This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

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

भारत का राजपत्र The Gazette of India

प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक

WEEKLY

सं. 52 ]

नई दिल्ली, दिसम्बर 19 दिसम्बर 25 , 2004, शनिवार/अग्रहायण , 28- पौष4, 1926

NEW DELHI, DECEMBER 19-DECEMBER 25, 2004, SATURDAY/AGRAHAYANA, 28- PAUSA 4, 1926 No. 52 }

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

भाग II- खण्ड 3-उप-खण्ड(ii)

PART II -Section 3 Sub- section (ii)

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

कार्मिक, लोक शिकायत तथा पेंशन मंत्रालय

(कार्मिक और प्रशिक्षण विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 14 दिसम्बर, 2004

षडयंत्रों तथा उसी संव्यवहार के अनुक्रम में किए गए उन्हीं तथ्यों से उद्भूत किसी अन्य अपराध के अन्वेषण के लिए दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना के सदस्यों की शक्तियों और अधिकारिता का विस्तार सम्पूर्ण कर्नाटक राज्य पर करती है ।

[सं० 228/92/2004- एवीडी- II ]

शुभा ठाकुर, अवर सचिव

MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS

(Department of Personnel and Training)

New Delhi , the 14th December, 2004

का.आ. 3253.-केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्‌द्वारा 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 197 पीसीआर 2004, दिनांक 27-10-2004 द्वारा प्राप्त कर्नाटक राज्य सरकार की सहमति से श्री अशोक माल्लया, शाखा प्रबंधक, सिंडिकेट बैंक, पर्सनल बैंकिंग ब्रांच, डिकनसन रोड, बंगलौर एवं किसी अन्य व्यक्ति के विरुद्ध मैसर्स एचएएल, बंगलौर के अपात्र कर्मचारियों को मांग ऋण मंजूर करने के मामले में भारतीय दंड संहिता , 1860 ( 1860 का अधिनियम सं. 45 ) की धारा 120- बी सपठित धारा 420, 468 और 471 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 से संबंधित अथवा संसक्त प्रयत्नों, दुष्प्रेरणों और

S. O. 3253. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 5 read with Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946) , the Central Government with the consent of StateGovernment of Karnataka , vide Notification No. HD 197 PCR2004 dated 27-10-2004, hereby extends the powers andjurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police 3684 GI/2004

(10067) 10068

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

Establishment to the whole of the State ofKarnataka for investigation in the matter of sanctioning demand loan to undeserving employees ofM/ s . HAL , Bangalore involving Shri Ashok Mallya, Branch Manager, at Syndicate Bank, Personal Banking Branch, Dickenson Road, Bangalore and any other person for the offences punishable under sections 120 - B read with 420 , 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code , 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860 ) and Section 13 (2) read with 13 ( 1 ) (d) of Prevention of Corruption , Act , 1988 (Act No. 49 of 1988) and attempts , abetments and conspiracies in relation to or in connection with the offences mentioned above or any other offence committed in the course of the same transaction arising out of the same facts .

[No.228/92/2004-AVD- II] SHUBHA THAKUR, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 16 दिसम्बर, 2004

का.आ. 3254.-केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्‌द्वारा दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना अधिनियम, 1946 ( 1946 का अधिनियम सं. 25 ) की धारा 6 के साथ पठित धारा 5 कीनष्ठपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत, शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए कर्नाटक राज्य सरकार की अधिसूचना सं. एचडी 185 पीसीआर 2004 , दिनांक 27-10-2004 द्वारा प्राप्त कर्नाटक राज्य सरकार की सहमति से श्री एम.एन. ईश्वर, रेल पथ निरीक्षक/अनुभाग अभियंता , सगरा, मैसूर डिवीजन, दक्षिण पश्चिम रेलवे के विरुद्ध भ्रष्टाचार निवारण, अधिनियम 1988.( 1988 का अधिनियम सं. 49 ) की धारा 13 ( 2) सपठित धारा 13 ( 1 ) ( ई ) के अधीन उसकी आय के ज्ञात स्त्रोतों के अनुपात में परिसंपत्तियां अर्जित करने और उपर्युक्त अपराधों से संबंधित अथवा संसक्त प्रयत्नों, दुष्प्रेरणों और षड्यंत्रों तथा उसी संव्यवहार के अनुक्रम में किए गए अथवा उन्हीं तथ्यों से उद्भूत किसी अन्य अपराध के अन्वेषण के लिए दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना के सदस्यों की शक्तियों और अधिकारिता का विस्तार सम्पूर्ण कर्नाटक राज्य पर करती है ।

[सं० 228/93/2004- एवीडी- II ]

शुभाठाकुर, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 16th December , 2004 S. O. 3254. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub -section ( 1 ) of Section 5 read with Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 , (Act No. 25 of1946), the Central Government with the consent of State Government of Karnataka , vide Notification No. HD 185 PCR 2004 dated 27-10-2004 , hereby extends the powers andjurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the State of Karnataka for investigation against Shri M.N. Eshwara, Permanent Way Inspector/Section Engineer , Sagara, Mysore Division , South Western Railway for amassing assets discorporate to his known sources of income under section 13 ( 2 ) read with 13 ( 1 ) (e) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Act

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

No. 49 of 1988) and attempts, abetments and conspiracies in relation to or in connection with the offences mentioned aboveor any other offence committed in the course ofthe same transaction arising out of the same facts.

[No. 228/93 /2004-AVD- II] SHUBHA THAKUR, Under Secy.

वित्त मंत्रालय

(राजस्वविभाग)

आदेश

नई दिल्ली, 25 नवम्बर, 2004

स्टाम्प

का० आ० 3255.-भारतीय स्टाम्प अधिनियम, 1899 ( 1899 का 2 ) की धारा 9 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार एत‌द्वारा इंडियन ओवरसीज बैंक , चेन्नई को मात्र एक करोड़ रुपये का समेकित स्टाम्प शुल्क अदा करने कीअनुमति प्रदान करती है , जो उक्त बैंक द्वारा जारी किये जाने वाले मात्र दो सौ करोड़ रुपए के समग्र मूल्य के प्रामिसरी नोटों के स्वरूप वाले असुरक्षित विमोच्य गैर- परिवर्तनीय गौण बंधपत्र श्रृंखला-6 पर स्टाम्प शुल्कके कारण प्रभार्य है ।

[सं० 23/2004- स्टाम्प फा० सं० 33/45/2004-बि ०क० ]

आर०जी ० छाबड़ा, अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF FINANCE (Department of Revenue) ORDER

New Delhi , the 25th November,2004.

STAMPS

S.O. 3255.-In exercise of the powers conferredby clause (b) of Sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 9 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of 1899), the Central Government hereby permits Indian Overseas Bank, Chennai to pay consolidated stamp duty of rupees one crore only chargeable on account of the stamp duty on Unsecurred Redeemable Non - Convertible Subordinated Bonds- SeriesVI in the nature of promissory notes aggregatingto rupees two hundred crore only, to be issued by the said Bank.

[No. 23/2004- STAMP F. NO . 33/ 45/2004-ST] R.G. CHHABRA , Under Secy ( आर्थिक कार्य विभाग )

(बैंकिंग प्रभाग)

नई दिल्ली, 15 दिसम्बर, 2004

का० आ० 3256. राष्ट्रीय आवास बैंक अधिनियम, 1987 (1987 का 53 ) की धारा 6 की उपधारा ( 2 ) और धारा 7 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के साथ पठित धारा 6 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक से 10069

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Income Tax Act, 1961. (43 of 1961 ) read with rule 2CA of the Income Tax Rules , 1962, the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Jodhpur hereby approves "Lala Kamlapat Singhania Education Sansthan " for the purpose of said section for the Assessment Years 2005-06 to 2006-07.

परामर्श करने के पश्चात्, एतद्वारा श्री पी ० के० गुप्ता, ( जन्म तिथि 10-09-1948 ) वर्तमान कार्यपालक निदेशक, कार्पोरेशन बैंक, मंगलौर को उनके कार्यभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से 30-9-2008 तक की अवधिके लिए या अगला आदेश होने तक, इनमें से जो भी पहले हो, राष्ट्रीय आवास बैंक के अध्यक्ष एवं प्रबंध निदेशक के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[फ० सं० 9/31/2004-बीओ-1 ] रमेश चन्द, अवर सचिव

Provided that the Institute conforms to and complies with the provisions of Sub - section (vi) of Clause (23C) of Section 10 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with rule 2CA ofthe Income Tax Rules , 1962..

(Department ofEconomic Affairs ) (Banking Division )

[NO.:CC/JDH/ITO(TECH )/ 10( 23C )( VI )/ 2004-05/ 2517 ] R. B. SINHA, Chief Commissioner of IncomeTax New Delhi , the 15th December , 2004

मानव संसाधन विकास मंत्रालय (माध्यमिक तथा उच्चतर शिक्षा विभाग ) नई दिल्ली, 10 दिसम्बर, 2004

का० ओ० 3258.- केन्द्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनोंके लिए प्रयोग ) नियम, 1976 के नियम 10 के उप- नियम 4 के अनुसरण में मानव संसाधन विकास मंत्रालय (माध्यमिक तथा उच्चतर शिक्षा विभाग ) के अन्तर्गत कार्यरत निम्नलिखित 4 केन्द्रीय विद्यालयों को, ऐसी संस्थाओं के रूप में, जिनमें 80 प्रतिशत से अधिक कर्मचारियों ने हिन्दी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, अधिसूचित करती है :-

S.O. 3256. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( a) of Sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 6 , read with sub- section ( 2 ) of Section 6 and sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 7 of the National Housing Bank Act , 1987 ( 53 of 1987) , the Central Government, after consultation with Reserve Bank ofIndia , hereby appoints Shri P. K. Gupta, (Date of Birth 10-09-1948 ) presently Executive Director , Corporation Bank, Mangalore as Chairman and Managing Director, National Housing Bank for the period from the date of his taking charge and upto 30-09-2008 or until further orders , whichever is earlier .

[F. No. 9/3 1/2004-BO- 1 ] RAMESH CHAND, Under Secy.

1. केन्द्रीय विद्यालय, करेरा, शिवपुरी, मध्य प्रदेश

कार्यालय मुख्य आयकर आयुक्त जोधपुर, 16 दिसम्बर, 2004 सं० 3 /2004-05

2. केन्द्रीय विद्यालय, आर०टी ० बी०पी ० , शिवपुरी , मध्य प्रदेश

3. केन्द्रीय विद्यालय, एस०पी० एम० , होशंगाबाद, मध्य प्रदेश

का० आ० 3257.- आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 ( 1961 की 43) की धारा 10 के खण्ड ( 23 ग ) की उप धारा ( vi ) के साथ पठित आयकर नियमावली, 1962 के नियम 2 ग क के द्वारा प्रदत्त अधिकारों का प्रयोग करते हुए मुख्य आयकर आयुक्त, जोधपुर " लाला कमलापत सिंघानिया एज्यूकेशन संस्थान, गोटन , जिला- नागौर ( राजस्थान ) " को उक्तधारा के प्रयोजन हेतु निर्धारण वर्ष 2005-06 से 2006-07 के लिए अनुमोदित किया जाता है ।

4. केन्द्रीय विद्यालय, नं०-2 , साल्ट लेक, कोलकाता

परन्तु यह तब जबकि सोसायटी आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 की धारा 10 के खण्ड ( 23 ग ) की उप धारा ( vi ) के साथ पठित आयकर नियमावली, 1962 के नियम 2 गक के प्रावधानों की पुष्टि एवं अनुपालना करती है ।

[सं० 11011-4/2003 - रा० भा०ए० ] डी० पी० बन्दूनी, निदेशक ( रा ० भा०)

MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURC DEVELOPMENT [क्रमांक: मुआआ जो० आअ/तकनीकी/10( 237 ) (VI)/ 2004-05/2517 ]

(Department. of Sec . & Higher Education )

New Delhi , the 10th December , 2004 .

रा०ब ० सिन्हा, मुख्य आयकर आयुक्त, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

Jodhpur, the 16th December , 2004

ΝΟ . 3/ 2004-05

S.O. 3257.- In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- section (vi ) of Clause (23C) of Section 10 of the

S.O. 3258. In pursuance of sub rule (4) of rule 100 ofthe Official Language (Use for Official Purposes of the Union) Rules , 1976 , the Central Govt. hereby notifies the following 4 Kendriya Vidyalayas under the Ministry of Human Resource Development , ( Deptt . of Sec. & Higher 10070

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )] Education) whose more than 80 % members of the staff have acquired working knowledge ofHindi :---

केन्द्रीय रेशम बोर्ड के सदस्यों के रूप में कार्य करने के लिए निम्नलिखित व्यक्तियों का नामांकन अधिसूचित करती है ।

1. Kendriya Vidyalaya, Karera, Shivpuri , Madhya Pradesh .

1. श्रीमती लता प्रियकुमार, एएम -10, 14वां मेन रोड, अन्नानगर, चैन्नई -600040

उपर्युक्त अधिनियम की धारा 4(3 ) (जे ) के अंतर्गत केन्द्र सरकार द्वारा नामित 2. Kendriya Vidyalaya, R.T.B.P. , Shivpuri , Madhya Pradesh .

2. सुश्री नरेला सारदा, कृ० नं० 32 , एपीएसआरटीसी जोनल वर्कशॉप कॉम्पलैक्स, जगतियल रोड, करीमनगर, (आंध्र प्रदेश)

3. Kendriya Vidyalaya, S.P.M. , Hoshangabad, Madhya Pradesh .

4. Kendriya Vidyalaya, No. 2, Salt lake, Kolkata.

3. श्रीमती बिजयलक्ष्मीसाहू, अर्पणा नगर, चौलियागंज, कटक -753004

[No. 11011-4/2003 -O.L.U.J D. P. BANDOONI , Director (O.L. )

[फा० सं० 25012/56/99-रेशम ] किरन धींगरा, संयुक्त सचिव

New Delhi , the 17th December , 2004 वस्त्र मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 16 दिसम्बर, 2004

S.O. 3260.-In exercise of the powers conferredby sub-section (3 ) of Section 4 of the Central Silk Board Act , 1948 (61 of 1948 ), the Central Government hereby notifies the nomination of the following persons to serve as members of the Central Silk Board for a period of three years from the date of this notification subject to the provisions of the said Act.

1. Mrs. Latha Priyakumar, AM- 10, 14thMain Road, Annanagar, Chennai -600040.

का०आ ० 3259.-केंद्रीय रेशम बोर्ड अधिनियम, 1948 ( 1948 का 61 ) की धारा 4 की उप- धारा ( 3 ) की धारा ( क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार एत‌द्वारा श्री एच ० अनुमन्तथप्पा को केन्द्रीय रेशम बोर्ड के अध्यक्ष के रूप में उनके पदभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए अथवा अगले आदेशों तक, इनमें से जो भी पहले हो, नियुक्त करती है । उनकी नियुक्ति केंद्रीय रेशम बोर्ड अधिनियम तथा केंद्रीय रेशम बोर्ड के नियमों के प्रावधानों के अध्यधीन होगी ।

Nominated by the Central Government under Section 4(3 ) (J) ofthe Act. [फा ० सं० 25012/67/ 99 - रेशम] किरन धींगरा, संयुक्त सचिव

2. Ms. Narella Sarada, Qr. No. 32, APSRTC Zonal Workshop Complex, JagtialRoad, Karimnagar (Andhra Pradesh) ..

MINISTRY OF TEXTILES New Delhi , the 16th December, 2004

3. Smt. Bijayalakshmi Sahoo , Aparna Nagar, Chauliaganj , Cuttack-753004.

[F. No. 25012/56/99 - Silk]

KIRAN, DHINGRA, Jt . Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 17 दिसम्बर, 2004 S.O. 3259.- In exercise of the powers conferredby clause (a) ofsub- section ( 3 ) of Section 4 of the Central Silk Board Act , 1948 (61 of 1948 ) , the Central Government hereby appoints Shri H. Hanumanthappa as Chairman of the Central Silk Board for a period of 3 years with effect from the date he assumes charge ofthe post or until further orders , whichever is earlier. His appointment shall be subject to the provisions of the Central Silk Board Act and Central Silk Board Rules .

[F. No. 250 12/67/99 -Silk]

KIRAN, DHINGRA, Jt . Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 17 दिसंबर, 2004

का०आ० 3261.-केन्द्रीय रेशम बोर्ड अधिनियम , 1948 (1948का 61 ) की धारा 4 की उपधारा (3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार एतद्‌द्वारा उक्त अधिनियम के प्रावधानों के अध्यधीन इस अधिसूचना की तिथि से तीन वर्षों की अवधि के लिए केन्द्रीय रेशम बोर्ड के सदस्यों के रूप में कार्य करने के लिए निम्नलिखित व्यक्तियोंका नामांकन अधिसूचित करती है ।

उपर्युक्त अधिनियम की

1. सचिव/प्रमुख सचिव, छत्तीसगढ़ सरकार, ग्रामीण उद्योग विभाग, रायपुर

का०आ० 3260.- केन्द्रीय रेशम बोर्ड अधिनियम, 1948 (1948का 61 ) की धारा 4 की उपधारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार एत‌द्वारा उक्त अधिनियम के प्रावधानों के अध्यधीन इस अधिसूचना की तिथि से तीन वर्षों की अवधि के लिए

धारा 4( 3 ) ( आई ) के अंतर्गत केन्द्र सरकार द्वारा नामित 10071

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष4, 1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

2. सचिव/प्रमुख , सचिव उत्तरांचल सरकार, लघु उद्योग, बागवानी तथा रेशम उत्पादन विभाग, देहरादून

3. वस्त्र एवं हथकरघा निदेशक उड़ीसा सरकार, भुवनेश्वर

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

New Delhi , the 17th December , 2004 S.O. 3261. In exercise of powers conferred by sub -section (3 ) of Section 4 of the Central Silk Board Act, 1948 (61 of 1948 ) , the Central Government hereby notifies the nomination of the following persons to serve as members of the Central Silk Board for a period of three years from the date of this notification subject to the provisions of the said Act.

Nominated by the Central Government under Section 4(3 ) ( i ) of the Act. 1. The Secretary/Principal Secretary to the Govt . of Chhattisgarh, Rural Industries Department, Raipur.

2. The Secretary/Principal Secretaryto the Govt . of Uttaranchal , Small Scale Industries , Horticulture and SericultureDeptt . Dehradun .

3. The Director of Textiles and Handlooms , Govt . of Orissa, Bhubaneshwar.

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

कृषिमंत्रालय

( कृषि अनुसंधान तथा शिक्षा विभाग ) नई दिल्ली, 9 दिसंबर, 2004 का. आ. 3262.-केंद्रीय सरकार कृषि अनुसंधान एवं शिक्षा विभाग , राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियमावली 1976के नियम 10 के उपनियम (4 ) के अनुसरण में एत‌द्वारा भारतीय कृषि अनुसंधान परिषद् ( आई.सी.ए.आर. ) के हैदराबाद स्थित मुर्गी पालन परियोजना निदेशालय जिसके 80 प्रतिशत से अधिक कर्मचारियों ने हिंदी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, को अधिसूचित करती है ।

[फा. सं. 13-2/2002- हिंदी ] डी.के. छतवाल, अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE (Department ofAgricultural Research and Education) New Delhi , the 9th December, 2004 S.O. 3262. -In pursuance of sub - rule (4 ) ofRule 10 of the Official Language (use for official purpose of the Union) Rules , 1976, the Central Government , Ministry of Agriculture , Department of Agricultural Research & Education hereby notifies the ICAR's Project Directorate on Poultry, Rajendranagar , Hyderabad where more than 80% ofstaff have acquired the working knowledge ofHindi .

[F. No. 13-2/2002 -Hindi] D. K. CHHATWAL, Under Secy.

शहरी विकास मंत्रालय (दिल्ली प्रभाग) नई दिल्ली , 7 दिसंबर, 2004

का. आ. 3263. केंद्र सरकार, दिल्ली नगर कला आयोग अधिनियम , 1973 ( 1974 का 1 ) की धारा 4 और 5 द्वारा दी गई द्वारा दी गई शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए तथा भारत सरकार के शहरी विकास मंत्रालय ( दिल्ली प्रभाग ) की दिनांक 12 जुलाई , 2001 की अधिसूचना के क्रम में एतद्द्वारा श्री पी.के. प्रधान, संयुक्त सचिव ( दिल्ली तथा भूमि) को दिल्ली नगर कला आयोग में 12 जुलाई , 2004 से 3 वर्ष के लिए अथवा उनके द्वारा आयोग का कार्य करते रहने तक, इनमें से जो पहले हो, सदस्यके रूप में पुनः नियुक्त करती है ।

[फा. सं. ए-11013/8/2004- डीडीआईए ( पार्ट ) ] परमजीत सिंह , डैस्क अधिकारी MINISTRY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT (Delhi Division)

New Delhi, the 7th December, 2004 S.O. 3263. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sections 4 & 5 of the Delhi Urban Art Commission Act, 1973 ( 1 of 1974) , and in continuation of notification dated 12th July, 2001 of the Govt . of India, Ministry of Urban Development (Delhi Division) , the Central Government hereby reappoints Shri P.K. Pradhan , Joint Secretary (Delhi & Lands) as Member of the Delhi Urban Art Commission w.e.f. 12th July, 2004 for a period of three years or the date up to which he shall be looking after the affairs of the Commission , whichever is earlier.

[F. No. A- 11013/8 /2004-DDIA (Pt. ) ] PARMJIT SINGH , Desk Officer उपभोक्तामामले , खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय (उपभोक्ता मामले विभाग )

भारतीयमानक ब्यूरो

नई दिल्ली, 10 दिसम्बर, 2004

का.आ. 3264.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम , 1987के नियम , 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय 10072

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गये मानक ( को) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं :-

अनुसूची

संशोधन की

क्रम संशोधित भारतीय मानक

सं. की संख्या और वर्ष

संख्या

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110002 and Regional Offices: New Delhi , Kolkatta Chandigarh , Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices : Ahmedabad, Bangalore , Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati , Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur Nagpur, Patna, Pune , Thiruvananthapuram .

संशोधन लागू

होने कीतिथि

औरतिथि

(2)

(1)

(3)

(4) 1. आई एस 8331 : 2003 संशोधन संख्या 1 , लागू नहीं वस्त्रादि-अंगोला

अक्तूबर, 2004

शर्टिंग-विशिष्टि

(दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

इन संशोधनों की प्रतियाँ भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 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, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: टी. एक्स 04/टी-30] एस. दास गुप्ता, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' उप महानिदेशक ( तकनीकी- I ) MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS , FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs)

BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS New Delhi , the 10th December, 2004 S.O. 3264. 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 amendments to the Indian Standards , particulars ofwhich are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :

SCHEDULE

Sl.

No. and Datefrom No. and year of the

No. Indian Standards

[Ref: TX04/T- 30 ]

S. DAS GUPTA, Scientist ' F' Dy.Director General (Tech. -1) नई दिल्ली, 10 दिसम्बर, 2004

नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गये मानक (को) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं :- का. आ. 3265.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के

अनुसूची

क्रम संशोधित भारतीय मानक

सं. की संख्या और वर्ष

संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि

संशोधन की कीसंख्या औरतिथि

(2)

(1)

(3)

(4) 1. IS 1208 : 1978

संशोधन संख्या 1 अक्तूबर, 2004

2. IS 1206 (Part I): 1978 संशोधन संख्या 1 अक्तूबर, 2004

3. IS 1202 : 1978

संशोधन संख्या 2 अक्तूबर, 2004

4. IS 918 : 1985

संशोधन संख्या 2 अक्तूबर, 2004

5. IS 1448 (Part 64): 1998 संशोधन संख्या 1

नवम्बर, 2004

6. IS 517 : 1986

संशोधन संख्या 1

नवम्बर, 2004

which the

year of

the

amendment

shall have

amendment

effect ( 1)

(2)

(3)

(4) 1. IS 8331 : 2003

Amendment Not Textiles . Angola

No. 1,

Applicable

Shirting - Specification October , 2004

(Second Revision)

Copy of this Standard is available for sale with theBureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan , 9 Bahadur इन संशोधनों की प्रतियाँ भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन, 9 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, जेयपुर, कानपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्धहैं ।

[संदर्भ: पीसीडी/जी -9 ] एस. दास गुप्ता, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' उप महानिदेशक

(तकनीकी-1 ) 10073 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/ पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

NewDelhi , the 10th December, 2004

S.O. 3265. In pursuance of clause (b ) of sub- rule (1 ) ofRule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that amendments to the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :

SCHEDULE

Date from which the amendment shall have effect

No. and year of the

amendment

No. and year of the Indian Standards

Sl. No.

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Amendment No. 1 , October 2004

1. IS 1208: 1978 Methods for testing tar and bituminous materials: Determination of ductility (first revision)

Amendment No. 1, October 2004

2. IS 1206: (Part 1 ) 1978 Methods for testing tar and bituminous materials : Determination of viscosity: Part 1 Industrial viscosity (first revision)

Amendment No. 2, October 2004

3. IS 1202 : 1978 Methods for testing tar and bituminous materials: Determination of specific gravity (first revision)

Amendment No. 2, October 2004

4. IS 918 : 1985 Specification for calcium carbonate , precipitated for cosmetic industry (second revision)

Amendment No. 1, November 2004

5. IS 1448: (Part 64) 1998 Methods oftest for petroleum and its products Part64:Non volatile matter insolvents (first revision)

Amendment No. 1, November 2004

6. IS 517: 1986 Specification for methanol (methylalcohol ) (second revision)

Copyofthese Amendments are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan , 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110 002 and Regional Offices: New Delhi , Kolkatta Chandigarh, Chennai , Mumbai and also BranchOffices: Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore , Guwahati , Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur Nagpur, Patna, Pune , Thiruvananthapuram .

Date: 1-12-2004

[Ref: PCD/G-9]

S. DAS GUPTA, Scientist ' F ' Dy. Director General (Tech. -I)

नई दिल्ली, 10 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3266.- 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 : - 10074

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4 , 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

अनुसूची

स्थापित भारतीय मानक ( कों) की

स्थापित तिथि

क्रम संख्या संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

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

(1) (2)

(3)

(4)

1. आई एस 13708: 2004/

आई एस 13708: 1993

31अक्तूबर, 2004

आई एस ओ . 8729:1997 पोत निर्माण और समुद्रीय प्रौद्योगिक- पोत राडार परावर्तक ( पहला पुनरीक्षण)

31अक्तूबर, 2004

2. आई एस 15516: 2004 औद्योगिक वैरिएबल - रीच ट्रक- स्थायित्व परीक्षण

इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियाँ भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन, 9 बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों भई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[ संदर्भ : टी ई डी/जी 17 : 2 ]

एस . दास गुप्ता, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' उप महानिदेशक ( तकनीकी-1 ) New Delhi , the 10th December , 2004

S.O. 3266.-In pursuance of clause (b ) of sub- rule ( 1) ofRule 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

Sl . No. Year & title of the

Date of Established

No. Indian Standards Established

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

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

1. IS 13708: 2004/

IS 13708 : 1993

31October 2004

ISO 8729 : 1997

Shipbuilding and Marine

Technology -Marine Radar

Reflectors ( First Revision )

Ν. Α.

31 October 2004

2. IS 15516 : 2004 Industrial Variable- Reach Trucks - Stability Test

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

[Ref: TED/G- 17: 2]

S. DAS GUPTA, Scientist ' F ' Dy. Director General (Tech . - I)

नई दिल्ली, 10 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3267.- 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 : - 10075 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

अनुसूची

स्थापित तिथि

क्रम संख्या

स्थापित भारतीय मानक ( कों ) की संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

अक्तूबर 2004

आई एस 4225 : 1979- इस्पात प्लेटों की सीधी धरन पराश्रवय परीक्षण की अनुशंसित रीति (दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

1. आई एस 4225 : 2004- इस्पात प्लेटों की सीधी धरन पराश्रवय परीक्षण की अनुशंसित रीति (दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

इस भारतीय मानक 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, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: एम. टी. डी. 21 /टी-19 ]

एस . दास गुप्ता, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ ' उप महानिदेशक ( तकनीकी-1 ) New Delhi , the 10th December, 2004

S.O. 3267. 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 Established Sl . No. & Year ofthe

No. Indian Standards Established

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

(3)

(2)

(1)

October 2004

IS 4225 : 1979-

1. IS 4225 : 2004-

Recommended Practice for Straight Beam Ultrasonic Testing of Steel Plates (First Revision)

Recommended Practice for Straight Beam Ultrasonic Testing of Steel Plates (Second Revision)

Copyof this Standard is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan , 9 Bahadur Shah ZafarMarg, New Delhi - 110002 and Regional Offices : New Delhi , Kolkatta Chandigarh, Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices:Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati , Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur Nagpur, Patna, Pune , Thiruvananthapuram .

[Ref: MTD 21 /T- 19 ]

S. DAS GUPTA, Scientist ' F ' Dy. Director General (Tech. - I )

नई दिल्ली, 10 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3268.- 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 :-

3684 GI/2004-2 10076

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA 4 , 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii )]

अनुसूची

स्थापित तिथि क्रम संख्या

स्थापित भारतीय मानक (कों ) की संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

(1) (2)

(3)

(4)

31अक्तूबर 2004 1. 7587 ( भाग 1 ) : 2004 खान केज निलंबन गियर में वेष्टन भाग 1 सामान्य अपेक्षाएं

30सितम्बर 2004 2. 15530: 2004 वाहक चेन, संयोजक और स्त्रोकेट-विशिष्टि

इस भारतीय मानक 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, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: एम. ई. डी./जी-2 : 1 ]

एस. दास गुप्ता, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ ' उप महानिदेशक ( तकनीकी- I )

New Delhi , the 10th December, 2004

S.O. 3268.- 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 Established Sl . No. & Year of the No. Indian Standards Established

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

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

310ct. 2004

1. 7587 (Part 1 ) : 2004 Cage suspension gear for winding in mines Part 1 General Requirements

30 Sep. 2004

2. 15530: 2004 Conveyor chains , attachments and sprockets- Specification

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

[Ref: MED/G-2: 1 ]

S. DAS GUPTA, Scientist ' F ' Dy. Director General (Tech.- I)

नई दिल्ली, 10 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3269.- 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 :-

10077 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/ पौष 4, 1926

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

अनुसूची

स्थापित तिथि स्थापित भारतीय मानक(कों ) की

क्रम

संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

सं.

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

31-10-2004

आई . एस. 12720 : 1993

1. आई. एस. 12720 : 2004

भारतीय मानक अधिप्लव ट्रेनिंग दीवारें और विभाजक दीवारों की संरचनात्मक (दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

इस भारतीय मानक 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, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: डब्ल्यू, आर. डी./जी-117 ]

एस. दास गुप्ता, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' उप महानिदेशक ( तकनीकी-I )

New Delhi , the 10th December, 2004

S.O. 3269. In pursuance of clause (b) of sub- rule ( 1 ) ofRule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars ofwhich are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:

SCHEDULE

Date of Established No. & Year of the

Sl.

Indian Standards Established

No.

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

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

31-10-2004

IS 12720 : 1993

1. IS 12720 : 2004 Indian Standard Criteria for Structural Design of Spillway Training Walls and Divide Walls (Second Revision)

Copy of this Standard is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan, 9, Bahadur Shah ZafarMarg, New Delhi - 110002 and Regional Offices: New Delhi , Kolkatta, Chandigarh, Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices: Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati , Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna , Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.

[Ref:WRD/G- 117]

S. DAS GUPTA, Scientist ' F ' Dy. Director General (Tech. - I)

नई दिल्ली, 10 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3270.- 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:-

10078

THE GAZETTEOF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II -SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

अनुसूची

क्रम स्थापित भारतीय मानक (कों ) की

स्थापित तिथि सं. संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

(1) (2)

(3)

(4)

31-10-2004 1. आई. एस. 15529 : 2004/ आई. एस. ओ 1995: 1982 नींबू प्रजाति के फल और व्युत्पन्न पदार्थ- अनिवार्य तेल का अंश ज्ञात करना (संदर्भ पद्धति)

31-10-2004 2. आई. एस . 11820: 2004/ आई. एस. ओ. 4389 : 2000 तम्बाकू और उत्पाद - ऑरगेनोक्लोरीन कीटनाशी अवशिष्ट ज्ञात करना - गैस क्रोमेटोग्राफिक पद्धति (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

इस भारतीय मानक 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, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: एफ. ए. डी./जी-128 ]

एस. दास गुप्ता, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ ' उप महानिदेशक ( तकनीकी- I )

New Delhi , the 10th December, 2004

S.O. 3270.-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

Sl. No. & Year of the

Date of Established No. Indian Standards Established

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

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

1 . IS 15529 : 2004 /ISO 1955 : 1982

31-10-2004

Citrus fruits and derived Products- Determination of Essential Oils (Reference Method)

31-10-2004

2. IS 11820 : 2004/ISO 4389: 2000 Tobacco and Tobacco Products- Determination of Organochlorine Pesticide Residues -Gas Chromato- graphicMethod (FirstRevision)

Copy of this Standard is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan, 9 , Bahadur Shah ZafarMarg, New Delhi - 110002 and Regional Offices : New Delhi , Kolkatta, Chandigarh, Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices : Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar , Coimbatore , Guwahati , Hyderabad , Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna , Pune , Thiruvananthapuram.

[Ref: FAD/G- 128]

S. DAS GUPTA, Scientist ' F ' Dy. Director General (Tech. -I) 10079

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/ पौष4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 10 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3271.- 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

क्रम

सं. संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

अक्तूबर 2004 1. आई. एस. 1696 ( भाग 2) : 2004 चूड़ियों के लिए आयाम - भाग 2 चूड़ी-अन्तराल व्यास संचयन (दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

इस भारतीय मानक 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, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: एम . जी. पी. 20/आईएस 4696 ( भाग 2 ) : 2004 ] एस. दास गुप्ता , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' उप महानिदेशक ( तकनीकी- I )

New Delhi , the 10th December, 2004

S.O. 3271. In pursuance of clause (b ) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987, theBureau 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 Established No. & Year of the

Indian Standards Established

Sl. No.

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

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Octbocer 2004 1. IS 4696 (Part 2) : 2004 ISO Dimensions for metric buttress threads - Part 2 Basic demensions (Second Revision )

Copy of this Standard is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan , 9 Bahadur Shah ZafarMarg, New Delhi - 110 002 and Regional Offices: New Delhi , Kolkata Chandigarh, Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices:Ahmedabad, Bangalore , Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati , Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur Nagpur, Patna, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.

[Ref: MGP 20/IS 4696 (Part 2) : 2004 ]

S. DAS GUPTA, Scientist ' F' Dy. Director General (Tech. -I)

नई दिल्ली, 10 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3272.- 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:-

10080

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)]

अनुसूची

क्रम स्थापित भारतीय मानक ( कों) की

स्थापिततिथि सं. संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

(1) (2)

(3)

(4)

31-10-2004 1. 15499: 2004 चक्रवात संभावित क्षेत्रों में क्षेत्र की संवेदनशीलता और चक्रवात के पश्चात् क्षति मूल्यांकन हेतु आवास और भवन टाइपोलाजी के सर्वेक्षण के मार्गदर्शी सिद्धांत

इस भारतीय मानक 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, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: सी. ई. डी. / गजट ]

एस. दास गुप्ता, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ ' उप महानिदेशक ( तकनीकी- I )

New Delhi , the 10th December, 2004

S.O. 3272.-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

Sl . No. & Year of the

No. & year of Indian Standards , if

Date of Established No. Indian Standards Established

any, Superseded by the New Indian

Standard

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

1. 15499: 2004

31-10-2004 Guidelines for Survey ofHousing andBuilding Typology in Cyclone Prone Areas for Assessment of Vulnerability of Regions and Post Cyclone Damage Estimation

Copy of this Standard is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan , 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110 002 and Regional Offices: New Delhi , Kolkata Chandigarh, Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices: Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore , Guwahati , Hyderabad, Jaipur , Kanpur Nagpur, Patna, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.

[Ref:CED/Gazette]

S. DAS GUPTA, Scientist ' F' Dy. Director General (Tech. -1)

नई दिल्ली , 10 दिसम्बर , 2004

का. आ. 3273.- 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 :-

10081 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/ पौष4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

अनुसूची

स्थापित तिथि स्थापित भारतीय मानक ( कों) की

क्रम

संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

सं.

नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा अतिक्रमित भारतीय मानक अथवा मानकों, यदि कोई हों, की संख्या औरवर्ष

(4) ( 1 ) (2)

(3)

31-10-2004 1.

आई. एस. 7771 : 1975 लैटर प्रैस हाफटोन स्याही,

काली - विशिष्ट

आई. एस . 7771 : 2004 लैटर प्रैस हाफटोन स्याही, काली - विशिष्टि

(पहला पुनरीक्षण)

इस भारतीय मानक 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, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: सी. एच. डी./जी.एन ]

एस. दास गुप्ता, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' उप महानिदेशक ( तकनीकी- I )

New Delhi , the 10th December, 2004

S.O. 3273.-In pursuance of clause (b ) of Sub Rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standars , particulards of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:

SCHEDULE

Date ofEstablished No. & Year ofthe

Indian Standards Established

Sl . No.

No.& year of Indian Standards, if any, Superseded by the New Indian Standards

(4)

(3)

(1)

(2)

IS 7771 : 1975

31-10-2004 1. IS 7771 : 2004

Letter Press Halftone Ink ,

Black - Specification

Letter Press Halftone Ink, Black - Specification (FirstRevision)

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

[Ref: CHD/GN : ]

S. DAS GUPTA, Scientist ' F ' Dy. Director General (Tech .-I)

नई दिल्ली, 10 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3274.- 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 नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गये मानक ( को ) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं:-

अनुसूची

संशोधन की संख्या और तिथि

संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि संशोधित भारतीय मानक की संख्या और वर्ष

क्रम सं.

(3)

(4) (1) (2)

30 नवम्बर, 2004

संशोधन की संख्या 2, नवम्बर, 2004

1. आई. एस. 376 : 1986

संशोधन की संख्या 1 , नवम्बर, 2004

30नवम्बर, 2004 2. आई . एस. 247: 1987

31अक्तूबर, 2004 3. आई. एस. 2752 : 1995

संशोधन की संख्या 1 , अक्तूबर , 2004

4. आई. एस. 1919 : 1982

संशोधन की संख्या 3 , अक्तूबर, 2004

31अक्तूबर, 2004 10082

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25, 2004 /PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] इन संशोधनों 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, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: सी. एच. डी./जीएन ]

एस. दास गुप्ता, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ ' उप महानिदेशक ( तकनीकी- I ) New Delhi , the 10th December, 2004

F S.O. 3274.- 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 amendments to the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :

SCHEDULE

No. and year of Amendment

Sl . No. and Year of the No. Indian Standards

Date from which the Amendment shall have effect

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

1. IS 376: 1986

30-11-2004

Amendment No. 2, Nov. , 2004

2. IS 247 : 1987

30-11-2004

Amendment No. 1 , Nov. , 2004

3. IS 2752 : 1995

31-10-2004

Amendment No. 1 , Oct. , 2004

4. IS 1919: 1982

31-10-2004

Amendment No. 3 , Oct. , 2004

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

[Ref: CHD/GN]

S. DAS GUPTA, Scientist ' F' Dy. Director General (Tech . -I)

नई दिल्ली, 10 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3275.- 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 नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गये मानक ( कों ) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं:-

1October, 2004

October, 2004 1. 13010: 2002 ac Watt hourMeters , Class0.5, 1 and 2 - Specification (FirstRevision)

2October, 2004

October, 2004 2. 13779 : 1999 ac Static Watt hour Meters , Class 1 and 2 - Specification (FirstRevision)

2October, 2004

October, 2004 3. 14697 : 1999 ac Static Transformer Operated Watt hour and Var- Hour Meters , Class 0.2S and 0.5S - Specification

Copy ofthese Amendments is available with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah ZafarMarg, New Delhi - 110002 and Regional Offices: New Delhi , Kolkatta, Chandigarh , Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices: Ahmedabad, Bangalore , Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore , Guwahati , Hyderabad , Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.

[Ref: ET 13 /T 34, 33 & 40]

S. DAS GUPTA, Scientist ' F' Dy. Director General (Tech . - 1)

नई दिल्ली, 10 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3276.- 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 नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गये मानक ( कों ) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं:-

अनुसूची

संशोधन की संख्या और तिथि

संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि क्रम संशोधित भारतीय मानक की सं. संख्या और वर्ष

(1) (2)

(3)

(4)

संशोधन की संख्या 1 जुलाई 2004

1. IS 3470 : 2002 हेक्सेन खाद्ध श्रेणी-विशिष्टि

संशोधन की संख्या 1 जुलाई 2004

2. IS 11488 : 1985 मेरीन डीज़ल ईंजनों के लिए ईंधन तेल कीविशिष्टि

3684 GI/2004-3 10084

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)] इस संशोधनों 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, भुवनैश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: पीसीडी 3/टी ]

एस. दास गुप्ता, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' उप महानिदेशक ( तकनीकी- I )

New Delhi, the 10th December, 2004

S.O. 3276.- 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 amendments to the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :

SCHEDULE

Sl .

No. and year of Amendment

No.

No. and Year of the Indian Standards

Date from which the Amendment shall have effect

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

Amendment No. I July 2004

1. IS 3470: 2002 Hexane, Food Grade-Specification (FirstRevision)

Amendment No. 1 July 2004

2.. IS 1488: 1985 Specification for fuel oil for use in marine diesel engines

Copy of these Amendments 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, Kolkatta Chandigarh, Chennai , Mumbai and also BranchOffices:Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati , Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna , Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.

[Ref: PCD3/T]

S. DAS GUPTA, Scientist ' F ' Dy. Director General (Tech. - I)

नई दिल्ली, 10 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3277.- 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 दिये गये हैं वे स्थापित हो गये हैं : -

अनुसूची

क्रम स्थापित भारतीय मानक (कों)

स्थापित तिथि

सं. की संख्या और शीर्षक

(1) (2)

(3)

(4)

कुछ नहीं

जून 2004

1. IS 1448 : [P: 149] : 2004/ISO 12156-1: 1997 पैट्रोलियम और उसके उत्पादों की परीक्षण पद्धति [ पी: 149 ] डीजल ईंधन- उच्च आवृत्ति प्रत्यागामी रिंग 10085 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

(एच.एफ.आर.आर. ) का प्रयोग करते हुए स्नेहन का मूल्यांकन करना- परीक्षण पद्धति

जून2004

कुछ नहीं

2. [IS 13360 Part 6/Sec 11) : 2004/ ISO974:2000] प्लास्टिक परीक्षण पद्धतियाँ भाग 6 तापीय गुणधर्म खण्ड 11 भंगुरता तापमान संधट्के द्वारा ज्ञात करना

जून 2004

कुछ नहीं

3. [IS 13360 Part 5/Sec 26): 2004/ISO 527.5 : 1997] प्लास्टिक परीक्षण पद्धतियाँ भाग 5 यांत्रिक गुणधर्म खण्ड 26 तनन गुणधर्म ज्ञात करना- एकदिशात्मक फाइबर प्रबलित प्लास्टिकसंमिश्र की परीक्षण पद्धतियाँ

जून 2004

कुछ नहीं

4. [ IS 13360 Part 8/Sec 13 ): 2004/ISO4582: 1998 ] प्लास्टिक परीक्षण पद्धतियाँ भाग 8 स्थायित्व / रसायनिक गुणधर्म वर्ग 13 कांच के नीचे दिन की रोशनी में रखने के पश्चात् रंगमे बदलाव और गुंणधमों में परिवर्तन ज्ञात करना

जुलाई 2004

कुछ नहीं

5. IS: 15477:2004

सिरैमिक टाइल्स और पच्चीकारी मेंप्रयुक्तआसंजक

जून 2004

कुछ नहीं

6. IS: 6092: Part 3 /Sec 3 ):

2004/ISO 53 16: 1977 उर्वरकोंके नमूने लेना और परीक्षण पद्धतियाँ भाग 3 फास्फोरस ज्ञात करना अनुभाग 3 विलेय फोसफेट्स का निष्कर्षण

इस भारतीय मानक 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, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: पीसीडी]

एस. दास गुप्ता, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ ' उप महानिदेशक (तकनीकी- Ⅰ ) 10086

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)]

New Delhi , the 10th December, 2004

S.O. 3277.- In pursuance of clause (b ) of sub -rule ( 1 ) of 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 ofwhich are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been establisihed on the date indicated against each:

SCHEDULE

No.

Date of Established Si . No. and year of the Indian Standards

Established

No. andyear of Indian Standards , ifany, Superseded by the New Indian Standard

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4) 1. IS 1448 : [P: 149 ] : 2004/ISO

None

June2004 12156 : 1997 Methods of test for Petroleum and its Products: Part 149 Diesel Fuels- Assessment of Lubricity using the High - frequency Reciprocating Rig ( HERR)-TestMethod .

None

June 2004 2. [ ( IS 13360 Part 6/ Sec 11) : 2004/ ISO 974: 2000] Plastics ---Methods testing Part 6 Thermal Properties Section 11 Determination ofBrittleness Temperature by Impact

None

June 2004 3. [ (IS 13360 Part 5/ Sec26): 2004/ ISO 527-5 : 1997]

Plastics Methods testing Part 5Mechanical Properties Section 26 Determination of Tensile Properties-Test conditions for unidirectional fibre- reinforced plastic composites

None

June 2004 4. [ ( IS 13360 Part 8/ Sec13 ) : 2004/ ISO4582: 1997]

Flastics-Methods testing Part 8 Permanence/Chemical Properties Section 13 Determination of changes in colour and variation in properties after exposure to day light under glass , natural weathering or laboratory light sources

None

July2004 5. IS 15477 : 2004 Adhesives for use with ceramic tiles and mosaics

None

June 2004 6. IS 6092 (Part 3 /Sec 3 ) : 2004/ ISC316 : 1977

Methods of sampling and test for fertilizers Part 3 Determination of phosphorus Section 3 Extraction of water- soluble phosphates

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

[Ref: PCD]

S. DAS GUPTA, Scientist ' F ' Dy. Director General (Tech. -I) 1008 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2004

का० आ० 3278.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स बेट्रानिक्स, प्लाट सं. 172-177, भाग ए, एम आई ई, बहादुरगढ़ - 124507 हरियाणा द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता वर्ग ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " डब्ल्यूबी" श्रृंखला के अकंक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित , ( वे ब्रिज प्रकार ) के तोलन उपकरण के माडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " इलेक्ट्रो " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2004/81 सममुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल अस्वचालित ( वे ब्रिज प्रकार का ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30,000 कि. ग्रा. , और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 5 कि. ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिश्त व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है । लोड सेल विकृत गेज प्रकार का है ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबान्द भीकिया जाएगा।

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदर शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडलके अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उनी विनिर्माता द्वारा सभी सिद्धान्त, जिन के अंनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्मित किया गया है विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही बैंक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तौलम ठपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 कि. ग्रा . या उससे अधिक के" ई" मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान ( एम ) अंतराल सहित टम से ऊपर और 100 टन तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2× 10 या 5 × 10 , के हैं,जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक यो शून्यं के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 219 )/2001 ]

पी० ए० कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 10088

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 18th August 2004

S.O. 3278. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) , is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Weighbridge type) with digital indication belonging to medium accuracy ( Accuracy class III ) of " WB " series with brand name " ELECTRO " ( herein referred to as the said Model) , manufactured by M/s . Weightronics , Plot No. 172-173, Part - A, M.I.E. Bahadurgarh - 124 507 (Haryana ) and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2004/81;

The said Model is a non - automatic weighing instument ( weighbridge) with a maximum capacity of 30,000kg and minimum capacity of 100kg . the verification scale interval ( e) is 5kg. It has a tare device with a 100 per -cent subtractive retained tare effect The Light Emitting Diode display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 volts and 50 - Hertz alternate current power supply. The load cell is of strain gauge type .

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

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

[WM-21 (219)/2001 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 10089 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 3 दिसम्बर, 2004

का० ० 3279.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रगत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स सांघी योशेंग वेइंग एपरेटस कं. लिमिटेड, कमरा नं. 201 , बिल्डिंग सं. 10 सं. 45 , झुआन जिंन रोड मिन्हॉग , शंघाई, चीन द्वारा विनिर्मित और मैसर्स ई जी कांटावाला प्रा. लिमिटेड, सर्वे सं. 28/1 , दामोदर नगर, ओल्ड नगर मुंडधाना रोड, खराड़ी, पुणे 411014 द्वारा भारत में आयातित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " ज्वैल " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) कैं मॉडल का जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " ईगल " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2004/232 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है । 1 उक्तमॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) विकृत ( स्ट्रेन ) गेज प्रकार भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित (टेबल टाप प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 300 ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमती 500 मि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 10 मि. ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिश्त व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य कैरता है ।

कीजाएगी । स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबन्द और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्मित किया गया है विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे और जो 1 मि. ग्रा. से 50 मि. ग्रा. के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 5,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि. ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ( ई ) " मान के लिए 5000 से 50000 तक कीरेंज में सत्यापन माप मान अंतराल सहित 50 कि.ग्रा.तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 2×10 या 5 ×10 , के हैं, जो बनात्मक या ऋणात्मकं पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 111 )/2003 ]

पी० ए० कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 10090

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )]

New Delhi , the 3rd December, 2004

S.O. 3279.-Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below), is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub -sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of self- indicating , non- automatic , (Table top type) weighing instrument with digital indication of " JEWEL" series of high accuracy (Accuracy class - II ) and with brand name " EAGLE " ( herein after referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s Shanghi Yousheng Weighing Apparatus Co. Limited, Room No. 201 , Bldg . No. 10 No. 45, Zhuan Xin Road, Minhang, Shanghai , China and imported in India by M/ s E. G. Kantawalla Pvt . Limited , Survey No. 28/1 , Damodar Nagar , Old Nagar Mundhwa Road Kharadi , Pune 411014 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2004/232;

The said Model ( see the figure given below) is strain gauge typerload cell based non - automatic weighing instrument ( Table top type) with a maximum capacity of 300g and minimum capacity of 500mg . The verification scale interval ( e ) is 10mg. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 - hertz alternate current power supply;

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

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

[F. No. WM-21 ( 111 ) /2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 10091 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/ पौष4 , 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 3 दिसम्बर, 2004

का० आ० 3280.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक. (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स सांत्री योशेंग वेइंग एपरेटस कं. लिमिटेड, कमरा नं. 201 , बिल्डिंग सं. 10 सं. 45, झुआन जिंन रोड मिन्हॉग, शंघाई, चीन द्वारा विनिर्मित और मैसर्स ई जी कांटावाला प्रा. लिमिटेड, सर्वे सं. 28/1 , दामोदर नगर, ओल्ड नगर मुंडधाना रोड , खराड़ी, पुणे 411014 द्वारा भारत में आयातित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " इको" श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित, अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के माडल का जिसके ग्राण्ड का नाम " ईगल " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2004/233 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) विकृत ( स्ट्रेन ) गेज प्रकार भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबल ढाप प्रकार) तोलन उपकरण है। इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1500 ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 4 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 200 मि. ग्रा . है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

कीजाएगी । स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबन्द

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 111 )/2003 ] और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्तमॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्मित किया गया है विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो और 100 मि.ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के ( ई ) मान के लिए 500 से 10000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन माप मान अंतराल सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक को अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2× 10 या 5 ×10* , के हैं, जो घनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

पी० ए० कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 3684 G1/2004-4 10092

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

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

New Delhi , the 3rd December, 2004

S.O. 3280.-Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority , is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below ), is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 ( 60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

تو Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections (7 ) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby publishes the certificate of approval non- automatic , (Table top type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " ECO " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) and with brand name "EAGLE " ( herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s Shanghi Yousheng Weighing Apparatus Co. Limited, Room No. 201 , Bldg. No. 10 No. 45 , Zhuan Xin Road, Minhang , Shanghai , China and imported in India by M/sE. G. Kantawalla Pvt . Limited, Survey No. 28/1 , Damodar Nagar , Old Nagar Mundhwa Road Kharadi , Pune-411014 and which is assigned the the approval mark IND /09/2004/233 ;

The said Model ( see the figure given below ) is a strain gauge type load cell based non- automatic weighing instrument (Table top type ) with a maximum capacity of 1500g and minimum capacity of 4g . The verification scale interval ( e ) is 200mg. It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The light emitting diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50- hertz alternate current power supply;

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

Further , in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg to 2g or with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k, k being positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 ( 111 )/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 10093 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष4, 1926

नईदिल्ली, 3 दिसम्बर, 2004

का० आ० 3281.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स सांघी योशेंग वेइंग एपरेटस कं. लिमिटेड, कमरा नं. 201 , बिल्डिंग सं. 10 सं. 45, झुआन जिंन रोड मिन्हॉग , शंघाई, चीन द्वारा विनिर्मित और मैसर्स ई जी कांटावाला प्रा. लिमिटेड, सर्वे सं. 28/1 , दामोदर नगर, ओल्ड नगर मुंडधाना रोड, खराड़ी, पुणे -411014 द्वारा भारत में आयातित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " पी एल टी " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित, अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल काजिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " ईगल " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2004/234 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) विकृत ( स्ट्रेन ) गेज प्रकार भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 150 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 500 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 10 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्तिहै जिसका शत प्रतिश्त व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्यकार

Class 11

Cap Max: 150 kg . edd = 10 g . Cap Min : 500 g

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबन्द भी किया जाएगा ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 111 )/2003 ]

पी० ए ० कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 10094

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii )]

New Delhi , the 3rd December , 2004

S.O. 3281. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) , is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

تو Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic , weighing instrument ( Platform type ) with digital indication of " PLT " series of high accuracy (Accuracy class - II ) and with brand name " EAGLE " ( herein after referred to as the said model ) , manufacturedby M/s Shanghi Yousheng Weighing Apparatus Co. Limited, Room No. 201 , Bldg . No. 10 No. 45, Zhuan Xin Road, Minhang , Shanghai , China and imported in India by M/ s E. G. Kantawalla Pvt . Limited, Survey No. 28/1 , Damodar Nagar , Old Nagar Mundhwa road Kharadi, pune -411014 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 2004/234;

The said Model ( see the figure given below ) is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform type ) with a maximum capacity of 150kg and minimum capacity of 500g . The verification scale interval ( c ) is 10g . It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode LED ) indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 -Hertz alternate current power supply;

Class 1

Cap Max: 150 kg . edd 10 g. Cap Min : 500 g

addition to sealing the stamping plate scaling shall also be done to prevent the opening of the machine for fraudulent practices .

Further , in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make , and performance of same series with maximum capacity ranging above upto 50kg to 300kg and with number of verification scale interval ( 11) in the range of 5000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k , k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 111 ) /2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 10095

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 3 दिसम्बर, 2004

का० आ ० 3282.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स सांघीयोशेंग वेइंग एपरेटस कं. लिमिटेड , कमरा नं. 201 , बिल्डिग सं. 10 सं. 45, झुआन जिंन रोड, मिन्हॉग , शंघाई, चीन द्वारा विनिर्मित और मैसर्स ई जी कांटावाला प्रा . लिमिटेड, सर्वे सं. 28/1 , दामोदर नगर, ओल्ड नगर मुंडधाना रोड, खराड़ी, पुणे 411014 द्वारा भारत में आयातित उच्च यथार्थता (यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " सिल्वर " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित, अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के. मॉडल का जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " इंगल " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/ 2004/235 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) विकृत ( स्ट्रेन ) गेज प्रकार भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 15 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 50 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 1 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्तिहै जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है। उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

कीजाएगी । स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबन्द और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्मित किया गया है विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो और 1 मि. ग्रा . से 50 मि.ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 5000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि.ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50 , 000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन माप मान अंतराल सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. तक को अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2×10 याः 5 × 10 , के हैं, जो घनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 111 ) /2003 ]

पी० ए ० कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 10096

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA 4 , 1926

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 3rd December, 2004

S.O. 3282. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below), is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models ) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of st stained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferredby Sub-sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of self- indicating non- automatic , ( Table top type) weighing instrument with digital indication of " SILVER " series of high accuracy (Accuracy class - II) and with brand name " EAGLE " ( hercin after referred to as the said model ) , manufacturedby M/ s Shanghi Yousheng Weighing Apparatus Co. Limited, Room No. 201 , Bldg . No. 10 No. 45 , Zhuan Xin Road , Minhang, Shanghai , China and imported in India by M/ s E. G. Kantawalla Pvt. Limited, Survey No. 28/1 , Damodar Nagar , Old Nagar Mundhwa Road , Kharadi , Pune -411014 and which is assigned the the approval mark IND/09 / 2004/235 ;

The said Model ( see the figure given below ) is strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with a maximum capacity of 15kg and minimum capacity of 50g . The verification scale interval (c) is 1g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 -Hertz alternate current power supply ;

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

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

[F. No. WM-21 ( 111 )/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4, 1926

10097

नईदिल्ली, 3 दिसम्बर, 2004

का० आ० 3283.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स सांघी योशेंग वेइंग एपरेटस कं, लिमिटेड, कमरा नं. 201 , बिल्डिंग सं. 10 सं. 45 , झुआन जिंन रोड मिन्हॉग , शंघाई, चीन द्वारा विनिर्मित और मैसर्स ई जी कांटावाला प्रा. लिमिटेड, सर्वे सं. 28/1 , दामोदर नगर, ओल्ड नगर मुंडधाना रोड, खराड़ी, पुणे 411014 द्वारा भारत में आयातित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " टी" श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित, अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) केमॉडल का जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " ईगल " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2004/236 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) विकृत (स्ट्रेन ) गेज प्रकार भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 2 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्तिहै जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

कीजाएगी। स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबन्द और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्मित किया गया है विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो और 1 मि. ग्रा. से 50 मि.ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 5000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि.ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50 000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन माप मान अंतराल सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 * या 5× 10 , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 111 )/2003 ]

पी० ए० कृष्णामूर्ति , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 10098

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

Ncw Delhi , the 3rd December, 2004

S.O. 3283. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) , is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections ( 7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act . the Central Government hercby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of self- indicating, non - automatic , (Table top type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " T " series of high accuracy (Accuracy class - II ) and with brand name " EAGLE " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Shanghi Yousheng Weighing Apparatus Co. Limited , Room No. 201 Bldg . No. 10 No. 45 Zhuan Xin Road, Minhang , Shanghai , China and imported in India by M/ s. E.G. Kantawalla Pvt. Limited, Survey No. 28/1 , Damodar Nagar, Old Nagar Mundhwa Road, Kharadi , Pune - 411014 and which is assisgned the approval mark IND /09 / 2004/236 :

The said Model ( see the figure given below ) is strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table Top type ) with a maximum capacity of 30 kg and minimum capacity of 100 g. The verification scale interval (e ) is 2 g . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The light Emitting Diode ( LED) indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts, and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

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

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

[F. No. WM - 21 ( 111 )/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 10099 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 3 दिसम्बर, 2004

का० आ० 3284.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स सांघीयोशेंग वेइंग एपरेटस कं लिमिटेड, कमरा नं० 201 , बिल्डिंग सं ० 10 सं० 45 , झुआन जिन रोड, मिन्हॉग , शंघाई, चीन द्वारा विनिर्मित और मैसर्स ईजीकांटावाला प्रा. लिमिटेड, सर्वे सं . 28/1, दामोदर नगर, ओल्ड नगर मुंडधाना रोड, खराडी, पुणे 411014 द्वारा भारत में आयातित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " पी एल टी " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " इंगल " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2004/ 237 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति ) देखें विकृत (स्ट्रेन ) गेज प्रकार भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबल दाप प्रकार) तोलन उपक्करण है। इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 75 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 10 ग्रा. है। इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्तिहै जिसका शत - प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

Cap Max: 75 kg . edd 10 g . Cap Min : 200 g

कीजाएगी । स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने केकेंखिए भी सीलबन्द ncitavay trolubest और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्मित किया गया है विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई" मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन माप मान अंतराल सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से 300 कि.ग्रा . तंक अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और "ई" मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 111 ) /2003 ]

पी० ए० कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 3684 G1/2004-5 100100

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART 11-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 3rd December , 2004

S.O. 3284.- Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) , is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models ) Rules . 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

T Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of the self indicating , non -automatic (Platform type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " PLT " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " EAGLE " ( herein referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/ s Sanghi Yousheng Weighing Apparatus Co. Limited , Room No. 201 , Bldg . No. 10 No. 45 , Zhuan Xin Road, Minhang , Shanghai , China and imported in India by M/ s E. G. Kantawalla Pvt . Limited, Survey No. 28/1 , Damodar Nagar, Old Nagar Mundhwa Road, Kharadi , Pune - 411014 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2004/237 ;

The said model (see the figure given below) is a strain gauge type load cell based weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 75 kg . and minimum capacity of 200g. The verification scale interval (e) is 10g . It has a tare device with 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Cap Max : 75 kg . edd 10 g . Cap Min: 200 g

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

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

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 111 )/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 10101 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, ३ दिसम्बर, 2004

का०आ ० 3285.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स सांधी योशेंग वेइंग एपरेटस कं० लिमिटेड, कमरा नं० 201 , बिल्डिग सं ० 10 सं० 45, झुआन जिन रोड, मिन्हाँग , शंघाई, चीन द्वारा विनिर्मित और मैसर्स ई जी कांटावाला प्रा० लिमिटेड, सर्वे सं ० 28/1 , दामोदर नगर, ओल्ड मगर मुंडधामा रोड, खराबी, पुणे -411014 द्वारा भारत में आयातित उच्च यथार्थता ( बथार्थता वर्ग -11 ) वाले " एपी सी " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित , तोलम उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " इंगल " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/2004/ 238 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) विकृत ( स्ट्रेन ) गेज प्रकार भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित (टेवल टाप प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का भान 2 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत - प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

277

2000

HOP

कीजाएगी । स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबन्द और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्मित किया गया है विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो और 1 मि.ग्रा. से 50 मि.ग्रा. बैंक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 5,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि.ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 3,000 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन माप मान अंतराल सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई ' कान 1 × 10*, 2×10*, घा × 10%, के हैं , जी घनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा० सं० डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 111 )/ 2003 ]

पी० ए ० कृष्णामूर्ति , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 10102

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 3rd December , 2004

S.O.3285. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below), is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models ) Ruics , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and io render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of self indicating , non- automatic ( Table top type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of "APC " series of high accuracy (Accuracy class - II ) and with brand name "EAGLE ( berein after referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/ s Sanghi Yousheng Weighing Apparatus Co Linned. Room No. 201 , Bldg . No. 10 No. 45 , Zhuan Xin Road , Minhang, Shanghai , China and imported in Indiaby M/s E. G. Kartawalla Pvt. Limited, Survey No. 28/1 , Damodar Nagar , Old Nagar Mundhwa Road. Kharadi . Pune -411014 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09 /2004 /238;

The said model ( see the figure given below) is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument ( Table top type ) with a maximum capacity of 30 kg. and minimum capacity of 100g . The verification scale interval ( e ) is 2g . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED ) indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

In addition to scaling the stamping plate scaling shall also be done to prevent the opening of the machine for frauduler practices .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government herby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg. and with number of verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 100 to 5,000 for ' e ' value of 1 mg . to 50 mg . and with number of verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 3,000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg. or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10 % , 2 × 10 or 5 × 10%, being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured .

[ F. No. WM- 21 ( 111 )/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Directer of Legal Metrology 10103 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 3 दिसम्बर, 2004

का०आ० 3286.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स सरटोरियस मेकाट्रोनिक्स इण्डिया प्रा. लि. , 10 तीसरा फेज, पीनिया, 6वां मेन के आई ए डी बी इण्डस्ट्रियल एरिया, बंगलौर-560058 द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " सी पी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित, तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " सरटोरियस " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/2003/626 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

000

उक्त मॉडल एक मोनोलिथिक ढांचा आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) का तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 34 कि. ग्रा. औरन्यूनतम क्षमता 50 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 1 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत- प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । द्रव क्रिस्टल प्रदर्शन ( एल सी डी) तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबन्द किया जाएगा।

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

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 224 )/2003 ]

पी० ए० कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 10104

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] New Delhi , the 3rd December, 2004

S.O. 3286. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the id report ( see the figure given below) , is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- sections (7 ) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of non- automatic (Table top type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " CP " series of high accuracy (Accuracy class - II) and with brand name " SARTORIUS " ( herein referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/ s Sartorious Mechatronics India Pvt. Ltd. , # 10, 3rd Phase, Peenya. 6th Main KIADB Industrial Area, Banglore - 560058 and which is assigned the approval mark IND / 09 /2003/626;

The said Model is a monolithic structure based non- automatic weighing instrument (Table top type ) with a inaximum capacity of 34 kg . and minimum capacity of 50g . The verification scale interval ( e) is 1g . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Liquid Crystal Display ( LCD ) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

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

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

[F. No. WM- 21 (224 )/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 10105

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 3 दिसम्बर , 2004

का०आ ० 3287. केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स फारमालाभ पैकेजिंग सिस्टम प्रा. लि. स्टार मेटल कंपाउंड, पल बी एस मार्ग , विकरोली ( पश्चिम ) मुंबई -400083 द्वारा स्वचालित भरण मशीन (पिस्टन फिलर ) वाले " वी एल एफ " श्रृंखला के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " फारमालाभ " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 / 2004/172/ समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है । उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक स्वचालित भरण मशीन ( पिस्टन फिलर ) मशीन है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 2.5 लीटर है । मशीन को द्रव जैसे औषधी, कीटनाशक आदि भरने के लिए प्रयोग किया जाता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत पर कार्य करता है ।

Pharmalab

कीजाएगी। स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन खोले जाने को रोकने के लिए भी सील और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल काविनिर्माण किया गया है , से विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 3 मि.ली. से 2.5 लीटर तक की रेंज की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 117 )/2004 ]

पी० ए० कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 10106

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4 , 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 3rd December, 2004

S.O. 3287. -Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) , is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Mcasures Act , 1976 ( 60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models ) Rules . 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7 ) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act . the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the self indicating, Automatic filling machine ( Piston Filler ) of " VLF" series with brand name "PHARMALAB" ( herein referred to as the said Model ) . manufacturedby M / s . Pharmalab Packaging System Private Limited , Star Metal Compound, LBS Marg , Vikhroli (West) . Mumbai - 410083 , Maharastra and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 2004 / 172 ;

The said Model ( See the figure given below) an automatic filling machine (Piston Filler ) and its maximum capacity is 2.5 litre . It is used for filling the liquids like pharmaceuticals , pesticides etc. The instrument operates on 230 Volts. 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Pharmalab

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

Further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accurecy and performance of same scries with capacity in the range of 3 ml . to 2.5 litre manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design , accuracy and with the same materials with which , the said approved Model has been manufactured.

[ F. No. WM - 21 ( 117)/2004 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 10107 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 3 दिसम्बर , 2004

का०आ० 3288.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

7.00 2271

अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स पल्सर टैक्नोलाजिस इण्डिया ( प्रा० ) लि० , 147/जी , 10 वी मुख्य , तीसरा ब्लॉक, कोरामगला, बंगलौर-560034 द्वारा विनिर्मित " ए एफ एम 4 ए " श्रृंखला के 5 अंकों का अंकक सूचन सहित , जिसका निष्तांक के फैक्टर 2800 प्लस प्रति कि.मी. है , सहित " टैक्सीमीटर " के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " पल्सर " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2004/254 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक " टैक्सी मीटर " है जो समय और दूरी मापने का उपकरण है जो प्राधिकृत टेरिफ के अनुसार पूरक प्रभारों की स्वतंत्रता, लगे समय अवधि और कतिपय चाल के नीचे चली दूरी के कृत्य के रूप में लोक वाहन द्वारा संदेय प्रभार की मात्रा के किसी क्षण किराये को प्रदर्शित करता है और निरंतर योग करता है ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 01 )/2004 ]

पी० ए ० कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 3684 GI/2004-6 10108

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4 , 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)]

New Delhi , the 3rd December , 2004

S.O. 3288. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Models described in the said report (see the figure given below) , is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

2271

100

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of " Taxi Meter " with 5 digit digital indication ( hcreinreferred to as the Model ) , of " AFM4A " series with brand name "PULSAR " and with constant ' k ' factor of 2800 pulses per kilometer manufacturedby M/s . Pulsar Technologies ( India ) Pvt . Ltd. , 147/G, 10th Main. 3rd Block. Koramangala, Banglore - 560034 , Karnataka and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/04/254;

The said Model " Taxi meter " is a time and distance measuring instrument which totalizes continuously and indicates the fare , at any moment of journey, the charges payable by the passenger of a public vehicle as a function of the distance travelled below a certain specd and the length of the time occupied , independent of supplementary charges according to the authorized tariffs .

[F. No. WM - 21 (01 )/2004]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 10109

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 8 दिसम्बर , 2004

का०आ ० 3289.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स शेखर ब्रदर्स, प्लाट नं. 58 , सेक्टर 6 , फरीदाबाद, हरियाणा द्वारा विनिर्मित " एस बी डी वी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , डिस्पेंसिंग पंप के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " शेखर ब्रदर्स " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/2004/253 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल अंकन सूचन सहित सबमर्सिबल प्रकार का डिस्पेंसिंग पंप है । जिसमें समायोजन के लिए श्रासमाधन हेतु धनात्मक विस्थापन मीटर दिया गया है । यह धन और आयतन के लिए प्रीसेट युक्ति है । इसकी अधिकतम प्रवाह क्षमता की दर 90 लीटर/ मिनट है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड (एल. ई. डी. ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । अधिकतम आयतन और मूल्य प्रदर्शन 6 अंकीय और छोटे से छोटा पदर्शन 10 मि.ली. है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

['फा.सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 (53 )/2004 ]

पी० ए० कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 10110

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 8th December , 2004

S.O. 3289.-Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) , is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -sections ( 7 ) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of Dispensing Pump with digital indication of " SBDP " series with brand name " Shekhar Brothers " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model) manufactured by M/ s Shekhar Brothers, Plot No. 58 , Sector -6, Faridabad, Haryana and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2004/253 ;

The said model is a submersible type dispensing pump with digital display having a positive displacement meter provided for calibration wheel for adjustment. The maximum flow rate is 90 litre per minute . It has preset device for money and volume . The display is of light Emitting Diode ( LED ) type . The maximum volume and price display is in 6 digits and the smallest display is 10ml. The instruments operates on 230V, 50Hertz alternate current power supply. In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing is also done on the metering unit and totalized to prevent the fraudulent practices.

[F. No. WM - 21 (53)/2004]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 10111

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, १ दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3290.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स साल्टर इण्डिया प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, ए-67, माउण्ट कैलाश, नई दिल्ली -110065 द्वारा विनिर्मित साधारण यथार्थता वर्ग ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले स्वतः , अस्वचालित समतुल्य अनुरूप सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( नलिकाकार प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " साल्टर " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/ 2004/216 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है;

LALTER

उक्तमॉडल स्प्रिंग आधारित समतुल्य सूचन सहित नलिकाकार तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 25 किग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 1 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 100 ग्रा. है । स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोले जाने को रोकने के लिए भी सील की जा सकती है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से, जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 1000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान ( एन ) अंतराल सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई" मान 1 × 10 , 2× 10 * या 5 × 10 * के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 20 )/2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 10112

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii )]

New Delhi , the 9th December, 2004

S.O. 3290. - Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority , is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to main- tain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and ( 8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the non - automatic weighing instru- ment (Tabular type ) with analogte indication of ordinary accuracy (Accuracy class - III) and with brand name " SALTER " (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s. Salter India Private Limited, A-67, Mount Kailash, New Delhi - 110 065 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2004/216;

SALTER

D The said model is a spring based non - automatic weighing instrument (Tabular type ) with analogue indication . Its maximum capacity is 25kg and minimum capacity of Ikg . The verification scale interval ( e) is 100g .

In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing is also done to stop the opening of the machine for fraudu- lent practices.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50kg with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 100 to 1000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2x10 or 5 × 10 * , k being a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM- 21 (20 )/2003]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 10113 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 9 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3291.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 (1976 का 60) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स साल्टर इण्डिया प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, ए-67, माउण्ट कैलाश , नई दिल्ली -110065 द्वारा विनिर्मित साधारण यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- IV ) वाले स्वतः , अस्वचालित समतुल्य अनुरूप सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( नलिकाकार प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " साल्टर " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 /2004/217 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है;

उक्त मॉडल स्प्रिंग आधारित समतुल्य सूचन सहित व्यक्ति तोलन मशीन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 130 किग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 5 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 500 ग्रा. है । स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोले जाने को रोकने के लिए भी सील की जा सकती है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से , जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के" ई " मान के लिए 100 से 1000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान ( एन ) अंतराल सहित 100 कि.ग्रा. से 130 किलोग्राम तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 *, के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 20 )/2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 10114

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4 , 1926

[PART 11 - SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 9th December, 2004

S.O. 3291. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in confor- mity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ), and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of non - automatic weighing instrument (Person weighing inachine ) with analogue indication of ordinary accuracy (Accuracy class - IV) and with brand name " SALTER " ( herein referred to as the said model ) , manufacturedby M/s . Salter India Private Limited , A- 67 , Mount Kailash , New Delhi - 110 065 and which is assigned the approval mark IND /09 /2004/ 217;

The said model is a spring based non - automatic weighing instrument (Person weighing machine ) with analogue indication . Its maximum capacity is 130kg and minimum capacity of 5kg. The verification scale interval ( e) is 500g.

In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing also is done to stop the opening of the machine for fraudu- lent practices.

Further, in exercise of the power conferred by Sub -section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity in the range of 100kg to 130kg with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 100 to 1000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5x10% , k being a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM - 21 ( 20)/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 10115 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष, 4, 1926

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 9 दिसम्बर , 2004

का. आं. 3292.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसेप्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्यहः समाधान होटगया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60) तथा बाट और भाषे मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा ; br

अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स साल्टर इण्डिया प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, ए-67 , माउण्ट कैलाश, नई दिल्ली-110065 द्वारा विनिर्मित साधारण यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग-IV) वालेस्वतः, अस्वचालिय समतुल्य अनुरूप सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( नलिकाकार प्रकार ) के माडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " साल्टर " हैं ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया हैं ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09 / 2004 / 218 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदननप्रमाण-प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है;

उक्त मॉडल स्प्रिंग आधारित अनुरूप सूचन सहित नलिकाकार तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 10 किग्रा, है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 500 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 50 ग्रा . है । स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन की खोलें जानें को रोकने के लिए भी सील की जा सकती हैं । alebo d और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करने हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे तक्तः अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेल यथार्थता और कार्यपालम के तौलने उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 1000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान ( एन ) अंतराल संहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णा या शुन्य के समतुल्य है dia breast

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 20 )/2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 3684 GI/2004-7 10116

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4 , 1926

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 9th December, 2004

S.O. 3292. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority , is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in confor- mity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the non - automatic weighing instru- ment with analogue indication of ordinary accuracy (Accuracy class - IV) and with brand name " SALTER " ( herein re- ferred to as the said model ) , manufacturedby M/ s . Salter India Private Limited, A- 67, Mount Kailash , New Delhi - 110 065 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /2004/218 ;

The said model is a spring based non - automatic weighing instrument with analogue indication . Its maximum capacity is 10kg and minimum capacity of 500g. The verification scale interval ( e) is 50g .

In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing is also is done to stop the opening of the machine for fraudulent practices .

Further, in exercise of the power conferred by Sub- section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 1000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k , k being a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 20)/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 10117 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4 , 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

कोयला मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 16 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3293.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम, 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 7 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन भारत सरकार के कोयला मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्यांक का.आ. 1079 , तारीख 20 अप्रैल , 2004 , जो भारत के राजपत्र, भाग II- खण्ड 3 उपखण्ड ( ii) तारीख 1 मई, 2004 में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट, परिक्षेत्र की भूमि और ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के समस्त अधिकारों के अर्जन करने के आशय की सूचना दीथी;

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार का, पूर्वोक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् और महाराष्ट्र सरकार से परामर्श करने के पश्चात्यह समाधान हो गया है, कि इससे संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित 305.80 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 755.63 एकड़ ( लगभग ) माप वाली भूमि और अर्जित ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के समस्त अधिकार अर्जित किए जाने चाहिए;

अतः , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 9 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है, कि इससे संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित 305.80 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 755.63 एकड़ ( लगभग ) भाप वाली भूमि और अर्जित ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के सभी अधिकार अर्जित किए जाते हैं ।

इस अधिसूचना के अधीन आने वाले क्षेत्र के रेखांक सं. सी.- I ( ई ) / III/जेजेजेआर/720-0804 तारीख 4 अगस्त, 2004 का निरीक्षण कलेक्टर, चंद्रपुर ( महाराष्ट्र ) के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक, 1 काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट कोलकाता ( पिन -700001 ) के कार्यालय में या वेस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड ( राजस्व विभाग ) , कोल ईस्टेट, सिविल लाईन्स, नागपुर -440001 ( महाराष्ट्र ) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकता है ।

अनुसूची

पौनीविस्तार विवृत परियोजन।

बल्लारपुर क्षेत्र

जिला चंद्रपुर ( महाराष्ट्र )

(रेखांक सं . सी. - 1 ( ई )/ III/जेजेजेआर/ 720-0804 तारीख 4 अगस्त, 2004)

सभी अधिकार: -

टिप्पणी

जिला

क्षेत्र हेक्टर में

तहसील

क्रम ग्राम का नाम सं.

