-6-91 to 24-6-91 he worked for all the 24 days. The Management has got the record of his muster rolls . Ex .W9 is the supplement of Visakhapatnam of Eenadu dated 2-7-2002 where Respondent made a statement that there are still vacancies . In the cross examination he deposed that he had no written proof that he informed about the sickness to the Assistant Engineer. Heworked till 16-2-98 only. It is not true to say that Ex. W5 was not shown to Management . He denied that he himself absconded from 16-2-98 . He denied that Ex. W3 to W5 were created by him to suit his case. No dates are mentioned as Ex. W4 and Ex . W5 as to when they were issuedby Dr. Naidu.

11. It is argued by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that he worked from 1-6-91 till February, 1998 that he could not work from 1-3-98 to 31-12-98 . After recovery he went with medical certificate . Management did not reinstate him. They did not pay him 5th Pay 7. Sri Rama Raju , deposed as WW2 who is a regular mazdoor in the underground cable, faults and line

440 Gl /04-16 802

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

[PART II-SBc. 3 (ii)]

months for Sciatica. He did not inform at all and approached the Tribunal after a gap of three years. He was a casual mazdoor hence , no noticewas issued to him as it was taken for grant that he absconded from service . It is very clear that these certificates Ex. W3 , W4 and W5 do not to have any dates, which means that they have been created for the purpose of this case.

13. It may be seen that it is an admitted factby the MW1 that the Petitioner worked from 1991 to February, 1998. So it may be seen that no enquiry has been conducted, no show cause notice has been issued and the Petitioner has examined the Doctor also as WW3 . In this case theplea of delay is taken in the counter, that there is three years delay. In view of that Judgement cited either Sec.25F should have been followed Here , no notice has been given, no charge sheet was issued nor Sec.25F is folowedandhere there is some fault ofthe Petitioner also . That he did not informe about his sickness although according to him. He suffered for 10 months if not immediately after one year one month to two months or even two months, he did not inform the Respondents. Hence, the question of back wages does not arise . Now, the Telecom has gone under several changes and they are not appointing any casual labourers . Hence, 1 am of the opinionthat paying some consolidated amount would serve as he was drawing Rs. 1800/- and he has worked from 1-7-91 till February. 1998 that is for 7 years . Hence , I am of the opinion, that the ends of justice would be met if he is paid 7 months pay last drawn. According to the Petitioner he was drawing Rs . 1800/- per month. Hence, 7 months payi.e. , Rs.12, 600/- is paid lumpsum along with Rs.2, 000/- as costs towards the litigation, total Rs . 14, 600/-, it canbe rounded up to Rs.15,000/-. Hence an award is passed directing the Respondents to pay Rs.15,000/- to the Petitioner within 30 days from the publication ofthe award failing which the Petitioner will be entitled to 12% interest onRs .15,000/-after 30 days of publication ofthis award.

Award passed accordingly. Transmit.

Dictated toKum . K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 22nd day of December, 2003 .

E. ISMAIL, PresidingOfficer

Appendix ofevidence

Witnesses examined for the Petitioner.

Witnesses examined for the Respondent Comrnissioner benefits from 1995 to the workman. That the Management agreed that the workman worked continuously from the date ofjoining till February, 1998 . That WW1 is not cross examined on the question of reinstatement. The prayer for reinstatement with back wages , continuity of service and direction to pay 5th Pay Revision Commission benefits which shows that the Management has no objection to reinstate the workman, That the Management itself mentioned in the counter that the workman worked continuously from 1991 to February, 1998. In the cross examination MW1 admitted that the day books are in the custody of J.T.O. and S.D.O. , therefore , asking the workman to submit day books does not arise since they are in the custody of the Management only.He further admitted that in 1991 no notice was issued asking the workman to submit day books. It shows that only for the purpose of the case they prepared annexures A to C and taken the said plea. Further in the cross examination he himself admitted that they have not issued any notice to the workman and not conducted domestic enquiry against the workman. According to Sec . 25F if any worker worked 240 days in a year, the Marnagement should issue one month notice to him and also conduct domestic enquiry if they want to terminate his service . The enquiry should have been conducted because he worked continuously for 8 years. As per our own Judgement that is A.P. High Court Judgement reported in 2001 (3 ) ALT page 459, it was held that, "Retrenchment - Termination of service ofworkman who worked for more than 240 days amounts to retrenchment-Retrenchment without following the mandatory requirements provided under Sec.25F-not les al - Petitioner Management not justified in terminating th service of Respondent-Workman by an oral order who following the mandatory requirement under the Acteinstatement ordered by Labour Court in such circ: rstance is sustainable " . Plea of appeal not taken in thabour Court. Hence , the said plea cannot be taken in wut. Therefore from the above Judgement it is clear that the workman is not only entitled for reinstatement but back wages also . The contention of the Management that he worked up to 16-2-98 and not 28-2-98 is not correct . They should have filed MRs . To prove their contention. WW2 is alsoworking in telecom Department and he accompanied te workman to submit sick and fitness certificate, the production of sickness certificate of the workman he ¡ roduced evidence by the Doctor by name Sri V.D. Naidu as WW3 and he deposed that he was under his treatment upto 31-12-98 . Hence, he is entitled for reinstatement with back wages and continuity of service.

