This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

REGD . NO. D. L. (N) 04/0007/2003-05 रजिस्ट्री सं० डी० एल० ( एन ) 04/0007/ 2003-05

सत्यमेव जयते भारत का राजपत्र The Gazette of India

प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक

WEEKLY

नई दिल्ली, जुलाई 10- जुलाई 16 , 2005 , शनिवार/आषाढ़ 19-आषाढ़ 25, 1927

सं० 29 ]

NEW DELHI, JULY 10-JULY 16 , 2005, SATURDAY / ASADHA 19- ASADHA 25, 1927 No. 29 ]

इस भाग में भिन्न पृष्ठ संख्या दी जाती है जिससे कि यह पृथक 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, 30 जून , 2005

52और 57 के अधीन ( 4 ) अपराध सं. 11/93 दिनांक 15-03-2005 के संबंध में तथा उक्त अपराधों में से एक अथवा अधिक से संबंधित अथवा संसक्त प्रयत्न, दुष्प्रेरण और षडयंत्र तथा उसी संव्यवहार के अनुक्रम में किए गए अथवा उन्हीं तथ्यों से उद्भूत किन्हीं अन्य अपराधों के अन्वेषण के लिए दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना के सदस्यों की शक्तियों और अधिकारिता का विस्तार सम्पूर्ण राजस्थान राज्य पर करती है ।

[सं. 228/37/2005 - ए.वी.डी.- II ] चन्द्र प्रकाश, अवर सचिव

MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSION

(Department of Personnel and Training) New Delhi , the 30th June , 2005

S.O. 2467. 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 the Government ofRajasthan, Home (Gr. 5) Department vide Notification No. F. 14 (2) Home- 5 /2005 dated 18-6-2005, hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of Delhi Special Establishment Act to the whole of the State of Rajasthan for investigation of ( 1 ) Crime No. 11/91 dated 15-3-2005

(7525)

का. आ. 2467.-केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना अधिनियम, 1946 ( 1946 का अधिनियम सं . 25 ) की धारा 6 के साथ पठित धारा 5 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए राजस्थान सरकार, गृह ( जीआर. 5 ) विभाग की अधिसूचना सं. एफ 14(2 ) गृह-5/ 2005 दिनांक 18-6-2005 द्वारा प्राप्त राजस्थान सरकार की सहमति से सरिस्का टाइगर रिजर्व, सरिस्का, जिला अलवर (राजस्थान ) के संबंध में वन्य जीव ( संरक्षण ) अधिनियम, 1972 ( 1972 का अधिनियम सं. 53 ) की धारा 51 सपठित धारा 9 , 39, 50 , 52 और 57 के अधीन ( 1 ) अपराध सं. 11/91 दिनांक15-03-2005 , वन्य जीव ( संरक्षण ) अधिनियम, 1972 ( 1972 का अधिनियम सं. 53 ) की धारा 51 सपठित धारा 9 , 27 , 31 , 39 , 48 - ए, 49 - ए, 49- बी और 50 केअधीन ( 2 ) अपराध सं . 45/91 दिनांक 11-03-2005 , वन्य जीव (संरक्षण) अधिनियम, 1972 ( 1972 का अधिनियम सं. 53 ) की धारा 51 सपठित धारा 9 , 39 , 50, 52 और 57 के अधीन ( 3 ) अपराध सं. 11/92दिनांक 15-03-2005 , वन्य जीव ( संरक्षण ) अधिनियम , 1972 (1972का अधिनियम सं. 53 ) की धारा 51 सपठित धारा 9 , 39 , 50, 1993 GI/ 2005 [PART II- SEC. 3 (ii )]

JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

7526

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA

hereby declare " Goundapalayam Revenue Village " of Tiruchengode Taluk , in the District of Namakkal. State of Tamil Nadu , to be a warehousing station under Section 9 of the Customs Act, 1962 for the purpose of licensing of Private Bonded Warehouse .

[F.C. No. VIII/40/1/2005-Cus . (CCO) ] J.M.K. SEKHAR , Chief Commissioner .

केन्द्रीय प्रत्यक्ष कर बोर्ड नई दिल्ली, 23 जून , 2005 (आयकर )

under Section 51 read with Sections 9 , 39 , 50 , 52 and 57 of Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 , (Act No. 53 of 1972 ) , (2) CrimeNo. 45/91 dated 11-3-2005 under Section 51 read with Sections 9 , 27 , 31 , 39 , 48-A, 49 -A, 49 -B and 50 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, (Act No. 53 of 1972), (3 ) Crime No. 11092 dated 15-3-2005 under Section 51 read with Sections 9 , 39, 50 , 52 and 57 of the Wild Life (Protection ) Act, 1972, (Act No. 53 of 1972) , (4) Crime No. 11/93 dated 15-3-2005 under Section 51 read with Sections 9, 39 , 50, 52 and 57 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act , 1972, (Act No. 53 of 1972) , relating to Sariska Tiger Reserve, Sariska, District Alwar ( Rajasthan ) and attempts , abetments and conspiracies in relation to or in connection with one or more of the offences mentioned above and any other offence oroffences committed in the course of the same transaction arising out of the same facts .

[No. 228/37/2005 -AVD - II] CHANDRA PRAKASH , Under Secy.

का. आ. 2469.- आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 ( 1961 का 43 ) की धारा 10 के खंड ( 23 ग ) के उप- खंड ( iv ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार एतद्वारा " महाराष्ट्र एनर्जी डवलपमेंट एजेन्सी, मुम्बई " को कर- निर्धारण वर्ष 2004-2005 से 2006-2007 तक के लिए निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुए उक्त उपखण्डके प्रयोजनार्थ अधिसूचित करती है, अर्थात्: - वित्त मंत्रालय (राजस्वविभाग )

(i ) कर निर्धारिती अपनी आय का इस्तेमाल अथवा अपनी आय का इस्तेमाल करने के लिए उनका संचयन पूर्णतया तथा अनन्यतया उन उद्देश्यों के लिए करेगा जिनके लिए इसकी स्थापना की गई है;

सीमा शुल्क एवं केन्द्रीय उत्पाद शुल्क मुख्य आयुक्त का कार्यालय

कोयम्बतूर , 8 जून , 2005 संख्या 1 /2005-सीमा शुल्क ( एन.टी. )

(ii ) कर निर्धारिती उपर्युक्त कर निर्धारण वर्षों से संगत पूर्ववर्ती वर्षों की किसी भी अवधि के दौरान धारा 11 की उपधारा (5 ) में विनिर्दिष्ट किसी एक अथवा एक से अधिक ढंग अथवा तरीकों से भिन्न तरीकों से उसकी निधि ( जेवर- जवाहिरात, फर्नीचर आदि के रूप में प्राप्त तथा अनुरक्षित स्वैच्छिकंअंशदान से भिन्न) का निवेश नहीं करेगा अथवा उसे जमा नहीं करवा सकेगा ;

(iii) यह अधिसूचना किसी ऐसी आय के संबंध में लागू नहीं होगी, जो कि कारोबार से प्राप्त लाभ तथा अभिलाभ हो जब तक कि ऐसा कारोबार उक्त कर निर्धारिती के उद्देश्योंकी प्राप्ति के प्रासंगिक नहीं हो तथा ऐसे कारोबार के संबंध में अलग से लेखा- पुस्तिकाएं नहीं रखी जाती हों;

का. आ. 2468.- यथा संशोधित अधिसूचना सं -14/2002 सी.शु. ( एन.टी. ) , दिनांक 7-3-2002 के साथ पठित सीमा शुल्क अधिनियम, 1962 की धारा 152 खंड ( ए) के अंतर्गत भारत सरकार, वित्त मंत्रालय, राजस्व विभाग , नई दिल्ली के दिनांक 1 जुलाई , 1994 के अधिसूचना संख्या 33/ 94- सीमा शुल्क ( एन.टी. ) के अधीन अधोहस्ताक्षरी को प्रत्यायोजित शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मै. जे. एम. के. शेखर, मुख्य आयुक्त, सीमा शुल्क एवं केन्द्रीय उत्पाद शुल्क कोयम्बतूर एतद्वारा तमिलनाडु राज्य, नामक्कल जिला, तिरूच्चेंगोड तालुक के गौन्डमपालयम राजस्व ग्राम को सीमा शुल्क अधिनियम , 1962की धारा 9 के अंतर्गत निजी भाण्डागार को लाइसेन्स देने के उद्देश्य से भाण्डागरण स्टेशन के रूप में घोषित करता हूँ।

[फा. सी. सं . VIII/40/1/2005- सी.शु. (मु.आ.का. ) ] जे. एम. के. शेखर, मुख्य आयुक्त

(iv) कर निर्धारिती आय कर अधिनयम, 1961 के प्रावधानों केअनुसार अपनी आय विवरणी नियमित रूप से आयकर प्राधिकारी के समक्ष दाखिल करेगा ;

MINISTRY OF FINANCE (Department ofRevenue)

(v) विघटन की स्थिति में इसकी अतिरिक्त राशियां और परिसम्पतियां समान उद्देश्यों वाले धर्मार्थ संगठन को द्रे दीजाएगी ।

[अधिसूचना सं . 167/2005/फा. सं. 197/14/2005- आयकर नि.- दीपक गर्ग , अवर सचिव OFFICE OF THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS & CENTRAL EXCISE Coimbatore , the 8th June , 2005 No. 1/2005-Customs (NT)

CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES New Delhi , the 23rd June, 2005 (INCOME TAX)

S.O. 2469. In exercise of powers conferred by the Sub - clause (iv) of clause ( 23C) of Section 10 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961 ), the Central Government hereby notifies the "Maharashtra Energy Development S.O. 2468.- In exercise of the powers delegated to the undersigned vide Notification No. 33/94- Customs (NT) dated 1st July 1994 by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance , Department of Revenue , New Delhi under clause (a) of Section 152 of the Customs Act , 1962, read with Notification No. 14/2002 - Customs (NT) dated 7-3-2002 as amended , I , J.M.K. Sekhar, Chief Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise , Coimbatore [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

Agency , Mumbai " for the purpose of the said sub- clause for the assessment year 2004-2005 to 2006-2007 subject to the following conditions , namely :-

( i ) the assessee will apply its income , or accumulate for application, wholly and exclusively to the objects for which it is established;

( ii ) the assessee will not invest or deposits its fund (other than voluntary contribution received and maintained in the form of jewellery , furniture etc. ) for any period during the previous years relevant to the assessment years mentioned above otherwise than in any one or more of the forms or modes specified in Sub-section ( 5) of Section 11;

( iii) this notification will not apply in relation to any income being profits and gains ofbusiness, unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the assessee and separate books of accounts are maintained in respect of such business ;

( iv ) the assessee will regularly file its return of income before the Income - tax authority in accordance with the provisions of Income -tax Act, 1961;

(v) that in the event of dissolution , its surplus and the assets will be given to a charitable organisation with similar objectives .

[Notification No. 167/2005/F . No. 197/ 14/2005 - ITA - I ] DEEPAK GARG, Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली , 27 जून, 2005 (आयकर)

का. आ. 2470.- आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 ( 1961 का 43) की धारा 10 के खंड ( 23 ग ) के उप- खंड ( iv ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियोंका प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार एतद्वारा " प्रजापिता ब्रह्म कुमारीज ईश्वरीय विश्व विद्यालय , माउंट आबू, राजस्थान " को कर-निर्धारण वर्ष 2006-2007 से 2008-2009 तक के लिए निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुए उक्त उपखण्ड के प्रयोजनार्थ अधिसूचित करती है , अर्थात्: -

( ii ) कर निर्धारिती उपर्युक्त कर निर्धारण वर्षों से संगत पूर्ववर्ती वर्षों की किसी भी अवधि के दौरान धारा 11 की उप - धारा ( 5 ) में विनिर्दिष्ट एक अथवा एक से अधिक ढंग अथवा तरीकों से भिन्न तरीकों से उसकी निधि (जेवर- जवाहिरात, फर्नीचर आदि के रूप में प्राप्त तथा अनुरक्षित स्वैच्छिक अंशदान से भिन्न ) का निवेश नहीं करेगा अथवा उसे जमा नहीं करवा सकेगा;

( iii ) यह अधिसूचना किसी ऐसी आय के संबंध में लागू नहीं होगी , जो कि कारोबार से प्राप्त लाभ तथा अभिलाभ हो

7527

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16 , 2005/ आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

जब तक कि ऐसा कारोबार उक्त कर निर्धारिती के उद्देश्योंकी प्राप्ति के प्रासंगिक नहीं हो तथा ऐसे कारोबार के संबंध में अलग से लेखा-पुस्तिकाएं नहीं रखी जाती हों;

( iv) कर निर्धारिती आयकर अधिनयम , 1961 के प्रावधानों के अनुसार अपनी आय विवरणी नियमित रूप से आयकर प्राधिकारी के समक्ष दाखिल करेगा ;

(v) विघटन की स्थिति में इसकी अतिरिक्त राशियां और परिसम्पतियां समान उद्देश्यों वाले धर्मार्थ संगठन को दे दी जाएंगी ।

[अधिसूचना सं. 171/2005/फा.सं. 197/126/2004- आयकर नि. - 1 ] दीपक गर्ग , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 27th June , 2005 (INCOME TAX)

S.O. 2470.- In exercise of powers conferred by the sub - clause (iv) of clause (23C) of Section 10 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961) , the Central Government hereby notifies the " Prajapita Brahma Kumaris Ishwariya Vishwa Vidyalaya , Mount Abu , Rajasthan " for the purpose of the said sub - clause for the assessment year 2006-2007 to 2008-2009 subject to the following conditions , namely:-

( i) the assessee will apply its income , or accumulate for application , wholly and exclusively to the objects for which it is established;

( ii) the assessee will not invest or deposit its fund (other than voluntary contributions received and maintained in the form of jewellery , furniture etc. ) for any period during the previous years relevant to the assessment years mentioned above other- wise than in any one or more ofthe forms or modes specified in Sub-section (5 ) of Section 11 ;

( iii) this notification will not apply in relation to any income being profits and gains ofbusiness , unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the assessee and separate books of accounts are maintained in respect of such business ;

( iv) the assessee will regularly file its return of income before the Income- tax authority in accordance with the provisions of the Income- taxAct , 1961;

( v) that in the event of dissolution, its surplus and the assets will be given to a charitable organisation with similar objectives .

[Notification No. 171 /2005/F . No. 197/ 126/ 2004 - ITA-I ] DEEPAK GARG, Under Secy.

7528

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA JULY 16, 2005 / ASADHA 25, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 27 जून, 2005 (आयकर )

furniture etc. ) for any period during the previous years relevant to the assessment years mentioned above otherwise than in any one or more of the forms or modes specified in Sub- section (5) of Section 11 ;

(iii) this notification will not apply in relation to any income being profits and gains of business , unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the assessee and separate books of accounts are maintained in respect of such business ;

का. आ. 2471.- आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 ( 1961 का 43 ) की धारा 10 के खंड ( 23 ग ) के उप- खंड ( iv ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियोंका प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार एतद्वारा " सोसायटी ऑफ सिस्टर्स आफ चैरिटी ऑफ सेंट बी. गेपिटानियो एण्ड सेंट वी गेरोसा, कोलकाता " को कर - निर्धारण वर्ष 2001-2002 से 2003- 2004 तक के लिए निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुए उक्त उपखण्ड के प्रयोजनार्थ अधिसूचित करती है, अर्थात्: -

( iv) the assessee will regularly file its return of income before the Income- tax authority in accordance with the provisions of Income -tax Act, 1961;

(i) कर निर्धारिती अपनी आय का इस्तेमाल अथवा अपनी आय का इस्तेमाल करने के लिए उनका संचयन पूर्णतया तथा अनन्यतया उन उद्देश्यों के लिए करेगा जिनके लिए इसकी स्थापना की गई है ;

(v) that in the event of dissolution , its surplus and the assets will be given to an organisation with similar objectives .

[Notification No. 172/ 2005 /F . No. 197 / 56/2005 - ITA- I ] DEEPAK GARG, Under Secy. नई दिल्ली , 27 जून , 2005 (आयकर)

(ii ) कर निर्धारिती उपर्युक्त कर निर्धारण वर्षों से संगत पूर्ववर्ती वर्षों की किसी भी अवधि के दौरान धारा 11 की उप- धारा ( 5 ) में विनिर्दिष्ट एक अथवा एक से अधिक ढंग अथवा तरीकों से भिन्न तरीकों से उसकी निधि (जेवर- जवाहिरात, फर्नीचर आदि के रूप में प्राप्त तथा अनुरक्षित स्वैच्छिक अंशदान से भिन्न ) का निवेश नहीं करेगा अथवा उसे जमा नहीं करवा सकेगा ;

का. आ. 2472.- आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 ( 1961 का 43) की धारा 10 के खंड ( 23 ग ) के उपखंड ( iv ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार एतद्वारा " इन्टरनेशनल कमीशन ऑन इरीगेशन एण्ड ड्रेनेज , नई दिल्ली " को कर नर्धारण वर्ष 2005- 2006 से 2007-2008 तक के लिए निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुए उक्त उप - खण्ड के प्रयोजनार्थ अधिसूचित करती है , अर्थात्:-

(iii) यह अधिसूचना किसी ऐसी आय के संबंध में लागू नहीं होगी , जो कि कारोबार से प्राप्त लाभ तथा अभिलाभ हो जब तककि ऐसा कारोबार उक्त कर निर्धारिती के उद्देश्यों की प्राप्तिके प्रासंगिक नहीं हो तथा ऐसे कारोबार के संबंध मेंअलग से लेखा- पुस्तिकाएं नहीं रखी जाती हों ;

(iv) कर निर्धारिती आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 के प्रावधानों के अनुसार अपनी आय विवरणी नियमित रूप से आय कर प्राधिकारी के समक्ष दाखिल करेगा;

[अधिसूचना सं. 172/2005/फा. सं. 197/56/2005- आयकर नि. - 1 ] दीपक गर्ग , अवर सचिव

(ii) कर निर्धारिती उपर्युक्त कर निर्धारण वर्षों से संगत पूर्ववर्ती वर्षों की किसी भी अवधि के दौरान धारा 11 की उप- धारा ( 5 ) में विनिर्दिष्ट किसी एक अथवा एक से अधिक ढंग अथवा तरीकों से भिन्न तरीकों से उसकी निधि ( जेवर- जवाहिरात , फर्नीचर आदि के रूप में प्राप्त तथा अनुरक्षित स्वैच्छिक अंशदान से भिन्न ) का निवेश नहीं करेगा अथवा उसे जमा नहीं करवा सकेगा ;

New Delhi , the 27th June , 2005 (INCOME TAX)

(iii ) यह अधिसूचना किसी ऐसी आय के संबंध में लागू नहीं होगी, जो कि कारोबार से प्राप्त लाभ तथा अभिलाभ हो . जब तककि ऐसा कारोबार उक्त कर निर्धारिती के उद्देश्यों कीप्राप्तिकेप्रासंगिक नहीं हो तथा ऐसे कारोबार के संबंध मेंअलग से लेखा- पुस्तिकाएं नहीं रखी जाती हों ;

S.O. 2471. In exercise of powers conferred by the sub - clause ( iv) of clause (23C ) of Section 10 of the Income -tax Act , 1961 (43 of 1961 ), the Central Government hereby notifies the " Society of Sisters of Charity of Saint B. Gapitanio and Saint V. Gerosa, Kolkata " for the purpose of the said sub- clause for the assessment year 2001-2002 to 2003-2004 subject to the following conditions , namely:-

(iv) कर निर्धारिती आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 के प्रावधानों केअनुसार अपनी आय विवरणी नियमित रूप से आयकर प्राधिकारी के समक्ष दाखिल करेगा

( i ) the assessee will apply its income, or accumulate for application, wholly and exclusively to the objects for which it is established:

[अधिसूचना सं. 173/2005/फा.सं. 197/58 / 2005- आयकर नि. - 1 ]

दीपक गर्ग , अवर सचिव ( ii) the assessee will not invest or deposit its fund (other than voluntary contributions received and maintained in the form of jewellery , [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7529

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

New Delhi , the 27th June, 2005

(INCOME TAX)

S.O. 2472. In exercise of powers conferred by the sub - clause (iv) of clause (23C) of Section 10 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961 ) , the Central Government hereby notifies the " International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage , New Delhi " for the purpose of the said sub - clause for the assessment years 2005-2006 to 2007-2008 subject to the following conditions , namely :-

( i ) the assessee will apply its income , for accumulate for application , wholly and exclusively to the objects for which it is established;

( ii ) the assessee will not invest or deposit its fund (other than voluntary contributions received and maintained in the form of jewellery , furniture etc. ) for any period during the previous years relevant to the assessment years mentioned above otherwise than in any one or more of the forms or modes specified in sub- section ( 5) of Section 11 ;

( iv) the assessee will regularly file its return of income before the Income - tax authority in accordance with the provisions of the Income- taxAct, 1961;

(v) that in the event of dissolution, its surplus and the assets will be given to a charitable organisation with similar objectives .