पटवारी सर्किल संख्या

भाग

305.80

1 साकरी

चंद्रपुर

राजूरा

कुल क्षेत्र 305.80 हेक्टर ( लगभग)

या

755.63 एकड़ ( लगभग ) ग्राम साकरी में अर्जित किए गए प्लॉट संख्यांक:

78, 79, 80 , 86/ 1-86/2, 87/1-87/2ए-87/2 बी- 87/2सी, 88/1-88/2-88/3, 89, 90/ 1-90/2-91 , 92/ 1-92/2 92/ 3, 93/1-93/2-93/3-93 /4, 94 , 95, 96, 97 98 , 106/1-106/2 , 107, 108 , 109/ए- 109/बी, 110/ए- 110/बी, 111/ 1-111/2-111/3- , 112/1-112/2 , 113/1-113/2-113/3 , 114, 117, 118, 123 , 124, 125, 126/1- , 126/2, 126/3 , 127 , 128 /1-128 /2 , 129 , 130, 131 , 132/1-132/2 , 133/1- 133/2, 134, 135/1-135 /2 , 136, 137 , 138 /1- 138/2 , 139/1-139/2 , 140/1-140/2-140/3-140/4-140/ 5 , 141 , 142, 143 , 144, 145 , 146/1-146/2- 2-174 , 175 , 176/1-176/2 176/3 176/4 , 177 , 178/1-178/2 , 179/1-179/2 , 180/1-180/2 , 181 /1-181/ 146/3, 149 भाग, 150/1 ए 150/1 बी- 150/2 , 151 , 152, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158/1- 158/2 158/3 , 159/1- 159/2 , 160/1-160/2 , 161 , 162/1-162/2 , 163/1-163/2-163/3-163/4, 164/ 1ए- 164/ 1बी- 164/2-164/3 , 165/1-165/2-165/3 , 166, 167, 168 , 169, 170, 171/ 1-171/2-171/3-171/4-172/1-172/2, 173/1-173/ 2-181 /3 , 182 , 183 , 184, 185 , 186/1-186/2-186/3 , 187/1-187/2-187/3 , 188/1-188/2ए- 188/2बी, 189 , 190 , 191 /1-191/2, 192/1-192/2 , 193 , 194/1-194/2-194/3-194/4 , 195/1-195/2 , 196/1-196/ 2 196/3-196/ 4, 197/1-197/2-197/3- 197/4, 198/1-198 /2 , 199 , 200, 214/1-214/2, 215 / 1 ए- 215/ 1 बी-215/2 , 216/1-216/2 , 217/1-217/2-217/3-217/4-217/5 , 265, 266, 267/ 1ए- 267/1 बी-267/1सी- 10118

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] 267/1 डी 267/2-267/3 , 279 /1-279/2-279/3 , 280/1-280/2, 281/1ए- 281/ 1बी 281/2ए- 281/2बी- 281/3 ए-281/3बी , 282 , 283 , 284/1-284/2 , 285/1-235/2-285/3 285/4.

सीमा वर्णन:

क-ख:

रेखा बिन्दु ' क' से आरम्भ होती है और ग्राम साकरी और पौनी की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा के साथ-साथ जाती है और साकरी नाला को पार करती है तथा पीडब्ल्यूडी रोड़ को पार करते हुए साकरी नाले के पूर्वी किनारे के साथ जाती है और बिन्दु ' ख ' पर मिलती है।

ख -ग:

रेखा ग्राम साकरी से होती हुई साकरी नाला के पूर्वी किनारे के साथ हुए प्लॉट संख्या 214/1-214/ 2, 217/1-217/2-217/3-217/4-217/ 5 , 216/ 1-216/ 2 , की बाहरी सीमा के साथ जाती है और बिन्दु ' ग ' पर मिलती है।

ग-घ

रेखा ग्राम साकरी से होती हुई प्लॉट संख्या 216/1-216/2, 279/1-279/2-279/3 , 280/1-280/2 , 281/ 1 ए-282/ 1 बी-281/2ए-281/2 बी- 281/3 ए-281/3 बी, 267/1 ए-267/1 बी-267/1 सी-267/ 1 डी- 267/2-267/3, 265 की बाहरी सीमा के साथ जाते हुए साकरी नाला को पार करती है और बिन्दु'घ ' पर मिलती है ।

घ -ङ: रेखा ग्राम साकरी से होते हुए साकरी नाला के पश्चिमी किनारे से होते हुए प्लॉट संख्या 285/1 285/2-285/3 , 285/4 की बाह्य सीमा के साथ जाते हुए सीजनल वॉटर कोर्स को पार करती है और प्लॉट संख्या 158/1-158/2 158/3 , 157, 156, 155 , 154, 152, 150/1ए- 150/1बी- 150/2 , की बाह्य सीमा के साथ - साथ जाती है तथा प्लॉट संख्या 149 भाग में से गुजरती हुई प्लॉट संख्याक 146/1-146/2-146/3, की बाहरी सीमा के साथ जाती है और बिन्दु ' ग ' पर मिलती है ।

ङ - च: रेखा ग्राम साकरी से होते हुए प्लॉट संख्या 146/1-146/2-146/3 , 145 , 144, 123 , 124 , 125 , 127, 118 , 117, 114, 113/1-113/2-113/3 , की बाहरी सीमा के साथ- साथ जाती है और पीडब्ल्यूडी सड़कों की पार करते हुए प्लॉट संख्या 106/1-106/2 , की बाह्य के साथ होते हुए बिन्दु ' च ' पर मिलती है ।

च-क:

रेखा ग्राम साकरी से होते हुए प्लॉट संख्या 106/1-106/2 , 107, 98, 95, 94, 78, 79, 80,87/1-87/2ए-87/2बी-87/2सी, 86/1-86/2, की बाहरी सीमा के साथ जाती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु ' क ' पर मिलती है ।

[सं. -43015/7/2001/पी. आर. आई. डब्ल्यू. ]

राजीव शर्मा , संयुक्त सचिव

MINISTRY OF COAL

NewDelhi , the 16th December , 2004

S.O. 3293. Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal number S.O. 1079 dated the 20th April , 2004, issued under sub - section ( 1 ) of section 7 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act , 1957 (20 of 1957) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and published in the Gazette of India, Part- II, section - 3 , sub- section (ii ) , dated the 1st May, 2004, the Central Government gave notice of its intention to acquire lands and all rights in the locality specified in the Schedule appended to that notification ;

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

And whereas the Central Government after considering the report aforesaid and after consulting the Government of Maharashtra is satisfied that the lands measuring 305.80 hectares ( approximately ) or 755.63 acres (approximately) and all rights in or over such lands as described in Schedule appended hereto should be acquired ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-Section ( 1 ) section 9 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that the land measuring 305.80 hectares ( approximately) or 755.63 acres (approximately) and all rights in or over such lands as deseribed in Schedule are hereby acquired ; ::

2. The plan bearing number C - 1 ( E)/III/ JJJR/ 720/0804 dated the 4th August , 2004 of the area covered by this notification may be inspected in the office of the Collector, Chandrapur (Maharashtra) or in the office of the Coal Controller , 1 , Council House Street , Kolkata (Pin 700 001 ) or in the office of the Western Coalfields Limited (Revenue Department ) , Coal Estate , Civil Lines , Nagpur -440 001 (Maharashtra).

10119

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4 , 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

SCHEDULE

Pauni Expansion Opencast Project

Ballarpur Area

District- Chnadrapur (Maharashtra)

(Plan No. C- I (E)/III/ JJJR/ 720 / 0804 dated the 4th August, 2004) .

All Rights

Remarks

District

Tahsil

Name of village

Area in ? Hectares

Serial No.

Patwari circle Number

Part

305.80

Chandrapur

01. Sakri

Rajura

Total area : 305.80 hectares

(approximately)

or755.63 acres

(approximately) Plot numbers acquired in village Sakri :

78, 79 , 80, 86/1-86/2 , 87/1-87/ 2A- 87/2B- 87/2C , 88/1-88/2-88/3 , 89 , 90/1-90/2-91 , 92/1-92/292/ 3 , 93/1-93/2-93/3-93/4 ,94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 106/1-106/2 , 107 , 108 , 109/A- 109 /B- 110 /A - 110/B, 111 /1111/2111/3- , 112/1-112/2, 113/1-113/2-113/3 , 114, 117, 118, 123, 124, 125, 126/1-126/2 126/3 , 127 , 128/1-128/2, 129 , 130 , 131 , 132/1-132/2, 133/1-133/2 , 134 , 135/1-135/2 , 136, 137, 138/1-138/2 , 139/1-139/2 , 140/1-140/2-/140/3-140/4-140/ 5 , 141 , 142, 143 , 144 , 145, 146/1-146/2-146/3 , 149 Part , 150 / 1A- 150/1B- 150 / 2 , 151 , 152 , 154 , 155 , 156 , 157 , 158 /1-158/2 158/3 , 159/1- 159/2 , 160/1- 160/2 , 161 , 162/1-162 /2 , 163/1-163/2-163/3-163 /4 , 164/ 14-164/1B- 164/2-164/3, 165/1-165/2-165/3 , 166, 167, 168, 169 , 170, 171 / 1-171 /2-171/3-171/ 4-172/ 1-172 /2,173/1-173/2-174, 175, 176/1-176/2 176/3 176/4, 177, 178/ 1-178/2 , 179/ 1-179/2 , 180/1-180/2, 181/1-181/2- 181/3 , 182, 183, 184, 185, 186/1-186/2-186/3 , 187/1-187/2-187/3,188/ 11188/2A- 188/28 , 189, 190, 191 / 1-191 /2 , 192/1-192/2 , 193,194/1-194/2-194/3-194/4, 195 / 1-195/2 , 1961-196/2 196 /3- 196/4, 197 /1-197/2-197/3-197/ 4, 198/ 1-198 /2, 199, 200, 214/1- 214/2, 215 / 1A- 215 /1B - 215 /2 , 216/1-216/2 , 217 / 1-217 / 2-217/ 3-217 / 4-217/ 5 , 265 , 266, 267/ 1A- 267/ 1B - 267/ IC- 267 / 1D- 267/2-267/3,279/1-279/2-279/3 , 280/1-280 /2 , 281 / 1A- 281/1B- 281/2A- 281/2B- 281 /3A- 281/3B , 282, 283 , 284/1-284/2,285/ 1-285/2-285/3 285/4.

Boundary description :

A-B :

Line start from point ' A' and passes along the common village boundary of village Sakri and Pauni crosses Sakri Nallah proceeds along the common village boundary of village Sakri and Pauni then crosses .PWD Road along the Eastern Bank of Sakri Nallah and meets at point 'B ' .

B-C:

Line passes through village Sakri along with the Eastern Bank of Sakri Nallah and outer boundary ofplot numbers 214/ 1-214/2, 217/1-217/2-217/3-217/4-217/ 5 , 216/1-216/ 2 and meets at point ' C' .

C-D:

Line passes through village Sakri along the outer boundary of plot numbers 216/ 1-216/2 , 279/1-279/2-279/3 , 280/1280/2 , 281 / 1A- 281 /1B - 281 /2A- 281/ 2B- 281 /3A- 281/ 3B, 267 /1A- 267/1B- 267/1C- 267/1D- 267/2-267/3 , 265 , crosses Sakri Nallah and meets at point D'.

D-E:

Line passes through village Sakri along the Westem Bank of Sakri Nallah and then proceeds along the outer boundary of plet numbers 285/ 1-285/2-285/3 285/4 , crosses seasonal water course and then proceeds along the outer boundary of plot numbers 158/1-158/2 158/3 , 157, 156, 155, 154, 152 , 150/ 1A- 150/1B- 150/2 , then proceeds through plot number 149 part and then proceeds along the outer boundary of plot numbers 146/ 1-146/2-146/ 3, and meets at point 'E' .

E-F:

Line passes through village Sakri along the outer boundary of plot numbers 146/1-146/2- 146/3, 145, 144, 123, 124, 125 , 127 , 118, 117 , 114, 113/1-113 /2-113/3 , crosses PWD Road and passes along the outer boundary of płot number 106/ 1- 106/2 , and meets at point F

F-A:

Line passes through village Sakri along the outer boundary of plot numbers 106/ 1-106/2 , 107, 98 , 95 , 94, 78 , 79 , 80, 87/1-87/2A- 87/2B- 87/20,86/ 1-86/2 , and meets at starting point 'A' .

[No. 430.15 /7/2001 -PRIWI

RAJIV SHARMA , Jt . Secy.

10120

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii ) ] पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 21 नवम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3294.- केन्द्रीय सरकार , पैट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50) की धारा 2 के खण्ड ( क ) के अनुसरण में तारीख 20 जनवरी , 2001 को भारत के राजपत्र में प्रकाशित , भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का० आ० 94 में निम्नलिखित संशोधन करती है , इसके उपरान्त यह अधिसूचना का० आ ० संख्या 2839 तारीख 04 अक्तूबर , 2003 द्वारा संशोधित की गई है, अर्थात्ः-

उक्त अधिसूचना की अनुसूची में , स्तम्भ 1 में ," श्री सतीश कुमार " शब्दों के स्थान पर , " श्री दलेल सिंह , तहसीलदार , गन्नौर " शब्द रखे जाएंगे ।

[फा. सं. आर-25011/44/2002-ओ.आर -1 ]

रेणुका कुमार, अवर सचिव Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas

New Delhi , the 21st November, 2004

S. O. 3294.- In pursuance of clause (a) of section 2 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land ) Act , 1962 (50 of 1962 ) , the Central Government hereby makes the following amendments in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 94, published in the Gazette of India Part II , Section 3 , Sub - section ( ii ) dated the 20th January , 2001 , and subsequently amended vide No. S.O. 2839 dated 04th October , 2003 , namely : -

In the said notification , in the Schedule , under column 1 , for the words, " Shri Satish Kumar " , the words " Shri Dalel Singh , Tehsildar , Ganaur " , shall be substituted .

[No. R -25011/44/2002 - O.R. - I ] RENUKA KUMAR , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 15 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3295.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) की धारा 6 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसुचना संख्या का.आ. और तारीख की नीचे दी गई अनुसूची में यथाउल्लिखित तारीखीं की अधिसुचना संख्या का.आ. द्वारा उन अधिसूचनाओं से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन का अधिकार प्राप्त किया था;

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का 10121

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

प्रयोग करते हुए , उक्त भूमियों में जी सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त है , उपयोग का अधिकार इंडियन ऑयल कॉपौरेशन में निहित किया था;

और सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने केन्द्रीय सरकार को रिपोर्ट दी है कि पश्चिमी बंगाल राज्य के हलदिया से बिहार राज्य के बरौनी तक पेट्रोलियम (क्रूड ) परिवहन के प्रयोजन के लिए ( पश्चिमी बंगाल राज्य में, ) उक्त भुमियों में पाइपलाइन बिछाई जा चुकी है। अतः , इन भूमियों में प्रचालन की समाप्ति की जाए जिसका संक्षिप्त विवरण इस अधिसुचना की संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट किया जाता है;

अतः, अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , पेट्रोलियम पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) नियम, 1963 के नियम 4 के स्पष्टीकरण 1 के अधीन अपेक्षानुसार उक्त अनुसूची के स्तंभ 8 में उल्लिखित तारीखी की प्रचालन की समाप्ति की तारीखों के रूप में घोषित करती है ।

अनुसूची

गांव का नाम

पुलिस थाना का. आं.सं० एबं दिनांक

क्र. सं.

जिला

राज्य

अधिकारिता

सूची संख्या

1849

सुताहाटा

सपुआ

दबारीवेरिया

सुताहाटा 26.07.1997

हादिया

सुताहाटा

बार बासुदेबपुर

गोरांखली

सुताहाटा

मनोहरपुर

चौलखोला

सुताहाटा

किस्मत शिवरामनगर

सुताहाटा

147

सुताहाटा

शोभारामपुर

170

सुताहाटा

तेंतुलबेरिया

किस्मत शिवरामनगर

सुताहाटा 691 31.03.2001

146

कसवेरिया

सुताहाटा

गोरांखली

सुताहाटा

चौलखोला

सुताहाटा

प्रचालन की समाप्ति की तारीख 6

8 पश्चिमी वंगाल 15.04.2000 मिदनापुर

15.04.2000 मिदनापुर पश्चिमी वंगाल

पश्चिमी वंगाल 15.04.2000 मिदनापुर

15.04.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

27.05.2000 मिदनापुर पश्चिमी वंगाल

27.05.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

27.05.2000 पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

24.02.2000 मिदनापुर पश्चिमी वंगाल

29.02.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 01.08.2002 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 28.05.2002 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 01.08.2002 मिदनापुर THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA4 , 1926

오

सुताहाटा

बार बासुदेबपुर

सुताहाटा

मनोहरपुर

डिहिशिवरामनगर

सुताहाटा

कुनारपुर

692

व्रजलालचक

सुताहाटा 31.03.2001

बाडसुन्दरा

सुताहाटा

ईश्वरदह जलपाइ

सुताहाटा

काष्ठखाली

सुताहाटा

आनन्दपुर

सुताहाटा

कुनारपुर

170

787

सुताहाटा

तेंतुलवेतिया

किस्मत शिबरामनगर

18.04.1998

सुताहाटा

मनोहरपुर

गोरांखली

सुताहाटा

सपुआ

170

सुताहाटा तेंतुलवेरिया

2678 18.10.1997

1849

148

महीशादल

कालीकाकुण्डु

26.07.1997

161

लाख्या

महीशादल

146

चानपी

महीशादल

144

महीशादल

झाऊपतरा

136

महीशादल

काकुरदाहा

138

बागदा

महीशादल

137

महीशादल

कचंनपुर

130

महीशादल

राजारामपुर

124

महीशादल

ताजपुर

123

महीशादल

मालुवासन

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii) ]

28.05.2002 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 02.03.2003 मिदनापुर

01.08.2002 मिदनापुर पश्चिमी वंगाल

18.01.2002 मिदनापुर पश्चिमी वंगाल

18.01.2002 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

18.01.2002 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 18.01.2002 मिदनापुर

18.01.2002 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

18.01.2002 पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

18.01.2002 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

29.02.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

01.08.2002

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

27.05.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

15.04.2000

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

15.04.2000

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 29.02.2000 मिदनापुर

10.06.2000

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 06.06.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी चंगाल 10.06.2000 मिदनापुर

02.06.2000

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

02.06.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

23.06.2000

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

02.06.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

08.06.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 08.06.2000 मिदनापुर

23.06.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर 10123

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष4,1926

[भाग II-खण्ड 3( ii) ]

134

महीशादल

यामुनया

143

133

महीशादल

केशवपुरजलपाइ

27.01.2001

132

महीशादल

कांचनपुरजलपाइ

130

महींशादल

राजारामपुर

129

दक्षिण काशिमनगर

महीशादल 8

787

148

महीशादल

कालीकाकुण्डु

18.04.1998

787

161

लाख्या

महीशांदल 18.04.1998

146

चानपी

महीशादल

144

महीशादल

झाउपतरा

136

महीशादल

काकुरदाहा

138

वागदा

महीशादल

137

महीशादल

कचंनपुर

130

महीशादल

राजारामपुर

महीशादल

117

1849

नाईकुण्डी

महीशादल

122

26.07.1997

माधबपुर

महीशादल

118

कुमारारा

महीशादल

101

वागमारी

महीशादल

100

धीताईवासन

महीशादल

जसनान

महीशादल

मंदरगेछिया

महीशादल

जाम्बुर वसान

महीशादल

कोलसार

महीशादल

दक्षिन श्रीकृष्णपुर

महीशादल

पुयदा

महीशादल

टीकारामपुर

महीशादल

तारागेरिया

महीशादल

गुरिया

महीशादल

नरादारी

10.

118

392

महीशादल

कुमारारा

101

वागमारी

महीशादल 21.02.1998

3684 GI/ 2004-8

8 6.

पश्चिमी वंगाल 08.06.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 13.06.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 10.06.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 06.06.2000 मिदनापुर

10.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 02.06.2000 मिदनापुर

02.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

23.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

02.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 08.06.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 29.05.2000 मिदनापुर

12.06.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

29.05.2000

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

29.05.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

29.05.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

29.05.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

29.05.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

29.05.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

25.05.2000

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

20.06.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

09.06.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

20.06.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

20.06.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

20.06.2000

पश्चिमी चंगाल

मिदनापुर

09.06.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

29.05.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

29.05.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर 10124

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

4 392

गुरिया

45 21.02.1998

नरादारी

कोलसार

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

महीशादल

पश्चिमी वंगाल 20.06.2000 मिदनापुर

महीशादल

पश्चिमी वंगाल 09.06.2000 मिदनापुर

88 महीशादल

787

122

माधबपुर

18.04.1998

117

नाईकुण्डी

118

कुमारारा

जसनान

कोलसार

दक्षिण श्रीकृष्णपुर

पुयदा

तारागेरिया

गुरिया

125

कल्यानपुर

145 27.01.2001

122

माधबपुर

121

सान्दालपूर

शीतलपुर

भवानीपुर

कल्लानचक

नन्दकुमार

शामसुन्दरपुर

नन्दकुमार

ठाकुरचक

नन्दकुमार

राजनगर

नन्दकुमार

पान्डव बसान

नन्दकुमार

दक्षिण दामोदरपुर 28

नन्दकुमार

चक शिमूलिया

नन्दकुमार

पश्चिमी बंगाल 25.05.2000 मिदनापुर

महीशादल

पश्चिमी बंगाल 12.06.2000 मिदनापुर

महीशादल

पश्चिमी बंगाल 29.05.2000 मिदनापुर

महीशादल

पश्चिमी वंगाल 29.05.2000 मिदनापुर

महीशादल

पश्चिमी बंगाल 29.05.2000 मिदनापुर

महीशादल

पश्चिमी वंगाल 25.05.2000 मिदनापुर

महीशादल

पश्चिमी वंगाल 20.06.2000 मिदनापुर

महीशादल

पश्चिमी वंगाल 09.06.2000 मिदनापुर

महीशादल

पश्चिमी वंगाल 09.06.2000 मिदनापुर

महीशादल

पश्चिमी वंगाल 09.06.2000 मिदनापुर

नन्दकुमार

पश्चिमी वंगाल 07.06.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल

नन्दकुमार मिदनापुर

07.06.2001

नन्दकुमार

पश्चिमी वंगाल 07.06.2001 मिदनापुर

नन्दकुमार

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

07.06.2001

नन्दकुमार

पश्चिमी वंगाल 07.06.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

07.06.2001 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

24.01.2002 पश्चिमी वंगाल 24.01.2002 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

24.01.2002 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

16.01.2002 पश्चिमी वंगाल 16.01.2002 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

16.01.2002 10125

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/ पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

5 2

145

नन्दकुमार

नच्छिपुर

27.01.2001

नन्दकुमार

महिषगोट

मल्लिकचक

नन्दकुमार

चक बड्चबेरिया

नन्दकुमार

चक चांदपोता

नन्दकुमार

बड़चबेरिया

1850

तमलुक

पदमपुर

सादीचाक

26.07.1997

तमलुक

रामकलुआ

*नीलकुंथिया

तमलुक

वालीकलुआ

तमलुक

हरशंकर खामारचक

तमलुक

नरसिंह कलुआ

तमलुक

दक्षिण उसतपुर

अमगेच्छया

तमलुक

136

वनहीचार

तमलुक

16.01.2002 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

16.01.2002 पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

18.01.2002 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

18.01.2002 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

18.01.2002 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 25.06.2001 मिदनापुर

12.04.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

02.04.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

15.03.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

02.04.2000 .

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

15.03.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

02.04.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

15.03.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

27.03.2000 पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

15.03.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

15.03.2000

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

16.03.2000

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

137 तमलुक

राधाबल्लभपुर

16.03.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

146 तमलुक

भुवनश्बरपुर

145

तमलुक

बार पादुमवसन

144

तमलुक

पादुमवसन

276

तमलुक

दाहारपुर

283

कापासबेरे

तमलुक

279

धारिण्डा

तमलुक

100

राजगोड़ा

तमलुक

02.03.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

02.03.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

02.03.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

16.03.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

02.03.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 27.03.2000 मिदनापुर 10126

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA4, 1926

5 14

392

निश्चिन्तवसान

147

तमलुक 21.02.1998

कन्टीबारी

तमलुक

136

वनहीचार

तमलुक

283

कापासवेरे

तमलुक

144

पादुमवसन

तमलुक

276

दाहारपुर

तमलुक

राजगोडा

100

तमलुक

पदमपुर

तमलुक हरशंकर खामारचक

तमलुक

145

वार पादुमवसन

तमलुक 15

787

नीलकुंथिया

तमलुक हरशंकर खामारचक

18.04.1998

तमलुक दक्षिण उसतपुर 60

तमलुक

वालीकलुआ

तमलुक

नरसिंह कलुआ

तमलुक

136

वनहीचार

तमलुक

137

राधाबल्लभपुर

तमलुक

145

वार पादुभवसन

तमलुक

276

दाहारपुर

तमलुक

कापासवेरे

283

तमलुक

धारिण्डा

279

तमलुक 142

261

मिरिकपुर

तमलुक 27.01.2001

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] 6

पश्चिमी वंगाल 12.04.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 02.04.2000 मिदनापुर

मिदनापुर पश्चिमी वंगाल 15.03.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल 16.03.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 02.03.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 27.03.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल

12.04.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 02.04.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 02.03.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 02.04.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 02.04.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 27.03.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 15.03.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 16.03.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 02.03.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 02.03.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 16.03.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 02.03.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 18.01.2002 मिदनापुर [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

10127

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

5 2

142

262

वारवसन्त

तमलुक 27.01.2001

256

तमलुक

कलिकापुर

257

तमलुक

जयकृष्णपुर

162

तमलुक

पुटपुटे

255

तमलुक

पूर्वनुखा

163

तमलुक

पुटपुता

राजनगर वाहारजाला 161

तमलुक

124

बरबरया पाङ्कवार

तमलुक

123

तमलुक

लईच्छनपुर

122

सालिकाधानीचक

तमलुक

121

गारुपोता लिज्जत

तमलुक

116

सालिकागरचक

तमलुक

117

तमलुक

आसुदापाइकवार

115

तमलुक

चकदुर्गादास

319

1850

वहरापोटा

पांशकुरा

322

उखरापारा

26.07.1997

पांशकुरा

321

पांशकुरा

चंनपुर

देरियाचक

8 पश्चिमी वंगाल 18.01.2002 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 18.01.2002 मिदनापुर

14.06.2001 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

14.06.2001 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

14.06.2001 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

14.06.2001 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.06.2001 मिदनापुर

14.06.2001

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.06.2001 मिदनापुर

14.06.2001 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

14.06.2001

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

14.06.2001 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

14.06.2001 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.07.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.07.2000

318 पांशकुरा

317

पांशकुरा

बंगालपुर

नंदाईगजन

मिदनापुर

14.07.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.07.2000

310 पांशकुरा

304

नाहला

पांशकुरा

305

सारदा वसन

पांशकुरा

306

उत्तर सागरवर

पांशकुरा

298

बारादाबर

पांशकुरा मिदनापुर

14.07.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

14.07.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

14.07.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

14.07.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

14.07.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

296 पांशकुरा

कुंगरहट

मिदनापुर 10128

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA4, 1926

5 1850

पायाग

297

पांशकुरा 26.07.1997

238

खेत्रहाट

पांशकुरा 18

392

249

पाथरिया

पांशकुरा 21.02.1998

248

गजाइ

पांशकुरा

250

पांशकुरा

रामचन्द्रपुर

मनोहरपुर

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] 6

पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.07.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 14.07.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.07.2000

252 पांशकुरा

317

पांशकुरा

बंगालपुर

नंदाईगजन

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.07.2000 मिदनापुर

14.07.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

310 पांशकुरा

305

सारदा वसन

पांशकुरा

298

वारादावर

पांशकुरा

296

कुंगरहट

पांशकुरा 19

3236

253

रायचक

पांशकुरा 23.11.1996

254

निझखयरा

पांशकुरा 20

352

महम्मदमुराद

पांशकुरा 14 06.01.2001

चकगोग्रास

353

पांशकुरा

वेरवेरिया

330

पांशकुरा

331

पूरुशातमपूर

पांशकुरा

349

चौगेरे

पांशकुरा

347

चन्डीपूर

पांशकुरा मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.07.2000 मिदनापुर

14.07.2000

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.07.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 06.06.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 06.06.2001 'मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 06.06.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 06.06.2001

348 पांशकुरा

राधाकृष्णपुर

फकिरगंज

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 06.06.2001

332 पांशकुरा

333

रघुनाथवारी

पांशकुरा

सुन्दरनगर

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 06.06.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 06.06.2001

335 पांशकुरा

सरस्वता

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 06.06.2001

212 पांशकुरा

मिदनापुर [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

10129

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/ पौष 4,1926

5 14

221

आमडुवि

पांशकुरा 06.01.2001

210

वसन्तवार

पांशकुरा

215

दूलियापूर

पांशकुरा

मुराइल

216 पांशकुरा

208

उत्तर चाचियारा

पांशकुरा

गोपालचक

207

पांशकुरा

देहाटि

पांशकुरा

कलिश्वर

पांशकुरा

पूर्वपितपुर

पांशकुरा

गोपालनगर

पांशकुरा

केशापाट

पांशकुरा

हातिशाल

पांशकुरा

कृष्णाचक

43 पांशकुरा

वृन्दावणचक

पांशकुरा 21

305

सारदावसान

पांशकुरा 787 18.04.1998

310

नंदाईगजन

पांशकुरा

317

पांशकुरा

बंगालपुर

318

देरियाचक

पांशकुरा

चैनपुर

321 पांशकुरा

बहरापोटा

319

पांशकुरा 22

पथरिया

249

पांशकुरा 1582 21.06.1997

248

गजई

पांशकुरा

254

निजखयरा

पांशकुरा 6

पश्चिमी वंगाल 06.06.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 04.06.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 04.06.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 04.06.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.07.2000 मिदनापुर

14.07.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

14.07.2000 पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.07.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 14.07.2000 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.07.2000 मिदनापुर THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

10130

238

3236

नारायनचक

दासपुर

237

गोमोकपोटा

23.11.1996

दासपुर

310

जोट घनश्याम

दासपुर

235

सीतापुर

दासपुर

156

पालशपई

दासपुर

157

जयरामचक

दासपुर

188

पांचगेच्छिया (अंश -1 )

दासपुर

174

केलोगोदा

दासपुर

228

दासपुर

आदमपुर

फरीदपुर

227 दासपुर

222

उत्तरबाड

दासपुर

216

चेनपत

दासपुर

214

डीरी अयेध्या

दासपुर

213

दासपुर

भागबतीपुर

212

दासपुर

जोट कानुरामगड

237

गोमोकपोटा

दासपुर 1582 21.06.1997

156

पालशपई

दासपुर

157

जयरामचक

दासपुर

227

दासपुर

फरीदपुर

216

चेनपत

दासपुर

214

डीरी अयेध्या

दासपुर

211

भागबतीपुर

दासपुर

212

दासपुर

जोटकानुरांमगड

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

15.05.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

15.05.2000

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 15.05.2000

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 15.05.2000

मिदनापुर

18.05.2000

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

18.05.2000

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

16.06.2000

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

17.05.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

16.06.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

16.06.2000

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

16.06.2000

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

08.05.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

21.04.2000

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

12.05.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

12.05.2000

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

15.05.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

18.05.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 18.05.2000

मिदनापुर

16.06.2000

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 08.05.2000

मिदनापुर

21.04.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 12.05.2000

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 12.05.2000

मिदनापुर [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

4 25

1352

चेनपत

216 24.05.1997

212

जोटकानुरामगड

1353

जोय रामचंक

157 24.05.1997

392

गोमेकपीटा

237 21.02.1998

156

पालशपई

जोय रामचक

157

228

आदमपुर

227

फरीदपुर

2438

151

श्रीपुर

11.11.2000

152

लक्षा कुंडु

खाशचक

श्यामचक

153

नविन मानुया

गैरा

लक्ष्मणचक

163

चक सुलतानपुर

167

जटगेबरधनपुर

दासपुर

पंचबेरा

165

दासपुर

166

जालालंपुर

दासपुर

बार जालालपुर

दासपुर

जटाधरपुर

दासपुर

राधाकांतपुर

दासपुर

3684 GI/2004-9

10131 5

पश्चिमी बंगाल 08.05.2000

दासपुर मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 12.05.2000

दासपुर मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 18.05.2000

दासपुर मिदनापुर

दासपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 15.05.2000 मिदनापुर

दासपुर

मिदनापुर पश्चिमी वंगाल 18.05.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल 18.05.2000

दासपुर

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 16.06.2000

दासपुर

मिदनापुर

दासपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 16.06.2000 मिदनापुर

दासपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 30.05.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल

दासपुर

30.05.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 30.05.2001

दासपुर मिदनापुर

दासपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 30.05.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 30.05.2001

दासपुर

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 30.05.2001

दासपुर मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 30.05.2001

दासपुर मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 30.05.2001

दासपुर मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 25.05.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 25.05.2001 मिदनापुर 10132

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25, 2004 /PAUSA 4, 1926

5 2

2437

दासपुर

सुलताननगर

11.11.2000

किशोरनगर

दासपुर

दासपुर खर राधाकृष्णपुर

दासपुर

बासुदेबपुर

दासपुर

वइकुन्टपुर

दासपुर

डिहिचेदुवा

दासपुर

रसुलपुर

शामसुन्दरपुर

दासपुर

सुजानगर

पंचबरा

2684

165

दासपुर

09.12.2000

जटाधरपुर

दासपुर 31

144

2145

घाटाल

शोलाराजनगर

घाटाल 30.11.2000 भेरीवलरामकुन्डु

घाटाल

आजबनगर

3155

घाटाल

रथीपुर

17.11.2001

घाटाल

टाकुरानीचक

घाटाल

डान्डीपुर

घाटाल

शामसुन्दरपुर

घाटाल

वृन्दांवनचक

घाटाल

अयोदधाकुन्डु

दिर्घाग्राम

घाटाल

8 पश्चिमी वंगाल 25.05.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 25.05.2001 मिदनापुर

25.05.2001 पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 25.05.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 25.05.2001 मिदनापुर

25.05.2001

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 25.05.2001 मिदनापुर

25.05.2001

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर

14.01.2002

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

25.05.2001

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

25.05.2001

पश्चिमी बंगाल

मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.01.2002 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 14.01.2002 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.01.2002 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 21.12.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 04.12.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 30.12.2001 मिदनापुर

30.12.2001

पश्चिमी वंगाल

मिदनापुर [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

5 3155 अराजी कृष्णवाटि

घाटाल

17.11.2001 किस्मत दिर्घलग्राम

घाटाल

राहातपुर

घाटाल

गोबिन्दपुर

श्यामचंक

घाटाल

कालिशा

घाटाल

इरपाला

घाटाल

लक्षणपुर

नारायणचक

घाटाल

सुलतानपुर

घाटाल

रामचंन्द्रपुर

2841

भोवला

178

चन्द्रकोना 20.10.2001

आग्रा

177

चन्द्रकोना 34

2990

घोरादाहा

खानाकुल 26.10.1996

रामचन्द्रपुर

खानाकुल

हीरापुर

खानाकुल

धर्मपुर

खानाकुल

नवासन

खानाकुल

रामनगर

खानाकुल

विरलोक

खानाकुल 35

1583 नोएडा नारायणपुर 40

खानाकुल 21.06.1997

10133 6

पश्चिमी वंगाल 30.12.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 30.12.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 30.12.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 30.12.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 30.11.2001 मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 30.11.2001. मिदनापुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल

हुगली

20.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

21.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी वंगाल 21.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

13.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल 13.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी बंगाल 13.06.2000 हुगली

13.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

13.06.2000 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

10134

गोपालनगर

2990

खानाकुल

26.10.1996

खानाकुल

कृष्णानगर

खानाकुल

चकभेदुया

खानाकुल

साईबोना

गौरान मान्दारन

खानाकुल

गौरान

खानाकुल 37

1354

खानाकुल

घोरादाहा

रामनगर

24.05.1997

खानाकुल 38

खानाकुल 1848

घोरादाहा

खानाकुल 26.07.1997 रामचन्द्रपुर

खानाकुल

धर्मपुर

रामनगर

खानाकुल

कृष्णानगर

आरामवाग

153

2990

भाण्डारहाटि

162

आरामवाग

सानमासा

26.10.1996

आरामवाग

161

आराकुल

आरामवाग

157

शीतलपुर

160

आरामवाग

प्रतापनगर

आरामवाग

158

मान्दारन

159

आरामवाग

आरान्दि

आरामवाग

142

कांटावनि

आरामवाग

144

सालालपुर

143

आरामवाग

पिरिचपुर

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

8 6

13.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

13.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

16.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

16.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

16.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

16.06.2000 पश्चिमी बंगाल

हुगली

20.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

13.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

20.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

21.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

13.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

13.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

पश्चिमी वंगाल 13.06.2000 हुगली

19.06.2000 पश्चिमी बंगाल

हुगली

19.06.2000 पश्चिमी बंगाल

हुगली

19.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

19.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

19.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

19.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

19.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

21.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

14.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

21.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

10135

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

5 40

1349

132

आरामवाग 24.05.1997

134

दक्षिण रसुलपुर हरादित्या

आरामवाग 41

1583

आरामवाग

मधुरपुर

21.06.1997

2990

ताराल

133

आरामवाग

26.10.1996

आरामयाग

मायापुर

आरामवाग

आसानपुर

आरामवाग

जसापुर

आरामवाग

तेलुया

वालिया

आरामवाग

मलयपुर

काशिगोरे

आरामवाग

चकहाजी

आरामवाग

बातानल

आरामवाग

चकआमद

आरामवाग

चकफाजिल

आरामवाग

आरामयाग

उत्तर रसुलपुर

आरामवाग

उत्तर शेखपुर

काशिगोरे

आरामवाग 1354 24.05.1997

वालिया

आरामवाग 44

134

आरामवाग 1355 24.05.1997

132

आरामयाग

हरादित्या दक्षिण रसुलपुर

8 पश्चिमी वंगाल 21.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी बंगाल 21.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी वंगाल 21.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी वंगाल 22.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी वंगाल 21.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी वंगाल 22.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी बंगाल 22.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी वंगाल 23.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी बंगाल 22.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी वंगाल 22.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी बंगाल 22.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी वंगाल 22.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी बंगाल 22.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी वंगाल 22.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी बंगाल 22.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी बंगाल 21.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी बंगाल 21.06.2000 हुगली 10136

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA 4 , 1926

4 2

5 45

1584

132

आरामवाग

दक्षिण रसुलपुर

21.06.1997

1848

143

आरामवाग

पीरीचपुर

आरामवाग

26.07.1997

ताराल

133

आरामवाग

तेलुया

आरामवाग

काशिगोरे

आरामवाग

भालिया

गोघाट

2711

193

दिवानचक

गोघाट

कोटा

194 13.10.2001

गोघाट

189

साओरा

187

गोघाट

नाकुण्डा

गोघाट

117

डाहियाकान्डा

गोघाट

118

कुरमाना

119

गोघाट

सुनिया

कामचि

गोघाट

उत्तर वलरामपुर

गोघाट

गोविन्दपुर

गोघाट

भादुर

गोघाट

याजुया

गोघाट

सेकाटि

मन्डंलगान्टी

गोघाट

145

174

कामरहटी

रायना

25.01.1997

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)] 6

8 पश्चिमी बंगाल 21.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी वंगाल 21.06.2000 हुगली

पश्चिमी वंगाल 22.06.2000 हुगली

22.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

पश्चिमी बंगाल 06.12.2001 हुगली

पश्चिमी वंगाल 06.12.2001 हुगली

06.12.2001 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

पश्चिमी वंगाल 06.12.2001 हुगली

04.12.2001 पश्चिमी बंगाल

हुगली

पश्चिमी वंगाल 04.12.2001 हुगली

पश्चिमी बंगाल 04.12.2001 हुगली

गोघाट

पश्चिमी वंगाल 04.12.2001 हुगली

गोघाट

04.12.2001 पश्चिमी वंगाल

हुगली

पश्चिमी बंगाल 04.12.2001 हुगली

04.12.2001 पश्चिमी बंगाल

हुगली

पश्चिमी वंगाल 04.12.2001 हुगली

पश्चिमी बंगाल 04.12.2001 हुगली

पश्चिमी यंगाल 04.12.2001 हुगली

04.12.2001 पश्चिमी बंगाल

हुगली

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 10.04.2000 10137

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

5 1

186

रायना 145

कोगंरपुर

185

रायना 25.01.1997

लोहाई

184

रायना

माधबडिहि

183

रायना

आलमपुर

रायना

जीत्राधब

180

181

रायना

चकबसौनबाती

124

रायना

धारन

रायना

बायथारी

रायना

उदगारह

रायना

बजितपुर

रायना

बीरा

रायना

उजिरहाटी

रायना कोना कृष्णापुर

रायना

मोगलमारी

रायना

सेहेरा

174

627

रायना 49

कामरहट्टी

184

रायना 28.03.1998

माधबडिहि

183

रायना

आलमपुर

174

1807

रायना

कामरहटी

185

रायना 19.07.1997

लोहाई

183

रायना

आलमपुर

180

जीत्राधब

रायना

धारन

124

रायना

बजितपुर

8 6

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 09.04.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 09.04.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 09.04.2000

09.04.2000 पश्चिमी बंगाल

वर्धमान

09.04.2000 पश्चिमी बंगाल

वर्धमान

09.04.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल

19.06.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल

वर्धमान

16.06.2000 पश्चिमी चंगाल

पश्चिमी वंगाल

वर्धमान

17.06.2000

17.06.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल

वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 17.06.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी यंगाल 17.06.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 17.06.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 17.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल 17.06.2000 वर्धमान

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 17.06.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 09.04.2000

09.04.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल

10.04.2000 पश्चिमी बंगाल

वर्धमान

09.04.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 09.04.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 09.04.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 19.06.2000 वर्धमान

17.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल 10138

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004 /PAUSA 4, 1926

5 1807

रायना

उजिरहाटी

19.07.1997

मोगलमारी

रायना

सेहेरा

रायना 51

136

2710

रायना

नरात्तमवाटि

137

13.10.2001

वावला

रायना

139

रायना

शंखनारायणपुर

141

रायना

कालुड़

140

रायना

रामपुर

132

रायना

नंन्दनपुर

131

रांयना

ऊचालन

102

रायना बड़ा गोपीनाधपुर

627 28.03.1998

रायना

कामदेवपुर

रायना

जुविला

रायना

अलादिपुर

रायना

कृष्णापुर कुकरा

रायना

शंकरी

सासंगा

रायना 53

145

102

खण्डघोष

बड़ा गोपीनाधपुर

25.01.1997

खण्डघोष

कामदेवपुर

जरूल

खण्डघोष

सुनिया

तारापोस

खण्डघोष

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 17.06.2000

वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 17.06.2000

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 17.06.2000

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 11.11.2001

11.11.2001

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 11.11.2001

11.11.2001

वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल

पश्चिमी बंगाल 11.11.2001

वर्धमान

पश्चिमी वंगाल 11.11.2001

वर्धमान

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 21.02.2000

21.02.2000

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 21.02.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल 21.02.2000

वर्धमान

पश्चिमी बंगाल 20.06.2000

वर्धमान

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 27.06.2001

वर्धमान

25.06.2001

पश्चिमी वंगाल

वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 21.02.2000

वर्धमान

21.02.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

वर्धमान

21.02.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 21.02.2000

वर्धमान

21.02.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

5 145

खण्डघोष

जुविला

25.01.1997

खण्डघोष

अलादिपुर

खण्डघोष

कृष्णापुर कुकरा

आइमा खेगेर

खण्डघोष

शंकरी

खण्डघोष

पलाशड़ांगा

खण्डघोष

ओनिया

खण्डघोष

कृष्णानगर

सासंगा

खण्डघोष

नपारा

खण्डघोष

मासिला

खण्डघोष

चाग्राम

खण्डघोष 54

1585

तारापोस

खण्डघोष 21.06.1997

सासंगा

खण्डघोष 55

1807

खण्डघोष

कामदेवपुर

19.07.1997

खण्डघोष

सुनिया

तारापोस

खण्डघोष

जुबिला

खण्डघोष

आल्लादिपुर

खण्डघोष कृष्णापुर कुकरा

शंकरी

खण्डघोष 56

106

मुझ्धारा

खण्डघोष 2653 06.10.2001

3684 G1/ 2004-10

10139 6

8 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 21.02.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 21.02.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 20.06.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 20.06.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 27.06.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 27.06.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 25.06.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 25.06.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 25.06.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी यंगाल 25.06.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 25.06.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 25.06.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 21.02.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 25.06.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 21.02.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 21.02.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 21.02.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 21.02.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 21.02.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 20.06.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 27 :06.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 11.12.2001 10140

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA4, 1926

5 2653

105

खण्डघोष

इन्दुति

104

खण्डघोष

06.10.2001

तरकाना

वालावाटि

100

खण्डघोष

पीताम्बरपुर

खण्डघोष

गोपीनाथपुर

खण्डघोष

काइआर

खण्डघोष

कामदेवपुर

खण्डघोष

गोपालपुर

खण्डघोष

चिन्तामणिपुर

अंग्राम

खण्डघोष

चाग्राम

खण्डघोष

कृष्णापुर कुकरा

शंकरी

खण्डघोष

नापारा

खण्डघोष

माशिला

खण्डघोष

145 25.01.1997

वर्धमान

नाला

627 28.03.1998

वर्धमान

1807 19.07.1997

वर्धमान

2653 06.10.2001

161

गलसी

कोनारपुर

145 25.01.1997

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )] 6

वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 11.12.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 10.12.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 10.12.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 10.12.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 10.12.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 10.12.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 07.12.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 10.12.2001

{ पश्चिमी बंगाल 07.12.2001 वर्धमान

वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 07.12.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी यंगाल 07.12.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 07.12.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 25.12.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 27.05.2002 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 27.05.2002 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 22.06.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 22.06.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 22.06.2001 वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 27.05.2002 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 22.06.2001 10141

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

पश्चिमी वंगाल 22.06.2001

वर्धमान

गलसी

152

145

वेलग्राम

22.06.2001

पश्चिमी वंगाल

वर्धमान

गलसी

149

सतीनंन्दी

25.01.1997

22.06.2001.

पश्चिमी वंगाल

वर्धमान

गलसी

147

हिट्टा

पश्चिमी वंगाल 22.06.2001

वर्धमान

गलसी

146

चात्रा

22.06.2001

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल

गलसी

145

शंकराय

पश्चिमी वंगाल 22.06.2001

वर्धमान

गलसी

161

627

कोनारपुर

22.06.2001

पश्चिमी वंगाल

गलसी

वर्धमान

152

वेलग्राम

28.03.1998

पश्चिमी वंगाल 22.06.2001

वर्धमान

149

गलसी

सतीनंन्दी

पश्चिमी बंगाल 22.06.2001

वर्धमान

147

गलसी

हिट्टा

पश्चिमी वंगाल 22.06.2001

वर्धमान

146

गलसी

चात्रा

पश्चिमी वंगाल 22.06.2001

वर्धमान

152

गलसी

वेलग्राम

1585

21.06.1997

पश्चिमी वंगाल 22.06.2001

वर्धमान

गलसी

152

वेलग्राम

1807

22.06.2001

पश्चिमी वंगाल

वर्धमान

147

गलसी

19.07.1997

हिट्टा

22.06.2001

पश्चिमी वंगाल

वर्धमान

गलसी

146

चात्रा

2653

27.05.2002

पश्चिमी वंगाल

वर्धमान

गलसी

161

कोनारपुर

06.10.2001

14.06.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

वर्धमान

ओशग्राम

154

1587

अलुतिया

01.03.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

वर्धमान

ओशग्राम

119

21.06.1997

सिलुत

01.03.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

वर्धमान

ओशग्राम

120

मल्लिकपुर

01.03.2000

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल

ओशग्राम

121

बेलुति

02.03.2000

पश्चिमी वंगाल

वर्धमान

128

ओशग्राम

रेओरा 10142

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4 , 1926

4 145

25.01.1997

करनजी

176 68

2679

154

आलुतिया

18.10.1997

1588

करनजी

176 21.06.1997

भडा

175

बलारी

177

वेलग्राम

168

167

नाओडा

शिब्डा

161

ओशग्राम

162

ओशग्राम

दरियापुर

158

गुसकारा

ओशग्राम

503

152

ओशग्राम

सोमयपुर

22.02.1997

118

ओशग्राम

बाबुरबांध

119

ओशग्राम

सिलुत

120

ओशग्राम

मल्लिकपुर

121

बेलुति

ओशग्राम

बेराण्डा

122

ओशग्राम

114

ओशग्राम

श्रीकृष्णापुर

चन्द्रादीप

124

ओशग्राम

बकशीबाद पोग्राम

129

ओशग्राम

रेओरा

128

ओशग्राम

125

सेघापुर

ओशग्राम

बिल्शांदा

127

ओशग्राम

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

ओशग्राम

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 29.02.2000

ओशग्राम

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.06.2000

ओशग्राम

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 29.02.2000

ओशग्राम

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 29.02.2000

ओशग्राम

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 29.02.2000

ओशग्राम

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 29.02.2000

ओशग्राम

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.06.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.06.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 14.06.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.06.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 01.03.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 01.03.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी यंगाल 01.03.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी यंगाल 01.03.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी यंगाल 01.03.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी यंगाल 01.03.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 01.03.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 02.03.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 02.03.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 02.03.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 02.03.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 02.03.2000 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

5 71

627

करनजी

176

ओशग्राम 28.03.1998

175

भड़ा

ओशग्राम

वेलग्राम

168

ओशग्राम

161

शिब्डा

ओशग्राम

158

ओशग्राम

गुसकारा

154

ओशग्राम

आलुतिया

121

ओशग्राम

बेलुति

152

ओशग्राम

सोमयपुर

788

175

भडा

ओशग्राम 18.04.1998

177

वेलारी

ओशग्राम

वेलग्राम

168

ओशग्राम

नाओडा

167

ओशग्राम

शिब्डा

161

ओशग्राम

158

ओशग्राम

गुसकारा

1587

रेओरा

128

ओशग्राम 21.06.1997

114

ओशग्राम

श्रीकृष्णापुर

129

यकशीयाद पोग्राम

ओशग्राम

118

ओशग्राम

बाबुरबांध

152

ओशग्राम

सोमयपुर

ओरग्राम

भातार 145 25.01.1997

ओरग्राम

भातार 627 28.03.1998

10143

8 6

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 29.02.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 29.02.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 29.02.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.06.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.06.2000 वर्धमान

वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.06.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 01.03.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 01.03.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 29.02.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 29.02.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 29.02.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.06.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.06.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 14.06.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 02.03.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 01.03.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 02.03.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 01.03.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 01.03.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 13.03.2000 वर्धमान पश्चिमी वंगाल 13.03.2000 10144

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

5 1807

ओरग्राम

भातार 19.07.1997

503

111

उदयपुर

वोलपुर 22.02.1997

110

चंदनपुर

वोलपुर

114

रसुलगंजहाट

वोलपुर

102

शिबपुर

वोलपुर

103

उत्तर राधानगर

वोलपुर

109

रायपुर

वोलपुर

105

वोलपुर

मेहिदीपुर

वोलपुर पश्चिम वाहादुरपुर

रुपपुर

वोलपुर 78

393

110

चंदनपुर

वोलपुर 21.02.1998

रुपपुर

वोलपुर 79

1586

110

चंदनपुर

वोलपुर

105

21.06.1997

मेहिदीपुर

वोलपुर

रुपपुर

वोलपुर

111

उदयपुर

वोलपुर 80

1586

गोपालनगर

132

[PART II-SEC . 3(ii) ] 6

8 वर्धमान पश्चिमी बंगाल 13.03.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल 13.06.2000 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल 21.02.2001 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल 13.06.2000 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी बंगाल 13.06.2000 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल 21.02.2001 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी बंगाल 21.02.2001 वीरभूम

105

शुनुत

साल्का

इलामवाजार 81

393

माटिकोना

115

इलामवाजार

106

21.02.1998

पंछियारा

इलामवाजार

वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल 19.02.2001 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल 21.02.2001 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल 20.02.2001 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल 19.02.2001

इलामवाजार

नृपतिग्राम

वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल 19.02.2001

इलामवाजार

धर्मपुर

वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल 19.02.2001

इलामवाजार

शुनुत

साल्का

वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल 19.02.2001

इलामवाजार

210

खागडा

दुबराजपुर 11.01.1997

211

पदुमा

दुबराजपुर

208

वोधग्राम

दुबराजपुर

कोटा

158

दुबराजपुर

207

भालुका

दुबराजपुर

160

दक्षिण चण्डीपुर

दुबराजपुर

164

विरोरी

दुबराजपुर

163

रेगना

दुबराजपुर वीरभूम

19.02.2001 पश्चिमी वंगाल

वीरभूम

पश्चिमी बंगाल 19.02.2001 वीरभूम

19.02.2001 पश्चिमी बंगाल

वीरभूम

पश्चिमी बंगाल 19.02.2001 वीरभूम

19.02.2001 पश्चिमी बंगाल

वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल 19.02.2001 वीरभूम

23.01.2001 पश्चिमी वंगाल

वीरभूम

23.01.2001 पश्चिमी बंगाल

वीरभूम 10146

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA4 , 1926

150

दक्षिण गोपालपुर

11.01.1997

पचियारा

168

169

चन्द्रपुर

143

हेतमपुर

142

मोहनपुर

104

सातकेन्दुरी

140

इसलामपुर

139

वेलेसुली

106

आसदुल्ला

110

नुनेदी

138

जंगल दुबराजपुर

111

पण्डितपुर

112

रुपशिमुली

कैथानपुर

होसेनावाद

पांच पुकुरिया

हारुलिया

वालिझुरि

गोपालनगर

दुबराजपुर

कुरालझुरि

दुबराजपुर

खोलाकुडि

दुबराजपुर

लक्षी नारायनपुर

दुबराजपुर

पुंगलापुर

दुबराजपुर

393

208

दुबराजपुर

21.02.1998

207

वोधग्राम भालुका

दुबराजपुर

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

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल

वीरभूम

23.01.2001

पश्चिमी चंगाल

दुबराजपुर

23.01.2001 वीरभूम

वीरभूम पश्चिमी वंगाल

दुबराजपुर

23.01.2001

पश्चिमी बंगाल

वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

20.02.2001

पश्चिमी बंगाल

दुबराजपुर

20.02.2001 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल

दुबराजपुर

20.02.2001 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल

दुबराजपुर

20.02.2001 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल

दुबराजपुर

20.02.2001 वीरभूम

वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 20.02.2001

पश्चिमी वंगाल

वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

20.02.2001

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 20.02.2001 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल

दुबराजपुर

16.09.2000 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

वीरभूम पश्चिमी यंगाल 16.09.2000 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 16.09.2000

दुबराजपुर वीरभूम पश्चिमी वंगाल 16.09.2000

दुबराजपुर वीरभूम पश्चिमी यंगाल 16.09.2000

दुबराजपुर वीरभूम पश्चिमी वंगाल 16.09.2000

दुबराजपुर वीरभूम पश्चिमी वंगाल 16.09.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

वीरभूम

16.09.2000 वीरभूम पश्चिमी वंगाल 16.09.2000. वीरभूम पश्चिमी वंगाल 16.09.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

वीरभूम

16.09.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

वीरभूम

16.09.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल 19.02.2001 वीरभूम वीरभूम पश्चिमी वंगाल 19.02.2001 10147

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

4 393

विरोरी

164 21.02.1998

रेंगना

163 84

1806

खागरा

210 19.07.1997

208

वोधग्राम

207

भालुका

विरोरी

164

रेंगना

163

पंछियारा

168

169

चन्द्रपुर

143

हेलमपुर

142

मोहनपुर

104

सनकेंदुरी

139

वेलेसुली

106

अजदुल्ला

111

पंडितपुर

होसेनावाद

केथानपुर

हारुलिया

बालीजुरी

खोलाकुडी

दुबराजपुर

पंगलापुर

393

150

दक्षिन गोपालपुर

दुबराजपुर

21.02.1998

पंछियारा

168

दुबराजपुर

169

चन्द्रपुर

दुबराजपुर

143

हेलमपुर

दुबराजपुर

3684 GI /2004-11

पश्चिमी वंगाल 23.01.2001 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 23.01.2001 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 19.02.2001 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 19.02.2001 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

19.02.2001 पश्चिमी वंगाल

वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 23.01.2001 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 23.01.2001

दुबराजपुर

वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल 23.01.2001 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 23.01.2001 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 20.02.2001 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी बंगाल 20.02.2001 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 20.02.2001 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 20.02.2001 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 20.02.2001 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 16.09.2000 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 16.09.2000 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 16.09.2000 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 16.09.2000 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 16.09.2000 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 16.09.2000 वीरभूम

दुबराजपुर

पश्चिमी वंगाल 23.01.2001 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल 20.02.2001 वीरभूम 10148

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA 4 , 1926

5 1

393

142

मोहनपुर

दुबराजपुर 21.02.1998

110

नुनेदी

दुबराजपुर

138

जंगल दुवराजपुर

दुबराजपुर

111

पंडितपुर

दुबराजपुर

बालीजुरी

दुबराजपुर

खोलाकुडी

दुबराजपुर

140

इसलामपुर

दुबराजपुर 86

रेंगना

163

628 28.03.1998

दुबराजपुर 87

आनन्दनगर

खयराशोल 11.01.1997

खयराशोल

युधपुर

खयराशोल

हरिपुर

अल्लीओट

खयराशोल

केन्डआकुरी

393

आनन्दनगर

खयराशोल 21.02.1998

खयराशोल

वुधपुर

खयराशोल

हरीपुर

केन्डआकुरी

खयराशोल

अल्लीओट

खयराशोल 89

1806

आनन्दनगर

खयराशोल 19.07.1997

वुधपुर

खयराशोल

हरीपुर

1806

अल्लीओट

खयराशोल 19.07.1997

केन्डआकुरी

खयराशोल

आमलाकुरी

खयराशोल

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ] 6

8 पश्चिमी वंगाल 20.02.2001 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल 20.02.2001 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल 16.09.2000 वीरभूम

16.09.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

वीरभूम

20.02.2001 पश्चिमी वंगाल

वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल 23.01.2001 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल 06.09.2000 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल 07.09.2000 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल

वीरभूम

07.09.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल 06.09.2000 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल 07.09.2000 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी वंगाल

वीरभूम

07.09.2000 वीरभूम पश्चिमी वंगाल 07.09.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

वीरभूम

06.09.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

वीरभूम

07.09.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल

वीरभूम

07.09.2000 वीरभूम पश्चिमी वंगाल 07.09.2000 पश्चिमी वंगाल 07.09.2000 वीरभूम

पश्चिमी यंगाल

वीरभूम

07.09.2000 [फा. सं. आर-25011/25/2004-ओ.आर-। ]

रेणुका कुमार, अवर सचिव 10149

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 15th December, 2004

S. O. 3295. Whereas , by the notifications of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number , S.O. and date as mentioned in the Schedule below issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of section 6 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government acquired the right of user in the lands specified in the Schedule appended to those notifications ;

And whereas , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section (4) of section - 6 of the said Act , the Central Government vested the right of user in the said lands , free from all encumbrances , in the Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

And whereas, the Competent Authority has made a report to the Central Government that the pipeline for the purpose of transport of petroleum products from Haldia in the State of West Bengal to Barauni in the State of Bihar through the villages in the State of West Bengal mentioned in the schedule has been laid in the said lands , so the operation may be terminated in respect of the land the description of which in brief is specified in the Schedule annexed to this notification;

Now, therefore, as required under explanation 1 of rule 4 of the Petroleum Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land ) Rules , 1963 , the Central Government hereby declares the dates mentioned in Column 8 of the said Schedule as the dates of termination of operation.

101.50

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

Name of Village

Sl. No.

S.O. No. and Date

on Jurisdicti List No. 1

4 1

1849

Sapua

26.07.1997

Dwari Beria

Hadia

Barbasudebpur

Gorankhali

Manoharpur

Chaulkhola

Kishmatshibramnagar 94

147

Sobharampur

Tentulberia

170 2

691

Kishmatshibramnagar 31.03.2001

Kasberia

146

Gorankhali

Chaulkhola

Barbasudebpur

Manaharpur

Dihisibram Nagar

Kunarpur

692

Brajalalchak

31.03.2001

Barsundara

Iswardahajalpai

Kasthakhali

Anandapur

Kunarpur

[PART II SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

Schedule

District

State

Police Station

Date of termination ofoperation 5

West Bengal

Sutahata Midnapur

15.04.2000

West Bengal

Sutahata Midnapur

15.04.2000 Sutahata

West Bengal

Midnapur

15.04.2000

West Bengal

Sutahata Midnapur

15.04.2000

West Bengal

Sutahata Midnapur

15.04.2000 Sutahata

West Bengal

Midnapur

27.05.2000 Sutahata Midnapur West Bengal 27.05.2000 Midnapur West Bengal 27.05.2000 Sutahata

Sutahata Midnapur West Bengal 24.02.2000 Sutahata Midnapur West Bengal 29.02.2000 Sutahata Midnapur West Bengal 01.08.2002 Sutahata Midnapur West Bengal 01.08.2002 Sutahata Midnapur West Bengal 28.05.2002 Sutahata Midnapur West Bengal 01.08.2002

West Bengal

Sutahata Midnapur

28.05.2002

- Sutahata Midnapur West Bengal 02.03.2003 Sutahata Midnapur West Bengal 01.08.2002 Sutahata Midnapur West Bengal 18.01.2002

West Bengal

Sutahata Midnapur

18.01.2002

West Bengal

Sutahata Midnapur

18.01.2002

West Bengal

Sutahata Midnapur

18.01.2002

West Bengal

Sutahata Midnapur

18.01.2002 Sutahata Midnapur | West Bengal 18.01.2002 Sutahata Midnapur West Bengal 18.01.2002 10151

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

4 2

787

170

Tentulberia

Kishmatshibramagar 18.04.1998

Manoharpur

Gorankhali

Sapua

170 2678

Tentulberia

18.10.1997

148 1849

Kalikakundu

161 26.07.1997

Lakhya

146

Chanpi

144

Jhaupatra

136

Kakurdaha

138

Bagda

137

Kanchanpur

130

Rajarampur

124

Tajpur

123

Malubasan

134

Bamunya

143

133

Keshabpur Jalpai

27.01.2001

132

Kanchanpur Jalpai

130

Rajarampur

129

Dakshin Kasimnagar 8

148

Kalikakundu

787 18.04.1998

8 6

Sutahata

29.02.2000

West Bengal

Midnapur

01.08.2002 Sutahata

WestBengal

Midnapur

Sutahata

West Bengal 27.05.2000 Midnapur

15.04.2000 Sutahata

West Bengal

Midnapur

15.04.2000 Sutahata

West Bengal

Midnapur

Sutahata

29.02.2000

West Bengal

Midnapur

10.06.2000 Mahishadal Midnapur West Bengal

06.06.2000

West Bengal

Mahishadal Midnapur

10.06.2000 Mahishadal Midnapur West Bengal

Midnapur

02.06.2000

West Bengal

Mahishadal

02.06.2000 Midnapur West Bengal

Mahishadal

Midnapur

23.06.2000

West Bengal

Mahishadal

Mahishadal Midnapur West Bengal 02.06.2000 Mahishadal Midnapur West Bengal 08.06.2000

08.06.2000 Midnapur West Bengal

Mahishadal

Midnapur

23.06.2000

West Bengal

Mahishadal

08.06.2001

WestBengal

Mahishadal Midnapur

08.06.2001

WestBengal

Mahishadal Midnapur

13.06.2001 Mahishadal Midnapur West Bengal

13.06.2001 Midnapur West Bengal

Mahishadal

Midnapur West Bengal 13.06.2001 Mahishadal

10.06.2000 Midnapur West Bengal

Mahishadal 10152

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

161

Lakhya

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] 6

06.06.2000 Midnapur

Mahishadal

787 18.04.1998

146

Chanpi

West Bengal

10.062000 West Bengal

Midnapur

Mahishadal

144

1849

Naikundi

117 Midnapur West Bengal

29.05.2000

Mahishadal

Jambur Basan

Midnapur

29.05.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

Mahishadal

Kolsar

25.05.2000 West Bengal

Guria

45 Midnapur

20.06.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

Mahishadal

Naradari

21.02.1998

Naradari

44 Midnapur

20.06.2000

Mahishadal

Kolsar

88 Mahishadal

122 Midnapur West Bengal 09.06.2000 Midnapur West Bengal 25.05.2000

Mahishadal

Madhabpur

787 18.04.1998

Naikundi

117 West Bengal

Midnapur

12.06.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

29.05.2000

Mahishadal

118

Kumarara

West Bengal

Mahishadal

Jasnan

Midnapur

29.05.2000 West Bengal

Mahishadal

Kolsar

88 Midnapur

29.05.2000 Midnapur

Mahishadal

Dakshin Srikrishnapur 59 West Bengal 25.05.2000 Midnapur

Mahishadal

Puyeda

West Bengal 20.06.2000 Midnapur

Mahishadal

Tarageria

West Bengal 09.06.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

Mahishadal

Guria

09.06.2000 Midnapur

Mahishadal

125

Kalyanpur

West Bengal 09.06.2000 Midnapur

Nandakumar

145 27.01.2001

122

Madhabpur

West Bengal 07.06.2001

Nachhipur

27.01.2001

Midnapur West Bengal 16.01.2002

Nandakumar

Mahishgot

Mallikchak

West Bengal

Midnapur

1850

Tamluk

Padampur

26.07.1997

Sadichak

Tamluk

Ramkalua

Tamluk

Nilkunthia

Tamluk

Balikalua

Tamluk

Harashankar

Tamluk

Khamarchak

Narsinghkalua

Tamluk

Tamluk DakshinUsatpur

Tamluk

Amgechhya 95

Banhichar

136

Tamluk

Radhaballavpur 137

146

Bhubaneswarpur

Tamluk Bara Padumbasan 145

Tamluk

Padumbasan

144- Tamluk

276

Daharpur

Tamluk

Kapashbera 283

Tamluk

Dharinda

279

Tamluk

100

Tamluk

Rajgoda

West Bengal

Midnapur

25.06.2001 West Bengal

Midnapur

12.04.2000 Midnapur West Bengal 02.04.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

15.03.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

02.04.2000 Midnapur West Bengal 15.03.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

02.04.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

15.03.2000 Midnapur West Bengal 27.03.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

15.03.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

15.03.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

16.03.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

16.03.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

02.03.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

02.03.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

02.03.2000 Midnapur West Bengal 16.03.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

02.03.2000 Midnapur West Bengal 27.03.2000 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

10155

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

147

Nischintapur

392 21.02.1998

Kantibari

Banhichar

136

283

Kapashbera

144

Padumbasan

276

Daharpur

100

Rajgoda

Padampur

Harashankar-

Khamarchak

145

Barapadumbasan

Nilkunthia

787 18.04.1998

Harashankar

Khamarchak

Dakshin Usatpur

Balikalua

Narasinghkalua

136

Banhichar

137

Radhaballavpur

Barapadumbasan 145

276

Daharpur

283

Kapashbera

Dharinda

279 16

261

Mirikpur

142 27.01.2001

3684 GI/ 2004-12

8 5

Tamluk Midnapur West Bengal 12.04.2000 Tamluk

West Bengal 02.04.2000 Midnapur

Tamluk

West Bengal 15.03.2000 Midnapur

Tamluk Midnapur West Bengal 16.03.2000 Tamluk mluk Midnapur West Bengal 02.03.2000 Tamluk Midnapur West Bengal 02.03.2000 Tamluk Midnapur West Bengal 27.03.2000 Tamluk Midnapur West Bengal 12.04.2000 Tamluk

West Bengal 02.04.2000 Midnapur

Tamluk

West Bengal 02.03.2000 Midnapur

Tamluk Midnapur West Bengal 02.04.2000 Tamluk Midnapur West Bengal 02.04.2000 Tamluk Midnapur West Bengal 27.03.2000 Tamluk Midnapur West Bengal 15.03.2000 Tamluk Midnapur West Bengal 15.03.2000 Tamluk

West Bengal 15.03.2000 Midnapur

Tamluk Midnapur West Bengal 16.03.2000 Tamluk Midnapur West Bengal 02.03.2000 Tamluk Midnapur West Bengal 02.03.2000 Tamluk

West Bengal

Midnapur

16.03.2000 Tamluk

West Bengal

Midnapur

02.03.2000 Tamluk Midnapur West Bengal 18.01.2002 10156

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA4, 1926

5 2

262

Tamluk 142

Barbasanta

27.01.2001

256

Tamluk

Kalikapur

Tamluk

257

Jaykrishnapur

Tamluk

162

Putpute

255

Tamluk

Purbanukha

Tamluk

163

Putputta

Tamluk

161

Rajnagar Baharjala

Tamluk

124

Barbarya Paikbar

123

Tamluk

Laichhanpur

122

Salikadhanichak

Tamluk

121

Tamluk

Garupota Nijzote

116

Tamluk

Salikagarchak

117

Tamluk

Ashudapaikbar

Tamluk

115

Chakdurgadas

319 1850

Panskura

Baharpota

26.07.1997

322

Panskura

Ukhrapara

321

Panskura

Chainpur

318

Panskura

Deryachak

317

Panskura

Bangalpur

310

Panskura

Nandaigazan

Nahala

304

Panskura

Sardabasan

305

Panskura

306

Panskura

Uttar Sagarbar

Bardabar

298

Panskura

296

Panskura

Kungerhat

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

8 6

18.01.2002 West Bengal

Midnapur

18.01.2002 West Bengal

Midnapur

18.01.2002 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.06.2001 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.06.2001 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.06.2001 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.06.2001 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.06.2001 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.06.2001 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.06.2001 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.06.2001 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.06.2001 Midnapur West Bengal

14.06.2001 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.06.2001 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.07.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.07.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.07.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.07.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.07.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.07.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.07.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.07.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

West Bengal 14.07.2000 Midnapur

14.07.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur 10157 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष4,1926

1850

297 Panskura Midnapur West Bengal 14.07.2000 Payag

26.07.1997

238

Khetrahar

Panskura

14.07.2000

West Bengal

Midnapur

392

249

Pathria

Panskura

14.07.2000

West Bengal

Midnapur

21.02.1998

248 Panskura

Gajai

West Bengal 14.07.2000

Midnapur

Panskura

West Bengal 14.07.2000 Ramchandrapur 250

Midnapur

252 Panskura

West Bengal 14.07.2000 Manoharpur

Midnapur

317 Panskura

West Bengal 14.07.2000 Bangalpur

Midnapur

310 Panskura

Nandaigazan

West Bengal 14.07.2000

Midnapur

Sardabasan

305 Panskura

West Bengal 14.07.2000

Midnapur

Bardabar

298 Panskura Midnapur West Bengal 14.07.2000

296 Panskura

Kungerhat

Midnapur West Bengal 14.07.2000 19

3236

253

Raichak

Panskura Midnapur West Bengal 14.07.2000 23.11.1996

254 Panskura

Nijkhyara

West Bengal 14.07.2000

Midnapur

352 Panskura

Mahammadmurad

Midnapur West Bengal 06.06.2001

353

06.01.2001

Panskura

Chakgogras

Midnapur West Bengal 06.06.2001

330

Beraberia

Panskura Midnapur West Bengal 06.06.2001

Panskura

West Bengal 06.06.2001

Midnapur

Purushottampur 331

349 Panskura

Chaugere

Midnapur West Bengal 06.06.2001

347 Panskura

Chandipur

Midnapur West Bengal 06.06.2001

348

Radhakrishnapur

Panskura Midnapur West Bengal 06.06.2001

332 Panskura

Fakirganj

Midnapur West Bengal 06.06.2001

333 Panskura

Raghunathbari

West Bengal

Midnapur

06.06.2001

335 Panskura

Sundarnagar

Midnapur West Bengal 06.06.2001

212

Swaraswatya

Panskura Midnapur West Bengal 06.06.2001 10158

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

5 14

Amdubi

221

Panskura 06.01.2001

Basantabar

210

Panskura

21.5

Panskura

Dhuliapur

Murail

216

Panskura

Uttar Chanchira .