WW1: Sri N. Ravi Kumar MW1 : Sri U. Ramakrishna

WW2 : Sri Rama Raju

WW3 : Dr. D.B. Naidu

Documents marked for the Petitioner

Ex.WI: Original identity card of the Petitioner 12. It is argued by the Learned Counsel for the Respondent that it is the Petitioner who has absconded fromduty from 16-2-98 and the Petitioner's name could not be included for benefits of 5th Pay Commission as he absconded from duty. That what Ex . W3 says is that he was suffering with discprolapse with sciatica and no person will not be able to come upto 1-3-98 to 31-12-98 i.e. , 10 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

803

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन2, 1925

Ex. W2: Service certificate of WW 1 dt . Nil

Ex.W3: Sick certificate by Dr. B.D, Naidu dt . Nil Ex.W4: Fit certificate by Dr. B.D. Naidu dt . Nil .

ExW5 : Copy of WW1's representation dt. Nil.

Ex.W6 : Copy of muster roll certificate

Ex.W7: Copy of muster rolls from Aug 92 to Feb'93 Ex.W8: Copy of certificate showing his working days from 1-6-91 to 24-6-91

Ex.W9: Supplement of Eenadu Visakhapatnam edition dt. 2-7-2002

Documents marked for the Respondent

NIL

नई दिल्ली, 12 फरवरी , 2004

का.आ. 430.-केन्द्रीय सरकार एत‌द्वारा, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 7 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) एवं (2) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए दूसरी अनुसूची में उल्लिखित औद्योगिक विवाद के किसी भी मामले के न्याय निर्णयन तथा उक्त अधिनियम के अधीन निर्धारित किए गए ऐसे अन्य कार्यों के लिए एक श्रम न्यायालय की स्थापना करती है , जिसका मुख्यालय एर्नाकुलम में होगा और श्री एन. राजेन्द्रन को दिनांक 23 जनवरी , 2004 ( पूर्वाहन ) से न्यायालय के पीठासीन अधिकारी के रूप में नियुक्त करती है । [फा. संख्या ए-11016/03/2003 -सीएलएस- II ]

वाई. पी. सहगल , अवर सचिव NewDelhi , the 12th February, 2004 S. O. 430. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-sections ( 1 ) and (2) of Section 7 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby constitutes a Labour Court with headquarters at Ernakulam for the adjudication of Industrial Disputes relating to any matter specified in the Second Schedule to the said Act and for performing such other functions as may be assigned to it under the said Act, and appoints Shri N. Rajendran as Presiding Officer of that Court with effect from23rd January, 2004 (FN) .

[F. No. A- 11016/3/2003 -CLS- II] Y.P. SEHGAL, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 12 फरवरी , 2004

का.आ. 431.-राष्ट्रपति, श्री एम. राजेन्द्रन को दिनांक 23जनवरी, 2004 ( पूर्वाहन ) से केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक न्यायाधिकरण- सह- श्रम न्यायालय, एर्नाकुलम के पीठासीन अधिकारी के रूप में नियुक्त करते हैं । श्री एम. राजेन्द्रन , केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक न्यायाधिकरण-सह- श्रम न्यायालय, एर्नाकुलम के पीठासीन अधिकारी के पद पर तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए अथवा अगले आदेशों तक बने रहेंगे ।

[संख्या ए-11016/3/2003- सीएलएस- II ]

वाईः पी. सहगल, अवर सचिव New Delhi, the 12th February, 2004 S.O. 431. The President is pleased to appoint Shri N. Rajendran as PresidingOfficer Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal - Cum-Labour Court , Ernakulam w.e.f. 23-01-2004 (F.N. ) . Shri N. Rajendran will continue to hold the post ofPresiding Officer of the CGIT-cum-Labour Court , Ernakulam for a period ofthree years or until further orders .