[Notification No. 173/2005/F . No. 197/58/2005 - ITA- I ] DEEPAK GARG, Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली, 27 जून, 2005

(आयकर)

का. आ. 2473.-आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 ( 1961 का 43) की धारा 10. के खंड ( 23 ग ) के उप- खंड ( iv ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियोंका प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार एतद्वारा " फेडरेशन ऑफ इंडियन एक्सपोर्ट आर्गेनाइजेशन, नई दिल्ली " को कर- निर्धारण वर्ष 2004-2005 से 2006-2007 तक के लिए निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुए उक्त उपखण्ड के प्रयोजनार्थ अधिसूचित करती है, अर्थात्-

( ii ) कर निर्धारिती उपर्युक्त कर निर्धारण वर्षों से संगत पूर्ववर्ती वर्षों की किसी भी अवधि के दौरान धारा 11 की उपधारा (5) में विनिर्दिष्ट किसी एक अथवा एक से अधिक ढंग अथवा तरीकों से भिन्न तरीकों से उसकी निधि (जेवर- जवाहिरात , फर्नीचर आदि के रूप में प्राप्त तथा अनुरक्षित स्वैच्छिक अंशदान से भिन्न) का निवेश नहीं करेगा अथवा उसे जमा नहीं करेगा ;

( iii) यह अधिसूचना किसी ऐसी आय के संबंध में लागू नहीं होगी, जो कि कारोबार से प्राप्त लाभ तथा अभिलाभ हो जब तक कि ऐसा कारोबार उक्त कर निर्धारिती के उद्देश्योंकी प्राप्ति के प्रासंगिक नहीं हो तथा ऐसे कारोबार के संबंध में अलग से लेखा- पुस्तिकाएं नहीं रखी जाती हों;

( iv) कर निर्धारिती आय कर अधिनियम , 1961 के प्रावधानों केअनुसार अपनी आय विवरणी नियमित रूप से आयकर प्राधिकारी के समक्ष दाखिल करेगा ;

[अधिसूचना सं. 174/2005/फा.सं. 197/ 59/2005- आयकर नि. - 1 ] दीपक गर्ग, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 27th June , 2005 (INCOME TAX)

S.O. 2473.- In exercise of powers conferred by sub -clause ( iv) of clause (23C) of Section 10 of the Income- taxAct, 1961 (43 of 1961) , the Central Government hereby notifies the " Federation of Indian Export Organisation , New Delhi " for the purpose of the said sub- clause for the assessment years 2004-2005 to 2006-2007 subject to the following conditions , namely:---

( i ) the assessee will apply its income , or accumulate for application , wholly and exclusively to the objects for which it is established;

( ii ) the assessee will not invest or deposit its fund (other than voluntary contributions received and maintained in the form of jewellery, furniture etc. ) for any period during the previous years relevant to the assessment years mentioned above otherwise than in any one or more of the forms or modes specified in sub- section ( 5) of Section 11 ;

( iii ) this notification will not apply in relation to any income being profits and gains ofbusiness , unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the assessee and separate books of accounts are maintained in respect of such business;

( iv) the assessee will regularly file its return of income before the Income -tax authority in accordance with the provisions of the Income- taxAct, 1961;

(v) that in the event of dissolution , its surplus and the assets will be given to a charitable organisation with similar objectives .

[NotificationNo. 174/2005 /F . No. 197 /59/2004 - ITA- I ] DEEPAK GARG, Under Secy .

7530

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA JULY 16, 2005 / ASADHA 25 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 27 जून, 2005 (आयकर)

का. आ. 2474.- आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 ( 1961 का 43) की धारा 10 के खंड ( 23 ग ) के उप - खंड ( iv ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियोंका प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार एतद्वारा " भारत सेवाश्रम संघ, कोलकाता " को कर- निर्धारण वर्ष 2005-2006 से 2007- 2008 तकके लिए निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुए उक्त उपखण्ड के प्रयोजनार्थ अधिसूचित करती है, अर्थात्-

(i) कर निर्धारिती अपनी आय का इस्तेमाल अथवा अपनी आय का इस्तेमाल करने के लिए उनका संचयन पूर्णतया तथा अनन्यतया उन उद्देश्यों के लिए करेगा जिनके लिए इसकी स्थापना की गई है ;

(ii ) कर निर्धारिती उपर्युक्त कर निर्धारण वर्षों से संगत पूर्ववर्ती वर्षों की किसी भी अवधि के दौरान धारा 11 की उपधारा ( 5 ) में विनिर्दिष्ट किसी एक अथवा एक से अधिक ढंग अथवा तरीकों से भिन्न तरीकों से उसकी निधि (जेवर- जवाहिरात , फर्नीचर आदि के रूप में प्राप्त तथा अनुरक्षित स्वैच्छिक अंशदान से भिन्न) का निवेश नहीं करेगा अथवा उसे जमा नहीं करवा सकेगा ;

( iii) यह अधिसूचना किसी ऐसी आय के संबंध में लागू नहीं होगी , जो कि कारोबार से प्राप्त लाभ तथा अभिलाभ हो जब तक कि ऐसा कारोबार उक्त कर निर्धारिती के उद्देश्यों कीप्राप्तिके प्रासंगिक नहीं हो तथा ऐसे कारोबार के संबंध में अलग से लेखा- पुस्तिकाएं नहीं रखी जाती हों ;

(iv) कर निर्धारिती आय कर अधिनियम, 1961 के प्रावधानों केअनुसार अपनी आय विवरणी नियमित रूप से आयकर प्राधिकारी के समक्ष दाखिल करेगा ;

(v ) विघटन की स्थिति में इसकी अतिरिक्त राशियां और परिसम्पतियां समान उद्देश्यों वाले धर्मार्थ संगठन को दे दीजाएंगी।

[अधिसूचना सं. 175/ 2005/फा.सं. 197 / 46/2005- आयकर नि. -1 ] दीपक गर्ग, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 27th June , 2005 (INCOME TAX)

S.O. 2474.- In exercise of powers conferredby sub -clause ( iv ) of clause (23C) of Section 10 of the Income- tax Act , 1961 (43 of 1961 ) , the Central Government hereby notifies the " Bharat Sevashram Sangha , Kolkata " for the purpose of the said sub - clause for the assessment years 2005-2006 to 2007-2008 subject to the fillowing conditions, namely:-

( i) the assessee will apply its income , or accumulate for application , wholly and exclusively to the objects for which it is established;

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] years mentioned above otherwise than in any one or more of the forms or modes specified in sub - section (5 ) of Section 11 ;

( iv) the assessee will regularly file its return of income before the Income-tax authority in accordance with the provisions of Income -tax Act, 1961;

(v) that in the event of dissolution, its surplus and the assets will be given to a charitable organisation with similar objectives .

[NotificationNo. 175/2005/F . No. 197/46/2005 -ITA - I ] DEEPAK GARG, Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली , 27 जून, 2005 (आयकर )

का. आ. 2475.-आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 ( 1961 का 43 ) की धारा 10 के खंड ( 237 ) के उप- खंड ( v ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार एतद्वारा " नाथद्वारा टेम्पल बोर्ड, नाथद्वारा ( राजस्थान ) " को कर- निर्धारण वर्ष 2005-2006 से 2007-2008 तक के लिए निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुए उक्त उपखण्ड के प्रयोजनार्थ अधिसूचित करती है , अर्थात्-

(i) कर निर्धारिती अपनी आय का इस्तेमाल अथवा अपनी आय का इस्तेमाल करने के लिए उनका संचयन पूर्णतया तथा अनन्यतया उन उद्देश्यों के लिए करेगा जिनके लिए इसकी स्थापना की गई है ;

(ii) कर निर्धारिती उपर्युक्त कर निर्धारण वर्षों से संगत पूर्ववर्ती वर्षों की किसी भी अवधि के दौरान धारा 11 की उपधारा (5 ) में विनिर्दिष्ट किसी एक अथवा एक से अधिक ढंग अथवा तरीकों से भिन्न तरीकों से उसकी निधि (जेवर-जवाहिरात , फर्नीचर आदि के रूप में प्राप्त तथा अनुरक्षित स्वैच्छिक अंशदान से भिन्न) का निवेश नहीं करेगा अथवा उसे जमा नहीं करवा सकेगा ;

(iii ) यह अधिसूचना किसी ऐसी आय के संबंध में लागू नहीं होगी, जो कि कारोबार से प्राप्त लाभ तथा अभिलाभ हो जब तक कि ऐसा कारोबार उक्त कर निर्धारिती के उद्देश्यों कीप्राप्तिकेप्रासंगिक नहीं हो तथा ऐसे कारोबार के संबंध मेंअलग से लेखा- पुस्तिकाएं नहीं रखी जाती हों ;

( iv) कर निर्धारिती आय कर अधिनियम , 1961 के प्रावधानों केअनुसार अपनी आय विवरणी नियमित रूप से आयकर प्राधिकारी के समक्ष दाखिल करेगा ;

(v ) विघटन की स्थिति में इसकी अतिरिक्त राशियां और परिसम्पतियां समान उद्देश्यों वाले संगठन को दे दी जाएंगी ।

[अधिसूचना सं . 170/ 2005/फा.सं . 197/65/2005- आयकर नि. -[ ]

दीपक गर्ग, अवर सचिव [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

New Delhi , the 27th June, 2005 (INCOME TAX)

S.O. 2475.- In exercise of powers conferred by the sub - clause (v) of clause (23C) of Section 10 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ( 43 of 1961 ), the Central Government hereby notifies the " Nathdwara Temple Board , Nathdwara, (Rajasthan) " for the purpose of the said sub -clause for the assessment years 2005-2006 to 2007-2008 subject to the following conditions , namely :-

( i) the assessee will apply its income , or accumulate for application , wholly and exclusively to the objects for which it is established;

( ii ) the assessee will not invest or deposit its fund (other than voluntary contributions received and maintained in the form of jewellery, furniture etc. ) for any period during the previous years relevant to the assessment years mentioned above otherwise than in any one or more of the forms or modes specified in sub-section ( 5) of Section 11;

( iii) this notification will not apply in relation to any income being profits and gains of business, unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the assessee and separate books of accounts are maintained in respect of such business;

( iv) the assessee will regularly file its return of income before the Income- tax authority in accordance with the provisions of Income -tax Act, 1961;

(v) that in the event of dissolution, its surplus and the assets will be given to an organisation with similar objectives .

[Notification No. 170/2005/F. No. 197/65/2005 - ITA- I ] DEEPAK GARG, Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली, 24 जून , 2005

(आयकर)

का.आ. 2476.- सर्वसाधारण की जानकारी के लिए एतद्वारा यह अधिसूचित किया जाता है कि केन्द्र सरकार द्वारा आयकर नियमावली, 1962के नियम 6 , के साथ पठित आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 की धारा 35 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ii ) के प्रयोजनार्थ विश्वविद्यालय, कॉलेज अथवा अन्य संस्था की श्रेणी के अन्तर्गत दिनांक1-4-2003 से 31-3-2005 तक की अवधि के लिए संगठन मैसर्स सर गंगा राम ट्रस्ट सोसाइटी, जो अंशतः अनुसंधान कार्य- कलापों में कार्यरत है , ( और न किअनुसंधान मात्र के लिए मौजूद ' वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान संघ ' रूप में है ) , को निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन अनुमोदित किया गया है :-

(i) अनुमोदित संगठन अपने अनुसंधान कार्य- कलापों के लिए अलग खाते रखेगा ।

7531 ( ii ) वित्तीय वर्षों के प्रत्येक वित्त वर्ष के लिए जिसके लिए अनुमोदन प्रदान किया जा रहा है , अनुमोदित संगठन अनुसंधान कार्य-कलापों के संबंध में लेखा परीक्षित आय एवं व्यय खाते की एक प्रति इसके क्षेत्राधिकार वाले आयकर आयुक्त/आयकर निदेशक ( छूट ) को आयकर विवरणी दाखिल करने की नियत तारीख को अथवा उससे पहले अथवा इस अधिसूचना की तारीख से 90 दिनों के अन्दर, जो भी बाद में समाप्त हो, प्रस्तुत करेगा, जिसके लिए इसे आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 की धारा 35 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के अन्तर्गत अनुमोदन प्रदान किया गया है । (iii) अनुमोदित संगठन उपर्युक्त पैरा ( ii ) में उल्लिखित आय तथा व्यय खाते के साथ लेखा परीक्षक से प्राप्त एक प्रमाणपत्र भी संलग्न करेगा :-

(क ) जिसमें संगठन द्वारा वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए प्राप्त की गई उस राशि का उल्लेख किया गया हो, जिसके लिए दानकर्ता धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ii ) के अन्तर्गत कटौती का दावा करने के लिए पात्र हैं ।

(ख ) जिसमें यह प्रमाणित किया गया हो कि किया गया व्यय वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए ही था । [अधिसूचना सं. 168/2005/फा.सं. 203/65/2004- आयकर नि.- II ] निधिसिंह, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 24th June, 2005 (INCOME TAX)

S.O. 2476. It is hereby notified for general information that the organization M/ s . Sir Ganga Ram Trust Society has been approved by the Central Government for the purposes of clause (ii ) of Sub - section (1) ofSection 35 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 , read with rule 6 of the Income Tax Rules , 1962 for the period from 1-4-2003 to 31-3-2005 under the category, ' university, college or other institution' , partly engaged in research activities (and not as a ' scientific research association ' existing solely for research ) subject to the following conditions:-

( i ) The approved organization shall maintain separate accounts for its research activities .

( ii) For each of the financial years for which the approval is being given, the approved organization shall submit a copy of its audited Income and Expenditure account in respect of the research activities for which it has been approved under Sub - section ( 1) of Section 35 of Income Tax Act, 1961 to the Commissioner of Income- tax or Director of Income - tax [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

JULY 16 , 2005 / ASADHA 25 , 1927

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA

7532

जिसके लिए दानकर्ता धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) केखण्ड ( ii ) के अन्तर्गत कटौती का दावा करने केलिए पात्र हैं ।

(Exemptions) having jurisdiction, on or before the due date of filing of return of income or within 90 days from the date of this notification, whichever expires later .

(ख) जिसमें यह प्रमाणित किया गया हो कि किया गया व्यय वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए ही था । ( iii) The approved organization shall also enclose with the Income and Expenditure account referred to in paragraph (ii ) above, a certificate from the auditor:-

टिप्पणी: उपर्युक्त ( i ) शर्त संघ के रूप में श्रेणीबद्ध संगठन पर लागू नहींहोगी।

( a) Specifying the amount received by the organization for scientific research in respect of which the donors are eligible to claim deduction under clause ( ii ) of Sub -section ( 1 ) of Section 35 .

[अधिसूचना सं. 169/2005/फा.सं. 203/89/2004- आयकर नि.- II ] निधि सिंह, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 24th June , 2005 (INCOME TAX)

(b) Certifying that the expenditure incurred was for scientific research.

[Notification No. 168/2005/F. No. 203 /65 /2004 - ITA -II ] NIDHI SINGH, Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली, 24 जून , 2005 (आयकर )

S.O. 2477. It is hereby notified for general information that the organization M. S. Swaminathan Research Foundation , 3rd Cross Road , Taramani Institutional Area , Chennai - 600113 has been approved by the Central Government for the purposes of clause ( ii ) of Sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 35 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, read with rule 6 of the Income Tax Rules , 1962 for the periodfrom 1-4-2004 to 31-3-2007 under the category of scientific research association ' ( existing solely for research) subject to the following conditions :-

( i ) The approved organization shall maintain separate accounts for its research activities .

का.आ. 2477.- सर्वसाधारण की जानकारी के लिए एतद्वारा यह अधिसूचित किया जाता है कि एम . एस. स्वामीनाथन रिसर्च फांडडेशन , तृतीय क्रास रोड, तारामणि इंस्टीट्यूशनल एरिया, चेन्नई -600113 को केन्द्र सरकार द्वारा आयकर नियमावली , 1962 के नियम 6 , के साथ पठित आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 की धारा 35 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ii ) के प्रयोजनार्थ वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान संघ (अनुसंधान मात्र के लिए मौजूद ) की श्रेणी के अन्तर्गत दिनांक 1-4-2004 से 31-3-2007 तक की अवधि के लिए निम्नलिखित शर्तों केअधीन अनुमोदित किया गया है:-

(i ) अनुमोदित संगठन अपने अनुसंधान कार्य- कलापों के लिए अलग खाते रखेगा ।

( ii) For each of the financial years for which the approval is being given , the approved organization shall submit a copy of its audited Income and Expenditure account in respect of the research activities for which it has been approved under Sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 35 of Income Tax Act, 1961 to the Commissioner of Income -tax or Director of Income - tax (Exemptions) having jurisdiction, on or before the due date of filing of return of income or within 90 days from the date of this notification, whichever expires later .

(iii) The approved organization shall also enclose with the Income and Expenditure account referred to in paragraph (ii ) above , a certificate from the auditor:-

( a) Specifying the amount received by the organization for scientific research in respect ofwhich the donors are eligible to claim deduction under clause ( ii ) of Sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 35 .

(ii ) वित्तीय वर्षों के प्रत्येक वित्त वर्ष के लिए जिसके लिए अनुमोदन प्रदान किया जा रहा है , अनुमोदित संगठन अनुसंधान कार्य- कलापों के संबंध में लेखा परीक्षित आय एवं व्यय खाते की एक प्रति इसके क्षेत्राधिकार वाले आयकर आयुक्त/आयकर निदेशक ( छूट ) को आयकर विवरणी दाखिल करने की नियत तारीख को अथवा उससे पहले अथवा इस अधिसूचना की तारीख से 90 दिनों के अन्दर, जो भी बाद में समाप्त हो, प्रस्तुत करेगा , जिसके लिए इसे आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 की धारा 35 की उप-धारा ( 1 ) के अन्तर्गत अनुमोदन प्रदान किया गया है ।

(b ) Certifying that the expenditure incurred was for scientific research .

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

(iii) अनुमोदित संगठन उपर्युक्त पैरा ( ii ) में उल्लिखित आय तथा व्यय खाते के साथ लेखा परीक्षक से प्राप्त एक प्रमाणपत्र भी संलग्न करेगा :-

[Notification No. 169/2005 /F . No. 203/ 89/2004 - ITA - II ] NIDHI SINGH , Under Secv.

(क) जिसमें संगठन द्वारा वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए प्राप्त की गई उस राशि का उल्लेख किया गया हो, 7533 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

सरकार एतद्वारा श्री डी. के. मेहरोत्रा , प्रबंध निदेशक, भारतीय जीवन बीमानिगम को तत्काल प्रभाव से अगले आदेश तक, उपर्युक्त निगम कासदस्य नियुक्त करती है

( आर्थिक कार्य विभाग ) (बीमाप्रभाग) नई दिल्ली, 1 जुलाई , 2005

[फा. सं. 14/11/2004- बीमा- IV ] ललित कुमार, उप सचिव

NewDelhi , the 7th July, 2005

का. आ. 2478.-जीवन बीमा निगम अधिनियम, 1956 (1956 का 31 ) की धारा 4 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केंद्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा श्री ए.के. शुक्ला, भारतीय जीवन बीमा निगम के प्रबंध निदेशक को 26,000 रुपए ( नियत ) के वेतनमान में, पदभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से 30-4-2006 अर्थात् उनकी अधिवार्षिता की तारीख तक या अगले आदेश तक, जो भी पहले हो , भारतीय जीवन बीमा का अध्यक्ष नियुक्त करती है

S.O. 2480.- In exercise of the powers conferredby Section 4 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 (31 of 1956) the Central Government hereby appoints Sh.D. K. Mehrotra Managing Director, Life Insurance Corporation of India as Member of the said Corporation with immediate effect unitl further orders .

[फा. सं. 14/11/2004-बीमा- IV] ललित कुमार, उप सचिव

[F. No.14/11/2004- Ins . IV] LALIT KUMAR, Dy. Secy.

Department of Economic Affairs (INSURANCE DIVISION) NewDelhi , the 1st July, 2005

नई दिल्ली, 7 जुलाई , 2005

S.O. 2478.- In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 4 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 (31 of 1956) the Central Government hereby appoints Sh. A.K. Shukla , Managing Director, Life Insurance Corporation of India ( LIC) as Chairman , LIC in the pay scale of Rs . 26,000 (Fixed) from the date of assumption of charge of the post and till the date of his superannuation 30-4-2006 .

का. आ. 2481.- जीवन बीमा निगम अधिनियम, 1956 ( 1956 का 31 ) की धारा 4 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केंद्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा श्री ए. के. शुक्ला, अध्यक्ष, भारतीय जीवन बीमा निगम को तत्काल प्रभाव से 30-4-2006 तक अर्थात् उनकी अधिवार्षिता कीतारीख या अगले आदेश तक, जो भी पहले हो, उपर्युक्त निगम का सदस्य नियुक्त करती है

[फा. सं. 14/11/2004-बीमा- IV ] [F. No. 14/ 11/2004-Ins . IV] LALIT KUMAR,Dy. Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 1 जुलाई , 2005

ललित कुमार, उप सचिव

New Delhi , the 7th July, 2005

का. आ. 2479.-जीवन बीमा निगम अधिनियम, 1956 ( 1956 का 31 )की धारा 4 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केंद्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा श्री डी. के. मेहरोत्रा, भारतीय जीवन बीमा निगम के क्षेत्रीय प्रबंधक निदेशक को 24,500-650-26,000 रुपए ( नियत ) के वेतनमान में, पदभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से या अगले आदेश तक, भारतीय जीवन बीमा का प्रबंध निदेशक नियुक्त करती है

S.O. 2481.- In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 4 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act , 1956 (31 of 1956) the Central Government hereby appoints Sh . A.K. Shukla, Chairman, Life Insurance Corporation of India as Member of the said Corporation with immediate effect upto 30-04-2006 i.e. the date of Superannuation or till further orders , whichever is earlier .