208

Panskura

207

Panskura

Gopalchak

Dehati

Panskura

Kaliswar

Panskura

Purbapitpur

Panskura

Gopalnagar

Panskura

Keshapat

Hatishal

Panskura

Krishnachak

Panskura

Brindabanchak

787

Sardabasan

305

Panskura 18.04.1998

310

Panskura

Nandaigazan

317

Panskura

Bangalpur

318

Panskura

Deryachak

321

Panskura

Chainpur

319

Panskura

Baharpota

Pathria

249

Panskura 1582

248

Panskura

Gajai

...06.1997

254

Panskura

Nijkhayra

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 6

06.06.2001 Midnapur West Bengal

06.06.2001 West Bengal

Midnapur

04.06.2001 Midnapur West Bengal

04.06.2001 West Bengal

Midnapur

04.06.2001 West Bengal

Midnapur

04.06.2001 Midnapur West Bengal

04.06.2001 West Bengal

Midnapur

04.06.2001 Midnapur West Bengal

14.07.2000 Midnapur West Bengal

14.07.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.07.2000 Midnapur West Bengal

14.07.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.07.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur

14.07.2000 West Bengal

Midnapur 10159

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

15.05.2000 3236

238

Narayanchak

Daspur

WestBengal

Midnapur

23.11.1996

237

15.05.2000

Daspur Midnapur West Bengal

Gomokpota

310

15.05.2000

West Bengal

JotGhanashyam

Daspur Midnapur

235

15.05.2000

West Bengal

Sitapur

Daspur Midnapur

18.05.2000

156

Midnapur WestBengal

Daspur

Palashpai

18.05.2000

157

WestBengal

Daspur Midnapur

Joyramchak

16.06.2000

188

Midnapur WestBengal

Daspur

Panchgachhia ( Part- 1)

174

17.05.2000

West Bengal

Kelogoda

Daspur Midnapur

16.06.2000

228

West Bengal

Adampur

Daspur Midnapur

227

16.06.2000

West Bengal

Midnapur

Faridpur

Daspur

222

Uttarbar

16.06.2000

West Bengal

Midnapur

Daspur

216

08.05.2000

West Bengal

Daspur Midnapur

Chainpat

214

21.04.2000

West Bengal

Midnapur

Doriayodhya

Daspur

12.05.2000

213

WestBengal

Daspur Midnapur

Bhagabatipur

12.05.2000

212 Daspur

WestBengal

JotKanuramgarh

Midnapur

1582

237 Daspur

Gomokpota

Midnapur West Bengal 15.05.2000 21.06.1997

156

18.05.2000 Palashpai

WestBengal

Daspur Midnapur

157

18.05.2000 Joyramchak

WestBengal

Daspur Midnapur

227

Faridpur

Daspur Midnapur West Bengal 16.06.2000

216

Chainpat

Daspur Midnapur West Bengal 08.05.2000

214

Dori .Ayodhya

West Bengal 21.04.2000

Daspur Midnapur

211

Bhagabatipur

Daspur Midnapur West Bengal 12.05.2000

212

JotKanuramgarh

West Bengal 12.05.2000

Daspur Midnapur 10160

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

4 25

1352

216

Chainpat

212 24.05.1997 Jot Kanuramgarh 26

1353

157

Joy ramchak

24.05.1997

392

237

Gomokpota

21.02.1998

156

Palasapai

157

Joy Ramchak

228

Adampur

227

Faridpur

151

Sripur

2438 11.11.2000

152

Lakshakundu

Khaschak

Shyamchak

Nobin Manua

153

Goura

Lakshmanchak

Chaksultanpur 163

JotGobardhanpur 167

165

Panchberya

166

Jalalpur

Bar Jalalpur

Jatadharpur

Radhakantapur

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

08.05.2000 Daspur

West Bengal

Midnapur

12.05.2000 Daspur Midnapur West Bengal

18.05.2000 Daspur Midnapur West Bengal

15.05.2000 Daspur Midnapur West Bengal

18.05.2000 Daspur Midnapur West Bengal

16.06.2000 Daspur Midnapur West Bengal

Daspur

West Bengal

Midnapur

30.05.2001

West Bengal

Daspur Midnapur

30.05.2001 Daspur Midnapur West Bengal 30.05.2001 Daspur Midnapur West Bengal 30.05.2001

Daspur

West Bengal

Midnapur

30.05.2001

Daspur Midnapur West Berigal 30.05.2001

Daspur Midnapur West Bengal 30.05.2001

Daspur

West Bengal

Midnapur

30.05.2001

Daspur Midnapur West Bengal 25.05.2001

Daspur Midnapur West Bengal 25.05.2001 10161

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

8 3

2437

Sultannagar

Daspur Midnapur West Bengal 25.05.2001 11.11.2000

Kishorenagar

Daspur Midnapur West Bengal 25.05.2001

Khar Radhakrishnapur

Daspur Midnapur West Bengal 25.05.2001

63 Daspur Midnapur West Bengal 25.05.2001 Basudebpur

64 Daspur Midnapur West Bengal 25.05.2001 Baikunthapur

Dihichetua

Midnapur West Bengal 25.05.2001

Daspur

Midnapur West Bengal 25.05.2001

Daspur

Rasulpur

50 Daspur Midnapur West Bengal 25.05.2001 Shyamsundarpur

14.01.2002

Sujanagar

Daspur Midnapur West Bengal

165

Midnapur West Bengal 25.05.2001 Panchberya

Daspur

2684

09.12.2000

Midnapur West Bengal 25.05.2001

Daspur

Jatadharpur

144

14.01.2002 2145

Ghatal

West Bengal

Shilarajnagar

Midnapur

30.11.2000 Bheribalaramundu

Ghatal Midnapur West Bengal 14.01.2002

68 Ghatal Midnapur West Bengal 14.01.2002 Ajabnagar

3155

Rathipur

Ghatal Midnapur West Bengal 21.12.2001

61 Ghatal

Thakuranichak

17.11.2001

Midnapur West Bengal 04.12.2001

Dandipur

Ghatal Midnapur West Bengal 04.12.2001

Shyamsundarpur

Ghatal

West Bengal

Midnapur

04.12.2001

Brindabanchak

Ghatal Midnapur West Bengal 30.12.2001

Ajodhyakundu

Ghatal Midnapur West Bengal 30.12.2001 Dirghagram

37 Ghatal

Midnapur West Bengal 30.12.2001 10162

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA4, 1926

Araji Krishnabati

38 3155 17.11.2001 Kismat Dirghalgram

Rahatpur

Gobindapur

Shyamchak

Kalisa

Irpala

Lakshmanpur

Narayanchak

Sultanpur

Ramchandrapur

2841

Bhobla

178

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

Ghatal Midnapur West Bengal 30.12.2001

Ghatal Midnapur WestBengal 30.12.2001

Ghatal Midnapur West Bengal 30.12.2001

Ghatal Midnapur WestBengal 30.12.2001

Ghatal Midnapur West Bengal 30.12.2001

Chandrakona

20.10.2001

177

Agra

Midnapur WestBengal 30.11.2001

Chandrakona

Ghoradaha

Khanaku

2990 26.10.1996

Ramchandrapur 54

Khanakul

Hirapur

Khanakul

Dharampur

Midnapur West Bengal 30.11.2001 Hoogly West Bengal 20.06.2000 Hoogly West Bengal 21.06.2000 Hoogly West Bengal 21.06.2000

23 Khanakul

Nabashan

Khanakul

Ramnagar

Hoogly

13.06.2000 WestBengal

Hoogly WestBengal 13.06.2000

42 Khanakul

Birloka

Khanakul

1583 Noada Narayanpur 40

Khanakul

21.06.1997

Hoogly

13.06.2000 WestBengal

Hoogly

13.06.2000 WestBengal

Hoogly

13.06.2000 West Bengal [ भाग II-खण्ड 3( ii) ]

10163

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

Gopalnagar

2990 26.10.1996

Krishnanagar

Chakbhedua

Saibona

Gouran Mandaran

Gouran

1354

Ghoradaha

57 24.05.1997

Ramnagar

Ghoradaha

1848 26.07.1997

Ramchandrapur 54

Dharampur

8 Khanakul Hoogly WestBengal 13.06.2000 Khanakul

13.06.2000

WestBengal

Hoogly

Khanakul

West Bengal 16.06.2000 Hoogly

Khanakul Hoogly West Bengal 16.06.2000 Khanakul

16.06.2000 Hoogly WestBengal

Khanakul Hoogly WestBengal 16.06.2000 Khanakul

WestBengal 20.06.2000 Hoogly

Khanakul

13.06.2000 Hoogly WestBengal

Khanakul

20.06.2000 Hoogly WestBengal

Khanakul

21.06.2000 Hoogly WestBengal

Khanakul

13.06.2000

WestBengal

Hoogly

42 Khanakul

Ramnagar

Krishnanagar 37 39

Bhanderhati

153 2990 26.10.1996

Satmasa

162

Arakul

161

Sitalpur

13.06.2000 Hoogly WestBengal

Khanakul

13.06.2000 Hoogly West Bengal

19.06.2000

Arambag

WestBengal

Hoogly

Arambag Hoogly WestBengal 19.06.20

19.06.2000

Arambag Hoogly WestBengal

19.06.2000

157 Arambag

Pratapnagar

Hoogly WestBengal

19.06.2000

160 Arambag

Mandaran

WestBengal

Hoogly

19.06.2000 Hoogly

158 Arambag

Arandi

159

Kantabani

142

144

Selalpur

Pirichpur

WestBengal

19.06.2000

Arambag

WestBengal

Hoogly

Arambag Hoogly West Bengal 21.06.2 21.06.2000

14.06.2000

Arambag Hoogly WestBengal

21.06.2000

143 Arambag

3684 GI /2004-13

WestBengal

Hoogly 10164

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4 , 1926

1349

132

Dakshin Rasulpur 24.05.1997

134

Haraditya

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] 6

8 Arambag Hoogly West Bengal 21.06.2000 Hoogly West Bengal

Arambag

Madhurpur

1583 21.06.1997

Taral

133 2990

84 26.10.1996

Mayapur

Asanpur

Josapur

21.06.2000 Arambag Hoogly West Bengal 21.06.2000 Hoogly West Bengal

Arambag

21.06.2000 Hoogly West Bengal

Arambag

22.06.2000

West Bengal 21.06.2000 Hoogly

Arambag

West Bengal

Arambag

Telua

Valia

Malaypur

Kasigore

Chakhazi

Batanal

Chakamad

Hoogly

22.06.2000

West Bengal

Arambag Hoogly

22.06.2000

West Bengal 22.06.2000 Hoogly

Arambag

West Bengal 23.06.2000 Hoogly

Hoogly West Bengal

Arambag

22.06.2000 Hoogly

Arambag

West Bengal 22.06.2000 Hoogly

Arambag

West Bengal 22.06.2000 Hoogly West Bengal

Arambag

Chakfazil

Uttar Rasulpur

Uttar Sheikpur

22.06.2000

Arambag Hoogly West Bengal 22.06.2000

West Bengal

Hoogly

Arambag

22.06.2000 Hoogly West Bengal

Arambag

1354

Kasigore

22.06.2000

Arambag

24.05.1997

Valia

73 44

1355

134

Haraditya

Hoogly West Bengal 22.06.2000

Arambag Hoogly West Bengal 22.06.2000

Arambag

132 24.05.1997 Dakshin Rashulpur Hoogly West Bengal 21.06.2000

Arambag

Hoogly West Bengal 21.06.2000 10165

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

132

1584

21.06.2000

Arambag

West Bengal

Dakshin Rashulpur

Hoogly

21.06.1997

143

West Bengal 21.06.2000

Arambag

Pirichpur

Hoogly

Taral

133

1848 26.07.1997

West Bengal 21.06.2000

Arambag Hoogly

Telua

22.06.2000

West Bengal

Arambag Hoogly

22.06.2000

West Bengal

Kasigore

Hoogly

Arambag

Valia

22.06.2000

West Bengal

Arambag Hoogly

193

Dewanchak

06.12.2001

WestBengal

Goghat Hoogly

2711 13.10.2001

Kota

194

06.12.2001

West Bengal

Goghat Hoogly

Saora

189

06.12.2001

Goghat

West Bengal

Hoogly

187

Nakunda

06.12.2001

West Bengal

Goghat Hoogly

117

DahiaKanda

04.12.2001

West Bengal

Goghat Hoogly

118

Kurmana

04.12.2001

Goghat

West Bengal

Hoogly

Sunia

119

04.12.2001

West Bengal

Goghat Hoogly

Kamche

04.12.2001

WestBengal

Hoogly

Goghat

04.12.2001

West Bengal

Goghat

Hoogly

04.12.2001

West Bengal

Goghat Hoogly

Uttar Balrampur

04.12.2001

Goghat

West Bengal

Gobindapur

Hoogly

Bhadur

04.12.2001

Goghat

West Bengal

Hoogly

32 Goghat

West Bengal 04.12.2001

Hoogly

Bajua

Sekati

29 Goghat

Hoogly West Bengal 04.12.2001

04.12.2001

West Bengal

Mondalganti

Goghat Hoogly

Kamarhati

174

Raina Burdwan West Bengal 10.04.2000 145 25.01.1997 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4 , 1926

10166

186 145

Raina

Kongerpur

25.01.1997

Lohai

185 Raina

Raina

184

Madhabdihi

183

Raina

Alampur

180

Raina

JotRaghab

Raina

Chakbasantabati 181

Raina

Dharan

124

Baithari

Raina

Udgarah

Raina

Bajitpur

Raina

Bora

Raina

Ujirhati

Raina

Kona Krishnapur

Raina

Mogaimari

Sehara

Raina 49

627

Kamarhati

174

Raina 28.03.1998

184

Madhabdihi

Raina

183

Raina

Alampur

1807

Kamarhati

[PART II-SEC . 3(ii )]

8 6

Burdwan

09.04.2000 West Bengal

09.04.2000 Burdwan WestBengal

09.04.2000 Burdwan West Bengal

09.04.2000 Burdwan WestBengal

19.06.2000 Burdwan WestBengal

16.06.2000 Burdwan WestBengal

17.06.2000 Burdwan WestBengal

09.04.2000 Burdwan WestBengal

Burdwan

09.04.2000 WestBengal

174 Raina

19.07.1997

Lohai

Burdwan

10.04.2000 WestBengal

185 Raina

183

Raina

Alampur

180

Raina

JotRaghab

Dharan

124

Raina

Bajitpur

Burdwan

09.04.2000 WestBengal

Burdwan

09.04.2000 WestBengal

Burdwan

09.04.2000 WestBengal

Burdwan

19.06.2000 West Bengal

Burdwan

17.06.2000 WestBengal 10167

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/ पौष4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

17.06.2000

West Bengal

Burdwan

58 Raina

17.06.2000 1807 Ujirhati 19.07.1997

West Bengal

Burdwan

Raina

Mogalmari

17.06.2000

West Bengal

Burdwan

Raina

Sehara

11.11.2001

West Bengal

Burdwan

Raina

136

Narattambati

2710

11.11.2001 13.10.2001

West Bengal

Burdwan

137 Raina

Babla

11.11.2001

West Bengal

Burdwan

Raina

139

Sanko Narayanpur

11.11.2001

West Bengal

Burdwan

141 Raina

Kalui

11.11.2001

West Bengal

Burdwan

Raina

140

Rampur

11.11.2001

West Bengal

Burdwan

Raina

132

Nandanpur

11.11.20

West Bengal

Raina

Burdwan

131

Uchalan

21.02.2000

West Bengal

Burdwan

Raina

102

Bara Gopinathpur

627 28.03.1998

21.02.2000

West Bengal

Raina

Burdwan

Kamdebpur

21.02.2000

West Bengal

Burdwan

Raina

Jubila

21.02.2000

West Bengal

Burdwan

Raina

Alladipur

20.06.2000

West Bengal

Raina

Burdwan

Krishnapur Kukra

27.06.2001

West Bengal

Burdwan

Raina

Shankari

25.06.2001

West Bengal

Burdwan

Raina

Sasanga

21.02.2000

Burdwan West Bengal

102 Khanda Ghosh

145 BaraGopinathpur

25.01.1997

21.02.2000

West Bengal

Burdwan

95 Khanda Ghosh

Kamdebpur

21.02.2000

West Bengal

Burdwan

Khanda Ghosh

Jarul

21.02.2000

Khanda Ghosh

West Bengal

Burdwan

Sunia

21.02.2000

West Bengal

Burdwan

Khanda Ghosh

Taraposh 10168

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

Jubila

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ] 6

Khanda Ghosh

145 25.01.1997

Alladipur

82, Burdwan West Bengal 21.02.2000 Burdwan

Khanda Ghosh

WestBengal 21.02.2000

Khanda Ghosh

Krishnapur Kukra

Burdwan West Bengal 20.06.2000 Burdwan

Khanda Ghosh

Burdwan West Bengal 27.06.2001

Khanda Ghosh

06.10.2001

Burdwan West Bengal 11.12.2001 10169

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/ पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

105

11.12.2001 West Bengal

Burdwan

Khanda Ghosh

Induti

2653 06.10.2001

10.12.2001 Burdwan West Bengal

Khanda Ghosh

104

Torkona

Burdwan

10.12.2001

Khanda Ghosh

100

Balabati

West Bengal

10.12.2001 West Bengal

Burdwan

Khanda Ghosh

Pitambarpur

10.12.2001 Burdwan West Bengal

Chagram

07.12.2001 Burdwan West Bengal

Khanda Ghosh

Krishnapur Kukra

Sankari

25.12.2001 Burdwan West Bengal

Khanda Ghosh

27.05.2002 Burdwan West Bengal

Khanda Ghosh

Napara

Burdwan

27.05.2002

Khanda Ghosh

Mashila

Burdwan

Nala

145 25.01.1997

Burdwan

Nala

627 28.03.1998

Burdwan

Nala

1807 19.07.1997

Burdwan

Nala

2653 06.10.2001

161

Galsi

Konarpur

145 25.01.1997

West Bengal

Burdwan

22.06.2001 West Bengal

Burdwan

22.06.2001 West Bengal

Burdwan

22.06.2001 West Bengal

27.05.2002 West Bengal

Burdwan

22.06.2001 West Bengal

Burdwan 10170

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

152

Galsi

Belgram

Satinandi

145 25.01.1997

149

Galsi

Hitta

147

Galsi

Channa

146

Galsi

Shankari

145

Galsi 62

161

Galsi

Konarpur

152

627 28.03.1998

Galsi

Belgram

Satinandi

149

Galsi

Hitta

147

Galsi

Channa

146

Galsi 63

1585

152

Galsi

Belgram

21.06.1997

1807

152

Galsi

Belgram

19.07.1997

Hitta

147

Galsi

146

Channa

Galsi 65

2653

161

Galsi

Konarpur

06.10.2001

Alutia

154

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] 6

22.06.2001 Burdwan WestBengal

Burdwan

22.06.2001 WestBengal

22.06.2001 Burdwan WestBengal

22.06.2001 Burdwan West Bengal

22.06.2001 Burdwan WestBengal

Burdwan

22.06.2001 WestBengal

22.06.2001 Burdwan WestBengal

Burdwan

22.06.2001 WestBengal

22.06.2001 Burdwan WestBengal

Burdwan

22.06.2001 WestBengal

Burdwan

22.06.2001 WestBengal

Burdwan

27.05.2002 WestBengal

Burdwan

14.06.2000

Aushgram

1587

21.06.1997

Silut

119

West Bengal

Burdwan

01.03.2000

Aushgram

120

Mallikpur

WestBengal

Burdwan

01.03.2000

Aushgram

Beluti

121

WestBengal

Burdwan

01.03.2000

Aushgram

128

176 1588

29.02.2000 West Bengal

Burdwan

Aushgram

Karanji

21.06.1997

175

Bhada

29.02.2000 West Bengal

Burdwan

Aushgram

177

29.02.2000 West Bengal

Burdwan

Aushgram

Belari

168

29.02.2000 West Bengal

Burdwan

Aushgram

Belgram

167

Noada

14.06.2000 West Bengal

Burdwan

Aushgram

161

Shibda

14.06.2000 West Bengal

Burdwan

Aushgram

162

14.06.2000 West Bengal

Burdwan

Aushgram

Dariapur

158

Gushkara

14.06.2000 West Bengal

Burdwan

Aushgram

152

01.03.2000 West Bengal

Burdwan

Aushgram

Somaipur

503 22.02.1997

118

Baburbandh

01.03.2000 West Beng:

Burdwan

Aushgram

119

Silut

03.2000.ان West Bengal

Burdwan

Aushgram

Mallickpur 120

121

Beluti

01.03.2000 West Bengal

Aushgram Burdwan

01.03.2000 West Bengal

Burdwan

Nrishinghapur

127

Bilshanda

02.03.2000 West Bengal

Burdwan

Aushgram

3684 G1/2004-14 10172

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

8 1

176

Burdwan

Karanji

West Bengal 29.02.2000

Aushgram

627 28.03.1998

Bhada

175

Burdwan West Bengal 29.02.2000

152

Burdwan

01.03.2000 Somaipur

West Bengal

Aushgram

Bhada

175

Burdwan West Bengal 29.02.2000

Aushgram

788

Belari

18.04.1998

177

Burdwan

29.02.2000

West Bengal

Aushgram

Burdwan

Belgram

29.02.2000

West Bengal

168 Aushgram

Noada

167

Burdwan

14.06.2000

Aushgram

West Bengal

Shibda

161

Burdwan

14.06.2000

West Bengal

Aushgram

Gushkara

158 Aushgram Burdwan West Bengal 14.06.2000 73

Reora

128

Burdwan West Bengal 02.03.2000

Aushgram

1587

21.06.1997

114

Burdwan

Srikrishnapur

West Bengal 01.03.2000

Aushgram

129

Burdwan

Bakshibad Pogram

West Bengal 02.03.2000

Aushgram

Baburbandh

118

Burdwan West Bengal 01.03.2000

Aushgram

152

Burdwan

Somaipur

Aushgram

West Bengal 01.03.2000 74

145

Bhatar

Orgram

Burdwan West Bengal 13.03.2000 25.01.1997

627

Bhatar

Orgram

Burdwan West Bengal 13.03.2000 28.03.1998 10173 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Burdwan

13.03.2000

West Bengal

Bhatar

Orgram

1807 19.07.1997

13.06.2000

Birbhum West Bengal

111 Bolpur

Udaypur

503 22.02.1997

21.02.2001

Birbhum West Bengal

110 Bolpur

Chandanpur

Birbhum

13.06.2000

West Bengal

114 Bolpur

Rasulganjhat

13.06.2000

Birbhum West Bengal

102 Bolpur

Shibpur

21.02.2001

Birbhum West Bengal

103 Bolpur

Uttar Radhanagar

Birbhum

21.02.2001

109

West Bengal

Bolpur

Raipur

21.02.2001

West Bengal

Birbhum

105 Bolpur

Mehidipur

21.02.2001

West Bengal

Birbhum

Bolpur

Pashim Bahadurpur 53

21.02.2001

Birbhum West Bengal

52 Bolpur

Ruppur

Birbhum

21.02.2001

West Bengal

Bolpur

Chandanpur 110

393 21.02.1998

21.02.2001

Birbhum West Bengal

52 Bolpur

Ruppur

21.02.2001

West Bengal

Birbhum

1586

110 Bolpur

Chandanpur

21.06.1997

Birbhum

21.02.2001

105

West Bengal

Bolpur

Mehidipur

Birbhum

21.02.2001

West Bengal

52 Bolpur

Ruppur

21.02.2001

Birbhum West Bengal

111 Bolpur

Udaypur

Birbhum

20.02.2001

West Bengal

Illafnbazar

132

Gopalnagar

1586 21.06.1997

20.02.2001

Birbhum West Bengal

Illambazar

131

Kamarpara

20.02.2001

Birbhum West Bengal

Illambazar

130

Ramnagar

Birbhum

Illambazar

21.02.2001

West Bengal Purbanarayanpur 114

Birbhum

110 Illambazar

21.02.2001

West Bengal Goltikuri

Birbhum

21.02.2001

WestBengal

Illambazar

115

Matikona 10174

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA 4 , 1926

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

108

Panchtentule

West Bengal

Iłłambazar Birbhum

20.02.2001 1586 21.06.1997

107

Kayera

Illambazar Birbhum West Bengal 20.02.2001 Panchiara

106

Birbhum West Bengal

Illambazar

20.02.2001 Paikuni

105 Illambazar Birbhum West Bengal 19.02.2001

43 Illambazar Birbhum

Nripatigram

19.02.2

West Bengal

19.02.2001 Gopinathpur

Illambazar Birbhum West Bengal Rakona

19.02.2001

Illambazar Birbhum West Bengal

Dharampur

Birbhum West Bengal

Illambazar

19.02.2001 Shunut

47 Illambazar Birbhum West Bengal 19.02.2001 Salka

West Bengal

Illambazar Birbhum

19.02.2001 81

393

Matikona

115

West Bengal

Illambazar Birbhum

21.02.2001 21.02.1998

Pachiara

106

Birbhum West Bengal

Illambazar

20.02.2001

Nripatigram

Illambazar Birbhum West Bengal 19.02.2001

Dharampur

West Bengal

Illambazar Birbhum

19.02.2001

Shunut

Illambazar Birbhum West Bengal 19.02.2001 Salka

48 Illambazar Birbhum West Bengal 19.02.2001 82

210

Khagra

Dubrajpur

West Bengal

Birbhum

19.02.2001 52 11.01.1997

Paduma

211

West Bengal

Birbhum

Dubrajpur

19.02.2001

208

Bodhgram

Dubrajpur

West Bengal

Birbhum

19.02.2001 Kota

158 Dubrajpur

West Bengal

Birbhum

19.02.2001 Bhaluka

207 Dubrajpur Birbhum West Bengal 19.02.2001

160

Birbhum

Dakshin Chandipur

Dubrajpur

West Bengal 19.02.2001 Birori

164

Birbhum

Dubrajpur

West Bengal 23.01.2001

163

Rengna

Birbhum

Dubrajpur

West Bengal 23.01.2001 10175

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

150

23.01.2001

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

Dakshin Gopalpur

168

Pachiara

52 11.01.1997

Birbhum

23.01.2001

West Bengal

Dubrajpur

169

23.01.2001

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

Chandrapur

143

20.02.2001

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

Hetampur

142

20.02.2001

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

Mohanpur

104

Satkenduri

20.02.2001

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

140

20.02.2001

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

Islampur

139

Beleshuli

20.02.2001

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

106

Azdulla

20.02.2001

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

20.02.2001

West Bengal

110

Nunedi

Birbhum

Dubrajpur

138

20.02.2001

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

Jungal Dubrajpur

111

16.09.2000

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

Panditpur

112

16.09.2000

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

Rupsimuli

16.09.2000

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

Kaythanpur

Hosenabad

16.09.2000

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

16.09.2000 Panch Pukauria

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

Harulia

16.09.2000

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

16.09.2000

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

Balijuri

16.09.2000

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

Gopalnagar

16.09.2000

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

Kuraljuri

Kholakudi

16.09.2000

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

16.09.2000

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

Lakhmi Narayanpur

16.09.2000

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

Punglapur

208

Birbhum

19.02.2001

West Bengal

Dubrajpur

Bodhgram

393 21.02.1998

19.02.2001

207

Bhaluka

Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur 10176

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4 , 1926

4 2

Birori

164 393

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

8 6

Birbhum West Bengal 23.01.2001

Dubrajpur

163 21.02.1998

Rengna

164

Birori

Birbhum West Bengal 23.01.2001

Dubrajpur

163

Rengna

Pachiara

West Bengal 23.01.2001

Dubrajpur Birbhum

168 Dubrajpur

169

Chandrapur

Birbhum West Bengal 23.01.2001 Birbhum West Bengal 23.01.2001

Dubrajpur

143

Hetampur

Birbhum West Bengal 20.02.2001

Dubrajpur

142

Mohanpur

Satkenduri

104 West Bengal 20.02.2001

Dubrajpur Birbhum

Birbhum West Bengal 20.02.2001

Dubrajpur

139

Beleshuli

Birbhum West Bengal 20.02.2001

Dubrajpur

106

Azdulla

20.02.2001 Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

111

Panditpur

Birbhum

16.09.2000 West Bengal

Dubrajpur

Hosenabad

Kaythanpur

16.09.2000 West Bengal

Dubrajpur Birbhum

Birbhum West Bengal 16.09.2000

Dubrajpur

Harulia

Birbhum

16.09.2000 West Befigal

Dubrajpuf

16.09.2000 Birbhum West Bengal

Dubrajpur

Balijuri

Kholakudi

Dubrajpur

Dubrajpur

Birbhum West Bengal 20.02.2001 10177

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

5 2

142 393

Mohanpur

8 6

Regna

28.03.1998

12 52

07.09.2000 WestBengal

Birbhum

Khoyrasole

Budhpu

07.09.2000 West Bengal

Birbhum

Khoyrasole

Haripur

Kenduakuri

07.09.2000 Birbhum West Bengal

Khoyrasole

Alliot

07.09.2000 West Bengal

Birbhum

Khoyrasole

06.09.2000 WestBengal

Khoyrasole

Anandanagar

1806

19.07.1997

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

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार को उक्त रिर्पोट पर विचार करने के पश्चात यह समाघान हो गया है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाना चाहिए ।

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

यह और के न्द्रीय 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 केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने की बजाय सभी विल्लंगमो से मक्त होकर इंडियन ऑयल कॉपोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । 10179 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

अनुसूची

जिल्ला: वडोदरा

राज्य: गुजरात

तालुका : वडोदरा

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टर

एयर

उप-खण्ड संख्या

सर्वे संख्या

गाँव का नाम

574

अनगढ

571

570

[फा. सं. आर-25011/5/2002- ओ.आर-1 ]

रेणुका कुमार, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 15th December, 2004

S. O. 3296.- Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 604 dated 8th March , 2004 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) , ( herein after referred to as the sald Act) the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the lands specified in the schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation of Crude Oil from Viramgam to Koyli in the State of Gujarat , a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited for implementing the Augmentation of Viramgam - Koyli Section of Salaya - Mathura Pipeline System;

And, whereas , copies of the said notification were made available to the public on 25/06/2004 ;

And whereas , the Competent Authority has under sub- section ( 1 ) of section of 6 of the said Act has submitted his report to the Central Government ;

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

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 lands specified in the schedule appended to this notification area hereby acquired;

And further, in the 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 .

3684 GI/2004-15 10180

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

SCHEDULE

State: GUJARAT

District : Vadodara

Taluka : Vadodara

Area

Are

Sub- Division No. Hectare

Sq . Mtr .

Survey No.

Name of the Village

574

Anagadh

59 571

570

[No. R- 25011/5/2002- O.R. - I ] RENUKA KUMAR , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 15 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3297.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय के का. आ. 607 , 1439, 1441 दिनांक 8 मार्च, 2004, 14 जुन , 2004 द्वारा पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962 का 50) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन अधिसूचना प्रकाशित कर, सलाया- मथुरा पाइपलाइन प्रणाली के विरमगाम-कोयली सेक्शन की संवर्द्धन परियोजन। हेतु, अपरिष्कृत तेल क। परिवहन करने के प्रयोजन के लिए, विरमगाम से कोयली तक पाइपलाइन बिछाने हेतु उक्त अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट की भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ।

और उक्त अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ जनता को दिनांक 25/06/2004, 19/08/2004 तक उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी।

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

यह 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 केंन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने की बजाय सभी विल्लंगमो से मक्त होकर इंडियन ऑयल कॉपोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । 10181

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/ पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

अनुसूची

जिल्ला: अहमदाबाद

तालुका : साणंद

सर्वे संख्या

उप-खण्ड संख्या गाँव का नाम

कलाना

100

106

116

137

155

154

2 साणंद

1515

1572

1/B

1687

2085

835

खोरज

1 खोडा

300

233

सनाथल

677

891

317

वसोदरा

राज्य: गुजरात क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टर

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

6 4

53 0

57 0

98 0

14 0

28 0

21 0

00 0

58 0

17 0

01..

80 0

48 0

00 0

[फा. सं. आर-25011/45/2001- ओ.आर-1 ]

रेणुका कुमार , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 15th December, 2004

S. O. 3297.- Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 607, 1439, 1441 dated 8th March , 2004, 14th June , 2004 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) , ( herein after referred to as the said Act ) the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the lands specified in the schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation of Crude Oil from Viramgam to Koyli in the State of Gujarat , a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited for implementing the Augmentation of Viramgam - Koyli Section of Salaya- Mathura Pipeline System;

10182

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA4, 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii )] And, whereas , copies of the said notification were made available to the public on 25/06/2004 , 19/08/2004;

And whereas , the Competent Authority has under sub- section ( 1 ) of section of 6 of the said Act has submitted his report to the Central Government; And whereas , the Central Government , after considering the said report is satisfied that the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this Notification should be acquired;

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 lands specified in the schedule appended to this notification area hereby acquired;

And further , in the 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 .

SCHEDULE Taluka : SANAND

District : AHMEDABAD

Sub-Division No.

Survey No.

Name of the Village

3 Kalana

100

106

116

137

155

154

Sanand

1515

1572

1/B

1687

2085

835

Khoraj

Khoda

300

233

State : GUJARAT

Area Are

Hectare

Sq. Mtr .

82 0

24 0

28 0

57 0

98 0

14 0

28 0

42 0

28 0

21 0

14 0

00 0

58 0

17 0

00 0

80 0

48 0

61 10183

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

の

677

Sanathal

891

317

Vasodara

[No. R-25011/45/2001 -O.R. - I ] RENUKA KUMAR , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 15 दिसम्बर , 2004

का. आ. 3298.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय के का. आ. 1440 दिनांक 14 जुन, 2004 द्वारा पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 (1962 का 50 ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन अधिसूचना प्रकाशित कर, सलाया - मथुरा पाइपलाइन प्रणाली के विरमगाम - कोयली सेक्शन की संवर्द्धन परियोजना हेतु , अपरिष्कृ त तेल क। परिवहन करने के प्रयोजन के लिए, विरमगाम से कोयली तक पाइपलाइन बिछाने हेत उक्त अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट की भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी । और उक्त अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ जनता को दिनांक 17/08/2004 तक उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी ।

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार को उक्त रिर्पोट पर विचार करने के पश्चात यह समाधान हो गया है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाना चाहिए । अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए घोषणा करती है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि के उपयोग का अधिकार अर्जन कि या जाता है ।

यह 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 केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने की बजाय सभी विल्लंगगो से मुक्त होकर इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहितं होगा । 10184

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II SEC . 3 (ii) ]

अनुसूची

जिल्ला: अहमदाबाद

राज्य: गुजरात

तालुका: विरमगाम

क्षेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

सर्वे संख्या

हेक्टर

एयर

वर्ग मीटर

उप-खण्ड संख्या

43 सचाणा

1129

1025

798

हांसलपुर सेरेश्वर

[फा. सं. आर-25011/45/2001- ओ.आर-1 ]

रेणुका कुमार, अवर सचिव

_New Delhi , the 15th December, 2004

S. O. 3298.- Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 1440 dated 14th June, 2004 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) , (herein after referred to as the said Act ) the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the lands specified in the schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation of Crude Oil from Viramgam to Koyli in the State of Gujarat, a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited for implementing the Augmentation of Viramgam - Koyli Section of Salaya- Mathura Pipeline System;

And , whereas , copies of the said notification were made available to the public on 17/08/2004;

And whereas , the Competent Authority has under sub- section ( 1 ) of section of 6 of the said Act has submitted his report to the Central Government ;

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

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 lands specified in the schedule appended to this notification area hereby acquired;

10185 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/ पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

SCHEDULE

State: Gujarat

District : Ahmedabad

Taluka: Viramgam

Area

Are Sq. Mtr .

Hectare

Sub-Division No.

Survey No.

Name of the Village

1129

Sachana

1025

798

Hansalpur Sereshvar

[No. R-25011/45/2001 - O.R. - I ] RENUKA KUMAR , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 16 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3299.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को यह प्रतीत होता है कि लोकहित में यह आवश्यक है कि तमिलनाडु राज्य में आईबीपी टर्मिनल , सीबीएमटी , मुटटम गाँब से सीपीसीएल जैटी, पठनाचेरी गाँब तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादन के परिवहन के लिये इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ;

और ऐसा प्रतीत होता है कि ऐसी पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए इस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करना आवश्यक है ;

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

उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध कोई व्यक्ति उस तारीख से, जिसको भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती हैं, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर , भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन या भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रति लिखित रुप में आक्षेप श्री आर. वजवेलू, सक्षम प्राधिकारी , चेन्नई-तिरुच्चि मदुराई उत्पाद पाइपलाइन परियोजना और आसनूर से शंकरी तक ब्रांच पाइपलाइन। परियोजना , 4/2 , आरोक्यसामी स्ट्रीट, काफोर्ड कालोनि, तिरुच्चिराप्पल्ली -620 012 , (तमिलनाडू) को कर सकेगा । 10186

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

अनुसूची

जिला: नागपठनम तालूका : नागपठनम

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] राज्य : तमिलनाडु

क्षेत्रफल

हिस्सा नंबर

सर्वे नंबर

गॉव का नाम

नं. 4. नागूर

4क

171

261

260

259

258

257

253

2अ

252

251

250

147

1अ

210

211

214

215

131

216

वर्ग मीटर

आर

हेक्टर

10 0

50 0

22 0

88 0

36 0

17 0

71 0

78 0

05 0

40 0

90 0

15 0

40 0

99 10187 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

218

219

228

7अ

228

7ब

228

9अ

228

[फा. सं. आर-25011/28/2004-ओ.आर-1 ]

रेणुका कुमार, अवर सचिव

NewDelhi , the 16th December, 2004

S. O. 3299.- Whereas , it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of petroleum products from IBP Terminal , CBMT , Muttam Village to CPCL Jetty , Pattanacheri Village in the State of Tamilnadu 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 of Right of User in Land ) Act.1962 (50 of 1962) , the Central Government hereby declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;

Any person , interested in the land described in the said Schedule may within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of 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 landto Shri . R. Vajravelu , Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Chennai- Trichy -Madurai Product Pipeline Project and a branch pipeline from Asanur to Sankari , 4/2 , Arockiasamy Street , Crawford Colony , Tiruchirappalli - 620 012. Tamilnadu.

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

10188

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ]

SCHEDULE

State : TAMILNADU

District : NAGAPATTINAM

Taluk : NAGAPATTINAM

Sub-Division No.

Survey No. Name of the Village

NO 4. NAGORE

171

261

260

259

258

257

253

252

251

250

147

210

211

214

215

2 Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr.

40 0

50 0

80 0

70 0

15 0

10 0

58 0

50 0

22 0

88 0

40 0

17 0

71 0

05 0

40 0

99 10189

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

216

218

219

228

[No. R-25011/28/2004- O.R. -I ] RENUKA KUMAR , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 16 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ . 3300.- केन्द्रीय सरकार , को लोक हित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है की उड़ीसा राज्य में पारादीप से पश्चिम बंगाल राज्य में हल्दिया तक कच्चे तेल के परिवहन के लिये इंडियन ऑइल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए.

और केन्द्रीय सरकार को उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है की ऐसी भुमि जिसके भीतर पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसुचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में वर्णित है , 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 उप- धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा करती है.

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भुमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधीन राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियों साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर भूमि के अन्दर पाइपलाइन बिछाने के संबंध में श्री अशोक कुमार दास, सक्षम प्राधिकारी पारादीप - हल्दिया पाइपलाइन परियोजना इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमीटेड , इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमीटेड मार्केटिंग डिविजन हाउसिंग कम्पलेक्स, मेघदम्बारा , डाकघर बालासोर 756056 , (उड़िसा) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । कुरूदा, 10190

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA4 , 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

अनुसूची

जिला : केन्द्रपाड़ा

तहसील का नाम गाँव का नाम

राज्य : उड़िसा

क्षेत्रफल

खसरा संख्या

हेक्टेयर 1

बन्धपारा

महाकालपाड़ा

366

103

206

352

204

205

201

200

375

374

175

174

173

362

490

काकटपूर

489

488

483

484

479

464

768

गगुआ

753

1109

1023

754

755

756

732

731

726

एयर वर्ग मीटर

83 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

4 1

727

724

722

723

716

725

721

719

1126

बाबर

418

499

419

417

संराहामा

458

457

456

459

460

455

454

453

452

445

446

451

447

450

427

449

426

425

423

422

419

421

1507

1464

473

0 पट्टामुन्उई

सनकृपा

472

10191 5

01 10192

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA 4, 1926

4 1

471

470

469

468

452

640

641

453

642

534

454

599

456

415

516

515

514

419

417

418

598

174

बाटीपाड़ा

181

182

175

171

406

407

350

106

397

सातकुड़िया

393

392

402

915

403

304

761

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

01 10193

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

292

771

772

बोउलान्ग

2146

2241

2467

2240

2435

2233

2232

2231

2230

2228

2227

2229

2189

2190

2174

2339

2253

1656

1654

1666

1667

1665

1668

1672

1673

1670

1671

1643

1595

1596

1597

1598

1592

1600

1599

1602

1603

1609

1610

1604 6

10 10194

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

1611

1612

1394

1399

1398

1397

1396

1395

1336

1335

1331

1315

1316

1317

1314

1313

1312

1299

1297

1298

1300

877

867

866

865

858

859

860

861

832

833

835

834

837

836

838

839

822

819

821

820

818

2463

807

809

808

791

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )]

18 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

CANAL

446

ब्रह्मपूर

706

418

417

420

415

421

422

413

412

411

423

404

410

409

408

407

406

566

चेड़िया

567

584

574

573

572

575

772

576

579

577

578

559

558

560

391

392

557

556

526

525

524

527

523

517

518

514

513

10195 6

02 10196

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA4 , 1926

512

511

510

508

509

507

115

113

554

बुहाळ

545

544

547

543

539

538

537

541

536

888

889

535

180

177

178

101

148

147

149

141

122

883

102

151

850

851

801

800

799

798

272

273

274

430

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii) ] 6

07 .

63.

02 10197

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

438

440

757

458

457

459

462

463

देउली

476

474

211

108

1289

बन्तो

1272

1271

1275

1276

1269

1270

1261

1224

1344

253 6

78,

90 10198

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

254

255

256

257

260

1223

270

267

271

272

209

208

207

203

202

190

197

193

196

194

195

184

181

178

179

177

176

1319

175

174

172

171

128

1312

1315

1323

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

▼ 10

93 10199

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/ पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

1293

1294

1295

अन्धारूआ

2399

मालीपुर

1584

1585

1586

2125

1288

1581

2471

1551

1580

2240

2244

2494

1555

1544

1543

1529

1523

2003

1524

1508

1505

1507

1506

2011

1475

2010

1474

1126

1473

2210

2203

1454

1452

1455

1451

1450

1453

1449 6

00 10200

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

1440

1441

2197

1439

2460

1415

1414

1413

1417

1392

1418

2062

1391

2061

1390

1389

1314

1388

2103

1387

2330

2331

अधाजोरी

बालीपटना

2343

465

464

460

462

461

456

457

442

431

430

424

429

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

10 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

423

426

425

520

2612

609

610

2810

621

643

648

650

652

651

653

2509

2582

667

2945

385

386

387

115

114

113

136

2759

112

108

389

106

105

103

102

104

101

2788

2935

2727

10201 6

01 10202

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

2507

डामरपुर

2506

2505

2504

2464

2465

2466

2467

2443

2460

2437

2436

2435

2433

2438

2424

2423

2412

2413

2414

2415

2416

2417

2403

2418

2402

2401

1461

श्रीरामपुर

1470

1469

1472

1473

1468

1483

1437

1436

1438

1435

1433

1432

1429

1428

3015

1426

1427

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii) ] 6

20 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

4 1

1401

1400

1403

1402

1386

3013

1387

1280

1281

1273

1276

1274

1275

1271

2497

2496

1257

1137

1138

1136

1141

2875

1133

2876

1142

1132

1143

1147

1144

1146

1145

1153

1154

1155

1156

888

865

864

867

869

868

872

2903

पालपटना

4255

4256

4254

4251

10203 5

00 10204

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

4252

4253

4229

4224

4748

4225

4226

4227

4109

4110

4111

4112

4113

4114

4104

4879

4539

4103

4102

4696

2152

2153

2154

2156

2158

2157

2159

2741

2740

2739

2738

2735

4623

2746

2734

2733

2732

2731

2730

2215

4774

4775

4776

2729

2728

2727

2757

2726

2725

2724

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

01 10205

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/ पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2723

2722

2721

2719

2720

2717

4622

2785

2786

2787

2788

2706

2705

2704

2703

2707

2681

2682

2683

2684

2685

2608

2595

2596

2597

2598

2593

4544

710

अलिहा

औल

826

707

706

704

706

642

639

431

409

430

429

427

759

426

414

415

423

426 6

01 10206

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

400

416

419

768

417

418

419

400

857

401

398

234

राईसरपुर

272

297

233

232

311

312

310

313

315

314

316

160

161

463

101

100

105

106

107

मोहासानी

2664

2665

2666

2809

2671

2673

2897

2669

2674

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

23.

41 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

2675

2654

2650

2680

2579

2574

2573

2572

2569

2570

2562

2561

2556

2885

2518

2517

2516

2195

2514

2925

2515

2926

2388

2389

2380

2390

2386

2224

2393

2395

2396,

2401

2402

2411

2910

2911

2412

2419

2415

2416

2417

2420

2419

2418

1248

1247

1249

10207 6

32 10208

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

1242

1201

1227

1228

1212

1226

2771

1221

1222

1220

1216

1217

1142

1140

1139

1137

1136

1132

1134

989

995

994

972

967

973

966

964

963

962

961

960

1176

चान्डियागड़ी

1175

2800

1174

1126

1127

1128

1131

1067

1066

1065

1064

1058

1059

574

575

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

67 10209

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

573

2613

576

577

539

543

540

537

536

531

532

521

394

393

395

502

396

501

397

500

488

487

474

473

475

476

452

477

451

444

447

446

सितलेश्वर

796

794

795

2124

2023

785

780

776

775

754

755

1991

751

1992

743 5

04 10210

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

741

742

488

487

485

483

484

482

1996

1994

458

1995

481

474

473

475

476

471

477

2077

1944

2093

सालिआन्च

998

992

991

[PART II- SEC . 3( ii) ]

3684GI/2004-18 01

27 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

967

नियाल

1817

1818

1816

1815

1684

1685

1686

1697

1688

1694

2356

1696

1641

1675

1674

1642

1646

1643

1647

1645

1650

1651

1653

2333

1487

1494

1495

1498

2501

1497

1499

1500

1501

1504

1503

1458

1453

1454

1455

1436

1431

1437

1430

1427

1425

1424

10211 5

39 10212

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

118

117

116

115

114

112

113

101

102

2546

1002

इन्डोल

1155

1001

1198

1842

तुन्गा

1481

1480

1479

1610

1609

1478

1576

1577

1576

1476

1477

1472

1452

1451

1450

1759

1760

1761

1540

1539

1449

1444

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

56.

10 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

1538

1537

1448

1415

1414

1413

1873

1411

1418

1416

1494

1419

1368

1367

1379

1778

1210

1377

1211

1212

1223

1378

1083

1082

1080

1070

1049

697

627

625

629

630

646

637

636

639

636

506

505

504

1649

2157

0 राजकनिका

पारिनुआपाड़ा

2096

2099

2097

2098

2090

10213 5

02 10214

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

2089

2082

2083

2085

2694

2086

2029

2030

2684

2031

2032

2033

2020

2021

2017

2019

2607

2018

2006

2014

2007

2005

2000

1999

2653

1998

1994

1982

1993

1983

1767

1765

1761

1755

1754

2600

1759

2753

1388

1389

1390

1391

1431

1539

1521

1522

2668

[PART II SEC . 3(ii) ] 5

03-

83 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

1523

1524

1526

1527

1529

1530

1517

382

353

355

354

356

352

351

349

368

369

247

248

246

222

2465

221

215

257

214

216

217

210

207

206

109

10215 6

02 10216

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA 4, 11026

मिर्जापुर

608

611

1117

604

615

603

600

599

1037

596

594

595

1031

563

565

566

558

1048

550

556

551

552

553

1055

366

365

361

362

347

349

350

1068

1067

347

247

248

249

1064

253

231

1038

234

232

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

10 10217

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/ पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

233

1062

221

203

206

204

205

168

107

169

171

170

172

147

145

148

149

150

151

142

141

1076

05.

1073

1097

1071

177

कोथापाही

176

175

168

266

167

166

147

269

132

141 10218

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

281

122

120

119

बालीबन्धा

493

494

535

489

495

717

478

477

481

473

471

472

466

469

450

455

456

458

714

435

440

441

439

1343

अगापाड़ा

1344

1341

1342

1339

1209

1227

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

02.

37 !

10219

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

1229

1228

1336

1230

1237

1238

1240

1246

1245

1244

1303

1309

1310

1311

1317

1319

1898

पेगारपाड़ा

1897

1895

1894

1229

1226

1225

1237

1212

1211

2143

1213

1210

1214

608

609

611

610

612

613

430

634

567

651

650

655

656

657

515

658

661 6

27 10220

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

660

676

514

512

511

508

501

500

509

499

689

2187

690

707

706

708

709

712

710

711

821

820

822

819

818

815

814

813

810

806

809

807

808

2237

789

788

787

161

नाहुनी

160

159

150

126

124

135

120

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

79 10221

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

पन्की

3242

3238

3239

3240

3235

3234

3233

3232

3231

3230

3229

3228

3314

3227

2857

3059

2850

2858

2863

2864

2866

3657

2867

2868

2869

2870

2865

2792

2876

2791

2783

2782

2775

2883

2886

2887

2909

2904 5

03 10222

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA4, 11026

2651

1421

1422

1420

1419

3775

1425

1418

1426

1436

1376

1377

1378

1379

1380

1381

1383

1382

1330

1329

1328

3352

1335

3599

3598

1339

1297

1296

1285

1295

1283

1286

1287

1288

1289

1254

1252.

1290

1534

1535

1536

1533

1537

1538

1540

1544

3595

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

08.

64 10223

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

1547

1545

1546

2513

1626

1622

1613

1623

3520

1950

1387

[फा. सं. आर-25011/12/2004-ओ.आर -1 ]

रेणुका कुमार, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 16th December, 2004

S. O. 3300.- Whereas , it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of petroleum (crude) from Paradip in the State of Orissa to Haldia in the State of West Bengal , a pipeline should be laid by Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

And whereas it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying such pipeline , it is necessary to acquire the Right of User in 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 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 . Ashok Kumar Dash , Competent Authority , Indian Oil Corporation Limited , Paradip Haldia Pipeline Project, Indian Oil Corporation Limited , Marketing Housing Complex, Meghadambaru , Post office- Kuruda , Balasore ( Orissa) .

10224

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

[PART II-SEC . 3(ii)]

Schedule

District : Kendrapara

Name of Tehsil Name of Village Khasara No.

366 Mahakalpada Bandhapara

103

206

352

204

205

201

200

375

374

175

174

173

362

490

Kakatpur

489

488

483

484

479

464

768

Gogua

753

1109

1023

754

755

756

732

731

726 State : Orissa

Area

Hectare Are Sq . Mtrs .

.00

83 10225

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

727

724

722

723

716

725

721

719

1126

418

Babar

499

419

417

458

Sanrahama

457

456

459

460

455

454

453

452

445

446

451

447

450

427

449

426

425

423

422

419

421

1507

1464

473

Sankrupa

Pattamundai

472

01 10226

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

471

470

469

468

452

640

641

453

642

534

454

599

456

415

516

515

514

419

417

418

598

174

Batipada

181

182

175

171

406

407

350

106

397

Satakudia

393

392

402

915

403

304

761

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

68 10227

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

292

771

772

2146

Baulang

2241

2467

2240

2435

2233

2232.

2231

2230

2228

2227

2229

2189

2190

2174

2339

2253

1656

1654.

1666

1667

1665

1668

1672

1673

1670

1671

1643

1595

1596

1597

1598

1592

1600

1599

1602

1603

1609

1610

1604

12.

44-

00 10228

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :

1611

1642

1394

1399

1398

1397

1396

1395

1339

1398

1397

1394

1393

1992

1299

867

886

838

889

880

832

894

822

2485

807

809

808

1791

DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA/ 4, 11026

[PART HSBC 3(ii ) ] [

13955

1336

1297

1208

1300

付

820,

18 10229

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/ पौष4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

875

CANAL-

Sre

30 00

ان

446

Brahampur

45 80

706

29 SS

418

300

86 00

417

420

415

421

422

413

412

244

411

423

12 00

404

410

388

41 00

409

TEB

79 10

408

74 00

244

407

406

888

48 20

566

Chadheya

288

567

32 60

584

081

574

573

450

572

101

67 10

575

772

52 10

576

579

577

578

€88

559

02 20

556

rat

10 20

560

028

391

188

392

68 10

557

108

556

008

96 00

526

525

524

вет

527

523

517

٤٢٤

518

§14

ATS

513

120 10230

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

512

511

510

508

509

507

115

113

Buhala

554

545

544

547

543

539

538

537

541

536

888

889

535

180

177

178

101

148

147

149

141

122

883

102

151

850

851

801

800

799

798

272

273

274

430

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

13 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

438

440

757

458

457

459

462

463

Deuli

476

474

211

108

1289

Banto

1272

1271

1275

1276

1269

1270

1261

1224

1344

253

10231

90 10232

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25,2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

PART SEC . 3 ( i) ]

254

255

256

257

260

YAT

1223

270

267

271

272

209

208

207

ilusa 0

203

202

190

197

193

196

194

195

184

181

178

179

177

176

1319

175

40.1

174

172

171

128

30 SU

1312

1315

oinsa 0

1323

93 10233 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

140

0 1293

0 1294 501

0 1295 28

Andharua

15 a

εε

0 19

Star

0 20

13 TRAN

seer

2399

Malipur

1584

5803

0 1585

reci

1586

1805

0 2125

0081

0 1288

288

1581

0 2471 ARE

8801

1551

1580 cors

1881

0 2240

さぁ

0 2244 Θεες

18ες

2494

1555

0 1544 ar

0 1543

1529

1523 a

2003

1524

1508

1505

1507

1506 3

2011

14758CS

O entega

2010 20

1474

0 112600 本

1473 204

2210

220392

1454

1452

.10

1455

1451084

1450ACA

145300

1449 10234

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

1440

1441

2197

1439

2460

1415

1414

1413

1417

1392

1418

2062

1391

2061

1390

1389

1314

1388

2103

1387

2330

2331

Adhajori

2343

Balipatna

465

464

460

462

461

456

457

442

431

430

424

429

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

3684GI/2004- 04-21 00

10 10235

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

423

426

425

520

2612

609

610

2810

621

643

648

650

652

651

653

2509

2582

667

2945

385

386

387

115

114

113

136

2759

112

108

389

106

105

103

102

104

101

2788

2935

2727

75 5

16-

02.

02 10236

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

2507

Damarpur

2506

2505

2504

2464

2465

2466

2467

2443

2460

2437

2436

2435

2433

2438

2424

2423

2412

2413

2414

2415

2416

2417

2403

2418

2402

2401

1461

Srirampur

1470

1469

1472

1473

1468

1483

1437

1436

1438

1435

1433

1432

1429

1428

3015

1426

1427

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

02 10237

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

1401

1400

1403

1402

1386

3013

1387

1280

1281

1273

1276

1274

1275

1271

2497

2496

1257

1137

1138

1136

1141

2875

1133

2876

1142

1132

1143

1147

1144

1146

1145

1153

1154

1155

1156

888

865

864

867

869

868

872

2903

4255

Palpatna

4256

4254

4251 10238

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

4252

4253

4229

4224

4748

4225

4226

4227

4109

4110

4111

4112

4113

4114

4104

4879

4539

4103

4102

4696

2152

2153

2154

2156

2158

2157

2159

2741

2740

2739

2738

2735

4623

2746

2734

2733

2732

2731

2730

2215

4774

4775

4776

2729

2728

2727

2757

2726

2725

2724

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

20 10239

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

2723

2722

2721

2719

2720

2717

4622

2785

2786

2787

2788

2706

2705

2704

2703

2707

2681

2682

2683

2684

2685

2608

2595

2596

2597

2598

2593

4544

710

Aliha

Aul

826

707

706

704

706

642

639

431

409

430

429

427

759

426

414

415

423

426

01 10240

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

400

416

419

768

417

418

419

400

857

401

398

234

Raisarpur

272

297

233

232

311

312

310

313

315

314

316

160

161

463

101

100

105

106

107

Mohasani

2664

2665

2666

2809

2671

2673

2897

2669

2674

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

41 10241

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

2675

2654

2650

2680

2579

2574

2573

2572

2569

2570

2562

2561

2556

2885

2518

2517

2516

2195

2514

2925

2515

2926

2388

2389

2380

2390

2386

2224

2393

2395

2396

2401

2402

2411

2910

2911

2412

2419

2415

2416

2417

2420

2419

2418

1248

1247

1249

00 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

10242

1242

1201

1227

1228

1212

1226

2771

1221

1222

1220

1216

1217

1142

1140

1139

1137

1136

1132

1134

989

995

994

972

967

973

966

964

963

962

961

960

1176

Chandiagadi

1175

2800

1174

1126

1127

1128

1131

1067

1066

1065

1064

1058

1059

574

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

02.

3684GI/2004-22 01

08 [भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

10243

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

573

2613

576

577

539

543

540

537

536

531

532

521

394

393

395

502

396

501

397

500

488

487

474

473

475

476

452

477

451

444

447

446

796

Sitleshwar

794

795

2124

2023

785

780

776

775

754

755

1991

751

1992

743 5

93 10244

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4 , 11026

741

742

488

487

485

483

484

482

1996

1994

458

1995

481

474

473

475

476

471

477

2077

52.

-47

1944

2093

Salianch

998

992

991

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

27 10245

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

967

1817

Nial

1818

1816

1815

1684

1685

1686

1697

1688

1694

2356

1696

1641

1675

1674

1642

1646

1643

1647

1645

1650

1651

1653

2333

1487

1494

1495

1498

2501

1497

1499

1500

1501

1504

1503

1458

1453

1454

1455

1436

1431

1437

1430

1427

1425

1424

14 10246

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

118

117

116

115

114

112

113

101

102

2546

1002

Endol

1155

1001

1198

1842

Tunga

1481

1480

1479

1610

1609

1478

1576

1577

1576

1476

1477

1472

1452

1451

1450

1759

1760

1761

1540

1539

1449

1444

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

10 10247

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/ पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

1538

1537

1448

1415

1414

1413

1873

1411

1418

1416

1494

1419

1368

1367

1379

1778

1210

1377

1211

1212

1223

1378

1083

1082

1080

1070

1049

697

627

625

629

630

646

637

638

639

636

506

505

504

1649

2157 Rajkanika Parinuapada

2096

2099

2097

2098

2090

02.

02 10248

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026.

2089

2082

2083

2085

2694

2086

2029

2030

2684

2031

2032

2033

2020

2021

2017

2019

2607

2018

2006

2014

2007

2005

2000

1999

2653

1998

1994

1982

1993

1983

1767

1765

1761

1755

1754

2600

1759

2753

1388

1389

1390

1391

1431

1539

1521

1522

2668

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

83 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

1523

1524

1526

1527

1529

1530

1517

382

353

355

354

356

352

351

349

368

369

247

248

246

222

2465

221

215

257

214

216

217

210

207

206

109

10249

02 10250

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

608

Mirjapur

611

1117

604

615

603

600

599

1037

596

594

595

1031

563

565

566

558

10:48

550

556

551

552

553

1055

366

365

361

362

347

349

350

1068

1067

347

247

248

249

1064

253

231

1038

234

232

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

10 10251 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/ पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

233

1062

221

203

206

204

205

168

167

169

171

170

172

147

145

148

149

150

151

142

141

1076

1073

1097

1071

177

Kothapahi

176

175

168

266

167

166

147

269

132

141 10252

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

281

122

120

119

493

Balibhanda

494

535

489

495

717

478

477

481

473

471

472

466

469

450

455

456

458

714

435

440

441

439.

1343

Agapada

1344

1341

1342

1339

1209

1227

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

04.

37 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

10253

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

1229

1228

1336

1230

1237

1238

1240

1246

1245

1244

1303

1309

1310

1311

1317

1319

1898

Pegarpada

1897

1895

1894

1229

1226

1225

1237

1212

1211

2143

1213

1210

1214

608

609

611

610

612.

613

430

634

567

651

650

655

656

657

515

658

661

11 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

10254

660

676

514

512

511

508

501

500

509

499

689

2187

690

707

706

708

709

712

710

711

821

820

822

819

818

815

814

813

810

806

809

807

808

2237

789

788

787

161

Nahuni

160

159

150

126

124

135

120

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

79 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

3242

Panki

3238

3239

3240

3235

3234

3233

3232

3231

3230

3229

3228

3314

3227

2857

3059

2850

2858

2863

2864

2866

3657

2867

2868

2869

2870

2865

2792

2876

2791

2783

2782

2775

2883

2886

2887

2909

2904

10255

04.

15 10256

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4 , 11026

2651

1421

1422

1420

1419

3775

1425

1418

1426

1436

1376

1377

1378

1379

1380

1381

1383

1382

1330

1329

1328

3352

1335

3599

3598

1339

1297

1296

1285

1295

1283

1286

1287

1288

1289

1254

1252

1290

1534

1535

1536

1533

1537

1538

1540

1544

3595

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

64 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

10257 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

1547

1545

1546

2513

1626

1622

1613

1623

3520

1950

1387

[No. R- 25011 /12/ 2004- O.R. - I ] RENUKA KUMAR , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 16 दिसम्बर , 2004

का. आ. 3301.- केन्द्रीय सरकार, को लोक हित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है की उड़ीसा राज्य में पारादीप से पश्चिम बंगाल राज्य में हल्दिया तक कच्चे तेल के परिवहन के लिये इंडियन ऑइल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए.

अतः अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( 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, उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा करती है .

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भुमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियों साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है , इक्कीस दिन के भीतर भूमि के अन्दर पाइपलाइन बिछाने के संबंध में श्री अशोक कुमार दास , सक्षम प्राधिकारी पारादीप - हल्दिया पाइपलाइन परियोजना इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमीटेड , इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमीटेड मार्केटिंग डिविजन हाउसिंग कम्पलेक्स , मेघदम्बारा , डाकघर कुरूदा , बालासोर 756056 , (उड़िसा) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । 10258

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

अनुसूची

जिला : भद्रक

राज्य : उडीसा

क्षेत्रफल

तहसील का नाम

गाव का नाम

खसरा संख्या

आर वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर

चान्दबाली

कान्ड़ीआसाही

1044

316

307

315

313

312

311

309

310

294

295

293

291

292

342

341

38.

346

345

285

284

282

281

280

279

278

277

275

276

273

274

272

381

382

379

383

388

387

243

172

169

170

10 [ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

102.99

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004 /पौष 4,1926

171

1074

32.

1718

टेन्टुलीड़िही

1709

1710

1708

1711

1680

1674

1675

1664

1663

2726

1649

1650

1633

1636

1637

1635

1622

1623

1621

1562

1561

1563

1564

1567

1568

1573

1570 5

:06

10 10260

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

1571

1574

1572

1579

1583

1581

1582

2725

2635

1316

613

डिओबिली

612

608

607

606

603

604

597

596

591

590

589

418

417

416

415

692

414

125

120

123

122

121

115

664

667

126

116

119

111

707

657

112

110

659

655

102

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

35 10261

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/ पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

113

661

114

675

606

अम्बुलो पुरूषोत्तमपुर

629

628

577

655

बौलजुड़ा

654

656

657

658

666

676

663

665

664

677

694

692

05 10262

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

693

691

690

689

688

872

700

910

701

683

394

415

883

421

422

423

440

424

425

439

438

426

437

436

444

384

435

434

385

386

388

387

278

273

272

193

195

196

200

878

100

101

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

57 10263

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

203

302

मुल्काईमा

753

374

373

375

392

395

394

801

393

397

398

345

344

341

342

343

340

339

769

405

768

164

165

166

161

163

456

466

467

468

469

500

501

503

504

506

507

509

508

536

537

00 10264

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

535

534

533

532

525

531

530

790

528

529

1488

सानसिंगपुर

1494

1493

1495

1497

1498

885

860

884

861

866

882

865

864

868

840

839

828

829

830

822

699

698

697

696

684

681

682

680

679

1898

1899

666

2366

461

177

178

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

43 [ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

10265

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

181

182

183

184

187

185

188

2438

192

203

204

205

208

209

2:14

215

216

217

213

220

221

222

226

228

229

230

396

397

398

399

402

रामपुर

147

145

144

142

141

139

138

137

129

130

131

132

120

3147

घाटपुर

4793 شب

00.

43 10266

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

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

4794

4795

4800

4796

4799

4798

4797

4766

4765

4761

4760

4767

4756

4759

4755

4754

4752

4753

4750

3221

3220

3212

4995

3215

3218

3217

3211

3201

3200

3186

3177

3176

3169

3166

3168

3155

3156

3149

3140

3138

3139

3136

3137

3135

3128

3129

3127

90 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग - खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

3125

2996

2997

2998

3030

2999

3012

3011

4892

3003

3006

3005

3004

2768

2786

2789

4859

2785

2791

2784

2792

2793

2800

2799

4825

2807

2806

2812

2813

2814

2815

2821

2827

2826

2835

2838

2837

2836

2529

2822

2530

2529

2506

2507

2508

4941

4940

10267

00 10268

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA 4 , 11026

2510

2511

2514

2512

2513

2109

2430

2427

2425

2424

2423

2120

2418

2122

2125

2126

2124

2123

1928

1918

1919

1921

1917

1916

1914

1915

4973

1896

4891

1895

1893

1894

1891

1880

1881

1884

1883

1740

1742

1743

1741

1735

1636

1737

1648

1649

1647

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

32.

08 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

1636

1638

1635

1634

1633

1628

1613

1612

1303

1256

1255

1258

414

210

412

411

410

413

211

235

236

237

4994

238

4849

239

240

244

245

251

243

242

4926

264

265

269

338

324

323

325

322

321

320

317

319

318

316

10269 5

25 10270

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

178

बरासिंगपुर

179

183

187

188

189

150

190

149

148

146

145

2080

140

151

3526

माधापुर

3131

3128

3133

3125

3126

3122

3123

3124

3121

3120

3104

3105

3106

3107

3108

खारीजन

100

लक्ष्मीप्रसाद

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )]

00 10271

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

4 1

1708

सन्तरापुर

1663

1672

1671

1673

1674

1675

1669

1760

1761

1678

1509

1510

1513

1536

1514

1515

1518

1507

516

1517

1498

1497

1496

1495

1494

153

1532

1537,

1493

1540

1541

1542

1543

1544

1545

1546

1547

1420

56 10272

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

[PART I-SBC. 3 (ii) ] 2

1419

1138

1742

1098

1096:

1097

1094

1093

1142

1143

1144

1762

1145

1146

1083

[फा, र्स, आर-25011/ 11/2004- ओ.आर -1 ]

रेणुका कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 10th December, 2004

S. O. 3301.- Whereas , it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of petroleum (crude) from Paradip in the State of Orissa to Haldia in the State of West Bengal , a pipeline should be laid by Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

And whereas it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying such pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the Right of User in 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 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 . Ashok Kumar Dash , Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Paradip - Haldia Pipeline Project, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Marketing Housing Complex, Meghadambaru , Post office- Kuruda, Balasore (Orissa ).

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

10273

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

Schedule

District : Bhadrak

State : Orissa

Area

Name of Tehsil Name of Village Khasara No.

Hectare Are Sq.Mtrs. 1

Chandbali Kandiasahi

1044

316

307

315

313

312

311

309

310

294

295

293

291

292

01.

342

341

346

345

285

284

282

281

280

279

278

277

275

276

273

274

272

381

382

379

383

388

387

243

172

169

170 10274

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

171

1074

Tentulidihi

1718

1709

1710

1708

1711

1680

1674

1675

1664

1663

2726

1649

1650

1633

1636

1637

1635

1622

1623

1621

1562

1561

1563

1564

1567

1568

1573

1579

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

10 10275

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

1571

1574

1572

1579

1583

1581

1582

2725

2635

1316

613

Deobil

612

608

607

606

603

604

597

596

591

590

589

418

417

416

415

692

414

125

120

123

122

121

115

664

667

126

116

119

111

707

657

112

110

659

655

102 5

00 10276

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

113

661

114

675

606

Ambulo Purushottampur 35

629

628

577

655

Bauljuda

654

656

657

658

666

676

663

665

664

677

694

692

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

71 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

10277

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

693

691

690

689

688

872

700

910

701

683

394

415

883

421

422

423

440

424

425

439

438

426

437

436

444

384

435

434

385

386

388

387

278

273

272

193

195

196

200

878

100.

101

07 10278

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

4 1

203

302

Mulkaema

753

374

373

375

392

395

394

801

393

397

398

345

344

341

342

343

340

339

769

405

768

164

165

166

161

103

456

466

467

468

469

500

501

503

504

506

507

509

508

536

537

{PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

93 10279

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

535

534

533

532

525

531

530

790

528

529

1488

Sansingpur

1494

1493

1495

1497

1498

885

860

884

861

866

882

865

864

868

840

839

828

829

830

822

699

698

697

696

684

681

682

680

679

1898

1899

666

2366

461

177

178

05 10280

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

181

182

183

184

187

185

188

2438

192

203

204

205

208

209

214

215

216

217

213

220

221

222

226

228

229

230

396

397

398

399

402

Rampur

147

145

144

142

141

139

138

137

129

130

131

132

120

3147

Ghatpur

4793

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)]

43 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

4794

4795

4800

4796

4799

4798

4797

4766

4765

4761

4760

4767

4756

4759

4755

4754

4752

4753

4750

3221

3220

3212

4995

3215

3218

3217

3211

3201

3200

3186

3177

3176

3169

3166

3168

3.155

3156

3149

3140

3138

3139

3136

3137

3135

3128

3129

3127

10281 5

90 10282

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

3 1

3125

2996

2997

2998

3030

2999

3012

3011

4892

3003

3006

3005

3004

2768

2786

2789

4859

2785

2791

2784

2792

2793

2800

2799

4825

2807

2806

2812

2813

2814

2815

2821

2827

2826

2835

2838

2837

2836

2529

2822

2530

2529

2506

2507

2508

4941

4940

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

17 10283 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

2510

2511

2514

2512

2513

2109

2430

2427

2425

2424

2423

2120

2418

2122

2125

2126

2124

2123

1928

1918

1919

1921

1917

1916

1914

1915

4973

1896

4891

1895

1893

1894

1891

1880

1881

1884

1883

1740

1742

1743

1741

1735

1636

1737

1648

1649

1647

3684 G1 /04-28 10284

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

1636

1638

1635

1634

1633

1628

1613

1612

1303

1256

1255

1258

414

210

412

411

410

413

211

235

236

237

4994

238

4849

239

240

244

245

251

243

242

4926

264

265

269

338

324

323

325

322

321

320

317

319

318

316

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii)]

25 10285

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

178

Barasingpur

179

183

187

188

189

150

190

149

148

146

145

2080

140

151

3526

Madhapur

3131

3128

3133

3125

3126

3122

3123

3124

3121

3120

3104

3105

3106

3107

3108

Kharijan

52、

100

Lakshmiprasad

0 5

13-

00 10286

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

1708

Santarapur

1663

1672

1671

1673

1674

1675

1669

1760

1761

1678

1509

1510

1513

1536

1514

1515

1518

1507

1516

1517

1498

1497

1496

1495

1494

1533

1532

1537

1493

1540

1541

1542

1543

1544

1545

1546

1547

1420

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

56 10287

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/ पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

1419

1138

1742

1098

1096

1097

1094

1093

1142

1143

1144

1762

1145

1146

1083

[No. R-25011/11/2004- O.R. -I ] RENUKA KUMAR, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 16 दिसम्बर , 2004

का. आ. 3302.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोक हित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि राजस्थान राज्य मे इन्डियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा कोयली सिद्धपुर- सांगानेर पाइपलाइन से अजमेर तक पैट्रोलियम उत्पाद शाखा पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार को उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछानें के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उक्त भूमि में , जो इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित है और जिसमें पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने का प्रस्ताव है, उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए ;

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

कोई भी व्यक्ति , जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है , उस तारीख से जिसको भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने या भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाने के संबंध में श्री ओ. पी. गुप्ता , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , ( राजस्थान) इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड , (पाइपलाइन्स प्रभाग ) 33 , मुक्तानंदनगर , गोपालपुरा बाई - पास , जयपुर ( राजस्थान) -302018 , को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप , भेज सकेगा । 10288

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA4 , 11026

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

अनुसूची

ताहसील : अजमेर

जिला : अजमेर

राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम खसरा संख्या

हेक्टेयर

एयर

वर्ग मीटर 1

5 दौराई

1652

80 1648

40 1647

40 1641

[फा. सं . आर-25011/2/2004- ओ.आर-1 ]

रेणुका कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 16th December, 2004

S. O. 3 :302.-Whereas , it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of Petroleum Product Branch Pipeline to Ajmer from Koyali Sidhpur Sanganer pipeline may be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

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

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

An'y 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 issued under sub section ( 1 ) of section 3 of the said act, as published in the Gazette of India, are made a'vailable 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 O. P. Gupta , Competent Authority , ( Rajasthan ) Indian Oil Corporation Limited , 33 , Muktanand Nagar , Gopalpura Bye - Pass , Jaipur - 302 018.

10289 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/ पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

SCHEDULE

State : Rajasthan

District : Ajmer

Tehsil : Ajmer

Area

Khasara No.

Name of Village

Are

Sq.mtr.

Hectare

1652

Dourai

1648

1647

1641

[No. R-25011 /2/2004 -O.R. - I ] RENUKA KUMAR , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 17 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3303.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि गुजरात राज्य में मुन्द्रा से दिल्ली तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ;

और केन्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसी पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि ऐसी भूमि में, जो इस से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में वर्णित है, जिसमें उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाऐ जाने का प्रस्ताव है , उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए ;

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

कोई व्यक्ति , जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको इस अधिसूचना से युक्त भारत के राजपत्र की प्रतियाँ साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने के लिए उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के सम्बन्ध में श्री आर.वी. सरवैया, सक्षम प्राधिकारी , हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, जिमखाना बिल्डिंग , आदिपुर रोड , अन्जार , कच्छ -370110 ( गुजरात) को लिखित रुप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । 10290

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

अनुसूची

[PART II SEC . 3 (ii) ]

जिलाः बनासकांठा

तालूका: अमीरगड

खसरा सं.

गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

कजॉ

बलराम नदी खसरा संख्या 86 और 92के बीच में

119

121

118

123

126

127

128

नाला खसरा संख्या 128 और 130 के बीच में

130

जेथी

राज्य: गुजरात

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर उप खण्ड सं .

एयर

हेक्टेयर

पी2

पी1 और पी2

00 पी5

पी 2

पी1

पी2

अ/10/पी/49

अ/10/पी/31

10/पी/1

10/पी/ 4

10/पा/3

10/पी/ 2

अ/10/पी/43

अ/10/पी/47

सडक 95

अ/10/पी/1

अ/10/पी/1 10291

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

राज्य: गुजरात

जिलाः बनासकांठा

तालुका: अमीरगड़

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर

खसरा सं.

उप खण्ड सं.

गाँव का नाम

हेक्टेयर एयर

क्रर्म सं.

120+121

2 जेथी (जारी ...)

119

पी1

सहक 119

पी2

115

108

सडक उमरकोट गाम सीमा और खसरा संख्या 10 / पी 1 के बीच में

पी1

1पी1

पी2

पी1

पी2

26+27

1पी3

पी2

पी1

पी2

उमरकोट

आबादी खसरा संख्या 81 और 83 /पी2 के बीच में

पी2

सडक खसरा संख्या 83 /पी 2 और जेथी गम्म सीमा के बीच में

पी 1

इकबालगड

3684 G1/04-29 10292

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

[PART I-SEC. 3 ( i))

जिलाः बनासकांठा

राज्य: गुजरात

तालूका: अमीरगड

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

उप खण्ड सं.

हेक्टेयर

क्रम सं.

एयर

7 1

53 4

पी 2

इकबालगन(जारी ...)

पी 2

पी1

पी3

सडक खसरा संख्या 45/पी 3 और 34 के बीच में

2पी4

2पी 1

2पी 2

1पी 1

2पी 3

2पी 1

58 रास्ता खसरा संख्या 36/ 2पी । और 30+ 31 + 38 / 1 + 39 + 45 + 56 + 57 + 58 /पी 11 के बीच में

पी11

30+31+ 38/1 + 39 + 45 + 56 + 57+ 58

पी20

30+ 31 + 38/1 + 39 + 45 + 56 + 57 + 58

पी17

30+31 + 38/ 1 + 39 + 45 + 56 + 57 + 58

रास्ता खसरा संख्या

30+ 31 + 38 / 1 + 39 + 45 + 56 + 57+

58/पी 17 और

65 30+31 +38 / 1 + 39 + 45 + 56 + 57+

58 / पा 15 के बीच में

30 + 31 + 38/ 1 + 39 + 45 + 56 + 57+

पी15

58 30+31 + 38 / 1 + 39 + 45 + 56 + 57 +

पी 24

58 30+ 31 + 38 /1 + 39 + 45 + 56 + 57+

पी14

58 30+31 + 38/1 + 39 + 45 + 56 + 57 +

पी 6

58 22

पी1

जुनी सरोत्री

पी 1

पी2

सड़क 23

पी3 10293

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौप 4,1926

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

जिलाः बनासकांठा

तालुका: अमीरग

खसरा सं.

गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

5 जुनी सरोग्त्री (जारी)

नाला खसरा संख्या 38 और 43 के बीच में

नाला'खसरा संख्या 47 और 51 के बीच में

232 सरोत्रा

232

233

237

234

235

236

208

नाला 237

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

राज्य: गुजरात

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर उप खण्ड सं.

एयर

हेक्टेयर

पी1

000

4.6

0.3

पी1

पी2

पी1

पी2

पी1

पी3

पी4

पी3

पी2

1+ 2+ 3+ 4

पी1

पी2 10294

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

जिलाः बनासकांठा

तालुका: अमीरगड़

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

क्रम सं.

3 6

सडक 237 सरोत्रा (जारी ...)

सडक 48

सड़क खसरा संख्या 38 /पी । और 34 के बीच में

278 किडोतर

280

281

282

286

287

288

राज्य: गुजरात

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर उप खण्ड सं .

हेक्टेयर एयर

7 4

01 1

29 पी1

1पी1

56 1पी 2

पी1

पी2

पी1

17 पी1

45 पी1

पी2/1

पी 2/ 2

43 पो३

10 पी4/2

64 पी4/ 3

31 0

41 0

53 0

61 1

68 0

48 0

07 2 10295

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

जिलाः बनासकांठा

तालुका: अमीरगड्

खसरा सं.

गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

3 2

7 क्रिडोतर(जारी ... )

माला खसरा संख्या 14/2 और 16 के बीच में

17 काकावाडा

माला किहोतर ग्रम सीमा और खसरा संख्या 7 और 6 के बीच में

सहक खसरा संख्या 6 और 115 के बीच में

115

114

और बनास नदी खसरा संख्या 114/पी 1 16/पी3 के बीच में

राज्य: गुजरात

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर उप खण्ड सं.

हेक्टेयर एयर

पी1

पी2

पी3

पी1

पी2

पी1

पी3

पी1

पी2

0 10296

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

[PART II SEC . 3 (ii) ]

जिलाः बनासकांठा

तालुका: अमीरगद्

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

क्रम सं.

बनास नदी किडोतर गाम सीमा के 9

इस्वानि

बीच में दभेला

46 10

सडक 50

नाला खसरा संख्या 42/ पी । और 24/पी3 के बीच में

रास्ता खसरा संख्या 34/पी 1 और

294/पी2 के बीच में

294

292

271

270

269

265

267

266

252

राज्य: गुजरात

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर उप खण्ड सं .

हेक्टेयर एयर

7 4

88 पी/15

पी15

पी17

पी18

34 पी22

पी1

52 पी3

पी1

28 पी4

12 पी1

42 ]

53 पी 2

पी1

पी 2

पी3

84 पी1

33 पी4

पी 1

64 पी1

24 पी3 10297

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

जिलाः बनासकांठा

तालूका: अमीरगड

खसरा सं.

गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

252 10 दभेला(जारी ... )

सडक खसरा संख्या 252/पी 1 और 251/पी 2 के बीच में

251

सड़क खसरा संख्या 251/पी2 और आवल ग्राम सीमा के बीच में

जुनी रोह

रास्ता खसरा संख्या 42 और 44 के बीच में

एस.एच. खसरा संख्या 50/1 और 59/पी 1 के बीच में

आवल

सडक दभेला गाम सीमा और खसरा संख्या 337/पी4 के बीच में

337

राज्य: गुजरात

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर उप खण्ड सं.

हेक्टेयर एयर

7 4

पी1

पी2

2 000

1:4

07 1

पी 2

पी 1

पी1

33 पी2

पी4

पी1

पी 2

16.

पी3

71 [PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] 10298

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 11026

जिलाः बनासकांठा

राज्य: गुजरात

तालुका: अमीरगड

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर

उप खण्ड सं.

खसरा सं.

गाँव का नाम

हेक्टेयर एयर

क्रम सं.

पी2

12 आवल(जारी ...)

पी3

पी2

पी 1

पी3

पी2

पी5

पी1

100

गधाडा

रास्ता खसरा संख्या 22 और 34 के बीच में

त्रनाम नदी खसरा संख्या 30 और 99 के बीच में

100

103

पी3

103

पी6

103

पी2 10299

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/ पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

जिलाः बनासकांठा

राज्य: गुजरात

तालुका: अमीरगढ़ा

उप अन्ड सं.

बसस सं.

गाँव का बाज

हेक्टेबर एबर

सं.

पी1

103

13 मध्धाडा जारी ... )

103

पी5

पी1

104

106

पी2

105

पी2

105

पी3

105

पी1

115

पी 2

113

112

118

119

[फा. सं. आर -31015/41/2004-ओ.आर- H ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the17th December, 2004

S.O. 3363-Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of petroleum products from Mundra (Gujarat) to Delhi , a pipeline should be laid by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited;

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

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

Any person, interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which copies of the Guestte of India containing this notification are made available to the public, object in writing to the acquisition ofthe right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land to the R.V. Sarvaiya, Competent Authority, Mundra- Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, Gymkhana Building, Adipur Road, Anjar, Kutch (Gujarat). 370110 3684 G1/04-30 10300

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA4, 1926

[PART II SEC. 3 (ii)]

SCHEDULE

Taluk : AMIRGADH

District : BANASKANTHA

State : GUJARAT

Area

Surveyno.

Nameof Village

Sub-Division No.

Hectare

Are

Square Metre KARZA

1 .

P1&P2

P2.

88 Balaram river in between Survey Number.86 and 92

119

121

118

37 118

123

36 126

37.

77 127

40 128

05.

70 Nala In between Survey Number . 128 and 130

130

2. JETHI

A/10/P/49

A/10/P/31

10/P1

10/P4

10/P3

10/P2

A/10/P/43

A/10/P/47:

37 Asphalted Road.95

A/10/P/1

08 95

A/10/P/1

89 10301 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

Taluk : AMIRGADH

District: BANASKANTHA..

State : GUJARAT

Area

Nameof Village

Surveyno.

Sub- Division No. Hectare

Are

Square Metre JETHI

120+121

31 2

119

11 (Contd ...)

88 Asphalted Road 119

115

108

12 Asphalted Road in between village boundry of Umarkot and Survey

No.10/P1

1P1

26+27

1P3

UMARKOT

65 Village site In between Survey No. 81and 83/P2

28 Asphalted Road In between Survey No.83 /P2 and village boundry of Jethi

IQBALGADH

07 10302

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4 , 1926

Taluk : AMIRGADH

State: GUJARAT District: BANASKANTHA

Area

Nameof Village

Surveyno.

Are

Sub- Division No. Hectare

Square Metre

4. IQBALGADH (Contd...)

85 Asphalted Road In between Survey Number.45/P3 and 34

2P4

2P1

2P2

1P1

2P3

2P1

Cart track Inbetween Survev Number.36/2P1 and 30+31+38/1 +39+45+ 56+57+58/P11

P11

30+31+38/1+ 39+45+56+57+58

P20

30+31+38/1 +39+45+ 56+57+58

P17

30+31+ 38/1 +39 +45+56+57+58

65 Carttrack in between 30+31+38/1 +39 +45 +56+57 +58/P17 and

30+31+38/1 +39+45+ 56+57+58/P15

P15

30+31+38/1 + 39+45 +56+57+58

P24

76 30+31 +38/1 + 39+45+56+ 57+58

59 30+ 31+ 38/1 + 39 +45 +56+57+58

P14

56 30+31+38/1+39+45+56+57+58

35 S. JUNI SAROTRI

Asphalted Road. 23 [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

District: BANASKANTHA

Taluk : AMIRGADH

Surveyno.

Name of Village

29 S, JUNI SAROTRI (Contd...)

NalaIn Between Survey No 38 and

NalaIn between Survey No. 47 and51

232 6. SAROTRA

232

233

237

234

235

236

208

Nala.237

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

10303

भारत काराजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

State : GUJARAT

Area

Are

Sub- Division No. Hectare

Square Metre

05 P2

04 1+2+3+4

0 10304

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

District: BANASKANTHA

Taluk : AMIRGADH

Name of Village

Surveyno.

Mud Road.237

6. SAROTRA (Contd ...)

Asphalted Road.48

MudRoadIn between Survey Number.38 /P1 and 34

278

7. KIDOTAR

280

281

282

286

287

288

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )]

State : GUJARAT

Area

Are

Sub- Division No. Hectare

Square Metre 0

78 0

42 1

01 P1

29 1P1

79 1P2

56 0

67 0

23 P1

50 0

46 0

70 P2

53 0

85 0

69 0

66 0

56 P1

17 P1

45 P2/1

12 0

P2/2

54 P3

43 P4/2

P4/3

64 1

41 0

48 0

53 1

61 0

68 0

48 2

07 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

10805

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

Taluk : AMIRGADH

District : BANASKANTHA

Nameof Village

Surveyno.

7. KIDOTAR

Nala Inbetween Survey Number ; 14/2 and 16

(Contd... )

S. KAKAWADA Nala In between village boundry of Kidotar and Survey No. 7& 6

MudRoad In between Survey Number . 6 and 115

115

114

Banas river In between Survey Number .114/P1 and 16/P3

State : GUJARAT

Area

Sub- Division No. Hectare

Are

Square Metre

82 0

37 0

25 0

98 0

71 P1

97 P2

11 P3

12 0

69 P2

62 P1

24 0

73 P3

85 P1

61 P2

08 0

04 0

49 0

67 0

25 0

10 0.

58 0

77 0

23 [PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

10306

State : GUJARAT

District : BANASKANTHA

Taluk : AMIRGADH

Area

Surveyno.

Are

Nameof Village

Hectare

Sub- Division No.

Square Metre

ISWANI

9 .

Banas river In between village boundry of Kidotar

DABHELA

10.

P/15

MudRoad50

P15

P17

P18

P22

Nala In between Survey No. 42/P1 and 24/P3

Mud Road In between Survey No. 34/P1 and 294/P2

294

292

271

270

269

265

267

266

252 10307

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

State : GUJARAT

Taluk : AMIRGADH

District: BANASKANTHA

Area

Name of Village

Surveyno.

Sub- Division No.

Are

Hectare

Square Metre

252

10. DABHELA (Contd....)

Asphalted Road In between Survey Number.252/P1 and 251/P2

251

Asphalted Road In between Survey Number 251 /P2 &V.B of Awal

11. JUNI ROH

Carttrack In between survey Number 42 and 44

S.H In between Survey Number.50 /1 and 59 /P1

12. AVAL

Asphalted Road In between Villageboundry of Dabhela and 337/P4

337

3684 G1/04-31 10308

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

Taluk : AMIRGADH

District : BANASKANTHA

State: GUJARAT

Area

Nameof Village

Surveyno.

Sub- Division No. Hectare

Are

Square Metre

12. AVAL

(Contd ....)

0 €

100

77 13. GADHADA

64 Carttrack in between Survey No. 22and 34

02 Banas River In betwee! Survey Number.30 and 99

100

103

20 10309 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Taluk : AMIRGADH

District: BANASKANTHA

State : GUJARAT

Area

Survey no.

Name of Village

Sub- Division No.

Are

Hectare

Square Metre

103

13. GADHADA (Contd.... )

104

106

105

115

113

112

118

119

[No. R- 31015/41/2004-O.R. -II ] HARISH KUMAR , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 20 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3304.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि राजस्थान राज्य में ब्यावर से चित्तौड़गढ़ तक पैट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए इण्डियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा 'सिद्धपुर-सांगानेर पाइपलाइन से चित्तौडगढ़ तक ब्रान्व लाईन" के कार्यान्वयन हेतु एक शाखा . पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार को उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उक्त भूमि में , जो इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूचि में वर्णित है और जिसमें पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने का प्रस्ताव है , उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए ।

अतः अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , पैट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन्स (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 , उक्त भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा करती है ।

कोई भी व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है , उस तारीख से जिसको भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है , इक्कीस दिन के भीतर उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने या भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाने के संबंध में श्री ओ. पी. गुप्ता, सक्षम प्राधिकारी , (राजस्थान), इण्डियन ऑयल कॉरपोरेशन लिमिटेड (पाइपलाइन्स प्रभाग), 33 , मुक्तानन्द नगर, गोपालपुरा बाईपास , जयपुर 302018 (राजस्थान) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । [PART II-SBC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

10310

अनुसूची

राज्य: राजस्थान

जिलाः अजमेर

तहसील : ब्यावर

क्षेत्रफल

खसरा सख्या

गांव का नाम

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

हेक्टेयर

313

सेसपुरा

70 .

314

318

478

479

145

लसाडिया

144

147/1

148

149/1

152

153

154

151

665

159

661

662

663

664

650

648

647

646

645

644

640

639

636

632

631

630 10311

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/ पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

राज्य : राजस्थान

जिलाः अजमेर

तहसील : ब्यावर

क्षेत्रफल

खसरा सख्या

गांव का नाम

2 1

629-

628

627

246

245

244

247

248

249

320

322

321

296

297

295

298

294

293

290

285

284

278

279

407

408

409

415/1

416/1

416/2

660 खिरनी खेड़ा

662

664

663/1

667 हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

70 0

60 0

10 0

50 0

00 0

10 0

20 0

80 0

70 0

00 0

20 0

0 10312

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ] तहसील : ब्यावर

जिलाः अजमेर

राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

गांव का नाम

खसरा संख्या

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

668

669

670

10 पाखरियावास

296

297

293

292

291

289

290

285

283

288

273

282

274/2

274/1

268

267

266

143

144

147

148

149

150

151

162

193

194

195

196

192

191

80 10313

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

तहसील : ब्यावर

राज्य : राजस्थान

जिलाः अजमेर

गांव का नाम

क्षेत्रफल

खसरा संख्या

197

190

189

186

187

165

619.

172

636

634

635

690

688

689

687

686

683

684

744

748

751

758

763

747

762

760

764

761 बाहिया भाऊ

302

304

303

315

316

301 हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

5 0

20 0

40 0

20 0

00 0

50 0

80 0

30 0

50 0

30 0

50 0

00 0

90 0

50 0

90 0

40 0

90 0

30 0

80 0

70 0

40 0 10314

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4 , 1926

राज्य राजस्थान

जिलाः अजमेर

तहसील : ब्यावर

क्षेत्रफल

खसरा सख्या

गांव का नाम

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

324

317

331

328

330

[फा. सं. आर-25011/27/2004-ओ.आर । ]

रेणुका कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 20th December, 2004

S. O. 3304. Whereas , it appears to the Central Government , that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of petroleum products from Beawar to Chittaurgarh a "Branch Pipeline to Chittaurgarh from Sidhpur-Sanganer Pipeline " , should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited.

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

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

Any person interested in the land described in the said schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of this notification issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the said Act , 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 O. P. Gupta , Competent Authority ( Rajasthan ) , Indian Oil Corporation Limited, 33 Muktanand Nagar , Gopalpura Bye -pass , Jaipur 302018, Rajasthan.

10315 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

SCHEDULE

Tehsil : BEAWAR

District : AJMER

State : RAJASTHAN

Area Name of the Village

Khasara No.

Hectare Are Sq.mtr...

5 SENSPURA

313

314

318

478

479

80 LASARIYA

145

144

147/1

148

06 30

149/1

152

153

154

151

665

159

661

662

663

664

650

648

647

646

645

644

640

639

636

632

631

630

50 3684 G1/04-32 10316

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA4, 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] Tehsil : BEAWAR

District : AJMER

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Khasara No.

Name of the Village

Hectare Are Sq.mtr. 1

629

628

627

246

245

244

247

248

0 05

249

04 50

320

06 30

322

04 60

321

296

297

295

298

294

293

290

285

284

278

279

1.407

408

409

415/1

416/1

416/2

20 KHIRANI KHERA

660

662

664

663/1

667

90 [ भाग IH- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

10317 Tehsil : BEAWAR

District : AJMER

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Khasara No.

Name ofthe Village

Hectare Are Sq.mtr.

668

669

670

60 PAKHARIYAWAS

296

297

293

292

291

289

290

285

283

288

273

282

274/2

274/1

268

267

266

143

144

147

148

149

150

151

162

O LANOO90

193

194

195

196

192

191

80 10318

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA 4 , 1926

State : RAJASTHAN

District : AJMER

Tehsil : BEAWAR

Area

Khasara No.

Name of the Village

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr.

197

190

189

186

187

165

619

172

636

634

635

690

688

689

687

686

683

684

744

748

751

758

763

747

762

760

764

761

302

BADIYA BHAU

304

303

315

316

301 10319 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

District : AJMER

State: RAJASTHAN Tehsil : BEAWAR

Area

Khasara No.

Name of the Village

Hectare Are Sq.mtr. 1

324

317

331

328

330

[No. R-25011/27/2004-O.R. - I] RENUKA KUMAR, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 21 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3305.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय के का. आ. 1428, 1429 दिनांक 14 जुन , 2004 द्वारा पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962 का 50) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन अधिसूचना प्रकाशित कर, सलाया- मथुरा पाइपलाइन प्रणाली के विरमगाम- कोयली सेक्शन की संवर्द्धन परियोजना हेतु, अपरिष्कृ त तेल क । परिवहन करने के प्रयोजन के लिए, विरमगाम से कोयली तक पाइपलाइन बिछाने हेतु उक्त अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट की भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ।

और उक्त अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ जनता को दिनांक 20/08/2004 तक उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी । और उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अनुसरण में सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने केन्द्रीय सरकार को अपनी रिपॉट दे दी है ।

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार को उक्त रिपोंट पर विचार करने के पश्चात यह समाधान हो गया है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाना चाहिए । अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्तः शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए घोषणा करती है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि के उपयोग का अधिकार अर्जन किया जाता है ।

यह 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 केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने की बजाय सभी विल्लंगमो से मक्त होकर इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । 10320

[PART II-SBC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA4, 1926

अनुसूची

जिल्ला: आणंद

तालुका: आंकलाव

राज्य : गुजरात

क्षेत्रफल

सर्वे संख्या

गाँव का नाम

हेक्टर

वर्ग मीटर

उप-खण्ड संख्या

एयर

245

50 अंबाली

136

148

353

68 आसोदर

1085

1007

1080

1079

19 भेटासी तणपद

150

2057

[ फा. सं. आर-25011/3/2002-ओ.आर-1 ]

रेणुका कुमार, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 21st December, 2004

S. O. 3305.- Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 1428, 1429 dated 14th June , 2004 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 ) , ( herein after referred to as the said Act ) the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the lands specified in the schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation of Crude Oil from Viramgam to Koyli in the State of Gujarat , a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited for implementing the Augmentation of Viramgam - Koyli Section of Salaya - Mathura Pipeline System;

And, whereas , copies of the said notification were made available to the public on 20/08/2004;

And whereas , the Competent Authority has under sub- section ( 1 ) of section of 6 of the said Acthas submitted his report to the Central Government ;

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

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 lands specified in the schedule appended to this notification area hereby acquired;

And further, in the 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 .

321 भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926 ) Α

SCHEDULE

State : GUJARAT

District : ANAND

Taluka : ANKLAV

Area

Are

Sq. tr.

Sub-Division No. Hectare

Survey No.

Name of the Village

6 1

03 Amball

245

2:8

136

148

353

Asodar

1085

1007

1080

1079

06 Bhetasi Talpad

bop

10.2 dun ac IT NOR- 25011 /3/2002-0.R. -IJ

hot puniores 20108 / RENUKA KUMAR, Under Secy.

endank husettev

नई दिल्ली, 21 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3306.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृ‌तिक गैस मंत्रालय के का. आ. 1431 , 1432 दिनांक 14 जुन , 2004 द्वारा पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जন) अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन अधिसूचना प्रकाशित कर, सलाषा- मथुरा पाइपलाइन प्रणाली के जिस्मगाम कोयली सेक्शन की संवर्द्धन परियोजन। हेतु, अपरिष्कृ त तेल क। परिवहन करने के प्रयोजन के लिए, विरमगाम से कोयली तक पाइपलाइन बिछाने हेत उक्त अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट की भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ।

और उक्त अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ जनता को दिनांक 23/08/2004 तक उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी ।

mond ni bailisoge bad ant ai toan to figh और उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अनुसरण में सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने केन्द्रीय सरकार को अपनी रिर्पोट दे दी है ।.. Sot of both men a way it to sexo a эт তীয় ও और केन्द्रीय सरकार को उक्त रिर्पोट पर विचार करने के पश्चातः यह समाधान हो गया है कि इस आना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाना चाहिए । अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए घोषणा करती है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि के उपयोय का आधिकार अर्जन किया जाता है।

यह 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 केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने की बजाय सभी विल्लंगमो से मक्त होकर इंडियन ऑयल कॉपोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । 10322

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART I-SBC . 3 (ii) ]

अनुसूची

जिल्ला: खेडा

तालुका: महेमदाबाद

राज्य : गुजरात

क्षेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

सर्वे संख्या

उप- खण्ड संख्या

वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टर

एयर

467

बीडज

660

22 खेडा

968

562

1/3C

46 खुमरवाड

[फा. सं. आर-25011/4/2002- ओ.आर-1 ]

रेणुका कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 21st December , 2004

S. O. 3306. Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 1431 , 1432 dated 14th June, 2004 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 ) , ( herein after referred to as the said Act) the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the lands specified in the schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation of Crude Oil from Viramgam to Koyli in the State of Gujarat, a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited for implementing the Augmentation of Viramgam - Koyli Section of Salaya - Mathura Pipeline System;

And. whereas , copies of the said notification were made available to the public on 23/08/2004;

And whereas , the Competent Authority has under sub- section ( 1 ) of section of 6 of the said Act has submitted his report to the Central Government ;

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

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 lands specified in the schedule appended to this notification area hereby acquired;

And further, in the 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 .

10323 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

SCHEDULE

State : GUJARAT

District : KHEDA

Taluka : MEHMEDABAD

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq. Mtr.

Sub- Division No.

SurveyNo.

Name of the Village

83 467

Bidaj

660

968

Kheda

1/3C

562

Khumarvad

[No. R- 25011 /4/2002-O.R. -IJ RENUKA KUMAR , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 21 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3307.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय के का. आ. 1433 दिनांक 14 जुन , 2004 द्वारा पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन अधिसूचना प्रकाशित कर, सलाया- मथुरा पाइपलाइन प्रणाली के विरमगाम - कोयली सेक्शन की संवर्द्धन परियोजना हेतु, अपरिष्कृत तेल क । परिवहन करने के प्रयोजन के लिए, विरमगाम से कोयली तक पाइपलाइन बिछाने हेतु उक्त अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट की भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ।

और उक्त अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ जनता को दिनांक 23/08/2004 तक उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी ।

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

यह और के न्द्रीय 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 केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने की बजाय सभी विल्लंगमो से मुक्त होकर इंडियन ऑयल कॉपोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । ७

3684 G1/ 04-33 10324

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA 4 , 1926

[PART II-SBC . 3 (ii) ]

अनुसूची

जिल्ला: खेडा

राज्य: गुजरात तालुका: मातर

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टर

एयर

सर्वे संख्या

उप- खण्ड संख्या

गाँव का नाम

हैजराबाद

[फा. सं. आर-25011/4/2001- ओ.आर -1 ]

रेणुका कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 21st December, 2004

S. O. 3307.- Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 1433 dated 14th June, 2004 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 ) , (herein after referred to as the said Act) the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the lands specified in the schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation of Crude Oil from Viramgam to Koyli in the State of Gujarat , a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited for implementing the Augmentation of Viramgam - Koyli Section of Salaya- Mathura Pipeline System;

And, whereas , copies of the said notification were made available to the public on 23/08/2004;

And whereas , the Competent Authority has under sub - section ( 1 ) of section of 6 of the said Act has submitted his report to the Central Government ;

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

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 lands specified in the schedule appended to this notification area hereby acquired;

And further , in the 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 .

10325 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

SCHEDULE

State : GUJARAT

District : KHEDA

Taluka : MATAR

Area

Are

Sq.Mtr.

Hectare

Sub-Division No.

Survey No.

Name of the Village

Haijrabad

[No. R- 25011 /4/2001 - O.R. -I ] RENUKA KUMAR , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 22 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3308.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि मध्यप्रदेश राज्य में मांगल्या (इंदौर ) संस्थापन से हरियाणा राज्य में पियाला तथा दिल्ली राष्ट्रीय राजधानी क्षेत्र में बिजवासन तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए भारत पेट्रोलियम कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक विस्तार पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

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

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

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है , उस तारीख से जिसको इस अधिसूचना से युक्त भारत के राजपत्र की प्रतियाँ साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती हैं , इक्कीस दिन के भीतर भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने के लिए उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के सम्बन्ध में श्री वी.पी. पाठक , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , मुम्बई मांगल्या पाइपलाइन विस्तार परियोजना , भारत पेट्रोलियम कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड , एम . बी. - 7 , महाश्वेता नगर , महेन्द्र भटनागर मार्ग , उज्जैन 456010 (मध्यप्रदेश ) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । 10326

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4 , 1926

[PART II -SEC . 3 (ii) ]

अनुसूची

तहसील: सांवेर

जिला: इन्दौर

क्र० ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर 1

3 1. मांगल्या

1 2. गारी पिपल्या

250

249

247

245

246

240

242

241

220

200

248(शा० रास्ता)

230 3. रामा पिपल्या

286

290

291

292

293

281

280

274

263

262

200

259

247

232 राज्य: मध्यप्रदेश

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.1206

0.0756

0.2500

0.2664

0.1944

0.1168

0.1026

0.3060

0.3005

0.2574

0.0594

0.0481

0.0216

0.0610

0.1044

0.0870

0.5382

0.1800

0.1750

0.3060

0.0267

0.0216

0.8120

0.1404

0.3365

0.1548

0.1948

0.0450

0.0318

273(शा० रास्ता)

222 4. खाकरोद

0.0360

0.0450

290 (शा० रास्ता)

260

265

270 0.3000

0.5847

0.0900

0.0180

278 (शा० रास्ता)

272

273

274

289 0.1602

0.1566

0.2340

0.3834

0.0864

309 (शां० रास्ता)

305

304

293 0.3942

0.3468

0.0540 10327

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

सर्वे नंबर क्र० ग्राम का नाम

3 2

298 4. खाकरोद (जारी....)

261

299

432 5. टोडी

427

428

421 (शा० रास्ता)

420

419

401

404

378

375

367, 433

429

400

409

735 6. बरलाई जागीर

755

754

753

743 (शा० रास्ता)

737

738

739

731

710

711

712

713

714

716

717

702(शा० रास्ता)

701

693

695

680

681

682

679

675(शा० रास्ता)

674 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.2106

0.2569

0.2148

0.0450

0.0050

0.2358

0.0216

0.4140

0.1983

0.0096

0.4788

0.1710

0.0540

0.0990

0.2280

0.0009

0.0072

0.0900

0.1115

0.2987

0.1392

0.0630

0.1894

0.4021

0.5760

0.6974

0.5130

0.1350

0.0050

0.2700

0.1620

0.3780

0.3060

0.0270

0.0396

0.3622

0.4080

0.2610

0.0450

0.1080

0.2929

0.0108

0.2160 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4 , 1926

10328

सर्वे नंबर ग्राम का नाम

क्र०

3 1 2

665 6. बरलाई जागीर (जारी..)

70 (शा० रास्ता)

22. (शा० रास्ता)

688

175 7. पुषारडा दाई

125

133

124

135

139

141 (शा० रास्ता)

142 (शा० रास्ता)

85 (शा० रास्ता)

144/669

144

145

148

59 (शा० नाला)

106

69 8. पुवारडा हप्पा

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.3834

0.4757

0.0450

0.2265

0.0108

0.0445

0.1191

0.2700

0.1980

0.2948

0.2520

0.0450

0.5762

0.0687

0.0096

0.0540

0.5310

0.0360

0.2880

0.2484

0.1152

0.0108

0.0270

0.0090

0.2520

0.1890

0.1260

0.0720

0.0990

0.0630

0.3960

0.0900

0.0180

0.0450

0.1620

0.0180

0.0065

0.0026

0.0038

0.0100

0.0360

0.4050

0.3600 10329

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

सर्वे नंबर क्र० ग्राम का नाम

3 2

57 8. पुवारडा हप्पा (जारी..)

56 (शा० रास्ता)

24, 25, 26

119 9. मच्छुखेडी

112

111

110

109

108

105 (शा रास्ता)

104

101

266

100

94 (शा० रास्ता)

166

167 (शा० रास्ता)

173

169

170

173/272

172

162

502 10. माकोडिया

501

500

495

376 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.4140

0.0540

0.3060

0.2970

0.6570

0.3780

0.0540

0.0078

0.1080

0.4699

0.0100

0.3708

0.0927

0.1422

0.0720

0.0216

0.0864

0.0144

0.2115

0.2935

0.1620

0.0884

0.1292

0.1008

0.0270

0.5400

0.0270

0.2227

0.0270

0.1014

0.2070

0.1080

0.1440

0.0180

0.0093

0.0241

0.0296

0.1710

0.0810

0.0720

0.0360 10330

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA4, 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] ग्राम का नाम

क्र०

सर्वे नंबर

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

1 2

499

0.0480

10. माकोडिया (जारी.. )

485

0.0764

[फा. सं. आर-31015/62/2004-ओ.आर- II ] .

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 22nd December, 2004

S. O. 3308.- Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of petroleum products from Manglya ( Indore ) terminal in the State of Madhya Pradesh, an extension pipeline to Piyala in the State of Haryana and Bijwasan in the NCT of Delhi should be laid by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited;

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

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

Any person , interested in the land described in the said Schedule may within twenty one days from the date on which copies of the Gazette of India containing this notification are made available to the public ; object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land to Shri V.P. Pathak , Competent Authority , Mumbai - Manglya Pipeline extension Project , Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, MB - 7 , Mahashweta Nagar , Mahendra Bhatnagar Road , Ujjain - 456010 (Madhya Pradesh ) 10331 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

[भाग II-खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

SCHEDULE

STATE: MADHYA PRADESH

DISTRICT : INDORE

TEHSIL : SANWER

AREA IN HECTARE

SURVEY NO.

S.No. NAME OF VILLAGE

0.1206

MANGLYA

0.0756

0.2500

250

2. GARI PIPLIYA

0.2664

240

0.1944

247

0.1168

245

6.1026

246

0.3060

240

0.3005

242

0.2574

241

0.0594

220

0.0481

200

0.0216

248(G. Road)

0.0610

230

0.1044

286

3. RAMA PIPLIYA

0.0870

290

0.5382

291

0.1800

292

0.1750

293

0.3060

281

0.0267

280

0.0216

274

0.6120

263

0.1404

262

0.3365

260

0.1548

259

0.1948

247

0.0450

232

0.0318

273(G. Read)

0.0360

222

0.0450

4. KHAKROD

290(G. Road)

0,3000

260

0.5847

265

0.0900

270

0.0180

276(G. Road)

0.1602

272

0.1566

273

0.2340

274

0.3834

289

0.0864

309(G. Road)

0.3942

305

0.3468

304

0.0540

293

0.2106

208

0.2569

261

0.2148

299

3684 G1/04-34 10332

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

S.No. NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO. 1

3 5. TODI

432

427

428

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] AREA IN HECTARE

0.0450

0.0050

0.2358

0.0216

421(G. Road)

420

419

401

404

378

375

367,433

429

400

409 6. BARLAI JAGIR

735

755

754

753 0.4140

0.1983

0.0096

0.4788

0.1710

0.0540

0.0990

0.2280

0.0009

0.0072

0.0900

0.1115

0.2987

0.1392

0.0630

743(G. Road)

737

738

739

731

710

711

712

713

714

716

717 0.1894

0.4021

0.5780

0.6974

0.5130

0.1350

0.0050

0.2700

0.1620

0.3780

0.3060

0.0270

702(G. Road)

701

693

695

880

681

682

679 0.0396

0.3622

0.4080

0.2610

0.0450

0.1080

0.2929

0.0108

675(G. Road)

674

665

78 0.2160

0.3834

0.4757

70(Cart Trak)

20 0.0450

0.2265

0.0108

0.0445

0.1191

0.2700

0.1980

0.2948

0.2520

0.0450

22(G. Road)

688 0.5762

0.0687

0.0098 10333

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4,1926

[ भाग II - खण्ड 3( ii) ]

SURVEY NO .

S.No. NAME OF VILLAGE

175 7. PUWARDA DAI

125

133

124

135

139

141(G. Road)

142(G. Road)

85(G. Road)

144/669

144

145

146

59.(G. Drain)

106

69 8. PUWARDA HAPPA

56(G. Road)

24,25, 26

119 9. MACHHUKHEDI

112

111

110

109

108

105(G. Road) AREAIN HECTARE

0.0540

0.5310

0.0360

0.2880

0.2484

0.1152

0.0108

0.0270

0.0090

0.2520

0.1890

0.1260

0.0720

0.0990

0.0830

0.3960

0.0900

0.0180

0.0450

0.1620

0.0180

0.0065

0.0028

0.0035

0.0100

0.0360

0.4050

0.3600

0.4140

0.0540

0.3060

0.2970

0.6570

0.3780

0.0540

0.0078

0.1080

0.4699

0.0100

0.3708

0.0927

0.1422

0.0720

0.0216

0.0864

0.0144 10334

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] S.No. NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO.

AREA IN HECTARE

104

0.2115

101

9. MACHHUKHEDI (Contd .....)

0.2935

266

0.1620

100

0.0864

0.1292

0.1008

0.0270

94(G. Road)

0.0270

166

0,5400

0.0270

0.2227

0.0270

167(G. Road) ,

173

0.1014

169

0.2070

170

0.1080

173/272

172

0.1440

0.0180

162

0.0093

0.0241

502

10. MAKODIYA

0.0296

501

0.1710

500

0.0810

495

0.0720

376

0.0360

499

0.0480

485

0.0764

[No. R- 31015/62/2004- O.R. - II ]

HARISH KUMAR, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 23 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3309.- केन्द्रीय सरकार , पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 (1962 का 50) की धारा 2 के खंड (क) के अनुसरण में , उक्त अधिनियम के अधीन , राष्ट्रीय राजधानी क्षेत्र राज्य क्षेत्र , दिल्ली के भीतर हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड की मुंद्रा-दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन के लिए सक्षम अधिकारी के कृत्यों के निर्वहन के लिए श्री सुशील यादव , डानिक्स , एस.डी.ओ. (नजफगढ़) , राष्ट्रीय राजधानी क्षेत्र, दिल्ली सरकार को , उनके अपने कार्यभार के साथ- साथ , प्राधिकृत करती है ।

[फा. स. आर-31015/6/2004- ओ.आर-11 ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 23rd December, 2004

S. O. 3309.- In pursuance of clause (a) of section 2 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines ( Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962) , the Central Government hereby authorizes Shri Sushil Yadav, DANICS , S.D.O. (Nazafgarh) , Government of NCT of Delhi , to perform the functions of the competent authority for Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited's Mundra- Delhi Petroleum Products Pipeline, in addition to his own duties , under the said Act, within the territory of NCT ofDelhi .

[No. R-31015/6/2004-O.R. - II ] HARISH KUMAR , Under Secy.

10335 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/ पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

: None.

Forthe applicant

श्रम मंत्रालय

Forthe non - applicants : Sh . Surendra Singh.

नईदिल्ली , 29 नवम्बर, 2004

05-11-2004

Date of award:

AWARD

1. The Central Government in exercise of the powers referred under Clause D of sub- section 1 and 2 (A) to Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act' ) has referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication, which runs as under:-

का. आ. 3310.- 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 केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय , जयपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 16/2004) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल.- 12011/202/ 2003- आई.आर. ( बी- II ) ]

सी० गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

MINISTRY OF LABOUR

"Whether action of the management of UCO Bank, Jaipur for not giving permanent status to Shri Ramavatar Jawa as part -time Sweeper in 1/3 pay of regular scale after 13 years of service is justified? If not, what relief the claimant is entitled to and from which date ? "

NewDelhi , the 29th November, 2004

S.O. 3310.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 16/ 2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court , Jaipur, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of UCO Bank and their workman, received by the Central Government on 29-11-2004 .

[No. L- 12011 /202/2003 -IR (B- II) ]

C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL- TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR

Case No. CGIT- 16/2004 .

Reference No. L - 12011/202/2003- IR (B- II)

2. The applicant- union has submitted the statement ofclaim to this effect that Sh. Ramavatar Jawa is its member who is working as a Cleaner in the branch of the non- applicant bank since , 1990, that at the time of his employment he was given wages @Rs . 200/- per month, which was raisedto Rs. 440/- w.e.f. 1998. It is further stated that the bank is not giving him the wages as per the Shastri Award and the workman has submitted his representation before the Divisional Manager , Jaipur that as per his seniority he has not been given wages equal to one -half or one - third of the regular pay scale whereas his junior employees are getting this benefit . He has submitted the various representations to the bank authorities but the oral assurances made to him were not carried out andhe has not been paid the wages equivalent to one-third of the regular pay -scale. The Union has , therefore , urged that the workman should be given wages equal to one- third ofthe regular pay-scale w.e.f. 1990 along with 18 per cent interest thereupon.

Sh . Ramavatar Jawa,

S/o Sh . Basantaram Jawa , (Through UCO Bank Staff Association) , Plot No. 176 , Gautam Nagar, Tonk Road,

Applicant

Jaipur

Versus

1. The Assistant General Manager,

3. Resisting the claim of the workman, the non- applicants in their written counter have stated that the workman Sh. Ramavatar Jawa was orally employed by the bank as a part -time Sweeper and likewise the workman, several employees have not been given the wages equal to one-third of the regular pay - scale. It is further stated that such benefit is provided on the basis of seniority and the workman does not possess the necessary qualification as per the banking rules.

UCOBank, Arcade International , 2nd Floor , AjmerRoad,

4. On the pleadings of the parties, the following pointsfor determination were framed:-

Jaipur

2. The Branch Manager ,

UCO Bank, TonkRoad,

L Whether the workman Shri Ramavatar Jawa is working continuously as Cleaner under the employment of the non - applicant bank w.e.f. 1990?

..Non - applicants

Jaipur.

PRESENT :

II. Whether the non - applicant bank has exercised unfair labour practice in not awarding the due benefits and status to the workman ?

SH. R.C. SHARMA, Presiding Officer:

10336

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )}

BETWEEN :

III. Whether the workman is entitled to permanent status as part -time sweeper in 1 /3rd pay ofregular scale?

TheGeneral Secretary, : I Party/Claimant

Indian Bank Employees Association,

Chennai .

AND

The General Manager, :II Party/Management

Indian Bank, Z.O. , Chennai .

APPEARANCE :

5. On two consecutive dates i.e. on 18-10-2004 and 5-11-2004 , none appeared on behalf of the application- union . It appears that the union is not interested in contesting the dispute further and parties have arrived at some sort of settlement. Accordingly, a "No Dispute Award" is passed in this matter.

Forthe Claimant

6. Let a copy ofthe award may be sent to the Central Government for publication under Section 17 (1 ) of theAct.

:M/s. D. Hariparanthaman. V.Ajoy Khose , Advocates

FortheManagement : M/s . Aiyar & Dolia & R.C. SHARMA , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 29 नवम्बर, 2004

N.Krishnakumar, Advocates

AWARD

The CentralGovernment, Ministry ofLabour vide Order No. L- 120 12/247/98- IR (B- II) dated 11-4-2001 has referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:-

का. आ. 3311.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार इंडियन बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 577/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल.-12012/247/1998-आई.आर. ( बी- II ) ]

सी० गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 29th November, 2004

"Whether it is a fact that the disputant Smt . Sukanya hasbeen engaged as a Temporary part- time sweeper by the management of Indian Bank from the year 1992 and from 1st July, 1996 continuously and without any break? Whether the claim of the union for regularisation ofSmt. Sukanya in bank's services isjustified and reasonable ? If so, what relief is the disputant concerned entitled to?"

2. After the receipt ofthe reference , it was taken on file as I.D. No. 577/2001 and notices were issued toboth the parties and both the parties entered appearance through their advocates and filed their Claim Statement and Counter Statement respectively.

3. The allegations of the Petitioner Association in theClaim Statement are briefly as follows:-

S.O. 3311. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 577 / 2001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Chennai , as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Indian Bank and their workman , received by the Central Government on 29-11-2004.

[No. L - 12012/247/ 1998 -IR (B - II)]

C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Friday, the 20th August, 2004

PRESENT :

K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO . 577/2001

(in the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2 (A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), between theManagement of Indian Bank and their workmen)

ThePetitioner espouses the cause of the concerned workman Smt. Sukanya who was engaged at Thirunnravur branch ofRespondent/Bank as part -time sweeper on leave vacancy from 1992 onwards. She has been continuously employed from 1-7-96 as part-time sweeper as her mother working as permanent part -time sweeper retired on 30-6- 96. She has also worked for 77 days in first 6 months of 1996 in the leave vacancy. As per Chapter 10 clause 20.8 ofBipartite Settlement dated 19-10-66 the Petitioner can employtemporary part-time sweeper in permanent vacancy for a period ofthree months only. The implication of the settlement is that the bank is not expected to engage temporary employee in a permanent vacancy for more than three months . But, in this case, the II Party/Management engaged the concerned employee continuously for years together . As per clause I of settlement dated 24-7-93 the II Party/Management should go for recruitment ofpart-time sweeper in the vacancy to be caused due to retirement at least six months in advance to the date of retirement of 10337

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

permanent part - time sweeper and the recruited person shouldjoin immediately after the retirement . But, in this case, only during January and February, 1997 the II Party/ Management initiated steps to recruit new persons by conducting interview to fill up the permanent vacancy for the post of part- time sweeper in Thiruninravur branch . Though clause 20.12 under Chapter XX of industry level Bipartite Settlement the temporary employee should be givenpreference in the matter of filling up of permanent vacancy, the concerned workman was not even called for interview. The I Party Union has made several representations to II Party/ Management but the Respondent has not considered their request. As the II Party/Management made attempts to fill up the vacancy to the post of sweeper at Thiruninravur branch after the failure of conciliation, Smt . Suganya filed a W.P. No. 15711/ 98 for direction to the II Party/Management not to terminate her service until the industrial dispute relating to her regularisation was adjudicated . The High Court granted interim injunction restraining the II Party/ Management from discontinuing her service during the pendency ofthe writ petition. But, the Government ofIndia issuede an order dated 14-5-99 declining to refer the dispute regarding regularisation of Smt . Suganya for adjudication. Again the concerned workman filed another W.P. No. 14743/99 seeking to quash the order dated 14-5- 99 ofGovernment of India and for a direction to refer the matter for adjudication . The High Court by an order dated 30-1-01 quashed the order dated 14-5-99 of Government of India and directed the Govt . to refer the matter for adjudication . Since the workman concerned has been employed for more than 3 months in a permanent vacancy at Thiruninravur branch in contravention of clause 20.8 . of Bipartite Settlement dated 19-10-66 the II Party/ Management ought to have regularised her service . Since the II Party/Management has not taken any steps six months before the date of retirement as per settlement dated 28-7-93 and when the concerned workman was continuously employued, the II Party/Management ought to have regularised the service of the concerned workman . Interms ofclause 20.12 of Bipartite Settlement dated 19- 10-66 II Party/Management ought to have regularised the services of the concerned workman and the concerned employee had completed more than 240 days of continuous service and she continues to work till date , the concerned workman is entitled to regularisation as per clause 20.12 of settlement . Therefore , II Party /Management in not regularising the services of Suganya as permanent part- time sweeper at Thiruninravur branch is illegal , arbitrary and unjust. Hence , for all these reasons the Petitioner Association prays that an award may be passed directing the Respondent/Management to regularise the services of the concerned workman with effect from the date on which she completed 240 days of service with all consequential benefits.

in its Counter Statement contended that no doubt, it is true that during the absence of Smt . Rajammal , Mother of the concernedworkman the said Smt . Suganya would have worked on casual basis occasionally prior to 30-6-96. It is false to allege that she was employed as temporary employee from 1992 onwards . The concerned employee wasworking in the branch on casual basis prior to 30-6-96 i.e. after the retirement of Smt . Rajammal , due to fortuitous circumstances . Since the concerned employee was working as casual prior to 30-6-96 that does not mean that she was engaged continuously for the reason that there was a permanent part-time sweeper at the branch, who was none other than her own mother, therefore , there is no scope to invoke either clause 20.8 or 20. 12 ofBipartite Settlement . No doubt , as per settlement dated 1-9-93 in the case of retirement/promotion re -designation of part -time sweeper, the branch office concerned should take up the matter at least six months in advance of the date of retirement. of concerned part- time sweeper with the Employment Exchange . The process of selection should be expeditiously completed and ensure that the selected candidate is appointed in time so that he can take over on retirement of existing permanent part -time sweeper. This clause ( i ) must be read with clauses 1 and 2 of settlement and not separately Smt . Rajammal, Mother of Suganya at the time of retirement was in ½ scale wages as permanent part-time sweeper. As per settlement dated 28-7-93 in order togive an opportunity to all permanent part - time sweepers working in lower scale wages a circular dated 4-6-96 was issued by Respondent /Bank Zonal Office . The Respondent/Bank did not go to Employment Exchange because it felt that in service part - time sweepers who are eligible as per settlement , who would opt for working in Thiruninravur branch on higher scale of pay . By way of cautial , the Respondent/Bank also requested the Employment Exchange , Thiruvallur to provide list of candidates who can be considered for utilising as casual sweepers in case the circular does not evoke any response . The Employment Exchange has sent names of persons in the prescribed format . Since the circular dated 4-6-96 did not evoke any response , the Respondent/Bank issued another circular dated 17-7-96 to all branches . Even after the no application was forthcoming and consequently during this interim period, the Respondent /Bank was constrainedto engage the Petitioner on casual basis as an ad-hoc measure. Pursuant to the bank approaching the Employment Exchange , an interview was conducted of the persons sponsored by Employment Exchange and a candidate was provisionally selected to be utilised to perform the services of sweeper on casual basis . Therefore , the Petitioner Union cannot take advantage of the position that happened to be engaged after 30-6-96 , when the bank was taking steps to implement the terms of settlement dated 28-7-93 entered into with the recognised union and also the pendency of conciliation proceedings to alllege that the concerned employese was continuously worked 4. As against this , the Respondent/Management 10338

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] and therefore , she is entitled to be regularised. The concerned employee was never engaged as temporary workman under clause 20.8 of Bipartite Settlement nor could she take shelter under clause 20.12 of Bipartite Settlement . Being a casual employee and her name was not sponsored by Employment Exchange , considering her case for appointment as part - time sweeper does not arise at all . Further , before the failure report being receivedby the Ministry of Labour , Government of India on 9-10-98 Mrs. Suganya moved the High Court and obtained an interim order . It is not correct to say that Mrs. Suganya was employed in the bank at any point of time. She was engaged on some days , when her Mother was on leave prior to her date of retirement on 30-6-96 and she was not an employee of the bank attracting provisions of Bipartite Settlement . The Respondent/Bank is a Government of India undertaking and is bound by guidelines and policy decisions issued by Government of India from time to time. Even in the Supreme Court judgements , it is clearly held that perons appointed through back door entry cannot claim permanency in service . Hence, for all these reasons , the Respondent prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs .

5. In these circumstances , the point for my determination is -

Smt . Rajammal , who was working in Thiruninravur branch of the Respondent/Bank . During her Mother's absence she would have worked on casual basis and she was never employed as a temporary employee and she has been working in the branch on casual basis due to fortuitous circumstances and therefore , there is no scope to invoke *clause 20.8 or 20.12 ofBipartite Settlement . Further, it is contended that her contiuance as casual sweeper even after 30-6-96 , after her mother's retirement due to bank's approach to the Emplolyment Exchange for appointment of sweeper on casual basis and due to the bank has. expecting in service ofpart - time sweeper accepting to work as sweeper in Tiruninravur branch ; secondly due to the bank's approach , the labour authorities had initiated conciliation proceedings and on account of which she had to be continued on casual basis as sweeper as per the orders of Assistant Labour Commissioner ( Central ) to maintain status quo ; thirdly even after failure ofconciliation proceedings , the Petitioner Association obtained interim orders from High Court on 19-9-98 from disengaging Mrs. Suganya, until the Government of India referring the dispute for adjudication . All the above fortuitous circumstances were prevented the Respondent/Bankfrom acting in accordance with the directives of Central Government and also in accordance with the judgement ofSupreme Court . Therefore , the concerned employee canot be said that she was continuously employed as part-time sweeper from 1-7-96 for years together .

( i) " Whether it is a fact that the concerned employee Smt . Suganya has been engaged as temporary part - time sweeper by the Respondent/Management from the year 1992 andfrom Ist July, 1996 continuously without any break ?"

(ii) " Whether the claim of the I party Union for regularisation of Smt . Suganya in the Respondent/Bank service is justified and reasonable?"

(iii) " To what relief the concerned emlpoyee is entitled?"

Point Nos . 1 & 2 :-

6. The contention of the Petitioner Union in this case is that concerned employee namely Mrs. Suganya was engaged in Thiruninravur branch of the Respondent/ Bank aspart- time sweeper on leave vacancy from the year 1992 onwards and she has been continuously employed from 1-7-96 as part - time sweeper as her Mother was working aspermanent part - time sweeper and retired on 30-6-96 and since as per clause 20.8 Chapter XX of the Bipartite Settlement dated 19-10-66 , the Respondent/Bank is not expected a temporary employee in a permanent vacancy ofpart- time sweeper for the more than three months and since Smt . Sugana was employed for years together, her service is to be regularised.

7. But , as against this , the Respondent contended that the concerned employee Smt . Suganya was the daughter of regular permanent part - time sweeper

8. To substantiate their contention , the Petitioner Association examined the concerned employee Smt. Suganya as WWI and also exmained one Mr. Krishnan, General Secretary of the I Party /Association as WW2 and marked Ex. W1 to W8 on their side . On the side ofthe Respondent/Management one Mr. D. Jayachandran, Manager inRespondent/Bank at Thiruninravur branch was examined as MW 1 and on their side Ex . Ml to M14 were marked . Out of these Ex . W1.is the xerox copy of the settlement dated 12-10-93 regarding absorption of temporary part-time sweepers as permanent part - time sweepers. Ex . W2 are copies of representations dated 25-01-97 and 14-2-97 made by the I Party Union requesting the Respondent/Bank to absorb Smt . Suganya as permanent part-time sweeper. Ex . W3 is the copy of remarks filedby the Respondent/Bank before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) , Ex . W4 is the failure report submitted by Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) . Ex W5 is the copy of the school record sheet issued to concerned employee . Ex . W6 is the copy of registration certificate issued by District Employment Exchange to the concerned workman and Ex . W7 is the copy of the clause 20.8 and 20.11 of the Bipartite Settlement dated 19-10-66 . Ex. W8 is the copy of the Memorandum of Settlement dated 6-2-92 under section 12 (3 ) of the Industrial Disputes Actwith regard to reinstatement of one Smt . Valliammal as part- time sweeper . On the side of the Respondent/ Management Ex.M1 is the order passed in W.P. Nos .

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

15711/98 and 14743/99 on the file ofHigh Court of Madras, Ex. M2 is the Government of India directives to the financial institutions with regard to appointment of sweepers . Ex.M3 is the circular issued by Respondent's personnel department to the branch office with regard to norms for engagement ofpermanent part -time sweeper. Ex.M4 and M5 are circulars as per career path policy. Ex.M6 is the copyof list ofcandidates sponsored by the Employment Exchange . Ex.M7 is the settlement between the Respondent/Bank and the workers union on 28-7-93. Ex. M8 to Ex.M10 are the attendance register in the name of Mrs. Rajammal for the year 1993. 1995 and 1996 respectively. Ex.M11 to M13 are copy of leave records pertaining to Smt. Rajammal for the years 1993 , 1995 and 1996 respectively. Ex. M14 is the copy of leave application submittedbyMrs. Rajammal for 1993 to 1995 .

9. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that since the concerned workman Smt. Suganya has been employed for more than three months in a permanent vacancy in Tirunindravur branch in contravention ofclause 20.8. , copy ofwhich is marked as Ex .W7 settlement dated 19-10-66 , the II Party/ Management ought to have regularised her service . Clause 20.8 says "A temporary workman may also be appointed to fill a permanent vacancyprovided that such temporary appointment shall not exceed a period of three months during which the bankshallmake arrangementsforfilling up the vacancy permanently. " But, on behalf of 2nd party it is contended thus even though this agreement contemplates that temporary appointment shall not exceed a period of three months , it cannot be contended that the concerned employee should be regularised in permanent vacancy because it is only a direciton given to the bank to fill up regular vacancy within three months . But, on that ground no one can request the management to absorb the temporry workman as a permanent workman. Secondly, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that when the Respondent/Bank failed to recruit a person for the permanent vacancy caused due to the retirement of Smt . Rajammal at Tirunindravur branch ofthe Respondent/Bank six months prior the date of her retirement as per settlement dated 28-7-93 , a copy of which is marked as Ex . M7 and whenthe concerned workman was continuously employed the II Party/Management ought to have regularised the services of the concerned employee. The said settlement says in the case of retirement/promotion/re -designation ofpart -time sweeper , the branch/office concerned should take up the matter at least six months in advance of the date of retirement of the concerned part - time sweeper , with the Employment Exchange . The process of selection should be expeditiously completed and ensure that the selected candidate is appointed in time so that he can take over on retirement of the existing part-time sweeper. Relying on this clause in settlement , the learned counsel for the Petitioner argued that the settlement is mandatory in nature and it is clearly stated that as per norms for a period not 3684 G1/04-35

10339

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

more than six months within which time, the branch has to approach the Employment Exchange and complete the process of filling up of vacancy and in this case, the Respondent/Bank has not approached the Employment Exchange six months prior to retirement of Smt . Rajammal and even after that till 1998 , no steps have been taken by the Respondent/Bank and therefore , the temporary employee should be regularised in the post of part-time sweeper.

10. But, here again, the learned counsel for the Respondent contended that the mother of the concerned employee namely Smt. Rajammal who worked as permanent part- time sweeper in the Respondent /Bank at Tirunindravur branch retired on 30-6-96, but even prior to that date on 4-6-96 , the bank has approached the Employment Exchange and also called for applications from thepart-time sweeper working in lower scale of pay in the Chennai Regional and in fact, the Respondent/Bank has conducted an interview with the Employment Exchange sponsored candidates and also selected one person for casual appointment. In the meantine, the I Party Union has raised the dispute with regard to concerned employee before Assistant Labour Commissioner ( Central) , Chennai and therefore , to maintain the status quo , the Respondent/Bank has not appointed the Employment Exchange candidates and subsequently on failure of conciliation before the labour authorities , the Petitioner Union approached the High Court for a stay and obtained the same on 8-10-98 and thus , she was continuously engaged as a casual part time sweeper and therefore , on this ground she cannot claim any permanency or regularisation.

11. Though, I find some force in the contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent in violation of clause in settlement under Ex.M7 , the Respondent/Bank has not approached the Employment Exchange six months prior to the retirement of the said Smt . Rajammal and further they have not finished the recruitment within the date of her retirement i.e. before 30-6-96 and they have not given any valid reason for not approaching the Employment Exchange before six months ofher retirement. But , the main question in this case is whether on this ground alone , the temporary employee can ask for regularisation of services in the Respondent/ Management?

12. Again, the learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that as per Clause 20.12 under Ex . W7 . " other things being equal, temporary workman (other than godown keeper) will be given preference for filling permanent vacancies and if selected they may have to undergo probation " and therefore, since the concerned employee worked as temporary workman she should have beengivenpreference for filling up the permanent vacancy ofpart -time sweeper in the Respondent/Bank branch . But , onthe other hand, wthout caling for application from the 10340

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

concerned employee , the Respondent /Bank has approached the Emplolyment Exchange and therefore, the Petitioner Union has raised the dispute before Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central ) , Chennai and under such circumstances , it cannot be said that only because of the stay, the concerned employee is continued to be worked as temporary employee in the Respondent/Bank .

13. But , again the learned counsel for the Respondent contended that at no stretch of imagination, the appointment of concerned employee be termed as temporary status , because no order of appointment was issued to her appointing as temporary part -time sweeper, onthe other hand, she has worked all along only on casual or ad -hoc basis . Therefore , the engagement of the concerned employee subsequent to 30-6-96 cannot be termed as a temporary appointment. It is only appointment on casual basis and therefore , there is no scope to invoke either clauses 20.8 and 20. 12 of Bipartite Settlement .

Chapter XX of Industry wise Settlement dated 19-10-66 and he relied on rulings report 1991 Tamil Nadu Law Notes Journal Page 1 SECRETARY, SCHOOL COMMITTEE , TILAK VIDYALAYA HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL Vs. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, TIRUNELVELI & ANOTHER, wherein the Division Bench of the Modras High Court has held "Employment Exchange (Compulsory Notification of Vacancies) Act, 1959 itself provides in Seciton 3 that the Act will not apply in relation to various vacancies including vacancies in any employment to do unskilled office work. Under section 2(2) (i) (7) it has been provided that unskilled office work would mean work done in an establishment amongst others by sweeper. Therefore , under the Employment Exchange (Compulsory Notification of Vacancies) Act, 1959 or 1960 rules framed thereunder, neither the Act nor the rulesl nor even G.O. MSNo. 1138 dated 26-9-78 authorise the Respondents to stop the grant in respect ofsalary of Mr. Paramasivam on the ground as notified above and as such they held that the Act will not apply to such appointment. " He further relied on an unreported case by the Division Bench of Madras High Court in A. ARUMUGAM VS. REGISTRAR OF CO- PERATIVE SOCIETIES AND ANOTHER, wherein the Division Bench ofMadras High Court has held that "the Govt. order/ rguidelines to recruit a person through on Employment Exchange is ordinarily directory and not mandatory and ithasnot beenshown to us that appointment not through Employment Exchange is void or even voidable under any rules, regulations or provisions ofthe Act or is even mandatory." and therefore , the learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that in this case , since the concerned employee was appointed only as a temporary sweeper and this post does not require any sponsorship from Employment Exchange and even otherwise , the concerned employee has registered her name in Employment Exchange on 21-5-95 , a copy of which is marked as Ex. W6..

14. But, again the learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the concerned employee had completed more than 240 days of continuous service and she continued to work till date in permanent vacancy at Tirunindravur branch as part time sweeper and the said post is still vacant and it is not yet filled up. Therefore, the concerned workman is entitled to be regularised as per clause 20.12 of the above said settlement . Further, it is the contention of the counsel for the Petitioner that while filling up the permanent vacancy for the post of Sweeper, they have made several settlements with the recognised union and also with the I Party Union and therefore , the II Party/Management cannot deny the same treatment to the workman concerned otherwise it will amount to discriminaton on that part and arbitrary and colourable exercise of power. For this , the learned counsel for the Petitoner relied on the settlement between the Respondent/Bank and the I Party Union regarding reinstatement of one Mrs. Valliammal by the Respondent/ Bank as part - time sweeper , a copy of which is marked as Ex . W8 and also settlement regarding absorption of temporary part -time sweeper as permanent part- time sweeper, a copy of which is marked as Ex . WI .

15. But , as against this , learned counsel for the Respondent contended that even in the said agreement , it has clerarly mentioned that union has agreed that proposal of management should not be quoted as precedent and therefore , this claim that II Party /Management has to regularise the concerned employee on this ground cannot be valid.

17. But, here again, the learned counsel for the Respondent contended that the concerned employee was never a temporary workman unde clause 20.8 ofBipartite Settlement nor she could take shelter under clause 20.12 oftheBipartite Settlement . Since the Respondent/Bank is ownedby Government of India in regard to policy matters , the Respondent/Bank is bound to act as per instructions, ofGovernment of India and such as per the instructions , the engagement of temporary or casual sub -staff would be made only after obtaining list of eligible candidated from the Employment Exchange and the Respondent/Bank is therefore, bound to follow the procedure made in this regard and the candidates called for interview were those sponsored by Employment Exchange and since the name ofMrs. Suganya was not sponsored by the Employment Exchange , she was not called for interview and the allegation made by the Petitioner Union that she was not considered for interview does not hold water. Further, mere possession of registration of name with Employment 16. Again , the learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that for the post of sweeper, the Employment Exchange Compulsory Notification Act is not applicable , therefore , without reference to sponsorshipfrom Employment Exchange , the concerned workman is entitled for regularisation in view of her long and continuous service more particularly in view of clause 20.12 under 10341 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/ पौष 4, 1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

Exchange without her name being sponsored is of no consequence and therefore, there is no point in the contentionthat she should be regularised in service. Being a casual/ad- hoc employee and her name not sponsored byEmployment Exchange considering her for appointment as part - time sweeper does not arise and in this case, the Respondent/Bank has taken all steps for the appointment oftemporarypart -time sweeper on the retirement of mother ofconcerned employee and in the meantime the Petitioner has raised the dispute and also before the failure report could be received from the Ministry of Labour, the concerned employee has moved to High Court obtained interim order ofstay on 8-10-98 and therefore , at no stretch of imagination, it can be said that her service after 1-10-96 is continuous and she has been appointed by the Respondent/Bank continuously. Smt. Suganya was not employed by the bank at any point of time and her engagement was only an ad - hoc measure and therefore, she cannot claim any benefit under clause 20.8 ofBipartite Settlement .

Supreme Court has held that " it is unnecessary in this case to examine either question oflaw or fact arising in the matter. Suffice to say that the Respondent has been appointednowand has been in servicefor more thanfive years. We do not think, it would be appropriate to disturn that state ofaffairs by making any other order resulting in uprooting the Respondent from his livelihood" and accordingly, dismissed the appeal filed by the management. Further , the learned counsel for the Petitioner relied on rulings reported in 1986 1 LLJ 127 SRI H.D. SINGH Vs. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS wherein the Supreme Court has held that " striking off the name of workman from the rolls by the employer amounts to termination of service and such termination is retrenchmentwithin the meaning ofSection 2(oo) ofthe Act and ifsuch retrenchment is effected in violation of mandatory provisions of Section 25F, the termination would be invalid and employee's name has been struck offfrom the list ofTikka mazdoor in violation ofSection 25F of the Act. " Relying on this decision, the learned counsel for the Petitioner argued that the concerned employee isworking as temporary sweeper even from the year 1992 and the Respondent has not produced certain documents, wantonly to deny her employment in the Respondent/Bank for more than 240 days . Even after filing apetition to produce documents , the Respondent/Bank hasburked certain documents , stating that they are not available with them . Therefore, in the absence of any records produced by the Respondent/Bank , the contention ofthe Petitioner that concerned employee had worked more than 240 days has to be accepted as true. Further, even after 1-7-96 she has worked more than five years continuously and in such circumstances , as stated by theApex Court and High Courts the long period should be considered and it would not be appropriate to disturb the state of affairs by making any other order resulting in uprooting the Respondent from his livelihood.

19. But, as against this , the learned counsel for the Respondent argued that the Supreme Court in the case reported in 1992 II LLJ 452 DELHI DEVELOPMENT HORTICULTURE EMPLOYEES ' UNION VS. DELHI ADMINISTRATION , DELHI & ORS has held that " apart fromthefact that the Petitioner cannot be directed to be regularised for the reasons given above, we may take note ofthe pernicious consequences to which the direction for regularisation ofworkmen on the only ground that they have put in work for 240 or more days has been leading. Ithad become a common practice to ignore the Employment Exchange and the persons registered in the Employment Exchange and to employ or get employed directly those who are eighter not reigstered with the Employment Exchange or who though registered are lower in the long awaiting list in the employment register. Such employment is sought andgiven directlyfor various

illegal considerations including money. Agood deal ofillegal employment market has developed 18. Again, the learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the concerned employee is in continuous employment from 1-7-96 and even though it is stated by the Respondent/Bank that they have taken steps, they have not taken any serious steps as per Bipartite Settlement and they have not produced any document to show that prior to six months of the date of retirement of Smt . Rajammal , they have taken steps . Even assuming for argument sake that they have taken steps . Even assuming for argument sake that they have taken steps , that steps have been taken only after 1996 i.e. long after the date of retirement of permanent part -time sweeper Smt . Rajammal. Though the Petitioner Union has raised the dispute before Assistant Labour Commissioner ( Central ) and also subsequently before High Court of Madras from the year 1996 to 2004 till date , she is continuously in employment and on that ground, the concerned employee is entitled for regularisation in her employment . Further, the learned counsel for the Petitioner relied on the above cited unreported case of Madras High Court and argued that it is held in that matter " without expressing any opinion on this aspect , we are the considered view that the appellant (workman) was allowed to work almost eight years and there is no complaint against him and he has been discharging his functions efficiently to the satisfaction of his superiors and he was appointed by the competent authority and by this time, he has become over-aged to seek an alternative employment and his appointment was inaccordance with law" and therefore , Division Bench of the High Court allowed the appeal filed by the workman and quashed the impugned order terminating the services of the workman . Further, the counsel for the Petitioner relied on judgement of Supreme Court reported in 2002 I LLJ 672 UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. K.P. TIWARI , wherein while considering the compassionate appointment, while he was ousted by the Department , the 10342

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

resulting in a new source ofcorruption andfrustration of those who are waiting at the Employment Exchangefor years. Not all those who gain such back door entry in the employment are in need of the particular jobs...... The public interests are thus, jeopardized on both counts . " Relying on this ruling rendered by the Supreme Court, the learned counsel for the Respondent argued that since the concerned employee was not sponsored by the Employment Exchange and since her appointment is not legal , she cannot claim any benefit only because she has completed 240 days or more and under such circumstances, the claim is to be dismissed by this Tribunal .

20. But , even though I find some force in the contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent, in this case , since the Employment Exchange ( Compulsory Notification of Vacancies) Act is not applicable to the appintment of sweeper , further since the concerned employee is employed for more than five years. I find the status quo is to be continued. Under such circumstances . I find both these points in favour of the Petitioner.

Point No. 3 : -

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

21. Inview ofmy foregoing findings . I find this point is also to be answered in favour of the Petitioner Union . Therefore , I direct the Respondent/Management to regularise services of the concerned employee from the date of this Award . No Costs .

22. Thus, the reference is answered accordingly.

(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him , corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 20th August , 2004. )

K. JAYARAMAN , Presiding Officer Witnesses Examined :-

Forthe I Party/ Workman : WW1 Smt. Suganya

: WW2 Sri K. Krishnan

For the II Party/Management : MWI Sri D. Jayaachandran Documents Marked:-

Forthe I Party/Claimant:

Ex. No. Date

M10

Description

12-10-93

M11

Xerox copy of the settlement regarding absorption of Temporary part- time sweeper as permanent part- time sweepers

Xerox copy of the letter from 25-10-97 &

14-02-97

M12

Petitioner Union to Respondent requesting to absorb concerned workman

W3 02-06-97

M14

Xeroxcopy of the remarks submitted by Respondent before Assistant LabourCommissioner ( Central) in the conciliation.

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

W4 19-09-98 Xerox copy of the failure report

W5 06-06-80 Xerox copy of the school record sheet issued to Mrs. Suganya

W6 21-09-95 Xerox copy of the registration certificate issued by District Employment Exchange to Smt . Suganya.

W7 19-10-66 Xerox copy ofthe clauses 20.8 & 20.12 ofBipartite Settlement

W8 06-02-92 Xerox copy of the settlement between the bank and union Regarding reinstatement of Mrs. Valliammal

For the II Party/Management:-

Ex. No. Date

Description

M1 30-01-01 Xerox copy ofthe order in W.P. 15711 / 98 & 14743/99 by High Court of Madras

M2 30-09-78 Xerox copy of the Government of India directives

26-03-83 Xerox copy of the circular No. 40/83 regarding norms for Engagement of part-time sweepers

04-06-96 Хегоx copy of the circular as per career path policy

17-07-96 Xerox copy of the circular as per careerpath policy

15-07-96 Xerox copy of the list of candidates furnished by Employment Exchange , Thiruvallur

28-07-93 Xerox copy of the settlement entered into with union

1993 Xeroxcopy of the attendance register in respect ofMrs. Rajammal 1995 Xerox copy of the attendance register in respect of Smt. Rajammal

Upto Xerox copy of the attendance July,96 register in respect of Smt . Rajammal 1993

Xerox copy of the leave records pertaining to Smt . Rajammal

1995

Xerox copy of the leave records pertaining to Smt. Rajammal

M13 1996

Xerox copy of the leave records pertainingto Smt . Rajammal

1993-95 Xerox copy of the leave applications toSmt .Rajammal

1 10343 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 29 नवम्बर, 2004

"Whether the claim of Tuticorin Port Mariner's and General Staff Union for counting of NMR service rendered by Shri M. Raja , Lineman from 1-8-1975 to 31-3-1979 for the purpose ofpensionary benefits is justified and legal ? If not , what relief is the workman concerned entitled to ?" का. आ. 3312.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार तूतीकोरन पोर्ट ट्रस्टके प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय , चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 96/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

2.After the receipt of the reference , it was taken on file as I.D. No. 96/2003 and notices were issued to both the parties and both the parties entered appearance through their advocates and filed their Claim Statement and Counter Statement respectively.

[सं. एल-44011/1/2003- आई आर ( बी- II ) ]

3. The allegations in the Claim Statement filedby the Petitioner Union are briefly as follows:-

सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 29th November, 2004

S.O. 3312. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 96/ 2003) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Tuticorin Port Trust and their workman , received by the Central Government on 29-11-2004 .

[No. L-44011 /1/2003 -IR (B - II) ] C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

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

Friday, the 10th September, 2004

Present : K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO. 96/2003

(Inthe matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of sub -section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2(A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), between the Management of Tuticorin Port Trust and their workmen)

BETWEEN

: I Party/Claimant

The President, Tuticorin Port Mariner's & General Staff Union, Tuticorin. AND

: II Party/Management

The Chairman Tuticorin Port Trust, Tuticorin. Appearance:

For the Claimant :

M/s . P. K. Rajagopal &

K. Santhakumari , Advocates

For the Management : M/s .G. Dhamodaran & Sathiyavathi , Advocates

AWARD

The Petitioner Union espouses the cause of the concerned workman Sri M. Raja working as a lineman in the mechanical department of Tuticorin Port Trust. The concerned workman namely Mr. M. Raja rendered continuous service under the Tuticorin Port Trust as NMR workman during the period between August, 1975 and March, 1979. It was followed by regular appointment in the post from April, 1979. The Government of India has taken a policy decision under Rule 14 of Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules followed by a resolution of Port Trust Board dated 27-5-88 to count 50% of the service rendered by an employee in the contingent establishment followed by absorption in regular service without break for the purpose of calculating service to grant pension . In this case, the Port Officer at the rank of Executive Engineer also certified the genuineness of the continuous NMR service rendered by the workman continuously between August, 1975, and March , 1979. Since it is came to the knowledge of the concerned workman that his NMR service has not been recognised in his service records , he made a representation dated 31-10-98 to the Port Trust that his 50% of service - rendered as NMR may be recogaised and counted for pensionary purpose. But, the PortTrust in its letter dated 3-10-98 has rejected the claim of the concerned workman to the effect that his service was subject to a break and hence , not counted for pensionary benefits . This was due to non - availability of records. Non - availability of records is not on account of any fault ofthe employee. Further , the Executive Engineer who is now the Chief Engineer of Port Trust has given the certificate that the Petitioner was in continuous NMR service and therefore , refusal on the part of the Respondent/Management is arbitrary, unjust and it is violative of Article 14 and 16 of Constitution of India . Therefore, the concerned workman is entitled to have 50% ofsaid service rendered during the period between August, 1975 andMarch, 1979 counted for the purpose of terminal benefits. Hence, the Petitioner Union prays for an award intheir favour.

4. As against this , the II Party /Management in its Counter Statement contended that as per the The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide Order No. L-44011/ 1 /2003 - IR (B - II) dated 26-05-2003 has referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal foradjudication:-- 10344

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

Point No. 1 :-

6. In this case, the short point to be decided is whether the rejection made by the management with regard to counting of NMR service rendered by the concerned employee Mr. M. Raja for the purpose of pensionary benefits is justified and legal ? It is admitted by both sides that the Government ofIndia in its decision 4 Rule 14( 2 ) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 half of the service period from contingencywill be taken into account for the calculation of pension at the time of absorption in the regular employment subject to condition specified therein . In this case , the Petitioner Union alleged that the concerned workman Sri M. Raja has worked continuously from August, 1975 to March , 1979 as a NMR in the electrical department of the Respondent/Management, but they have not produced any document to show that he has continuously worked in this period . On behalf of the Petitioner, it is alleged that all the records pertaining to concerned workman was with the Respondent/ Management and due to non - availability of records , it is alleged that there was a break - in-service of the concerned workman during April , 1976 to June , 1976 and February, 1978. The non - availability of records is not at the fault of concerned employee and therefore , the Respondent/ Management has to give benefits to the concerned employee . Further, it is the contention of the Petitioner Union that in similar cases of non - availability of records, the Respondent/Management issued orders for counting NMR serviceby condoning the break - in - service in respect of several employees, but he has not produced any document to show that in a similar case , the Respondent/ Management has issued orders counting the NMR service by condoning the break - in-service.

provisions contained in Government of India decision 4 under Rule 14(2 ) of CCS Pension Rules , 1972 , it has been contemplated that half of the service period from contingency will be allowed to count towards pension at the time absorption in the regular employment subject to condition specified therein . In the same rule , it is clearly mentioned that NMR workmen who had not put in continuous service , had not been taken into account for the said pension benefit . In other words , if there were break in service of NMR workmen who were absorbed had not been considered since it is not as per said rule 14(2) of CCS Rules, 1972. The case of Mr. M. Raja lineman had been examined with available records and found that there was break - in - service covering the period from August 1975 to March , 1979 i.e. to say Mr. Raja had not worked during the period April , 1976, May, 1976, June , 1976 and February, 1978. Further , Mr. Raja had not produced any authenticated records and therefore, his NMR service had not been taken into account for counting of 50% of the service as per the said relevant statutory rule. It is not correct to say that NMR service of concerned employee has not been taken into account for the reason of non- availability of records with the management . It is a fact that the Committee constituted for the purpose had thoroughly gone through the records and relevant materials containing two volumes . The allegation about the non-availability of records made by the Petitioner is simply to suit their convenience . Though the Petitioner alleged that the Executive Engineer has given the certificate to Mr. Raja , the concerned employee, the said Executive Engineer is not a competent officer to authenticate the service of NMR workman and it is only the Chief Engineer who shall only issue or give certificate in respect of NMR service rendered by the concered workman. In fact , the then Chief Engineer has written a letter dated 28-9-98 that the NMR service of the concerned employee from 8/75 to 3/79 were with break - in - service i.e. from 4/76 to 6/76 and 2/78 . Therefore , it cannot be said that the action of the management is arbitrary and unjust and inviolative of Article 14 and 16 of Constitution. Hence , for all these reasons , the Respondent prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs .

7. On the other hand , it is the contention of the Respondent/Management that it is false to allege that the records pertaining to concerned employee was not available. On the other hand, a Committee constituted to examine the request ofemployees who had rendered NMR service had taken into consideration all records in this respect and had come to a conclusion that after going through all the records and relevant materials contained in two volumes that the concerned workman was not in service during the period 4/76 to 6/76 and 2/78 and therefore, the allegation made by the petitioner is made only for the purpose of this case.

5. In these circumstances , the point for my determination is -

(i) " Whether the claim of the Petitioner Union for counting of NMR service rendered by the concerned employee Mr. M. Raja from 1-8-75 to 31-3-79 for the purpose of pensionary benefits is justified and legal ?

(ii) To what relief the concerned workman is entitled?"

8. Then again on the side of the Petitioner it is alleged that the Executive Engineer who is now the Chief Engineer of the Respondent/Management has given a certificate that the concerned employee was in continuous service from 1-8-75 to31-3-79 and a copy of which is filed along with the claim petition and therefore , the rejection ofthe Respondent/Management with regard to request of the Petitioner Union is only on non - availability of records pertaining to the concerned employee Sri M. Raja .

10345

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/ पौष 4, 1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him, correctedand pronounced by me in the open court on this daythe 10th September, 2004.)

K. JAYARAMAN , Presiding Officer

Witnesses Examined :-

: None

Oneither side

Documents Marked :-

For the I Party Claimant

Date

Ex. No.

Description

W1 29-09-98 Xerox copy of the letter from TuticorinPort Trust management to concerned workman

W2 27-09-99 Xerox copy of the letter from Respondent to concerned workman

9. But, here again the Respondent contended that though the Petitioner Union alleged that the Executive Engineer of the Respondent/Management has given a certificate to the effect that the concerned employee had worked in the Respondent /Management as NMR continuously from 8/75 to 3/79 , he is not the competent officer to authenticate the service of NMR workman and the Chief Engineer only who can issue or give certificate in respect ofNMR service rendered by workman concerned. Further, in this case, the then Chief Engineer had written a letter dated 28-9-98 , a copy of which is marked as Ex. W1 thatNMR service of Mr. Raja from 8/75 to 3/79 were with break -in- service i.e. from 4/76 to 6/76 and 2/78 and further, he has reiterated the letter dated 27-9-99 , which is marked as Ex. W2 , and under such circumstances , it cannot be said that the Respondent/Management has rejected the claim of the Petitioner Union on the ground of non- availability of records in respect of Mr. Raja , the concerned workman.

For the II Party/Management :- Nil

नई दिल्ली, 29 नवम्बर, 2004

का.आ. 3313.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एल. आई. सी. ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 2, नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 6/94) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल.-17011/107/90- आई.आर. (बी- II ) ] सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 29th November, 2004

S.O. 3313.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award Ref. No. 6/94 of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum - Labour Court, No. 2, New Delhi as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of LIC of India and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 29-11-2004.

10. Under these circumstances , the duty caste upon the Petitioner Union is to establish before this Tribunal that the concerned employee has worked with the Respondent/Management from 1-8-75 to 31-3-79 under NMR service continuously. But , except the bald allegations that he was working as NMR continuously, there is no other documentary proof to show that the concerned employee has worked as NMR from 1-8-75 to 31-3-79 continuously. Though the Petitioner alleged that the rejection was made by the Respondent only on the non- availability of records, there is no proof to substantiate the claim of the Petitioner Union . On the other hand, the Respondent has stated that a Committee was constituted to look into the case and they have thoroughly gone through the records and relevant materials contained in two volumes . Under such circumstances , I find the allegations about non - availability of records made by the Petitioner Union is only to suit their convenience . Since the Petitioner Union has not established that the concerned employee has worked from 1-8-75 to 3 1-3-79 as NMR continuously, I find the request of the Petitioner Union cannot be acceded to . Therefore , I find this point against the Petitioner Union .

Point No. 2-

[No. L- 17011 / 107/90- IR (B- II)] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy. ANNEXURE

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

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL- TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT-II

PRESIDING OFFICER : R. N. RAL

L.D. No. 6/94 an off shoot of L.D. No. 27/91

IN THE MATTER OF :-

11. In view of my foregoing findings that the Petitioner Union has not established the fact that concerned employee Mr. M. Raja was in continuous NMR service from 1-8-75 to 31-3-79 and in view ofthe fact that there was a break - in -service of Mr. Raja from 4/76 to 6/76 and 2/78, I find the concerned employee is not entitled to any relief as claimed by the Petitioner Union. No Costs .

All India National Insurance Employees Federation VERSUS

12. Thus , the reference is answered accordingly.

LIC 10346

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

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

Complaint u/s 33 -A of I.D. Act, 1947 against Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred as LIC) who contravened provisions of Section 33 of the above act , during pendency of proceedings before this Hon'ble Tribunal in reference No. 1.D. case No. 27 of 1991.