[No. A- 11016/3 /2003-CLS- I

Y. P. SEHGAL, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 12 फरवरी , 2004

का.आ. 432.-केन्द्रीय सरकार एत‌द्वारा, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 7( क ) की उप/धाराएं ( 1 ) एवं ( 2 ) द्वारा .प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए तीसरी अनुसूची में उल्लिखित किसी भी मामले से सम्बन्धित औद्योगिक विवाद के न्याय- निर्णयन और उक्त अधिनियम के अन्तर्गत ऐसे सौंपे जाने वाले अन्य कार्यों को करने के लिए एक औद्योगिक न्यायाधिकरण, जिसका मुख्यालय एर्नाकुलम में होगा, की स्थापना करती है और श्री एन. राजेन्द्रन को दिनांक 23 जनवरी, 2004 ( पूर्वाहन ) से न्याधिकरण के पीठासीन अधिकारी के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[फा. संख्या ए-11016/03/ 2003 - सीएलएस- II ]

वाई. पी. सहगल, अवर सचिव NewDelhi , the 12th February, 2004 S. O. 432. In exercise of the powers conferredby Sub -sections ( 1 ) and (2) of Section 7 (A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby constitutes an Industrial Tribunal with Headquarters at Ernakulam for the adjudication of Industrial Disputes relating to any matter specified in the Third Schedule and forperforming such other functions as may be assigned to itunder the said act, and appoints Shri N. Rajendran as Presiding Officer of the Tribunal with effect from 23rd January, 2004 (FN).

[F. No. A- 11016/3/2003 -CLS- II} Y.P. SEHGAL, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 6 फरवरी, 2004

का. आ. 433.-जबकि, पावर ग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लिमिटेड ( इसके पश्चात् उक्त प्रतिष्ठान के रूप में उल्लिखित ) ने 804

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध अधिनियम , 1952 ( 1952 का 19 ) ( इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम के रूप में उल्लिखित ) की धारा 17 की उप- धारा ( 3 ) के अंतर्गत अपने उन 8 कर्मचारियों केसंबंध में छूट के लिए आवेदन किया है जिन्होंने केन्द्र सरकार के कर्मचारियों के लिए लागू सी सी एस ( पेंशन ) नियमों के अंतर्गत पेंशन लाभोंके लिए विकल्प दिया है ।

और, जबकिकेन्द्र सरकार के विचार में उक्त प्रतिष्ठान में नियोजित ये कर्मचारी जिन पर स्कीम लागू होती है, इसी प्रकार तैनात होने के वजह से कर्मचारियों की एक श्रेणी में आते हैं और भविष्य निधि, ग्रेच्युटी व वृद्धावस्था पेंशन स्वरूप के लाभों एवं ऐसे अन्य लाभों के हकदार हैं जो कुल मिलाकर, इस अधिनियम या स्कीम के अंतर्गत प्रदान किए जा रहे लाभों की तुलना में किसी तरह कम नहीं है।

अतः , अब , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 17 की उप - धारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए और इस संबंध में समय - समय पर उल्लिखित शर्तों के अध्यधीन, केन्द्र सरकार तत्काल प्रभाव से अथवा अगली अधिसूचना जारी होने तक इन व्यक्तियों पर उक्त अधिनियम के सभी उपबंधों को लागू होने से छूट प्रदान करती है ।

[सं. आर-15025/4/03 - एस.एस.- II ]

संयुक्ता राय, अवर सचिव NewDelhi , the 6th February, 2004 S.O. 433. Whereas the Power Grid Corporation of India Limited ( hereinafter referred to as the said establishment ) has applied for exemption under Sub -section (3) of Section 17 of the Employees ' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (19 of 1952) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act ), in respect of 8 of its employees who have opted for the pensionary benefits under CCS (Pension) Rules applicable to employees ofthe Central Ciovt .

And whereas , in the opinion of the Central Government these 8 employees employed in the said establishment to which the Scheme applies constitute a "class of employees " by virtue of being placed similarly and are entitled to benefits in the nature of provident fund, gratuity and old age pension and such benefits , which are on the whole not less favourable than the benefits provided under this act or the Scheme.

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub section (3 ) of Section 17 of the said act and subject to the conditions specified in this regard from time to time , the Central Government , hereby, exempts these persons from the operation of all the provisions of the said Act with immediate effect or until further notification .