[फा. सं. 14/11/2004- बीमा- IV ]

ललित कुमार, उप सचिव

[F. No. 14/11/2004-Ins . IV] LALIT KUMAR, Dy . Secy.

New Delhi , the 1st July, 2004

स्वास्थ्यऔर परिवार कल्याण मंत्रालय

(स्वास्थ्यविभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई, 2005

S.O. 2479.-In exercise of the powers conferredby Section 4 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 (31 of 1956 ) the Central Government hereby appoints Sh . D. K. Mehrotra , Zonal Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of IndiIndia (LIC) as Managing Director , LIC in the pay scale of Rs . 24,500-650-26,000 from the date of assumption of charge of the post and until further orders.

[F. No.14/ 11/2004- Ins. IV] LALIT KUMAR, Dy. Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 7 जुलाई , 2005

का. आ. 2482.-दंत चिकित्सक अधिनियम, 1948 (1948 का 16 ) की धारा 10 की उपधारा 2 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय दन्त चिकित्सा परिषद् से परामर्श करने के बाद, एतद्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की अनुसूची के भाग -1 में निम्नलिखित संशोधन करती है; नामतः

का. आ. 2480.-जीवन बीमा निगम अधिनियम, 1956 ( 1956 का 31 ) की धारा 4 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केंद्रीय

2. चौधरी चरणसिंह विश्वविद्यालय, मेरठ ( उ.प्र. ) द्वारा आई टी एस सेंटर फार डेंटल स्टडीज एण्ड रिसर्च, गाजियाबाद ( उत्तर प्रदेश ) 1993 G1/05-2 7534

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25 , 1927

को दंत चिकित्सा सम्बधी मान्यता प्रदान किए जाने के संबंध में दन्त चिकित्सक अधिनियम , 1948 ( 1948 का 16 ) की अनुसूची के भाग- I में क्रम संख्या 56 के सामने कालम 2 और 3 की मौजूदा प्रविष्टियों के अतंर्गत निम्नलिखित प्रविष्टियां जोड़ी जाएगी

" II. आई टी एस सेंटर फारडेंटल स्टडीज एण्ड रिसर्च, गाजियाबाद (उत्तर प्रदेश )-

(i) बैचलर आफ डेंटल सर्जरी , बी.डी.एस चौधरी चरणसिंह विश्वविद्यालय, मेरठ" (जब यह दिनांक 22-4-2005 को अथवा इसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो) ।

[सं.वी. - 12017/15/2000- पीएमएस ]

ए. के. सिंह, अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (Department of Health)

NewDelhi, the 5th July, 2005

S.O. 2482. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- section (2 ) of Section 10 of the Dentists Act, 1948 (16 of 1948), the Central Government , after consultation with Dental Council of India, hereby makes the following amendments in Part - I of the Schedule to the said Act, namely.-

2. In the existing entries of columns 2 and 3 against Serial No. 56 , in Part - I of the Schedule to the Dentists Act, 1948 ( 16 of 1948) pertaining to recognition ofDental qualification inrespect of I.T.S. Centre for Dental Studies & Research, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh awarded by Chaudhary Charan Singh University , Meerut, Uttar Pradesh, the following entries shall be inserted there- under:-

" II . I.T.S. Centre for Dental Studies & Research, Ghaziabad , Uttar Pradesh .

BDS , Ch . Charan Singh

University Meerut . " (i) Bachelor of Dental Surgery (Whengranted on or after 22-04-2005)

[No. V- 12017/ 15/2000 -PMS] A. K. SINGH , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई, 2005

का. आ. 2483. दंत चिकित्सा अधिनियम , 1948 ( 1948 का 16 ) की धारा 10 की उपधारा 2 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय दन्त चिकित्सा परिषद् से परामर्श करने के बाद, एतद्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की अनुसूची के भाग -1 में निम्नलिखित संशोधन करती है; नामतः

2. डा. एम.जी.आर. मेडिकल यूनिवर्सिटी, चैन्नई ( तमिलनाडु) द्वारा श्री रामकृष्ण डेंटल कालेज एण्ड हास्पिटल , कोयम्बटूर को

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] दंत चिकित्सा सम्बधी मान्यता प्रदान किए जाने के संबंध में दन्त चिकित्सक अधिनियम, 1948 ( 1948 का 16 ) की अनुसूची के भाग- I में क्रम संख्या 56 के सामने कालम 2 और 3 की मौजूदा प्रविष्टियों के अतंर्गत निम्नलिखित प्रविष्टियां जोड़ी जाएगी

"XII . श्री रामकृष्ण डेंटल कालेज एण्ड हास्पिटल , कोयम्बटूर-

बी.डी.एस. , डा. एम.जी.आर. मेडिकल, यूनिवर्सिटी,

तमिलनाडु, चैन्नई" (i) बैचलर आफ डेंटल सर्जरी , (जब यह दिनांक18-2-2005 को अथवा इसके बाद प्रदान कीगई हो) ।

[सं. वी-12017/31/99-पी.एम.एस. ] आस्था एस. खटवानी, निदेशक ( एम.ई. ) NewDelhi , the 5th July , 2005

S.O. 2483. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub -section ( 2) of Section 10 of the Dentists Act, 1948 (16 of 1948), the Central Government , after consultation with Dental Council of India, hereby makes the following amendments in Part - I of the Schedule to the said Act , namely.-

2. In the existing entries of columns 2 and 3 against Serial No. 56 , in Part- I of the Schedule to the Dentists Act, 1948 (16 of 1948) pertaining to recognition of Dental qualification in respect of Sri Ramakrishna Dental College &Hospital , Coimbatore awarded by Dr. M.G.R. Medical University, Tamil Nadu , Chennai , the following entries shall be inserted thereunder :-

" XII . Sri Ramakrishna Dental College & Hospital , Coimbatore .

BDS, Dr. M.G. R. Medical University Tamil Nadu, Chennai ."

(i)Bachelor of Dental Surgery (Whengranted on or after 18-2-2005)

[No. V- 12017/31 /99 -PMS] AASTHA S. KHATWANI , Director (M.E ) नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई , 2005

का. आ. 2484. दंत चिकित्सा अधिनियम , 1948 ( 1948 का 16 ) की धारा 10 की उपधारा 2 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय दन्त चिकित्सा परिषद् के साथ परामर्श करने के पश्चात् एत‌द्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की अनुसूची के भाग -1 में निम्नलिखित संशोधन करती है;

2. राजस्थान विश्वविद्यालय , जयपुर के संबंध में दंत चिकित्सा अधिनियम, 1948 ( 1948 का 16 ) की अनुसूची के भाग -1 में क्रम सं.

[भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

7535

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

31 के सामने कालम 2 एवं 3 की मौजूदा प्रविष्टियों के अंतर्गत निम्नलिखित प्रविष्टियां शामिल की जाएंगी:-

" Ⅰ. राजस्थान विश्व विद्यालय, जयपुर ( राजस्थान )

(i) बैचलर आफ डेंटल सर्जरी , बी.डी. एस. , राजस्थान , जयपुर (यदिअगस्त, 1988 में या इसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो ) ।

II. जयपुर डेंटल कालेज , जयपुर, ( राजस्थान )

(i) बैचलर आफ डेंटल सर्जरी , बी.डी. एस. , राजस्थान , जयपुर (यदि9-5-2005 को या इसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो) ।

III. दर्शन डेंटल कालेज, उदयपुर, ( राजस्थान )

(i) बैचलर आफ डेंटल सर्जरी , (यदि 10-5-2005 को या इसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो ) । बी.डी. एस. , राजस्थान, जयपुर IV. पैसिफिक डेंटल कालेज एण्ड हास्पिटल, उदयपुर ( राजस्थान ) (i ) बैचलर आफ डेंटल सर्जरी , बी.डी. एस. , राजस्थान, जयपुर (यदि 10-5-2005 को या इसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो ) ।"

[सं. वी. 12017/46/98-पीएमएस ]

ए. के. सिंह, अवर सचिव NewDelhi, the 5th July, 2005

S.O. 2484. In exercise of the powers conferredby Sub -section (2) of Section 10 of the Dentists Act, 1948 (16 of 1948) , the Central Government, after consultation with Dental Council of India, hereby makes the following amendments in Part - I of the Schedule to the said Act, namely.-

2. For the existing entries of column 2 and 3 against Serial No. 31 in Part - I of the Schedule to the Dentist Act , 1948 ( 16 of 1948) Pertaining to Univeristy of Rajasthan , Jaipur the following entries shall be substitued:-- " I. University of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Rajasthan) (i) Bachelor of Dental Surgery BDS, Rajasthan, Jaipur (Whengranted on or after August 1988)

II . Jaipur Dental College, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

(i) Bachelor of Dental Surgery BDS ,Rajasthan , Jaipur (Whengranted on or after 9-5-2005)

III . Darshan Dental College , Udaipur (Rajasthan) (i) Bachelor of Dental Surgery BDS , Rajasthan, Jaipur (Whengranted on or after 10-5-2005)

IV. Pacific Dental College, & Hospital, Udaipur (Rajasthan)

( i) Bachelor of Dental Surgery BDS, Rajasthan, Jaipur (Whengranted on or after 10-5-2005) ."

[No. V- 12017/46/98 -PMS]

A. K. Singh, Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई , 2005

का. आ. 2485. दंत चिकित्सा अधिनियम, 1948 ( 1948 का 16 ) की धारा 10 की उपधारा ( 2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय दन्त चिकित्सा परिषद से परामर्श करने के बाद, एत‌द्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की अनुसूची के भाग -1 में निम्नलिखित संशोधन करती है; नामतः:-

2. महाराष्ट्र यूनिवर्सिटी आफ हेल्थ साइंसेज, मासिक द्वारा येरला मेडिकल एंड रिसर्च सेंटर्स डेंटल कालेज एण्ड हास्पिटल, नवी बुम्बई को दंत चिकित्सा सम्बन्धी मान्यता प्रदान किए जाने के संबंध में दन्त चिकित्सक अधिनियम, 1948 ( 1948 का 16 ) की अनुसूची के भाग- I में क्रम संख्या 60 के सामने कालम 2 और 3 की मौजूदा प्रविष्टियों के अतंर्गत निम्नलिखित प्रविष्टियां जोड़ी जाएगी:-

XIV. येरला मेडिकल एंड रिसर्च सेंटर्स डेंटल कालेज एण्ड हास्पिटल, नवी मुम्बई

(i) बैचलर आफडेंटल सर्जरी , बी डी एस , महाराष्ट्र यूनीवर्सिटी (जब यह दिनांक 12-4-2005 को आफ हेल्थ सांईसेज , नासिक " अथवा इसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो) ।

[सं. वी. 12017/17/98- पीएमएस ]

आस्था एस. खटवानी, निदेशक ( एम. ई. ) NewDelhi , the 5th July, 2005

S.O. 2485. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub -section (2) of Section 10 of the Dentists Act, 1948 (16 of1948), the Central Government , after consultation with Dental Council of India , hereby makes the following amendments in Part - I of the Schedule to the said Act , namely:-

2. In the existing entries of column 2 and 3 against Serial No. 60 , in Part- I of the Schedule to the Dentists Act, 1948 ( 16 of 1948) pertaining to recognition of dental qualification in respect of Yerala Medical Trust and Research Centre's Dental College and Hospital , Navi Mumbai awarded by Maharashtra University of Health Sciences , Nashik , the following entries shall be inserted there under:-

" XIV. Yerala Medical Trust & Research Centre's Dental College and Hospital, Navi Mumbai .

7536

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ ASADHA 25 , 1927

(i)Bachelor ofDental BDS Maharashtra University Surgery (When granted of Health Sciences , Nashik . " on or after 12-4-2005).

[No. V- 12017 / 17/ 98 -PMS ] AASTHA S. KHATWANI , (ME) सूचना और प्रसारण मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 27 जून, 2005

का. आ. 2486.- इस मंत्रालय की 5 फरवरी , 2005 और 7जून, 2005 की समसंख्यक अधिसूचनाओं और चलचित्रकी ( प्रमाणन ) नियमावली, 1983 के नियम 7 व 8 के साथ पठित चलचित्रकी अधिनियम, 1952(1952 का 37 ) की धारा 5 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार, श्री ए.वी. श्रीनिवासन् 37/18 , टी.पी. कोइल, पहली लेन , ट्रिपलिकेन, चेन्नई-600005 को तत्काल प्रभाव से दो वर्षों की अवधि के लिए अथवा अगले आदेशों तक, जो भी पहले हो, केन्द्रीय फिल्म प्रमाणन बोर्ड के चेन्नई सलाहकार पैनल के एक सदस्यके रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[फा. सं. 809/4/2004- एफ ( सी) ]

पी. पी. नायर, डैस्क अधिकारी MINISTRY OF INFORMATION & BROADCASTING New Delhi , the 27th June , 2005

S.O. 2486.-In continuation of this Ministry's Notification of even number dated 5th February, 2005 and 7th June, 2005 and in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 5 of the Conematograph Act , 1952 (37 of 1952) read with rules 7and 8 of the Cinematograph (Certification) Rules, 1983 the Central Government is pleased to appoint Shri A. V. Srinivasan , 37/18 , T.P. Koil , Ist Lane , Triplicane , Chennai - 600005 as a member of the Chennai advisory panel of the Central Board of Film Certification with immediate effect for a period of two years or untill further orders , whichever is earlier.

[F. No. 809/4/2004 -F (C) ]

P. P. NAIR, Desk Officer नई दिल्ली, 20 जून , 2005

का. आ. 2487.- चलचित्रकी ( प्रमाणन ) नियमावली, 1983 के नियम 7 और 8 के साथ चलचित्रकी अधिनियम, 1952 ( 1952 का 37) की धारा 5 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार, केन्द्रीय फिल्म प्रमाणन बोर्ड के मुम्बई सलाहकार पैनल का गठन करती है और निम्नलिखित व्यक्तियों को तत्काल प्रभाव से दो वर्षों की अवधि के लिए अथवा अगले आदेशों तक, जो भी पहले

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)] हो, उपर्युक्त पैनल के सदस्यों के रूप में नियुक्त करती है । यह इस मंत्रालय की दिनांक 4 फरवरी , 2004 की समसंख्यक अधिसूचना के अधिक्रमण में है ।

1. मनोज दूबे

2. कैलाश मुरारका

3. राकेश के. उपाध्याय

4. रेनूजैन

5. नीतिन पी. मवानी

6. किशोर शंकर बहोर

7. नदीम नुसरत

8. धर्मी एम. बेदी

9. देवयानी खानखोज

10. मिठाईवाला सराह हसनअली

11. विनय कुमार सिन्हा

12. सुषमा अग्रवाल

13. वजफर जुंग

14. मधु जैन

15. इफ्तखार खान

16. अनिलशाह

17. एस. वाई . खान

18. रिजवान अहमद खान

19. शंकर गंगाधर सोनावाने

20. लक्षराज एस. सनाप

21. इकबाल सिंह सांरग

22. रानी कैलाश पोद्दार

23. पुनीत बागरोडिया

24. तीजे सिध्धु

25. मोहन स्वरूप महेश्वरी

26. डॉ. प्रतिभा डी. सिंह

27. हिसामुन इस्लाम सिद्दकी

28. प्रशान्त आर. देशपांडे [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

29. साहेबराव एस. दांगडे 30. ममता कनोडे

31. प्रदीप के. पाटिल

32. राजुभाई बह्मभट्ट

33. खालिद अहमद

34. सूरज रमेश परमार

35. वासुबेन भट्ट

36. पूर्णिमाबेन खंडेरिया

37. नीताबेन यशवंतभाई शाह 38. कश्मीराबेन मुंशी

39. मायाबेन देव

40. आसिफा खान

41. विजयभाई संघवी

42.कीर्तिभाई गनेत्रा

43. देवेन्द्र पटेल

44.सुनील पटेल

45. चेतन रावल

46. निशांत एच. पटेल

47. परेश धनानी

48. नरेन्द्र रावत

49. जीतुभाई भट्ट

50. धर्मेश ए. पटेल

51. हनीफ महेरी

52. शिवकुमार रामलाल रूपलाल 53. मंगल सूरजकर

54. एम. आई पटेल

55. मनोज बरोत

56. देवेन्द्र मक्वाना

57. जवाहरभाई छावदा

58. हिमांशु जोशी

59. संजय दादलिका.

60. अरुण दुग्गल

61. कंचन काशीनाथ घानेकर

7537

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

62. सेवा रघुवेन्द्ररा चौहान

63. सुलभा तेरनिकर

64. सुमित्राभावे

65. सुधीर गाडगिल

66. जयन्तकुमार त्रिभुवन

67. कदम

68. राधिका बोरगांवकर

69. विनीता दीक्षित

70. भावना कमल शर्मा

71. विट्टठल उमाप

72.रामदास फुताने

73. श्रीधर गजेन्द्र माडुगुलकर

74. रज़िया पटेल

75. डॉ मानसी मागिकर

76. अंजली पथारे

77. नीलिमा देशमुख

78. कीर्ति जयराम शैलीदर

79. राफॅ अहमद

80. मीनाक्षी शीदे

81. सुशील दलवी

82. अशोक सिंह

83. शालनी चावन

84. आशा आर. प्रांजपे

85. क्लारा लुईस

86. सुजाता आनंदन

87. रवि किरण देशमुख

88. रघुवेन्द्राद्विवेदी

89. अफजल हुसैन सिद्दकी

90. लक्ष्मीकांत सातेलकर

91. भारत नायर

[फा. सं. 809/1/2004-एफ ( सी) ]

पी. पी. नायर, डेस्क अधिकारी 7538

THE GAZET TE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25, 1927

New Delhi , the 20th June , 2005

S.O. 2487.- In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 5 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 (37 of 1952) read with rules 7 and 8 of the Cinematograph (Certification) Rules , 1983 , the Central Government is pleased to Constitute the Mumbai advisory panel of the Central Board of Film Certification and to appoint the following persons as members of the said panel with immediate effect for a period of two years or until further orders , whichever is earlier . This supersedes this Ministry'snotification of even number dated 4th February 2004.

1. Manoj Dubey

2. Kailash Muraraka

3. Rakesh K Upadhye

4. Renu Jain

5. Nitin P Mavani

6. Kishore Shankar Bhoir

7. Nadeem Nusrath

8. Dharamiji M Bedi

9. Devyani Khankhoje

10. Mithaiwala Sarah Hasanali

11. Vinay Kumar Sinha

12. Sushma Agarwal

13. Zafar Jung

14. Madhu Jain

15. Iftekhar Khan

16. Anil Shah

17. S.Y. Khan

18. Rizwan Ahmed Khan

19. Shankar Gangadhar Sonawane

20. Laxraj S Sanap

21. Iqbal Singh Sarang

22. Rani Kailash Poddar

23. Puneet Bagrodia

24. Teejay Sidhu

25. Mohan Swaroop Maheswari

26. Dr. Pratibha D Singh

27. Hisamul Islam Siddiqui

28. Prashant R Deshpande

29. Sahebrao S Dandge

30. Mamata Kanade

31. Pradeep K Patil

32. Rajubhai Brahmbhatt

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] 33. Khaleed Ahmad

34. Suraj Ramesh Parmar

35. Vasuben Bhatt

36. Poornimaben Khandheriya

37. Nitaben Yashwantbhai Shah

38 . Cashmiraben Munishi

39. Mayaben Dave

40. Asifa Khan

41. Vijaybhai Sanghvi

42. Kirtibhai Ganatara

43. Devendra Patel

44. Sunil Patel

45. Chetan Rawal

46. Nishant H Patel

47. Paresh Dhanani

48 . Narendra Rawat

49. Jitubhai Bhatt

50. Dharmesh A Patel

51. Hanif Mehri

52. Shivkumar Ramlal Ruplal

53. Mangal Surajkar

54. M.I. Patel

55. Manoj Barot

56. Devendra Makwana

57. Jawaharbhai Chavda

58. Himanshu Johsi

59. Sanjay Dadlika

60. Arun Duggal

61. Kanchan Kashinath Ghanekar

62. Seva Raghavendra Chouhan

63. Sulbha Ternikar

64. Sumitra Bhave

65. Sudhir Gadgil

66. Jayanthkumar Tribhuvan

67. Kadam

68. Radhika Borgaonkar

69. Vanita Dikshit

70. Bhavana Kamal Sharma

71. Vitthal Umap

72. Ramdas Phutane

73. Shridhar Gajanana Madgulkar

74. Raziya Patel [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7539 भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

75. Dr. Manasi Magikar

members ofthe said panel with immediate effect for a period of two years or until further orders , whichever is earlier.