The petitioner federation named above begs to submit that opposite parties have been guilty of contravention of the provisions of Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( hereinafter referred as act) as shown below :-

of service as decided and fixed in the Award ofDr. Justice R.D. Tulpule in reference No. NTB - 1 of 1985 on the basis ofwhich a large number ofBadli/temporary and part time workmen were absorbed in the regular service ofLIC in 1989. On implementation of the above award LIC rejected claims ofthose workmen who came in the service of LIC after 20thMay, 1985. Since LIC continued to employ Badli/ temporary/part time workmen on daily wage basis many workmen who were employed after 20th May, 1985 claimed absorption in regular service through labour courts or otherwise but they failed in their attempts on the above ground.

7 The Petitioner federation is an all India organisation and it has within its organisation, Zonal , Divisional and Branch units affiliated to it. The Head quarter of the federation is situated at 11 -H tropical Building, Connaught Circus, New Delhi -01 , " National life insurance employees association ( INTUC) , Muzaffarpur " , is an affiliated divisional unit of the petitioner federation Sh. BNP Srivastava is the General Secy. of the aforesaid divisional unit , having its Head quarter at J.P. Colony Chandwara, Muzaffarpur.

Since the question whether or not the above action of LIC in not absorbing workman after 20-5-1985 was justifiedwas not decided by any court of law, LIC continued to reject all claims of workman for permanent employment in LIC on the above ground and the workman also could not enforce their claims of permanent employment. The workman ofMuzaffarpur division who were also claimant ofpermanent employment in LIC were continuing their service during pendency and were anxiously awaiting the award in the present proceedings as the said decision had to decide their fate in LIC in the matter ofemployment.

The petitioner federation besides permanent staff of LIC in class III and class 1V category also grants its membership through its zonal divisional and branch units to all Badli/Temporary and part time workmen employed by Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred as LIC ) in its Zonal divisional and branch offices on daily wage basis or otherwise . Hence a large number of badli/ temporary and part time workmen are bonafide members ofthe petitioner federation.

The opposite parties by terminating their service during pendency committed contravention of Section 33 of the act . The opposite parties during pendency of proceedings in the present reference invited applications from the open market (through advertisement ) for recruitment of class III staff in the category of Asstt. typists and stenographers . Since the above action of LIC could affect adversely the interests of workmen in the present reference one of the employees unions opposed through an application the above action of recruitment process adopted by LIC. This Hon'ble Tribunal under belief and confidence that if there is an award in the pending reference, LIC will honour it faithfully and the recruitment process adopted by LIC will not in any way jeopardize the interests of concerned workmen refused to pass any order directing LIC to stop recruitment process and also dismissed the aforesaid application of the union by its orderdated 23-9-91 .

The cause of action to file the present complaint u/s 33 -A of the Act , arose when the Sr. Divisional Manager of Muzaffarpur division discontinued/ terminated the services of as many as 20 badli/temporary workmen whose details are given in the list , attached to this petition under annexure ' A' . The said list forms a part of this petition . This illegal action of LIC was brought to the notice ofthis Hon'ble authority through an application but the said application was disposed of in routine manner. Hence the present complaint u/ s 33 -A of the act is being filed for proper adjudication of the dispute .

The workman whose services were terminated by Sr. Divisional Manager , Muzaffarpur were/are bonafide members of the petitioner federation . Most of them had also completed a long services over 240 days . They were employed by the LIC before 4th March , 1991 ( i.e. the date of present reference) and they were continuing their services during pendency of present proceedings . They were/are claimants of absorption in regular service ofLIC on the basis of their long service as Badli and temporary employces of LIC . They had fulfilled eligibility conditions

The above order dated 23-9-91 never permitted LIC expressly or impliedly to discontinue or terminate the services of the existing workmen working on daily wage basis in capacity of badli/ temporary/ part time workmen particularly those who came in the service of LIC before 4thMarch, 1991 and were continuing in services and had also completed a long service. The workmen working as badli/temporary workmen in the Muzaffarpur division of LIC were employed by LIC before 4th March, 1991 and were continuing in service during pendency. Hence the termination of their service by LIC is contravention of Section 33 of the Act.

10347 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

referto the contents of the written statement as if the facts stated therein are specifically incorporated in this reply and the same are not being repeated for the sake ofbrevity.

The pendency of proceedings in the present reference u/ s 20 (3 ) of the act commenced on the date of the order of the Central Government referring the dispute to this Hon'ble Tribunal i.e. 4th March, 1991 and shallbe deemed to have concluded on the date on which the award becomes enforceable u/ s 17 - A of the Act . The workmen whose details are given in the list attached under annexure 'A' were employed by Muzaffarpur Division of LIC as badli/temporary workmen much before 4th March 1991 and they were continuing their service during pendency of these proceedings .

It is further stated that the workmen before the. Hon'ble Tribunal have no legitimate claims to ask for absorption in the regular service of the corporation. The workmenwere employed only as a temporary employees for a specific period of time and on expiry of the said period they automatically seized to be the temporary employees ofthe corporation . Such of the workmen which fulfil the recruitment condition are free to apply for and appear with the general public for fresh recruitment as regular employees as and when notified by the corporation .

Theyhadcompleted a long service sufficient toclaim absorption although they were employed by LIC after 20th May 1985. They could enforce their claim of absorption in regular service of LIC only after the award in the present reference . Hence the aforesaid workmen were directly related to the subject - matter of this reference and its proceedings . Since the workmen as stated above were seriously concerned in the dispute pending adjudication before this Hon'ble Tribunal LIC could not legally terminate these workmen as their right to continue in service was well protected u/s 33 of the act.

This Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to decide the complaint set out above and pass such order or orders thereon as it may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice and this Hon'ble Tribunal be also pleased to declare the action ofLIC as stated above illegal and the aggrieved workmen be treated and accordingly be declared to be continuing in service ( on the same wages and conditions ofservice as were applicable to them) with effect from the date of their discontinuance in service .

Itisfurther stated that earlier several unions had filed an application before this Hon'ble Tribunal inter alia praying that the temporary employees may be continued in service and the corporation may not be allowed to recruit any fresh employees from the open market pending the disposal of the present case. The Hon'ble Tribunal vide order dated 23rd September 1991 was pleased to dismiss the said application . Thereafter a writ petition was filed against the said order dated 23rd September 1991 and the said writ petition was dismissed by the division bench of the Hon'ble High Court by order dated 6th December 1991. In the present application the workmen have complained of the temporary employees being not continued in service . Suffice it will be to state here that these temporary employees were employed only for a specific stipulated period and on expiry of that period their services automatically ceased and seeking relief from thisHon'ble Court that they should be continued in service even after expiry of the stipulated period tantamount to the corporation not being permitted to recruit fresh employees in accordance with the recruitment rules . This is merely an attempt to over reach the order dated 23rd September 1991 that was passed by the Hon'ble Tribunal.

Themanagement has filed reply. It has been stated that the application deserves to be dismissed because vague allegations have been made without giving any particulars of the branches in which the temporary employees were working and in which capacity theywere working. Without the said details it is not possible for the corporation toverify and effectively reply to the allegations that have been made in the application. The application deserves to be dismissed on this ground alone .

That it is further stated that the present application is misconceived and untenable section 33 A of the Industrial Dispute Act has no application to the facts of the present case . There has been no alteration of the conditions of service applicable to the workmen . There has been no discharge or punishment for any misconduct and there cannot be said to be any misconduct and there cannot be said to be any violation of section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act. The application is liable to be dismissed summarily.

Inview ofwhat has been stated above the present application is an abuse of the process of the court and should be dismissed summarily. In this respect it is submitted that the corporation has framed LIC Staff Regulations, 1960. The said regulations have been framed inexercise ofpowers under section 49 of the LIC Act 1959. By virtue of LIC (Amendment ) Act 1981 , the regulations framed by corporation under section 49 of the act shall be deemed to be rules framed by the Central Govt . under section 48 of the LIC Act . The validity of the amendment act 1981 has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of A. V. Nachane V/s Union of India, reported as AIR 1982 SC 1126. It is further stated that the temporary employees of the corporation are governed by regulation ofthe staff regulations which are deemed to be the rules framedby the Central Govt . The regulation No. 8 clearly stipulated that no person appointed as a temporary employee under sub - regulation ( 1 ) shall , only by the It is further stated that temporary workers were employed in the circumstances which have been explained in detail in the written statement filed by the management. The management craves leave of this Hon'ble Court to

3684 G1 /04-36 10348

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

fresh employees under the recruitment rules .

reason of such appointment be entitled to absorption in the service of the corporation or claim preference for recruitment to any post.

It is denied that there has been any illegal action on thepart ofthe corporation or that the workmen are entitled toanyprotection or relief under section 33 of the ID Act .

Thus, it would be seen that the law itself provides that the temporary employees would cease to be employees on expiry of the period for which they are appointed and they cannot by reason only of their being appointed as a temporary employee , claim absorption in the regular cadre ofthe corporation.

All India National Insurance Employees Federation has filed rejoinder. In the rejoinder they have reiterated the facts ofthe statement of claim and have asserted that the claimants were the regular employees of the management and there services have been arbitrarily terminated.

The management has denied most of the paras of the statement of claim and the federation has also denied most of the paras of the written statement .

Evidence ofboth the parties have been taken .

In view of what has been stated and particularly because of the earlier order dated 23rd September 1991 passed by the Hon'ble Tribunal it is stated that neither any wrong has been committed nor has there been any violation of the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act and the present application is an abuse of the process of the court and should be summarily rejected.

Heard arguments from both the sides and perused the papers on the records .

Itwas submitted from the side of the Union that the services of the claimants were terminated during the pendency of ID No. 27/1991 so they have filed a complaint u/ s 33A ofthe ID Act . Section 33A Act reads as hereunder:-

"Where an employer contravenes the provisions of Section 33 during the pendency of proceedings [ before a conciliation officer, Board an arbitrator, Labour Court . Tribunal or National Tribunal ] any employee aggrieved by such contravention, may make a complaint in writing, [intheprescribed manner:-

Subject to what has been stated above it is submitted that the allegation of the provisions of section 33 of the ID Actismisconceived and untenable . The corporation has not violated any law and has also not altered the terms and conditions of the service of the temporary employees. The allegations as regards discontinuing/termination of service of the temporary employees are wrong and are denied. The said employees were employed only for a specific period of time and on expiry of that period oftime they ceased to be the employees of the corporation. The same is in accordance with terms and conditions of their employment as temporary employee . The said action cannot be said to be illegal particularly when such employees have no right to be absorbed as regular employees ofthe corporation .

(a) to such conciliation officer or Board, and the conciliation officer or Board shall take such complaint into account in mediating in, and promoting the settlement of, such industrial dispute, and

False and frivolous allegations have been made of absorption by the temporary employees having been continued for over 240 days . No particulars of which of the employees has been allowed to continue for over 240 days have been given . The said allegation being vague deserves to be ignored. None of the temporary employees has any right to be absorbed as a regular employee merely because he was appointed as a temporary employee.

(b) to such arbitrator , Labour Court , Tribunal or National Tribunal and on receipt of such complaint, the arbitrator, Labour Court , Tribunal or National Tribunal, as the casemay be, shall adjudicate upon the complaint as if it were a dispute referred to or pending before it, in accordance with the provisions of this Act and shall submit his or its award to the appropriate government and the provisions ofthis Act shall apply accordingly. ] In so far as the award given by Justice R.D. Tulpule is concerned the same has no relevance in respect of the workmen who are involved in the present proceedings .It is denied that the employees on whose behalf the application under reply has been made were entitled tobe continued as employees of the LIC of India .

In this respect it is submitted that these employees automatically cease to be employees on expiry of stipulated period. It is denied that the interest of these workmen has beenjeopardized . The said allegation is false and suffice it will be to state that this Hon'ble Court had refused to grant any reliefto these workmen in respect of their being continued in the service of the corporation and rather to the contrary had permitted to the corporation to recruit

According to this provision which has been introduced by the amendment Act 48 of 1950 , the Court has to give award as if it were a dispute referred to or pendingbefore the Court/Tribunal in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the award shall be submitted to the appropriate government and the provisions of this act shall applyaccordingly. It was submitted from the side of the management that the services of the workmen applicant were terminated during the pendency of the aforesaid ID 10349 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/ पौष 4, 1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

(c) These candidates will be given an age relaxation for applying for regular recruitment provided that they were eligible on the date of their first temporary appointment for securing regular appointment with the Life Insurance Corporation.

(d) Ifthese candidates are otherwise eligible, they canapply for regular recruitment in the normal course. This regularisation will , in the circumstances, be by selection for appointment . We make the above clauses of the Scheme a partofour order. "

As per the scheme , temporary employees were entitledto a chance to compete for regular recruitment.

Assuch, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has settled all the disputes of the LIC and its workmen in several cases by orderdt.23-10-1992 and approved the scheme . In the light of the scheme approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has allowed the Writ Petition of the management. Life Insurance Corporation of India and others in view of the scheme framed by the petitioner in 1992 ( 4) SCC 118 and approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. As such, all the disputes between the workmen and the LIC shall be deemed to be settled under the scheme approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court case of 1991. The Court has to give award and that cannot be contrary to the award already passed in the case referred to u/s 10 of the ID Act. In 33 A itself it has been mentioned that the court shall adjudicate upon the complaint as it were a dispute referred to or pending before it. So far as ID No. 27 of 1991 is concerned, an award was givenby the CGIT - I but the same has been set aside by theHon'ble Delhi High Court in Writ Petition (C) No. 4346 of2001 against the workman in the light of the scheme approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Prabhawati's Case. So far as Section 33A is concerned it has been termedas a complaint and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 1994 LLR Page 112 (P&H) has decided the violation ofthe provision of Section 33 of the Act entitles the workman to file a complaint u/s 33 A thereof and makes the employer liable to be punished. Section 33A of the ID Act is not a penal provision as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Supra . The reference in this case is to be replied as if the dispute has been referred to the Tribunal by the appropriate government . So Section 33A by no stretch has any force like a penal provision and the award is given in the light of the original case referred to by the appropriate government. It would have been better in case such a provision is included under Section 33 of the ID Act, 1947 and it can be decided alongwith the original reference by the Tribunal . Section 33A multiplies the pendency of the cases.

Itwas further submitted from the side of the federation that they were not the parties before the Hon'ble Supreme Court . Whether they were the parties or not , the matter has been finally settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and if they are aggrieved, they may approach the Hon'ble Supreme Court for changing of the scheme framed and approved by the union of the LIC and the LIC.

Itwas argued from the side of the management that the award passed in ID No. 27/91 has been set aside by theHon'ble Delhi High Court . It is no longer in existence and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana V/s . Pyara Singh 1992 (4 ) SSC 118 on 23rd October , 1992 the Supreme Court granted special leave and disposed ofall the civil appeals incorporating the essential features of the scheme prepared by the petitioner as a part of its order. The operative portion of the order passed by the Supreme Court in Prabhavathy reads as follows :-

Itwas further submitted by the federation that they have been working for a long period in the LIC but they were directedto compete with the general candidates and even no weightage was given to the employees already working under the LIC and the LIC has arbitrarily without giving any weightage to the workmen already working with the LIC has appointed new hands and has not absorbed them.

"The scheme contained in Clauses (a) to (d) of paragraph 1, which is as under , is approved subject to the postponment ofthe recruitment scheduled in November, 1992 by at least six weeks and the LIC will proceed to regularise the employees eligible under the Scheme.

(a) All those temporary employees who have worked for 85 days in any two consecutive calendar years with the Life Insurance Corporationbetween 20th May, 1985 uptil date and who conformed th the required eligibility criteria for regular recruitment on the dates of their initial temporary appointment will be permittedto compete for the next regular recruitment after the regular recruitment for these posts currently scheduled for November, 1992.

Fromtheperusal of the records , it transpires that in justicehas been done with the workmen who were working inthe LIC and they have not been absorbed but the union itself agreed to the scheme framed by the LIC and that was approvedby the Hon'ble Supreme Court so nothing is left forthis Tribunal to adjudicate upon or decide . It was further submitted that in the scheme , para C only gives relaxation in age and para D requires them to apply for regular recruitment in the normal course and the regularisation will inthe circumstances , be by selection for appointment. Itwas submitted that the service rendered by the workman applicant has not been considered while making appointment . The union has agreed to the scheme framed bythe LIC and it has got the seal of approval of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as such the matter may be again raised (b) These candidates will be considered on their merits with all other candidates who may apply for such appointments , including those from theopenmarket.

10350

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

before the Hon'ble Supreme Court as everything has been finalised. The scheme was approved in 1992 whereas the ID case was pending in 1991. As such, ID case No. 27/1991 merged in the scheme approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court . Their remains nothing to be adjudicated upon or to be decided in view of the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Delhi High Court referred to above. In case any injustice has been caused to the workmen, i.e. due to bargaining of the union, the union has considered to the scheme framed by the LIC. Of course , there appears to be no proper dispensation of justice but if the union has entered into a compromise before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and that scheme has been approved , every appointment is to be made according to the scheme formulated and the workman cannot get relief of reinstatement . The law cited by the workman applicant is not applicable in the facts and circumstances ofthis case.

ORDER

The complaint under section 33 -A of the ID Act, 1947 arising out of ID No. 27/91 is dismissed . The workmen applicants are not entitled to any relief as prayed for.

Dt. 22-11-2004

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 29 नवम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3314. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार डॉक लेबर बोर्ड के प्रबंधतंत्रके संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 24/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-31025/1/2004- आई.आर. ( बी- II ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 29th November, 2004 S.O. 3314. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 24/ 2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court, Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Dock Labour Board and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 29-11- 2004.

[No. L - 31025/ 1/ 2004- IR (B -II) ]

C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii))

ANNEXURE

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

Present : Shri E. Ismail , B.Sc. ,LL.B. , PresidingOfficer Dated the 23rd day of September, 2004 INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C.L. D. No.24/2002 (Old I.D.No.32/2000 Transferred from Industrial -Tribunal -cum -Labour Court ,Visakhapatnam) Between:

Sri K. Ramana Rao,

S/o Late K. Ramulu,

D.No. 18-34-85,

Kummari Veedhi ,

Maharanipeta,

Petitioner Visakhapatnam.

AND

The Chairman,

Dock Labour Board,

Visakhapatnam Port Area ,

Respondent Visakhapatnam.

Appearances:

For the Petitioner : Sri M.S. Sastry, Advocate For theRespondent : M/s. K. Srinivasa Murthty, V. Umadevi & C. Vijaya Shekar Reddy, Advocates

AWARD

This is a case taken under Sec.2 A (2) of the I.D. Act , 1947 by the Industrial Tribunal Labour Court , Visakhapatnam in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No.8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/s. Cotton Corporation of India and two others 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. 32/2000 and renumbered in this Court as L.C.I.D.No. 24/2002 .

2. The brief facts as stated in the petition are : that the Petitioner was appointed as a casual worker on 7-10-92, securing the job of his medically unfit father Late K. Ramulu with T.No. 7184. After serving The Dock Labour Board for three years he was served with a show cause notice dated 21-2-1995 on the ground that the job was 10351 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/ पौष 4, 1926

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

secured by him for impersonation . The workman has submitted his explanation dated 28-2-95 . The Enquiry Officer served notice on the workman on 3-5-95 to attend the enquiry on 12-5-95 . Much is written about the enquiry but this Court by an order dated 9-1-2004 held that the enquiry is validly conducted. Hence, all that need not be repeated. He submits that he had filed a Writ Petition but the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. has not considered.

3. Acounter was filed stating that Hon'ble High Court of A.P. has decided in Writ Petition No. 23731/96 and passed orders on merit that the workman is not entitled to any relief. The order of the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. acts as res judicata and this case is barred by principles of res judicata and various other things has been mentioned about the enquiry which need not be gone into at this stage . Further it is added that the petition may be dismissed.

4. Arguments were heard on the validity ofdomestic enquiry and this Court by a detailed order dated 9-1-2004 passed an order holding that the domestic enquiry is validly conducted.

5. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has argued at length and tried to convince this Court that the decision in the Writ Petition will not act as res judicata as the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. sitting in the writ jurisdiction cannot decide on the facts of the case.

6. The Learned Counsel for the respondent submits that once having taken order from the Hon'ble High Court ofA.P. on merits , this Court ceases to have jurisdiction in view of resjudicata.

documents were shown to the 2nd Petitioner and that he had ampel opportunity to explain those two documents . If really, the 2nd Petitioner is having any evidence to contradict those two documents, he would have adduced oral or documentary evidence . The second Petitioner has not done so . In other words , the 2nd Petitioner has not availed of the opportunity given to him. Therefore , I do not see any reason to interfere with the order terminating the services of the second Petitioner " . So when the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. has held categorically, that the Hon'ble Judge does not see any ground to interfere with the order of the Enquiry Officer and dismiss the Writ Petition which was for declaring that the action of the Respondent in removing the Petitioner is illegal , arbitrary and unreasonable and to direct the Respondent to continue the Petitioner in service . Then I am afraid it acts resjudicata. In fact , the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. has gone into the enquiry report and held that the enquiry cannot be interfered with and also did not say anything about the reinstatement , reduction of punishment and to argue that this Court can still has jurisdiction under Sec . 11A, according to my view is not correct . The Petitioner has chosen to seek alternate forum namely the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. and got a finding on the question of fact that is the enquiry and about the reinstatement etc. , the Hon'ble High Court of A. P. has not said anything and dismissed the Writ Petition and this Tribunal cannot now sitand decide whether he is entitled for a lesser punishment or not. I am of the opinion that having chosen to select and alternative forum and taken the verdict from that forum to which this Court is subordinate . Hence , I cannot even consider whether the quantum of punishment can be reduced and even otherwise it is a criminal act of impersonation and in the normal course also this Tribunal would not have interfered with the quantum of punishment as it is a case of impersonation . Accordingly, I hold that the Peitioner is not entitled for any relief. Hence , an award is passed holding that the Petitioner is not entitled for any relief.

Awardpassed accordingly. Transmit.

Dictated to Kum. K. Phani Gowri, Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 23rd day of September, 2004 .

E. ISMAIL, Presiding Officer

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for

the Petitioner

Witnesses examined for the Respondent

NIL

Documents marked for the Petitioner

NIL Documents marked for the Respondent NIL

7. Itmay be seen that without going into the details , because after this is an argument only under Sec . 11A about the quantum of punishment having held that the enquiry is validly conducted. Now, the question is whether this Court can exercise the jurisdiction in view of the Judgement of the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. in Writ Petition No. 23731 of 1996 wherein it is held as follows : " Inview of the above argument advanced by the Learned Counsel for the 2nd Petitioner , I; have called for the records of enquiry and also the files containing the original documents . Accordingly, the records and files are produced . I have perused the same. In the enquiry, the application filed by the widow of the original employee and the school certificate issued by the Head Master were shown to the second Petitioner and after going through the documents the second Petitioner stated that he does not know as to who gave that application , that the school certificate does not belong to him , that his father died at home only and not in an accident . He also stated that he did not study upto 5th class and does not possess any driving license . He further says that he does not know as to who gave the application for employment . From these answers and the proceedings taken , it is clear that the two 10352

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA4, 1926

[PART II SEC .3(ii) ]

APPEARANCE :

नई दिल्ली, 29 नवम्बर, 2004

Forthe Petitioner

:Sri M.S. Sastry, Advocate

For the Respondent : M/s. K. Srinivasa Murthy, V. Umadevi & C. Vijaya Shekar Reddy, Advocates .

का. आ. 3315.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार डॉक लेबर बोर्ड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 23/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

AWARD

[ सं. एल -31025 / 1/2004- आई . आर. (बी. II ) ] सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 29th November, 2004

This is a case taken under Sec . 2A(2) of the I.D. Act, 1947 by the Industrial Tribunal 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 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/ s. Cotton Corporation of India and two others and transferredto 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. 31/2000 and renumbered in this Court as L. C.I.D. No. 23/2002 .

S.O. 3315. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 23/2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , hyderabad as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Dock Labour Board and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 29-11-04 .

[No. L-31025/1/ 2004 - IR (B - II) ] C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT:

SHRI E. ISMAIL, B.SC. , LL.B. , Presiding Officer

Dated the 23rd day of September, 2004

2. The brief facts as stated in the petition are : that thePetitioner was appointed as a casual worker on 7-10- 92, securing the job of his medically unfit father Late Korlayya with T. No. 7389. After serving The Dock Labour Board for two years he was served with a show cause notice dated 10-12-2004 on the ground that the job was secured by him by impersonation . The workman has submitted his explanation dated 16-12-94 . It was said that the show cause notice was served on the basis of Venkat Rao'sCommittee report dated 13-8-2004. One year later theworkmanwas served with notice dated 19-12-95 saying that the explanation of workman dated 16-12-94 was found unsatisfactory and the workman was to attend enquiry. Much is written about the enquiry but this Court by an order dated 9-1-2004 held that the enquiry is validly conducted. Hence , all that need not be repeated. He submits that he had filed a Writ Petition but the Hon'ble High Court ofA.P. has not considered.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C.LD. NO.23/2002

(Old I.D. No. 31/2000 Transferred from Industrial Tribunal-cum -Labour Court, Visakhapatnam)

BETWEEN:

Sri P. Nooka Raju ,

3. A counter was filed stating that that Hon'ble High Court ofA.P. has decided Writ Petition No. 23683/96 andpassed orders on merit that the workman is not entitled to any relief. The order of the Hon'ble High Court ofA.P. acts as resjudicata and his case is barred by principles of resjudicata and various other things has been mentioned about the enquiry which need not be gone into at this stage. Further it is added that the petition may be dismissed.

Petitioner

S/ o . Late Korlayya , D. No. 32-32-117 , Kobbarithota , Visakhapatnam

AND

4. Argumentswere heard on the validity ofdomestic enquiry andthis Court by a detailed order dated 9-1-2004 passed an order holding that the domestic enquiry is validly conducted.

The Chairman ,

Dock Labour Board ,

Visakhapatnam Port Area ,

Visakhapatnam

Respondent

5. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has argued at length and tried to convince this Court that the decision in the Writ Petition will not act as res judicata as 10353

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

Appendix of evidence

the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. sitting in the writ jurisdiction cannot decided on the facts of the case.

Witnesses examined for : thePetitioner

Witnesses examined for theRespondent

NIL

6. The Learned Counsel for the Respondent submit that once having taken order from the Hon'ble High Court ofA.P. on merits, this Court ceases to have jurisdiction in view of resjudicata.

Documents marked for the Petitioner NIL Documents marked for the Respondent NIL नई दिल्ली, 29 नवम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3316.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सेन्ट्रल बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय, हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 210/2002) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12025/1 /2004-आई. आर. ( बी. II ) ] सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 29th November, 2004

S.O. 3316.- In Pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 210/2002 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court , Hyderabad now as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Bank of India and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 29-11-04.

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

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

PRESENT :

7. It maybe seen that without going into the details, because after all this is an argument only under Sec . 11A about the quantum of punishment having held that the enquiry is validly conducted. Now, the question is whether this Court can exercise the jurisdiction in view of the Judgement of the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. in Writ Petition No. 23683 of 1996 wherein it is held as follows:" I do not see any ground to interfere with the order of the Enquiry Officer as the Enquiry Officer considered the evidence and gave a finding that the Petitioner failed to establish that he is son ofKorlayya " . So when the Hon'ble High Court ofA.P. has held categorically, that the Hon'ble Judge does not see any ground to interfere with the order oftheEnquiry Officer and dismiss the Writ Petitionwhich was for declaring that the action of the Respondent in removing the Petitioner is illegal , arbitrary and unreasonable and to direct the Respondent to continue thePetitoner in service . then I am afraid it acts resjudicata. In fact, the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. has gone into the enquiry report and held that the enquiry cannot be interfered with and also did not say anything about the reinstatement, reduction of punishment and to argue that this Court can still has jurisdiction under Sec.. I1A, according to my view is not correct. The Petitioner has chosen to seek alternate forum namely the Hon'ble High Court ofA.P. and got a finding on the question of fact that isthe enquiry and about the reinstatment etc. , The Hon'ble High Court of A.P. has not said anything and dismissed the Writ Petition and this Tribunal cannot now sit and decide whether he is entitled for a lesser punishment or not. I am of the opinion that having chosen to select an alternative forum and taken the verdict from that forum to which this. Court is sub-ordinate . hence, I cannot even consider whether the quantum of punishment can be reduced and even otherwise it is a criminal act of impersonation and in the normal course also this Tribunal wouldnot have interfered with the quantum of punishment asitis a case of impersonation.

Accordingly. Ihold that the Petitioner is not entitled for any relief. Hence , an award is passed holding that the Petitioner is not entitled for any relief.

SHRI E: ISMAIL , B.SC. , LL.B. , Presiding Officer Dated the 19th day of October, 2004 INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C.LD. NO . 210/2002 Awardpassed accordingly, Transmit.

BETWEEN:

Dictatedto Kum. K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 23rd day of September, 2004.

....Petitioner E. ISMAIL, PresidingOfficer

Sri Md. Afzal Nawab , S/o. Md. Yakub Ali , H. No. 24-2-56 Darga, Kazipet-506004.

10354

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

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

1. The Regional Manager , Central Bank of India , Bank Street, Hyderabad -500 195 .

2. The Branch Manager, Central Bank of India , Hanamkonda-506 001 .

Respondents

APPEARANCES :

For the Petitioner

: M/s . C. Suryanaryana & P. Venkateswara Rao , Advocates

For the Respondent

several persons were employed as temporary peons who were employed after January, 1983 were continued in service . Ex. W1 is the particulars of his working days as workman during 1983-84, total working days are 309 , Ex. W2 contains part of those working days which are given in Ex. W1 . Ex . W3 is also a document showing his total working days . Ex . W4 dated 24-5-2001 is the representation to the Manager, Central Bank of India, Hanamkonda. In the cross examination he deposed that he was terminated on 9-4-1984 . Since then , he had been orally representing the managers for giving him employment. He was not in employment . That he got the information about his work only in the year 1988 before that he did not make any efforts . It is correct the Ex . W1 to W3 does not contain the signature of anybody from the management or office seal . According to Ex . W5 he has worked for 95 days . He was taken on daily wages in a temporary vacancy.

: Sri R. Muralidhar, Advocate

AWARD

This is a case taken under Sec . 2A (2) of the I.D. Act, 1947 in view of the judegment of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/ s. Cotton Corporation of India and two others.

5. WW2 , Sri A.B. Narasimha is the retired officer who took retirement under VRS. He said that he issued the particulars ofPetitioner's working days at his request . As he believed that he is entitled for absorption in the Respondent bank as a full time employee as claimed by him. In the cross examination he deposed that the Petitioner is an account holder and he used to tell him that he was not absorbed in service that he worked on casual basis . Heworked prior to 1990. Even now he is not aware as to how many days the Petitoner worked in the branch. He denied that he is deposing falsely..

6. Sri N. Narayana Rao , another officer of the bank who has taken VRS was examined as WW3 . He stated that he found from records that the Petitioner was employee for a total number of309 days during 1983-84. In fact in the year preceding his retrenchment in April , 1984 the Petitioner worked for 222 days, much longer than the 90 days required for his absorption in the bank as per the Approach Paper . In the cross examination he said that he is not deposing falsely but based on facts .

2. The brief facts as averred in the petition are : That the Petitioner was employed as temporary sub staff also called as temporary attender or peon in the 2 Respondent bank. He was employed from 3-1-83 for a total of 309 days till the end of April, 1984. In fact he was in employment for much longer period. The Ministry issued circular for absorption of those employees who were employed for atleast 90 days during the period 1-1-82 to 31-12-89 . But he was retrenched. He represented several times but to no avail . Then he relied on several judgements in the petition which need not be mentioned here and will be mentioned at proper time . Hence, he prays he may be reinstated with back wages and continuity of service etc.

7. The Respondents reported that they have no evidence.

3. A counter was filed stating that he worked for 8days in March, 1983 , and for 2 days in April , 1983 , for 28 days in June, 1983 , for 19 days in August, 1983 , for 29 daysin September, 1983 and for 5 days in October, 1983 as casual employee in R2 branch at Warangal District . As such the Petitioner never worked for period of 30 days continuously. All other averments are denied and further there is latch of approaching the Court after 18 years . Hence, the petition may be dismissed.

8. The Learned counsel for the Petitioner argued at length . That he did work for 309 days. It is proved by Ex. W3 and he gave several ruling which are all correct. He also relied on judgement in WP No. 6984/88 of the Hon'ble High Court ofA.P. where a direction was given to consider the Petitioner for permanent appointment within a period two months , i.e. judgement of State Bank Employees ' Union, Vijayawada Vs. Government of India and 2 others . He also relied on 1995 (5 ) ALD page 92 of Division Bench. Inthe judgement it was held that , workman who has worked for more than 90 days prior to 1982 is entitled to regularization . Refusal of regularization by the Respondent onthe ground that he worked earlier to 1982 is illegal. In 4. The Petitioner examined himself and deposed that he worked at the bank on daily wages on Rs . 8/- per day. In April 1984 he was retrenched from services without notice and without payment of notice period wages . Though 10355 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4 , 1926

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for : the Petitioner

Witnesses examined for theRespondent

WW1 : Sri Mohd.

Nil

Afzal Nawab

WW2: Sri A.B. Narasimha

that case also the Petitioner had, worked for 164½ days during the year 1978-79 in Mahaboobnagar branch as a casual labour. He made a representation on 22-6-91 , then he filed writ petition where his case was directed to be considered. Then he got issued a legal notice and hewas asked to appear for interview. He was not given on the ground that he rendered service prior to 1-1-82 . The Court held that the Petitioner is entitledto regularization.

WW3 : Sri N. NárayanaRao

9. The Respondents did not sumbit any arguments.

Documents marked for the Petitioner

Ex. W1: Copy of particulars of WWI's working days during1983-84

Ex. W2: Copyofpart ofworking days given in Ex . W1

Ex. W3: Copy of document showing particulars of working days of WW1

Ex. W4: Copy of representation of WWI to the Managementdt . 24-5-2001

Postal receipt

Ex. W5:

Ex. W6: Postal registration

Ex. W7 : Postal receipt

Ex. W8: Postal acknowledgement

Ex. W9: Postal receipt

Postal acknowledgement

Ex .W10:

Ex. W11 : Postal receipt

Ex. W12: Postal acknowledgement

Ex. W13: Copy ofIr . No. F3 /J / 104/87 - IR of M/ s . Finance , dt.6-8-1990

Documentsmarked for the Respondent

NIL

नई दिल्ली, 29 नवम्बर, 2004

10. It maybe seen that whatever the Petitioner says may be correct . But according to him only he worked upto 1984. But did not approach this Court till 2002. No doubt in the judgement cited by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that was also approaching by 12 years . No doubt in the case referred by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner where the circular was issued in 1991 that those who have worked for 90 days on or after 1-1-82 shall be considered. The Petitioner made an application immediately on 22-6-91 . In this case the Petitioner worked for 309 days tillApril, 1984. The said circular is Ex . W13 and it is the case ofthe Petitioner that he has been orally representing since 9th April , 1984. But he asked for details only in the year 1988. He did not make any efforts before 1988 for getting information . So it may be seen that he made efforts only from the year 1998 and even if the circular is of 1990 it was not valid by any action on the part of the Petitioner. So can any one help a person who sleeps for 8 years even after the circular inspite of the fact that he was having a bank account and now comes to the Court seeking relief after a gap of 18 years ? No doubt there is no limitation under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 but now it is well settled fact that even in cases of agreements where no specific date is given, it is always presumed to be a reasonable time . Similarly, when no limitation is given if the circular is of 1990, he did not try till 1998 and he gave representationto the management basing on Ex. W4, he received Ex . W5 on 17-11-2001 . I am afraid that no doubt the Petitioner comes within the meaning of the circular yet for such a belated approach to the Court, the only relief that can be given to him is directing the bank to consider the Petitioner for absorption in view of the circular No. F/3 /J/ 104/87 -IR of Government of India, M/ s . Finance, dated 6-8-1990, for absorption and if it is not possible he shall be considered fortemporary or casual appointment taking his age as on 3-1-83.

Awardpassed accordingly, Transmit .

का. आ. 3317.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सेन्ट्रल बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , नं. 2 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 19/94) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

Dictated toKum. K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 19th day of October, 2004.

[सं. एल-12012/236/ 93- आई. आर. ( बी. II ) ] सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव E. ISMAIL, PresidingOfficer

3684 Gl /04-37 10356

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

New Delhi , the 29th November, 2004 S.O. 3317.-In Pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 19/94 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum - Labour Court , No. 2 , New Delhi now as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Bank of India and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 29-11-04 .

[No. L - 12012/ 236/ 93 - IR (B - II) ]

C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT -II, NEW DELHI PRESIDING OFFICER : R.N. RAI

[PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii)] That after Sh. Bagh Singh had worked in the staff canteen at Gole Market , New Delhi branch for about 21 months since his appointment w.e.f. 7-9-79 during which period his wages were being directly paid to him by the bank. The bank established in June 1981 a staff canteen committee at the said branch consisting of the officials of the branch and from then onwards the wages as prescribed by the Head office of the bank for the canteen staff were being credited by the bank to the account of the canteen committee which in turn was disbursing these wages to Sh. Bagh Singh on monthly basis.

That though Sh. Bagh Singh was initially employed to work in the staff conteen at the aforesaid Gole Market branchbut shortly after his appointment, the management started to require Sh . Bagh Singh to perform other duties/ functions also which are generally performed by the members of subordinate staff in the bank such as the following:-

I.D. NO . 19/94

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Sh . Bagh Singh

S/o Sh. Khem Singh

R/ o R- 417 . School Block, Shakarpur, Delhi

VERSUS:

Central Bank of India

Link House 4 , Bahadur Shah , ZafarMarg, New Delhi-02

AWARD

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L- 12012/ 236/93 - IR ( B -2 ) Central Goverment DT. 17-02-1994 has referred the following point for adjudication .

The point runs as hereunder :--

"Whether the action of the management of CBI , New Delhi in not regularising the services of Sh . Bagh Singh , cantcen boy with effect from 7-9-79 is justified ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled to . "

The claimant has filed statement of claim . In the statement of claim , it has been stated that in pursuance of its scheme for providing canteen facilitics to the staff, the bank established a staff canteen at its Gole Market , New Delhi branch in September, 1979 and the then manager of the said branch appointed Sh . Bagh Singh , the workman concerned in the present dispute to work in the said staff canteen w.c.f. 7-9-79 and to begin with he was paid a monthly wage of Rs. 93.75 which was directly disbursed to Sh . Bagh Singh by way of vouchers or by credit to his account with the bank .

(1) Serving drinking water to the staff and clients inthe branch .

( ii) Feching eatables , snacks , cold drinks etc. for the staff during lunch hours .

(iii) Doing general work of an office peon in exitgencies such as in the absence of other office peons or in the event of shortage of subordinate staff including lodging of telegrams , dak , etc. at the post office .

(iv) At times working as a substitute peon or as anadditional peon in leave vacancies ofother members of subrodinate staff or in times of requirements of additional subordinate staff.

That though the bank has not been allowing Sh. Bagh Singh to mark his attendance , timings of daily arrival and departure and hours of work in the staff attendance register but his normal working hours ever since his appointment have been the same as prescribed for the other members of the subordinate staff.

That the wages paid to Sh . Bagh Singh have been revised and raised from time to time as determined by the Head Office either on its own or on representations/ demands from the employees of the bank and their unions and the Head Office of the bank has been conveying such revision of wages of the staff canteen employees through Circulars which will be produced before the Hon'ble Tribunal in the course of further proceedings . At present Sh . Bagh Singh is paid wages at the rate of Rs . 450 per month in the Gole Market, New Delhi branch .

That when Sh. Bagh Singh had worked in the bank atitsGoleMarket, New Delhi branch for several years and he came to know that the bank was giving regular / 10357 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

control and supervision on them besides other factual as well as legal position stated here - in -before and here - in- after.

permanent employement even to temporary/casual members of sub -staff including part-time members of sub- staff who had worked in the bank for a year or more he approached his branch authorities to take up his case for being treated as a permanent member of subordinate staff and for being paid the same pay and allowances as payable to the members of subordinate staff under the Bipartite Settlement Sh. Bagh Singh also made a number of representations to the management in this behalf. On the representations of Sh . Bagh Singh the Gole Market, New Delhi branch entered into correspondence with the concerned Regional office of the bank for regularisation of Sh. Bagh Singh.

It is stated that Sh. Bagh Singh the claimant wants to avoid the rules and regulations which provide for appointment in subordinate cadre , one has to get himself registered in employment exchange and then subject to fulfilling recruitment norms of qualification and age he has to appear in the written test and the interview and ifhe is successful then only he is appointed in the bank. The back door entry which Sh. Bagh Singh wants to adopt is not tenable under the present circumstances and facts. Hence the same should be rejected .

It isstated that the claimant was only engaged as a catneen boy by the bank staff canteen committee Gole Market branch and there is no privity of contract between the bank and the claimant . Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in the case of Shiv Mohan V/s Punjab National Bank. , 1955 1 SCR- 1427 as well as in another case cited in AIR 1966 SC-370 that the crux of the relationship between an employer and the employee is to be decided in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case .

The claimant has filed rejoinder and in his rejoinder, he has denied almost all the paras of the written statement andhe has asserted that despite the duties in the canteen, he was serving drinking water to the staff and on many occasions worked as a substitute in the leave etc. vacancies of the subordinate staff.

The management/respondent has tiled WS . In the WS it has been submitted that the canteen boy, who is engaged is being paid Rs . 3 per staff member at the branch besides other facilities namely purchase of crockery facility for cooking gas , electricity kerosene stove etc. The bank had been raising the canteen subsidy from time to time taking into consideration the fact that the service charges have increased Rs . 3 was increased to Rs . 3.75 and lately ithas been increased to Rs . 20 per member . That means if the staff strength in a particular branch is approximately 100 the canteen subsidy which will be paid to the canteen boywill be Rs. 2,000. It is mentioned that all other expenses are to be borne by the bank and he has to provide only the canteen services . The canteen boy is also entitled to charge cost for tea and other snacks etc. which he serves to the staffmembers .

Heard arguments from both the sides and perused the papers on the record.

It is stated that the policy as regards the canteen subsidy which is being provided to the staff members of a branch the policy says that the branch has to constitute a canteen committee and all payments are made to the canteen boy by the staff canteen committee . There is no privity of contract between the canteen boy and the bank .

It was submitted from the side of the workman that he was appointed as canteen boy and he was paid from the income of the bank. He sometimes discharged the duties of a peon also . He was made payments through vouchers . The orders regarding opening of the canteen has been referred to and the documents regarding the same has been filed . As such, he should be deemed to be an employee of the managementbank and not only an employee of the canteen. My attention was drawn to W/8 in which the General Manager has referred to his letters and has stated in that letter that Sh . Bagh Singh worked as temporary peon,

Itwas submitted from the side of the management that no such letter has been issued and the management witness has denied the same. It is a forged letter and it contains no signature of the Branch Manager. W/9 shows that Sh . Bagh Singh was working in staff canteen at Gole Market, New Delhi . This letter has been sent by the staff union of the bank to the Deputy General Manager. In this letter, it has been mentioned that he was employed in the staff canteen and payment was made to him by the staff It is stated that in case of Anand Singh Bisht the Government of India has rejected their claims on the ground. The bank submits that it has provided various facilities to its staff besides the above canteen facility namely paying allowance for engaging personal drivers for executives . It is stated that the bank gives certain amounts to its executives for engaging personnal drivers are being made by the executives directly and the bank has no control and supervision over the duties and functions of the drivers . These personal drivers do not become the employee of the bank by virtue of the payment made to them by the executives . Similarly in the case of canteen committee and whereby payment is made by the staff canteen committee and whereby payment and working in the canteen does not entitle the canteen boy to allege that they are the staff members of the bank because the bank has no contract of employment as well as no 10358

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the RBI case has held that ifthe canteen is not a statutory canteen, the workman shall be deemed to be an employee of the canteen . The law cited by the workman is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of this case .

Inview of the above discussions , the case of regularisation of the workman applicant is not made out.

The reference is replied thus:-

canteen committee . He also served water to the staff and the clients . W/10 is the letter sent by the bank and in the letter, it has been said that Mr. Bagh Singh has not been engaged by the bank . It is for the canteen committee to engage such canteen boys to whom direct payments are nade by the canteen committee as per the scheme/rules . Hence, there is no question of his employment in the bank as claimed by him . This letter indicates that Shri Bagh Singh was simply a canteen boy and he was made payment from the income of the canteen .

The action of the management of the CBI, New Delhi innot regularising the services ofShri Bagh Singh canteen boy with effect from 7-9-79 is justified. The workman applicant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.

The award is given accordingly.

Dt. 18-11-2004

R.N. RAI , PresidingOfficer

नई दिल्ली, 29 नवम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3318.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सेन्ट्रल बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, नं. 2 , धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 19/94) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/217/93- आई. आर. ( बी. II ) ] सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 29th November, 2004 It has been asserted by the workman that he was made payments through vouchers but no vouchers have been annexed with the record . There are no papers regarding payment made to Shri Bagh Singh . He was paid from the income of the canteen . It was further submitted by the management that there is no employer and employee relation between the workman applicant and the management . He has not been recruited by the management and he has not been engaged by the management but the staff committee has appointed him to serve in the canteen as such he cannot be deemed to be an employee of the bank. The workman applicant has given evidence and in his cross -examination , he has admitted that as canteen boy,he used to supply tea and water. He used to bring the articles for the canteen at the asking of the Director of the canteen in the morning daily who used to pay him. He used to collect money from the persons to whom he used to supply tea and passed themto the Director in the evening. He used to work on monthly wages of Rs . 93.75 per month only for one or two years . The rate of tea or the rate of the tea used to differ from time to time . It is incorrect that he used to retain the money in respect of the tea and snacks served to the employees in the branch .

S.O. 3318.-In Pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 19/94) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court , No. 2 , Dhanbad now as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Bank of India and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 29-11-2004,

[No. L- 12012/217/93 - IR (B -II) ]

C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 2, DHANBAD

Inthe matter of a reference U/S . 10( 1 ) (d) (2A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 .

REFERENCE NO . 19 OF 1994

It was submitted from the side of the management that accordingto the statement in cross - examination of the workman applicant , he has admitted that he used to collect money from the persons to whom he supplied tea and water and the canteen committee used to pay him by cheque in his own name. The bank never paid him any payment by cheque. His presence was marked nowhere . He used to take leave orally. The admissions of the workman applicant show that he was related only to the canteen and he served in the canteen for only one to two years. In his cross -examination, he has not said that he performed the duties of a peon . As such, the entire affidavit becomes false as he has accepted that as a canteen boy, he used to supply tea and water and collect money for the same. It simply indicates that for one or two years , he was engaged by the canteen managing committee and he collected money for the tea which he supplied. He did not perform the duties of a peon . The bank has been made him no payment by any voucher. The canteen has made him payments through cheques but those cheques have not been filed. The canteen was not a statutory canteen . The

Parties: Employers in relation to the management of Central Bank of India.

10359 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4 , 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

AND

Their workmen.

SENT: Shri B. Biswas, PresidingOfficer.

APPEARANCES :

For the Employers : Shri P.K. Nagwansi , Manager

For the Workmen

Shri.N. B. Srivastava , Authorised Representative

State: Bihar

: Industry: Bank

Dated, the 9th November, 2004.

AWARD

By Order No. L - 12012/217/ 93 -I.R. (B- 2 ) dated the 24th March, 1994 the Central Government in the Ministry ofLabour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section ( 1 ) and sub - section (2A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:

"Whether the action of the management of CentralBank of India, Patna in dismissing Shri Ram Bhagwan Singh, Clerk from service with effect from 18-7-1990 is justified? If not, what relief is the said workman entitled to ? "

2.The case ofthe concerned workman according to the written statement submitted by the sponsoring union on his behalf, in brief, is as follows:

accepted particularly when the original was not brought on record accept . The management also produced list of witnesses in which S. A. Khan , the then Branch Manager, Jhauganj and the Registrar, Vice Chancellor of Hindi Vidyapeeth were named. In place of the Registrar or the Vice Chancellor a Clerk was examined by the management in course of that enquiry as MW- 2. Though the representative of the concerned workman raised objection to that effect it was not adhered to by the Enquiry Officer . They submitted that MW - 2 is mere a Clerk and his oral testimony in support of one document and denial ofother documents without any supporting records is not tenable in support of the alleged charges . Inspite of demand by the representative of the concerned workman to call for the witnesses given in the list with all records of Vidyapeeth like copy of examination tabulation records , registers , result sheets but nothing was produced. They submitted that the Provisional Certificate submitted by the CSE bears the stamp of Hindi Vidyapeeth , Deoghar, signed by the Deputy Registrar, Deoghar Vidyapeeth delivered through Patliputra Ratri Vidyalaya which was affiliated to Deoghar Vidyapeeth was admitted by MW-2. They disclosed that during hearing of the enquiry proceeding the concerned workman disclosed that he appeared through Patliputra Ratri Vidyalaya and passed in 1st Division as informed by the school in providing the Provisional Certificate of the said examination . The signatures on the two certificates i.e. one delivered from the school and the other produced through MW -2 were identical . It was also admitted that the certificate provided by the school was provisional and he did not apply for the original certificate. They alleged that the certificate given by the CSE was not produced though it was under the custody of the management . The so- called Clerk of Deoghar Vidyapeeth was not competent to accept or deny the signature as he was not an expert . The management also failed to produce any other supporting document in favour of the alleged charges . It is the allegation of the sponsoring union that the management illegally and arbitrarily dismissed the concerned workman from his service without considering all aspects and accordingly they raised an industrial dispute which ultimately resulted reference to this Tribunal for adjudication.

3. The management , on the contrary, after filing written statement have denied all the claims and allegations which the sponsoring union asserted in their written statement submitted on behalf of the concerned workman . They submitted that the concerned workman, Ram Bhagwan Singh , was a sub - staff in the Bank and submitted anapplication dated 15-5-81 informing therein that he had passed the Praveshika Pariksha of 1980 in the First Division with English and Mathematics from Hindi Vidyapeeth, The sponsoring union submitted that the concerned workman, Ram Bhagwan Singh , joined in Bank's service assub- staff on 30-11-71 and was promoted in ClericalCadre on 10-6-81 . He performed his duties to the full satisfaction of the higher authorities till the order of dismissal dated 3-7-90 issued against him . His whole service consists of nearly 19 years out of which in the clerical cadre he performed his duties for more than 8 years . The management vide memo No. PRO/DAW/ 88 / 251 dated 8-12-88 issued a charge-sheet for committing misconduct to the concerned workman. He submitted his reply to the said charge-sheet on 26-12-88 , but the same was not accepted by the management . Accordingly, management conducted an enquiry against the concerned workman. They submitted that in the enquiry attested copy of the certificate was produced and the original was not produced. Similarly, the attested copy of the mark-sheet and not the original also was produced. The same was demanded for verification by the concerned workman but it was not given to him . Accordingly , the sponsoring union submitted that the secondary evidence could not be 10360

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II SEC . 3 ( ii)) Deoghar . He further requested the Bank in his said application to promote him to clerical cadre in terms of Bank's promotion Policy Agreement . In support of his aforesaid declaration and claim he enclosed a copy of Provisional Certificate bearing No. 1223 dated 4-5-81 and Patliputra Hindi ( Ratri ) Mahavidyalaya Certificate dated 9-5-81 declaring him to have passed the said examination in First Division and also attested copy of Marksheet dated 2-5-81 showing that he had obtained 480 marks out of 800 marks of the said Examination .

certificate. They disclosed that the Disciplinary Aut before deciding the case gave personal hearing concerned workman and after giving the said oppor and also considering all material facts dismiss concerned workman from his service. Against that order ofdismissal the concerned workman preferred an appeal. TheAppellate Authority collected full records of the case and after carefully going through all the enquiry papers dismissed the appéal filed by him . They submitted that full opportunity was given to the concerned workman in deferiding his case. The charge of gross misconduct under clause 19.5 ( (j ) of the Bipartite Settlement 1966 attracting punishment under Clause 19.6 was conclusively proved against him. The proved charge against the petitioner was very serious and deserved no leniency and for which the order ofpunishment was fair and proper in commensurate with the gravity of misconduct committed by him.

Accordingly, management submitted that the concernedworkman is not entitled to get any relief and for which an award may be passed rejecting his claim .

Points to decided :

4. "Whether the action of the management of Central Bank of India , Patna in dismissing Shri RamBhagwan Singh , Clerk from service with effect from 18-7-1990 is justified ? Ifnot, what relief is the said workman entitled to .?"

Finding with reasons:

5. Before taking up hearing of the instant case on merit it was taken into consideration if the domestic enquiry held against the conce med workman by the Enquiry Officer as per order of the management was fair, proper and in accordance with the principle of natural justice or not . The said issue on preliminary point was disposed of vide orderNo. 57 dated 16-7-2004 in favour ofthe management .

6. Now the point for consideration is whether the charge framed against the concerned workman has duly been established against him or not . In course of hearing the chargesheet issuedto the concerned workman was marked as Ext. M - 1 which speaks as follows:

Relying on the above declaration straightway promotion as Asstt . Cashier-cum- Godown Keeper was effected by theBank in June , 1981. However it came to the Bank's notice that the said certificate/ marksheet submitted by the concerned workman were bogus and the fact that he had passed in Second Division in Praveshika Examination 1980 ( Supplimentary ) . A regular enquiry on above charges was conducted by an independent Enquiry Officer during which full opportunity ofdefence was made available to him . Before holding the said departmental enquiry the concerned workman submitted a petition raising objection relating to said departmental enquiry on the goround that a court case was pending against him but as the concerned workman failed to submit any order of the court the enquiry was continued , and accordingly the management submitted that the enquiry done against the concerned workman was proper. They submitted that the charge against the concerned petitioner was conclusively proved . On the contrary, inspite of giving opportunity the defence could not produce any cogent and substantial material . In their support , ME - 10 which was a letter from Registrar, Hindi Vidyapeeth , Deoghar, clearly exposed that the certificate submitted by the petitioner to the Bank was bogus . On the contrary, DE-4 a defence exhibit did not confirm issuance of certificate to CSE by the Mahavidyalaya. They submitted that the concerned workman in his evidence disclosed that the Vice Chancellor of Vidyapeeth was not brought in the enquiry. Vide ME- 11 the Vice Chancellor through letter No. 100 dated 1-6-89 had deputed his representative , Bhubneshwar Prasad for the purpose . Therefore, the objection raised by the petitioner was not tenable because it was not possible for a V.C. to appear personally in all such cases . They submitted that during enquiry proceeding it was established beyond all shadow of doubt that the concerned workman obtained and submitted bogus certificate deliberately in connivance with one Parmanand Prasad and thus cheated the Bank by submitting a bogus certificate and obtained undue promotion to clerical cadre in the Bank which was highly prejudicial to the interest of the Bank . They submitted further that had the petitioner been innocent he should have proceeded against the authorities in providing bogus

"The Memo No. PRO/DAW/88/251 dtd . 8-12-1988 was issued to Sri Ram Bhagwan Singh , Clerk, presently working at Rajendranagar branch for his acts of omission and commission . His explanation dtd . 26-12-88 to the aforesaid Memo has not been found satisfactory. It has been, therefore , decided by theBank to hold a regular departmental enquiry against him on the following charge.

10361

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/ पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

While working as subordinate staff in the Bank , Sri Ram Bhagwan Singh submitted an application dt. 15-5-81 to Bank informing therein that he had passed the Parveshika Pariksha Examination of 1980 in the FirstDivision with English and mathematics from Hindi Vidyapeeth , Deoghar. He further requested the Bank in his said application to promote him to çlerical cadre in terms of Bank's promotion Policy Agreement. In support of his aforesaid declaration and claim , he enclosed attested copy ofProvisional Certficate bearing Serial No. 1223 (A) dt . 4-5-1981 , Patliputra Hindi (Ratri ) Mahavidyalaya Certficate dt . 9-5-81 declaring him to have passed the said examination in the First Division and also the attested copy ofMarks - sheetdt . 2-5-81 showing that he had obtained 480 marks out of the total 800 marks ofthe said examination.

Relying on his above declaration his straightaway Promotion as Asstt . Cashier-cum- Godown Keeper, was effected by the Bank in june 1981 in terms of para 9.2 of the Bank's Promotion Policy Agreement for award staff.

However , it came to the Bank's notice that the said certificate/marks - sheet submitted by Sri Ram Bhagwan Singh to the Bank were bogus and that in fact he had passed in Second Division in Parveshika Examination 1980 (supplementary ) . Sri Ram Bhagwan Singh , thus cheated the Bank with clear intention to secure straightaway promotion from subordinate cadre to clerical cadre in terms of clause 9.2 ofthe Bank's Promotion Policy Agreement . His such acts are highly prejudicial to the interest of the Bank and constitute gross misconduct on his part as per clause 19.5 (j ) of the Bipartite settlement 1966, which attracts punishment under the clause 19.6 of the said settlement . "

Vidyapeeth, Deoghar . In support of his claim he enclosed attested copy of Provisional Certificate bearing Serial No. 1223 (A) dated 4-5-1981 and patliputra Hindi (Ratri ) Mahavidyalaya Certificatedt. 9-5-81 . Those Proveshika pariksha Examination certificate and the certificate issued by Patliputra Hindi (Ratri ) Mahavidyalaya during evidence were marked as Exts . M-6 and M- 5 respectively. Considering the xerox copy of these two certificates there isno dispute to hold that the concerned workman passed the Proveshika Pariksha Examination of 1980 in first Division . He also submitted xerox copy of mark -sheet dated 2-5-81 in that regard which also during evidence was marked as Ext . M-8 . The mark - sheet also supports the claim of the concerned workman. It transpires from the said mark - sheet that out of total 800 marks the concerned workman secured 480 marks in the said examination . it is the contention of the management that in terms of clause 9.2 of the Bank's Promotion Policy Agreement for the subordinate staff they issued promotional order directly infavour of the concerned workman and designated him as Cashier-cum-Godown Keeper which came into effect in 1981. It is the specific allegation of the management that subsequently it came to their notice that the said certificate and mark-sheets submitted by the concerned workman to the Bank were bogus . Actually the concerned workman passed the Proveshika pariksha Examination of 1980 in Second Division (supplementary) and not in First Division. They alleged that by such act of the concerned workman as the management was cheated in getting his straightaway promotion from subordinate cadre to clerical cadre a charge- sheet was issued in terms of clause 19.5 (j ) of the Bipartite Settlement 1966 which attracts punishment under clause 19.6 of the said settlement . During hearing the management relied on certain documents marked as Exts . M-9, M- 10, M - 11 , M- 12 and M - 13 to show that in view of the application submitted by the concerned workman all steps were taken by them for giving straightaway promotion to the concerned workman from the post of subordinate staff to the post of Asstt . Cashier- cum- Godown Keeper. Interms of Para 9.2 of Bank's promotion Policy Agreement the management took such decision as the concerned workman passed Proveshika Pariksha Examination of 1980 in First Division . Therefore , it is seen that the managements gave all the importance to the documents which the concerned workman submitted for getting his straightaway promotion in clerical cadre. It is the specific allegation of the management that subsequently they came to how that the certificates and marks - sheets which the concerned workman relied on for getting his straightaway promotion were not genuine and accordingly they called for a report from the Vice- Chancellor, Hindi Vidyapeeth, Deoghar to ascertain whether

the certificate and mark - sheet which the concerned The concerned workman submitted reply in response to that chargesheet wherein he categorically denied the allegation brought against him . The Enquiry Officer after conducting domestic enquiry against the concerned workman submitted his report holding the concerned workman guilty to the charge . The enquiry report during the course ofhearing was marked as Ext .M - 20 . Considering the evidence of both sides and also considering the materials on record there is no dispute to hold that the concerned workman while working as sub - staff in the Bank submitted an application dated 15-5-81 to the management requesting the management to promote him in clerical cadre in terms of Bank's Promotion Policy Agreement as he passed Proveshika Pariksha Examination of 1980 in the First Division with English and mathematics from Hindi 10362

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

considering this letter it has been exposed clearly that the concerned workman collected the provisional certificate and mark -sheet from one Parmanand Prasad and submitted the same to the management for consideration his promotion. Therefore , the evidence of said Parmanand Prasad to show that the concerned workman was innocent isto be considered as very vital because of the fact that Hindi Vidyapeeth , Deoghar by producing original mark- sheet before the enquiry authority establishes that the concerned workman did not pass Proveshika Pariksha Examination of 1980 in First Division,

Accordingly to prove innocence of the concerned workman burdenofProof was on him . The concerned workman had ample scope to examine said Parmanand Prasadis defence witness duringhearing of the enquiry proceeding .But the concerned workman did not consider necessary to do so for the reason best known to him though he pleaded his innocence althrough . By taking the plea of his innocence he intended to explain that it was the school authority who will be held responsible for committing such mischief. Considering allmaterials on record it is clear that the school authority did not issue the said provisional certificates and copy ofmark- sheet to the concerned workman but the same were obtained by the concerned workman from Parmanand Prasad with whom he had some relation . Had that not been so the said Parmanand Prasad would not writeletter marked Ext.M - 18 asking the concerned workman to meet him in connection with examination matter . Therefore, the plea taken by the concerned workman is not atall believeable. Considering the facts and circumstances there is ample reason to believe that the concerned workman inconnivance with said Parmanand Prasad of Patliputra Hindi (Ratri ) Mahavidyalaya, Bakshi Maidan manufactured false mark - sheet and provisional certificate which he submitted to the management for getting his promotion in clerical cadre directly from the post of subordinat staff. I find no hesitation to say that the concerned workman by his such act cheated the management for his unlawful gain.

Inview of the facts and circumstances stated above I hold that the management have been able to establish the charge brought against the concerned workman under clause 19.5 of the Bipartite Settlement , 1966. After receipt ofthe said order the disciplinary authority dismissed the concerned workman from his service and the said order during evidence marked as Ext . M - 21 . Against the said order ofdismissal the concerned workman preferred an appeal with a prayer for setting aside the order of dismissal passed by the Disciplinary Authority. The Appellate Authority after hearing both sides dismissed the appeal preferred by theconcerned workman which during evidence was marked asExt.M-23 .

workman relied on were genuine or not . The Vice - Chancellor in response to that quarry submitted a report vide letter No. 83 dated 20-7-82 , marked as Ext. M- 14 wherein it was categorically reported that the concerned workman , Ram Bhagwan Singh passed proveshika pariksha Examination of 1980 in Second Division. During hearing ofthe enquiry proceeding the management examinedB.P. Singh , Sinor Clerk of Hindi Vidyapeeth , Deoghar and in course ofhis examination he produced the original mark- shect of the concerned workman which during hearing was marked as Ex. M - 17. From this mark- sheet it transpires thatthe concerned workman secured 419 marks in the said examination and was placed in Second Division . It is the contention of the concerned workman that he received the Provisional Certificate and mark - ssheet from Patliputra Hindi (Ratri ) Mahavidyalaya and accordingly he submitted the same to the management for consideration of his promotion . Disclosing this fact the concerned workman submitted that he was not at all aware if those documents were fake , bogus or not. It transpires from the record that to establish his genuinity the concerned workman wrote a letter to the principal , Patliputra Hindi ( Ratri ) Mahavidyalaya dated 18-6-83 seeking information to the effect that the provisional certificate and mark - sheet which he received from the said Mahavidaylaya weregenuine or not . In response to that letter the Principal intimated him that as per register maintained by Sri Parmanand Prasad the concerned workman passed the Proveshika Pariksha Examination of 1980 in First Division . From this letter it transpires clearly that the Principal did not furnish the particulars required by the concerned workman from the school register but from a register preserved by Parmanand Prasad. Accordingly, it is difficult to draw any conclusion to the effect that the said school authority received provisional certificate and mark- sheet from Hindi Vidyapeeth , Deoghar (Bihar ) or not . In this connection the contents of the Post Card marked as Ext . M - 18 addressed to the concerned workman by Parmanand Prasad may be taken into consideration . The said letter was written on 29.11.80. By this letter said Parmanand Prasad requested the concerned workman to meet him immediately by 13th or 14th December, 1980 as there was some important talk in the matter of his appearance in the said Proveshika Pariksha Examination of 1980. It is ratherunthinkable to note that a person who is attached to the said school would show his such sincerity to have a talk with a candidate who intended to appear in the Proveshika Pariksha Examination . Therefore it shows that the concerned workman had some how a very good relation with that Parmanand Prasad . I find support of this fact from the letter written by the principal of the said school , marked as Ext . M - 18 /3 wherein it has also been exposad that the concerned workman had a very good relation with said Parmanand Prasad . Therefore ,

Now, the point for consideration is whether the concerned workman is entitled to get any relief under 10363

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

and got his direct promotion in clerical cadre and there by cheated the management .

Sec.11A of the Industrial Disputes Act . Sec . 11 - A of the I.D. Act speaks as follows:

"Where an industrial dispute relatingto the discharge or dismissal of a workman has been referred to a Labour Court , Tribunal or National Tribunal for adjudication and, in the course of the adjudication proceedings, the Labour Court, Tribunal or National , as the case may be , is satisfied that the order of discharge or dismissal was not justified, it may, by its award set aside the order of discharge or dismissal and direct reinstatement of the workman on such terms and conditions if any, as it thinks fit , or give such other relief to the workman including the award of any lesser punishment in lieu discharge or dismissal as the circumstances of the case may require."

Incourse of hearing the representative of the concernedworkman producing certified copy of the award passed in Reference No. 195 of 1993 submitted that when the learnedPresiding Officer in similar nature ofcase instead ofupholding the punishment of dismissal took lenient view and directed the management to reinstate said workman in service subject to certain terms and conditions, the same principle may be applied in the instant case also . On the contrary, learned representative of the management raising strong objection to the submission made by the representative of the concerned workman relied on a decisionpassedby me in Reference No. 136 of 1991 wherein the order ofdismissal of Ram Bhagwan Singh was upheld . Inthis connection decision reported in 2003(1) Bank C.L.R. 622 ( SC) may be referred to . In the said decision Their Lordships held that every officer/employee is required to take all possible steps to protect the interest of the Bank and to discharge his duties with utmost integrity, honesty, devotion and diligence and to do nothing which is unbecoming of a Bank Officer . If the decision ofHon'ble Apex Court is taken into consideration it would expose clearly that maintenance of diligency is needed for the interest of creating faith in the mind of the public who attend the Bank as customers . Here in the instant case the concerned workman was very much eager to get his direct promotion in clerical cadre from subordinate staff and to achieve goal he did not hesitate to manufacture false provisional certificate and mark -sheet in connivance with others and thereby not only cheated the management but also created disfaith in the mind of the customers of the Bank. Safety of the Banks , transaction cannot be secured from a personson who is dishonest as utmost integrity and honesty are very much needed in dealing with Bank's affairs.

I consider that there is no room for dishonest staffto attach himself with bank's affairs and considering this aspect I hold that the management did not commit any illegality in dismissing a dishonest staff i.e. the concerned workman from his service who not only cheated the Bank but also casted shadow in the business of the Bank . Accordingly, hold that the concerned workman is not entitled to get any relief in view ofhis prayer.

7. In the result, the following award is rendered- This provision of the Act speaks clearly that the Tribunal is empowered to set aside the order of discharge or dismissal and direct reinstatement of the concerned workman on such terms and conditions if the said order of dismissal appears to be not genuine . It is seen that on the allegation of commiting serious misconduct under clause 19.5 ( j ) ofBipartite Settlement 1966 the management issued charge-sheet to the concerned workman . The concerned workman by giving his reply, no doubt, denied the charge brought against him. It is admitted fact that the concerned workman got his promotion in clerical cader straightaway from the post ofsubordinate staff taking into consideration that he passed proveshika Pariksha Examination of 1980 in First Division . The management considered his such promotion relying on the provisional certificate and mark- sheet submitted by the concerned workman. Subsquently it was established that the said provisional certificate and mark - sheet which the concerned workmann produced for getting his promotion were not genuine documents. Actually from the original mark - sheet produced by Hindi Vidyapeth , Deoghar (Bihar) who conducted the said examination showed that he passed the said examination inSecond Diivision and not in First Division . It has been established that the concerned workman procured the said two documents from Parmanand Prasad who was attached to Patliputra Hindi (Ratri ) Mahavidyalaya , Patna . The concerned workman to establish his plea of innocence did not consider necessary to examine said Parmanand Prasad either before this Tribunal in course of hearing or before the enquiry authority.

That the action ofthe management of Central Bank of India, Patna in dismissing Shri Ram Bhagwan Singh, Clerk from service with effect from 18-7-1990 is justified. Hence , the concerned workman is not entitled to get any relief.

B. BISWAS, Presiding Officer Considering all the material facts and circumstances discussed above the management have been able to establish that the concerned workman in connivance with said Parmanand Prasad procured the said two documents

3684 GJ/04-38 10364

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] नई दिल्ली, 29 नवम्बर, 2004

Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (herein after referred to as the ' Act' ) has referred the following industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal which runs as under :-

का. आ. 3319.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार पंजाब नेशनल बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय जयपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 31/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल.-12012/424/1995 - आई. आर. ( बी- II ) ]

"Whether it is a fact that Sh. Dinesh Chandra Sharma was employed as a peon by the management ofPunjab National Bank, Sikari Branch , Bharatpur during the period from 01-06-1991 to 31-05-1995 and whether the action of the management to terminate him from service w.e.f. 01-06-1995 is legal and justified ? If not , what relief is the disputant concerned entitled to ? "

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 29th November , 2004

S.O. 3319. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 31/ 2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court Jaipur, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Punjab National Bank and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 29-11-2004.

[No. L - 12012/ 424/ 1995 - IR (B- II) ] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL- TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR

Case No. CGIT -31/2003 .

Reference No. L- 12012/424/95 ( IR( B - II)

Sh . Dinesh Chandra Sharma , S/o Sh . Shyam Babu Sharma , R/ o Village & P.O. Sikari , Distt. Bharatpur (Raj . )

........Applicant

2. The workman in his statement ofclaim has pleaded thathe hadworked as 4th Class from 1-6-91 to 31-5-95 in the Sikari branch district Bharatpur, who discharged the functions to that of a 4th Class and when he requested the bank authorities to confirm him on the post of the 4th Class, it caused displeasure to them and his service was terminated w.e.f. 1-6-95 by an oral order . A legal notice dated 16-6-95 was issued to the non - applicant bank, but he was not taken on duty from 17-6-95 . His service was terminated without giving him one month's notice or pay in lieu of the notice and retrenchment compensation in violation of Section 25 - F of the Act. He has further stated that after his termination , the bank had appointed fresh hands in violation of Section 25 -H of the Act. According to his averments, he raised an industrial dispute before theAssistant Labour Commissioner, who submitted the failure report on 27-11-97 and the Central Governmentby its order dated 28-2-96 declined to refer the industrial dispute to the Court . Aggrieved by this order, he preferred awrit petition before the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court, which was accepted by its order dated 5-2-2002 and the Central Government was directed to refer his industrial dispute before the competent forum. The workman has prayed that the termination order dated 1-6-95 be declared as illegal and unjustified and he be reinstated in the service .

Versus

Punjab National Bank, Through Branch Manager , Sikari ,

Distt. Bharatpur,

Non - applicant

PRESENT :

SH. R.C. SHARMA , Presiding Officer:

: Sh. V.K. Mathur.

Forthe applicant

For the non - applicants

: Sh . Rajendra Arora .

26-10-2004

Date of award:

AWARD

1. The Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred under Clause ' D' of sub - Sections 1 & 2 (A) to

3. Resisting the claim of the workman, the non- applicant , in his written counter has averred that the workman was never employed by the bank , that he was working as a canteen contractor who was running the canteen and was supplying the tea and snacks to the bank employees . The payment of wages were made to him through the voucher Ex. 2 for the work of a contractor and in addition to it, on contingent occasions the work of cleaning and sweeping was taken from him for which the `payment of wages were made to him through Ex. 3. The non - applicant has further stated that the workman had only worked for 33 days in total for the bank. He also used to fill the drinking water in the pitchers in the bank for which he was separately paid . The non - applicant has also stated that the workman voluntarily seized to work as a canteen contractor . The non - applicant has denied any 10365 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

violation of the provisions under Section 25 - F and 25-H of the Act respectively.

4. In the rejoinder , the workman has reiterated the same facts as stated in the statement of claim.

5. On the pleadings ofboth the parties, the following points for determination were framed:--

I Whether the claimant is a ' workman ' as defined under the IDAct? BOA

IL Whether the workman was employed by the non- applicant management as a 4th Class employee who has worked w.e.f. 1-6-91 to 31-5-95 with the non - applicant management ? BOA

submits that the workman has not submitted any document in support of his submission that he was employed as the bank employee. His submission is that he was employed by the Local Implementation Committee as a canteen boy and the bank only gave the subsidy per employee to the canteen boy through the vouchers which have been signedby the workman . The Id . representative further adds that the workman was engaged for sweeping only for 33 days in the year 1992 for which he was paid separately. He also filled thedrinking water in the water pots for which he was paid separately. It is also the contention of the non- applicant that the workman had voluntarily discontinued form the employment . The Id. representative has also urged that the workman was not appointed as per prescribed procedure of the bank.

III Whether the service of the workman was terminated in violation of Section 25 -F of the Act? BOA

11. I have given my anxious consideration to the rival contentions and have carefully gone through the judicial pronouncements referred tobefore me.

IV. Whether after the termination of the service of theworkman, the new hands have been recruited by the management in violation of Section 25-H of the Act? BOA

V. Relief, if any.

6. Both the parties have led oral as well as documentary evidence. In the oral evidence , the workman has examined himself. On behalf of the bank, MW- 1 , LR Meena , Manager and MW - 2 , RL Canojia, Assistant Manager have been examined.

7. I have heard both the parties and have scanned the record. The issue- wise discussion follows as under:-

Point No. I, II & III :

12. The workman in his affidavit has deposed that hehad continuously worked from 1-6-91 to 31--5-95 as a 4th Class under employment of the bank . He has exhibited various documents in support of his submission and has deposed in his cross-examination that his name was not sponsored from the employment exchange and that at the time of engaging him , he was only 17 years of age . He has further admitted that no letter of appointment or order of termination was given to him. He has pleaded ignorance from the fact that how much salary was admissible to the permanent employee at that time. He has also admitted that Ex. M - 2 , the details of the canteen contribution amount given to him bears his signature . The workman has placed his reliance on dak delivery register Ex . 8 , local and outward dispatch register Ex . 9 , details of payment of canteen contribution amount Ex. 14 and details of payment ofwages Ex. 15.

8. All these three points are interlinked. Hence, they are discussed together as under.

9. The Id. representative for the workman has argued that the workman had worked from 1-6-91 to 31-5-95 continuously as a Peon with the non - applicant bank who performed the work of distribution ofthe dak and sweeping and cleaning of the bank premise, but his service was terminated w.e.f. 1-6-95 in violation of Section 25 -F ofthe Act. Theld. representative in this context has reliefupon thedak delivery register Ex. 8, local and outward dispatch register Ex . 9 , details of payment of canteen contribution Ex. 14 and payment ofwages Ex . 15. His next submission is that even.on the basis of the documents produced by the management Ex . M - 2 and M- 3 , it is proved that the workman had continuously worked with the non -applicant bank at its Sikari branch .

13. Dak delivery register and local and outward dispatch register consist of several parts of the documents respectively, e. g . , the dak delivery register Ex. 8 bears the name of the workman and the various copies filed thereof on behalf of the workman also contain the name ofthe workman on 11-4-94 , 22-4-94, 26-5-94, 1-6-94, 26-8-94, 19-9-94, 22-9-94 and 23-9-94. It is alleged that on these days various daks were handed over to the workman for distribution to the concerned offices . Thus , it is clear that Ex. 8 contains about 8 entries falling in the year 1994 onwhich days the workman had acted as a 4th Class in the bank, Next to Ex. 8 comes the local and outward dispatch register Ex . 9 wherein on various dates the workman has entered into the entires of the dispatch of the daks , which relate to the year 1991. These entries at their foot bear the signature of the workman respectively andwere made on 3 dates , e.g. on 19-4-91 , 3-6-91 and8-10-91 .

14. Now, I advert to the next document relied upon bytheworkman which is Ex. 15. It is a detail ofthe payment 10. Countering the submissions made on behalfof the workman , the ld. representative for the non - applicant 10366

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004 /PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] of wages made to the workman for the cleaning work performed by him . It discloses that in this period he had worked for 29 days in the year 1992 , 4 days in the year 1994 and 26 days in the year 1995. Thus , for a total number of 59 days in these years he was assigned the job of sweeping and cleaning by the bank.

15. At the strength of these documents Ex. 8, Ex. 9 and Ex . 15, it is abundantly clear that the workman had not continuously worked from 1-6-91 to 31-5-95 under the cmployment of the bank .