[No. R-15025/4/03 -SS- II]

SANJUKTA RAY, Under Secy.

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] नई दिल्ली, 9 फरवरी, 2004

का.आ. 434.-केन्द्रीय सरकार संतुष्ट हो जाने पर किलोकहित में ऐसा करना अपेक्षित था, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 2 के खण्ड ( ढ़ ) के उप - खण्ड (vi ) के उपबंधोंके अनुसरण में भारत सरकार के श्रम मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 2784दिनांक 15-9-2003 द्वारा यूरेनियम उद्योग जोकि औधोगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14)114 ) की प्रथम अनुसूची की प्रविष्टि । में शामिल हैं, को उक्त अधिनियम के प्रयोजनों के लिए दिनांक 15-9-2003 से छः मास की कालावधि के लिए लोक उपयोगी सेवा घोषित किया था । 19 और केन्द्रीय सरकार की राय है कि लोकहित में उक्त कालावधि को छः मास की और कालावधि के लिए बढ़ाया जाना अपेक्षित है । अतः अब, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 2 के खण्ड ( ढ़ ) के उप- खण्ड ( vi ) के परन्तुक द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त उद्योग को उक्त अधिनियम के प्रयोजनों के लिए दिनांक 15-3-2004 से छः मास की कालावधिकेलिए लोक उपयोगी सेवा घोषित करती है.।

[संख्या एस-11017/9/97- आई. आर. ( पी.एल. ) ]

जे. पी. पति, संयुक्त सचिव NewDelhi, the 9th February, 2004 S.O. 434. Whereas the Central Government having been satisfied that the public interest so required that inpursuance of the provisions of sub -clause (vi ) of the clause(n) of Section 2 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of1947), declared by the Notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour S.O. No. 2784 dated 15-9-2003 the services in the Uranium Industry which is covered by item 19 of the First Schedule to the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) to be a public utility service for the purpose of the said act , for a period of six months from the 15th September, 2003 .

Andwhereas, the Central Government is of opinion thatpublic interest requires the extension of the said period bya further period of six months .

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to sub -clause (vi ).of clause (n) of Section 2 ofthe IndustrialDisputes act, 1947, the Central Government hereby declares the said industry to be a public utility service for the purposes of the said act for a period of six months from the 15th March, 2004 .

[F. No. S - 11017/9/97 -IR(PL)]

J. P. PATI , Jt . Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 12 फरवरी, 2004

का.आ. 435.- कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम , 1948 (1948 का 34) की धारा -1 की उपधारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा 01 मार्च , 2004 को उस तारीख के [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

805)

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/ फाल्गुन 2, 1925

व्यय

मुख्म शीर्ष-2230

01.105 अभ्रक खान श्रम कल्याण नि খি

01.105.01 - प्रशासन

रूपमें नियत करती है, जिसको ठक्त अधिनियम के अध्याय-4 (44 व45 धारा के सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रवृत्त हो चुकी है ) अध्याय -5 और 6 [ धारा- 76 की उप धारा ( 1 ) और बारा -77, 78, 79 और 81 के सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रकृत की जा चुकी है के उपबन्ध तमिलनाडू राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत होंगे, अर्थात्

लेखा का सीर्ष

रकम (हजार रुपयों में)

01.00.01

वेतन

1722

01.00.02

मजदूरी

01.00.11

घरेलूयात्रा व्यय

" सेलम जिला में सेलम तालुक के निलवरपट्टी, गज्वलनायकंप‌ट्टी और उसके छोटा गांव बीरसामी पुदुर, परनाट्टमंगलम , तम्मनायकनपट्टी, जारि कोण्डलमपट्टी, अमणिकोण्डलमपट्टी, और उसके छोटा गांव-कोण्डलमपट्टी, दासनायक्कम्प‌ट्टी, संतियूर , संतियूर अत्तयम्पट्टी के राजस्वग्राम ।"

01.00.13

कार्यालय व्यय

01.00.27

0 [संख्या एस-38013/06/04- एस. एस.- I ]

गौण कार्य

01.00.50

अन्यभार

के० सी० जैन , निदेशक

1900

कुल,

NewDelhi, the 12th February, 2004

01.105 अभ्रक खान श्रम कल्याण निधि

01.105.02- स्वास्थ्य

लेखा काशीर्ष

इकाई

रक्रम (हजार रुपयों में)