76. Anjali Pathare

1. Ms. Alka Pande

77. Nilima Deshmukh

2. Shri Kapil Chandrakant Gorpode

78. Kirti Jayram Shiledar

3. Ms. Talluri Rameshwari

79. Rauf Ahmad

80. Meenakshi Shede

81. Sushil Dalvi

[F. No. 809/1/2004-F(C) P.P. NAIR, Desk Officer 82. Ashok Singh

अन्तरिक्षविभाग

83. Shalini Chavan

बेंगलूर, 22 जून, 2005

84. Asha R. Paranjape

85. Clara Lewis

86. Sujata Anandan

87. Ravi Kiran Deshmukh

का.आ. 2489.- राष्ट्रपति, संविधान के अनुच्छेद 309 के परन्तुक द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, और आगे अन्तरिक्ष विभाग कर्मचारी ( वर्गीकरण, नियंत्रण और अपील ) नियम, 1976 में संशोधन करने हेतु निम्नलिखित नियम बनाते हैं :-

88. Raghavendra Dweidi

89. Afzal Hussein Sidhiqui

90. Lakshmikant Satelkar

(1) इन नियमों का संक्षिप्त नाम अन्तरिक्ष विभाग कर्मचारी (वर्गीकरण , नियंत्रण और अपील ) संशोधन नियम, 1976 है।

91. BharatNair

(2) ये राजपत्र में प्रकाशन की तारीख को प्रवृत्त होंगे ।

2. अन्तरिक्ष विभाग कर्मचारी ( वर्गीकरण, नियंत्रण और अपील) नियम 1976में

[F. No. 809/1/2004-F (C) ] P. P. NAIR, Desk Officer

नई दिल्ली, 28 जून , 2005

(i ) नियम 11 के उप- नियम ( 2 ) के बाद, स्पष्टीकरण से पहले निम्नलिखित उपबन्ध को जोड़ना है :-

का.आ. 2488. इस मंत्रालय की दिनांक 20-6-2005 की समसंख्यक अधिसूचना और चलचित्रकी ( प्रमाणन ) नियमावली , 1983 के नियम 7 व 8 के साथ पठित चलचित्रकी अधिनियम, 1952 ( 1952 का 37 ) की धारा 5 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार, केन्द्रीय फिल्म प्रमाणन बोर्ड के मुंबई सलाहकार पैनल का गठन करती है और निम्नलिखित व्यक्तियों को दो वर्षों की अवधिके लिए अथवा अगले आदेशों तक , जो भी पहले हो, उपर्युक्त पैनलके सदस्यों के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

1. सुश्री अल्कापांडे

'परन्तुजहाँ केन्द्रीय सिविल सेवा ( आचरण ) नियम, 1964 के नियम 3 सी में दिए गए व्याख्या के अन्दर यौन उत्पीड़न की शिकायत है, ऐसी शिकायतों की जाँच- पड़ताल हेतु प्रत्येक मंत्रालय या विभाग या कार्यालय में स्थापित शिकायत समिति को , इन नियमों के उद्देश्य हेतु अनुशासनिक प्राधिकारी द्वारा नियुक्त जाँच प्राधिकारी के रूप में माना जाएगा और यदि, यौन उत्पीड़न की शिकायतों की जाँच- पड़ताल हेतु शिकायत समिति के लिए अलग प्रक्रिया निर्धारित नहीं की गयी है , तो शिकायत समिति, जहाँ तक व्यवहार्य हो इन नियमों में निर्धारित प्रक्रिया के अनुसार ही जाँच- पड़ताल आयोजित करेगी । '

2. श्री कपिल चन्द्रकांत घोरपड़े

3. सुश्री ताल्लुरी रमेशवरी

( ii ) नियम 8 में, मद ( iii क ) के लिए, निम्नलिखित को प्रतिस्थापित किया जाएाग: -

[फा.सं. 809/1 /2004-एफ ( सी) ] पी.पी. नायर, डैस्क अधिकारी

" ( iii क) काल- वेतनमान में तीन साल से अनधिक अवधि के लिए संचित प्रभाव के बिना और उसके पेंशन पर प्रतिकूल प्रभाव न डालते हुए निम्नतर श्रेणी में एक स्तर तक अवनत करना । " New Delhi , the 28th June , 2005

[फा.सं. 4/5/1/2004-V] वाणी रामचन्द्र, उप सचिव

टिप्पणी: प्रधान नियम दिनांक 1-4-1976 को भारत के राजपत्र (असाधारण ) के भाग II , खण्ड 3 , उप- खण्ड ( ii ) में सं. का.आ. 270( ई ) द्वारा प्रकाशित किया गया है और इसके पहले दिनांक 18-3-2004 को भारत के राजपत्र दिनांक 28-3-2004 के सं. का.आ. 804 द्वारा संशोधित किया गया है ।

S.O. 2488.- In continuation of this Ministry's Notification of even number dated 20-6-2005 and in exercise ofthepowers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 5 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 (37 of 1952) read with rules 7 and 8 of the Cinematograph ( Certification) Rules , 1983 , the Central Government is pleased to constitute the Mumbai advisory panel of the Central Board of Film Certification and to appoint the following persons as 7540

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25 , 1927

DEPARTMENT OF SPACE

Bangalore, the 22nd June , 2005

S.O. 2489.- In exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution, the President hereby makes the following rules further to amend the Department of Space Employees ' ( Classification, Control and Appeal ) Rules, 1976 , namely :-

(1) These rules may be called the Department of Space Employees ' ( Classification, Control and Appeal ) Amendment Rules, 2005.

(2) They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.

2. In the Department of Space Employees ' (Classification, Control and Appeal ) Rules , 1976- (i)After sub -rule (2) of Rule 11 , the following proviso shall be inserted before the explanation namely:-

"Provided that where there is a complaint of sexual harassment within the meaning of Rule 3C of the Central Civil Services (Conduct ) Rules , 1964, the Complaints Committee established in each Ministry or Department or Office for inquiring into such complaints , shall be deemed to be the Inquiring Authority appointed by the Disciplinary Authority for the purpose of these rules and the Complaints Committee shall hold, if separate procedure hasnot beenprescribed for the Complaints Committee for holding the inquiry into the complaints of sexual harassment , the inquiry as far as practicable in accordance with the procedure laid down in these rules . "

(ii)InRule8, for item (iii a) , the following shall be substituted namely: -

"(iii a) reduction to lower stage in the time -scale ofpay by one stage for a period not exceeding three years , without cumulative effect and not adversely affecting his pension" .

[F. No. 4/5 /1/2004-V]

VANI RAMACHANDRA , Dy . Secy .

Note : The Principal rules were published vide No. S.O. 270(E) dated 1-4-1976 in the Gazette of India (Extraordinary) Part II , Section 3 , Sub - section ( ii ) and has been lastly amended on 18-3-2004 vide the Gazette of India , No. S.O. 804, dated 28-3-2004 .

पोत परिवहन, सड़क परिवहन और राजमार्ग मंत्रालय (पोत परिवहन विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 6 जुलाई , 2005

का.आ. 2490.- केन्द्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम , 1976 ( यथा संशोधित 1987 ) के नियम 10 के उप नियम 4 के अनुसरण में पोत परिवहन , सड़क परिवहन और राजमार्ग मंत्रालय , पोत परिवहन विभाग के प्रशासनिक नियंत्रण के अधीन निम्नलिखित कार्यालयों में 80 % से अधिक कर्मचारियों द्वारा

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] हिन्दी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लेने पर उन्हें एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करती है:-

1. कलकत्ता डॉक लेबर बोर्ड, 20 - बी, अब्दुल हमीद स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता-600069

2. समुद्री वाणिज्य विभाग, ' दीप भवन ' तीसरी मंजिल, पंडित नेहरू मार्ग , जामनगर-361008

[फा. सं. ई -11011/1/2000-हिन्दी ] अजय कुमार भल्ला, संयुक्त सचिव MINISTRY OF SHIPPING , ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS

(Department of Shipping) NewDelhi , the 6th July, 2005

S.O. 2490.- In pursuance of the sub - rule (4) of the rule 10 of the Official Language (use for the official purpose ofthe Union) Rules , 1976 ( as amended 1987) , the Central Government hereby notifies the following offices under the administrative control of the Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways , Department of Shipping, more than 80% of the staff of which have acquired working knowledge ofHindi:-

1. Calcutta Dock Labour Board , 20 - B , Abdul Hameed Street, Kolkata-600069

2. Mercantile Marine Department, ' Deep Bhavan ' 3rd Floor, Pandit Nehru Marg, Jamnagar-361008 .

[F. No. E- 11011/ 1 /2000-Hindi ]

A. K. BHALLA , Jt. Secy .

उपभोक्तामामले, खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय (उपभोक्तामामले विभाग ) भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो

नई दिल्ली, 1 जुलाई , 2005

का.आ. 2491.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम 7 के उप- नियम ( 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

संशोधित भारतीय मानक की संख्या

संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि क्रम संख्या

संशोधन की संख्या और तिथि

और वर्ष

(2)

(3)

(4) (1)

1 आई एस 458: 2003 संशोधन संख्या 1 , अप्रैल 2005 1, अप्रैल 2005

इन संशोधनों की प्रतियाँ, भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों :

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

7541

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़, चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, पटना, पुणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्धहैं ।

[संदर्भ: सीईडी 53/राजपत्र ] सतीश कुमार जैन, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ ' एवं प्रमुख ( सिविल इंजीनियरी ) MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs) BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS NewDelhi , the 1st July, 2005

S.O. 2491.- 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. No. and year ofthe Indian Standards

No. and year ofthe amend- ment

Datefrom which the amendment shall have effect (1)

(2)

(3)

(4) 1

IS458: 2003

1April 2005

Amendment No. 1 , April 2005

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 , Kolkatta Chandigarh , Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices: Ahmedabad, Bangalore , Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar , Coimbatore , Guwahati , Hyderabad , Jaipur , Kanpur , Nagpur , Patna, Pune , Thiruvananthapuram.

[Ref: CED 53/Gazette] S. K. JAIN, Sc ' F' & Head (Civil Engg .) नई दिल्ली, 6 जुलाई, 2005

का.आ. 2492.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम 7 के उप- नियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक 1993 GI /05-3

ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं :-

अनुसूची

क्रम स्थापित भारतीय

स्थापित तिथि

नये भारतीय

संख्या

मानक द्वारा

अतिक्रमित

मानक(कों ) की संख्या, वर्ष और

शीर्षक

भारतीय मानक अथवा मानकों, यदिकोई हो, की संख्या और वर्ष

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4) 1.

फरवरी 2005 आईएस/आई एस ओ/

आई ई सी गाईड 51:2005 सुरक्षा संबंधी सिद्धांत-मानकों में शामिल करने के लिए मार्गदर्शन (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

मई2005 आईएस 1367 (भाग 17) :2005 चूड़ीदार इस्पात बंधन सामग्री की तकनीकी आपूर्ति शर्तें- भाग 17 निरीक्षण, प्रतिचयन तथा स्वीकरण प्रक्रिया (चौथा पुनरीक्षण)

मई2005 आईएस 5030 (भाग 3):2005 धातु काटने के पट्टी आरा ब्लेड- विशिष्टि- भाग 3 आयाम और अन्य अपेक्षाएं (दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

मई2005 आईएस 6639: 2005

सामान्य इस्पात के लिए षटकोणीय सिरे वाले काबले विशिष्टि (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

अप्रैल 2005 आईएस 11835 (भाग 1):2005 समतल बेलनाकार शैंक औजारों के लिए क्लैम्प स्क्रूज़ के साथ औजार चक्र ( एंड मिल होल्डर ) - भाग 1 औजार शैंक की ड्राइविंग पद्धति

के आयाम (पहला पुनरीक्षण) 7542

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25 , 1927

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

[संदर्भ: पीजीडी/जी-3.5 ] राकेश कुमार, निदेशक एवं प्रमुख (पीजीडी) New Delhi , the 6th July, 2005

S.O. 2492. In pursuance of clause (b ) of sub - rule (1) ofRules ( 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. No. & Year ofthe Indian Standards Established

No. & year Date ofIndian Standards, ifany, Superseded by theNew Indian Standards Established

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

February

2005 IS/ISO/IEC Guide 51 :2005 Safety aspects- Guidelines for their inclusion in standards (First Revision)

May 2005 IS1367 (Part 17) ; 2005 Technical supply conditions forthreaded steel fasteners-Part 17 Inspections, sampling and acceptance procedure (Fourth Revision)

IS5030 (Part 3): 2005 Metal cutting bandsaw blade- Specification-- Part3 Dimensions and other requirements (Second Revision) May 2005

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] (2) (4) (3)

(1)

May2005 IS6639:2005 Hexagonhead bolts for general steel structures- Specification (FirstRevision)

5. IS11835 (Part 1): 2005 Tool chucks (Endmillholders) April2005 with clamp screws for flatted cylindri-

cal shank tools- Part 1 Dimensions ofthe driving system oftool shanks (First Revision) (Superseeding IS 11440:1985)

Copy of these Standards is available for sale with theBureau 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: PGD/G-3.5 ] RAKESH KUMAR, Director & Head (PGD) नई दिल्ली, 6 जुलाई , 2005

का.आ. 2493.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम 7के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि निम्न भारतीय मानकों में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं :

अनुसूची

संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि क्रम संख्या

संशोधन की संख्या और तिथि

संशोधित भारतीय मानक की संख्या और वर्ष

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

31मई 2005 1 .

आईएस 9725 ( भाग 1 ):

1981 तेल द्रवचालित कपलिंग के लिए स्टड टी बॉडी ( स्टड ब्रॉच ) की विशिष्टि-भाग 1 गढ़ाई द्वारा तैयार किए गए

आईएस 9725 ( भाग 2 ): 1 31मई 2005 1981 तेल द्रवचालित कपलिंग के लिए स्टड टी बॉडी ( स्टड ब्रॉच ) की विशिष्टि- भाग 2 बार स्टाक से तैयार किए गए [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7543

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

(4) (1)

(2)

(3)

31मई 2005 आईएस 10453 ( भाग 1 ):

1983 तेल द्रवचालित कपलिंग के लिए टेपर मेल स्टड टी बॉडी ( स्टड रन) की विशिष्टि- गढ़ाई द्वारा तैयार किए गए

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

[संदर्भ: पीजीडी/जी-3.5 ] राकेश कुमार, निदेशक एवं प्रमुख (पीजीडी) NewDelhi , the 6th July, 2005

S.O. 2493.- Inpursuance 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 amended on the date indicated against each:

SCHEDULE

SL.

Date Established No.

No. of Amendments &Date

No. &Year ofthe Indian Standards Established

(4) (1)

(2)

(3)

1 .

31May IS 9725 (Pt 1 ) : 1981

2005 Specification for male stud tee body (studbranch) for oil-hydraulic couplings-Part 1: Madefrom forgings

31 May IS 9725(Pt 1 ) : 1981 1

2005 Specification for male stud tee body (studbranch) for oil-hydraulic couplings-Part 2: Made from bar stock

31 May IS 10453 (Pt 1 ): 1983 1

2005 Specification for Taper male stud tee body (stud run) for oil-hydraulic couplings-Part 1: Made from forgings

CopyoftheseAmendments of Standards 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: PGD/G-3.5] RAKESH KUMAR, Director & Head (PGD) नई दिल्ली, 6 जुलाई, 2005

का.आ. 2494.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम 7के 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 विस्थापित हो गए हैं :

अनुसूची

टिप्पणी क्रम संशोधित भारतीय

संख्या मानक की संख्या और वर्ष

विस्थापित होनेकी तिथि

(3)

(4) (1)

(2)

30अप्रैल आधार मानक 1.

आईएस 3653:1966

2005 डिन 760:1937 गठित सिरे टाइप

केकठोर युग्मकों के आयाम

काविस्थापित होना

[संदर्भ: पीजीडी/जी-3.5 ] राकेश कुमार, निदेशक एवं प्रमुख ( पीजीडी) NewDelhi, the 6th July, 2005

S.O. 2494.- 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 IndianStandards, particulars of which are given in the Schedule here to annexed have been cancelled and stands withdrawn:

SCHEDULE

Dateof

Remarks

Withdrawn

SL No.

No. & Year of the Indian Standards Established

(3)

(4) (1) (2)

1. IS 3653: 1966

30April 2005

Dimensions for

forged end type

Base Standard DIN 760 : 1937 hasbeen withdrawn rigid couplings

[Ref: PGD/G-3.5] RAKESH KUMAR, Director & Head (PGD) [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] 7544

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, दिनांक 4 जुलाई, 2005

का. आ. 2495.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम , 1962 (1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 3034 तारीख 17 नवम्बर, 2004 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 27 नवम्बर , 2004 , में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मुन्द्रा - दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन के माध्यम से गुजरात राज्य में मुन्द्रा से दिल्ली तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 23 जनवरी, 2005 , को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं ;

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने, उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात , और यह समाधान हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए अपेक्षित है, उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चय किया है ;

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए , इस मंत्रालय के सहमति पत्र सं. आर 31015/7/03 ओ.आर- ॥ दिनांक 25/11/2004 द्वारा लगाई गई शर्तों के अध्यधीन सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । 7545 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

अनुसुची

राज्यः हरियाणा तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

जिलाः झज्जर

श्रेत्रफल गाँव का नाम

मुसतिल संख्या

खसरा/ किला संख्या हेक्टेयर

हदबस्त संख्या

एयर वर्गमीटर 1. बादली

02 41

13 50

04 99

07 26

00 89

3/1

3/2

8/4

10 44

25/1

05 49

25/2

5/1

7/1

7/2

58 [PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 7546

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

खसरा/ किला संख्या

दबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

1. बादली (जारी ... )

15/2

24/1

24/2

9/1

9/2

09 7547

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

एयर

हेक्टेयर

मुसतिल संख्या

खसरा/ किला संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

1. बादली (जारी...)

12 78

00 04

00 00

9/1

07.

9/2

00 03

25/2

25/3

03.

25/4

104

136

2/1

2/2

620(नहर)

634(कच्चा रास्ता)

635(सड़क)

675(खाल)

678 (खाल)

680(नाला)

724(रास्ता)

2059(रास्ता) [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

7548

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

एयर

हेक्टेयर

खसरा/ किला संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

2061(रास्ता)

1. बादली (जारी...)

2151(कच्ता रास्ता)

2154(रास्ता)

2170 (रास्ता)

2187 (रास्ता)

2193 (रास्ता)

6/1

2. मोहमदपुर माजरा

14/2/1

14/2/2

15/1

15/2

16/2

17/1/1

17/1/2

17/2/1

17/2/2

24/1

10/2

2/1

2/2

6/1

6/2

15 7549 भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/ किला

गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर,

हेक्टेयर एयर

संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

2. मोहमदपुर माजरा (जारी... )

24/2

04 40

39(सड़क)

85(खाल)

86(खाल)

97(कच्चा रास्ता)

_00

98 (कच्चा रास्ता)

123(खाल)

3. गोयला कलां

22/1

21/1

21/2

20.

21/1

21/2

10 7550

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

राज्यः हरियाणा

सदबस्त

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/ किला

मुसतिल

गाँव का नाम

संख्या

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्गमीटर

संख्या

3. गोथला कलां (जारी ...)

93(सड़क)

482(कच्चा रास्ता)

489(रास्ता)

490 (कच्चा रास्ता)

4. बुपनियां

20/1

20/2

5/2

6/1

6/2

6/4

15/1

15/2

16/1

17/1

17/2

07.

19/1

51 7551 [ भाग II -खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/ आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/ किला

गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

हदबस्त संख्या

संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

4. बुपनियां (जारी...)

220

14/1

14/2

10/1

10/2

25/2

6/1

6/2

06.

10 7552

THE GAZETTE OF

PEY-16,2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II -SEC . 3 (ii) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल

गाव का नाम

हदबस्त संख्या

एयर वर्गमीटर

मुसतिल संख्या

खसरा/ किला संख्या हेक्टेयर

58 4. बुपूनियां (जारी... )

121

00.

127

25/1

25/2

128

2/1

20/1

152

5/1

5/2

23 7553 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/ किला

गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

एयर

हेक्टेयर

संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

00 00

152

4. बुपनियां (जारी...)

159

8/1

8/2

19/1

19/2

22/1

1/1

181

1/2

10/1

10/2

182

16/1

16/2

185

7/1

7/2

23 7554

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II SEC . 3 (ii) ] तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

जिलाः झज्जर

राज्यः हरियाणा

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा किला

गाँव का नाम

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या संख्या हेक्टेयर एयर वर्गमीटर 4. बुपनियां (जारी ... )

185

205

8/1

8/2

244(खाल)

257 (खाल)

260 (नहर)

261 (खाल)

262(खाल)

268 (खाल)

272(खाल)

276 (खाल)

278 (खाल)

284(खाल)

286 (खाल)

293 (खाल)

294(खाल)

302(कच्वा रास्ता)

306(सड़क)

307 (सड़क)

1478( कच्चा रास्ता) 00

1498 ( कच्चा रास्ता)

1505 (खाल)

1506(कच्चा रास्ता)

1516(कच्चा रास्ता)

1523 (रास्ता)

1665( कच्चा रास्ता)

1672(खाल)

1673(रास्ता) 00

92 7555 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा / किला

गाँव का बाम

हदबस्त संख्या

एयर वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर

मुसतिल संख्या संख्या

5. डाबोदा खुर्द

10 84

3/2

4/1

4/2/1

8/1/1

8/1/2

13/2/2

18/1

23/2

3/2

8/1

13/2

24/1

24/2

8/1

12/1

08 09 7556

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

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

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/ किला

गाँव का नाम

मुसतिल संख्या

हेक्टेयर

रुदबस्त संख्या

संख्या

एयर वर्गमीटर 5. डाबोदा खुर्द (जारी ... )

12/2

13/1/1

13/1/2

20/1

20/2

14/2

17/1

17/2

23/2

10/2

2/1

107

2/2

3/1

3/2

9/1

14 7557 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/ किला

गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

1604

9/2

107

5. डाबोदा खुर्द (जारी... )

134(रास्ता)

148/2(खाल)

151/2(खाल)

154/2(खाल)

157 (खाल)

162(सड़क)

165 (सड़क)

168/2( कच्चा रास्ता)

288 (रास्ता)

495 (रास्ता)

501 (रास्ता)

523/2(रास्ता)

543/2(रास्ता)

6. मेहन्दीपुर

8/2

12/1

12/2

11/2 7558

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/ किला

गाँव का नाम

हेक्टेयर

वर्गमीटर

एयर

संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

20 6. मेहन्दीपुर (जारी ... )

20/1

0001

20/2

5/2

14/1

14/2

5/1

5/2

17/1

17/2

00 7559 भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का बाम

वर्गमीटर

एयर

हेक्टेयर

मुसतिल संख्या

खसरा/ किला संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

6. मेहन्दीपुर (जारी... )

64/2(खाल)

68/1(खाल)

78/2(रास्ता)

159(रास्ता)

160(रास्ता)

168/2(रास्ता) 00

7. डाबोदा कलां

2/1

2/2

10/1

12/1

12.