21. The 1d. representative for the workman has also relied upon AIR 1995 SC 1666 by contending that the Hon'bleApex Court has held that even the canteen boy is a bank employee. The decision supra, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that where it is not statutorily obligatory to provide a canteen , it is otherwise an obligation on the employer to provide a canteen, the canteen becomes a part of the establishment and the workers working in the canteen , the employees of the management . Further the Hon'ble Court has held that the obligation to provide a canteen has to be distinguished from the obligation to provide facilities to run canteen. The canteen run pursuant to the later obligation does not become a part of the establishment,

16. The remaining document relied upon by the workman is Ex. 14 , the details of the payment of canteen contribution amount to him which discloses that this amount was given to him in between the period 13-9-91 to 2-12-94 as a canteenboy.

22. On behalf of the bank, it has been clearly stated at para 1 ( i ) of the written counter that to provide the canteen facility to its employees is neither contractual nor is obligatory on it . By contrast , the workman has failed to prove this fact that canteen was provided by the bank as a statutorily obligation or otherwise on account of any obligation on the bank. Thus , the workman does not derive any assistance from the decision supra.

23. The Id. representative for the bank in support ofhis contention in this context has referred to 1996 Lab IC SC1048 , wherein the Hon'ble Court has observed that inthe absence of any obligation , statutorily or otherwise, regarding the running of a canteen by the bank and in the absence of any effective control vested in the bank to supervise it, the workers in the canteen cannot be said to be employees of the bank . the submission made onbehalf ofthebank is fortified by the principle propounded in this decision .

17. The workman could not be able to establish this fact by producing his oral as well as documentary evidence that this canteen was run by the bank and the payment of wages were made to him on behalf of the bank . Contrary to it, on behalf of the bank, it has been shown that only the canteen contribution amount was paid to the workman by the bank and that he was a canteen contractor who used to run the canteen. This document relied upon by the workman does not disclose that the wages for the said work was paid by the bank to him , rather it clearly indicates that the canteen contribution amount was given to him , which he had acknowledged without raising any objection. Accordingly, I find that the details of the payment of canteen contribution amount Ex. 14 does not strengthen the case of the workman that he was employed by the bank to run the canteen as a 4th Class employee .

24. For the foregoing reasons , it is concluded that the termination of the workman does not amount to retrenchment . Since the workman is not an employee of the bank, who was a canteen contractor, he is notcovered bythe definition under Section 2 - S of the Act. Accordingly, all the three points are decided against the workman and infavour of the bank.

18. As against the workman's evidence , MW - 1 LR Meena has deposed in his evidence that the workman used to manage the canteen and intermittently the sweeping work was also extracted from him for which he was paid separately. Similar is the evidence of MW -2, RL Canojia. Both these management witnesses could not be shaken on this point .

Point No. IV :

19. From the aforesaid evidence , oral as well as documentary, it follows that the workman was not in continuous service from 1-6-91 to 31-5-95 uninterruptedly with the non- applicant bank nor he had completed 240 days of actual work in the calendar year preceding to his date of termination. Thus , his termination does not amount to retrenchment .

25. Inhis affidavit, the workman has named Mangtu Ram and Laxmi Narayan Sharma, who were appointed after his termination as 4th Class. But in his cross-examination , he has admitted that in the branch where he was working , no fresh hand was recruited after his termination . That apart, in support of his plea that fresh appointment was made after his termination, he has not submitted any documentary evidence. Therefore , the workman has failed to prove that after his termination , new hands were appointed by the bank without giving him an opportunity of employment in contravention of Section 25 -H of the Act . As such , this point is decided against the workman.

20. The 1d. representative for the workman has drawn my attention towards 1981 Lab IC SC 806 and 2001 (3) WLC Rajasthan 250. I have gone through these verdicts carefully, but in my humble opinion, their facts are easily distinguishable from the controversy at hand.

10367

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Relief

Sh . Moti Chand Shah ,

S/o Lt. Sh . Banarsi Shah ,

26. On the evaluation of the evidence adduced by both the parties on the record, oral as well as documentary, itis concluded that the workman is entitled to no relief. C/o Sh. Ramesh Kumar Sweeping Dept. Richa & Co. 28/2, Ware Housing Scheme , Kirti Nagar, NewDelhi - 110015.

Versus

The Manager , Syndicate Bank, 34, DLF Industrial Area, Najafgarh Road, Kirti Nagar, NewDelhi - 110015 .

27. Consequently, the reference is answered in the negative and it is held that the workman is not entitled to any relief. His claim is dismissed and it is declared that the workman was not employed as a Peon by the non- applicant bank during theperiod from 1-6-91 to 31-5-95 and the action ofthe bank to terminate him from the service w.e.f. 1-6-95 was legal andjustified. An award is passed in these terms accordingly.

AWARD

28. Let a copy of the award be sent to the Central Government for publication under Section 17 ( 1 ) of the Act.

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L - 120012/ 253/97- IR(B - II) Central Government Dt. 28-11-1997 has referred the following point for adjudication.

R.C. SHARMA, Presiding Officer.

The point runs as hereunder:-

नई दिल्ली, 29 नवम्बर, 2004

"Whether the action of the management of Syndicate Bank in not regularising and then terminating the services of the workman Sh . Moti Chand Shah a temporaryGroup D Employee is legal and justified? Ifnot, to what relief the said workman is entitled¹?

का. आ. 3320.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सिंडिकेट बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय नं. -2, नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 196/1997 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल.- 12012/253/1997- आई.आर. ( बी- II ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 29th November, 2004

That the workman was appointed on 23-12-1990 on dailywages at the rate ofRs . 25/- per day. The same payment ofRs. 25/- per day was increased to Rs. 30/- per day w.e.f. the year 1991. That he has been employeed/ working for eight hours a day which minimum duty of 240 days in a year. He is required to work all the day with different job such as to supply water to the staff to get photostat copies for the bank, to clean the cooler and look after the cooler and supply water to the same cooler during summer and doing all the other miscellaneous job attending to the requirement of the officers and the staff working in the bank.

S.O. 3320.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 196/1997) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court, New Delhi , No. II, New Delhi as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Syndicate Bank and their workman, received by the Central Government on 29-11-2004.

[No. L- 12012/253/ 1997 - IR (B- II) ] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

That inspite of working for about five years with eight hours duty and minimum 240 days of work in a year hehas not been paid the wages for the full work of eight hours in a day and as per various judgement of the various court he has also become entitled for his regularisation as in the case Jagriti Mazdoor Union Vs. Union of India, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down the law that any casual worker who has worked 240 days in a year is entitled for temporary status and full payment of basic and other allowance . And after rendering three years of continuous service with temporary status the casual worker shall become entitled to be treated at par with temporary group 'D' employee and thereby entitled to such benifits as are available to the temporary group ' D ' employees on regalar basis .

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM- LABOUR COURT-IL, NEW DELHI

That workman having worked for more than five years is neither being paid full pay of the work done by him nor

I.D. No. 196/97

Presiding Officer : R. N. RAI 10368

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

for watering the coolers in the Branch, when asked by the branch . He was doing the work of watering the coolers as and when he was getting time and he was paid coolie charges for the same . This is a contract for service and not contract ofservice. His work was of purely casual nature. A fixed sum was being paid as coolie charges for the services rendered by the petitioner on day to day basis .

he has been considered for temporary status and consequent treatment at per with temporary group ' D' 'D' employees on regular basis inspite of representation made. The payment ofRs . 30/- per day is not accordingto theMinimum Wages Act which may also be ordered to be paid to the workman. That subsequent upon the filing of the petition before A.L.C. (Central ), New Delhi on 19-02- 1996 the workman was discharged from the service by the management and the conciliation proceedings resulted in failure where upon the Central Government referred the case to this Hon'ble Tribunal for adjuducation of the question " Whether the action of the management of Syndicate Bank in not regularising and then terminating the services of the workman Sh. Moti Chand Shah, a temporary Group ' D ' employee is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief the said workman is entitled ? "

The management has filed wrtitten statement . In the written statement, it has been stated that the Government has made the reference in question mechanically without application of mind and without considering the facts of the case. The reference is bad in Law. There is no post called clause 'D ' in the Respondent Bank nor the petitioner was appointed in any such post in the Respondent Bank. The Claim is liable to be rejected on this ground alone.

It is denied that the petitioner was employed/working for8 hours a day and for 240 days in a year. In fact, there was no working hour for the petitioner and he was on his free will and convenience to come and go . The only condition , which the Respondent Bank imposed on the contractor who supplied the generator set on hire, was that he should ensure the running of the generator set as andwhen required by the respondent bank. The petitioner was engaged and sent by the contractor to fill oil and water etc. in the said generator set and to ensure that the generator set is operational as there were frequent power cuts . It is also denied that the petitioner was required to do different types of jobs such as to supply water to the staff, to get photostat copies for the bank, to clean the coolers and look after the coolers and supply water to the coolers during summer and during any other alleged job attending to the requirement of the officers and the staff working in the bank . The entire para iswrong.

That the petitioner is not a workman as envisaged in Section 2( s) of the ID Act, 1947 and hence no Industrial Dispute exists between the petitioner and the Bank. It is further submitted that the petitioner was not in the capacity of a workman in the Bank because there was no post as Water-boy or water supplier in the Bank . In fact , neither the petitioner submitted any application for any alleged work nor any appointment order was issued by the Bank to the petitioner, either temporary or permanent . The petitioner cannot partakethe character of a workman of the bank.

It isdenied that the petitioner worked for 8 hours a dayand minimum of240 days of work in a year. There was no question of making any payment for the alleged wages . It is further denied that the petitioner is entitled to regularisation in view of the judgement cited by the petitioner in this para. It is further denied that the petitioner is entitled to benefit of temporary clause 'D' employees. There is no post called Class 'D ' in the Respondent Bank. Assubmitted above , the Delhi Kirti Nagar Branch of the Respondent Bank had hired a generator and the petitioner was working under the contractor of the generator. He was attending to the work of the generator under the supervision and control of the contractor . The Branch is having desert coolers and water coolers in the premises . These coolers have to be cleaned periodically and filled with water regularly. As the petitioner was having some free time in between his regular work of generator'smaintenance and operation, he offered himself forwatering coolers in the Branch. He was doing the work ofwatering in the coolers as and when he was getting time and he was paid coolie charges for the same . This is a contract for service and not contract of service . His work was ofpurely casual nature . A fixed sum was being paid as coolie charges for the services rendered by the petitioner on day to day basis. The petitioner was however never engaged by the Respondent Bank nor he ever worked with the Respondent Bank leave alone working for 8 hours in a It isdenied that the petitioner was appointed in the Respondent Bank on 23-12-1990 or on any other day on dailywages as claimed. In fact, the Delhi Kirti Nagar Branch ofthe Respondent Bank had hired a generator to cope with the inadequate supply of electricity. Generally, these generators are operated and maintained by a person engaged by the Contractor. The Bank pays an agreed sum to the Contractor and it is his look out to ensure the maintenance and running of the generator whenever needed by the Branch . Sh . Moti Chand Shah was working under the contractor of generator. He was not employeed/ engaged by the Bank . He was attending to the work of generator under the supervision and control of the contractor . The Respondent Bank's Branch is having desert coolers and water coolers in the permises . These coolers have to be cleaned periodically and filled with water regularly. As the petitioner Sh. Moti Chand Shah was having free some time in between his regular work of generator'smaintenance and operation , he offered himself [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

day and 240 days in a year. Rest of the para is wrong and denied.

The management has denied almost all the paragraphs of the statement of claim.

The claimant bas filed rejoinder. In his rejoinder, the claimant has reiterated the averments of his claim .

Heard arguments from both the sides and perused the papers on the record . It was submitted from the side of the workman that the workman Moti Chand Shah was a regular employee of the management . He was working in class -D in the respondent bank. He was appointed on 23-12-1990 in Kirti Nagar Branch. He worked for more than 245 days so he is entitled to regularisation. It was submitted from the side of the management that the respondent bank had hired a generator to cope up with the inadequate supply ofelectricity. Generally these generators are operated and maintained by the contractor . The bank pays an agreed sum to the contractor and it is his look out to ensure the maintenance and running of the generator whenever needed by the branch. Shri Moti Chand Shah was working under the contractor of generator . He was not employed or engaged by the bank . He was attending to the work of generator under the supervision and control ofthe contractor . The bank has desert coolers . It was filled with water regularly when the workman applicant had extra time . He filled up water in the generator. He was not an employee of the bank. He was acontractor's man . No payment to him has been given by the bank. Payment has been made to the contractor. It was submitted from the side of the workman that on 16-12-1991 , the Chief Manager Syndicate Bank has issued a certificate that he knows Shri Moti Chand Shah since the last one year. He is found to be very sincere and devoted to his assigned duties . I recommended that he may be employed in any Govt . Department or Corporation.

It was submitted from the side of the workman applicant that the ChiefManager has admitted that he was working since last one year so he has completed 240 days and he deserves to be regularised. In the certificate, there is no mention that he was an employee of the bank and he was working with the bank. This certificate indicates that whatever job was assigned to the workman applicant, he performed that sincerely and Chief Manager has recommended that he may be employed in Govt . or Corporation . The Chief Manager has not given the certificate that he was employed in the bank . The case of the management is that he was a contractor's man and he was assigned duty of operating the generators .

My attentionwas drawn to 2003 LLR 1 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the burden ofproof to establish

10369

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4 , 1926

that theworkman has worked for 240 days in last preceding twelve calendar months- lies upon the workman . The workman has to prove that he has worked for 240 days in the last preceding year.

In JT 1997 (4 ) SC, 560 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that daily wager had no right to posts and their disengagement is not arbitrary-Since they are temporary employees working on daily wages , their disengagement from service cannot be treated under the ID Act. In AIR 1994 Supreme Court- 1638 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that in case post is not sanctioned , an employee cannotbe regularised on the ground of 240 days work .

I have perused the entire record. The workman applicant has filed no paper to show that he received any payment from the bank and he discharged any of the duties of the bank . The management witnesses admitted in his cross-examination that he was being paid his wages weekly for filling the water in the water coolers . There are no papers on the record to show that the workman applicant has discharged the duties of the bank at any time. I have perused the law citedby the workman. These are not applicable in view of the citations referred to above the management . Theworkmanhas failed to prove his case .

The reference is replied thus :---

The action of the management Syndicate Bank in not regularising and then terminating the services of the workman Sh . Moti Chand Shah , a temporary Group D Employees is legal andjustified . The workman is not entitled toget any relief as prayed for.

The award is given accordingly.

Dt. 19-11-2004

R.N. RAI, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 29 नवम्बर , 2004

का. आ. 3321.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एस. आई. सी. ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. -2, नई दिल्ली के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 64/1995 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को29-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल.- 17012/54/ 1994-आई.आर. (बी- II ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 29th November, 2004 S.O. 3321 ,-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central 10370

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 64/95) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court No. 2 , New Delhi , as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of LIC of India and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 29-11-2004.

[No. L- 17012/54/ 1994- IR (B - II)]

C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT- IL, NEW DELHI

Presiding Officer : R.N. Rai

I.D. No. 64/95.

In the matter of :-

Sh. Raghubar Dutt

Versus

L.I.C.

AWARD

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No.L- 17012/54/ 94 - IR(B - II ) Central Government Dt. 15 , May 1995 has referred the following point for adjudication . The point runs as under :-

"Whether the action of the management of LIC of India, New Delhi in imposing the punishment of reduction ofbasic pay by two stages for a period of two years on Sh . Raghubar Dutt, Peon (presently working as record clerk) vide order dated 21-9-91 is legal and justified? If not ,to what relief is the said workman entitled? " .

The claimant has filed statement of claim . In the statement of claim, it has been stated that the life insurance employees association an affiliated unit of All India Life Insurance. Employees Association a registered body under the Indian Trade Unit act decided to spouse the case of Sh . Raghubar Dutt . That the workman above named opted for becoming a member of the above named life Insurance Employees Association Delhi Division , New Delhi and riow he is working under divisional office branch unit 11 - D, D.O. under respondent No. 1 and as such became a regular Member of the association in the month of June , 1984. That the workman started enrolling successfully and actively as an activist of the above named association and thus had enrolled 7 members

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] besides himself to its strength during the period w.e.f. June , 1984 to June, 1988 from his own unit No. 11 - D of life insurance corporation of India .

That inorder to coerce the workman for the purpose ofputting implied restraint upon him for exercising his right toorganise form join and associate with a trade union as aforesaid and also to engage in concerted activities for the purpose of mutual aid and protection amongst the members ofthe union the management of Life Insurance Corporation of India started harassing the workman above named by putting additional work load un -reasonably upon him that too without agreeing to the payment of overtime and special allowance in view of the workman's working beyond office hours prior to office hours and even on holidays etc. besides undertaking work of a special nature beyond the scope of his prescribed duty list as a peon.

This entire game of finding faults on patently false reasons flimsy grounds besides trumpeted up allegations with malafide intentions ulterior motive and full of arbitrariness and with a view to discourage the workman to be an activities in his role to add - up to the strength of the said union viz. , life insurance employees association Delhi Division No. 2 .

That the workman filed a reply to the charge sheet dated 29-11-84vide his letter dated 3-1-85 and emphatically denied the charges point by point in their entirely since thesewere basically wrong. That the workman was informed vide letter dated 5-2-85 by the management for the purpose ofholding a domestic enquiry against him for the baseless charges levelled against him as per the charges levelled against him contained in the said charge sheet dated 29-11-84 and the enquiry was conductedby.

That in the event of the workman unable to place the list of witnesses and supporting documents on record on that day itself i.e. 20-2-87 despite his dire need to finalise the list ofwitnesses in due consultation with his assisting employee Sh . S.S. Jain after screening the requisite relevance vis -a - vis the documentary proof in his power and possession or /and which were already produced by his assisting employee and placed on record it could not bepresumed that the workman had nothing to say in his defence and finally the enquiry in question was very surprisingly and quite suddenly and hurriedly illegally and abruptly shown as completed and closed and a confidential enquiry report was submitted by the said enquiry officer on 10-3-87 with his one word finding proved against each ofthe charges without carring to add anything as logic/ reason for each finding on record on the basis of which he could authentically assert that allegation was treated as proved.

Besides the above it may also be put on record that the workman was mercilessly denied the chances of 10371 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

promotion not once but 4 times during the period w.e.f. 1986 to 1991. When the selection for up gradation post of record clerk was conducted by the Senior Divisional Manager the workman candidature was not granted promotion on the simple plea that the enquiry proceedings under reference were going on against the workman or the workman appeal was still under consideration ofthe Zonal Manager.

It is denied that any overtime charges were payable to the workman. It is further denied that the workman was givenany additional work. It is denied that there has been any violation of principle of equal work and equal pay. The instance given by the workman has no obligation . Suffice , it will be to state that employee is eligible for a special allowance for oprating the franking machine only if he operates the same for four hours or more in a day. The workman concerned in these proceedings had been and was asked to do the said job for 20 to 25 minutes per day. Thus there was no question of his becoming entitled to any special allowance .

The management has filed written statement and in the written statement , it has been stated that the enrolling of the members of the association by the workman is not relevant with the decision of the case , It is denied that the LIC management started entrapping the workman on the basis of any false allegation . The workman was absorbed as a peon in the corporation pursuant to the award made bythe Industrial Tribunal in the year 1981 .

Itissubmitted that the workman was served with a chargesheetdated 29-11-84 in as much as his conduct was inviolation of regulation 21 which is punishable under regulation 39 of the LIC corporation of India (staff regulations 1960) .

It is denied that by virtue of sincere honest competent and satisfactory performance the workman was duly considered and absorbed as a peon on regular basis . As stated above the workman was taken on the rolls of the corporation as a peon as a result of the National Industrial Tribunal Award and not on account of what has been stated bythe workman .

The management has stated that the chargs were self-explanatory and were substantiated during the course ofednquiry. The management further stated that in all 34 hearings were conducted and the workman was present on all the dates. The assisting employee had appeared on 20 hearings and he chose to be absent himself on the rest of the hearings. The enquiry proceedings were held in a fair andjust manner. The enquiry officer afforded reasonable opportunity to the workman to defend his case fully. The workman participated in the enquiry and never complained ofany violation of principles of natural justice.

It is not true that the reasonable opportunities to produce the witness/ documents in support of his defence were not granted . It is submitted that during the proceedings of 29-8-89 . The assisting employee had demanded two (2 ) months time for the same but even after the lapse ofsix months the workman could not produce the requisite defence in spite of repeated persuations by the enquiry officer during the subsequent proceedings which took place as per the details given .

The following charges were framed against the workman:-

Itis denied that after the enrollment of the workman as peon pursuant to the National Industrial Tribunal Award of1981 the performance of the workman has always been appreciated and he has been given high laurels by his seniors superiors officers and superiors . The management stated that the record of the workman is being maintained since his enrollment as a peon. There are several instances ofthe workman having refused to obey office instructions and/or to perform the offical duties assigned to him . The workman was called upon to explain for his misbehaviour with a colleague on 2-5-83 . The workman refused to operate the franking machine and his explanation was aksed for by the assistant branch manager ( Administrative) vide letter dated 12-6-84 as to why he has refused to operate the franking machine which is one of the duties to be performed by him. The workman also refused to take the letter issued by the branch manager. The workman was called upon to explain the misconduct vide letter dated 21-6-84.

( 1 ) That on 16-7-84 you threatened.Sh . R.K. Singhmar HGA of dire consequences for standing witness in the enquiry proceedings against you.

(2) That on 29-8-84 at about 9.50 A.M. when Sh , J.P. Kainath , ABM ( A ) was issuing instructions to sweeper to come in time you were advised not to interfere you shouted at Sh. J.P. Kainath saying , Mujh see mat uljho .

The management further states the dispute being ID No. 83/88 in respect of the above charges is already pending adjudication before the Central Govt . Industrial Tribunal . The management further states that the operation of the franking machine comes under the duty of the peon . The peons can also be assigned any other hob of similar nature which includes the operation of duplicating machines ( where finances as such are not involved ) . The operation of the duplicating machine is also job assigned to a peon . Thus there was no question ofgiving any additional duty.

(3) That on 30-8-84 you were advised to deposit stamp fee for age declaration forms in Delhi treasury, Tis Hazari you left the office at 10.45 A.M. and did not report back about the job assigned to you .

3684 G1/04-39 10372

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

(4) That on 12-9-94 you went to divisional office without seeking permission of the competent authority. By the commission of the aforesaid acts you have acted in a manner prejudical to good conduct and have thereby violated regulations 21 and 39 ofthe LIC ( staff) Regulations 1960.

The workman has filed rejoinder. In his rejoinder, he has reiterated the averments of his claim application and has asserted that the enquiry was held against the principles of naturaljustice . It was held in English whereas, he does not known English . No proper opportunity was given to him to cross - examine the witnesses . principles of natural justicehave not been followed. The management has denied almost all the paras of the statement of claim .

Heard arguments from both the sides and perused the papers on the record . It was submitted from the side of the workman that he has not been given opportunity to cross-examine the management witnesses. He has not been given opportunity to produce witnesses in defence . He has no knowledge of Hindi whereas the enquiry has been conducted in English so he could not understand the language and he could not give proper reply. No opportunity was afforded to him to cross -examine . He was not permitted to defend his case through a defence lawyer or any representative . As such , the eniqiry is not proper. Principles ofnatural justice have not been followed . The action of the management based on enquiry report is absolutely wrong. The enquiry is liable to be set aside .

Both the parties have adduced evidence in the court also and the fairness of the enquiry was not pressed as preliminary issue. My attention was drawn to the cross of workman. It was admitted by the workman that his representative was present all along the enquiry proceedings. He has admitted that opportunity was given to him and to his representative to cross -examine the witnesses of the management . He has always been appearing during the enquiry. He understood the enquiry proceedings through this representative . He understood all the contents of the application before filing the same . He gave his application for appointment in English and signed the same. He was given five opportunities after the conclusion of the evidence of the management to produce any defence during that period .

The cross -examination of the management witnesses is reproduced as hereunder:-

"My representative had been appearing in these proceedings . The enquiry officer submitted his report after the enquiry, on which a show cause notice was received by me. Two increments were stopped as a punishment

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii)] against which I made appeal to the authorities . In the appeal , it was ordered that the stoppage of increment would be for two years . It is wrong to suggest that no opportunity was given to me and my representative to cross -examine the witness of the management . I had always been appearing during the enquiry. I used to understand the enquiry proceedingby sitting with my representative throughout . I gave two applications in English to the authorities. I used to understand all the contents of the application before filing the same. It is correct that I gave my application for appointment in English and signed the same . I did not give any objection in writing to the question put to me in the interview for my promotion . I have no receipt of the letter given by me regarding asking me to sit overtime . I had signed the application which was submitted to the enquiry officerfor adjournment. I was given five opportunities after the conclusion of the evidence of the management to produce any defence during that period. It is incorrect to suggest that I am deposing falsely. It is incorrect that I do not understand English language" .

It was submitted by the management that the workman applicant has admitted that he participated inthe enquiry. He understood the proceddings of the enquiry. He was given show-cause notice . He understood English . He was given opportunities to cross -examine the witnesses and he was given five opportunities to defend himself. Thus, there appears to be no force in the argument of the workman applicant . His admission in cross-examination is sufficient to hold that the enquiry has been conducted according to the principles of natural justice and he has beenaforded proper opportunity to defend himself. Thus , the enquiry is obviously quite fair, No interference is. required. I have perused the law cited by the workman applicant . The law cited by the workman applicant is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case . I have also gone through the enquiry proceedings . Enquiry proceedigns are quite fair. The workman applicant is not liable to get any relief as prayed for. MW/ I has also stated in cross -examination that the workman himself had given inwriting that the matter had been settled with him . He has produced that letter.

The reference is replied thus:-

The action of the management of LIC of India, New Delhi in imposing the punishment of reduction of basic payby two stages for a period of two years on Sh . Raghubar Dutt , Peon ( presently working as record clerk) vide order dated 21-9-91 is legal and jusstified. The workman applicant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.

The award is given accordingly.

Dated 17-11-2004

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer 10373 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4 , 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

AWARD

नई दिल्ली, 30 नवम्बर, 2004

The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide Notification Order No. L- 29012/ 5 / 2004- IR (M) dated 31-03-2004 has referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:-

का. आ. 3322.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार ग्रासिम इंडस्ट्रीज लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 359/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल.- 29012/5/2004- आई.आर. (विविध ) ]

"Whether the claim of Shri Ramalingam for continuity ofservice, regularisation with back wages and all benefits against the management of Grasim Industries Ltd. , Cement Division ( South) Reddipalayam, Ariyalur is legal and justified? If not , to what relief the workmen are entitled to?"

बी० एम ० डेविड, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 30th November, 2004

2. After the receipt of the reference , it was taken on file as I. D. No. 359/2004 and notices were issued to both the parties . Even after several notices , the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court . The Respondent appeared through their advocate and filed Statement of Objection .

S.O. 3322. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 359/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Grasim Industries Ltd. and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 24-11-2004

[No. L -29012/5/2004 -IR (M)] B. M. DAVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Wednesday, the 15th September, 2004

PRESENT:

K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO . 359/2004

(Inthe matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2 ( a) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947), between theManagement ofGrasim Industries Ltd. Grasim Cement Division (S) and their workman)

3. In the statement of objection , the II Party/Management has contended that the I Party/Workman was never an employee of the II Party/Management nor was the II Party/Management his employer. It is learnt that the I Party was employed as a Helper (unskilled ) in various locations by one of the contractors ofthe II Party/Management. Further, the I Party through its union has raised industrial dispute against the contractors of Management for payment of bonus , minimum wages before this Tribunal in August, 2003 and the matter is still pending as I.D. No. 109/2003 and after admitting in that industrial dispute that he was an employee ofthe contractor , he cannot now be heard to set up a new case that he is an employee of the II Party/Management . Before the minimum wages forum, though the Petitioner has filed an application against the II Party /Management and also contractor seeking to pay ' E ' grade wages as per the Cement Wages Settlement dated 14-8-2000 and obtained the order. The said order was stayed by the High Court in W.P. No. 1613 & 16 16. of 2004. Therefore , the Petitioner always considered himself as an employee of the contractor and not as of the II Party/Management and therefore , he cannot now be heard to claim that he is an employee of the II Party/Management . Hence , it prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs .

BETWEEN :

I Party/Petitioner

4. In these circumstances , the point for my consideration is-

Sri G. Ramalingam.

AND

"To what relief the Petitioner is entitled?" : II Party/Management

Point:-

The Joint President , Grasim Industries Ltd. Grasim Cement Division (S) Reddipalayam Post.

APPEARANCE :

: M/sA.P. Peter Gunasekaran &

For the Workman

P. Dharmaraj , Advocates

For the Management : M/ s Meenakshisundaram & Dwarakanatham, Advocates

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )]

BETWEEN :

Respondent contended that they have admitted in the said applications that they were employees of the contractors and they cannot now turn around and say that they are employees of the II Party/Management .

Sri C. Shankar, S/o Rajaiah, C/o R. Yogender Singh, H. No. 1-10-100, Temple Alwal ,

Secunderabad- 10.

.Petitioner

AND

1. The Chief General Manager, O & E , HindustanPetroleum Corporation Ltd. , Hindustan Bhavan , Cherlapally, Rangareddy District .

2. The Director, Marketing, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. , Vijayawada.

Respondents 6. I find much force in the contention of the Respondent because when the Respondent/Management denies the relationship of master and servant between them and Petitioner, it is the bounden duty of the Petitioner to establish that there is a relatonship of master and servant and they are entitled to the benefits of Industrial Disputes Act . 1947. In this case , the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court to establish his contention that he was an employee under the II Party/Management and entitled to the benefits of Industrial Disputes Act . Since he has not chosen to appear before this Tribunal to establish his case, I find the Petitioner is not entitled to any relief. No Costs.

APPEARANCES : For the Petitioner

7. The reference is disposed of accordingly.

: M/ s. R. Yogender Singh, V. Kiran Kumar , K. Sunil KishoreGoud & B. Pavan Kumar, Advocates (Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him , corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 15th September, 2004).

: M/ s . P.B. Vijay Kumar & K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer

FortheRespondent D.

नई दिल्ली, 30 नवम्बर, 2004

Srikanth, Advocates

AWARD

This is a case taken under Sec. 2 A (2) of the I.D. Act, 1947 in view of the judgement of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/s. Cotton Corporation of India and two others .

का. आ. 3323.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कार्पो . लि. 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 148/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-11-04 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल.- 30025/5/2004-आई.आर. ( विविध ) ]

बी०एम ० डेविड, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 30th November, 2004

2. The brief facts as mentioned in the petition are : That the Petitioner has put in more than 20 years of service. That he was issued a charge sheet on 6-2-2000 on an allegation of unauthorized absence during the years 1996 to2000 for a period of 618 days . An enquiry was conducted, he was dismissed and his appeal was also dismissed. Hence , this petition . That the Petitioner served the organization with commitment and honesty towards his service . That no proper enquiry was conducted . That during the years 1996 to 2000 he had jaundice, struck with majoraccident , he lost his mother and brother. Yet , he was dismissed. Hence , the termination order dated 11-3-2002 may be held as null and void .

S.O. 3323. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 148/2003) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court , Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Hindustan Petroleum Corpn . Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 29-11-04

[No. L -30025/5 /2004 - IR (M) ] B. M. DAVID , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

PRESENT : Shri E. Ismail , B.Sc. , L.L.B. , Presiding Officer Dated 29th day of October , 2004

Industrial Dispute L. C. I.D. No. 148/2003

3. A counter was filed stating that the workman was frequently absenting from duties and also overstayed of the leave sanctioned. In fact during the period from January, 1996 to December, 2000 the workman remained on leave for a total of 618 days and since his continued absence from the duty was affecting the work on several occasions he was cautioned through letters of the Respondent to improve himself. However, he did not improve himself neither by the communications nor by the advises during counseling. Even after the issuance of the charge sheet for the unauthorized absence the workman during the year 2001-2002 remained unauthorisedly absent 10375

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

and 2002 unauthorisedly for a period of 93 days which goes to show that the workman has no respect for the advise given by the Respondent organization during counseling. Hence , the dismissal order may be upheld .

for a period of 93 days which goes to show that the workman has no respect to the advise given by the Respondent establishment during the counseling and also careless and very casual towards his bread earning . Hence, the dismissal may be confirmed .

4. A memo was filed conceding that the domestic enquiry is validly conducted and arguments were advanced under Sec . 11A by both the counsels for Petitioner and Respondent respectively.

7. It may be noted that the charge sheet dated 6-2- 2001 was issued to him and the enquiry was completed and the Enquiry Officer submitted his report on 12-11-2001 . So one thing is clear that he has been issued with a charge sheet on 6-2-2001 . That was the only month when he was not unauthorisedly absent . After that practically every month he was unauthorisedly absent except June , 2001. No doubt , one has to see only about the charge and the enquiry, but the subsequent conduct also has to be seen for showing any mercy. I am afraid that a person who is so careless has to absent himself for 93 days inspite of domicile sword hanging on his head , although he was given counseling also . But however, taking into consideration that he has served the organization for more than 20 years . Hence , an award is passed holding that the order dated 11-3-2002 of discharge is converted into one of compulsory retirement on 11-3- 2002 and he will be entitled to all benefits of which a compulsorily retired employee is entitled setting aside the order of dismissal dated 11-3-2002 . He shall be erititled to all his retirement benefits which shall be paid within 30 days from the publication of this award failing which he will be entitled to 6 % interest p.a. after the said period.

Award passed accordingly. Transmit .

Dictated to Kum. K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 29th day of October, 2004 .

E. ISMAIL, Presiding Officer Appendix of evidence Witnesses examined for the Witnesses examined for Petitioner NIL the Respondent NIL Documents marked for the Petitioner NIL Documents marked for the Respondent NIL

नई दिल्ली, 30 नवम्बर, 2004 5. It is argued by the Learned Counsel for the Petitoner is Group 'D ' employee and has worked for more than 20 years with the Respondent . On 6-2-2001 the Petitioner was served with a charge sheet alleging that from 1996 to 2000 he was absent for 618 days and was removed from service on 11-3-2002. That during the above said period the Petitioner lost his brother, mother and met with an accident apart from having jaundice . That during the enquiry these points were left untouched. During the enquiry he submitted his medical certificates pertaining to the treatment of his leg which was injured in a major accident . The accident was borne by the Company on credit facility. After recording all these things the period of unauthorized absence was reduced to 21 days which is evident from the reading of the proceedings of the Disciplinary Authority dated 11-2-2002 . Thus it is clear that the unauthorized absence was only for 21 days and the Petitioner was imposed with the punishment of discharge . Therefore, it is clear that the Respondents are having record of intimation of the absence by the Petitioner except for 21 days . Inspite of this , the Respondent punished the Petitioner basing on past record pertaining to the period w.e.f. 1996 to 2000 which is against the law laid down in Mahipal Singh Vs. Union on India, SLJ 2002 ( 1 ) CAT (PB) 235 , wherein it was held that, " . Disciplinary proceedings -Evidence - charged for unauthorized absence-pleads he had sent intimation of his sickness , this evidenced by staff on duty who acknowledged it- still EnquiryOfficer by cryptic manner held charge proved without considering the defence evidence -Quashed" . The Petitioner proved his sickness by establishing that the expenditure for the treatment to his fractured leg was made by the Respondent. That is why , the period absence was reduced to 21 days from 618 days . Even punishing for unauthorized absence basing on the past record is bad in law. The above contentions are proved if one reads the order of the Disciplinary Authority dated 11-3-2002 and the appeal of the Petitioner dated 28-4-2002 and the orders of the Appellate Authority dated 24-6-2002 . Therefore , it is conclusively proved that the unauthorized absence is not 618 days but 21 days for a period of 5 years and the punishment is highly disproportionate and inhuman. Hence , he may be reinstated into service with back wages , continuity of service etc.

का. आ. 3324.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार ग्रासिम इंडस्ट्रीज लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 332/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-11-04 को प्राप्त हुआ था । 6. It is argued by the Learned Counsel for the Respondent that even after the issuance of the charge sheet the Petitioner remained absent during the year 2001

[सं . एल.- 29012/1 /2004- आई.आर. ( विविध ) ] बी० एम ० डेविड, अवर सचिव 10376

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] New Delhi , the 30th November , 2004

2. After the receipt of the reference, ifwas taken on file as I.D. No. 332/2004 and notices were issued to both the parties . Even after several notices , the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court . The Respondent appeared through their advocate and filed Statement of Objection .

S.O. 3324. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award Ref. No. (332/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court , Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Grasim Industries Ltd. and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 24-11-04

[No. L -29012/1 /2004 - IR (M) ]

B. M. DAVID , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Wednesday, the 15th , September, 2004

Present :-K. JAYARAMAN. ,

PresidingOfficer

Industrial Dispute No. 332/2004

( In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of sub - section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2 ( A) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , between the Management of Grasim Industries Ltd. Grasim Cement Division ( S) and their workman)

Between:

3. In the statement of objection , the II Party/Management has contended that the I Party/Workman was never an employee of the II Party /Management nor was the II Party/Management his employer . It is learnt that the I Party was employed as a Helper ( unskilled) in various locations by one of the contractors ofthe II Party/Management . Further, the I Party through its union has raised industrial dispute against the contractors of Management for payment of bonus , minimumwages before this Tribunal in August , 2003 and the matter is still pending as I.D. No. 109/2003 and after admitting in that industrial dispute that he was an employee of the contractor, he cannot now be heard to set up a new case that he is an employee of the II Party/ Management . Before the minimum wages forum , though the Petitioner has filed an application against the II Party/Management and also contractor seeking to pay ' E' grade wages as per the Cement Wages Settlement dated 14-8-2000 and obtained the order. The said order was stayed by the High Court in W.P. No. 1613 & 1616 of 2004. Therefore, the Petitioner always considered himself as an employee of thecontractor and not as of the II Party/Management and therefore , he cannot now be heard to claim that he is an employee of the II Party/Management . Hence , it prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs .

: I Party/Petitioner

Sri Subbiramaniyan

4. In these circumstances , the point for my consideration is-

AND

"To what relief the Petitioner is entitled ?" The Joint President,

: II Party Management

Point:-

Grasim Industries Ltd.

Grasim Cement Division (S)

Reddipalayam Post .

Appearance:

For theWorkman

: M/sA. P. Peter Gunasekaran & P. Dharmaraj , Advocates

For the Management : M/ s Meenakshisundaram & . Dwarakanatham , Advocates

AWARD

5. Even after several notices , the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court nor filed his Claim Statement . The Respondent in its statement of objection clearly stated that there is no relationship of master and servant between them and Petitioner . Further , they have stated that the Petitioner and other workmen have raised a dispute against thecontractors for payment ofbonus and minimum wages in I.D. No. 109/2003 . Under such circumstances , the Respondent contended that they have admitted in the said applications that they were employees of the contractors and they cannot now turn around and say that they are employees of the II Party/Management .

The Central Government , Ministry ofLabour vide Notification Order No. L - 29012 / 1 / 2004 - IR( M ) dated 31-03-2004 has referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :-

"Whether the claim of Shri Subbiramaniyan for continuity of service , regularisation with back wages and all benefits against the management of Grasim Industries Ltd. , Cement Division ( South) Reddipalayam , Ariyalur is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the workmen are entitled to ?"

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

BETWEEN :

SriNatarajan

: I Party/Petitioner

AND

that he was an employee under the II Party/Management and entitled to the benefits of Industrial Disputes Act. Since he has not chosen to appear before this Tribunal to establish his case , I find the Petitioner is not entitled to any relief. No costs .

: II Party Management 7. The reference is disposed of accordingly.

The Joint President, Grasim Industries Ltd. Grasim Cement Division (S) Reddipalayam Post .

(Dictated to the P. A. , transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 15th September, 2004.)

APPEARANCES :

K. JAYARAMAN , Presiding Officer

Forthe Workman

नई दिल्ली, 30 नवम्बर, 2004

: M/s. A. P. Peter Gunasekaran &P. Dharmaraj , Advocates

FortheManagement :: M/s . Meenakshisundaram &Dwarakanatham, Advocates.

AWARD

का. आ. 3325.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार ग्रासिम इंडस्ट्रीज लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 333/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-11-04 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-29012/17/2004- आई.आर. ( विविध ) ]

The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide Notification Order No. L- 29012/ 17/ 2004 - IR(M) dated 31-03-2004 has referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :-

बी० एम० डेविड, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 30th November, 2004

"Whether the claim of Shri Natarajan for continuity of service , regularisation with back wages and all benefits against the management of Grasim Industries Ltd. , Cement Division ( South ) Reddipalayam, Ariyalur is legal andjustified ? If not , to what relief the workmen are entitled to ?" S.O. 3325. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 333/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court , Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Grasim Industries Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 24-11-04.

2. After the receipt of the reference , it was taken on file as I.D. No. 333/2004 and notices were issued to both the parties . Even after several notices , the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court . The Respondent appeared through their advocate and filed Statement of Objection.

[No. L- 29012/ 17/2004 - IR (M) ]

B. M. DAVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Wednesday, the 15th September , 2004

PRESENT :

K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer Industrial Dispute No. 333/2004

3. In the statement of objection , the II Party /Management has contended that the I Party/Workman was never an employee of the II Party/Management nor was the II Party/Management his employer. It is learnt that the I Party was employed as a Helper ( unskilled) in various locations by one of the contractors of the II Party /Management . Further , the I Party through its union has raised industrial dispute against the contractors of Management for payment of bonus , minimum wages before this Tribunal in August , 2003 and the matter is still pending as I : D. No. 109/2003 and after admitting in that industrial dispute that he was an employee of the contractor, he cannot now be heard to set up a new case that he is an employee of the II Party/Management . Before the minimum wages forum, though the Petitioner has filed an application against the II Party/Management and also contractor seeking to pay 'E' grade wages as per the Cement Wages Settlement dated [In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of Sub - section ( 1 ) and Sub - section 2 ( A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947), between theManagement of Grasim Industries Ltd. Grasim Cement Division (S ) and their workman. ] 10378

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

14-8-2000 and obtained the order. The said order was stayed by the High Court in W.P. No. 1613 & 1616 of2004. Therefore, the Petitioner always considered himself as an employee of the contractor and not as of the II Party/Management and therefore , he cannot now be heard to claim that he is an employee of the II Party/Management . Hence, it prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs .

4. In these circumstances , the point for my consideration is-

"To what relief the Petitioner is entitled ? " Point:---

5. Even after several notices , the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court nor filed his Claim Statement . The Respondent in its statement of objection clearly stated that there is no relationship of master and servant between them and Petitioner. Further, they have stated that the Petitioner and other workmen have raised a dispute against the contractors for payment of bonus and minimum wages in I.D. No. 109/2003 . Under such circumstances , the Respondent contended that they have admitted in the said applications that they were employces of the contractors and they cannot now turn around and say that they are employees of the II Party/Management .

6. I find much force in the contention of the Respondent because when the Respondent/Management denies the relationship of master and servant between them and Petitioner, it is the bounden duty of the Petitioner to establish that there is a relationship of master and servant and they are entitled to the benefits of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. In this case , the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court to establish his contention that he was an employee under the II Party /Management and entitled to the benefits of Industrial Disputes Act . Since he has not chosen to appear before this Tribunal to establish his case , I find the Petitioner is not entitled to any relief. No costs.

7. The reference is disposed of accordingly.

(Dictated to the P. A. , transcribed and typed by him , corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 15th September , 2004. )

K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 30 नवम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3326.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार ग्रासिम इंडस्ट्रीज लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] अधिकरण चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 337/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-11-04 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं . एल-29012/25/2004- आई.आर. ( विविध ) ]

बी० एम ० डेविड, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 30th November, 2004 S.O. 3326. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 337/2004 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court , Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Grasim Industries Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on24-11-2004.

[No. L -29012/ 25/2004 - IR (M) ]

B. M. DAVID, Under Secy. ANNEXURE

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

Wednesday, the 15th September, 2004 PRESENT :

K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer Industrial Dispute No. 337/2004

[ In the matter ofthe dispute for adjudication under clause (d) ofSub-section ( 1 ) and Sub - section 2 (A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), between theManagement ofGrasim Industries Ltd. Grasim Cement Division (S) and their workman . ]

BETWEEN :

Sri K. Ravi

: I Party/Petitioner

AND

: II Party /Management The Joint President , Grasim Industries Ltd. Grasim Cement Division ( S) Reddipalayam Post .

APPEARANCES :

Forthe Workman

: M/s . A. P. Peter Gunasekaran & P. Dharmaraj , Advocates .

Forthe Management : M/ s . Meenakshisundaram & . Dwarakanatham , Advocates .

10379 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

AWARD

The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide Notification Order No. L - 29012 / 25 /2004 - IR( M) dated 30-04-2004 has referred the following industrial dispute to thisTribunal for adjudication :

the contractors for payment ofbonus and minimum wages in I.D. No. 109/2003 . Under such circumstances , the Respondent contended that they have admitted in the said applications that they were employees of the contractors and they cannot now turn around and say that they are employees of the II Party /Management .

"Whether the claim of Shri Ravi for continuity of service, regularisation with back wages and all benefits against the management of Grasim Industries Ltd. , Cement Division (South ) Reddipalayam , Ariyalur is legal andjustified ? If not, to what relief the workman are entitled to ?"

2. After the receipt of the reference , if was taken on file as I.D. No. 337/2004 and notices were issued to both the parties . Even after several notices , the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court . The Respondent appeared through their advocate and filed Statement of Objection.

6. 1 find much force in the contention of the Respondent because when the Respondent/Management denies the relationship of master and servant between them and Petitioner, it is the bounden duty of the Petitioner toestablish that there is a relatonship of master and servant and they are entitled to the benefits of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. In this case , the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court to establish his contention that he was an employee under the II Party/Management and entitled to the benefits of Industrial Disputes Act . Since he has not chosen to appear before this Tribunal to establish his case, I find the Petitioner is not entitled to any relief. No Costs.

7. The reference is disposed of accordingly.

(Dictated to the P. A. , transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court onthis day the 15th September, 2004. )

K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 30 नवम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3327.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का-14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार ग्रासिम इंडस्ट्रीज लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 338/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-11-04 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-29012/26/2004- आई.जार. ( विविध ) ]

बी०एम० डेविड, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 30th November, 2004.." 3. In the statement of objection , the II Party /Management has contended that the I Party /Workman was never an employee of the II Party/Management nor was the II Party/Management his employer . It is learnt that the I Party was employed as a Helper (unskilled) in various locations by one of the contractors of the II Party/Management . Further, the I Party through its union has raised industrial dispute against the contractors of Management for payment of bonus, minimum wages before this Tribunal in August, 2003 and the matter is still pending as I.D. No. 109/2003 and after admitting in that industrial dispute that he was an employee of the contractor, he cannot now be heard to set up a new case that he is an employee of the II Party/Management . Before the minimum wages forum , though the Petitioner has filed an application against the II Party/Management and also contractor seeking to pay 'E' grade wages as per the Cement Wages Settlement dated 14-8-2000 and obtained the order . The said order was stayedby the High Court in W.P. No. 1613 & 1616 of 2004. Therefore, the Petitioner always considered himself as an employee of the contractor and not as of the II Party/Management and therefore , he cannot nowbe heard to claim that he is an employee of the II Party/Management. Hence, it prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs .

4. In these circumstances , the point for my consideration is-

"To what relief the Petitioner is entitled?"

Point :-

S.O. 3327.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award Ref. No. (338/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Grasim Industries Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 24-11-04 .

[No. L- 29012/26/2004 - IR (M) ]

B. M. DAVID , Under Sety 5. Even after several notices , the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court nor filed his Claim Statement. The Respondent in its statement of objection.clearly stated that there is no relationship of master and servant between them and Petitioner. Further , they have stated that the Petitioner and other workmen have raised a dispute against

3684 G1/0440 10380

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, CHENNAI

Wednesday, the 15th, September, 2004

PRESENT:

K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer

Industrial Dispute No. 338/2004

[In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of Sub - section ( 1 ) and Sub-section 2 (A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , between theManagement ofGrasim Industries Ltd. Grasim Cement Division (S) and their workman. ]

BETWEEN:

Sri P. Selvarasu

Party through its union has raised industrial dispute against the contractors of Management for payment of bonus , minimum wages before this Tribunal in August , 2003 and the matter is still pending as I.D. No. 109/2003 and after admitting in that industrial dispute that he was anemployee of the contractor, he cannot now be heard to set up a new case that he is an employee of the II Party/Management . Before the minimum wages forum , though the Petitioner has filed an application against the II Party/Management and also contractor seeking to pay 'E' gradewages as per the Cement Wages Settlement dated 14-8-2000 and obtained the order . The said order was stayedby the High Court in W.P. No. 1613 & 1616 of2004 . Therefore, the Petitioner always considered himself as an employee of the contractor and not as of the II Party/Management and therefore , he cannot now be heard to claim that he is an employee of the II Party/Management. Hence, it prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs .

: I Party/Petitioner

AND

4. In these circumstances , the point for my consideration is-

The Joint President ,

: II Party/Management

"To what relief the Petitioner is entitled? " Grasim Industries Ltd.

Point:-

Grasim Cement Division (S)

Reddipalayam Post .

APPEARANCES :

FortheWorkman

: M/s . A. P. Peter Gunasekaran &P. Dharmaraj ,

Advocates .

For the Management : M/ s . Meenakshisundaram & Dwarkanatham , Advocates .

AWARD

5. Even after several notices , the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court nor filed his Claim Statement . The Respondent in its statement of objection clearly stated that there is no relationship of master and servant between them and Petitioner. Further , they have stated that the Petitioner and other workmen have raised a dispute against thecontractors for payment of bonus and minimum wages in I.D. No. 109/2003 . Under such circumstances , the Respondent contended that they have admitted in the said applications that they were employees of the contractors and they cannot now turn around and say that they are employees of the II Party/Management.

The Central Government, Ministry of Labour vide Notification Order No. L- 29012/ 26/ 2004 - IR ( M) dated 30-04-2004 has referred the following industrial dispute to thisTribunal for adjudication :-

"Whether the claim of Shri Selvarasu for continuity of service , regularisation with back wages and all benefits against the management of Grasim Industries Ltd. , Cement Division ( South) Reddipalayam, Ariyalur is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workmen is entitled to ?"

2. After the receipt of the reference, ifwas taken on file as I.D. No. 338/2004 and notices were issued to both the parties. Even after several notices , the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court. The Respondent appeared through their advocate and filed Statement of Objection .

6. I find much force in the contention of the Respondent because when the Respondent/Management denies the relationship of master and servant between them and Petitioner, it is the bounden duty of the Petitioner to establish that there is a relationship of master and servant and they are entitled to the benefits of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. In this case , the Petitioner has not appeared before this Courtto establish his contention that he was an employee under the II Party/Management and entitled to the benefits of Industrial Disputes Act . Since he has not chosen to appear before this Tribunal to establish his case, I find the Petitioner is not entitled to any relief. No costs.

7. The reference is disposed of accordingly.

(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him, correctedandpronounced by me in the open court on this day the 15th September, 2004.)

K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer 10381

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

APPEARANCE :

नई दिल्ली, 30 नवम्बर, 2004

For the Workman

: M/ s . A.P. Peter Gunasekaran &P. Dharmaraj , Advocates

For theManagement : M/s. Meenakshisundaram & Dwarakanatham , Advocates

AWARD

का.आ. 3328.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार ग्रासिम इंडस्ट्रीज लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 339/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल-29012/27/2004- आई.आर. (विविध ) ]

बी० एम ० डैविड, अवर सचिव

The Central Government, Ministry of Labour vide Notification Order No. L- 29012/27 /2004 -IR( M) dated 30-04-2004 has referred the following industrial disputeto this Tribunal for adjudication :-

New Delhi , the 30th November , 2004

"Whether the claim of Shri Muruganantham for continuity of service , regularisation with back wages and all benefits against the management ofGrasim Industries Ltd. , Cement Division ( South) Reddipalayam, Ariyalur is legal and justified? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled to ?" S.O. 3328. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 339/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court Chennai , as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Grasim Industries Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on24-11-2004.

2. After the receipt of the reference , it was taken on file as I.D. No. 339/2004 and notices were issued to both the parties. Even after several notices, the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court . The Respondent appeared through their advocate and filed Statement of objection .

[No. L- 29012/27/2004- IR (M) ] B. M. DAVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Wednesday, the 15th September, 2004

PRESENT :

K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer Industrial Dispute No. 339/2004

(In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) ofsub-section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947), between the Management of Grasim Industries Ltd. Grasim Cement Division ( S ) and their workmen).

BETWEEN :

Sri S.Muruganantham : I Party/Petitioner

AND

3. In the statement of objection , the II Party/ Management has contended that the I Party/Workman was never an employee of the II Party/Management nor was the II Party/Management his employer. It is learnt that the I Party was employed as a Helper (unskilled) in various locations by one of the contractors of the II Party/Management . Further, the I Party through its union has raised industrial dispute against the contractors of Management for payment ofbonus , minimum wages before this Tribunal in August, 2003 and the matter is still pending as I.D. No. 109/2003 and after admitting in that industrial dispute that he was an employee of the contractor, he cannot now be heard to set up a new case that he is an employee of the II Party/Management . Before the minimum wages forum, though the Petitioner has filed an application against the II Party /Management and also contractor seeking to pay ' E ' grade wages as per the Cement Wages Settlement dated 14-8-2000 and obtained the order. The said order was stayed by the High Court in W.P. No. 1613 &1616 of2004. Therefore , the Petitioner always considered himself as an employee of the contractor and not as of the II Party/Management and therefore , he cannot now be heard to claim that he is an employee of the II Party/Management . Hence, it prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs.

: II Party/Management

4. In these circumstances , the point for my consideration is :-

"To what relief the Petitioner is entitled ?" The Joint President, Grasim Industries Ltd. Grasim Cement Division ( S) Reddipalayam Post.

10382

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

Point :-

5. Even after several notices , the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court nor filed his Claim Statement . TheRespondent in its statement of objection clearly stated thatthere is no relationship of master and servant between them and the Petitioner. Further, they stated that the Petitioner and other workmen have raised a dispute against the contractors for payment ofbonus and minimum wages in I.D. No. 109/2003 . Under such circumstances, the Respondent contended that they have admitted in the said applications that they were employees of the contractors and they cannot now turn around and say that they are employees of the II Party/Management .

6. I find much force in the contention of the Respondent because when the Respondent/Management denies the relationship of master and servant between them and Petitioner, it is the bounden duty of the Petitioner to establish that there is a relationship of master and servant and they are entitled to the benefits of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. In this case, the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court to establish his contention that he was an employee under the II Party /Management and entitled to the benefits of Industrial Disputes Act. Since he has not chosen to appear before this Tribunal to establish his case, I find the Petitioner is not entitled to any relief. No Costs.

7. The reference is disposed of accordingly.

(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him , correctedand pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 15th September, 2004.)

K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 30 नवम्बर, 2004

का.आ. 3329.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सिंडिकेट बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में श्रम न्यायालय कोजीकोड के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 3/98 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-11- 2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल -12012/207/97- आई.आर. ( बी. II ) ]

सी० गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 30th November , 2004 S.O. 3329.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 3/98 ) of the Labour Court , Kozhikode , as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Syndicate Bank and their workmen , received by the Central Governnient on 29-11-2004 .

[No. L - 12012/207/97 - IR(B - II) ]

C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

ANNEXURE

IN THE LABOUR COURT, KOZHIKODE, KERALA STATE

Dated this the 15th day of October, 2004.

PRESENT:

SHRIK. BALASUBRAMANIAN , B.COM. , LL.B. , PresidingOfficer

LD. (C) No. 3/98

Between:

Management The DeputyGeneral Manager, Syndicate Bank, Zonal Office ,

Sasthamangalam, Trivandrum -673001 . AND

Workman Shri K. Chandradasan,

Koduvayil Veedu,

Karuvanthuruthy, Feroke, Calicut.

REPRESENTATIONS :

ForManagement Sri E.M. Vijayan , Advocate, Calicut

. For Workman SriK. Hemachandran, Advocate , Calicut

AWARD

Thisreference was made by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour as per Order No. L- 12012/207/97/IR (B- II) dated 23-02-1998 to adjudicate the dispute raisedby the workman challenging the action ofhis management Bank in terminating his services on the guilt of unauthorised absence from duty.

2. The workman under reference was employed as anattender at the Calicut Main Branch of the Management Bank . The management bank terminated his services for unauthorised absence from duty by invoking the relevant provisions ofbipartite settlement treating him as voluntarily retired from the service of the Bank.

This reference has been made to adjudicate the issue as to the justifiability of the action of the management .

3. In pursuance of the notices issued from this Court both parties appeared and filed their respective statements. The gist of the claim statement filed by the workman is as follows:-

4. The workman joined the service of management asan attender on 15th January, 1974. During 1991-92/1992- 93 , the workman was forced to avail Medical leave on account ofcontinuous ill- health . From 16-11-1992 onwards the worker was under the treatment of an Ayurvedic physician for a period of 181 days . The fact of aillment was informed to the Managementby forwarding a leave application along with Medical Certificate . But without considering the leave application the management treated [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

him as voluntarily retired from service from 17-4-1993 and issued a letter in that regard. The services were terminated without framing any charges or hearing the worker which amounts to flagrant violation of principles of naturaljustice. The requests for reinstatement in service were also met with deaf ears of the management . The entire action of the management is against all cannons of law, natural justice and fair play and the same amounts to victimisation and unfair labour practice . Therefore , the workman prays for passing an Award directing the management to reinstate him with continuity in service with attendent service benefits.

5. The case of the management is that the workman was highly irregular in attending duties . The case ofthe workman that during the year 1991-92 and 1992-93 he was on Medical leave on account of continuous ill -health is false. The workman was in the habit of absenting from duty without intimation or sanction of leave which is self evident from the various letters referred to in the counter statement. This has considerably affected the functioning ofthe branch and the service of customers . On so many occasions Bank had intimated that disciplinary action will be initiated for his irresponsible acts . On all those occasions workman used to project some excuses to justify his absence. when the workman again resorted to such practice by unlawfully absenting from duties from 17-4-1993 , two letters were sent in his residential address . They were returned unclaimed . Since the employee was mis - utilising the leave provision and absenting from duty un- authorisedly, the Management, invoked Clause 17A of bipartite settlement and terminated his service treating him to have voluntarily retired from employment . Leave application was submitted only after his name was removed from the rolls . The workman was not removed from the rolls as punishment or disciplinary action . There is no denial of natural justice and the workman is not entitled for reinstatement in service .

6. Adetailed rejoinder was also filed attacking the orderofdischarge from service mainly alleging infrigement offair-play and natural justice. It is also contended that the action of the management without conducting a domestic enquiry is high - handed and unlawful .

7. The evidence consists of oral evidence of the worker when examined as WW1 and Exts . Ml toM16 .

8. The points for consideration are ' Whether the irnpugned action of the management is in accordance with law? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled ? ' 9. Points :-It could be seen from the evidence that the worker in this case joined the service of the Management Bank as an attender in the year 1974. While so he absented from duty from 16-11-1992 without leave or sanction of the management . So the Bank sent a telegram requesting the workman to join duty followed by Ext . M12 letter dated 22-12-1992 calling upon him to join duty within 7 days of the receipt of the registered letter lest to face disciplinary action . A similar registered letter was also

10383

i sentfrom the Regional Office of the Bank as evidencedby Ext. M16 dated 13-1-1993 . Both letters were returned unserved with the postal endorsement ' Intimation Served' . Since the worker did not respond to the letters , invoking Clause 17A of the bipartite settlement , the Bank, allegedly sent a notice dated 17-3-1993 calling upon the worker to report back for work within thirty days treating his absence as unauthorised. It appears that by the time the worker had absented for more than 120 days consecutively. Since the worker did not report for duty in obedience to the notice, his name was removed from the rolls of the Bank w.e.f. 17- 4-1993 treating him to have been voluntarily retired from service and this was communicated to the workman as per letter dated 6-5-1993 . On receipt ofthis letter workman sent Ext. M2 reply (Copy) along with Ext. M1 medical certificate issued by an Ayurvedic Physician highlighting the reasons for absence . According to the workman he was under the treatment of an Ayurvedic Physician for severe rheumatic complaint (Peralisis-Partial ) during the days . Workman further sought for review of the order of removal of his name from the rolls . The workman also stated in his reply that his illness was informed to the Bank and that the letters issued by the Bank did not reach his hands in time on account of some domestic problems .

10. The impuged action was taken by invoking clause 17(a) of the bipartite settlement produced in Court for reference . Clause 17(a) read thus .

"When an employee absents himself from work for a period of 90 or more consecutive days , without submitting any application for leave or for its extension of without any leave to his credit or beyond the period of leave sanctioned originally / subsequently or when there is satisfactory evidence that he has taken up employment in India or when the management is reasonably satisfied that he has no intention ofjoining duties , the management may atany time thereafter give a notice to the employee at his last known address calling upon him to report for duty within 30 days of the date of the notice, stating inter- alia the grounds for coming to the conclusion that the employee has no intention of joining duties and furnishing necessary evidence , where available. Unless the employee reports for duty within 30 days of the notice or given an explanation for his absence within the said period of 30 days satisfying the management that he has not taken up another employment or avocation and that he has no intention of not joining duties, the employee willbe deemed to have voluntarily retired from the bank's service on the expiry of the said notice. In the evient of the employee submitting a satisfactory reply, he shall be permitted to report for duty thereafter within 30 days from the date of the expiry of the aforesaid notice without prejudice to the bank's right to take any action under the law or rulcs of service ." 10384

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4 , 1926

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

Ext.M2 : Copy of letter sent by the worker to the Dy. General Manager , Syndicate Bank , Zonal Office, Trivandrum on 20-5-1993.

Ext. M3

11. It is only when the workman was unauthorisedly absents from duty unreasonably for a period of more than 120 days consecutively, it would be open to the Bank to have terminated his services invoking this clause .

: Copy of letter sent by the worker to the Dy. General Manager, Syndicate Bank, Zonal Office Trivandrum on 20-5-1993 issued by Manager, Syndicate Bank , to the workman with acknowledgement dt. 21-4-1983 .

Ext.M4 : Copy of letter sent by the worker to the Dy. General Manager, Syndicate Bank, Zonal Office, Trivandrum on 20-5-1993 issued by Manager, Syndicate Bank , to the workman with acknowledgement dt . 7-6-1984.

Ext.M5 : Letter written by the workman to the Manager, Syndicate Bank dt . 15-6-1984 .

12. In this case there is nothing on record to show that the management had issued any such notice to the employce to report for duty within 30 days of date of notice in accordance with the relevant clause in the bipartite settlement . Instead , the management has only produced a document evidencing the intimation of final decision for removal of the name of the worker from the rolls . Thus the additional benefit of the employee to receive show cause notice even in the case of the unauthorised absence is violated and therefore the action of the Bank may not stand to legal scrutiny.

Ext.M6 : Letter written by the workman to the Manager, Syndicate Bank dt. 6-11-1987 .

Ext. M7 : Letter by Manager , Syndicate Bank , Cherootty Road,to Asstt . General Manager , ZonalOffice, Trivandrum and enclosed letter writtenbyworkman.

Ext. M8 : Office communication ack . by workman dt. 6-6-1991 .

Ext. M9 : Leave application submitted by workman dt. 22-1-1992.

Ext. M 10 : Copy of letter issued to workman with postal acknowledgementdt . 24-2-1992 .

Ext . M11 :

Ext. M12

13. The worker in this case was almost a regular absentee from the time he joined service could be seen from Ext . M3 and M15 , may be on account of reasons as statedby him. It could further be seen from the materials onrecord that the Bank was very much considerate towards him on former occasions . The worker is out of service for more than a decade . He has crossed the age of 50. Taking into account all these events and circumstances it may not be proper to order reinstatement in service . Instead the interest of the worker could be served by directing the management to pay Rs . 50,000/ -as lumpsum compensation in licu of reinstatement so that it will enable the workman to re -habilitate himself by seeking suitable avocation . It is also make clear that this amount will be in addition to the service benefits due to the worker.

Letter written by workman dt . 3-7-1992 . Letter issued to workman , cover with acknoledgement returned dt . 22-12-1992.

Ext. M13 : Copy of letter written by Management to workman and postal acknowledgement dt. 20-6-1992 .

Ext. M14 : Letter written by workman to manager, Syndicate Bank dt . 15-6-1984.

: -do- dt . 23-4-1984 .

Ext. M15

14. In the result, an Award is passed holding that the impugned action of the management in treating the services of the worker under reference as voluntarily retired w.c.f. 17-4-1993 is not legal and justifiable . The management is directed to pay a lumpsum amount of Rs. 50,000/- as compensation in lieu of reinstatement in addition to the service benefits paid or payable to the worker.

Ext. M16 : Copy of letter issued by Management to workman and cover returneddt . 13-1-1993 . नई दिल्ली, 30 नवम्बर, 2004

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant , transcribed by her, revised , corrected and passed by me on the 15th day of October , 2004 .

K. BALASUBRAMANIAN , Presiding Officer

APPENDIX :

Witnesses examined on the side of the workman:-

WWI : Chandras .

Witnesses examined on the side of the Management :--

NIL

का. आ. 3330.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार ग्रासिम इंडस्ट्रीज लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 364/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

Documents marked on the side of the Workman :-

[सं० एल-29012/19/2004- आई.आर. ( विविध ) ] NIL

बी.एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव Documents marked on the side of the Management :--

New Delhi , the 30th November , 2004

S.O. 3330. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Ext.Ml : Medical Certificate issued by Dr. Yatheendradas Pallath to the worker on 16-5-1993 .

10385

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 364/ 2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court Chennai , as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Grasim Industries Ltd. and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 24-11-2004.

[No. L-29012/ 19/2004- IR (M)] B.M. DAVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Wednesday, the 15th September, 2004

PRESENT

K. JAYARAMAN

PresidingOfficer

Industrial Dispute No. 364/2004

3. In the statement of objection , the II Party/ Management has contended that the I Party / Workman was never an employee of the II Party /Management nor was the II Party /Management his employer. It is learnt that the I Party was employed as a Helper (unskilled ) in various locations by one of the contractors of the II Party/Management . Further, the I Party through its union has raised industrial dispute against the contractors of Management for payment of bonus , minimum wages before this Tribunal in August, 2003 and the matter is still pending as I.D. No. 109/2003 and after admitting in that industrial dispute that he was an employee of the contractor, he cannot now be heard to set up a new case that he is an employee of the II Party/Management . Before the minimum wages forum, though the Petitioner has filed an application against the II Party /Management and also contractor seeking to pay ' E ' grade wages as per the Cement Wages Settlement dated 14-8-2000 and obtained the order . The said order was stayed by the High Court in W.P. No. 1613 &1616 of2004. Therefore, the Petitioner always considered himself as an employee of the contractor and not as of the II Party/Management and therefore, he cannot now be heard to claim that he is an employee of the II Party/Management. Hence, it prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs.

(In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) ofsub -section ( 1 ) and sub -section 2 (A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , between theManagement ofGrasim Industries Ltd. Grasim Cement Division (S) and the workman).

4. In these circumstances , the point for my considerationis :-

Between

"To what relief the Petitioner is entitled? " Sri P. Annanthan : I Party/Petitioner

Point:-

And

: II Party/Management

The Joint President ,

Grasim Industries Ltd.

Grasim Cement Division (S)

Reddipalayam Post .

Appearance:

For the Workman

: M/ s . A.P. Peter Gunasekaran &P. Dharamaraj , Advocate

Forthe Management : M/ s . Meenakshisundaram & Dwarakanatham , Advocates

AWARD

5. Even after several notices , the Petitioner hàs not appeared before this Court nor filed his Claim Statement . TheRespondent in its statement of objection clearly stated that there is no relationship of master and servant between them and the Petitioner . Further, they have stated that the Petitioner and other workmen have raised a dispute against the contractors for payment ofbonus and minimum wages in I.D. No. 109/2003 . Under such circumstances, the Respondent contended that they have admitted in the said applications that they were employees of the contractors and they cannot now turn around and say that they are employees of the II Party/Management .

The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide Notification Order No. L- 29012/ 19/ 2004 - IR( M) dated 31-03-2004 has referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication: -

"Whether the claim of Shri Annanthan for continuity of service , regularisation with back wages and all benefits against the management ofGrasim Industries Ltd. , Cement Division (South) Reddipalayam, Ariyalur is legal andjustified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to ?"

6. I find much force in the contention of the Respondent because when the Respondent/Management denies the relationship of master and servant between them and Petitioner, it is the bounden duty of the Petitioner toestablish that there is a relationship of master and servant and they are entitled to the benefits of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. In this case, the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court to establish his contention that he was an employee under the II Party/Management and entitled to the benefits of Industrial Disputes Act . Since he has not chosen to appear before this Tribunal to establish his case, I find the Petitioner is not entitled to any relief. No Costs.

7. The reference is disposed of accordingly.

2. After the receipt of the reference , it was taken on file as I.D. No. 364/2004 and notices were issued to both the parties . Even after several notices , the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court. The Respondent appeared through their advocate and filed Statement of Objection.

10386

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ]

For the Management : M/s. Meenakshisundaram & Dwarakanatham , Advocates (Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him , corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 15th September, 2004.)

AWARD

K. JAYARAMAN , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 30 नवम्बर, 2004

The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide Notification Order No. L - 29012 / 2/ 2004 - IR ( M) dated 31-03-2004 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :-

"Whether the claim ofShri Samivel for continuity of service, regularisation with back wages and all benefits against the management of Grasim Industries Ltd. , Cement Division ( South) Reddipalayam , Ariyalur is legal andjustified ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to? " का.आ. 3331.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार ग्रासिम इंडस्ट्रीज लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 373/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं ० एल-29012/2/2004- आई. आर. ( विविध ) ]

बी.एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 30th November , 2004

2. After the receipt of the reference , it was taken on file as I.D. No. 373/2004 and notices were issued to both the parties . Even after several notices , the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court. The Respondent appeared through their advocate and filed Statement of Objection .

S.O. 3331. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 373/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ cum - Labour Court , Chennai , as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Grasim Industries Ltd. and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 24-11-2004.

[No. L -29012 / 2/2004 - IR (M) ] B.M. DAVID , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Wednesday, the 15th September, 2004

PRESENT:

K. JAYARAMAN , PresidingOfficer Industrial Dispute No. 373/2004

3. In the statement of objection , the II Party/ Management has contended that the I Party/Workman was never an employee of the II Party/ Management nor was the II Party/Management his employer . It is learnt that the I Party was employed as a Helper ( unskilled ) in various locations by one of the contractors of the II Party/Management . Further, the I Party through its union has raised industrial dispute against the contractors of Management for payment of bonus , minimum wages before this Tribunal in August , 2003 and the matter is still pending asI.D. No. 109/2003 and after admitting in that industrial dispute that he was an employee of the contractor, he cannot now be heard to set up a new case that he is an employee of the II Party/Management. Before the minimum wages forum, though the Petitioner has filed an application against the II Party/ Management and also contractor seeking to pay ' E ' grade wages as per the Cement Wages Settlement dated 14-8-2000 and obtained the order . The said order was stayed by the High Court in W.P. No. 1613 & 1616 of 2004. Therefore , the Petitioner always considered himselfas an employee of the contractor and not as of the II Party/Management and therefore , he cannot now be heard to claim that he is an employee of the II Party/Management . Hence, it prays that the claim may be disınissed with costs .

(In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of sub - section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2 (A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , between the Management of Grasim Industries Ltd. Grasim Cement Division ( S) and their workman) .

4. In these circumstances , the point for my considerationis :-

Between

"To what relief the Petitioner is entitled?" Sri V. Samivel

Point:-

: I Party/Petitioner And

: II Party/Management

The Joint President . Grasim Industries Ltd. Grasim Cement Division( S) Reddipalayam Post. Appearance:

Forthe Workman

5. Even after several notices , the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court nor filed his Claim Statement . The Respondent in its statement of objection clearly stated that there is no relationship of master and servant between them and the Petitioner. Further, they stated that the Petitioner and other workmen have raised a dispute against the contractors for payment of bonus and minimum wages in I.D. No. 109/2003 . Under such circumstances , the &P. Dharamaraj , Advocate : M/ s . A.P. Peter Gunasekaran 10387

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/ पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

Inthematter of:-

Sh .A.S. Yadav

Versus

LAAL

AWARD

TheMinistry ofLabour by its letter No. L- 11012/9/ 94- IR (VIVIDH) Central Government Dt. 2-01-1995 has referredthe following point for adjudication.

Thepoint runs as hereunder:-

"Whether Shri A.S. Yadav and 50 others (as per the list enclosed) were the workmen of International Airports Authority of India ? If so , whether the action of the Airport Director of I.A.A.I. , New Delhi in terminatingtheir services w.e.f. 31-05-1993 is justified? Ifnot, to what relief the workman is entitled to. " 6. I find much force in the contention of the Respondent because when the Respondent/Management denies the relationship of master and servant between them and Petitioner, it is the bounden duty of the Petitioner to establish that there is a relationship of master and servant and they are entitled to the benefits of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. In this case , the Petitioner has not appeared before this Court to establish his contention that he was an employee under the II Party/Management and entitled to the benefits of Industrial Disputes Act. Since he has not chosen to appear before this Tribunal to establish his case, I find the Petitioner is not entitled to any relief. No Costs.

7. The reference is disposed of accordingly.

(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 15th September, 2004. )

K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 30 नवम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3332.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार इंटरनेशनल एयर पोर्ट ऑथोरिटी ऑफ इण्डिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनकेकर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नई दिल्ली- II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 14/1995 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल-11012/9/94- आई.आर. ( विविध ) ]

बी.एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 30th November , 2004

The claimant has filed statement of claim . In the statement of claim, it has been stated that a civil suitwas filed by the workmen for obtaining injunction order but it was revealed that the civil suit in such a case does not lie. Thereafter a writ petition was also filed by the concerned workman in the High Court of Delhi, which was also not pressed as the labour court has got the jurisdiction to try and entertain the case. That on 8-2-95, the concerned workmen received a letter from the Executive Director of E.A.T.S. regarding the re -employment which was duly repliedby the concerned workmen rejecting the said offer on the ground that the workmen were not the security guards and are entitled for their reinstatement with full back wages and all other attendent benefits from the management E.A.T.S. who has retrenched them on the instigation of I. A.A.I. by thier director. The termination of contract between these two was with a malafide intention and in connivance with each other to curb the trade union activities of the workmen concerned, The letter of offer for re-employment was issued only when the Hon'ble Conciliation officer was pleased to admit the claim ofthe workmenconcerned regarding their reinstatement etc. which shows the malafide and connivance of EATS and IAAI .

S.O. 3332. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 14/95) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum -Labour Court ,New Delhi - II , as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of International Airports Authority of India and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 24-11-2004 .

[No. L- 11012/9 /94- IR (M) ] B.M. DAVID , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL

That the termination of the services in the garb of retrenchment order of the confirmed concerned employees by the EATS in connivance with IAAI and their directors ispurely illegal , arbitrary, and un -justified as well as against the rules of naturaljustice. That all the concernedworkmen are still un -employed although some of them were re- employed even by the same management and some of them have joined their own profession and services . The concerned workmen who have signed and verified this statement of claim are badly in need of services and financial assistance .

GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR, COURT- II , RAJENDRA BHAWAN, GROUND FLOOR, RAJENDRA PLACE, NEW DELHI

Presiding Officer

R.N. RAI

The management/respondent has filed WS. In the WS it has been submitted that the present order ofreference has been made mechanically and without application of mind in that there was no material whatsoever before the CentralGovt. to form an opinion about the existence of an L.D. No. 14/95

3684 G1/ 04-41 10388

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4 , 1926

[PART II- SEC. 3(ii) ]

reference were employed by M/ s . EATS who has taken the contract of trolly retrieval job in accordance with the contract labour ( Regulation and abolition) Act which is a special Act dealing with the regulation and abolition of the contract labour and in view of the provisions contained in that act no court much less a Tribunal of a limited jurisdiction has the power to prohibit the employment of contract labour in any work. In view of this position ofthe matter the present order of reference merits no consideration and is liable to be rejected summarily.

Thatthe averments made in the statement of claim do not disclose any cause of action agairist the answering management and a reading of the same will clearly show that the persons named in the order of reference were employedby M/ s . EATS they were discharged by M/ s . EATS and as such the answering management was never their employer nor it ever discharged them and as such there was no action on the part of the answering management the jurisdiction of which may be called in question. It is on this ground also that the present order of reference merits no consideration and is liable to be rejected summarily and it may please be held accordingly.

industrial dispute between the answering management and the persons named in the order of reference . It is nodoubt true that formation of opinion about the existence of an "Industrial Dispute" is an administrative function but that opinion has to be formed on the basis of objective material. Itisthus submitted that existence of an industrial dispute isa condition precedent for the making of a legal and valid order of reference . In the present case a reading of the order of reference clearly shows that there was no material whatsoever before the appropriate Govt . and it was not sure even about the employer and employee relationship between the parties to the order of reference. It has ignored completely the averments made by the persons named in orderof reference in the statement of claim filed before the ALC ( Central ) whose report formed the basis for the making ofthe reference . The fifty persons named in the order of reference specifically state in their claim statement that theywere employed and discharged by M/ s. Ex. Servicemen Air Link transport services Ltd. Which clearly shows that they were neither employed nor discharged by the answering management and as such , there was no cause ofaction for the making of the present order of reference, involving the answering management . The present order ofreference is thus bad in law, not maintainable and liable to be rejected/dismissed summarily on this ground alone.