वेतन

02.00.01

4430

02.00.02

मजदूरी

02.00.11

घरेलू यात्रा व्यय

S.O.435.-In exercise of the powers conferredby Sub-section (3) of Section 1 of the Employees' State InsuranceAct, 1948 (34 of1948) the Central Government hereby appoints the 1st March, 2004 as the date on which the provisions of Chapter IV ( except Sections 44 and45 which have already been brought into force) and Chapter VandVI [ except Sub -section (i) ofSection 76 and Sections 77, 78, 79 and 81 which have already been brought into force] ofthe said act shall come into force in the following areas in the State ofTamil Nadu namely:-

02.00.13

149

कार्यालय ब्पय

02.00.14

किराया, दर और कर

02.00.21

301

सामग्री और पूर्ति

02.00.27

गौण कार्य

02.00.31

सहायता अनुदान

"Areas comprising the revenue villages of Nilavarapatti, Gajjalanaickenpatti and its Hamlet veerasamy pudur, Parnattamanglam, Thamma- naickenpatti , Jarikondalampatti , Amani Kondalampatti & its Hamlet Kondalampatti , Dasanaickenpatti, Santhiyur, Santhiyur Attayampatti ofSalem Taluk in Salem District ." .

02.00.50

अन्य भार

[No. S-38013/06/2004-SS-I]

02.00.52

मशीनरी और उपस्कर

K. C. JAIN, Director

4994

कुल

नई दिल्ली , 12 फरवरी , 2004

01.105 अभ्रक खान श्रम कल्याण निधि का० आ० 436.- केन्द्रीय सरकार, अभ्रक खान श्रम कल्याण

01.105.08-शिक्षा

लेखा का शीर्ष

रकम

इकाई

( हकार रुपयों में) निधिअधिनियम, 1946 ( 1946 का 22 ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (4) के अनुसरण में उपाबद्ध अनुसूची । और अनुसूची II के अनुसार 2002-2003 वर्ष के लिए उक्त अधिनियम के अधीन लेखाओं का विवरण और वित्त क्रियाकलापों की रिपोर्ट को प्रकाशित करती है ।

वेतन

03.00.01

अनुसूची-1

5012 वर्ष2002-2003 के लिए

03.00.02

मजदूरी

03.00.11

अभ्रक काल श्रम कल्याण निधि के लेखाओं का विवरण

घरेलूयात्रा व्यय

03.00.13

कार्यालय व्यय

03.00.21

सामग्रीऔर पूर्ति

01-4-2002 को आरंभिक अतिशेष

1.16करोड़

03.00.27

गौणकार्य

1.17 करोड़

वर्ष 2002-2003 के दौरान स्थानांतरित उपस्कर

03.00.31

सहायता अनुदान

2.91 करोड़

कुल आय 806

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 21 , 2004/PHALGUNA 2, 1925

(2)

(3) (1)

03.00.34

छात्रवृत्तिऔर

वृत्तिका

2 03.00.50

अन्य भार

5157

कुल

01.105 अभ्रक खान श्रम कल्याण निधि 01.105.04- मनोरंजन

लेखा का शीर्ष

इकाई

रकम (हजार रुपयों में)

वेतन

383 04.00.01

04.00.11

घरेलूयात्रा व्यय

0 04.00.21

सामग्रीऔर पूर्ति

4 04.00.50

अन्य भार

393

कुल

01.105 अभ्रक खान श्रम कल्याण निधि 01.105.05- जलापूर्ति

लेखा का शीर्ष

इकाई

रकम (हजार रुमयों में)

51 05.00.31

सहायता अनुदान

05.00.50

अन्य भार

कुल

12509

कुल योग (अभ्रक)

01-4-2003 को

कुल आय

2.91 करोड़

1.25करोड़

कुल व्यय

अभ्रक निधिके 1.66करोड़

अधीन आरक्षित

निधि

अनुसूची 2

वर्ष 2002-2003 के दौरान

अभ्रक खनिज श्रम कल्याण निधि के अधीन वित्त कार्यकलाप कार्यकलाप का नाम

इकाई क्रम

सं.