7/2

02. 59

23/1

23/2

24.

23 7560

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii)]

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

मुसतिल संख्या

हेक्टेयर एयर

हदबस्त संख्या

वर्गमीटर

खसरा/ किला संख्या

7. डाबोदा कलां (जारी ... )

63(खाल)

64(खाल)

81(रांस्ता)

331 (रास्ता)

67 8. मान्डोठी

1262

)

1263

1264

1266

1273

1274

1275

1314

1365

1366

1367

1375

1377

1378

1380

1381

1382

5427/1388/1

5417/1442/3

(नहर) 5418/1441/2

5420/1441/3 00

(नहर) 5423/1440/2

5425/1440/1

1444

10 7561 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

खसरा/ किला संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

10 8. मान्डोठी (जारी... )

1445

1473

1474

1475

1544

1545

1549

1550

1551

1552

1554

1555

1556

1557

1558

1717

1718

1719

1720

4736/1722/1 00

4737/1722/2 00

1723/1

1723/2

1724/1

1724/2

1721

1726

1741

1742 7562

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16, 2005 / ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

जिलाः झज्जर

राज्यः हारेयाणा तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/ किला

गाँव का नाम

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्गमीटर

हदबस्त संख्या

संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

8. मान्डोती (जारी... )

1743

1752

1753

1754

1755

1756

1767

1768

4591/1770/1

4592/1770/2 00

4593/1770/3

(नाला) 1779

1780

(नाला) 1878

2212

2213

4662/2217/1

4663/2217/2 00

2218

2224

2225

2228

2231

2233

2235

(नाला) 2236

2237

2424

15 9. जाखोदा

5/1

49 7563 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

मुसतिल संख्या

खसरा/ किला संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

6/2

04 59

9. जाखोदा (जारी... )

24/2

09 86

6/1

7/1

7/2

13/1

20/1

84(नहर)

92(खाल)

117(सड़क)

801 (खाल)

802(रास्ता)

62 10. आसोदा टोडरान

826

830 7564

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ ASADHA 25,1927

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

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/ किला

गाँव का बाम

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

संख्या हेक्टेयर एयर वर्गमीटर 10. आसोदा टोडराब (जारी ...)

831

836

837

838

02 85

[फा. सं. आर-31015/48/2004- ओ.आर- ।। ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS

New Delhi , dated 4th July, 2005

S. O. 2495.- Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry ofPetroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 3034 dated the 17th November , 2004 , issued under sub -section ( 1 ) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Rightof User in Land) Act, 1962 ( 50 of 1962) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act ) , published in the Gazette of India dated the 27th November , 2004, the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of petroleum products from Mundra in the State of Gujarat to Delhi through Mundra - Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited ;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 23rd January , 2005;

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

And whereas the Central Government , after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline , has decided to acquire right of user therein;

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

And further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -section (4 ) of section 6 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Central Government , vest on the date of publication ofdeclaration , in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited , free from all encumbrances , subject to the conditions imposed vide this Ministry's consent letter no . R- 31015/7/03 OR- II dated 25-11-2004.

7565 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

SCHEDULE

State : HARYANA Tehsil :BAHADURGARH

District : JHAJJAR

Area Name of Village

Hectare

Mustil No.

Are

Hadbast No.

Khasara / Killa No.

Square Metre

1.BADLI

3/1

3/2

8/4

13.

25/1

25/2

5/1

7/1

7/2

58 1993 G1/05-6 7566

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] Tehsil :BAHADURGARH

District : JHAJJAR

State : HARYANA

Area Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Are

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare

Square Metre

24 1. BADLI ( Contd ...)

15/2

70 )

24/1

24/2

9/1

9/2

09 7567 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

State : HARYANA

District : JHAJJAR

Tehsil :BAHADURGARH

Area

Name of Village

Hectare Are

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No.

Hadbast No.

Square Metre

1.BADLI ( Contd ... )

12.

9/1

9/2

25/2

25/3

25/4

104

05.

136

2/1

2/2

620(Canal)

634 (C.T)

635(Road)

675(Khal)

678( Khal )

680 (Nala)

724(Path)

2059 (Path)

7568

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] Tehsil : BAHADURGARH

District: JHAJJAR

State : HARYANA

Area

Nameof Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Are

Hectare

Khasara/ Killa No.

Square Metre

1. BADLI (Contd ...)

2061 (Path)

2151 (C.T)

2154(Path)

.00

2170(Path)

2187(Path)

2193(Path)

2. MOHAMAD PUR MAJRA

6/1

14/2/1

14/2/2

15/1

15/2

16/2

17/1/1

17/1/2

17/2/1

17/2/2

24/1

10/2

2/1

2/2

6/1

6/2

92 7569 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

State: HARYANA

District : JHAJJAR

Tehsil :BAHADURGARH

Area

Name of Village

Are

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare

Mustil No.

Hadbast No.

Square Metre

24/2

2. MOHAMAD PUR MAJRA (Contd...)

01.

39(Road)

85(Khal)

86(Khal)

97(C.T)

98(C.T)

123(Khal)

3. GOYALA KALAN

22/1

21/1

21/2

21/1

21/2

00 7570

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii) ] Tehsil :BAHADURGARH

District: JHAJJAR

State : HARYANA

Area

Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Hectare

Khasara / KillaNo.

Are

Square Metre 3. GOYALA KALAN

80 (Contd...)

93(Road)

482(C.T)

489(Path)

490(C.T)

4. BHUPAΝΙΑ

20/1

20/2

5/2

6/1

6/2

6/4

15/1

15/2

16/1

17/1

17/2

)

19/1

51 7571 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

State : HARYANA

District : JHAJJAR

Tehsil : BAHADURGARH

Area

Nameof Village

Are

Hectare

Khasara/ Killa No.

Mustil No.

Hadbast No.

Square Metre

220

4. BHUPANIA (Contd ...)

14/1

14/2

10/1

10/2

25/2

6/1

6/2

18 7572

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] Tehsil :BAHADURGARH

District : JHAJJAR

State : HARYANA

Area Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Hectare Are

Khasara / Killa No.

Square Metre

4. BHUPANIA (Contd ...)

121

127

25/1

25/2

128

2/1

20/1

152

5/1

5/2

)

18 7573 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

State: HARYANA

District: JHAJJAR

Tehsil :BAHADURGARH

Area Name of Village

Are

Hectare

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No.

Square Metre

152

4. BHUPANIA ( Contd ... )

159

8/1

8/2

07.

19/1

19/2

22/1

1/1

181

1/2

10/1

10/2

182

16/1

16/2

185

7/1

7/2

1993 GI/05-7 7574

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] Tehsil : BAHADURGARH

District : JHAJJAR

State: HARYANA Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara/ KillaNo.

Area Hectare Are

Square Metre

185

49 4. BHUPANIA (Contd ...)

205

8/1

8/2

244(Khal )

)

257(Khal )

260(Canal )

261(Khal)

262(Khal)

268 (Khal)

00 .

272(Khal )

276( Khal)

278(Khal)

284(Khal)

286(Khal )

293(Khal)

294(Khal)

302( C.T)

306(Road)

307(Road)

1478 ( C.T)

1498 (C.T)

1505(Khal )

1506 ( C.T)

1516 (C.T)

1523 ( Path)

1665 ( C.T)

1672( Khal )

1673 (Path) 7575 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Tehsil : BAHADURGARH

District : JHAJJAR

State: HARYANA

Area

Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara/ KillaNo. Hectare Are

Square Metre

5. DABODA KHURD

3/2

4/1

4/2/1

8/1/1

8/1/2

13/2/2

18/1

23/2

3/2

8/1

13/2

24/1

24/2

8/1

32 7576

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 / ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )] Tehsil : BAHADURGARH

State: HARYANA

District : JHAJJAR

Area

Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Hectare Are

Khasara/ KillaNo.

Square Metre

12/1

09 5. DABODA KHURD

12/2

04 (Contd...)

13/1/1

13/1/2

20/1

)

20/2

14/2

17/1

17/2

23/2

10/2

107

2/1

2/2

3/1

3/2

9/1

14 7577 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

State: HARYANA

District : JHAJJAR

Tehsil : BAHADURGARH

Area

Name of Village

Are

Hadbast No.

Hectare

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No.

Square Metre

107

9/2

5. DABODA KHURD (Contd...)

134(Path)

148/2(Khal)

151/2(Khal)

154/2(Khal)

157(Khal)

162(Road)

165 (Road)

168/2(C.T)

288(Path)

495 (Path)

501( Path)

,00

523/2(Path)

543/2(Path)

6. MEHINDIPUR

8/2

12/1

12/2

11/2 7578

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii)] Tehsil : BAHADURGARH

District : JHAJJAR

State: HARYANA

Area

Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Hectare Are

Khasara / Killa No.

Square Metre

20/1

20 6. MEHINDIPUR (Contd ... )

20/2

5/2

14/1

14/2

5/1

5/2

17/1

17/2

20 7579 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

State : HARYANA

District: JHAJJAR

Tehsil : BAHADURGARH

Area

Name of Village

Hectare Are

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No.

Hadbast No.

Square Metre

6. MEHINDIPUR ( Contd ... )

64/2(Khal)

68/1 (Khal)

78/2(Path)

159(Path)

160( Path)

168/2( Path)

7. DABODA KALAN

2/1

2/2

10/1

12/1

7/2

23/1

23/2

00 7580

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] Tehsil :BAHADURGARH

District : JHAJJAR

State : HARYANA

Area Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Are

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare

Square Metre

7. DABODA KALAN

67 (Contd...)

63(Khal)

64(Khal)

81(Path)

331(Path)

8.MANDOTHI

1262

1263

1264

1266

1273

1274

1275

1314

1365

1366

1367

1375

1377

1378

1380

1381

1382

5427/1388/1

5417/1442/3

(Canal) 5418/1441/2 00

5420/1441/3 00

(Canal ) 5423/1440/2

5425/1440/1

1444

10 7581 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

State : HARYANA

District : JHAJJAR

Tehsil :BAHADURGARH

Area

Name of Village

Hectare Are

Khasara/ Killa No.

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Square Metre

1445

8. MANDOTHI ( Contd ...)

1473

1474

1475

1544

1545

1549

1550

1551

1552

1554

1555

1556

1557

1558

1717

1718

1719

1720

4736/1722/1

4737/1722/2

1723/1

1723/2

1724/1

1724/2

1721

1726

1741

1742

1993 G1/05-8 7582

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 / ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] Tehsil : BAHADURGARH

State : HARYANA

District: JHAJJAR

Area

Nameof Village

Are

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare

Square Metre

1743

8. MANDOTHI ( Contd ... )

1752

1753

1754

1755

1756

1767

1768

4591/1770/1 00

4592/1770/2 00

4593/1770/3

(Nala) 1779

1780

(Nala) 1878

2212

2213

4662/2217/1 00

4663/2217/2 00

2218

2224

2225

2228

2231

2233

2235

(Nala) 2236

2237

2424

9. JAKHODA

5/1

49 7583 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

State : HARYANA

District : JHAJJAR

Tehsil : BAHADURGARH

Area

Nameof Village

Are

Hectare

Khasara / Killa No.

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Square Metre

6/2

9. JAKHODA ( Contd...)

24/2

6/1

7/1

7/2

13/1

20/1

84(Canal)

92(Khal)

117(Road)

801 (Khal )

802( Path)

826

10. ASUDHA TODRAN

06.

830

00 7584

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART 11-SEC . 3 (ii )] Tehsil : BAHADURGARH

State : HARYANA

District: JHAJJAR

Area

Name of Village

Hectare Are

Mustil No.

Khasara / KillaNo.

Hadbast No.

Square Metre

831

836.

63 10. ASUDHA TODRAN (Contd...)

837

838

[No. R-31015/48/2004-O.R. -II ] HARISH KUMAR, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 4 जुलाई , 2005

का. आ. 2496.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम , 1962 (1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 3149 तारीख 7 दिसम्बर , 2004, जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 11 दिसम्बर , 2004, में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मुन्द्रा-दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन के माध्यम से मुन्द्रा (गुजरात) से दिल्ली तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 26 फरवरी , 2005 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी ;

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने, उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात , और यह समाधान हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए अपेक्षित है, उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जल करने का विनिश्चय किया है ;

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए इस मंत्रालय के सहमति पत्र संसार 31015/7/03 ओ.आर- दिनांक 25/11/2004 द्वारा लगाई गई शर्तों के अध्यधीन सभी तिल्लंगमों से मुक्त, हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा। [भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

7585

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

अनुसुची

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

खसरा/ किला गाँव का नाम

मुसतिल संख्या

संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

1. आसोदा टोडरान

879

1017

1022

1023

1024

1025

1028

1097

1098

1103

1104

1106

1112

1117

1118

1119

1125

21 2. आसोदा सिक्न

103

104

105

106

2/1

2/2

9/1

9/2

15/1

15/2

107

11/2

19/1

19/2 श्रेत्रफल

वर्गमीटर

एयर

हेक्टेयर

87 00

11 00

58 00

99 00

32 00

04 00

42 00

80 00

57 00

59 00

25 00

91 00

33 00

24 00

47 00

41 00

10 00

00 00

40 00

76 00

< 7586

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii ) ]

जिलाः झज्जर

गाँव का नाम

हदबस्त | संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

खसरा/ किला संख्या

107

20 2. आसोदा सिवान (जारी...)

23/1

144

153

373 3. बराही

1872

1952

1953

1954

1955

1957

1958

1963

1965

1969

2040

2041

2044

2045

2049

2050

2051

2052

2053

2054

2083

2084

2089

2094

2098

2112

2114

2140

2154

2155

2157

2158 राज्यः हरियाणा

श्रेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्गमीटर 00

17 00

05 00

64 00

27 00

) 00

12 00

82 00

85 00

73 00

65 00

61 00

69 00

70 00

82 00

04 00

46 00

67 00

58 00

73 00

52 00

13 00

19 00

38 00

79 00

26 00

30 00

20 00

65 00

34 00

50 00

81 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

जिलाः झज्जर तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

गाँव का नाम

7587 राज्यः हरियाणा

श्रेत्रफल

एयर वर्गमीटर हेक्टेयर

खसरा/ किला

संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

2172 3. बराही (जारी...)

2173

2174

2175

2176

2178

2179

2192

2194

2276

2279

2285

2286

2287

2297

2299

2300

2301

2303

2304

2307

2313

2314

2316

2319

2321

2324

2325

2326

2330

2340

2343

2344

2348

2356

2359

2360 00

87 00

10 00

06 84 00

71 00

33 00

78 00

85 00

51 00

32 00

95 00

75 00

40 00

47 00

38 00

59 00

10 00

67 00

44 00

37 00

25 00

44 00

68 7588

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

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

जिलाः झज्जर

राज्यः हरियाणा

खसरा/ किला

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हेक्टेयर

संख्या

एयर वर्गमीटर 3. बराही (जारी...)

2361

2362

2372

2373

2374

2375

2383

2384

2386

2395

2398

2399

2407

2408

2411

2412

2420

2421

2425

2426

2431

2432

2503

2539

49 4. बाहमनोली

19/1

19/2

19/3

20/1

20/2

00 20

47 7589

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii)]

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

गाँव का नाम

मुसतिल संख्या

खसरा/ किला संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

19 4. बाहमनोली (जारी...)

20/1

20/2

24/2

14/2

3/1

3/2

4/1

4/2

1/1

1/2

2/1

2/2

3/1

6/2

6/3

7/1

7/2

8/1

14 1993 G1 /05-9

श्रेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्गमीटर

38 00 06

75 00 05

11 00

12 00

40 00

00 39 00

80 00

98 00

92 00

51 00

04 00 00

58 00

74 00

40 00

33 00

97 00

05 79 00

60 00

10 00

06 00

00 57 00

44 00

31 00

00 7590

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

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

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

गाँव का नाम

खसरा/ किला संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

4. बाहमनोली (जारी... )

15/1

15/2

10/2

17/1

17/2

18/1

100

21/1

21/2

22/1

103

104

10/2

105

2/1/1

2/1/2

2/2

3/1

3/2

6/1

6/2

26 श्रेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर

वर्गमीटर

एयर

10 00

44 00

29 00

65 00

75 00

50 00

95 00

65 00

63 00

29 00

49 00

01 00

29 00

02 00

00 00

45 00

73 00

10 00

01 00

99 00

75 00

48 00

81 00

10 00

37 7591

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

गाँव का नाम

खसरा/ किला संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

124

4. बाहमनोली (जारी ...)

125

132

134

146

160

923

932

934

935

952

957 5. परनाला

2/1

2/2

2/3

8/1

8/2

9/1

9/2

14/2

16/2

17 श्रेत्रफल

वर्गमीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

90 00

38 00

60 00

23 00

29 00

91 00

97 00

60 00

10 00

07 00

63 00

58 00

92 00

86 00

63 00

37 00

51 00

46 00

01 00

10 00

25 00

10 00

68 7592

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

जिलाः झज्जर तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

गाँव का नाम

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

श्रेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर

खसरा/ किला

संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

5. परनाला (जारी... )

25/1

25/3

25/4

10/1

17/1

17/2

17/3

18/1

18/2

24/1

24/2

24/4

4/1

5/1

5/2

6/1

106

129

525

528

530

550

551

553

554

एयर वर्गमीटर 00

36 00

10 00

23 00

06 55 00

47 00

50 00

66 00

74 00

47 00

03 00

94 00

10 00

55 00

63 00

05 00

57 00

94 00

01 00

74 00

35 00

37 00

42 00

70 00

91 00

00 00

17 00

77 00

14 00

71 7593 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

एयर

हेक्टेयर

खसरा/ किला संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

555

5. परनाला (जारी...)

558

[फा. सं. आर-31015/56/2004 - ओ.आर- II ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 4th July, 2005

S. O. 2496.- Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry ofPetroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 3149 dated the 07th December , 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) , (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), published in the Gazette of India dated the 11th December , 2004, the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of petroleum products from Mundra in the State of Gujarat to Delhi through Mundra -Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 26th February , 2005;

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

And whereas the Central Government , after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline , has decided to acquire right of user therein:

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferredby sub- section ( 1 ) of section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule , appended to this notification , is hereby acquired for laying the nipeline:

And further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section (4) of section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said land for laving the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Central Government , vest on the date of publication of declaration, in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, free from all encumbrances subject to the conditions imposed vide this Ministry's consent letter no . R- 31015/7/03 OR- II dated 25-11-2004 7594

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

SCHEDULE

Tehsil : Bahadurgarh

District : Jhajjar

Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No.

879 1. ASUDHA TODRAN

1017

1022

1023

1024

1025

1028

1097

1098

1103

1104

1106

1112

1117

1118

1119

1125

103

21 2. ASUDHA SIWAN

104

105

106

2/1

2/2

9/1

9/2

15/1

15/2

107

11/2

19/1

19/2 State : Haryana

Area

Are

Hectare

Square Metre 00

) 00

25 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7595

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

State: Haryana

District: Jhajjar

Tehsil :Bahadurgarh

Name of Village

Khasara / Killa No.

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

107

23/1 2. ASUDHA SIWAN (Contd...)

144

153

373

1872

3.BARAHI

1952

1953

1954

1955

1957

1958

1963

1965

1969

2040

2041

2044

2045

2049

2050

2051

2052

2053

2054

2083

2084

2089

2094

2098

2112

2114

2140

2154

2155

2157

2158

Area

Hectare Are

Square Metre 00

05 00

64 00

66 00

82 00

85 00

73 00

65 00

61 00

69 00

70 00

04 00

46 00

67 00

73 00

13 00

38 00

20 00

71 00

34 00

85 00

56 00

81 7596

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

Tehsil :Bahadurgarh

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )] State: Haryana

District : Jhajjar

Nameof Village

Mustil No.

Hadbast No.

Khasara / Killa No. :

2172

3. BARAHI ( Contd...)

2173

2174

2175

2176

2178

2179

2192

2194

2276

2279

2285

2286

2287

2297

2299

2300

2301

2303

2304

2307

2313

2314

2316

2319

2321

2324

2325

2326

2330

2340

2343

2344

2348

2356

2359

2360 Area

Hectare Are

Square Metre

) 00

68 7597

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

District : Jhajjar

Tehsil :Bahadurgarh

Nameof Village

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No.

Hadbast No.