The claimants have filed rejoinder. In the rejoinder, they have denied almost all the paras of the written statement and have reiterated the averments of statement ofclaim. Evidence of both the parties has been taken.

That no employer and employee relationships ever existed between the answering management and the 50 persons named in the order of reference . It is submitted that the persons named in the order of reference were in fact the employees of M/ s . Ex - serviceman Air Link transport services Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as M/s . EATS) who has not been made a party in the present order of reference and in the absence of the same no adjudication proceedings can take place . The present order of reference is thus bad in law for non -joinder and/or misjoinder of necessary parties .

That no dispute much less an industrial dispute exists between the parties named in the order of reference as the persons named in the order of reference do not answer the description of the word " workmen " as defined in Section2 (s) of the ID Act, 1947 in as much as no employer and employee relationship , which is an essential condition for the existence of the industrial dispute ever existed between the parties in the present case . It is on this ground also that the present order of reference merits no consideration and is liable to be rejected summarily.

Heard arguments from both the sides and pursued the papers on the record. It was submitted from the side of the workman that 11 workmen namely. S/Shri A. S. Yadav, S. K. Yadav, Ram Kumar (I ) , Mahinder Singh , Dharambir Singh, Ramphool, Ram Phal , Om Prakash, Ashok Kumar, Mehtab Singh , Khaali Ram have filed statement of claim . The others have not joined them. As such , the cases of the 11 workmenis being considered . It was submitted from the side of the claimant that MIS. EATS , has employed them under the contract and their services have been terminated by M/ s . EATS but the contract is mere a formality. The workmen were directly the employees of the management . They worked under the control of the management and payment to them was made by the management . As such, there is no employer and employee relationbetweenthe workmen and the management . The job isofperennial nature . That job is still in existence . It is of courseadmitted by the management that the said job is still continuing but the claimants were not the employees ofthe management but they were employed through the contractor.

That the present order of reference is ultravires the powers ofthe Central Govt. and at the same time the matter referred for adjudication to this Hon'ble Court is beyond the ambit and scope of jurisdiction of this Tribunal in that the present order of reference seeks from this Hon'ble Tribunal the prohibition of employment of contract labour which it cannot do . It is submitted that what this Hon'ble Tribunal cannotdo directly, equally cannot do so indirectly. It is submitted that the persons named in the order of

Itwas submitted from the side of the workmen that heither the contractor nor the management has obtained any license or registration for employing contractuat workmen. I have perused the entire record but there is no certificate.The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in 1997 (75) FIR page 368 has held that a Licence under Contract Labour(Regulation and Abolition) Act cannot be granted 10389

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

when the work is of perennial nature . It is not disputed that the work is not of perennial nature . As such , license cannot be issued under the Contract labour Abolition Act, 1970 for a perennial nature of work. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has also held in 1995 SUPP(3 ) SCC 579 AND IN 1997 9 SCC 377 that contract labour for the perennial nature ofwork is to be abolished and the principal employer isbound to absorb such labour. In view of this judgement ofthe Hon'ble Supreme Court , the employer is bound to absorb the contractor's men as the work is of perennial nature. In the work of perennial nature , contract labour is to be abolished and the principal employer is duty bound to absorb the men of the contractor . It was submitted from the side ofthe workmen that in view ofthis pronouncement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the claimants are to be absorbed by the principal employer.

It was further submitted that neither the employer nor the contractor has obtained any license for employing contractual men for the perennial nature of work. Since no license form or registration form has been attached with the record so it cannot be ascertained for what type of work contractual labour are to be engaged. A license cannot be granted for perennial nature of work by the licence or registration authority in view of the above pronouncement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

Hon'ble Supreme Court has further held that " where a workman is hired in or in connection with the work of an establishment by the principal employer through a contractor, he merely acts as an agent so there will be master and servant relationship between the principal employer and the workman. But where a workman is hired in or in connection with the work of an establishment by a contractor, either because he has undertaken to produce a given result for the establishment or because he supplies workmen for any work of the establishment a question might arise whether the contractor is a mere camouflage, if the answer is in the affirmative , the workman will be in fact anemployee ofthe principal employer but if the answer isinthe nagative, the workman will be a contract labour. According to this finding of the Hon'ble Supreme Court , it is to be ascertained whether the contractor is a mere camouflage. In the present case , supervisors as well as trolleymen totalling about 57 have been engaged and no duty has been assigned to the cotractor to supervise the work and the contractor has no control , the management has to take work from these workmen according to their scheduled flights . As such, the contractor has no effective control over the workmen. The workmen are to attend the flights coming in and going out at the instructions of the management . In the agreement , even the presence ofthe contractor all along has not been mentioned . It transpires that the men engaged by the contractor worked under the instructions of the management in the absence of the contractor all along. As such in the facts and circumstances ofthis case the contract is mere a camouflage to engage 11 supervisors and 57 loaders . All these workmen worked under the guidance and direction of the management and the contractor nowhere comes in picture . So strictly speaking contractor is a mere camouflage.

Itwas further submitted from the side ofthe workmen that chapter 5 of Contract Labour Act, 1970 has not been fulfilled. There is no description anywhere regarding the welfare and the health of contract labour. As such, the workmen have been employed in contravention of Section 16, Section 17, Section 18, Section 19 and Section 20 ofthe Contract Labour (Registration and Abolition ) Act , 1970. The principal employer has committed a flagrant breach of this provision. In view of this fact also, the contractor's men cannot be treated as contractual workers but they are tobe treated as the employers men . It was further submitted from the side of the workman that the contract was entered into on 18-12-1986 and it was extended and it prolonged upto 4-5-1993 . As such , the workmen have worked for about 6 years despite the fact that no contractual facilities have been provided to them as mentioned above . As such the principal employer has employed 57 loaders and 11 supervisors against the provisions of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abutilon ) Act, 1970.

My attention was further drawn to 1999 6'Supreme Court cases 439. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the management's contention that in absence of prohibition of contract labour under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition ) Act, it was free to engage contract labour to run the canteen is liable to be rejected and the Hon'ble Apex Court rejected the contention of the management and further held that the Hon'ble High Courts direction to the management to absorb the workmen subject to the conditions specified therein , upheld . According to this judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it has been referred in 2001 ( 7) SCC even if there is no Abolition of Contract Labour by the appropriate Govt. , the contractor's men have been treated as the employees of the employer and the Hon'ble Apex Court has directed to absorb therm . It was submitted from the side of the management that in 20017 SCC , the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the appropriate Government should issue order for abolition of contract labour under Section 10 of the said Act . Since the Central Government has not issued any order, (2001 ) 7 SCC is to be followed . I have gone though the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme In view of this matter also , the claimants cannot be treated to be a contractor's men as there is no valid contract entered into between the contractor and the principal employer . The contract has been renewed for several times and the work is of perennial nature. My attention was drawn to 2001 7 SCC . The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held on page 11 that if the contract is found to be not genuine but a mere camouflage , the so -called contract labour will have to be treated a employees of the principal employer who shall be directed to regularise the services of contract labour in the establishment concerned . The 10390

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)]

trolleymen have all along been used in the airport. There cannot be landing down an flying up of the planes without the trolley- men and the trolleys . Hence, the work is absolutely of perennial nature.

Itwas submitted from the side of the management that the workmen have stated that they had been employedbyM/s. E.A.T.S. and their services have been terminatedby M/ s . E.A.T.S. but this is of no consequences . M/s EATS is only an agency and a camouflage contractor , the principal employer is the Indian Airport Authority and the management is resorting to unfair labour practice in engaging contractor's men for a job of perennial nature . The contractor is a jobber but the real job was taken by the management and payment was made by the management and the workmen were under the control bythemanagement . To sum up there is no valid licence for engaging contract labour and the work is of perennial nature and the claimants worked under the control and guidance of the management as such there ismaster and servant relationship between the Airport Authority and the workmen. As such, according to the pronouncement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to above , the workman are to be absorbed . The workment have worked for 6 years and there is renewal ofcontract . This is also a circumstance , which indicates invariably that there is a permanent need of trolleymen to carry out the work of the International Airport Authority. Some of the workmen had been designated as permanent workman in the list filed which has not been challenged by the management .

In view of the foregoing facts , the inevitable conclusion is that the 11 claimants are the employees ofthe International Airport Authority and they deserve to be absorbed. Since, only 11 workmen along with Shri A. S. Yadav have filed this ID case so the reference is replied in regard to them only. The workmen are the loaders so they are manual workers. It cannot be even presumed that they are sitting idle , as such, 10% back wages in the facts and circumstances of the case will meet the ends of justice .

The reference is replied thus:

Shri A. S. Yadav and 11 others ( as per the authority letter) were the workmen of International Airports Authority of India. The action of the Director of I.A.A.I. NewDelhi in terminating their services w.e.f. 31-05-1993 isnot justified. The workmen deserve to be regularised with 10% of back wages from the date of termination i.e. 31-5-1993. The I.A.A.I. is directed to regularise 11 workmen referred to above within one month from the date of the publication of award . In case of default, the workmen will be entitled to get 15% interest per annum.

The award is given accordingly.

Dt. 8-11-2004

Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above judgement on page 43 as referred to 30 ( 1978) 4 ACC AND 43 ( 1999) 6 SCC 439. As such the Hon'ble Apex Court in 2001 (7 ) page 44 has affirmed the decision of the above two cases of the Hon'ble Supreme Court . This judgement is regarding the appropriate Government who has to abolish Contract labour and he consequences of the abolition of such contract labour. Moreover , the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgement has confirmed the view taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court earlier in cases referred to above and as such , this judgement is not applicable so far as 1978 (4 ) SCC 257 and 1999 ( 6 ) Supreme Court Cases 439 are concerned. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in this judgement has categorically mentioned these two cases a stray reference . Even a reference or an obiter dicta of the Hon'ble Apex Court has the force of law. It has been already established that the contractor is a mere camouflage . As such, 2001 (7) SCC is not applicable in the facts and circumstances ofthe case as the matter was not under direct reference before the Hon'ble Apex Court but the matter under reference was regarding the order of Abolition of Contract Labour and regarding the appropriate Govt . and the consequences thereof. As such the law cited by the management is not applicable . The Hon'ble Supreme Court in IInd LLJ. 1978 has held " The true test may be indicated once again. Where a worker or group of workers produce goods or render services and these goods or services are for the business of another that other is in fact the employer.He has economic control over the workers skill , and continued employment . If he for any reason, chokes off, the worker is virtually laid off. The presence ofthe intermediate contractors with whom alone the workers have immediate or direct relationship ex contractuis is of no consequence when , on lifting the veil or looking at the conspectus of factors governing employment, we discover the naked truth, though draped indifferent paper arrangement , that the real employer is the management, not the immediate contractor . Myriad devices, half hidden in fold after fold of legal form depending on the degree of concealment needed, the type of industry, the local conditions and the like may be resorted to when labour legislation casts welfare obligations on the real employer, based on Arts , 38 , 39 , 42, 43 and 43A of the Constitution . The court must be astute to avoid the mischief and achive the purpose of the law and not be misled by the maya of legal appearances . According to this pronouncement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court , the presence of intermediate contractor with whom alone the workers have immediate or direct relationship ex - contractuis is of no consequence . The real employer is the management and not the immediate contractor and the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the labour legislation casts welfare obligations on the real employer, based on Arts, 38 , 39 , 42, 43 and 43 -A of the constitution and it has been further observed that the court should be astute to avoid the mischief and achieve the purpose of the law and not be misled by the maya of legal appearances . According to this judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court, the principal employer is contravening the Articles of the Indian Constitution referred to above . Trolleys and

R.N. RAI, Presiding Officer 10391

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 30 नवम्बर, 2004

का... 3333.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार इंटरनेशनल एयरपोर्ट ऑथोरिटी ऑफ इंण्डिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नई दिल्ली- II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 29/93 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42012/2/92- आई आर ( विविध) ]

The claimant has filed statement of claim. In the statement of claim , it has been stated that the workman wasappointed through employment exchange as daily rated lower division clerk on temporary basis @ Rs . 17.75 per dayby the employer vide appointment order No. CWC/ CC/I/RPB/ 85 /394 dated 21-6-85 . That though the appointment of the workman was shown in annexure -Ito be for 89 days he continued to be in the employment of the employer with artificial breaks of a day or so and was in continuous service for more than 240 days. It is therefore clear that showing his initial employment for 89 days only inthe appointment letter ( Annexure -I) was malafide.

बी० एम ० डेविड, अवर सचिव

NewDelhi, the 30th November, 2004

That in fact the workman was engaged on work of regular nature of a LDC throughout the period of his employment with the central warehousing corporation till hisillegal andunjustified termination on 18-8-88 . Thatwhile the workman continued to perform his assigned work efficiently diligently and sincerely the employer surreptitiously and in furtherance of his malafide intentions started showing the workman as WAG- II (LDC on daily wages) .

S.O. 3333. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 29/93 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court, NewDelhi - II now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of International Airports Authority of India and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 24-11-04.

[No. L -42012/2/92-IR(M) ]

B. M. DAVID , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

That though his initial appointment as LDC did not require the workman to pass a typing test yet the workman was directed by the Regional Office ofthe employer in the year 1986 to appear in a written and typing test . Though the workman passed the written test conducted by the Regional Office he could not qualify in the typing test on account ofthe fact that the workman was neither mentally prepared for such a test nor he was informed initially that he has to undergo such a test .

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT - II, RAJENDRA BHAWAN , GROUND FLOOR, RAJENDRA PLACE NEWDELHI

PRESIDING OFFICER : R. N. RAI .

I.D. No. 29/93

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Sh. D. K. SINGH

That all of a sudden and without any notice the service of the workman was arbitrarily and illegally terminated vide office order No. CWC/CC/I/Est . 1/88-89/ 1099 dated 18-8-1988 with retrospective effect from February, 1988 on the purported ground that the workman failed to qualify in the typing test which is compulsory. A copy of the said office order is annexed hereto and marked as annexure-III .

C/o Sh . Y. Kr. , E- 17, Mother Dairy, Patparganj , New Delhi

Versus

IAAI

AWARD

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L-42012/2 / 92IR(Misc. ) Central Governmentdt. 18-3-93 has referred the following points for adjudication.

The point runs as hereunder :-

That the employer has recruited fresh daily rated LDC in his establishment without giving an opportunity of re-employment to the workman in utter violation of section 25-H of the ID Act , 1947. That the entire action of the employer right from inception in giving artificial breaks in service showing him as WAG - II rather than LDC and in terminating the services of the workman with retrospective effect being totally arbitrary manifestly illegal nakedly malafide a clear case of unfair labour practice ab - initio void and invalid in the eyes oflaw. The workman challenges the same on the following among other grounds .

The order dated 18-8-88 terminating the service of the workman with retrospective effect from February 1988 is illegal unlawful and invalid whether the employee is "Whether the action of the management of the central warehousing corporation in terminating the services of Sh. D. K. Singh , w.e.f. Feb. 88 is justified ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled" .

10392

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4 , 1926

permanent or temporary. The condition of qualifying the typingtest was not stipulated in the original office order of the appointment of the workman but the typing test qualification has been imposed on him subsequently.

Ithas beenheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Courtthat termination of service of a workman for not qualifying in a test amounts to retrenchment in the case of SantoshGupta V/sStateBank ofPatiala ( 1980 II LLJ 72 (SC) ] . Non payment of retrenchment compensation, and non-compliance of section 25 F- of the ID Act, 1947 entitles the petitioner workman to reinstatement and to a declaration that his termination was unlawful .

he has completed 240 days, he was paid one month's pay byway ofcompensation under Section 25 (F) (D) ofthe ID Act, 1947. He has been given compensation so Section 25(F) ofthe ID Act is not attracted. So far as Section 25 (H) is concerned, he was given opportunities to qualify the typetest but he failed twice. The workman applicant has admitted in his cross -examination that it was correct that hewas given opportunity to appear for typing test before termination and he appeared twice . The test was conducted by outside agencies but he could not qualify. As such , he has been given opportunity to qualify typing test, but he didnot qualify and he has been given compensation so section 25 (F) of the ID Act and Section 25 (H) of the ID Act arenot applicable. The law cited by the workman is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of this case as he hasbeenpaid due compensation and he has been offered opportunities for regularisation.

Thereference is replied thus:-

The action of the management of the Central Warehousing Corporation in terminating the services of Sh. D. K. Singh, w.e.f. Feb. 88 isjustified. The workman is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.

Theaward isgiven accordingly.

Dt. 10-11-2004

R. N. RAI, PresidingOfficer

नई दिल्ली, 30 नवम्बर , 2004

का.आ. 3334- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार ग्रासिम इंडस्ट्रीज लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण ,चेन्नई, के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 109/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-29011/8/2003- आई०आर० (विविध) ]

बी० एम० डेविड, अवर सचिव

NewDelhi , the 30th November , 2004 The management has filed written statement. In the written statement , they have stated that he was engaged on temporary basis as regular recruitment could not be made within time and according to the rules, the knowledge of typing is essential for the post of LDC. Only those candidates who have knowledge of typing according to norms laid down can be regularised. 89 days appointment was given to the workman applicant but it was done so in urgency and it was clearly mentioned in the appointment letter that this post is purely temporary and the workman applicant knew very well that typing knowledge is very essential for the work of LDC . It is obligatory on the part of the candidate for recruitment/appointment as WAG- II LDC that he should be at least Matric with minimum typing speed of30 words per minute . He was given appointment of a daily wager and he did not raise any objection . The work in construction cell is of periodical nature depending onthe construction programme of a particular project , as such, the workman worked for small spells with breaks according to exigencies of the work in the construction cell.He was engaged as daily rated LDC in the construction cell for a short period and his appointment was for a specific purpose . The management knew that he did not know typing. Section 25 (F ) of the ID Act is not attracted as he was given opportunities two times to qualify the typing test but he did qualify the test so he could not be regularised against the rules prescribed for recruitment. The workman applicant has filed rejoinder. In his rejoinder, he has reiterated the averments of his statement ofclaim and the management has denied almost all the paragraphs of the statement of claim .

It was submitted from the side of the workman that the applicant workman has worked from 21-6-1985 to 18-08-1998 which is almost less than 3 years work. He has been given appointment letter on 21-6-1985 for 89 days and again he has been given appointment letter for 89 days , the copics are annexed with the record.

S.O. 3334.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 109/ 2003) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Grasim Industries Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on24-11-2004.

[No. L-2901 1/8/2003 -IR(M)]

B. M. DAVID , Under Secy.

It was submitted from the side of the management that in view ofhis work, in compliance with the HeadOffice letter dt. 11-8-1988 , his services were terminated as he failed to qualify the typing test which is compulsory as per CWC Staff Regulation Act for the recruitment of WAG- II . Since 10393

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भागं II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

ANNEXURE

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

engaged by the Contractors employed in the Grasim Industries Ltd. Cement Division South, Reddipalayam Post, Ariyalur is legal and justified and if not, to what relief the workmen are entitled?"

NewDelhi, the 30th September, 2004

PRESENT:

2. After the receipt of the reference , it was taken on file as I.D. No : 109/2003 and notices were issued to both the parties and both sides entered appearance through their advocates and filed their Claim Statement and Counter Statements respectively.

K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 109/2003

3. The allegations in the Claim Statement are briefly asfollows :-

(Inthe matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) ofSub-section ( 1 ) and Sub- section 2 (A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), between theManagement of Grasim Industries Ltd. Grasim Cement Division(S) and their workmen).

BETWEEN:

: IParty/Claimant

TheGeneral Secretary, TamilManila Congress Thozhil Sangam

AND

: II Party/Management

1. TheManaging Director , Grasim Industries Ltd. , Grasim Cement Divison (S) Reddipalayam Post.

2. Sri S. Gnanaprakasam

3. Sri A. Elavarsan

4. Sri N. K. Sharma & Sons , Contractor

5. Sri V. S. K. Projects Pvt . Ltd. Contractor

Appearance:

Forthe Claimant : M/sA. P. Peter Gunasekaran & B. Dharmaraj , Advocates

For the Respondent : M/ s. Meenakshisundaram & No. 1 Dwarakanatham , Advocates .

For the Respondent Nos . 2 &3 Mrs. M. R. Pramela , Advocate

Forthe Respondent Mrs. D. Veda , Advocate Nos . 4& 5

AWARD

The I Party/Union is working and fighting for the cause andwelfare of the contract workers employed by the II Party/Management . As per the Arbitration Awardthere was specific directions in the award to avoid contract labourers except in loading ( including packing ) and unloading operations as stated by the first wage board and it is also mentioned that such labour shall be made regular departmental empoyee under the employer and made eligible to the same wages , DA bonus and other allowances under Award as other regular employees under the employer. It is further mentioned that they shall be given same wages , bonus and other benefits as are given to regular employees of the company. Therefore , the Respondent/Management is bound to pay bonus and other allowances to the contract workers as paid to regular employees. But in spite of the above said recommendation, the 11 Party/Management is not giving bonus and other benefits to the contract workers and is evading . Even after several representation , the II Party/ Management has not given any assurance. Therefore the Petitioner Union has raised this dispute before the Assistant Labour Commissioner ( Central ). As per the Arbitration Award published by the Central Govt . , the II Party/Management is bound to pay the benefits and other benefits to the contract workers equally as paid to the regular employces. The action of the II Party/Management in not complying with the Arbitration Award is against law and the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 and denying bonus and other benefits to be given to contract workers is not justified. The II Party/Management is also prohibited under Section 25T of the Industrial Disputes Act and is also an offence punishable under sections , 25U & 29 of the Industrial Disputes Act. Hence , the Petitioner Union prays that an award may be passed holding the action of the II Party/Management in not giving bonus and other benefits to the contract employees is in violative of Award and consequently direct the II Party/Managementto pay the same to the members of the Petitioner Union .

The Central Governments Ministry of Labour vide Notification Order No. L-29011 /8 /2003 -IR(M) dated 17-06- 2003 has referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :-

4. As against this, the II Party/Management in its Counter Statement has contended that the reference "Whether the non - payment of bonus @ 20% for the year 2001-2002to the Contract Workmen 10394

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

deserves to be dismissed as not maintainable as against the II Party/Management . The said Arbitration Award was given under Clause 253 that it was in force from January, 1982 to 30-06-1986 as agreed by the parties themselves.

Therefore, the claim made by the Petitioner Union is not maintainable before this forum . This II Party/Management has two units besides the mines where contract labour is used in accordance with Arbitration Award . The main unit is called as Unit No. 1 where the Il Party/Management had hired the services of one contractor namely N. K. Sharma & Sons , the 4th Respondent in this dispute . The said contractor supplies labour only for loading , unloading and packing which are permitted under the arbitration award. Unit No. 2 is a mini cement plant with an installed and licensed capacity of 66,000 tonnes per annum . The Arbitration Award is exempted from the application of the Award as per the provision. In the mines , the II Party/ Management hired the services of V.S.K. Projects Pvt . Ltd. namely the 5th Respondent who employs the contract labours working in mines for road maintenance work . The other two contractors namely S. Gnanaprakasam, 2nd Respondent and Mr. A. Elavarasan, 3rd Respondent herein also supply labourers for the purpose of housekeeping and gardening in the units and the residential colony provided by the II Party /Management to the staff. They are not connected with the work of manufacturing process . Therefore , these contractors will not be covered by Arbitration Award . The workmen who are represented by I Party Union are only workmen employed by contractors and not employees of the Respondent/Management and therefore, there exists no employer - employee relationship between the workmen and the II Party/Management . They were employed by contractors and paid by contractors. The I Party Union's claim for entitlement does not exist either under Award or on facts . Even if they have got any grievance , they can very well proceed against their employers and therefore , no claim can be made against the II Party /Management . This claim is made only to harass the II Party/Management . Hence , the Respondent prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs .

5. The 2nd Respondent in his Counter Statement has adopted the allegations of the 1st Respondent and he further says that the licence was first granted by Ministry of Labour , Government of India under Licence No. L- II/79 / 2000 dated 19-6-2000 for a period of one year for doing the work of labour supply of miscellaneous work in the establishment of II Party/Management . It was renewed upto 18-6-2004 . This Respondent supplies labour for the purpose of house keeping and gardening in units and in the residential colony provided by Il Party/Management to staff. Therefore, this Respondent will not come within the purview of the Award which is the basis for relief claimed by the I Party. Since the claim made by the Petitioner is for

[PART II- SEC . 3( ii) ] the period from 2001-2002 and this Respondent having commenced business only in 2000 and not having made any profit need not pay bonus as claimed by the Petitioner . No averments are made in the Claim Statement to show the entitlement of the contract workers to claim as against this Respondent . Hence , he prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs .

6. The 3rd Respondent in its Counter Statement alleged more or less the similar allegations raised by the II Party/Management.

7. Further, the 4th Respondent in its Counter Statement has more or less raised similar plea as that ofthe 2nd Respondent and it further stated that in a licence grantedbyMinistry of Labour, Government of India under Licence No. L - II/ 155/2000 dated 10-11-2000 for a period of one year for doing the work of packing and loading of cement bags in the establishment of II Party/Management and it was renewed upto 9-11-2004. Hence , the 4th Respondent prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs.

8. Similarly, the 5th Respondent in its Counter Statement has raised more or less similar allegations made by the 4th Respondent and this Respondent also prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs.

9. In these circumstances , the points for my consideration are :-

( i) " Whether the non -payment of bonus @ 20% for the year 2001-2002 to the contract workmen engaged by the contractors employed in the 1st Respondent's Cement Division South , Reddipalayam Post is legal and justified ?" (ii) " To what relief the concerned employees are entitled ?"

Point:-

10. This case is pending before this Tribunal from 17-6-2003 . Even though the parties have filed Claim Statement and Counter Statement respectively, the I Party/ claimant has never appeared before this Tribunal to conduct the case. Even after several reminders to advocates , the I Party/Petitioner have never appeared before this Court . Therefore , the Petitioner was set ex-parte .

11. Under these circumstances , this Tribunal has to look into the question ' whether the concerned employees areentitled for the payment of bonus as alleged by them ?' 12. No document has been produced before this Tribunal and it is not established before this Tribunal that 10395

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.45/2002) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Burn Standard Co. Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 24-11-2004.

[No. L-29011/91/2001 - IR(M) ]

B. M. DAVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

how the concerned employees of the Petitioner Union are entitled for bonus as clamied by them . Though the Petitioner Union alleged that as per the Arbitration Award published in Govt . Notification, the workmen concerned are entitled for bornus , no Award has been producedbefore this Courtto scrutinize the same. Under such circumstances , since the Petitioner has not produced any document nor examined themselves with regard to their entitlement to get bonus , I am not inclined to hold that the concerned employees of the Petitioner Union are entitled to the bonus claimed by them. Under such circumstances , I find this point against the Petitioner.

Point No. 2:----

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

The next point to be decided in this case to what relief the concerned employees are entitled ?

Tuesday the 21st September, 2004

PRESENT:

K. JAYARAMAN; PresidingOfficer

13. In view of my finding that the Petitioner has not established before this Tribunal with regard to their entitlement to get bonus from the II Party/Management , I find the Petitioner is not entitled to any relief as claimed by them.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 45/2002 14. Thus , the reference is disposed of accordingly.

(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him , corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 30th September, 2004. )

K. JAYARAMAN , Presiding Officer

(Inthe matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) ofsub- section ( 1 ) and sub -section 2 ( A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947( 14 of 1947) , between the Management ofBurn Standard Company Ltd. Salem and theirworkmen)

Witnesses Examined :---

BETWEEN:

None

On either side

: 1 Party/Workman

Sri P. Samiappan

Documents Marked:

AND

Nil

On either side

: Il Party/ Management नई दिल्ली, 30 नवम्बर, 2004

The General Manager, Burn Standard Company Ltd. Salem

APPEARANCE :

For the Workman : M/ s . S. Arunachalam & C. Regurajan ,, Advocates

For the Management : Mr. M.R. Raghavan , Advocate .

का.आ. 3335.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बर्न स्टैंडर्ड. कं. लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 45/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

AWARD

[सं. एल-29011/91/2001 - आई.आर. (विविध ) ]

बी० एम ० डेविड, अवर सचिव

The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide Notification No. L-29011/91/2001 - IR (M) dated 06-05-2002 hasreferred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal foradjudication:-

New Delhi , the 30th November, 2004

"Whether the action of the management of Burn Standard Co. Ltd. , Salem in terminating the services of the workman Sri P. Samiappan , P.F. S.O. 3335.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central

3684 GI/04 42 10396

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926 .

No. 4311 is justified ? If not, to what relief is he entitled to ? "

2. After the receipt of the reference , it was taken on file as 1.D. No. 45/2002 and notices were issued to both the parties and both the parties entered appearance through their advocates and filed their Claim Statement and Counter Statement respectively.

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

Therefore, the findings of the Enquiry Officer is perverse and on the basis of the perverse findings , the Respondent/ Management has issued 2nd show cause notice and the management has rejected the contention of the Petitioner in his reply and passed an order of dismissal against the Petitioner on 9-9-2000 . Even the appeal preferred by the Petitioner before the Managing Director was rejected on 17-10-2000 . The enquiry conducted by the Respondent/ Management was not fair and proper and the principles of natural justice has been violated . The Vigilance Officer who have conducted the preliminary enquiry has been made the Presenting Officer in respect of the first part of the enquiry and as witness , he was allowed to cross examine the witnesses . The Presenting Officer has been allowed to cross examine the management witnesses too without their being treated as hostile witnesses . The management witnesses were threatened by the officers . The findings of theEnquiry Officer is not based on proper appreciation of evidence of the witnesses . The second part of the charge is also not fair and proper. The enquiry conducted was not on principles of natural justice . Therefore , the findings of the Enquiry Officer is totally perverse and based on conjectures and surmises . In any event , the punishment of dismisal awarded to the Petitioner is highly disproportionate .Hence, for all these reasons , the Petitioner prays that an award may be passed directing the Respondent to reinstate him into service with back wages , continuity of service and other attendant benefits .

The Petitioner was working as Mines Maistry in the Respondent/Management. While he was acting as maistry , he was chargesheeted . The allegation of the Respondent/ Management is that they have received a anonymous petition sent in the name of A.K.R. Mines workers without any date and signature , which contains the allegations to the effect that the Petitioner has received bribe from some of the employees of the Respondent/Management to get some undue advantage by illegal means . The Respondent's security and vigilance officer has enquired the persons who alleged to have given bribe and it was alleged that one Mr. Muthu and his wife Mrs. Chinnaponnu gave bribe of Rs . 21.000 to the Petitioner to effect their voluntary retirement . Secondly, one Mrs. Arisiammal alleged to have given Rs. 2000 to the Petitioner to get a job for her sister's son Mr. Palanichamy against the rules of the company. Thirdly, one Mr. Govindan alleged to have given Rs . 10,000 to the Petitioner to get him pecuniary benefits arising out his voluntary retirement. The Petitioner submitted his explanation to the charges levelled against him , but it was not accepted and domestic enquiry was ordered to be conducted against the Petitioner. Though the management as examined nine witnesses and also marked 11 documents in support of their claim, the management has not. established the charges levelled against the Petitioner. But, on the other hand . the Enquiry Officer accepted the hearsay evidence of the witnesses and has come to a conclusion that the charges framed against the Petitioner has been proved. While the said enquiry was pending the Petitioner was again issued with charge memo dated 24-5-2000 on the allegation that the Petitioner has misused his position as mines maistry and gave 15 workers of his union excess incentives of Rs . 23,400 for the months of October, November and December , 1999 for the production not given by them. Even for this charge also the Petitioner has given his explanation and it was also not accepted by the Respondent/Management. The enquiry was conducted with the biased evidence . Even in this enquiry also , the Enquiry Officer held that the charges were proved against the Petitioner. The findings of the Enquiry Officer in both the cases are perverse and evidence of some witnesses refuted during their cross examination of witnesses and this was also defended by the management representative.

4. As against this , the Respondent in its Counter Statement has contended that no doubt the Petitioner was employed as maistry. During his employment with the Respondent he has indulged in serious and grave misconducts , hence charges were framed on 14-2-2000 and 24-5-2000. Since the explanation submitted by the Petitioner was not satisfactory and acceptable to the charges levelled against him, two individual enquiries were ordered to enquiry into the charges levelled against him. The Petitioner participated in the enquiries fully and enquiries were conducted in accordance with principles of natural justice and all opportunities were afforded to the Petitioner to place his defence in the enquiry . In the two enquiries, it was found ultimately that the charges were proved through reportsdated 20-5-2000 and 23-8-2000. The excess payment of incentives made to 15 workmen resulting in financial loss to the company, hence, the authorities found that the charges framed against him have been proved and they have issued 2nd show cause notice and after gone through the explanation given by the Petitioner which was neither satisfactory nor acceptable , they have come to the conclusion todismiss the Petitioner from service . Further, theRespondent/Management had also lost its faith and confidence on the Petitioner who was employed with them in a responsible position as maistry in mines . Hence , they 10397

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/ पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

have passed an order of dismisal from service. The appeal preferred by the Petitioner was also rejected by an order dated 23-11-2000. The Petitioner was dismissed from service for the misconduct committed by him, which were proved in a properly held domestic enquiry. The misconducts committed by the Petitioner were grave and serious in nature and therefore , the punishment of dismissal was warranted and it cannot be said to be disproportionate to the gravity of the misconducts . The allegation of victimisation is baseless and misleading . Further, it cannot be said that the Enquiry Officer is wrong in accepting the hearsay evidence . Further, it is a well settled law that Enquiry Officer is not bound to follow the provisions of Evidence Act . Therefore, the findings ofthe Enquiry Officer are just , proper and not perverse and based on evidence given by the witnesses . It is false to allege that Presenting Officer has been permitted to cross examine management witnesses, without treating him as hostile . The Presenting Officer has elicited the required evidence from the witnesses by way of re-examination only and he is in law bound to do so. Hence , for all these reasons , the Respondent prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs.

5. In these circumstances , the points for my consideration are-

(1) " Whether the action of the Respondent/ Management in terminating the services of the Petitioner is justified ?"

(ii) "To what relief, the Petiotioner is entitled ?"

Point No. 1 :-

6. It is admitted case ofboth sides that the Petitioner was employed as maistry in the Respondent/Management and the Respondent has received anonymous letter alleging that the Petitioner has received bribe for undue consideration and a preliminary enquiry was conducted by the Vigilance Officer of the Respondent/Management and after investigation , it was found that three persons have alleged to have given bribe and a charge was framed against the Petitioner. Subsequently, second charge was also framed against the Petitioner on the ground that he has misused his position as Mines Maistry and for 15 workers of the union, he gave excess incentive to the tune ofRs . 72,600/- for the months of October, November and December , 1999 for the production not given by them . In this case , the Respondent/Management has filed two sets of documents with regard to the charges framed against the Petitioner and also the findings given by the Enquiry Officer and orders passed in that enquiry as Ex.M1 and M2. Both sides have not examined any oral evidence with regard to these allegations .

7. On behalf of the Petitioner, the learned counsel for the Petitioner has submitted written arguments , wherein

it is alleged that on the sets of two charges , the first set contains three allegations . The first allegation is that the Petitioner has taken bribe amount of Rs . 21,000/- from one Sri Muthu and his wife Smt . Chinnaponnu that he could get permission for retirement of Muthu and his wife Smt . Chinnaponnu under voluntary retirement scheme by giving the amount to higher officials . The 2nd allegation is that thePetitioner has received Rs . 2000/- from Smt. Arisiammal in the guise ofgetting fitter trainee post in the company for her sister's son Mr. Palanichamy, contrary to practice of appointing trainees only direct legal heirs of the workers . The third allegation is that the Petitioner has received bribe ofRs. 10,000/- from one Mr. Govindan that he will help him ingetting retirement under voluntary retirement scheme and thus , he alleged to have committed misconducts . In the second set of charge , it is alleged that the Petitioner haswritten excess production than the actual one and has become cause for the loss of Rs . 72,6000/- to the company, as itwas given as incentive to 15 workers during the months ofOctober, November & December, 1999. It is also alleged that the Petitioner has failed to collect norms cards for the above mentioned months , even after getting specific instruction to that effect from Mr. Mani in order to cover his misconduct. On behalf of the Petitioner, it is alleged that though the management has alleged that in mines nearly 70 to 80 labourers alleged to have given bribe to the Petitioner, in the investigation the Vigilance Officer has obtained three statements from three persons , who have alleged to have given bribe as per the first charge. It is also contended on behalf of the Petitioner that the past record of the Petitioner is not a tainted one and it was appeared that he was a trade union activist and he was the Vice President of the FITU union. It is further alleged that since theEnquiry Officer and the Presenting Officer and also the witnesses examined in that case are employees of the Respondent/Management , who have framed charges against the Petitioner and since they were employees of the Respondent/Management only to help the management and as an act ofvictimisation , the management has taken this stand . Though the Enquiry Officer has given a finding that the charges framed against the Petitioner were proved against him in the first set , the findings of the Enquiry Officer is perverse as it is not supported by any oral or documentary evidence. Regarding the bribe alleged to have given byMr.Muthu and Smt . Shinnaponnu , the complaint under Ex. M5 dated 24-1-2000 has not been proved by the Respondent/Management . Further, the said persons have alsogiven a letter under Ex. W2 in which they have retracted from the contention mentioned in Ex.M5 . No one either Mr. Muthu or Smt . Chinnaponnu or a person who has written the letter namely Mr. Venkatesh adduced any oral evidence before the enquiry. On the other hand , the management has marked Ex.M12 purported to be written by one Mr. Subramani , who is the employce of management stating 10398

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA 4, 1926

PART II- SEC. 3 (ii )| that the Petitioner has requested Mr. Muthu and Mrs. Chinnaponnu not to come forward to give oral evidence against him. The Petitioner has objected for marking these documents, but any how, the Enquiry Officer with a pre- determined mind has marked the same and the Enquiry Officer should not have accepted the letter of Mr. Subramani and it shows he is perverse and also having pre determined mind.

MW1 of the management clearly stated that in their cross examination that he does not know the working pattern of mines fully and he has also stated that he has seen lot of difference between the production account of stock builder diary and norms book and incentive books and such is the stand of the management witness , the Enquiry Officer should not have believed one portion of the witness that the Petitioner has given incentive to workers of his union tothe tune ofRs . 72,600/- . Further, the management witness MW5 & MW6 when they narrated the exact pattern of taking account of production in mines , who are the immediate involving persons, the Enquiry Officer is wrong in rejecting their evidences and this clearly shows the perversity of the findings of the Enquiry Officer. Further , the allegation against the Petitioner that he failed to collect norm cards of October, November and December, 1999 has not been provedby the management and further MW6 Mr. Vijayakanthan has clearly stated that the Petitioner was not present when the so called allegation made against the Petitioner, hence the Enquiry Officer has given a perverse finding that the charges were proved against the Petitioner.

8. But , on the other hand , the learned counsel for theRespondent contended that even at the time of marking the document, the management wanted to examine Mr. P. Subramani , but on the other hand , the Petitioner has requested the Enquiry Officer to mark documents without examining the said witnesses and he has no objection for marking the document on the side of the Respondent/ Management. The learned counsel for the Respondent further contended that the enquiry was conducted totally ina fair and proper manner and domestic Tribunal need not be allergic to hearsay evidence and the Supreme Court and High Court have held that the Tribunal like Industrial Tribunal and Labour Courts need not discard the hearsay evidence and need not bound to follow the provisions of Evidence Act in the domestic enquiry.

12. As against this , the learned counsel for the Respondent contended that the Enquiry Officer after scrutinishing the evidences given by the management and also the evidences given on the side of the Petitioner has come to a conclusion that the management has clearly established the fact that the Petitioner was the root cause for mismanagement and also for over-payment of incentive to the union members . Under such circumstances , it cannot be said that the findings given by the Enquiry Officer is perverse. Further, the Enquiry Officer has clearly stated the reasons for not accepting the evidence given on the side of the Petitioner. Under such circumstances , at no stretch of imagination, it can be said that the Enquiry Officer is pre - determined for supporting the case of the Respondent/Management .

9. Again, the learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that with regard to the allegation of Smt . Arisiammal , there are lot of contradictions in the evidence of Mrs. Arisiammal and her sister's son Mr. Palanichamy. But, the Enquiry Officer has come to a different conclusion even though there are lot of contradictions in the evidence ofSmt . Arisiammal and Mr. Palanichamy with regard to payment of Rs . 2000 /- to the Petitioner and therefore, the findings given by the Enquiry Officer is perverse . Further, itisargued on behalf of the Petitioner with regard to third allegation that the bribe alleged to have been given byMr. Govindan, in his evidence , the said Mr. Govindan has deposed that he did not give any money to the Petitioner and further he added that his signature was obtainedfrom him without reading out the statement in Ex . M4 . But, the Enquiry Officer has come to a different conclusion which clearly proves that he has pre-determined in this case and has given a perverse finding.

10. But , as against this , the learned counsel for the Respondent contended that the Enquiry Officer has given. reasons for not accepting the evidence of Mr. Govindan and has come to a different conclusion which cannot be said that his findings is perverse.

11. The learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that with regard to second set of charge , the said charge has not been proved with adequate oral or documentary evidence . The Presenting Officer and witness

13. It is further alleged on behalf of the Petitioner that even though the Petitioner has submitted his explanation with summary of different entries in the stock builder diary, norms notes for all the three months namely October, November, & December, 1999 which clearly shows that there was more production submitted to the company than the entries in the above diary, note book and which wasmarked as Ex. W4 and it clearly proves that there was excess submission of production 91 tones , 73 tones and 87 tones for the months of October, November , and December, 1999 respectively. But, the Enquiry Officer has given a findingto the effect that these entries were made in acquiring time as cubic feet out for final calculation . Which was made as tonnage. Therefore , this itself has been accounted for the side of the company and the finding is perverse and 10399.

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Witnesses Examined :-

None

Oneither side

Documents Marked : -

without any justification and even all the workers who gave evidence on the side of the Petitioner denied receiving ofany excess incentives , the Enquiry Officer has not acted fairly but bent on proving the charges by extraneous consideration .

For the I party /Workman Nil

For the II Party/Management : -

Ex . No. Date Description

MI 20-05-00 Xerox copy of the enquiry proceedings

M2 23-08-00 Xerox copy of the enquiry proceedings

नई दिल्ली, 30 नवम्बर, 2004 14. As against this , the Respondent contended that even though the Petitioner contended that the finding was given on extraneous consideration, it is not alleged what is extraneous consideration given to or taken by the Enquiry Officer, hence it is made as an afterthought and only to prejudice the mind of this Tribunal , Though the Petitioner alleged that Petitioner's witnesses have given supporting evidence on behalf of the Petitoner , the Enquiry Officer has clearly stated for what reasons , he is not believing the evidence given on the side of the Petitioner. Under such circumstances , it cannot be said that the finding givenby the EnquiryOfficer is perverse or without any justification, Further, though the Petitioner alleged that he was victimized, he has not established this fact with any satisfactory evidence. under such circumstances , it cannot be said that the domestic enquiry held against the Petitioner is without any justification or without following the naturaljustice.

का.आ. 3336.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का(14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैं . मद्रास सीमेंटस लि. 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 181/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -29025/16/2004- आई.आर. ( विविध ) ]

बी. एम . डेविड, अवर सचिव

NewDelhi , the 30th November, 2004 15. I find much force in the contention of the leamed counsel for the Respondent because though the Petitioner alleged that the Enquiry Officer has given a perverse finding, the Petitioner has not established before this Tribunal that the findings given by the Enquiry Officer is perverse. Further as contended by the learned counsel for the Respondent, the Petitioner has not established the fact ofvictimisation by the Respondent/Management . On the other hand , the Enquiry Officer's findings clearly established that the charges have been proved by the materials produced before him . Under such circumstances , I am not inclined to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the findings given by the EnquiryOfficer and the punishment imposed on the basis ofdomestic enquiry are without any justification. A such, I find this point in favour of the Respondent/Management .

S.O. 3336. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref.. No. 181 / 2003) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- LabourCourt , Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s . Madras Cements Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on29-11-04 .

Point No. 2 :-

[No. L- 29025/ 16/2004 -IR(M) ]

B. M. DAVID , Under Secy.

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

ANNEXURE

16. Inview of my foregoing finding that the findings ofthe domestic enquiry is justified , I find the Petitioner is not entitled to any relief as claimed by him.

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD 17. The reference is answered accordingly.

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

Dated the 19th day of October, 2004 (Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him , corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 21st September, 2004. )

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C.I.D. NO. 181/2003 K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer 10400

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

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

Sri Kantheti Ramakrishna Vara Prasad,

S/ o K. Venkateswarlu ,

C/o A. Rajendra Babu ,

H. No.6-3-596/60 (780) ,

Venkataramana Colony,

Khairatabad,

... Petitioner

Hyderabad.

AND

attend before the medical officer when the applicant was suffering from Jaundice . Applicant sent a telegram and also leave letter through his wife for extension of leave but theofficers ofthe Respondent want only ignored the same inthis regard and various other allegations are made against the enquiry and it was said that on the assurance of the witnesses examined before the Enquiry Officer, that the Petitionerwillbe let offwith minor punishment, he signed some more blank papers and ultimately he was removed from service which is illegal, arbitrary and he is entitled for reinstatement with back wages and the dismissal order dated8-2-2001 maybe set aside by ordering his reinstatment with back wages and consequential benefits .

TheVice-President (MFG) ,

M/s . Madras Cements Limited,

Kumaraswamy Raja Nagar ,

Jaggaiahpet Taluk ,

Krishan District .

...Respondent

APPEARANCES :

Forthe Petitioner :M/s . A. Rajendra Babu ,

G. Venkateswara Rao,

K. Sivaramprasad &

P. Rameswara Prasad , Advocates

For the Respondent : M/ s . Raj Kishan Mehra &

B.Y. Narayana Reddy, Advocates

AWARD

This is a case taken under Sec . 2A ( 2) of the I.D. Act , 1947 in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/ s . Cotton Corporation of India and two others .

3. A counter was filed stating that the Petitioner was working as a dresser in the dispensary of the Respondent company which was catering medical services totheir workmen and their families. Since there is only one dresser, his absence will dislocate the whole work of the dispensary putting the patients to great hardship . The Petitioner applied for leave of absence for two days on 14th and 15th Februrary, 2000 and extended his leave for threemoredays from 16-2-2000 to 19-2-2000 . That he was suffering from Jaundice and the Petitioner was habitual absentee himself previously also to the Petitioner asking him toappear before the company's Cheif Medical Officer for the medical check - up. The Petitioner neither appeared before the ChiefMedical Officer for the medical ckeck up . The Petitioner neither appeared before the Chief Medical Officer nor he attended for his duties on 20-2-2000 . So the Petitioner was unauthorizedly absent from duty without obtaing prior permission. in the past also he was absent unauthorizedly for three times and departmental enquiries conducted the domestic enquiry for unauthorized absenteeism and after receiving the enquiry reports , since the Petitioner apologized he was let off with minor punishment. Unauthorized absence without prior permission has been habitual to the Petitioner. For his unauthorized absence for the period from 16-2-2000 to 19-2-2000, the Respondent issued a show cause notice to the Petitioner dated 26-2-2000 . The Respondent also kept him under suspension for the charges levelled against him . The Petitioner submitted his reply on 25-3-2000 which was not convincing.hence , an enquiry was conducted following theprinciples of natural justice and the Petitioner was found guilty of the charges . Hence , a second show cause notice dated 26-9-2000 was issued to him proposing the action . ThePetitioner submitted his reply dated 6-10-2000 and as there was no valid reason the Petitioner was dismissed from service we.f. 7-2-2001 by order dated 8-2-2001 . A statement of accounts in full and final settlement were served on the Petitioner . On 25-8-2001 he refused to accept the same. The allegation of the Petitioner that he was asked to sign.on some blank papers and he reported for duty on 21-3-2000 , all were false . hence , he is not entitled foranyrelief.

4. The Petitioner's counsel conceded by filing a memo that the domestic enquiry is validly conducted.

2. The brief facts as mentioned in the petition are : Thatthe Petitioner joined the Respondent organization as per proceedings dated 4-4-88 as dresser and has been working continuously to the utmost satisfaction of his superiors . On 26-9-2000 he was issued with a charge sheet stating. " Despite our earlier show cause notices served to you and your assurance of regular attendance , you still continue to remain absent off and on, in sheer disregard to your responsibilities " . That due to ill - health he applied for two days leave on 14-2-2000 and 15-2-2000 . He was treated by Dr. V. Satish and found that he was suffering from Jaundice Hence , he applied for extension of leave on 16-2-2000 . Subsequently, after recovery of illness he went to report for duty.on 21-3-2000 and officers did not permit him to join. Officers asked the applicant to sing on some blanck papers for reconsideration of his employment and the applicant signed on blank papers . Since then , he was waiting , but an enquiry was conducted . The Management had no right or authority to issue telegram on 17-2-2000 to 10401

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

Hence , arguments were hear under Sec. 11A about the quantum ofpunishment by both the counsels for Petitioner and Respondent.

asking him to come over and report to the C.M.O. he did not do so . The Respondent counsel also relied on a case reported in theHigh Court of Punjab and Haryana, wherein itwas held that once workman was found to have committed for and domestic enquiry was conducted , Labour Court could not interfere with quantum of punishment by invoking Sec . 11A. Hence, he prays that the petition may be dismissed.

7. Itmay be noted that the previous enquiry also for about 6 days absence , and here he was placed under suspension . No doubt , his track record is not up to the mark, i.e , he has been absenting himself frequently. Not only that it is also stated that he was once warned for drunkenness also. So however , the judgements relied by the Learned Counsel for the Respondent about defrauding theManagement about some issuing tickets by a conductor orPunjab Roadways where the Petitioner had intentionally issued tickets of less denomination to the passengers and causing loss to the Management to the tune of Rs.32.45 paise. So that is not applicable here. If the Petitioner was absent for longer period , it would have found place in the counter. In fact nothing is mentioned about 9 warnings etc. , in the counter. So what is not pleaded in the counter cannot be relied on . The petitioner is aged about 42 years . He has put in 12 years of service and he has been dismissed from 7-2-2001 vide order dated 8-2-2001 . Hence , the order dated 8-2-2001 dismissing the Petitioner from service from 7-2-2001 is hereby set aside and an award is passed in the following terms: " The petitioner shall be reinstated within 30 days from the publication of this award on the last pay drawn . His services from 1988 to 7-2-2001 shall be calculated for the purposes of terminal benefits and the order dated 8-2-2001 dismissing him from services w.e.f. 7-2-2001 is hereby set aside . He will not be entitled for any back wages and the service from 8-2-2001 till he is reinstated will not be counted for any purpose . I think the said punishment is sufficient, therefore I do not propose any other alternate punishment.

Award passed accordingly . Transmit .

5. It is argued by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner originally applied for leave on 14-2-2000 and 15-2-2000, in this two days he was treated by Dr. V. Satish and another and as he was suffering from Jaundice, he extended leave by further three days and after recovery from Jaundice on 21-3-2000 he was not permitted to join in duty and advised to sign on some blank papers. He further submits that after all he has put in 12 years of service and the dismissal is too harsh a punishment . Therefore he submits that he may be reinstated. He also relies on 1997 ( 1 ) LLJ High Court of Rajasthan page 241 , wherein held that " Reference by the State Government after a long lapse of 12 years would not really serve as an alternative remedy-it was manifest that it was a single act of continued absence on the part of the writ petitioner- He had been writing letters to his employer praying for leave and/ or extension thereof" . The removal was set aside and a minor punishment was given to him of stoppage of three increments with cumulative effect . He also relied on 1996 (7) Supreme Court cases page 634 , wherein it was held that , "Constable absenting himself for one day in each of three different years such absence held, does not amount to regular absence negating efficiency-discharge , improper-hence , reinstatement without back wages directed however, liable to action in future if he absents without permission for more than one day in a single year " . He also relief on 2004 (4) Supreme Court cases page 560 , wherein it was held that , "Police constable absence of more than two months on medical grounds with sanction of leave---held , cannot be regarded as a grave misconduct . He was reinstated " . He also relied on the judgement of 1999 (5 ) ALD page 735 of High Court of A.P. , wherein it was held that, " Labour Court is duty bound to reappreciate the evidence even in cases where the workman files a memo conceding as to the validity of the domestic inquiry " . And he relied on various other judgements and prayed that the Petitioner may be reinstated with all attendant benefits .

Dictatedto Kum. K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 19th day of October , 2004 .

E. ISMAIL , Presiding Officer Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for the Witnesses examined for the Petitioner Respondent

NIL

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

6. The Learned Counsel for the Respondent submits that in 12 years the Petitioner had 9'warnings. 7 for absenteeism , one for drunkenness , and one for another cause and besides this there was two other domestic enquiries, one held in 1996 where during the year 1996 he was unauthorizedly absent for six days and then he was held guilty. Similarly in 1998 also he was issued with a charge sheet for habitual absenteeism without leave , wherein all his previous warning letters were marked and ultimately the finat enquiry for which the charge sheet was issued and the charges were proved against him and he was dismissed from service and it is an essential service , he is a dresser working in the dispensary, what makes him run to the private doctors for his treatment. In spite of 10402

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

नई दिल्ली, 30 नवम्बर, 2004

10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 has referred this dispute vide order . No. L-40012 /39 / 99 / IR (DU ) dated 26th July 1999 , for adjudication on the following schedule.

SCHEDULE

का.आ. 3337.-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/श्रम न्यायालय , बंगलौर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 89/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 30-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

"Whether the Telecom District Manager, Kolar is legal and justified in refusing employment to Shri A. Nagaraj ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?"

[सं० एल -40012/39/99 - आई.आर. ( डी.यू. ) ]

कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 30th November , 2004

S.O. 3337.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 89/99) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour- Court.Bangalore , now 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 30-11- 2004..

[No. L-40012 /39/ 99 - IR (DU)]

KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT

2. The case ofthe first party workman , as made out, in the Claim Statement briefly, stated is that he was appointed by the Second Party Management as the Casual Mazdoor in Coaxial Cable Project with effect from 24-5-1985 and was discharging permanent nature ofwork continuously till 25-2-1988 . He once again worked from 1-5-90 to 30-10-1995 and thereafter he was stopped from work as per the instructions of the higher authorities ; that the action of the Second Party management in retrenching the services of the workman w.e.f. 1-11-1995 is illegal , unjust , unfair and in violation of provisions of Section 25F (A & B ) ofthe ID Act so also Section 25N of the said act; that the action of the management in retrenching his services illegally amounts to a clear case of unfair labour practice and an act ofvictimization and so also against the principles of natural justice and fair play; that the workman raised an Industrial dispute before the jurisdictional Conciliation Officer andconciliation proceedings ended in failure due to hostile and non co -operative attitude of the management and therefore the present reference . He requested the court to pass an award in declaring the action of the management asillegal and directing it to reinstate him in service with continuity of service and full backwages and all other consequential benefits .

" SHRAM SADAN" , III MAIN , III CROSS , II PHASE , TUMKUR ROAD , YESHWANTHPUR, BANGALORE -560022

Dated 8th November, 2004

PRESENT :

Shri A.R. Siddiqui Presiding Officer

C.R. No. 89/99

IParty

IIParty

Shri A. Nagaraja .

Veerandanahalli Village . Gowribidanur Taluk ,

Distt . Kolar-563101

TheTelecom District Manager, Telecommunication Depart- ment . Kolar District. Kolar-563101

AWARD

1. The Central Government by exercising the powers conferred by clause ( d ) of Sub- section 2A of the Section

3. The management by its Counter Statement whilc denying the case of the workinan that he was working with it since 24-5-1985 , however , admitted that the workman worked with the management from May 1990 to 24th October 1995 and he did not work with the management regularly and that he used to remain absent and take breaks inhis service without intimation to the management . It was contented that the workman was a casual mazdoor engaged on daily wages and the work he was discharging was not permanent in nature but was casual , seasonal and intermittent in nature . While denying the contention that the workman was refused work it was contended that he himself did not turn up for duty and his whereabouts were not known to the management till he filed a written complaint . However, due to the ban on recruitment by the Department of Telecommunication , the management was not able to provide any sort of casual work to the workman . Itwas contended that the workman was irregular and was unauthorisedly absent from duty and his whereabouts were not known to the management therefore , he having failed to attend the work regularly cannot make an allegation that [ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

the management has not complied with the provisions of Section 25F ( a & b ) and Section 25N of the ID Act and in the result it was a case of unfair labour practice or a case of victimization as alleged by the workman ; as there was a ban on recruitment in engaging casual mazdoor for work, managment was unable to provide work to the workman in the light of the guidelines and instructions issued by the department of telecommunication and he was also not provided with the work there being no casual work in existence . It was further contented that the workman has not fulfilled the conditions as laid down for temporary status for casual mazdoors as per the instructions issued by the department vide letter No. 269-4 /93 - STN - II dated 17-12-1993 in as much as he remained absent from duty since October 1995. Therefore , the action taken by the management is legal andjustified and the reference is liable to be dismissed.

4. During the course of the trial the management on its behalf examined one witness as MWI and got marked 3 documents at Ex. MI to M3 whereas the workman examined himself as WW1 and got marked 2 documents Ex. WI & W2 . Ex, M1 is the reply dated 12-9-98 given by the Telecom District Manager , Kolar on behalf of the management in response to the notice dated 3-8-98 issued by the Conciliation Officer on the complaint filed by the workman . Ex . M2 is the attested copy of the statement for the period and number of the days the workman worked with the management and Ex. M3 is the above said notice dated 3-8-98 issued by the Conciliation Officer to the management . Ex . W1 is said to be the work book pertaining to the workman for having worked with the management from 24-5-1985 to 15-2-1988 and from 1-5-90 to 30-10-95 showing M.R. No. and number of days and Ex . W2 is the conciliation failure report .

5. I would like to refere the statement of MWI and WW1 in their examination in Chief as well as cross examination as found relevant and necessary.

6. Learned counsel for the management vehemently argued that there are no documents produced by the workman to show that he worked continuously for a period of240 days in a calendar year of 1995 and therefore , the testimony of WW1 is not sufficient and legal to suggest thathis services were illegally terminated or retrenched in violation of provisions of Section 25F (a & b ) of the ID Act . it was contented that Ex . WI said to be a work book produced by the first party does not disclose that it pertained to him and that it was issued by the management . Hecontended that the first party was being engaged on daily wage basis as a Casual Mazdoor whenever the work was available with the management . He contended that the first party himself remained absent from duty and his whereabouts were not known till he raised the dispue in 3684 G1/04-43

10403

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/पौष 4, 1926

the Conciliation Officer and thereafter he could not be provided with the work as the casual work was not available and so also in the light of the instructions given by the department oftelecommunication not to engage any casual worker. Therefore, question of reinstatement of the workman whowasjust a casual worker not appointed in accordance with rules and against permanent vacancy, does not arise. Whereas, the learned counsel for the workman argued that there is sufficient , legal and satisfactory evidence brought on record not only in the statement of the workman but also in the from of documentary evidence at Ex. W1 & Ex . M2 and in the very admissions made by MW1 to show that the workman was in the service of the management right from the year 1985 till the month of October 1995 and that he was refused work from 1-1-1995 without any notice or intimation and therefore , the workman having worked with the management for a period of not less than 10 years and having worked continuously for a period of 240 days in a calendar year , immediately, preceding the termination ofhis services without compliance of provisions of Section 25F(a&b) tent amounts to a case of retrenchment as defined under Section 2 (00 ) of the ID Act and since there was no compliance of Section 25 F( a&b ), the retrenchment amounts to illegal termination and is liable to be set aside as illegal and void abinitio and therefore , the workman is entitled to reinstatement with backwages and continuity of service and other benefits .

7. After having gone through the records 1 find substance in the arguments advanced for the workman that the refusal of work to him by the management w.e.f. 1-11-1995 tant amounts to illegal retrenchment . The workman in his statement before this tribunal has sworn to the effect that he worked with the management from the year 1985 to 1988 in the Bangalore Division in Coaxial Cable Project and from the year 1990 to 1995 he worked in the said capacity at Kolar department of the management . He further stated that he worked continuously up till 30-10-1995 and he was refused the work from 1-11-1995 . This statement of the workman has remained to be unshaken in his cross examination for the management . However, as contended for the management there is no documentary evidence pressed into service on behalf of the workman for the period he said to have worked from the year 1985 to 1988. The work book at Ex. WI ofwhich support was taken by the workman to show that he worked during the said period does not help his case as it does not disclose thathe worked in Coaxial Cable Project at Bangalore as stated by him. This book refers to the place as Cannanore , which is not the case of the workman. Now, the next question to be considered would be whether the workman worked with the management from the year 1990 till 30th October 1995 and that during the year 1995 he worked continuously for a period of 240 days immediately preceding termination 10404

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) |

being available with the management and that there is a ban from the department not to take services on dailywage basis it will not be in the interest of justice to burden the management with the reinstatment ofthe workman. Coming to the relief of the backwages, the termination of the workman having been held illegal , in normal course he should have been paid full backwages from the date of termination till the date of the award to be passed in his favour. First of all he cannot be paid backwages for the period from the date of termination till the date he raised thedispute with the Conciliation Officer . He was terminated as seen above w.e.f. 1-1-1995 and whereas he appoached the Conciliation Officer raising the dispute in the year 1998 . From Ex . M3 which is the notice copy issued to the management calling upon it to attend the conciliation proceedings it is revealed that the notice was issued to the management in the month ofAugust 1988 and therefore , it can be presumed that somewhere in the month of August or a month prior thereto the workman approached the Conciliation Officer. Therefore, from 1-11-1995 till August 1988 no backwages can be granted to the workman particularly there being no explanation offered on his behalf as to why he did not raise the dispute with the Conciliation Officer earlier to the month of August 1988. Now the next question to be decided would be whether he could get backwages from the month of September 1998 till the date of award in question. The workman in the normal course could not have been denied full backwages for the aforesaid period unless it was established by the management that he was gainfully employed during the said period . The management witness , MWI in his deposition before this Tribunal no where uttered a single word with regard to the gainful employment or otherwise ofthe workman when he was away from the service of the management during the said period . Likewise , it was also incumbent on the part of the workman to disclose before this tribunal as to whether he was gainfully employed or not when he was not in the service of the management during the above said period. Very strangely, the workman whowas examined before this tribunal was conspicuously silent on this aspect of the case . Therefore , there being lack of evidence both on the part of the retrenchment compensation to be paid to the workman and salary to be paid in lieu of the notice of one month and also taking into account the fact that the workman just worked as Casual Mazdoor earning daily wages , it appears to be a fit case to pay him certain amount in lumsum as compensation for the loss of his services to the management and it appcars to me that ends of justice will meet if he is ordered to be paid a sum ofRs . 75,000 towards his full and final settlement of the claim against the management . Accordingly the reference is allowed and following award is passed.

AWARD

of his services . This fact as argued for the workman has been very much proved and established in the oral testimony of MW1 as well as the aforesaid statement at Ex . M2 produced and marked on behalf of the management, itself. In his examination chief MW1 in no uncertain terms says that the workman worked as casual worker from the year 1990 to 1995 and he was attending the cable work on the basis of daily wages . However, he added to say that during the said period the first party (workman) has not worked continuously and that he worked with certain breaks . He further admitted that the workman has worked for more than 240 days . In his cross examination he admitted that from the year 1990 to 1995 he worked at Kolar. He further admitted in his cross examination that during the year 1994 the workman has worked for 312 days . From the perusal of the above said statment at Ex. M2 it can be very well gathered that the workman worked with the management from the month of July 1990 till October 1995. As seen above it was admitted by MW1 that the workman worked for a period of 312 days during the year 1994. This fact is also borne out from the statement of Ex . M2 . From the above said statement again it is disclosed that during the year 1995 the workman worked for a period of 279 days i.e. for a period of more than 240 days in the above said calendar year . Therefore, going by the very statement of MW1 and the statement of Ex . M2 filed by the management itself it gets very much clear that during the year 1994 as well as in the year 1995 the workman worked continuously for a period of240 days and more immediately preceding the termination of his services w.e.f. 1-11-95 . Therefore , this being the admitted position of fact , the position of law certainly must come to the rescue of the workman . Since the workman has fulfilled the conditions of the provisions of Section 25 (B) having worked continuously for a period of 240 days in a calendar year preceding immediately before he was refused work, the action of the management tant amounts to retrenchment as defined under Section 2(00) of the ID Act . Undisputedly the management has not complied with the provisions of Section 25 ( a&b ) of the ID Act and therefore, the retrenchment amountsto illegal termination of the services in violation of the above provisions of law Consequent upon , the termination of the services of the workman shall have to be held illegal and void abinitio . Now coming to the question of the reliefs , undisputedly the workman was being enganged on daily wages working as casual mazdoor. His appointment certainly was not in accordance with the rules . The contention of the management that under the instructions and guidelines of department of Telecommunication, the workman has not been provided with work and engaged any more of daily wage basis has not been disputed on behalf of the workman. Therefore , he being a casual worker, enagaged as a Casual Mazdoor on daily wage basis and the said work , now, not

The management is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 75,000 towards the full and final settlement of the claim 10405

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/ पौष4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

of the workman. He shall be paid the above said amount within the period of 3 months from the date of publication ofthis award. In case of failure , the aforesaid amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9 per cent after the expiry of a period of 3 months .

(Dictated to P.A. transcribed by her, corrected and signed by me on 8th November, 2004)

A. R. SIDDIQUI, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 30 नवम्बर, 2004

का.आ. 3338. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार डाक विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्रके संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या एलसीआईडी-186/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 30-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-40025/26/2004- आईआर( डी.यू. ) ]

कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डेस्कअधिकारी New Delhi , the 30th November , 2004 S.O. 3338.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. LCID- 186/2003 ) 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 D/o Post and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 30-11-2004.

[No. L-40025/26/2004- IR (DU) ]

KULDIPRAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT : Shri E. Ismail , B. Sc. , LL.B. , Presiding Officer

Dated the 27th day of September, 2004 INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C.L.D. NO . 186/2003 Between:

Sri N. Vijaya Kumar,

S/o N. V. Subbaiah ,

C/o Sri K. Balagopal ,

6-3-609/ 10/5 , Upstairs ,

Anandnagar colony,

..Petitioner Khairatabad , Hyderabad.

AND

1. The Assistant Superintendent of PostOffices,Bapatla Division, Bapatla.

2. The Superintendent of Post Offices, TenaliDivision, Tenali .

...Respondent APPEARANCES :

Forthe Petitioner : Sri K. Balagopal , Advocate For the Respondent : Sri . B. Rajavardhan Reddy,

Advocate 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 High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and. M/s. Cotton Corporation of India and two others .

2. The brief facts of the petition are : That the Petitioner was drawing wages ofRs . 2200 P.M. at the time of his removal from service on 1-4-99 . When he was working as Extra Departmental Delivery Agent (EDDA) in the postal Department at Pedapulivarru in Vellatur S.O. Repalle Sub - Division , Guntur District on 19-9-84 . Against his removal he filed an appeal on 25-5-99 which was rejected on 14-2-2000 . Again he send a demand letter in the form of a petition for reconsideration dated 15-7-2000 addressed to the Post Master General , A.P. Circle, Vijayawada. Said demand letter was rejected on 17-1-2003 . He has not approached any other authority orforum.

3.The brief facts are that he was appointed as EDDA in the postal Department at Pedapulivarru on 19-9-84: That when the post fell vacant he made a representation as he is having experience . He belongs to Scheduled Caste . Yet , it was not considered and they appointed one Sri N. Jagadish who developed a grudge against the Petitioner and framed a case against him by fabricating evidence .

4. on 20-2-97 , the Petitioner was served a memorandum offour charges namely, (1 ) that he had failed to deliver 91 un - registered letters recieved for delivery at . the Pedapulivarru post office between 5-3-96 and 19-6-96 , deliverable at six villages within that post office's jurisdiction; ( 2 ) that he failed to deliver 61 un - registered articles received by the Pedapulivarru post office on 1-1-97 till 2-1-97 ; (3 ) that from 22-7-96 onwards till 2-1-97 he failed to visit Gorigapudi , a fixed beat village , except for only six days ; and ( 4 ) one wedding cover received for 10406

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)]

that, " ... Failure ofDepartment to produce material witness denying the delinquent opportunity to cross examine that witness -Enquiry vitiated being in violation of principles of natural justice. " That has no bearing because he has conceded that the domestic enquiry was vailidly conducted.Any way he submits that for an alleged offence between 5-3-96 to 19-6-96 which pertains to non -delivery ofabout one letter per day for which he was dismissed on 1-4-99 which is a major punishment. Hence , he submits that the Petitioner is entitled to the relief sought in the case.

8. The Respondent's counsel was absent he did not give any written arguments also . He submits that he had previouslywritten in the counter that it is not an ' industry' .

delivery on 2-5-96 at Pedapulivarru post office was delivered by him only 4-5-96 . Charge No. 1 was supported by the discovery of a bundle of 91 un - reisgered letters found by a passer -by Sir Gorigapati Seshaiah , near the Petitioner's residence . That 91 letters over a period of 3 months and 2 weeks comes to less than one letter perday. Why any EDDA would keep just one letter un -delivered each day when he is taking the trouble to deliver all the other letters is a question that finds no answer in the entire proceedings , more particularly when there is no allegation of any grudge on the part of the Petitioner against the individual recipients of the letters . That the bundle is planted so as to incriminate the Petitioner cannot be ruled out. That the possibility of the letters being pilfered after being stamped in order to create grounds for proceedings against the Petitioner cannot be ruled out. The other three charges are frivolous . It is submitted that on 1-1-97 there were about 300 letters to be delivered over a length of 36 KMs and it so happened that the Petitioner could not deliver 62 of them. The Petitioner could not deposit the undelivered letters in the post office but brought them home , where they were found by the IPO on 2-1-97 . It shows the prejudiced mind of the Enquiry Officer and the Disciplinary Authority Charge No. 3 was held not proved , and article of charge No. 4 is even more frivolous than charge No. 2. One Single letter which could not be delivered on 2-5-96 which was a Saturday, since the receipient's house was locked , was delivered promptly on 4-5-96 on Monday. Even assuming that the misconduct is proved the extreme punishment of removal was not considered as the period pertains to 5-3-96 to 19-6-96 and there was no complaint regarding non- delivery of mail thereafter until 12-1-97 , Hence, the removal order may be set aside and he may be reinstated.

5. A counter was filed stating that the Petitioner was appointed from 19-09-84 as alleged by him. The post of GDS BPM, Pedapulivarru branch office is fallen vacant w.e.f. 16-10-95 due to the promotion of its incumbent to Grade -C cadre . Though necessary propaganda for making provisional arrangement to the post was made the Petitioner did not apply for the post of BPM, Pedapulivarru. Only one application of Sri . N. Jagadish was received on 5-3-96 and he was appointed and he repeats that what all happened. Further added that the Petitioner in his statement even before IPO ( PG) on 2-1-97 admitted his guilt . Hence , the dismissal maybe upheld.

6. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner conceded that the domestic enquiry is validly held and arguments were advanced under Sec . 11A by both the Counsels for the Petitioner and Respondent respectively.

7. The same things are advanced by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner as mentioned in the petition and he also relied on 1982 LAB IC 1745 wherein it was held

9. It maybe noted that as respondent's counsel was not present his arguments could not be heard . But, now it iswell settled in view of 1998( 1 ) LLR page 184 that Telecom is an ' industry' . So it will apply to the postal Department also , because their Lordships held that the Telecom Department is not engaged in discharging sovereign functions of the State and that the decisions in the case of Sub -Divisional Inspector of Posts, Vaikam V. Theyyam Joseph 1996 II CLR 237 and Bombay Telephone Canteen EmployeesAssociation V. Union of India 1997 II CLR 218 cannot be treated as laying down the correct law. Charge No. 1 pertains to non- delivery of 91 unregistered letters during the period 5-3-96 to 19-6-96 deliverable at six villages within that post office's jurisdiction. This seems to be a rather serious charge and it stands proved. (2 ) That he failed to deliver 61 un - registered articles received by the pedapulivarru post office on 1-1-97 till 2-1-97. This does not seem to be a serious charge , because on 1-1-97 accordingto the Petitioner there were 300 letters to be delivered over a beat length of 36 KM and he could not deliver 61 un - registered letters . So it is not a grave charge . (3) That he did not visit Gorigapudi , a fixed beat village , which is not proved. (4) The fourth charge is that one wedding cover received for delivery on 2-5-96 at Pedapulivarru post office was delivered by him only on 4-5-96 for this he gave explanation that 2nd , May was a Saturday and the recipient's house was locked , he delivered it on 4-5-96 . So it may be seen that only the grave charge is charge No. 1 and the greatest part of it is that he was allowed to continue in service till 1-4-99 . He was not even placed under suspension , although the complaint was received on 30-10-96. So that means the post office continued to trust him and taking the work upto 31-3-99 when the matter was discovered and obviously there were no complaints against him during the said period . So it took them two years three months to dismiss him. No doubt , it is a grave charge that he failed to deliver 91 un- registered letters between 5-3-96 to 19-6-96, 10407

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

thatmay contain important letters. It may also contain interview letters and other important matters and it is a grave offence. But yet as the post office allowed him to continue for two years three months when the said offence was disclosed through complaint dated 30-12-96. They allowed him to continue for two years . So I am of the opinion that the Petitioner having put in service from 19-9-84 to 1-4-99 , i.e. , for 15 years , the punishment is too harsh to send him unceremoniously. Hence , I am of the opinion that although the order of the dismissal dated 1-4-99 has to be confirmed, yet the Petitioner is entitled for 10 months pay i.e. , pay last drawn multiplied by 10. Accordingly as to the Petitioner was drawing at the time of dismissal Rs . 2200/-, which is not contradicted in the counter. Hence, the Petitioner is entitled to 10 months pay i.e. , Rs . 22,000 / -plus Rs . 3,000/- for the cost of this litigation in all Rs . 25,000/- to be paid within 30 days ofthe publication ofthis Award and if paid thereafter with interest @ 6 % p.a. Awardpassed accordingly. Transmit.

Dictated to Kum . K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 27th day of September, 2004.

E. ISMAIL, PresidingOfficer Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for the Petitioner

Witnesses for the Respondent examined NIL

NIL

Documents marked for the Peitioner

NIL

Documents marked for the Repondent

NIL

नई दिल्ली, 2 दिसम्बर, 2004

का.आ. 3339.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक ऑफ हैदराबाद के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आईडी नं०-100/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 01-12-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12014/2/2004-आई.आर. ( बी 1 ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव New Delhi, the 2nd December , 2004 S.O. 3339.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. ID No. 100/2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ LabourCourt Hyderabad now as shown in the Annexure , inthe IndustrialDispute between the employers in relation to the management of State Bank ofHyderabad and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on01-12-2004.

[No. L-12014/2/2004- IR (B. 1)]

C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

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

Dated the 23rdday of September, 2004 INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C.L.D. No. 100/2002 Between:

Sri Maqbool Khan , S/o Khaja Khan, R/o 2-6-14, Brahman Puri , Nirmal,

....Petitioner Adilabad , District.

AND

1. The General Manager, StateBank of Hyderabad, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad

2. The BranchManager, StateBank of Hyderabad, Nirmal Branch, Adilabad, District.

....Respondents APPEARANCES :

For the Petitioner : M/sG. Ravimohan , R. Devender Reddy, G. Srinivas Reddy & G. Naresh Kumar, Advocates For the Respondent : Sr. A. V.S.S. Prasad , Advocate AWARD

This is a case taken under Sec . 2A (2) of the 1.D. Act, 1947 in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble High 10408

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4 , 1926

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

aBranch Manager and Ex. WI is brought up after the retirement of the person who has signed on it and therefore itisundated . That he is not entitled for any reinstatement orback wages .

6. The Management examined Sri Sudhir Katgeri , ChiefManager with the Respondent , Nirmal branch. He has submitted that Ex. Wl the certificate filed by the workman is undated and it is not the official record ofthe bank and it is a cooked up document. That he never worked for 240 days or more in a calendar year. Attendance registers are Ex . Ml to M7.

7. In the cross-examination he deposed that he does not know the Petitioner personally and he is deposing on the basis of records . The Petitioner was engaged on day to day duty when some body was on leave. He denied thathe worked for 240 days and more.