[PART II-SBC. 3 (ii)]

(1) ( 2)

(3)

निपटाए दुर्घटना के मामले

116879 अस्पताल औषधालय में उपचार किए गएरोगी

ख. शिक्षा

60 अभ्रक खान कर्मकारों के विद्यालय जाने वाले बच्चों को छात्रवृत्ति प्रदान करना और अन्यवित्तीय सहायता

ग. मनोरंजन

6. अभ्रक खान कर्मकारों के लिए फिल्मों का 7 दृश्य श्रव्य, सेटों/सिनेमा वैनों के माध्यम से प्रदर्शन

[ फा. सं. एस -50025/2 /2003 - डब्ल्यू- II ] मनोहर लाल, महानिदेशक ( श्रम कल्याण ) संयुक्त सचिव NewDelhi, the 12th February, 2004

S.O. 436. In pursuance of Sub - section ( 4) of Section 3 of the Mica Mines Labour Welfare Fund Act 1946 (22 of 1946), the Central Government herebypublishes the statement of accounts and the report of the activities financed under the said Act, for the year 2002-2003 as per schedule - I and Schedule- II , respectively, annexed hereto :-

SCHEDULEI

STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS OF MICA MINES LABOUR WELFARE FUND FOR THE YEAR 2002-2003

Income:

1.16 Crores

OpeningBalance as on 01-4-2002

1.75 Crores CessTransferred during the year 2002-2003

2.91 Crores Total Income

Expenditure:

MajorHead - 2230

01.105 . Mica Mines Labour Welfare Fund 01.105.01-Administration

Head ofAccount

क्र . स्वास्थ्य

(3) (1) (2)

11 1. स्थिरसह - चालित/स्थिर एलोपैथिक और स्थिर आयुर्वेदिक औषधालय

2 2. अभ्रक खान कर्मकारों के लिए अस्पताल निपटाए दुर्घटना के मामले

Units

Amount

(Rs. in thousand) 01.00.01

Salaries

1722 01.00.02

Wages

01.00.11

Domestic Travelling

Expenses [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

807

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 21 , 2004/फाल्गुन2, 1925

Head of Account Units

01.105 Mica Mines Labour Welfare Fund

Amount (Rs . in thousand)

01.105.04-Recreation 01.00.13

93 Head of Account

OfficeExpenses

Units

01.00.27

Minor Work

Amount (Rs. inthousand)

04.00.01

Salaries

383 01.00.50

OtherCharges

04.00.11

Domestic Travelling Total

1900

Expenses

04.00.21

Material & Supply 01.105 Mica Mines Labour Welfare Fund

04.00.50

OtherCharges 01.105.02-Health

Total

393 Units

Head of Account

01.105 Mica Mines Labour Welfare Fund

Amount (Rs. in thousand)

01.105.05-Water Supply 02.00.01

Salaries

4430

Head of Account Units

02.00.02

Wages

Amount (Rs. in thousand)

05.00.31

02.00.11

Grants- in-aid

51 Domestic Travelling

05.00.50

Allowances

Other Charges 02.00.13

Total

149

65 OfficeExpenses

02.00.14

12509 Rents , Rates & Taxes

GrandTotal (Mica)

Total Income

2.91 Crores 02.00.21

301

Material & Supply

TotalExpenditure

1.25 Crores 02.00.27

MinorWork

Reserve Fund Under Mica

1.66Crores 02.00 . 31

Fund

Grants- in-aid

As on01-4-2003

02.00.50

OtherCharges

SCHEDULE-II

02.00 . 52

Machinery & Equipment

Total

4994

ACTIVITIES FINANCED UNDER THE MICA MINES LABOUR WELFARE FUND DURING THE YEAR 2002-2003

01.105 Mica Mines Labour Welfare Fund

S. NAME OF THE ACTIVITY

UNITS 01.105.03-Education

No. A. HEALTH:

Units

Head of Account

Amount (Rs. in thousand)

Static-cum-Mobile/ Static Allopathic and Static Ayurvedic Dispensaries.

03.00.01

2 Salaries

5012

Hospitals for the Mica Mines workers .

3. Accident cases settled

2 03.00.02

Wages

116879 03.00.11

Patients treated in Hospitals/ dispensaries

Domestic Travelling

Expenses

B. EDUCATION :

03.00.13

OfficeExpenses

60 03.00.21

Material & Supply

Award of Scholarship and other financial assistance to the school going children of Mica Mines workers 03.00.27

MinorWork

C. RECREATION :

03.00.31

Grants- in-aid

7 03.00.34

Scholarship & Stipend

Exhibition offilms for Mica Mines workers through Audio- visual Sets/ CinemaVans.

03.00.50

OtherCharges

[F. No. S- 50025/2/2003 -W. II] Total

5157

MANOHAR LAL, Director General

(Labour Welfare)/Jt. Secy.

Printed by the Manager, Govt . of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri , New Delhi - 110064

and Published by the Controller of Publications , Delhi- 110054.