2361

3. BARAHI (Contd ...)

2362

2372

2373

2374

2375

2383

2384

2386

2395

2398

2399

2407

2408

2411

2412

2420

2421

2425

2426

2431

2432

2503

2539

4. BAMNOLI

19/1

19/2

19/3

20/1

20/2

22 1993 G1/05-10

State : Haryana

Area

Are

Hectare

Square Metre

94 00

58 00

60 00

80 00

30 00

10 00

18 00

33 00

58 00

40 00

33 00

06 00

17 00

10 00

60 00

00 7598

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

District: Jhajjar

Tehsil :Bahadurgarh

Hadbast

State: Haryana

Area

Khasara / Killa

Name of Village

No.

Mustil No.

No.

19 4. BAMNOLI (Contd ...)

20/1

20/2

24/2

14/2

3/1

3/2

4/1

4/2

1/1

1/2

2/1

2/2

3/1

6/2

6/3

7/1

7/2

8/1

14 Hectare Are

Square Metre 00

38 00

77 00

75 00

44 00

11 00

16 00

02 12 00

40 00

39 00

84 00

80 00

42 00

98 00

07 00

92 00

51 00

95 00

87 00

40 00

33 00

97 00

79 00

60 00

10 00

06 00

57 00

20 00

57 00

31 00

10 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7599

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

District : Jhajjar

Tehsil :Bahadurgarh

Nameof Village

Khasara / Killa No.

Mustil No.

Hadbast No.

15/1

4. BAMNOLI (Contd...)

15/2

10/2

17/1

17/2

18/1

21/1

100

21/2

22/1

103

104

10/2

2/1/1

105

2/1/2

2/2

3/1

3/2

6/1

6/2

26 State : Haryana

Area

Hectare Are

Square Metre 00

64 00

10 00

29 00

75 00

50 00

65 00

92 00

16 00

29 00

01 00

29 00

54 00

45 00

40 00

10 00

13 00

10 00

01 00

75 00

48 00

81 00

00 7600

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

Tehsil : Bahadurgarh

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

District : Jhajjar

Khasara / Killa

Name of Village

Hadbast No.

No. Mustil

No.

124 4. BAMNOLI (Contd ...)

125

132

134

146

160

923

932

934

935

952

957 5. PARNALA

2/1

2/2

2/3

8/1

8/2

9/1

9/2

14/2

16/2

17 State : Haryana

Area

Hectare Are

Square Metre 00

90 00

38 00

60 00

23 00

65 00

81 00

29 00

91 00

97 00

03 00

60 00

44 00

10 00

07 00

63 00

54 00

58 00

92 00

52 00

68 00

86 00

63 00

01 00

37 00

51 00

20 00

46 00

27 00

01 00

10 00

25 00

10 00

71 00

10 00

68 7601

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

District : Jhajjar

Tehsil :Bahadurgarh

Name of Village

Khasara / Killa No.

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

25/1

5. PARNALA (Contd ...)

25/3

25/4

10/1

17/1

17/2

17/3

18/1

18/2

24/1

24/2

24/4

4/1

5/1

5/2

6/1

106

129

525

528

530

550

551

553

554 State:Haryana

Area

Hectare Are

Square Metre 00

23 00

55 00

47 00

50 00

74 00

47 00

03 00

94 00

10 00

63 00

05 00

57 00

01 00

37 00

42 00

70 00

93 00

75 00

17 00

77 00

71 00

01 7602

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] Tehsil : Bahadurgarh

District: Jhajjar

State: Haryana

Area

Nameof Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No.

Hectare Are

Square Metre 36

555

10 5. PARNALA (Contd ...)

558

[No. R-31015/56/2004- O.R. - II ] HARISH KUMAR , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 4 जुलाई , 2005

का. आ. 2497. - केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 3152 तारीख 10 दिसम्बर , 2004 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 11 दिसम्बर , 2004 , में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मुन्द्रा- दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन के माध्यम से गुजरात राज्य में मुन्द्रा से दिल्ली तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी :

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 29 जनवरी , 2005 , को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं ;

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने , उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात, और यह समाधान हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए अपेक्षित है , उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चय किया है ;

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

1 और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए , इस मंत्रालय के सहमति पत्र सं. आर ओ.आर-।। दिनांक 25/11/2004 द्वारा लगाई गई शर्तों के अध्यधीन सभी विल्लंगों से मुक्त, हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । 31015/7/03 7603 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

अनुसुची

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः झज्जर

क्षेत्रफल

खसरा/किला

गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

एयर

हेक्टेयर

संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

250

1.लुहारी

17/1

17/2

609

00 08

11.

8/2

19/1

19/2

611

9/1

9/2

10/2

12 7604

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] तहसीलः झज्जर

जिलाः झज्जर

राज्यः हरियाणा

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

हदबस्त संख्या

खसरा /किला संख्या हेक्टेयर

मुसतिल संख्या

एयर वर्गमीटर

250

1. लुहारी (जारी...)

21/1

286

21/2

288

119

10 94

280

24/1

24/2

3/2

127

583

15/1

144

15/2

15/3

25/1

96 7605 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

तहसीलः झज्जर

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

हदबस्त संख्या

खसरा/किला संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्गमीटर

250

144

25/2

1. लुहारी (जारी... )

1/2

145

620

11/2

11/3

20/1

153

585

5/1

02.

7/1

7/2

588

167

9/1

9/2

20/1

21/2

22/1

174

1/1

1/2

175

6/1

6/2

1993 GI/05-11 [PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

7606

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः झज्जर

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/किला

गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

संख्या हेक्टेयर एयर

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

250

175

1. लुहारी (जारी... )

17/1

17/2/1

17/2/2

184

18/1

18/2

589

21/2

276

2. कुतानी

20/2

131

16 7607 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः झज्जर

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा /किला

गाँव का नाम

हेक्टेयर

संख्या

एयर वर्गमीटर

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

276

2. कुतानी (जारी... )

23/1

9/1

132

9/2

19/2

10/1

10/2

86 7608

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

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

जिलाः झज्जर

राज्यः हरियाणा

श्रेत्रफल गाँव का नाम

हदबस्त संख्या

खसरा/किला संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्गमीटर

276

2. कुतानी (जारी... )

342

343

134

7/1

7/2

23/2

24/1

24/2

133/2

80 3. दादरी तोए

275

406

175

498

1/2

10/1

05 7609 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः झज्जर

श्रेत्रफल गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर

खसरा/किला संख्या

एयर

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

11/2

275

3. दादरी तोए (जारी ... )

20/2

468

21/1

21/2

500

499

502

7/1

7/2

13/2

477

23/1

23/2

505

100

8/2

9/1

9/2

169

20 7610

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः झज्जर

राज्यः हरियाणा

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

खसरा /किला संख्या हेक्टेयर एयर वर्गमीटर

275

3. दादरी तोए (जारी ... )

100

115

511

25/1

25/2

116

122

509

17/1

131

17/2

489

23/2

24/1

24/2

3/2

136

4/1

18/1

18/2

139

88 7611 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16 , 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः झज्जर

खसरा/किला

श्रेत्रफल गाँव का नाम

एयर

मुसतिल संख्या संख्या हेक्टेयर

वर्गमीटर

हदबस्त संख्या

271

93 4.बीड़ दादरी

269

5. मूनीमपुर कुकड़ोला

124

165

4/1

4/2

7/1

7/2

00 09

6. बाहमनोला

270

4/1

4/2

5/1/1 7612

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)]

राज्यः हरियाणा

तहसीलः झज्जर

जिलाः झज्जर

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/किला

गाँव का नाम!

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल|

संख्या

हेक्टेयर

संख्या

एयर वर्गमीटर

7/1/1

270

46 6. बाहमजोला ( जारी...)

7/1/2

7/2

14/1/2

14/2/2

17/1

17/2

3/1

3/2

7/2

8/1

305

12/1

12/2

22/1

22/3

23/1

2/2

21 7613 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

राज्यः हरियाणा

तहसीलः झज्जर

जिलाः झज्जर

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

मुसतिल संख्या

हेक्टेयर

खसरा/किला संख्या

एयर वर्गमीटर

हदबस्त संख्या

270

57 6. बाहमनोला (जारी ... )

10/1

10/2

286

325

310

19/2

324

9/1

9/2

12/1

12/2

-18

332

103

1993 G1/05-12 [PART II-SEC . 3 (11) ] 7614

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः झज्जर

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम!

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

मुसतिल संख्या

खसरा/किला संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

345

270

6. बाहमनोला (जारी...)

25/1

25/2

17/1

17/2

110

7. लाडपुर

21/1

456

119

00 7615 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः झज्जर

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/किला

गाँद का नाम

वर्गमीटर

एयर

हेक्टेयर

संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

7. लाडपुर (जारी...)

123

474

8/2

12/1

12/2

13/1

19/1

19/2

19/3

137

21/2

1/1

60 7616

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ ASADHA 25,1927

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः झज्जर

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/किला

गाँव का नाम

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

संख्या

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

1/2

58 7. लाडपुर (जारी... )

480

138

6/1

15/1

15/2

462

13 8. फैजाबाद उर्फ पाहसौर

287

8/1

8/2

23/1

23/2

289

00 7617 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः झज्जर

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

हेक्टेयर

वर्गमीटर

खसरा/किला संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

एयर

हदबस्त संख्या

9/1

8. फैजाबाद उर्फ पाहसौर (जारी...)

12/1

12/2

[फा. सं. आर-31015/36/2004- ओ.आर- II ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर संचिव

New Delhi , the 4th July , 2005

S. O. 2497. Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 3152 dated the 10th December, 2004, issued under sub -section ( 1 ) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Rightof User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962 ) .( hereinafter referred to as the said Act) , published in the Gazette of India dated the 11th December , 2004, the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of petroleum products from Mundra in the State of Gujarat to Delhi through Mundra- Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 29th January , 2005;

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

And whereas the Central Government , after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline , has decidedto acquire right of usertherein;

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

And further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 4) of section 6 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Central Government, vest on the date of publication of declaration , in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited , free from all encumbrances, subject to the conditions imposed vide this Ministry's consent letter no. R- 31015/7/03 OR- 11 dated 25-11-2004.

7618

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

SCHEDULE

Tehsil : JHAJJAR

District : JHAJJAR

State : HARYANA

Area

Nameof Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

250

24 1. LOHARI

17/1

17/2

609

8/2

19/1

19/2

611

9/1

9/2

10/2

15 7619 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

State: HARYANA

District: JHAJJAR

Tehsil :JHAJJAR

Area

Are

Nameof Village

Hectare

Khasara / Killa No.

Mustil No.

Hadbast No.

Square Metre

250

1. LOHARI ( Contd ...)

21/1

286

21/2

288

119

280

24/1

24/2

3/2

127

583

15/1

144

15/2

15/3

25/1 7620

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :

JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] Tehsil : JHAJJAR

District : JHAJJAR

State : HARYANA

Area

Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No.

Are

Hectare

Square Metre

250

144

25/2

1. LOHARI ( Contd ...)

145

1/2

620

)

11/2

11/3

20/1

153

585

5/1

7/1

7/2

588

167

9/1

9/2

20/1

21/2

22/1

174

1/1

1/2

175

6/1

6/2

61 7621 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16 , 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

District : JHAJJAR

Tehsil : JHAJJAR

State : HARYANA

Area

Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

250

175

08 1. LOHARI ( Contd ... )

17/1

17/2/1

17/2/2

184

1.1

18/1

18/2

589

21/2

276

2. KUTANI

20/2

131

1993 GI/05-13 [PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

7622

State : HARYANA

District : JHAJJAR

Tehsil : JHAJJAR

Area

Nameof Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

276

2. KUTANI (Contd ...)

24.

23/1

9/1

132

9/2

19/2

10/1

10/2

11 7623 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

State: HARYANA

District: JHAJJAR

Tehsil : JHAJJAR

Area

Name of Village

Are

Mustil No.

Hectare

Khasara / Killa No.

Hadbast No.

Square Metre

342

276

2. KUTANI ( Contd...)

343

00 $$$ 08

134

7/1

7/2

23/2

24/1

24/2

133/2

406

275

3. DADRI TOE

175

498

1/2

10/1

00 7624

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii )] Tehsil : JHAJJAR

District : JHAJJAR

State: HARYANA

Area

Nameof Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

275

3. DADRI TOE (Contd ...)

11/2

20/2

468

21/1

21/2

500

499

502

7/1

7/2

13/2

477

23/1

23/2

100

505

8/2

9/1

9/2

169

39 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

7625 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Tehsil : JHAJJAR

District : JHAJJAR

State : HARYANA

Area

Nameof Village

Mustil No.

Hadbast No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

275

100

00 3. DADRI TOE ( Contd ... )

511

115

25/1

25/2

116

122

509

17/1

131

17/2

489-

23/2

24/1

24/2

136

3/2

4/1

00.

18/1

18/2

139

88 7626

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

District : JHAJJAR

Tehsil : JHAJJAR

State : HARYANA

Area Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

271

93 4. BIR DADRI

269

5. MUNIMPUR KUKROLA

124

165

4/1

4/2

7/1

7/2

270

32 6. BAMANOLA

4/1

4/2

5/1/1

96 7627 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Tehsil : JHAJJAR

District : JHAJJAR

State : HARYANA

Area

Nameof Village

Mustil No.

Hadbast No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

270

7/1/1

6. BAMANOLA ( Contd ... )

7/1/2

7/2

14/1/2

14/2/2

17/1

17/2

3/1

3/2

7/2

8/1

305

12/1

12/2

22/1

22/3

23/1

2/2

43 7628

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] Tehsil : JHAJJAR

District : JHAJJAR

State : HARYANA

Area Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No.

Are

Hectare

Square Metre

270

57 6. BAMANOLA ( Contd ...)

.00

10/1

10/2

286

325

310

19/2

324

9/1

9/2

12/1

12/2

332

103

60 7629 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

State : HARYANA

District : JHAJJAR

Tehsil : JHAJJAR

Area

Name of Village

Mustil No.

Hectare Are

Khasara / Killa No.

Hadbast No.

Square Metre

345

270

6. BAMANOLA ( Contd ...)

25/1

25/2

17/1

17/2

110

7. LADPURA

21/1

456

119

1993 GI /05-14 7630

JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :

District: JHAJJAR

State : HARYANA Tehsil : JHAJJAR

Area

Name of Village

Hectare Are

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No.

Square Metre

7. LADPURA ( Contd ... )

123

474

8/2

12/1

12/2

13/1

19/1

19/2

19/3

137

21/2

1/1

60 7631 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

State : HARYANA

District : JHAJJAR

Tehsil : JHAJJAR

Area

Name of Village

Are

Hectare

Khasara / Killa No.

Mustil No.

Hadbast No.

Square Metre

1/2

7. LADPURA (Contd ... )

480

138

6/1

15/1

15/2

462

8. FAIZABAD ALIAS

PASAOR

287

8/1

8/2

23/1

23/2

289

49 7632

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

State : HARYANA

District : JHAJJAR

Tehsil : JHAJJAR

Area Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

9/1

14 8. FAIZABAD ALIAS PASAOR ( Contd ... )

12/1

12/2

[No. R -31015/36/2004-O.R. - II ] HARISH KUMAR , Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली, 4 जुलाई , 2005

t का. आ. 2498.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 256 तारीख 17 जनवरी , 2005 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 22 जनवरी, 2005 , में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मुन्द्रा- दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन के माध्यम से गुजरात राज्य में मुन्द्रा से दिल्ली तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉरिशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 8 अप्रैल , 2005 , को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं ;

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने , उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात , और यह समाधान हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए अपेक्षित है , उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चय किया है ;

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए , इस मंत्रालय के सहमति पत्र सं . आर ओ.आर- दिनांक 25/11/2004 द्वारा लगाई गई शर्तों के अध्यधीन सभी विल्लंगों से मुक्त, हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । 31015/7/03 7633

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

अनुसूची राज्य : राजस्थान

जिला: जयपुर

तहसील: आमेर

खसरा सं.

गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

521 1. खोराबीसल

520

516

517 क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

515/721

515

514

514/720

506

513

507

511

510

554

555

0.0

555/719

485

484(जे.डी.ए.रास्ता)

556 (जे.डी.ए.रास्ता)

483

482

480

561/747

561

562

478

476

42 0

475(जे.डी.ए.रास्ता)

454

438

442

16 0

0.4

441/918

441

399/906

399

395

397

396

0 7634

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

तहसील : आमेर

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ]

जिला: जयपुर

क्रम सं.

गाँ का नाम

खसरा सं .

3 1. खोराबीसल (जारी...)

राज्य: राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर

एयर वर्ग मीटर 4

364(जे.डी.ए.रास्ता)

354

351

352

349

347(जे.डी.ए.रास्ता)

346 01

346/894(जे.डी.ए. )

100

101 0

103(जे.डी.ए.रास्तां)

101/709

229/712

229

230 0

230/694

237

235

238/866

238

239

242

243

252

246

247

208

207

206

205 0

199/849

199 0

259 (जे.डी.ए. रास्ता)

273

272

271

269

268

72 7635

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

आमेर

तहसील :

राज्य : राजस्थान

जिला: जयपुर

खसरा सं .

गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

267 1. खोराबीसल (जारी ...)

180 2. शुभरामपुरा

212 3. बेनाड़मयदौलतपुरा

211

210

209

208

205 क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

232(स .रास्ता)

234

237

238

167

166

169

165

171

163

174

109

104

103 0

52 0

56 0

72 0

64 0

90(स .रास्ता)

59 4. नांगलसिरस

48 0

09 0

52 0

82 0

:49(जे.डी.ए.चारागाह)

76 0

250 (रेल्वे)

251(रेल्वे)

804 (जे.डी.ए. चारागाह)

805 (जे.डी.ए. चारागाह)

806 (जे.डी.ए. चारागाह)

806/876 (जे.डी.ए.)

7636

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16 , 2005 / ASADHA 25,1927

तहसील : आमेर

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

जिला : जयपुर

गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

खसरा सं.

819 4. नांगलसिरस (जारी...)

815

813 5. नींदड़

167

166

165

163

162

187

188

192

191

190/3433

203

204/3434

204

205

208

207

206 क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर

152(जे.डी.ए.नाला)

145

140

144

141

142

135

136

125

116 0

116/3527

1 0

275(जे.डी.ए.नाला)

292

291

288

287

283

338

340

341 0

07 7637

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड3 ( ii) ]

राज्य: राजस्थान

जिला: जयपुर

तहसील: आमेर

खसरा सं.

गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

342 5. नींदड़ (जारी... )

351

350

354

355

356

357

358

359

412

411 क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयरं एयर

96 0

20 0

9.9

567 (जे.डी.ए. रास्ता)

408

409

407

576

574

573

569

571

570

428 6. राजावास

427/887

429

431

432

441

440

439

478

07 * 64 0

20 0

476(स.चारागाह)

477 (स.चारागाह)

474(स.चारागाह)

484(स.चारागाह)

473

485

486/908 (स.चारागाह)

487(स.चारागाह)

655 (पी.डब्ल्यू.डी. सड़क)

771 1993 GI/05-15

0 7638

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( u)] तहसील : आमेर

जिला: जयपुर

राज्य: राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

6 6. सजाबास (जारी...)

771/877

770

768,

765/830.

77.5

776

757 (पी.डब्ल्यू.डी. सड़क)

756

732

733

752

753

751

749

749/868

748

7. नांगलपुरोहित

1-3

16 (जे.डी.ए. चारागाह)

12(जे.डी.ए.चारागाह)

'0/1242 (जे.डी.ए.चारागाह

114(जे.डी.ए. चारागाह)

115(जे.डी.ए.नाला)

116 (जे.डी.ए. चारागाह)

7639

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II - खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

तहसील : आमेर

राज्य : राजस्थान

जिला : जयपुर

खसस सं.

गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 4

198/1298

7. नांगलपुरोहित (जारी... )

113/1297

111 (जे.डी.ए. चारागाह)

110

201

107

105 0

72(जे.डी.ए.चारागाह)

8. छवरकावास

279 (जे.डी.ए.चारागाह)

278 (जे.डी.ए.नाला)

277 (जे.डी.ए.चारागाह)

263(जे.डी.ए.रास्ता)

276

271

273

264

272

270

269

268 9. चेतावाला

287

286

241

282

283

242

243

238

240

133

135

136

137

139

142

141

143

144

145

107 0

28 0

40 0

20 0

36 0

48 0

80 0

98 0

68 0-

94 0

88 0

36 0

45 0

30 0

04 0

56 0

28 0

34 7640

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

तहसील : आमेर

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )]

जिला: जयपुर

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

3 9. चेतावाला (जारी ... )

राज्य: राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

106(स.रास्ता)

105

83 0

158(स.रास्ता)

159.

162

161 0

176(स. रास्ता)

201

200

199

182

185

184

183

188

196 10. बदनपुरा

197 0

199(स.रास्ता)

213

202

205

254

253

247

252

248

250

249

243 0

272/403

275

313

312

315

311 00

72 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7641

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

तहसील : आमेर

जिला: जयपुर

गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

खसरा सं.

318 10. बदनपुरा (जारी...)

310

304

305

303

301 11. खोराश्यामदास

राज्य: राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 4

1.3

54 0

199(ग्रा.पं.चारागाह)

209/1841 (ग्रा.पं. चारागाह)

209

207

210

20-6

121

37 0

20* 0

07 74

262(स.रास्ता)

292

293

295

296

297

298

299

300

307

308

309

310 0

0 .