2. The brief facts as mentioned in the petition are : That the Petitioner was appointed in the Respondent bank on 8-6-95 as a watchman cum attender. Since his appointment he has been performing his duties to the utmost satisfaction of his superiors . That the Petitioner was paid Rs . 25/- per day. Subsequently, his pay was enhanced from time to time on 31-3-99 . The Petitioner was terminated orally. At the time of this termination he was drawing Rs . 75 per day. The Petitioner was not issued any notice or no enquiry was conducted. He used to work from 10 AM to 5 PM . His services were terminated without any notice or notice pay. Even under the settlement of the bank rules , notice is required to be issued before terminating an employee . But , in the present case no such notice is issued . Hence , it is prayed that the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to set aside oral termination order dated 31-3-99 passed by the Respondent .

8. It is argued by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that originally he was appointed on 8-6-95 as a watchman-cum-attender. Initially he was being paid Rs . 25 per day. Subsequently his pay was enhanced to Rs . 75 per day. Since his appointment, he has been performing his duties to the utmost satisfaction of his superiors . That he was orally terminated on 31-3-99 without notice or notice pay. That the Nirmal Branch Manager issued a certificate which is Ex . W1 . No notice or notice pay was paid. The Petitioner is having qualifications . Hence , the termination order dated 31-3-99 may be set aside and he may be reinstated with back wages .

3. A counter was filed stating that the Petitioner never worked for more than 240 days in calendar year, he was appointed without authority and as such the employment is illegal and the appointment is non - exist in eye of law he was engaged only on daily wages . Hence , he is not entitled for any relief. There were instructions fromGovernment of India dated 6-8-90 those temporary employees who have put in temporary service of 90 days or more after 1-1-82 and who have fulfilled the prescribed eligibility criteria considered for appointment in a sub- ordinate cadre and thereafter as per Government of India guidelines no absorption of the daily labours the employees will be considered by the bank .

9. The Respondent argued that Ex. WI cannotbe believed as it is undated and it is admitted by WWI that he is a Petitioner that he has not filed in written proved that he worked continuously for 240 days or more . In absence ofprove he is not entitled for any relief. He relied onAIR 2002 Supreme Court page 1147 wherein it was held that, " . ...Onus lies upon claimant to show that he had in fact worked for 240 days in a year - In absence of proof of receipt of salary or wages or record of appointment, filing of an affidavit by workman is not sufficient evidence to prove that he had worked for 240 days in a year preceding his termination " . He submits that the Petitioner has failed to prove the same . Hence , he is not entitled for any relief.

4. That this Petitioner's services were utilized on daily wages as watchman during the years 1998-99 for a period of 50 days only. He was not appointed as a watchman cum attender on 8-6-95 . Again his services were utilized from 7-10-98 to 4-3-99 for 50 days only when the permanent watchman was on leave on day to day casual basis by paying wages for the day. He never worked for 240 days in a calendar year . Then several Judgements are mentioned which need not be mentioned here as they will be looked into at the time of arguments.

10. I have given serious thoughts to the case . But, there is no proof at all that he worked for 240 days or more except Ex. W1 and Ex. W1 is undated and he is unable even to give the name of the person who has issued the certificate except saying that Manager issued that . If atleast he has given the name , the Court could have summoned him and tried to come to a conclusion . In absence of any proofthat heworked for 240 days , I am afraid no relief can be given to him . Hence , an award is passed holding that the Petitioner is not entitled for any relief.

5. The Petitioner examined himself as WWI and deposed the facts as stated in the petition . That certificate was issued that he is working from 8-6-95 which is Ex . WI . That he made various representations . The representations and postal acknowledgements are Ex . W2 to W7 . In the cross-examination he deposed that it is correct that Ex. WI does not bear any date and he has not filed any written proof issued by the bank that he worked continuously for 240 days in a year. He denied that he worked only for 50 days on leave vacancy from 7-10-98 to 4-3-99 . It is not true to suggest that person who has signed on Ex . WI was not

Awardpassed accordingly . Transmit .

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

10409

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष4, 1926

Dictated to Kum. K. Phani Gowri , PersonalAssistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 23rd day of September, 2004.

E. ISMAIL, PresidingOfficer set Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for thePetitioner

Witnesses examined for Respondent

WW1: Sri Maqbool Khan MWI : Sri Sudhir Katgeri Documents marked for the Petitioner Ex. WI: Certificatedt . Nil

Ex. W2: Office copy ofthe representation by WWI Ex. W3 : Postalacknowledgement

Ex. W4: Postal acknowledgement

Ex. W5 : Postal acknowledgement

Ex. W6: Postal acknowledgement

Ex. W7: Postal acknowledgement

Documentsmarked for the Respondent Ex. Ml to M7 : Attendance registers from 1995 to 2000

नई दिल्ली, 2 दिसम्बर, 2004

का.आ. 3340.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एस. ई. रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय , हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई. डी. नं. 68/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 1-12-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल -41014/1/2004- आई.आर. ( बी. 1 ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 2nd December, 2004 S.O. 3340. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (I.D. No. 68/2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Hyderabad , as shown in the Annexure , in the IndustrialDispute between the management of S.E. Railway and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 1-12-2004 .

[No. L-41014/1/2004- IR (B.1 ) C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT

SHRI E. ISMAIL, B.SC. , LL.B. , Presiding Officer Dated the 28th day of October , 2004 Industrial Dispute L.C.L.D. No. 68/2002 (Old L.T.LD. No. 46/2001 Transferred from Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Visakhapatnam) Between:

SriBandari Sambasiva Rao,

..Petitioner D. No. 13-28-1 , K.G.H. UpRoad, Visakhapatnam

AND

1. TheGeneral Secretary, S.E. RailwayGardenReach, Calcutta.

2. The President/Secretary Ore Exchange Yard StaffCentre , S.E. Railways , Visakhapatnam. ..Respondents Appearances:

Forthe Petitioner : Sri M. Venkata Ramana, Advocate

For the Respondent : M/s. Badirnath & Madanmohan ,

Advocates for R1 . M/s . A. Narasimha Appa Rao , & P.V. Ramana , Advocates for R2 .

AWARD

Thisisa case taken under Sec . 2 A( 2) of the I.D. Act, 1947 by the Industrial Tribunal-cum - Labour Court , Visakhapatnam in view of the judgment of the Hob'ble High Court ofAndhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/s . CottonCorporation of India, and two others 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.T.I.D. No. 46/2001 and renumbered in thisCourt as L.C.I.D. No. 68/2002.

2. The brief facts as mentioned in the petition are: that the Petitioner joined as salesman on 13-2-1989 in Ore Exchange Yard Staff Canteen and he was paid Rs . 250 per month till May, 1993. Thereafter he was paid Rs. 100. Then he filed a case before Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Circle II , Visakhapatnam along with one Mr.. B. Nagabhushana Rao under Minimum Wages Act . The case was numbered as P.W. No. 8/94 and the same was allowed by the authority and the workman won the case and the Management was directed to deposit an amount of Rs.3000towards deducted wages. The authority was also given direction to deposit an amount of Rs . 1500 towards compensation.The said order was received by the workman on 5-1-2001 . The amount was deposited before the Assistant Commissioner of Labour. The Management terminated the services of the workman in the month of April, 1994 after filing the above case without any notice is 10410

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004 /PAUSA 4, 1926

illegal . That in place of the workman the son of 2nd Management was appointed . He approached several times but to no avail. Hence, this petition . It is prayed that to direct the Respondent No. 2 to reinstate the workman with continuity of service and other attendant benefits , for costs ofthis claim.

3. A counter was filed by R1 denying all the allcgations and stating that no employer and employee relationship existing between the R1 and the Petitioner . They have got nothing to do except to encourage them as welfare activity. The Railway Administration has given them free accommodation, water and electric power. Beyond this gesture railways did not do anything as regard to the maintenance and day to day functioning of the canteen and not at all involved in its Management . That the staff themselves have elected one person as a Secretary who used to engage some outsiders and they have no say in the same. The representation is about the report for recognizing the canteen as a statutory canteen and extend the privileges at par with all the statutory canteen staff. The said canteen is non - statutory and non- recognized canteen . That the rail way administration has deposited the amount of Rs . 4500 in pursuance of the order in P. W. 8/94 and appcal before the District Court . They are in no way connected with the canteen. Hence , the petition may be dismissed.

4. R2 , the canteen filed a counter stating that there is no relationship between the Petitioner and the Respondent . Hence, the petition is not maintainable . That the gesture of the railways providing free accommodation , water and light has been misinterpreted by the Petitiorier and has taken advantage of the orders in P.W. 8/94. Hence , the petition may be dismissed.

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

become final and the Petitioner by virtue of that Judgement isaRailway employee entitled for reinstatement, backwages and other benefits . It is not true to suggest that the wages are paidby Railway through the Secretary.

Y 7. Much has been argued by either side which need not be gone into as WW1 , the Petitioner who examined himself, stated that he is working as Conductor in APSRTC, not only that he has also deposed in another L.C.I.D. 88/ 2004 that beforejoining the APSRTC he worked in the Ore Exchange Yard Canteen which need not be gone into because for the simple fact that he has deposed that he is now working as Conductor in APSRTC . The only draw back is that it is not elicited in the cross examination as to since when he is working as conductor ? The argument that the Petitioner never worked does not stand to any reason because in P.W. 8/94 he has been ordered tobe paid by the Respondents . An appeal is pending, is a different matter. According to WWI the Petitioner herein he has already drawn the amount on 22-6-2002 by way of a cheque . So that does not hold water. He has been working from 1989. According to the Petitioner he was dismissed in May, 1993. But he has approached this Court in 2001. The age that is shown is 40 years , obviously he must have joined immediately or within a short span after being dismissed in April , 1994 the service as Conductor in APSRTC and hence , as he is already working in a better post and he has failed to show how long he was unemployed due to being terminated from services in April, 1994 and what is the actual loss caused to him is not shown . So Ido not want to go into the details as to whether notice was necessary and whatis the fact and all because the Petitioner is gainfully employed and as a job , he is having one . Therefore , I hold thatthe Petitioner is not entitled to any relief and there is delay in approaching the Court in 7 years . Therefore , I hold that the Petitioner is not entitled to any relief.

Award passed accordingly. Transmit.

Dictated to Kum . K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 28th day of October, 2004 .

E. ISMAIL, Presiding Officer Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for

thePetitioner

5. The Petitioner examined himself as WWI and deposed the facts stated in the petition and about the case P.W. 8/94 and he has submitted two applications to the Secretary, Government of India , Ministry of Railways, New Delhi in 1992 and 1993. Ex. W1 is the order in P.W. 8/94 . Ex . W2 is the letter dated 21-9-92 . Ex . W3 is the letter dated 12-2-93 . In the cross examination he deposed that there is no record to show that he was employee of the Railways . He does not have any documents to show that Railways has paid salary to him . It is not true that an appeal is pending against the P. W. 8/94 order.

6. Sri N.V.S. Krishna Rao , Head Clerk was examined asMW1 . He deposed that he has been working since 18 years. No appointment order was given to the workman . There is no connection to the Railways to maintain the administration of canteen. That they paid Rs . 4500 to the Petitioner and another person in P.W. 8/94 on the file of ACL . Visakhapatnam . In the cross examination he deposed thatR2 canteen is situated in the premises of R1. It is true thatpermanent employees of the Railways are running the canteen. It is not true to suggest that as ACL orders have

Witnesses examined for the Respondent

WW1 : Sri B. Sambasiva Rao MW1 Sri N.V.S. Krishna Rao Documents marked for the Petitioner

Ex. W1: Ordercopy in P.W. 8/94

Ex. W2: Copy of Ir. sent to the Government of India, M/o Railwaysdt. 21-9-92

Ex. W3: Copy of Ir. sent to the Government of India, M/o Railwaysdt. 12-2-93

Documents marked for the Respondent NIL [ भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

10411

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष4, 1926

नईदिल्ली, 2 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3341.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार भा.को.को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों केबीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद-11 , के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 209/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-11- 2004को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल-20012/186/2001- आईआर ( सी-1 ) ]

एस० एस० गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 2nd December, 2004 S.O. 3341. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 209/ 2001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court Dhanbad - II now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 25-11-2004.

[No. L-20012/186/2001 - IR (C-I)] S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO . 2) ATDHANBAD PRESENT :

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

REFERENCE NO . 209 OF 2001

PARTIES :

Employers in relation to the management of Kustore Area ofM/ s . BCCL and their workman. APPEARANCES :

Onbehalf of the Workman : Mr. K. Chakravorty, Advocate

Onbehalfof the employers : Mr. R.N. Ganguly, Advocate

State: Jharkhand

: Industry Coal .

Dated, Dhanbad, the 3rd November, 2004 AWARD

The Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise ofthe powers conferred on them under Section 10( 1 ) ( d) of the I.D. Act. , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 20012/ 186/ 2001 - IR(C- I ), dated, the 11th July, 2004.

SCHEDULE " KYA MESSRS . BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED KEY PRAVANDHTANTRA DWARA 3684 G1/04-44

KARMAKAR SHRI JAGDISH BAURI MINER/ LOADER HURRILADIH COLLIERY KI SEVAYAKO BARKHAST KIYA JANA VIDHIBAT EVAM NAYACHIT HAI ? YADI NAHI TO KARMAKAR KIS LAV KEY HAKDAR HAI? "

2. In this reference both the sides appeared through theirauthorised representative . In course ofhearing ofthe instant reference the representative of the workman/union submitted that the sponsoring union/ workman is not interested to proceed with the hearing of this case and for which they are not taking any step to file Written Statement.

Inview of such submission there is sufficient reason to believe that the concerned workman/union is not interested to proceed with the hearing of this case and for. which I do not find any cogent ground to adjourn the case further. Hence the same is closed and a ' No dispute' Award ispassed in this reference presuming non -existence ofany industrial dispute between the parties.

B. BISWAS, PresidingOfficer नई दिल्ली, 2 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3342.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार भा.को.को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों केबीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद- II , के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 35/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-11- 2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल-20012/244/2002- आईआर ( सी-1 ) ] .

एस० एस० गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 2nd December, 2004

S.O. 3342. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 35/2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court Dhanbad - II now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 25-11-2004.

[No. L -20012 /244/2002- IR (C-I)] S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO . 2) AT DHANBAD PRESENT : Shri B. BISWAS, PresidingOfficer

Inthe matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1) (d) ofthe I.D. Act, 1947. REFERENCE NO . 35 OF 2003

PARTIES :

Employers in relation to the management of SijuaArea ofM/s . BCCL and their workman.

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

10412

ANNEXURE

APPEARANCES :

BEFORE THE CENTRALGOVERNMENT None

Onbehalf of the Workman :

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2) AT DHANBAD Onbehalf of the employers: Mr. D.K. Verma, Advocate

PRESENT :

State: Jharkhand

: Industry Coal.

Dated, Dhanbad, the 4th November, 2004

Shri B. BISWAS,

AWARD

PresidingOfficer

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

REFERENCE NO . 171 OF 2001

PARTIES:

The Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise ofthe powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-20012/244/ 2002- IR(C -I ) , dated, the 10th March, 2003 .

SCHEDULE

Employers in relation to the management of M/s. BCCL and their workman.

APPEARANCES :

None

Onbehalf of the Workman :

Mr. D.K. Verma, Advocate

Onbehalf of the employers :

"Whether the action of the management of Loyabad Colliery, Sijua Area ofM/s . Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. , to retire Sri Lal Bahadur Gope , Haulage Operator w.e.f. 5-6-2001 as per notice dated 17-2-2001 is proper and justified? If not, to what relief is the concerned workman entitled?"

State: Jharkhand

: Industry Coal.

Dated, Dhanbad, the 5th November , 2004

AWARD

The Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10( I ) (d) of the I.D. Act , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 20012/ 88 / 2001- IR(C -I) , dated, the 24th March, 2004.

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of CCL Govindpur Area III in reverting Shri Alu Rajak as Line Mazdoor, after serving as Office Peon for seven years is legal , proper justified ? If not, to what relief is the workman concerned entitled?".

2. In this reference neither the concerned workman nor his representative appeared. Management , however, made appearance through their learned Advocate . Instant reference is pending since 2003 for disposal . It transpires from the record that sufficient opportunities have been given to the workman/union but inspite of giving ample opportunities they have failed to turn up and even they did not consider necessary to file Written Statement on their behalf. Attitude of the concerned workman/union if is taken into consideration it will expose clearly that they are not intcrested to proceed with the hearing of this case . Under the circumstances , there is no reason to drag on the case suo moto for days together. Hence , the case is closed. Accordinłgy a ' No dispute ' Award is passed presuming non - existence of any industrial dispute between the parties .

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 2 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3343.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 वा 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा.को.का.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों केबीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद- II , के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 171/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-11- 2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल-20012/88/2001- आईआर ( सी-1 ) ]

एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 2nd. December , 2004

2. In this case neither the concerned workman nor his representative appeared before this Tribunal. Management , however, made appearance through their learned Advocate . It reveals from the record that the instant reference is pending for disposal since 2001. It also further transpires from the record that sufficient opportunities have beengiven to the workmanside but inspite of giving amplc opportunities they have failed to appear before this Tribunal . Even they did not consider necessary to file Written Statement on their behalf. As the workmansidc failed to file Written Statement management also declined to file Written Statement on their behalf. The attitude ofthe parties clearly show that they arc not interested to proceed with the hearing of this casc. Under the circumstances , there is no reason to adjourn the case suo moto for days together. Hence , the case is closed and a ' No dispute Award is passed in this reference presuming non -existence ofany industrial dispute between the parties.

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 2 दिसम्बर , 2004

S.O. 3343. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 171 / 21001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court Dhanbad - II now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman, which was reccived by the Central Government on 25-11-2004 .

[No. L -20012/88/2001 - IR (C -I ) ]

का. आ. 3344.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

10413

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष4, 1926

भा.को.को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों केबीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , धनबाद- II , के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 160/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-11- 2004को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल-20012 /262/2000- आईआर ( सी- I ) ]

एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 2nd December , 2004 S.O. 3344. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 160/ 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Dhanbad- II now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 25-11-2004.

[No. L -20012/262/2000- IR(C-I)] S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT :

Shri B. BISWAS , PresidingOfficer

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

REFERENCE NO . 160 OF 2000

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the management of M/s . BCCL and their workman.

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalf ofthe Workman : None

Onbehalf of the employers : Mr. S.N. Ghosh , Advocate State: Jharkhand

Industry Coal.

Dated, Dhanbad, the 3rd November , 2004

AWARD

The Govt. of India , Ministry of Labour, in exercise ofthe powers conferred on them under Section 10( 1 ) (d) of the I.D. Act . , 1947 has referred the following dispute to thisTribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-20012/ 262/2000 - IR(C-I), dated, the 25th October, 2000 .

SCHEDULE

"Whether the demand of the Union that Sh . Gangi Mandal , driver who had met with an accident and is reported to be mentally worried, may be sent to MedicalBoardto assess his disability is justified? If so, what directions are necessary in this regared?" 2. In this case neither the concerned workman nor his representative appeared. Management , however, made appearance through their learned Advocate . In course of hearing of the instant reference the representative of the management submitted that the concerned workman by filing a petition before the management expressed his unwillingness to proceed with the hearing of this case .

It transpires from the record that the concerned workman/sponsoring union after initiating the instant case for hearing never appeared .

Inview ofthe facts and circumstances and in view of the petition filed by the learned Advocate for the management I do not find any reason to drag on this case suo moto . Hence , the case is closed and a ' No dispute ' Award ispassed in this reference presuming non-existence of any industrial dispute between the parties.

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 2 दिसम्बर , 2004

आ. 345.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 का. (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार इंडियन एअर लाइंस के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , नई दिल्ली- II , के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 128/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल -11012/140/2000- आईआर ( सी-1 ) ] एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 2nd December , 2004 S.O. 3345. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Indústrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 128/ 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court N. Delhi - II now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation tothe management of Indian Air lines and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 25-11-2004.

[No. L- 11012/ 140/2000- IR (C-I)]

S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL : CUM LABOUR COURT -II REAJENDRA BHAWAN, GROUND FLOOR, RAJENDRA PLACE , NEW DELHI

I.D. No. 128/2000 Presiding Officer : R. N. RAI IN THE MATTER OF :-

Sh . Sushil Kumar Saini & others

S/o Sh. Davinder Kumar Saini , R/o H. No. 3593 , Gali Hakim Booali , Daryganj , NewDelhi -2 VERSUS

Indian Airlines (Northern Regiona) Indira Gandhi International Airport, Terminal-B, NewDelhi .

10414

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

AWARD

TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No. L- 110012/ 140/2000 - IR/ ( C - I ) CENTRAL GOVERNMENT DT. 22-11-2000 has referred the following point for adjudication. The point runs as hereunder:-

"Whether the action of the management of Indian Airlines, Northern Region. IGI Airport, Palam , New Delhi is not regularising the services of 75 casual workmen as per list enclosed is legal andjust ? If not, to what relief are the said workmen , entitled and from what date."

Inthe writ petition , the learned counsel for the Cental Govt . has stated that the reference order made on 22-11-2000 may be quashed because it is contrary to the judgement ofthe division bench of the court in CW 2644/ 97 (Gurpal Singh and others V/s . Indian Airlines and others) decided on 21-8-1998 .

The Hon'ble Delhi High Court has quashed the reference in view of the statement of learned counsel for the Central Govt. The workman is absenting despite notice. Copy of the order of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has beenfiled.

The reference has been quashed as such there remains no point and no dispute to be adjudicated upon.

No dispute Award is given accordingly.

Dt. 16-11-2004

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 2 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3346.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार भा. को. लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, धनबाद- II , के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 28/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-11- 2004को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल-20012/ 232/2002- आईआर ( सी- I ) ]

एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 2nd December , 2004 S.O. 3346. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 28/2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court , Dhanbad - II now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 25-11-2004 .

[No. L - 20012 /232/2002 - IR( C- I) ] S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii)]

ANNEXURE

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

SHRI B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer

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

REFERENCE NO . 28 OF 2003

PARTIES: Employers in relation to the management ofAmlabad Colliery ofM/ s . BCCL and theirworkman

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalf of the workman

None

Onbehalf of the employers : Mr. U.N. Lall , Advocate.

State: Jharkhand

Industry: Coal.

Dated, Dhanbad, the 3rd Nov. , 2004

AWARD

TheGovt . of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) (d) of the I.D. Act. , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their order No. L- 20012/232/ 2002- IR (C - I ) , dated, the 10th March, 2003 .

SCHEDULE

" KYA BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED AMLABAD COLLIERY KEY PRAVANDTANTRA DWARA KARMAKAR SHRI DEBU DESWAL KO DINANK 26-3-2002 SEY BARKHAST KIYA JANA UCHIT, VIDHIBAT EVAM NAYA SANGAT HAI ? YADI NAHI TO KARMKAR KIS RAHAT KEY PATRA HAI ?"

2. In this reference neither the concerned workman nor his representative appeared before this Tribunal. Management , however, made appearance through their authorised representative . Instant reference is pending since 2003 for disposal . It transpires from the record that consecutively three registered notices havebeen is used to the workman/ union . But inspect of giving ample opportunities they have failed to turn up and even they did not consider necessary to take steps in the matter of filing Written Statement on their behalf. As the workman/union failed to file Written Statement management also declined to file Written Statement on their behalf. Gestures of the workman/union and the management if is looked into itwill expose clearly that they are not interested to proceed with the hearing of the instant dispute . Hence, the case is closed and a ' No dispute ' Award ispassed presuming non -existence of any industrial dispute between the parties .

B. BISWAS, PresidingOfficer [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

10415

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/ पौष 4, 1926

नईदिल्ली , 2 दिसम्बर , 2004

का. आ. 3347.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा. को. को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध मेंनिर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद- II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 48/2002) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल.- 20012/38/2002 - आई.आर. ( सी- I ) ]

एस ० एस ० गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 2nd December, 2004 S.O. 3347. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 48/ 2002) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour CourtDhanbad II now, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 25-11-2004.

[No. L- 20012/38/2002 - IR (C- 1 ) ]

S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

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

SHRI B. BISWAS, Presiding Officer In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10( 1 ) ( d) of the L.D. Act, 1947 REFERENCE NO . 48 OF 2002 PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the management ofM/ s . BCCL and their workman .

APPEARANCES :

: None.

Onbehalfofthe workman

: None

Onbehalf of the employers

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal Dated, Dhanbad, the 4th Nov. , 2004

AWARD

TheGovt. of India, Ministry ofLabour, in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10( 1 ) (d) of the I.D. Act , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 20012/ 38/2002- IR(C - I ) , dated, the 24th/30th May, 2002.

SCHEDULE

"KYA COLLIERY KARAMACHARI SANGH KI BHARTIYA COOKING COAL LIMITED BASTACOLLA KSHETRA KEY PRAVANDHA- TANTRA SEY MANG KI SHIR RAMBABU MALLA KO SHOVEL OPERATOR KEY PAD PAR NIYAMITA KIYA JANA TATHA UKT PAD KI VETANDIYA JAYA UCHIT EVAM NAYA SANGAT HAI ? YADI HA TO KARMKAR KIS RAHAT KEY PATRA HAI TATHA KIS TARIKH SEY ? " 2. In this case neither the concerned workman nor his representative appeared before this Tribunal . None also appeared on behalf of the management . It reveals from the record that the instant reference case is pending since 2002 for disposal . If further transpires from the record that sufficient opportunities have been given to the parties but inspite of giving ample opportunity they have failed to turn up and even they did not consider necessary to submit Written Statement on their behalf. Gesture of the parties if is taken into consideration it will expose clearly that the parties are not interested to proceed with the hearing of this case . Under such circumstances it is needless to adjourn the case suo moto for days together. Hence the case is claimed arid a ' No dispute ' Award is passed in this reference presuming non -existence of any industrial dispute between the parties .

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 2 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3348.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा. को. को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध मेंनिर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद- II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 170/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-11-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल.- 20012/67/2001- आई.आर. ( सी-1 ) ]

एस ० एस० गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 2nd December, 2004 S.O. 3348 -In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 170/ 2001) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribuna /Labour Court Dhanbad II now, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 25-11-2004.

[No. L- 20012/67/2001 - IR (C- 1) ]

S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4 , 1926

10416

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT :

SHRI B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10 ( 1) (d) of the L.D. Act, 1947 REFERENCE No. 170 OF 2001

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the management of M/ s . BCCL and their workman .

APPEARANCES :

: None.

Onbehalf of the workman

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

State: Jharkhand

Industry: Coal Dated, Dhanbad, the 5th Nov. , 2004

AWARD

TheGovt. of India , Ministry of Labour , in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d) of the I.D. Act , 1947 has referred the following dispute to thisTribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-20012/ 67/2001 - IR- C - I, dated, the 22ndMay, 2001.

SCHEDULE

"Whether the refusal of the management to pay 50 % of rope pulling and looseman allowance for underground trammer and 50% tub cleaning extra hazard for surface trammer to Sri Bhagwan Das Dusad and 15 others (as per list attached) proper and justified ? If not , to what relief are the concerned workman entitled and from what date ?"

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ] clearly that they are not interested to proceed with the hearing of the case. Hence , the case is closed and a ' No dispute' Award is passed presuming non -existence of any industrial dispute between the parties .

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 3 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3349.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार विजय बैंक के प्रबंध तंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं . 2 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 131/97 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 02-12-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल.- 12012/407/1996- आई.आर. ( बी- II ) ]

सी० गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 3rd December, 2004

S.O. 3349. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby published the (Award Ref. 131/97) of the Central . Govt . Industrial Tribunal - cum -Labour Court, NEW DELHI NO . II as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of VijayBank and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 02/12/2004.

[No. L - 12012/407/1996 - IR (B - II ) ]

C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM LABOUR COURT- II , NEW DELHI R. N. RAI . , Presiding Officer

I. D. No. 131/97

IN THE MATTEROF :

Sh. K.A. Balakrishna

C/oMr. Kutty, K- 114 , Hauz Khas ,

NewDelhi - 16

2. In this reference neither the concerned workman nor his representative appeared before this Tribunal . Management, however, made appearance through their learned Advocate . It reveals from the record that the instant reference is pending since 2002 for disposal . It also transpires from the record that sufficient opportunities have been given to the workmanside but inspite of giving ample opportunities they failed to turn up before this Tribunal . Even they did not consider necessary to file Written Statement on their behalf. As the workmanside faile to file Written Statement management also declined to file Written Statement on their behalf. The attitude of the parties if is taken into consideration , it will expose VERSUS

TheDy. General Manager,

Vijaya Bank, Zonal office , NewDelhi-

AWARD

TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No. L - 12012/ 407/96 - IR(B - II ) Central Government Dtd . 29-08-1997 has referred the following point for adjudication .

10417

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

The point runs as hereunder :-

one Janardhan on 14-11-92 and thereafter destroying the paid cheque .

"Whether the action of the management of Vijaya Bankby dismissing Sh. K. A. Balakrishna, Peon from service w.e.f. 28-06-1995 is legal and justified ? Ifnot, to what relief the workman is entitled to?"

The claimant has filed statement of claim . In the statement of claim , it has been stated that the workman was a regular employee of the respondent bank in subordinate cadre and was put under suspension vide order dated 12-9-93 and later he was charge sheeted on 7-12-93. A false enquiry was conducted by an officer of the bank and the bank was represented by another officer of the bank . The workman was denied to be represented by a lawyer. The workman was represented by a person who was not much qualified and experienced in comparison to the management representative.

The said chargesheet dt . 7-12-93 was sent to the woman to the residential address submitted by him to the bank. Though the workman was advised to submitted his statement of defence if any, within the stipulated time he did not submitted the same. Hence it was decided to take departmental action to conduct departmental Enquiry in the matter pursuant to the said decision both Enquiry Officerand presenting officer were appointed . The Enquiry Officer conducted the enquiry on various dates and completed the same on 27-3-95 holding the petitioner guilty of the charges levelled against him . The workman was defended by Shri Ramesh H. Shetty, office bearer of the Vijaya Bank employees association. The management in support of its charge produced as many as 14 exhibits 9 witnesses . Copies of the documents were provided to the workman and the workman was given sufficient opportunity to cross - examine the witnesses through his authorised representative . The workman examined himself as defence witness in the enquiry . The enquiry was conducted in accordance with the principles of natural justice which is evident from the record of the enquiry proceedings . The workman was given every opportunity to defend himself.

The enquiry officer hold the workman guilty by assuming certain cooked and imaginary stories . There was nó direct evidence adduced by the management to establish the charges levelled against the workman . The disciplinary authority and appellate authority did not apply their mind while awarding and confirming the punishment. The appellate authority did nor afford opportunity of personnal hearing which is a mandatory provision under BPS 1966 : The punishment imposed is harsh and disproportionate to the charges levelled against the workman.

The Enquiry Officer after analysing the entire evidence and the documents and records , by his report dated 27-3-95 held that the workman was guilty of the charges levelled against him.

The management has filed written statement and in the written statement it has been stated that the claim statement of workman is totally vague and without containing any details as such , therefore it is incapable of being given any specific reply.

The disciplinary authority after carefully examining the enquiry proceedings and the enquiry report and other related documents and records on this matter accepted the finding of the Enquiry Officer and proposed the punishment of " Dismissal from service of the bank with immediate effect " vide letter dated 25-4-95 .

Sh. K.A. Balakrishnan , applicant herein joined the services of the bank as probationary sub -staff on 14-6-89 at the zonal office of Delhi . His services were confirmed on 16-12-89 and he was working as sub- staff at our Barakhamba Road branch from 22-6-89 to 22-11-92 . He lastly worked as a peon in the Regional Office at New Delhi .

The disciplinary authority after considering the reply of the workman and the totality of the matter came to the conclusion that there is no need to deviate from the punishment already proposed . Accordingly the disciplinary authority vide his order dated 28-6-95 confirmed the punishment of dismissal from service of the petitioner workman with immediate effect .

That, the workmen who was working as a peon atB. K. Road branch, New Delhi was placed under suspension vide Head office order dt . 12-2-93 and later charge sheeted vide chargesheet No. PER: IRD : CS : 284:93 dt . 7-12-93 under sub clause (j ) of clause 19.5 of chapter XIX of the Bipartite Settlement 1966 , for his alleged involvement in the commission of a fraudulent act such as stealthily removing the cheque book containing the cheque left bearing No. 391176 to 391200 pertaining to S.B. А/ С . No. 14540 of one Smt . Monika Jain, issuing a cheque bearing No. 391189 for Rs . 40,000/- by forging the signature of the account holder and encashed the same through

The appellate authority after careful consi- deration of the records and the grounds of appeal urged by the applicant upheld the order of dismissal by its order dated 21-11-95. The workman applicant has filed rejoinder. Inrejoinder , he has denied almost all the paragraphs of the written statement and has maintained that the enquiry was held against him against the principles of natural justice and he was not afforded proper opportunity to defend himself. He was not even permitted to defend himself by a lawyer, copy of the report has not been submitted to him .

10418

[PART II -SEC. 3 ( ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4 , 1926

He removed one cheque leaf from a cheque book which was not taken by the account holder: He took one leaf out of that cheque book and he withdrew Rs. 40,000/- by imitiating the signature of the drawer, putting the seal and collected the amount of Rs . 40,000/- from the cashier . He has admitted regarding the destruction ofthe cheque . The CSE has admitted his fraud before MW/9 and he has stated the manner through which he got Rs . 40,000/-withdrawn from the bank. The confessional letters are MEX 1,2 and 3 . As such there are other witnesses before whom he has admitted that he has fraudulently withdrawn the money.

Heard arguments from both the sides and perused the papers on the record . It was submitted from the side of the workman applicant that he has not been permitted to engage a lawyer to defend himself, the bank has not permitted him to engage lawyer. It is settled law that the workman cannot compel the bank to get himself defended by a lawyer. He was defended by Shri Ramesh H. Shetty, office bearer of the Vijaya Bank employees association. It was further submitted from the side of the workman that he was not afforded opportunity to cross - examine the witnesses of the management . The management has appointed the Enquiry Officer who was prejudiced . He has not been supplied copy of the enquiry report . The management witness has stated in his cross -examination that the workman was dismissed on charge of forgery. After holding enquiry, he was given time to cross -examine the management witnesses . The charge of forgery was admitted by the workman and he has actually reimbursed the amount to the bank . The substantial question is whether the enquiry conducted against the workman applicant was proper and according to the principles of natural justice , whether the workman applicant has been afforded proper opportunity or not . The CSE has reimbursed the amount drawn by him. He has written letters containing his confession and the fact of returning the money supported by uncontrovertible statement of MW/ 9, MW/ 10, MW/4 . The workman applicant has confessed about his fraudulent withdrawal of Rs . 40,000/ - and he destroyed the cheque thereafter and he also confessed before these witnesses the modus operandi applied by him. The cheque through which the CSE acknowledged to withdraw the money was presented by the brother of the CSE Shri Janardan for payment . The CSE has admitted thatMr. Janardan is his brother. Rs . 15,000/- was recovered from Shri Janardan who is brother of the CSE . The CSE wasnot pressurized by the AGM and he has not given the letters under any pressure . It was submitted by the management that before the management witnesses , he has accepted modus operandi or the manner by which he withdrew Rs . 40,000/- and his brother received the payment . Rs. 40,000/- was remitted by the CSE in installments .

The cheque through which the money was fraudulently withdrawn was destroyed so that instrument could notbe put before the Enquiry Officer and there was no other direct evidence but he has confessed his entire dealings before the witnesses who have been examined during the proceedings of the enquiry and he has given confessional letters and he has also deposited the entire Rs . 40,000/- in instalments . Hearsay evidence is also admissible in domestic enquiry as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. All the witnesses have deposed against him . He has examined himself as DW/1 and he accepted that Janardan was his brother and Janardanreceived the money. From perusal of the records ofthe enquiry, it becomes quite obvious that the CSE took out the leaf from the cheque book left by the account holder, and he filled up Rs . 40,000/- in that cheque book and he imitated the signature of the account holder and he has himself put the seal and the cheque was presented by his brother Janardan and his brother Janardan received the money. As such, enquiry has been conducted properly. The workman applicant has been given proper opportunity to defend himself. He has examined himself as DW/ 1 . It is settled law that it is upto the discretion of the management to permit the lawyer in defence or not so the workman is not prejudiced even if a lawyer was not provided to him . Office bearer of the workman association defended him . From perusal of he entire records and the proceedings of the enquiry. I am bound to conclude that the fraudulent act has been committed by the CSE and the findings of the Enquiry Officer are based on cogent evidence . No interference is required.

The reference is replied thus :-

The action of the management of Vijaya Bank by dismissing Sh . K. A. Balakrishna . Peon from service w.e.f. 28-06-1995 is legal and justified. The workman applicant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for .

The award is given accordingly.

DT. 29-11-04

I have perused the enquiry proceedings and the evidence of the witnesses . Witnesses have all along stated that the money was fraudulently withdrawn by the brother of the workman applicant . MW/ 4 Mr. S.D. Makkar has deposed before the Enquiry Officer that Mr. Balakrishnan confessed before him that he has removed the cheque and defrauded the bank for Rs . 40,000/ - He has confessed before this witness that he has destroyed the cheque and tore into pieces and threw it outside the premises . Shri Balakrishnan MW/9 Shri K.B. Kharvi has also stated that he has confessed the fraud committed by him before him and he has also informed the modus operandi of the fraud.

R.N. RAI , PresidingOfficer 10419 کر भारत काराजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

The point runs as hereunder:-

नई दिल्ली, 3 दिसम्बर, 2004

"Whether the action of the management ofGeneral Manager (North), Union Bank of India, Zonal Office, New Delhi in imposing punishment of stoppage of next six annual increments with cumulative effect vide their order dt. 04-10-1990 on Shri Girish Kumar, Clerk- cum-Cashier is legal and justified ? If not, to what reliefthe said workman is entitled?"

का. आ. 3350 औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 2 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 68/97 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 02-12-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/294/1996-आई.आर. ( बी- II ) ]

सी० गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

NewDelhi, the 3rd December, 2004

TheUnion has filed statement ofclaim on behalf of theworkman. In the statement of claim, it has been stated that Shri Girish Kumar the workman was ordered to officiate by the respondent management as Head Cashier on 6th- 8thDecember, 1989 and again on 16-17, December, 1989 at Yusuf Sarai Branch of the Bank. That in the morning of 18th December, 1989 , the workman handed over to Shri Jagat Singh, Head Cashier the entire cash, who found the same in order and in accordance with the entires in the cash balance book of the bank . Shri Jagat Singh, Head Cashier did not raise any objection as he duly checked the amount received by him and it tallied with the bank records and there was no shortage at all .

S.O. 3350.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 68/97) ofthe Cent. Govt . Indus . Tribunal -cum - Labour Court, New Delhi No. II as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Union Bank of India and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 02-12-2004.

[No. L - 12012/294/ 1996- IR (B- II)]

C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

That on 20th December , 1989 again , no shortage was found in cash when cash was remitted to Karol Bagh -(Currency Chest) ofthe Bank. That on 23rd December, 1989 the workman was told that there was a shortage of Rs.12,500.00 from five packets ofRs . 100/-each on account of 25 notes of Rs. 100/- each missing from the said five packets. That the workman, who was very much shocked bythis unbelievable and baseless allegation was threatened with arrest and dismissal from service by Shri O.P. Kapoor, BranchManager.

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT- IL, RAJENDRA BHAWAN, GROUND FLOOR, RAJENDRA PLACE, NEW DELHI

LD . No. 68/97

R. N. RAI . , Presiding Officer:

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Sh. Girish Kumar,

That to save the image, respect and social position ofthe workman and his family, the workman immediately arranged money through his uncle by contacting him on phone and deposited the sum ofRs . 12,500.00, in thebank being the alleged amount of shortage . That not with standing the above , the workman was issued a memo bearing No. C.O.; IRD ; 2991/90 Dt. 28th March, 1990 (Annexure W - I) calling upon him to submit statement of defence within 15 days.

Through Union Bank of India Employees Union , 111/112, Fatehpuri , Khari Baoli, Delhi -110 006 .

VERSUS

TheGeneral Manager (North) ,

UnionBank of India,

Zonal Office, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Place,

Bangla Sahib Marg, New Delhi.

AWARD

That at this stage the workman was pressurized by the then office bearers of the Union to plead guilty saying that the management had assured them to close the matter ifhe agreed to do so . The workman was further informed this wouldbe in the common interest of the workman and thebank andwill enable the management to close the matter honourably and also save the workman from police harassment. That the workman, believing the then Union tobe bonafide in their advice , got in the trap and admitted that he had misappropriated the amount of Rs . 12,500.00 which infact he had not done . That the management having thus procured admission from the workman by The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L- 12012/294/ 96- IR(B- II) Central Government Dt. 15-05-1997 has referred the following point for adjudication.

3684 G1/04-45 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25 , 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

10420

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] misrepresentation , passed orders on 01-10-1990 awarding punishment on him.

The management has denied almost all the paras of the statement of claim and has maintained that the enquiry wasfair andproper.

Heard arguments from both the sides and perused the papers on the record.

The management has filed written statement . In the written statement , it has been stated that it is relevant to point out here that the reliefs claimed by the workman are time barred and also suffered from laches since the order sought to be quashed was passed by the Disciplinary Authority on 04-10-1990 on the basis of the enquiry conducted by the competent authority and the workman had admitted the contents of the charge sheet during enquiry proceedings without any pressure and promise by the management.

It is further submitted that the workman is governed by B.P. Settlement and various awards and any workman who is aggrieved by any order passed by the competent authority can file an appeal and admittedly no appeal has been filedby the workman and thus the reference is bad in law since the workman has not exhausted the remedy provided under law. It is submitted that it is reported on 23-12-1989 that certain acts and omissions have been committedby the workman during the period of 16-12-1989 to 18-12-1989 and the workman was charge sheeted in this misconduct and proper enquiry was conducted by the competent authority after observing principles of natural justice.

Itwas submitted from the side of the workman applicant that he worked from 16th to 18th as Cashier and the packets were stitched and on 18th, he gave all the packetsto the Head Cashier. No shortage was detectedtill 23rd of the same month so shortage was detected after five days . Any person would have taken out the notes from the bundles . The entire bundles were handed over to Shri Jagat Singh but Shri Jagat Singh had not been charge sheeted. Only the workman applicant had been charge sheeted and that too after a lapse of 5 days . He was threatened by the General Secretary of the Union and the Branch Manager and the other officers to confess the charges so he confessed the charges under assurance of the management that lenient view would be taken against him. His confession is not voluntarily but he was assured to confession the charges . No personal hearing was given to him . The punishment inflected on him is illegal and arbitrary. It was submitted from the side of the management that he has admitted the charges voluntarily during enquiry andby separate letters , no assurance was given to him and he was not threatened by any person . He has not even appealed against the punishment. Proper enquiry was conducted . Shri A.K. Pujara was management representative. He has been examined and he has stated that confession was madeby him voluntarily and willingly. He confessed that he had taken 125 notes of 100 rupee denominations packets so he has fraudulently taken away Rs . 12,500/- when the bundles were counted and in each of the bundles 25 notes of Rs . 100 denominations were found short. As such, while stitching the bundles , in some ofthe bundles of 100 rupee notes, he has stitched only 75 notes in 5bundles . So, there was a shortage of 125 notes of Rs . 100/-. A huge cash was handed over by him so at that time, the notes were not counted but later, it was detected and the notes were counted before the officers of the bank and shortage was found.

It is submitted that the management had never assured any onė regarding closure of the case . The workman admitted the charges before the enquiry officer during the enquiry and also admitted during the personal hearing and asked for lenient view to be taken in passing the final order in the matter by the Disciplinary Authority. The admission was without any pressure and without any promise. It is submitted that the workman admitted his guilt voluntarily and without pressure in the enquiry and it is submitted that the management never procured the admission on any assurance given by any one from the management . The order of punishment was passed after affording full opportunity and after considering the humanitarian grounds of the applicant by the Disciplinary Authority. It is submitted that the orderdt. 01-10-1990 is legal and is fair and has been passed after considering various records and submissions of the workman during personal hearing and contents of each of the grounds are wrong and hence denied and are against the record.

The workman applicant has filed rejoinder and in his rejoinder, he has reiterated the averments of his claim and has stated that the principles of natural justice were not followed during the enquiry and he was not given opportunity to cross -examine the management witnesses .

Itwas submitted by the management that the workman applicant has been given full fledged opportunity to represent himself and to cross -examine the management witnesses and he was afforded personal hearing also . During the course of enquiry, he has admitted that it was his first lapse in his 8 years of clean service in the bank . Thisis the first and very unfortunate lapse on his part and he humbly requests that lenient view may be taken in the matter to enable him to have a new lead of life.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

There are lot of domestic responsibilities that he has to discharge. He has to look after his old and aged parents . He has no source of income . It would be hard for him to earn his subsistence in case punishment of dismissal is awarded to him. He again requested to re-consider the proposed punishment of dismissal and take a lenient view ofhis admitted misconduct for which he regrets and once again re- assures the bank that he will be given no chance of complaint whatsoever and serve the bank honestly. After these admissions , leniency was shown to him and he was not dismissed from his service but his increments were stopped with cumulative effect . The enquiry officer and the disciplinary officer have considered his requests and prayers and so, he was not awarded the punishment of dismisal . Only six annual increments were withheld with cumulative effect.

Itwas further submitted from the side of the management that on re -checking, Rs . 12,500/- was found short . The bundles were counted in the presence of Mrs. Gupta, Mrs. Ahluwalia and Mr. O.P. Kapoor who are the employees of the bank and they confirmed the shortage . Mr. Jagat Singh was working as Head Cashier andhe was present but the workman applicant came late at 120' Clock . It has further come in the enquiry that the workman applicant has stitched the bundles himself and he has put his signatures . The bundles were intact . There were no tampering so there is no question of shortage causedby the Head Cashier Shri Jagat Singh. Since there was no tampering with the bundles and he stitched all the packets himself and the packets were found intact and untampered so it cannot be said that Shri Jagat Singh took away the notes from the bundles . Since the bundles were intact and bore the signatures of the workman applicant , so there is no question of taking away the notes by any other person . The bundles were found intact and they were counted before the officers of the bank. That is sufficient proof that the workman applicant stitched the bundles of short notes at the place of 100 notes only 75 notes were found on being counted before the officers of the bank. I have gone through the proceedings of the enquiry. Principles of natural justice have been followed and the workman applicant has been given opportunity to cross-examination the witnesses . He has himself admitted in his cross -examination that he had not made any complaint ofthreat to anybody previously. It indicates that for the first time, in this case , he has taken the plea ofbeing threatened for confession. After going through the entire proceedings of the enquiry, it is cogently established that the workman took away Rs . 12,500/- from 5 packets ofRs . 100 denomination notes and the enquiry officer rightly found him guilty of the charges . The award of punishment 3684 G1 /04-46

10421

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष4, 1926

ofdismissal should have been imposed on him but in view ofhis prayers and requests , the authorities took lenient view and withheld his six increments . As such, enquiry is quite proper and according to the principles of natural justice and the action of the management is quite justified.

The reference is replied thus :-

The action of the management of General Manager (North), Union Bank of India, Zonal Office, New Delhi in imposing punishment of stoppage of next six annual increments with . cumulative effect vide their order dt.04-10-1990 on Shri Girish Kumar, Clerk -cum -cashier is legal and justified. The workman applicant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for .

Theaward is given accordingly. Dated: 30-11-2004 R.N. RAI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 3 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3351.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक ऑफ बीकानेर एंड जयपुर के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या आई.डी. नं. 5/94 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 03-12-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल.-12012/188/93 - आई.आर. (बी-1 ) ] सी० गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 3rd December , 2004 S.O. 3351.-In Pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( I.D. No. 5/94 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court , NewDelhi now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on03-12-2004.

[No. L- 12012/ 188/93 - IR (B - I) ] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy. ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL : CUM LABOUR COURT - II , RAJENDRA BHAWAN , GROUND FLOOR, RAJENDRA PLACE NEW DELHI

I.D. No. 5/94 10422

1HE GAZETTEOF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] PRESIDING OFFICER: R.N.RAL

IN THE MATTER OF :

Sh . Dinesh Kumar

VERSUS

S.B.B.J.

AWARD

That though the vacancy/vacancies against which the workman had worked from 11-7-83 to 28-9-83 at Cannought Circus, New Delhi branch existed and continued after termination ofhis services from 28-9-83 but instead ofcontinuing the appointment of the workman against such vacancy/vacancies after 28-9-93 the bank gave and continued to give appointments to new hands and to these personswhohad got initial appointment as temporarywater boy-cum-peon in the bank after the initial appointment of theworkman.

TheMinistry ofLabour by its letter No. L- 12012/ 188/ 93- IR(B -I) Central Governmentdt. 27-12-1993 has referred the following point for adjudicating.

The point runs as hereunder :-

That itwas after repeated approaches ofthe workman to the bank that the workman was re -appointed in the bank from 9-5-91 but again only as a temporary peon -cum -water boy at the same branch and only for 80 days and though the vacancy post in which he was appointed was permanent and was still existing and continued to exist onand after expiry of 80 days but his services were discontinued from 27-7-91 .

"Whether the action of the management of S.B.B.J. New Delhi is justified in terminating the services of Sh . Dinesh Kumar , Sub Staff working at Cannaught Circusbranch w.e.f. 15-9-91 ? If not , to what reliefthe workman is entitled to . "

That after a break of about one month after 27-7-91 the workman was re - appointed at the same branch in the samepost vacancyjust for 20 days from 26-8-91 and again though the post vacancy in which he was re- appointed waspermanent and was still existing and continued on and afterthe expiry of20 days but the services of the workman werediscontinued from 15-9-91.

The claimant has filed statement of claim . In the statement of claim , it has been stated that in July 1983 when the workman came to know that the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur required the services of persons for appointment in the subordinate category in its Delhi branches he applied for appointment in the said bank and after finding the workman eligible and suitable for appointment in the bank he was required to submit necessary certificates in support of hiseductional qualification and age etc. and also his employment exchange registration card . That as required by the bank the workman submitted to the bank his school leaving certificate of having passed the 8th class pass and also a photostate copy where after the workman was appointed to work as a temporary water boy - cum- peon at Cannaught Place , New Delhi branch of the bank for 30 days w.e.f. 11-7-83 on the prescribed pay and allowances of the subordinate staff at the initial stage.

That during the period of non -employment of the workmanfrom 28-7-91 to 25-8-91 and also after 15-9-91 the management continued the appointment ofother temporary sub- staffwhose initial dates of appointment were after the initial date of his appointment and/or who were new hands without offering such further appointment employment to the workman. The management has filed written statement and in the written statement , it has been stated that the workman was engaged temporarily for 30 days from 11-7-83 to 28-9-83. He was merely engaged due to temporary increase in work. It is correct that the workman was engaged fora fixed period from 11-7-83 to 28-9-83 to fulfill the leave vacancies and not against regular vacancy. He was appointed on leave vacancy from 09-05-1991 to 27-07-1991 for 80 days . He was again appointed for 20 days from 26-08-1991.

That after the expiry of the 30 days of his initial appointment the appointment of the workman was extended by30 days to work in the same capacity at the same branch and before the expiry of the said period of 30 days of the extended period of his appointment it was further extended by 20 days w.e.f. 8-9-83 by a letter of the bank dated 6-9-83 to work in the same capacity and at the same branch. That though the workman was designated as a temporary in the letters ofappointment and extensions of appointment given to him by the bank but the nature of vacancy in which he was appointed from 11-7-83 and continued till 28-9-83 was not specified nor was it specified in the appointed and in factfrom11-7-83 to 28-9-83 he was working in permanent vacancy/ post of sub - staff.

It is not mandatory in the appointment letter to mention about the name of person in whose vacancy the new temporary workman was engaged . Temporary appointment means the engagement for a short period which can be demarcated on the appointment letter and on the date or extended date mentioned in the appointment letter or any further letter in connection with the appointment letter. The workman had not completed the period of 240 days as prescribed under the Industrial Disputes Act . In the memorandum issued to the workman 10423 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

perused the appointment letters . He has been appointed fora fixed period..

on 11-7-83 , 10-8-83 and 9-9-83 the workman was engaged fora temporary period knowing well at the time ofjoining that his period of service is fixed and has no claim , whatsoever of a permanent employee of the bank and his services will automatically come to an end on the last date prescribed on the aforesaid memorandum. The workman had never raised any objection to it during his period of temporary engagement .

Themanagement has denied almost all the paras of the statement of claim. It has been admitted that he worked for less than 240 days and he was posted on leave vacancy anddue to over work . The claimant has filed rejoinder. In the rejoinder, he has reiterated almost all the averments of statement of claim . He has further stated that he was appointed against a permanent vacancy after taking interview. His services have been terminated illegally.

Heard arguments from both the sides and perused the papers on the record . It was submitted from the side of the workman that when he knew that appointments are to be made in subordinate category, he applied for the same and he was found eligible and suitable for being appointed in thebank . He was asked to submit necessary certificates in support of his educational qualification and age etc. and also his employment exchange regn . Card. He was appointed for 30 days w.e.f. 11-7-1983 and thereafter his appointmentwas extended for 30 days more and thereafter hisappointment was again extended for 20 days w.e.f. 8-9-1983 .He started working from 11-7-1983 and worked till 28-09-1983. He was working against a permanent vacancy post of said staff. His services were terminated. He has worked for 80 days. Since he was appointed on permanent basis , his services cannot be terminated without giving him notice. He worked for 100 days at intervals in 1991 also .

It was submitted from the side of the bank that he was appointed against leave vacancy and he was given 30days appointment letter for a fixed period and thereafter itwas extended for 30 days again and it was again extended for20days. The letters of appointment have been annexed with the record. He was appointed for 80 days and the extensionof30days and 20 days was given to him. It was submitted from the side of the management further that the workman applicant has worked for 80 days. He was . appointed against leave vacancy and due to over work, hehas not worked for 240 days so section 25 ( F) of the ID , Act is not attracted. Since he was appointed for a fixed period so Section 25 (G) is also not attracted. There was additional load of work in the bank so his services were takenfor a fixed period. When the work was over, he was asked not to come and his extended period of service terminated automatically. From the side of the management, my attention was drawn to CWP No. 3324 of 1984 , GW.P. No. 77/1998 and W.P. 1580/1987 and 1984 L.A.BIC 445. I have gone through all the citations . The citations are not applicable in view of only 80 days work of the workman applicant. He was not appointed against a regular vacancy. No advertisement was given . Thereafter the bank advertised the post and recruitments were made so the workman applicant was appointed for a fixed period due to additioal workload or against leave vacancies . The law cited by the workman applicant is not applicable in the facts and circumstances ofthis case . Neither Section 25 (F) nor Section 25 (G) of the ID Act are attracted . It was submitted from the side of management that he was given appointment for a fixed period in 1983 and 1991. He has not worked regularly even for three months . There are rules of the bank regarding recruitment after giving advertisement but this workman applicant was appointed fora temporary fixed owing to overlead ofthe work so the workman applicant has not proved his case for regularisation.

The reference is replied thus

The action ofthe management of S.B.B.J. , New Delhi is justified in terminating the services of Sh. Dinesh Kumar, Sub Staff working at Cannought Circus Branch w.e.f. 15-9-91. The workman applicant is not entitled to get any reliefas prayed for.

The award is given accordingly.

Dt. 25-11-2004

The workmari made representation vide letter dt . 1-6-1984 and his request was denied. It was after repeated approaches of the workman to the bank that the workman wasre-appointed in the bank from 9-5-1991 but again only as a temporary peon cum water boy at the same branch and only for 80 days . Though the vacancy/post was terminated , his service was discontinued on 27-7-1991 . That after a break of about one month, hewas againappointed on 26-8-1991 for 20 days and on 15-9- 1991, the workman was again discontinued so the workman wasappointed for 80 days in 1983 and again in 1991 for 80 days and thereafter for 20 days . The workman in all his work after a gap ofseveral periods worked for 180 days.He worked for 80 days in 1983 and 100 days in 1991 so he has not completed 240 days in any calendar months . 1 Have

R.N. RAI , PresidingOfficer 10424

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

श्रम एवं रोजगार मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 15 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3352.- कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम, 1948 (1948का 34 ) की धारा 1 की उपधारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार एतदद्वारा 01 जनवरी , 2005 को उस तारीख के रूप में नियत करती है , जिसको उक्त अधिनियम के अध्याय 4 (44 व 45 धारा के सिवाय जो पहले से प्रवृत्त हो चुकी है ) अध्याय 5 और 6 ( धारा 76 की उपधारा ( 1 ) और धारा 77 , 78 , 79 और 81 के सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रवृत्त की जा चुकी है ) के उपबंध हरियाणा राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे , अर्थात्:-

"जिला फरीदाबाद के राजस्व ग्राम पाली हदबस्त संख्या-13 तथा मोहबताबाद हदबस्त संख्या -14 के अन्तर्गत आने वाले क्षेत्र।"

[सं. एस-38013/92/2004-एस.एस. - 1 ]

के. सी. जैन, निदेशक MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT New Delhi , the 15th December , 2004 S.O. 3352. In exercise of the powers conferredby Sub-section (3 ) of Section 1 ofthe Employees ' State Insur- ance Act , 1948 (34 of 1948) the Central Government hereby appoints the 1st Jan. , 2005 as the date on which the provi- sions of Chapter IV (except Sections 44 and 45 which have already been brought into force ) and Chapter V and VI (except Sub -section ( 1 ) of Section 76 and Sections 77, 78 , 79 and 81 which have already been brought into force) of the said Act shall come into force in the following areas in the State ofHaryana namely :-

"Areas comprising the Revenue villages of Pali Had bast No. 13 and Mohabatabad Had bast No. 14 in the Dis- trict of Faridabad. "

[No. S-38013/92/2004-S.S . 1 ]

K. C. JAIN, Director नई दिल्ली, 15 दिसम्बर, 2004

का. आ. 3353.-केन्द्रीय सरकार संतुष्ट हो जाने पर कि लोहहित में ऐसा करना अपेक्षित था, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 2 के खण्ड ( ढ़ ) के उप- खण्ड ( 6 ) के उपबंधों के अनुसरण में भारत सरकार के श्रम मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 1519 दिनांक17-6-2004 द्वारा कोयला उद्योग जो कि औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की

[PART II SEC. 3 ( ii)] प्रथम अनुसूची की प्रविष्टि 04 में शामिल हैं, को उक्त अधिनियम के प्रयोजनों के लिए दिनांक 17-6-2004 से छः मास की कालावधि के लिए लोक उपयोगी सेवा घोषित किया था;

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 (6 ) के परन्तुक द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त उद्योग को उक्त अधिनियम के प्रयोजनों के लिए दिनांक 17-12-2004 से छः मास की कालावधि के लिए लोक उपयोगी सेवा घोषित करती है ।;

[फा. सं. एस -11017/2/97 - आई आर. (पी.एल. ) ]

जे. पी. पति, संयुक्त सचिव MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT New Delhi , the 15th December , 2004 S.O. 3353.-Whereas the Central Government hav- ingbeen satisfied that the public interst so required that in pursuance of the provisions of sub-clause (vi ) of the clause (n) of Section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , declared by the Notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour S.O. No. 1519 dated 17-6-2004 the service in the Coal Industry which is covered by item 4ofthe First Schedule to the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) to be a public utility service for the purpose ofthe said Act , for a period of six months from the 17thJune, 2004.

Andwhereas, the Central Government is of opinion that public interest requires the extension of the said pe- riodby a further period of six months .

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to sub -clause (vi) of clause ( n) of Section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 , the Central Govern- ment hereby declares the said industry to be a public utility service for the purposes of the said Act, for a period ofsix months from the 17th December, 2004.

[F. No. S- 11017/2/97- IR(PL)]

J. P. PATI, Jt . Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 16 दिसम्बर , 2004

का. आ. 3354.- कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम, 1948 (1948का 34) की धारा 1 की उपधारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार एतदद्वारा 01 जनवरी , 2005 को उस 10425

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25 , 2004/ पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

तारीख के रूप में नियत करती है, जिसको उक्त अधिनियम के अध्याय 4 (44 व 45 धारा के सिवाय जो पहले से प्रवृत्त हो चुकी है ) अध्याय 5 और 6 ( धारा 76 की उपधारा ( 1 ) और धारा 77 , 78 , 79 और 81 के सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रवृत्त की जा चुकी है ) के उपबंध केरल राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे , अर्थात्:-

"जिला आलप्पी के चेर्तला में पानावेल्ली क्षेत्र । "

anceAct, 1948 (34 of 1948 ) the Central Government hereby appoints the 1st Jan. , 2005 as the date on which the provi- sions of Chapter IV ( except Sections 44 and 45 which have already been brought into force ) and Chapter V and VI (except Sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 76 and Sections 77 , 78 , 79 and 81 which have already been brought into force) of the said Act shall come into force in the following areas in the State ofKerala namely :-

[सं. एस-38013/91/2004-एस.एस.- 1 ]

"Kunnamanglam & Kuttikatoor in Koshikode Taluk &District ."

के. सी. जैन, निदेशक

[No. S-38013/89/2004-S.S . 1 ] New Delhi , the 16th December , 2004

K. C. JAIN, Director

नई दिल्ली , 16 दिसम्बर, 2004 S.O. 3354. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section(3 ) ofSection 1 ofthe Employees ' State Insur- anceAct, 1948 (34 of 1948) the Central Government hereby appoints the 1st Jan. , 2005 as the date on which the provi- sions ofChapter IV (except Sections 44 and 45 which have already been brought into force) and Chapter V and VI (except Sub -section ( 1 ) of Section 76 and Sections 77 , 78 , 79 and 81 which have already been brought into force) of the said Act shall come into force in the following areas in the State ofKerala namely:-

"Panavelly in Cherthala Taluk in Alleppy District. "

का. आ. 3356. कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम, 19:48 (1948का 34 ) की धारा 1 की उपधारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार एतदद्वारा 01 जनवरी , 2005 को उस तारीख के रूप में नियत करती है, जिसको उक्त अधिनियम के अध्याय 4(44 445 धारा के सिवाय जो पहले से प्रवृत्त हो चुकी है ) अध्याय 5 और 6 ( धारा 76 की उपधारा ( 1 ) और धारा 77 , 78 , 79 और 81 के सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रवृत्त की जा चुकी है ) के उपबंध केरल राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे , अर्थात्:-

[No. S -38013/91/2004-S.S. 1 ]

K. C. JAIN, Director

"जिला मलपुरम के तालुक तिरुरन्नगाडी में वेन्गाय तथा ओररक्रम के क्षेत्र । "

नई दिल्ली, 16 दिसम्बर, 2004

[सं. एस-38013/90/2004 - एस.एस. - 1 ]

के. सी. जैन, निदेशक

New Delhi, the 16th December, 2004 का. आ. 3355.- कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम, 1948 (1948 का 34 ) की धारा 1 की उपधारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियोंका प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार एत‌द्वारा 01 जनवरी, 2005 को उस तारीख के रूप में नियत करती है , जिसको उक्त अधिनियम के अध्याय 4(44 व 45 धारा के सिवाय जो पहले से प्रवृत्त हो चुकी है ) अध्याय 5 और 6 ( धारा 76 की उपधारा ( 1 ) और धारा 77 , 78 , 79 और 81 के सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रवृत्त की जा चुकी है ) के उपबंध केरल राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे, अर्थात्:-

६ "जिला एवं तालुक कोषिकोड में कुन्नामंगलम और कु‌ट्टीकाटूर क्षेत्र।"

[सं. एस-38013/89/2004- एस.एस.- 1 ]

S.O. 3356. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (3 ) of Section 1 of the Employees ' State Insur- anceAct, 1948 (34 of 1948 ) the Central Government hereby appoints the 1st Jan. , 2005 as the date on which the provi- sions ofChapter IV ( except Sections 44 and 45 which have already been brought into force) and Chapter V and VI (except Sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 76 and Sections 77, 78 , 79 and 81 which have already been brought into force) of the said Act shall come into force in the following areas in the State ofKerala namely :-

के. सी. जैन, निदेशक

"Vengara and Orrakam in Thirurangadi Taluk of Malapuram District . "

New Delhi , the 16th December, 2004

[No. S-38013/90/2004-S.S. 1 ]

K. C. JAIN , Director S.O. 3355. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub -section (3 ) ofSection 1 of the Employees ' State Insur- 10426

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004/PAUSA 4, 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)]

3. The Branch Manager ,

नईदिल्ली, 2 दिसम्बर , 2004

Chaitanya Grameena Bank, Repalle.

Guntur District.

Respondent

APPEARANCES :

Forthe Petitioner

: M/ s. R. Yogender Singh,

V. Kiran Kumar and

K. Sunil KishoreGoud का.आ. 3357.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार चैतन्य ग्रामीण बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई ० डी० नं ० 105/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 01-12-2004 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

Advocates

For the Respondent : M/ s . K. Srinivasa Murthy, [सं ० एल -12014/3/2004- आईआर ( बी-1 ) ]

सी० गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

C.Vijay Shekar Reddy and B. Vani , Advocates

AWARD

New Delhi , the 2nd December, 2004

This is a case taken under Sec . 2A (2) of the I. D. Act , 1947 in view of the judgement of the Hon'ble High Court ofAndhra Pradesh Reported in W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/ s. Cotton Corporation of India and two others .

S. O. 3357. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( I. D. No. 105/2003) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour- Court , Hyderabad, as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Chaitanya Grameena Bank and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 01-12-2004.

[No. L- 12014/3 /2004- IR (B- 1)] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT :

SHRI E. ISMAIL, B.Sc. , LL.B. , Presiding Officer Dated the 11th day of October , 2004 INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO . L.C.L.D. 105/2003

BETWEEN:

Sri S. Hari Krishna ,

S/ o Madhusudhan Rao,

C/o Sri R. Yogender Singh , H. No. 1-10-100, 1st floor,

E.S.I. Dispensary, Temple Alwal, Secunderabad-500010 .

.... Petitioner

AND

1. The Managing Director, Chaitanya Grameena Bank, Marrispet , Tenali . Guntur District.

2. The Chairman, Chaitanya Grameena Bank, MarrispetTenali . Guntur District.

2. The brief facts as mentioned in the petition are: That the Petitioner was initially engaged w.e.f. 19-2-1990 with the 3rd respondenti.e. , Branch Manager, Chaitanya Grameena Bank, Repalle , Guntur District. That during the period of employment between 19-2-90 to 3-1-97 he was engaged for more than 240 days. In the year 1997 he was engaged only for 5 days and he was asked not to attend to duties further . That the Petitioner approached the Hon'ble High Court for redressel of his grievances . Wherein the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. vide order dated 7-4-98 in Writ Petition No. 17333/97 directed the Respondent to consider his case as per the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and if he had completed 240 days , to give preference in future recruitment . Even after the directions of the Hon'ble High Court the Respondent never bothered to implement its orders . hence , he filed contempt petition No. 107/1998 in the above writ. In pursuance of which they issued letter dated 19-8-98 engaging the Petitioner for one month . After that he was periodically engaged . From 19-8-98 to 10-3-99 for 109 days . After this his services were terminated on 17-11-2000 saying that there is no fresh recruitment, hence, he can not regularized. During this period, the Respondent made a list of Chaitanya Grameena Bank Sub Staff pattern wherein at S. No. 38 where the petitioner working , it shows that they have engaged four temporary messengers . One of them is viz . Mr. S. K. Zakaraiha is a retired employee . even now, the respondents have engaged one Mr. Sambasiva Rao , Mr. Rama Krishna and Mr. Shyam Sunder who are farjuniors to the Petitioner. this itself is arbitrary and against the directions given by the Hon'ble High Court ofA. P. and violative of provisions ofthe Industriral Disputes Act , 1947. That from August , 1994 to August, 1995 he worked for more than 240 days . That the respondents are taking no doubt advantage of the terminology used in the Hon'ble High Court's order to 10427 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 25, 2004/पौष 4, 1926

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

engage the juniors than the Petitioner . Hence , he may be reinstated with all backwages.

engaged in case of need. He was not terminated from the service. That the Petitioner has raised an ID before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (C) , Vijayawada alleging illegal retrenchment from service . The Management has also submitted its comments in this regard.

6. In the crossexamination he deposed that he denied that the juniors to the Petitioner are working.

3. Acounter was filed stating that for regularization there must be a reference from the Government of India and Sec . 2A (2) is not applicable . That merely because he has completed 240 days he does not ipsofacto becomes entitled for regularization. The Petitioner was being appointed from time to time on leave vacancy . The sub Staff whenever they go on leave , the management engages casual labour in their place whoever is readily available during the period is engaged. Hence, the petition may dismissed.

7. It is argued by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner what all he stated in the petition and further that the Respondents are employing others , juniors to him and also engaging retired employees one of them is Mr. S. K. Zakaraiah to which the Respondent never replied. That he was engaged for sufficiently long period . Hence , he may be reinstated .

8. The respondent argued that the petitioner never worked for 240 days continuously in a period of 12 months and WW1 himself has admitted in the cross examination that it is true that he was engaged intermittently in leave vacancies for 53 days from 4-11-94 to 8-1-95.

4. The petitioner examined himself as WWI and deposed to the said facts as stated in the petition and further deposed marking Ex . WI to W39 which are payment receipts w.e.f. August , 1994 to August, 1995 . Ex. W40 is the statement showing the service particulars . Ex. W41 is the copy of Hon'ble High Court's order in Writ Petition No. 17333/97 . Ex. W42 is a letter dated 19-8-98 engaging him for one month. Ex. W43 is letter dated 11-11-98 engaging him for 4 days . Ex. W44 is letter dated 16-12-98 engaging him for 4 days . Ex . W45 and W46 are letters through which he was engaged for 13 days and 17 days respectively. Ex . W47 is the letter dated 17-11-90 rejecting his request for recruitment . Ex . W48 is his , application dated 28-2-92 requesting the Respondents to engage him on temporary basis . Ex . W49 is Xerox copy of particulars showing his attendance from 22-8-98 to 19-3-99. In the cross examination he deposed that he worked as temporary messenger in the Respondent bank . He joined through one of the Managers by name Sri P. Madhusudhan Reddy . The said manager was known to him as he worked at his village . That he has passed X class but he has not filed any proof as to prove his qualification. He worked as a daily wager . It is true that he was engaged intermittently in leave vacancy only for a period of 4 to 5 days from 1999k to 1994. It is true that he never worked more than 4 to 5 days except from 4-11-94 to 8-1-95 for a period of 53 days . He was not sponsored by any employment exchange that one regular messenger by name Mr. Nagamalleshwar Rao. It is not true to suggest that Mr. Nagamalleshwar Rao was sponsored through employment exchange . That the premises consists of 4 rooms.

9. Itmay be seen that nothing is necessary when he himself has stated that he has not worked at a stretch for more than 53 days. What the Hon'ble High Court meant was that if he has worked for 244 days . He may be considered. Be that may be so . The said 240 days should be in a period of 12 months and he has put in 244 days from 1990 to 1997. So obviously he was working as a casual employeewhenever work was available . Therefore, I am of the opinion that no more direction can be given except what the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. has given that, the Petitioner should be given preference to others whenever casual employees or daily wage employees are engaged taking his date of joining and age as on 19-2-90 and ifwhat the petitioner contends that Mr. S. K. Zakaraiah, retired employee is given preference over others the same is not desirable . The Respondent bank should also being an employer is in a better position, more liberally can engage this Petitioner whenever any opportunity arises, forgetting that he has approached the Hon'ble High Court or this Court . Hence , an Award is passed directing that the Petitioner shall be engaged in preference to others whenever there is work of daily wagers or casual nature work is available taking his date of appointment as 19-2-90 and his age as on 19-2-90.

Award passed accordingly. Transmit .

Dictated to Kum. K. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by me on this the 11th day ofOctober , 2004.

E. ISMAIL, PresidingOfficer 5.TheManagement examined Sri K. Murali Krishna, Manager (Staff) as MW1 . He deposed that the Petitioner WWI was engaged in leave vacancy. The Petitioner filed WritPetition No. 17333/97 and the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. passed an order dated 7-4-98 directing that the Petitioner should be given preference in future recruitment, in accordance with the Sec . 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. He was found to have worked for 240 days . The contempt petition filed by the Petitioner was closed by the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. on 10-9-98 and he was GAZETEGINDIA : DECEMBER 25, 2004 /PAUSA 4 , 1926

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for the Petitioner

Witnesses examined for Respondent

MW1: Sri K. Murali Krishna WW1 : Sri S. Hari Krishna

Documents marked for the Petitioner Ex. W1: Copy ofPayment receipt dt. 4-9-94 Ex. W2: Copy of Payment receipt dt . 11-9-94 Ex. W3 : Copy ofPayment receipt dt . 18-8-94 Ex. W4: Copy ofPayment receiptdt. 25-8-94 Ex. W5: Copy ofPayment receipt dt . 1-10-94 Ex. W6: Copy of Payment receipt dt . 16-10-94 Ex. W7: Copy of Payment receiptdt . 23-10-94 Ex. W8 : Copy ofPayment receiptdt. 2-11-94 Ex. W9 : Copy ofPayment receiptdt. 13-11-94 Copy of Payment receipt dt . 8-1-95 Ex. W10:

Copy of Payment receiptdt. 15-1-95 Ex . W11:

Copy ofPayment receipt dt . 22-1-95 Ex. W12:

Copy of Payment receipt dt . 31-1-95 Ex. W13:

Copy of Payment receipt dt . 12-2-95 Ex. W14:

Copy of Payment receipt dt. 19-2-95 Ex. W15:

Copy of Payment receipt dt. 26-2-95 Ex. W16:

Copy ofPayment receipt dt . 5-3-95 Ex. W17:

Copy of Payment receipt dt . 12-3-95 Ex. W18 :

Copy of Payment receipt dt . 21-3-95 Ex. W19:

Copy ofPayment receipt dt. 31-3-95 Ex. W20:

Copy of Payment receipt dt. 8-4-95 Ex. W21:

Copy of Payment receipt dt. 18-4-95 Ex. W22:

Copy of Payment receiptdt . 25-4-95 Ex . W23:

Copy of Payment receipt dt . 9-5-95 Ex .W24:

Copy of Payment receipt dt . 16-5-95 Ex.W25 :

Copy of Payment receipt dt . 21-5-95 Ex . W26:

Copy of Payment receiptdt . 4-6-95 Ex. W27:

Copy of Payment receipt dt. 13-6-95 Ex . W28:

Copy of Payment receipt dt . 21-6-95 Ex. W29:

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] Copy of Payment receipt dt. 25-6-95 Ex.W30:

Copy of Payment receipt dt . 9-7-95 Ex. W31 :

Copy of Payment receipt dt . 18-7-95 Ex. W32:

Copy of Payment receipt dt. 23-7-95 Ex. W33 :

Copy of Payment receipt dt . 6-8-95 Ex. W34:

Copy of Payment receipt dt. 13-8-95 Ex. W35 :

Copy of Payment receipt dt . 27-8-95 Ex. W36:

Copy of Payment receipt dt . 7-8-94 Ex. W37 :

Copy of Payment receipt dt . 14-8-94 Ex. W38 :

Copy of Payment receipt dt. 20-8-94 Ex. W39 :

Ex. W40: Copy of document showing service particulars ofWWI

Ex. W41: Copy of order in WP No. 17333/1997 dt. 7-4-98

Copy of Ir. No. 099 /3 /G/47/ 821 dt . 19-8-98 Ex. W42:

Ex. W43: Copy of Ir. No. 099/3/G/47/ 1135 dt. 11-11-98

Ex. W44: Copy of Ir. No. 099 /3 /G/47/1278 dt. 16-12-98

Copy of Ir. No. 099/3 /G/47/ 189 dt. 4-2-99 Ex. W45:

Copy of Ir. No. 099 /3 /G/47/ 344 dt. 10-3-99 Ex .W46:

Ex. W47: Copy of Ir . No. 099/3 /G/47/1473 dt. 17-11-2000

Ex.W48: Copy of representation of WW1 dt. 28-10-2002

Ex. W49: Copy of document showing attendance particulars of WW1

Copy of Ir. No. 099/3 /G/47/221 dt. 24-12-98 Ex. W50 :

Copy of Ir. No. 039/3/7/805 dt . 17-11-88 Ex. W51:

Copy of Ir. No. 099/3/ G/47/ 970dt. 24-9-98 Ex. W52:

Documents marked for the Respondent Ex. M1: Copy of Ir . No. 099/3 /G / 47/ 821 dt . 19-8-98 Ex. M2: Copy of Ir. No. 099/3/G/47/ 970 dt. 24-9-98 Ex.M3: Copy of Ir. No. 099/3 / G/47/ 1135dt. 11-11-98 Ex.M4: Copy of Ir. No. 099 /3 /G/47/ 1278 dt . 16-12-98 Ex. M5: Copy of Ir . No. 099/3/ G/47/ 189 dt . 4-2-99 Ex. M6: Copy of Ir. No. 099/3 / G/ 47/344 dt . 10-3-99

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