05 7642

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 / ASADHA 25,1927.

तहसील : आमेर

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

जिला: जयपुर

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

क्रम सं.

311 1 खोराश्यामदास (जारी...)

312

313

969

970 क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 4

10 0

34 0

970/1810

978

974

975

976

990

991

228

229 12. देगडास

86 0

76 0

75 0

1.8 0

49 0

52 0

92 0

230(स.रास्ता)

219

218

217

216

215

214 13. चोप

436 0

20 0

58 0

1.2 0

34 0

438/2475

438(स .चारागाह)

0.3

437(स.चारागाह)

439(स.चारागाह)

475(स. चारागाह)

441

464

465

462 0

30 0

78 0

461(स.रास्ता)

582

583

584

456 0

40 0

20 0

456/2401

455

452

586 0

68 0

10 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7643 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

तहसील : आमेर

जिला: जयपुर

राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 1

13. चोंप (जारी...)

670(स .नाला)

587

588

589/2332

589

590

591

592

669

668

666

667

676

677

681

680

679

715(स.रास्ता)

245

244/2275

244

168

172

175/2478

188

187

186

191

821(स.रास्ता)

819

820

824

833

825

828

20 7644

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

तहसील : आमेर

राज्य: राजस्थान

जिला : जयपुर

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

क्रम सं.

830 चोंप (जारी...)

13.

852

854/2182/2402

854

854/2182

855/2183

855 क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

-73

28 0

855/2183/2403

857

859

859/2377

899

898

894

895

892

8.87

886-

885

923

68 0

967 (स.रास्ता)

959

958(स.चारागाह)

952(स.चारागाह)

950(स.चारागाह)

934 14. ईशरावाला

678

677

679 0

52 0

28 0

676 (स.रास्ता)

667

666

696

663

643 0

640 (स.भूमि)

639 0

583(स .नाला)

582(स.भूमि)

581 0

19 7645

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

तहसील : आमेर

राज्य: राजस्थान

जिला : जयपुर

खसरा सं .

गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

491 14. ईशरावाला (जारी...)

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

489 (स.भूमि)

490(स.भूमि)

501

503

502

504

505

506

507

510

511

512

509

513

514 0

84 0

63 0

44 0

7.7

62 0

1.5

56 0

434/830 (स.चारागाह)

465

462

605 15. बिलोंची

606

610

68 0

53 0

34 0

07 0

600 (स.रास्ता)

533

536

538

537

546.

547

545

548

549

544

27 0

20 0

16 0

06 0

26 0

90 0

510 (स .रास्ता)

509

508

503

502

501

499 1993 GI/05-16

20 0

58 0

12 7646

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] तहसील : आमेर

जिला : जयपुर

राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 1

15. बिलोंची (जारी...)

384(स.नाला)

385

390

390/1755 (स.भूमि)

235(स.रास्ता)

254

16. श्रीगोविन्दपुरा

255

259

260

260/492

260/494

260/493

7.5

260/489

262

423

432

434

435

421(स. रास्ता)

411 (स.भूमि)

411/496 (स.भूमि)

420(स.रास्ता)

419(स.भूमि)

415(स.भूमि)

404/498

403

397/500

390/501

391

385/503

386/502

390 (स.भूमि)

386 (स.भूमि)

387 (स. भूमि)

378(स.भूमि)

379(स.भूमि)

371/560 (स. रास्ता)

370/559 (स.चारागाह)

370

362

40 7647

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

तहसील : आमेर

राज्य : राजस्थान

जिला : जयपुर

खसरा सं .

गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

365 श्रीगोविन्दपुरा (जारी...)

16.

363

367

361

360 क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

355/469

355

860 17. घटवाडा

862

: 863

864(स.नाला)

866

874

24 0

953/1191

787/1201

787

786

785

781

772(स. रास्ता)

731

730

729

725

724

704/1164

704

705

710

711

709 0

16 0

94 0

83 0

62 0

674(स.रास्ता)

665

668

666

667

36 0

29 0

634(स.रास्ता)

533

534

535

24 0

80 0

07 7648

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] तहसील : आमेर

जिला : जयपुर

राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.:

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

537

56 17. घटवाडा (जारी ...)

536(स.रास्ता)

564

539

539/1137 (स.भूमि)

560/998

560

544

546

3004

75 18. मानपुरामाचेडी

3008

3006

3000

2998

2995

2996

3049

3059 (स .रास्ता)

3100

3098

3086

3111

3125

3128

3130

3633(स.नाला)

3616

3617

3619

3585

3580

3579

3577

3555

3562(स.चारागाह)

3560

3518 (स .चारागाह)

3518/3703 (स .चारागाह)

3520

52 7649

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

तहसील : आमेर

राज्य : राजस्थान

जिला: जयपुर

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

क्रम. सं.

3523 मानपुरामाचेडी (जारी... )

18.

3524

3466

3465

3464

3463 19. पुठकाबास

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

52 0

64.

08 0

66 0

40 0

72 0

3473(स. रास्ता)

1232 उर्फ

चावा का बास

1233(स.नाला)

56 0

52 0

86 0

72(स.रास्ता)

78/1428

78/1430

77/1427 0

20 0

36 0

20 0

52 0

227 (पी.डब्ल्यू.डी. सड़क)

80 0

45(स.भूमि)

47 0

20 0

42/1414

42(स.भूमि)

13(स.भूमि)

34 0

13/1425

13/1408

76 0

01 0

72 0

4(स.चारागाह)

669 20. बीलपुरा

668

667/924

667

78 0

09 0

96 7650

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

तहसील : आमेर

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

जिला : जयपुर

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

666 20. बीलपुरा (जारी... )

672

673

674

665

664

661

662

623

622

616

605

603

596

534

535

595

536

537

538

581 राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर

D 0

1.8

581/978 (स.भूमि)

580(स.भूमि)

539

438 0

438/976(स.भूमि)

579 0

539/977 (स.नाला)

437

577

572

574

571

567/912

567

564

562

563

555

556 0

05 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii ) ]

7651

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

तहसील: आमेर

राज्य : राजस्थान

जिला: जयपुर

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

3 20. बीलपुरा (जारी...)

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर एयर

376(स .नाला)

369

312

313

311

310

309

308

307

305 0

306(स.भूमि)

318/859 (स.रास्ता)

318/860

161/857 00

161/858

161

287/949

287(स.नाला)

289

288 0

272(स.रास्ता)

271

267

266

268

265

31 21. सुन्दरपुरा

7 0

2(स.चारागाह)

39 0

20 7652

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

तहसील : आमेर

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ]

जिला: जयपुर

गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

खसरा सं.

45 21. सुन्दरपुरा (जारी... )

48 राज्य: राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

एयर

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर 4

55/748

53(स.पहाड़)

351

353

358

357

356

359

365

368

374

370

373

372

377

376

375

380

381

382

385

384

383

386

389

387

388

367 22. लाम्यामेवाल

128(स.पहाड़)

129(स.पहाड़)

131

123

121

119

109 0

30 [ भाग II- खण्ड-3( ii) ]

7653

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

तहसील : आमेर

राज्य : राजस्थान

जिला: जयपुर

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

111 लाम्यामेवाल (जारी...)

22.

112

113

101

100

67 क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

68(स.नदी)

69 (स.भूमि)

64(स.नदी)

3 1993 GI/05-17

7.2

9.6

48 7654

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

तहसील : आमेर

जिला: जयपुर

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

2 लाम्यामेवाल (जारी ...)

22.

23. देव का हरमाडा

796

795

794

793

792

791

802

804

805

806

807 राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

428(स.रास्ता)

422

423

299

300

298 0

301 (स.चारागाह)

297

205 0

419(स. चारागाह)

204/1204(स . चारागाह)

302

325

204/1397 0

204/1396

204/1391

200/1390 }

185/1221

174

171

170

169

340

341

120

118

117

347

348 09

28 7655

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

आमेर

राज्य: राजस्थान

जिला: जयपुर

तहसील:

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

क्रम सं.

351 23. देव का हरमाडा (जारी...)

352 क्षेत्रफल

एयर वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर

352/1279

353/1280 (स. खड्डा)

353

94 0

92 0

12 0

94 0

72 0

77/1374

22/1335

17/1334

21/1359

98 0

17/1328

17/1372

32 0

16(स.नाला)

24. लखेर

44 0

230 (स.नाला)

142

141

40 0

28 0

20 0

12 0

48 0

02 0

0 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] 7656

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

तहसील: आमेर

राज्य: राजस्थान

जिला : जयपुर

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

हेक्टेयर

खसरा सं .

गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

24. लखेर (जारी...)

285 (पी.डब्ल्यू.डी. सड़क)

291

291/1295

294/1296/2

1 (स. नदी)

457 (स.चारागाह)

25. चक मनोहरपुरा

[फा. सं. आर-31015/70/2004-ओ.आर-II ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

NewDelhi , the 4th July , 2005

S. O. 2498.- Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 256dated the 17th January , 2005, issued under sub-section ( 1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Rightof User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act) , published in the Gazette of India dated the 22nd January , 2005, the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of petroleum products from Mundra in the State of Gujarat to Delhi through Mundra - Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 8th April , 2005; And whereas the competent authority has , under sub - section ( 1 ) of section 6 of the said Act, submitted report to the Central Government ; Andwhereas the Central Government , after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline , has decided to acquire right of usertherein;

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

And further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -section (4) of section 6 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Central Government , vest on the date of publication of declaration , in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, free from all encumbrances , subject to the conditions imposed vide this Ministry's consent letter no . R- 31015/7/03 OR- II dated 25-11-2004 .

7657

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

SCHEDULE

State : RAJASTHAN

District : JAIPUR

Tehsil : AMER

Khasara No. Sr. No.

Name of the Village

521 1. KHORABISAL

520

516

517 Area

Hectare Are Sq.mtr.

16 92

96 0

515/721

515

514

04 0

514/720

506

513

507

511

510

554

555

20 0

17 0

13 0

60 0

72 0

555/719

485

78 0

484( J.D.A Cart Track)

52 0

556( J.D.A Cárt Track)

483

482

480 0

80 0

561/747

561

562

478

476

19 29 0

62 0

20 0

52 0

475(J.D.A Cart Track)

454

438

442

16 0

88 0

04 0

441/918

441 0

20 16

399/906

399

395

397

396

59 0

55 0

0 7658

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] Tehsil : AMER

District: JAIPUR

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Sr. No.

Khasara No.

Are

Hectare

Name of the Village

Sq.mtr. 1

1. KHORABISAL ( Contd ... )

364( J.D.A Cart Track)

354

351

352

349

347.( J.D.A Cart Track)

346

346/894(J.D.A )

25 56

100

101

28 26

103( J.D.A Cart Track)

101/709

229/712

229

230

230/694

00 80

237

09 18

235

238/866

238

239

242

243

252

246

247

208

207

206

205

199/849

199

259( J.D.A Cart Track)

273

272

271

269

13 68

268

09 72 7659

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

State : RAJASTHAN

District : JAIPUR

Tehsil : AMER

Khasara No. Sr. No.

Name of the Village

267 1. KHORABISAL ( Contd... )

180 2. SHUBHRAMPURA

212 3. BENARMAYDAULATPURA

211

210

209

208

205

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr. 4

37 0

20 0

48 0

46 0

03 90 0

232(G/L Cart Track)

234

237

238

167

166

169

165

171

163

174

109

104

103 0

20 0

52 0

62 0

13 86 0

06 00

51 0

73 0

72 0

64 0

08 0

90(G/L Cart Track)

59 4. NANGALSIRAS

92 0

06 48 0

04 86 0

09 52 0

249( J.D.A . Pasture)

76 0

250(Railway)

251(Railway)

20 0

804(J.D.A. Pasture)

02 16

805(J.D.A. Pasture)

806 ( J.D.A. Pasture )

806/876( J.D.A)

7660

[PART II SEC. 3( ii) ]

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

Tehsil : AMER

District : JAIPUR

Sr. No.

Khasara No. Name of the Village

3 1

819 4. NANGALSIRAS ( Contd ... )

815

813 5. NINDAR

167

166

165

163

162

187

188

192

191 State : RAJASTHAN Area

Sq.mtr.

Are

Hectare

00 40

14 15

-0

190/3433

203 0

204/3434

204

205

208

207

206

03 80

152( J.D.A . Nala)

145

140

144

141

142

135

136

125

116

116/3527 0

275(J.D.A Nala)

292

291

288

287

283

338

340

341 0

07 02

09 00

11 7661

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

State : RAJASTHAN

District : JAIPUR

Tehsil : AMER

Khasara No. Sr. No.

Name of the Village

342 5. NINDAR (Contd ... )

351

350

354

355

356

357

358

359

412

411

567( J.D.A Cart Track).

408

409

407

576

574

573

569

571

570

428 6. RAJAWAS

427/887

429

431

432

441

440

439

478 Area

Are Sq.mtr. Hectare

38 0

20 0

18 18 0

60 0

02 0

04 86 0

05 51 0

20 0

28 0

64 0

12 0

46 0

42 0

70 0

24 0

42 0

03.

26 0

476(G/ L Pasture)

13 .86 0

477(G /L Pasture)

06 62 0

474(G / L Pasture )

96 0

484(G/L Pasture)

473

485

02 0

486/908 (G/ L Pasture)

487(G/L Pasture)

655 ( P.W.D Road )

771 1993 G1/05-18

48 0

44 0

10 PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

7662

State : RAJASTHAN

District : JAIPUR

Tehsil : AMER

Area

Hectare Are Sq.mtr.

Khasara No.

St No.

Name of the Village

771/877

6. RAJAWAS ( Contd ... )

770

768

765/830

775

776

757 (P.W.D Road)

756

732

733

752

753

751

749

7,49/868

748

7. NANGALPUROHIT

16 ( J.D.A Pasture) .

12( J.D.A Pasture )

70/1242 (J.D.A Pasture)

114(J.D.A Pasture)

115 (J . D.A Nala)

116 (J.D.A Pasture)

7663

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

State : RAJASTHAN

District : JAIPUR

Tehsil : AMER

Khasara No. Sr. No.

Name of the Village

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr .

198/1298

7. NANGALPUROHIT ( Contd ...)

113/1297

111 ( J.D.A Pasture)

110

201

107

105

72( J.D.A Pasture)

8. CHHAWARKAWAS

279( J.D.A Pasture )

278 ( J.D.A Nala)

06 84

277 ( J.D.A Pasture)

263 ( J.D.A Cart Track )

276

271

273

264

272

270

269

268

287 9. CHETAWALA

286

241

282

283

242

243

238

240

133

135

136

137

139

142

141

143

144

145

107

05 90

02 7664

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

Tehsil : AMER

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

District: JAIPUR

Sr. No.

Khasara No. Name of the Village

3 9. CHETAWALA ( Contd ... )

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Hectare Are Sq.mtr. 4

106(G /L Cart Track)

105

83 0

12 99

158 (G / L Cart Track)

159

162

161 0

176 (G /L Cart Track)

201

200

199

182

185

184

183

188 10. BADANPURA

196

197 0

09 18

10 80

19 44

199(G/L Cart Track)

213

202

205

254

253

247

252

248

250

249

243 0

272/403

275

313

312

315

311 0

06 7665

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

State : RAJASTHAN

District : JAIPUR

Tehsil : AMER

Khasara No. Sr. No. Name of the Village

3 1

318 10. BADANPURA (Contd ...)

310

304

305

303

301 11. KHORASHYAMDAS

Area

Hectare Are Sq.mtr. 4

09 54

199(G /P Pasture)

209/1841 ( G /P Pasture)

209

207

210

206

121

37 0

00 68

18 99 0

20 0

65 0

49 0

16 0

262(G / L Cart Track)

292

293

295

296

297

298

299

300

307

308

309

310 0

05 94

10 44 0

12 0

06 66 0

80 0

70 0

04 7666

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

Tehsil : AMER

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

District : JAIPUR

Sr. No.

Khasara No. Name of the Village

3 11. KHORASHYAMDAS

311

312 (Contd...)

313

969

970 State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr.

970/1810

978

974

975

976

990

991 12. DEGDAS

228

229 0

07 92

230(G /L Cart Track)

219

218

217

216

215

214 13. CHONP

436 0

18 18

438/2475

438(G/L Pasture)

437(G /L Pasture)

439(G /L Pasture)

475(G/L Pasture)

441

464

465

462 0

05 00

461 (G /L Cart Track)

582

583

584

456

) 0

02 20

456/2401

455

452

586 0

10 [ भाग II - खण्ड 3( ii) ]

7667

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Tehsil : AMER

District : JAIPUR

Sr. No.

Khasara No. Name of the Village

3 1

State : RAJASTHAN Area

Hectare Are Sq.mtr.

670(G /L Nala)

13. CHONP ( Contd ...)

587

588 0

589/2332

589

590

591

592

669

668

666

667

676

677

681

680

679

08 19

715(G/ L Cart Track)

245 0

244/2275

244

168

172 0

02.

175/2478

188

187

186

191

89 0

18 00

821(G / L Cart Track)

819

820

824

833

825

828 0

00 7668

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

Tehsil : AMER

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

District : JAIPUR

Sr. No.

Khasara No. Nameof the Village

3 1

830 13. CHONP ( Conta ...)

852 State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Hectare Are Sq.mtr. 4

854/2182/2402

854

854/2182 0

855/2183

855 0

855/2183/2403

857

859 0

05 94

859/2377

899

898

894

895

892

887

886

885

923 0

29 16

26 58

967(G / L Cart Track)

959

958(G / L Pasture)

952( G / L Pasture)

950(G/L Pasture)

934 14. ISHARAWALA

678

677

679 0

676(G/L Cart Track)

667

666

696

663

643 0

25 54

640(G/L)

639 0

02 08

05 60

583(G/L Nala)

582(G/L)

581

19 7669 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

State : RAJASTHAN

District : JAIPUR

Tehsil : AMER

Area

Hectare Are

Khasara No.

Sq.mtr .

Sr. No.

Name of the Village

14 31

491

14. ISHARAWALA (Contd... )

00 20

489(G/L)

490(G/L)

501

503

502

504

45.

505

506

507

510

511

512

509

513

514

434/830 (G /L Pasture)

465

462

605

15. BILONCHI

606

610

600(G/ L Cart Track)

533

536

538

537

546

547

545

548

549

544

510(G / L Cart Track)

509

508

503

502

06 57

501

499

1993 G1/05-19 7670

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] Tehsil : AMER

District : JAIPUR

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Sr. No.

Name of the Village

Hectare

Khasara No.

Are Sq.mtr. 1

6 15. BILONCHI ( Contd ... )

384(G /L Nala)

385

390

390/1755( G/L)

235(G/ L Cart Track)

16. SHREEGOVINDPURA

254

255

259

260

260/492

260/494

260/493

260/489

262

423

06 12

432

434

435

421 (G / L Cart Track)

411(G/L)

411/496(G/L)

420(G/ L Cart Track)

419(G/L)

04 95

415(G/L)

404/498

403

397/500

28 26

390/501

391

385/503

386/502

390(G/L)

386(G/L)

387(G/L)

378(G/L)

379(G/L)

371/560 (G / L Cart Track )

370/559(G/L Pasture)

370

362

40 [ भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7671

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Tehsil : AMER

District : JAIPUR

Sr. No.

Name of the Village

Khasara No.

3 16. SHREEGOVINDPURA

365

363 (Contd ...)

367

361

360 State : RAJASTHAN Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr. 4

02 88

03 40

04 77

355/469

355 17. GHATWADA

860

862

863 0

864(G /L Nala)

866

874 0

953/1191

787/1201

787

786

785

781 0

13 95

772(G /L Cart Track)

731

730

729

725

724 0

14 04

05 49

704/1164

704

705

710

711

709 0

05 94

00 99

10 98

7.0

674(G/ L Cart Track)

665

666

667 0

05 29

634(G /L Cart Track)

533

534

535 0

73 7672

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3(ii)) Tehsil : AMER

District : JAIPUR

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Sr. No.

Hectare Are

Khasara No.

Name of the Village

Sq.mtr .

537

17. GHATWADA ( Contd ... )

536(G /L Cart Track)

564

539

539/1137(G/L)

560/998

560

544

546

08 28

3004

75 18. MANPURAMACHEDI

3008

3006

3000

02 16

2998

2995

2996

3049

3059(G /L Cart Track)

3100

3098

3086

3111

3125

3128

3130

3633(G /L Nala)

3616

3617

3619

10 08

3585

3580

3579

03 60

3577

3555

3562(G /L Pasture)

08 20

3560

28 98

3518 (G / L Pasture)

3518/3703(G/L Pasture) 0

3520

52 [भाग II- खण्ड 3

7673

का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

AER

District: JAIPUR

Tehsil :

Sr. No.

Khasara No. Name of the Village

3 1

3523 18. MANPURAMACHEDI

3524 (Contd...)

3466

3465

3464

3423 19. PUTHKABAS

State : RAJASTHAN Area

Hectare Are Sq.mtr .

03 66

3473 (G /L Cart Track)

1232 URF

CHAWA KA BAS

1233(G /L Nala)

56 0

09 00

02 52

72G/L Cart Track)

78/1428

76 0

78/1430

77/1427

227(P.W.D Road)

45(G/L)

42/1414

42(G/L)

13(G/L)

13/1425 0

13/1408

4(G/L Pasture)

669 20. BILPURA

668 0

18 09

667/924

667 0

96 7674

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 / ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] Tehsil : AMER

District : JAIPUR

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Sr. No.

Hectare

Name of the Village

Are

Khasara No.

Sq.mtr. 2

666

20. BILPURA ( Contd ... )

05 04

672

673

674

02 40

665

664

661

662

623

09 18

622

616

605

18.

603

596

534

535

595

536

537

538

581

581/978(G /L)

580(G/L.)

539

438

438/976(G/L)

579

539/977(G /L Nala)

437

577

572

574

571

567/912

567

564

562

05 69

563

555

556

05 [ भाग II - खण्ड 3( ii) ]

7675

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Tehsil : AMER

District : JAIPUR

Sr. No.

Name of the Village

Khasara No. 1

3 20. BILPURA (Contd ... )

State : RAJASTHAN Area

Hectare Are Sq.mti

376(G/L Nala)

369

312

313

311

310

309

308

307

305 0

19 98

306(G/L)

318/859(G/ LCart Track)

318/860

161/857

17 97

161/858

161 0

287/949

287(G/L Nala)

289

288 0

272(G / L CartTrack)

271

267

266

268

265 21. SUNDARPURA

7 0

04 94

04 86

09 54

2(G /L Pasture )

39 0

06 04

20 7676

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

Tehsil : AMER

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ))

District : JAIPUR

Sr. No.

Khasara No. Name of the Village

45 21. SUNDARPURA ( Contd ... )

55/748

54 State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr .

> 0

06 54

09 54

53(G /L Pahad)

351

353

358

357

356

359

365

368

374

370

373

372

377

376

375

380

381

382

385

384

383

386

389

387

388

367 22. LAMYAMEWAL

09 99

01 08

03 08

02 79

) 0

64 44

18 18

128( G /L Pahad )

18 85

129(G/ L Pahad)

131

123

121

119

109 0

30 7677

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

State : RAJASTHAN

District: JAIPUR

Tehsil : AMER

Khasara No. Name of the Village

Sr. No.

111 LAMYAMEWAL (Contd ... )

22.

112

113

101

100

67 Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr.

04 68

00 88

68(G/L River)

69(G/L)

04 86

64(G/L River)

3 1993 G1/05-20

0 7678

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] Tehsil : AMER

District : JAIPUR

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Sr. No.

Hectare Are

Name of the Village

Khasara No.

Sq.mtr .

22. LAMYAMEWAL ( Contd ... )

12 23. DEV KA HARMADA

796

08 10

795

794

793

792

)

791

802

804

10 80

805

806

807

428 (G/ L Cart Track)

422

423

299

300

298

301 (G /L Pasture)

297

205

419(G/L Pasture)

204/1204 (G / L Pasture)

302

325

204/1397

204/1396

204/1391

。

}

200/1390

185/1221

174

171

170

169

340

341

120

118

117

05 58

347

348

28 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7679

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

State : RAJASTHAN

District : JAIPUR

Tehsil : AMER

Khasara No. Sr. No.

Name of the Village

351 23. DEV KA HARMADA

352 (Contd ...)

Area

Hectare Are Sq.mtr .

352/1279

353/1280 (G / L Khadda)

353

77/1374

00 48

22/1335

17/1334

21 0

21/1359

17/1328

17/1372

15 0

01 98

00 48

16(G/L Nala)

24. LAKHER

230(G/L Nala)

142

141

40 30

12 60

79 7680

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] Tehsil : AMER

District : JAIPUR

State : RAJASTHAN

Area Sr. No.

Hectare

Name of the Village

Are

Khasara No.

Sq.mtr. 1

24. LAKHER ( Contd ...)

17.

285( P.W.D Road)

291

291/1295

294/1296/2

1(G/L River)

25. CHAK MANOHARPURA

457(G/L Pasture)

[No. R- 31015/10/2004-O.R. -II ] HARISH KUMAR , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 4 जुलाई , 2005

का. आ. 2499.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि मुद्रा (गुजरात) 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 इससे उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में वर्णित है , जिसमें उक्त गाइपलाइन 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 शिवदत्त गौड़, सक्षम प्राधिकारी , मुन्द्रा- दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन, हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड , डी-7 लालबहादुर नगर ( पूर्व ) क्लार्क्स आमेर होटल के सामने , जवाहरलाल नेहरु मार्ग, मालवीय नगर , जयपुर -302017 (राजस्थान) को लिखित रुप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । [भाग II-

7681

त का राजपत्र : जुलाई16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

अनुसूची तहसील : आमेर

राज्य : राजस्थान

जिला: जयपुर

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

3 1

1. खोराबीसल

515/721

514

514/720

513

511

554

555

483

482

561

476

454

438

399/906

399

351 क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 4

347 (जे.डी.ए. रास्ता)

103(जे.डी.ए. रास्ता)

230

237

235

238

242

243

252

246

247

208

207

205

199

273

271

267

204 2 शुभरामपुरा

180

209 3. बेनाड़मयदौलतपुरा

237 0

15.

18 7682

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 / ASADHA 25 , 1927

राज्य: राजस्थान

तहसील: आमेर

जिला: जयपुर

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

एयर

हेक्टेयर

166

3. बेबाड़‌मयदौलतपुरा (जारी...)

165

163

109

104

4. नांगलसिरस

251 (रेल्वे)

806/876 (जे.डी.ए. )

5. नींदड़

166

162

187

188

204/3434

205

207

206

141

136

125

116

292

287

283

340

341

354

355

358

67(जे.डी.ए.रास्ता)

408

576

573

570

428

6. राजावास

429

432

440

476(स .चारागाह)

474(स.चारागाह)

7683 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

तहसील: आमेर

राज्य: राजस्थान

जिला: जयपुर

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

एयर वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टेयर

473

6. राजावास (जारी... )

771

771/877

770/833

765/830

733

753

749/868

748

9.0

7. नांगलपुरोहित

12(जे.डी.ए.चारागाह)

116 (जे.डी.ए. चारागाह)

198/1298

111 (जे.डी.ए.चारागाह)

8. छवरकावास

272

270

10 9. चेतावाला

241

240

133

141

143

145

106 (स.रास्ता)

162

200

185

188

213

10. बदनपुरा

204

205

254

247

250

243

318

73 7684

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) तहसील: आमेर

राज्य : राजस्थान

जिला: जयपुर

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

एयर वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टेयर

304

10. बदनपुरा (जारी... )

11. खोराश्यामदास

209/1841 (ग्रा.पं. चारागाह)

207

206

121

262(स.रास्ता)

309

975

976

990

991

12. देगडास

219

13. चोंप

438/2475

438(स.चारागाह)

475(स.चारागाह)

465

466

461 (स.रास्ता)

582

583

584

670/2313

586

587

588

589

592

681

187

186

830

852

854

0 7685 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

तहसील : आमेर

जिला: जयपुर

राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर

899

चॉप (जारी ... )

13.

894

895

959

950(स.चारागाह)

14. ईशरावाला

677

667

666

663

639

582(स.भूमि)

503

502

505

507

510

509

513

514

464

461

15. बिलोंची

532

533

538

547

545

548

549

544

509

502

390

390/1755 (स.भूमि)

259

16. श्रीगोविन्दपुरा

260

260/494

260/493

411 (स.भूमि)

419(स.भूमि)

404/498

1993 G1 / 05-21 7686

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] तहसील : आमेर

जिला: जयपुर

राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

6 16. श्रीगोविन्दपुरा (जारी ... )

385/503

387 (स.भूमि)

371/560 (स.रास्ता)

370/559 (स. चारागाह)

362

365

18 17. घटवाडा

866

865

873

790/1184

787/1201

53 ख.सं .787/ 1201 और 787 के बीच 0

787

786

785

784

731

729

725

704

711

667

533

534

535

564

998/1222

560/998

560

546

08 18. मानपुरामाचेडी

3004

3005

3000

2995

2979

2978

2977

2976

2975

2974

20 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7687

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

तहसील : आमेर

जिला: जयपुर

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

3100 18. मानपुरामाचेडी (जारी...)

3101

3102

3103

3086

3105

3106

3106/3965

3109 राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 4

0.2

3107(स. नाला)

3117

3124

3125

3126

3129

3130

3131

3132

3616

3619

1241

3585

3587

3577

3574

3575

3576

3555

3561

3558

3545

3520

3464

3463

1982 19. पुठकाबास

3473 (स.रास्ता)

उर्फ

बाया का बास

77/1427 0

30 7688

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

तहसील : आमेर

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

जिला : जयपुर

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा

19. पुठकाबास

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

45(स.भूमि)

उर्फ

47 चावा का बास (जारी...)

13 (स. भूमि)

13/1425

3 0

4(स.चारागाह)

667/924 20. बीलपुरा

674

664

661

605

603

596

595

538

539

438 0

438/976(स.भूमि)

437

436/898

426

541

540

542

545

572

574

571

564

563

313

161

288

266

7 21. सुन्दरपुरा

366 0

) 0

20 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7689

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

तहसील : आमेर

राज्य : राजस्थान

जिला: जयपुर

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

क्रम सं.

3 1

358 सुन्दरपुरा (जारी...)

21.

368

373

372

377

381

3.84

383

387

388 22. लाम्यामेवाल

123/454(स.भूमि)

121

109

793 23. देव का हरमाडा

804

807

422

300

301 (स.चारागाह)

297

325

120

118

353/1280 (स. खड्डा)

22/1335

17/1328

83 24. लखेर

45 क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

36 7690

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

तहसील : आमेर

राज्य : राजस्थान

जिला : जयपुर

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर

खसरा सं.

हेक्टेयर एयर

गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

24. लखेर (जारी...)

285 (पी.डब्ल्यू.डी. सड़क )

291/1295

294/1296/3

294

[फा. सं. आर-31015/70/2004- ओ.आर-II ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 4th July , 2005

S. O. 2499. 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;

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 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 Shivdutt Gaur, Competent Authority, Mundra- Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, D - 7 , Lal Bahadur Nagar ( East ) , Opp . Clarks Amer Hotel, Jawaharlal Nehru Marg , Malviya Nagar, Jaipur- 302017 ( Rajasthan ) [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7691

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

SCHEDULE Tehsil : AMER

State : RAJASTHAN

District: JAIPUR

Sr. No.

Khasara No. Name of the Village

3 1. KHORABISAL

Area

Hectare Are Sq.mtr. 4

515/721

514

514/720

513

511

554

555

483

482

561

476

454

438 0

00 69

00 54

00 18

399/906

399

351 0

00 45

347( J.D.A Cart Track)

103( J.D.A Cart Track)

230

237

235

238

242

243

252

246

247

208

207

205

199

273

271

267

204 2. SHUBHRAMPURA

180

209 3. BENARMAYDAULATPURA

237 0

18 7692

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II- SBC . 3 (ii)]

State : RAJASTHAN Tehsil : AMER

District : JAIPUR

Area Hectare Are Sq.mtr. Sr. No.

Khasara No.

Name of the Village

6 1

166

08 3. BENARMAYDAULATPURA

165

(Contd...)

163

109

104

)

36 4. NANGALSIRAS

251(Railway)

806/876( J.D.A)

166

5. NINDAR

162

187

188

204/3434

205

207

206

141

136

125

116

292

287

283

340

341

354

355

358

567( J.D.A Cart Track)

408

576

573

570

428

6. RAJAWAS

429

432

440

00 45

476(G/L Pasture)

474(G /L Pasture )

7693

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

State : RAJASTHAN

District : JAIPUR

Tehsil : AMER

Khasara No. Sr. No.

Name of the Village

473 6. RAJAWAS ( Contd ...)

771

771/877

770/833

765/830

733

753

749/868

748

41 7. NANGALPUROHIT

Area

Hectare Are Sq.mtr.

36 0

26 0

90 0

50 0

36 0

00 68

12( J.D.A Pasture)

54 0

116 ( J.D.A Pasture)

198/1298

111 ( J.D.A Pasture)

272 8. CHHAWARKAWAS

270

241 9. CHETAWALA

240

133

141

143

145

27 0

16 0

26 0

96 0

20 0

106(G / L Cart Track)

162

200

185

188

213 10. BADANPURA

204

205

254

247

250

243

318 1993 GI/05-22

18 0

90 0

20 0

0 7694

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii ) ] Tehsil : AMER

District : JAIPUR

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Sr. No.

Nameof the Village

Hectare Are

Khasara No.

Sq.mtr. 1

6 10. BADANPURA (Contd... )

304

00 18 11. KHORASHYAMDAS

209/1841 (G / P Pasture )

207

206

121

262(G / L Cart Track)

309

975

976

00 18

990

991

11 12. DEGDAS

219

54 13. CHONP

438/2475

438(G/ L Pasture)

475(G/L Pasture)

465

03 08

466

461( G / L Cart Track)

582

583

584

670/2313

586

587

588

589

592

681

)

187

186

830

852

854

09 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7695

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

State : RAJASTHAN

District : JAIPUR

Tehsil : AMER

Khasara No. Sr. No.

Name of the Village

3 1

899 13. CHONP ( Contd ... )

894

895

959 Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr .

950(G /L Pasture)

677 14. ISHARAWALA

667

666

663

639

582(G/L)

503

502

505

507

510

509

513

514

464

461

532 15. BILONCHI

533

538

547

545

548

549

544

509

502

390

00 29

390/1755 (G/L)

259 16. SHREEGOVINDPURA

260

250/494

260/493

411(G/L)

419(G/L)

404/498

7696

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

JAIPUR

Distris

Tehsil : AMER

Khasara NO .

Sr. No.

Name of the Village

385/503 16. SHREEGOVINDPURA

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ] State : RAJASTHAN Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr. 4

387(G/L)

(Contd ... )

37 1/560 (G /L Cart Track )

370/559(G/L Pasture)

362

365

866 17. GHATWADA

865

873

790/1184

787/1201

In Bet Svy No. 787/1201 & 787

787

786

785

784

731

729

725

704

711

667

533

534

535

564

63 0

20 0

998/1222

560/998

560

546

3004 18. MANPURAMACHEDI

3005

3000

2995

2979

2978

2977

2976

2975

2974

04 13

0 [भाग II- खण्ड ( ) ]

7697

धरत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

State : RAJASTHAN

District : JAIPUR

Tehsil : AMER

Khasara No. Sr. No. Name of the Village

3100 18. MANPURAMACHED !

3101 (Contd... )

3102

3103

3086

3105

3106 Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr.

3106/3965

3109

02 48

3107 ( G /L. Nala)

3117

3124

3125

3126

3129

3130

3131

3132

3616

3619

1244

3585

3587

3577

3574

3575

3576

3555

3561

3558

3545

3520

3464

3463

1982 19. PUTHKABAS

16 56 0

3473(G/L Cart Track)

57 URF

55 HAWA KA BAS

77/1427

00 7698

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II--SEC. 3 (ii)] Tehsil : AMER

District : JAIPUR

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Sr. No.

Nameof the Village

Hectare Are

Khasara No.

Sq.mtr. 1

6 19. PUTHKABAS

45(G/L)

24 URF

CHAWA KA BAS ( Contd ... )

13(G/L)

13/1425

)

4(G/L Pasture)

20. BILPURA

667/924

674

664

651

605

603

596

595

538

539

438

438/976( G/L)

437

436/898

426

541

540

542

545

572

574

571

564

563

313

161

288

266

21. SUNDARPURA

366

20 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7699

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

Tehsil : AMER

State : RAJASTHAN

District: JAIPUR

Sr. No.

Khasara No. Name of the Village

3 1

358 21. SUNDARPURA ( Contd ... )

368

373

372

377

381

384

383

387

388 22. LAMYAMEWAL

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr. 4

00 09

123/454(G/L)

121

109

793 23. DEV KA HARMADA

804

807

422

300

00 09

301 (G / L Pasture)

297

325

120

118

353/1280(G / L Khadda)

77 0

22/1335

17/1328

83 24. LAKHER

45 0

00 7700

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 / ASADHA 25.1927

[PART II -SEC . 3 (ii) ) Tehsil : AMER

District: JAIPUR

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Sr. No.

Khasara No

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr Name of the Village

24. LAKHER (Contd ...)

285 ( P.W.D Road)

291/1295

)

294/1296/3

294

09 18

[No. R-31015/70/2004- O.R. -II ]

HARISH KUMAR , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई, 2005

का. आ. 2500.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियन और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 3040 तारीख 23 नवम्बर, 2004, जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 27 नवम्बर , 2004 , में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मुन्द्रा- दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन के माध्यम से मुन्द्रा (गुजरात) से दिल्ली तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाजे के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 4 जनवरी , 2005 को उपलब्ध करा ही गई थीं ;

और सक्षम प्राधिकारी जे , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीम , केन्द्रीय सरकार को रिपोर्ट दे दी है ;

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने , उक्त रिपोट पर विचार करने के पश्चात , और यह समाधान हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए अपेक्षित है, उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चय किया है ;

)

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए , इस मंत्रालय के सहमति पत्र सं. आर 31015/7/03 ओ.आर-1 दिनांक 25/11/2004 द्वारा लगाई गई शर्तों के अध्यधीन सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त , हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । 7701 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

अनुसुची

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

तहसीलः रेवाड़ी

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/किला

गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

एयर

हेक्टेयर

संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

143

1. जैतडावास

1/2

3/1

11/2

6/1

6/2

15/1

15/2

267

125

145

2. भाडावास

126

19/1

00.

19/2

19/3

20/2

128

1993 G1/05-23 7702

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

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

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

राज्यः हरियाणा

गाँव का नाम

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा /किला

एयर वर्गमीटर

मुसतिल संख्या संख्या हेक्टेयर

हदबस्त संख्या.

2. भाडावास ( जारी... )

128

145

13/1

13/2

129

138

6/2

8/1

14/1

22/1

139

144

145

5/1

5/2

6/1

6/2

7/1

7/2

13/1

13/2

18/1

18/2

23/1 7703 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

राज्यः हरियाणा

तहसीलः रेवाड़ी

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

खसरा /किला

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

हदबस्त संख्या

संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

147

2. भाडावास (जारी... )

145

1/1

148

1/2

246

613

619

624

625

637

21/2/1

150

3. भवाड़ी

17/1

18/1

24/3

25/1

25/2/1

2/1

3/1

6/1

7/1

8/2

9/1

12/1

1.2

14/1

14/2

16/2

16/3 7704

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

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

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

तहसीलः रेवाड़ी

गाँव का नाम

श्रेत्रफल

उत्तमुसतिलसरा/किला

हल

संख्या

17/1

3. भवाड़ी (जारी... )

25/1

21/1

21/2/1

77/1

77/2

152

25 4. कमालपुर

21/1

21/2

16/1

16/2

22/3

23/1/2

23/2/1

12/1

12/2

19/1 .

वर्गमीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

57 00

79 GO

10 00

01 00

82 00

85 00

97 00

12 00

54 00

90 00

42 00

68 00

1 00

87 00

01 00

97 00

64 00

35 00

15 00

48 00

26 00

03.

00 7705 [भाग II- खण्ड (ⅱ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

राज्यः हरियाणा

तहसीलः रेवाड़ी

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

श्रेत्रफल गाँव का नाम

खसरा /किला

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या संख्या

152

19/2

4. कमालपुर (जारी... )

21/1

3/1

3/2

155/1

43 5. छुरियावास

157

1/2/2

3/1

10/1/1

10/1/2

10/2/1

10/2/2

11/1/2

21/1

21/2

22/1

23/1

23/2

6/1

7/1

7/2

14 7706

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा

तहसीलः रेवाड़ी

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

गाँव का नाम

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा /किला

हेक्टेयर

वर्गमीटर

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

एयर

संख्या

5. छुरियावास (जारी... )

157

21/1

21/2

2/1

2/2

12/2

18/2

25/1

25/2

150

159

160

50 8. धागलाका

155

23/2

24/1

24/2

25 7707 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

तहसीलः रेवाड़ी

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

खसरा /किला

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

मुसतिल संख्या संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

6. धामलाका (जारी... )

155

11/2

11/3

20/2

21/1

15/2

16/1

16/2

20/1

171

7. शहबाजपुर खालसा

20/2

21/1

21/2

25/2

24/2

24/3

5/2/2

6/1

6/2

00 7708

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) तहसीलः रेवाड़ी

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

राज्यः हरियाणा

गाँव का नाम

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/किला

हदबस्त संख्या

संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

7. शहबाजपुर खालसा (जारी ...)

171

13/1

13/2

19/1

19/2

20/1

20/2

)

1/1

1/2

1/3

2/1

2/2

3/1

4/2

7/1

7/2

8/1

8/2

9/1

9/2

4/1

4/2

5/1

)

16/1

16/2

59 7709 भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25,'1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

तहसीलः रेवाड़ी

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

खसरा/किला संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

171

7. शहबाजपुर खालसा (जारी...)

35/2

3/1

8. बैरियावास

170

3/2

8/1

8/2

12/1/1

12/1/2

12/2

12/3

13/1

1993 G1/05-24 7710

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )]

राज्यः हरियाणा

तहसीलः रेवाड़ी

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

गाँव का नाम

क्षेत्रफल

खसरा /किला

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्गमीटर

मुसतिल संख्या संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

8. बैरियावास (जारी ... )

170

13/2

22/1

98 9. माजरा गुरदास

188

15/1

15/2

19/1

04.

22/1

1/1

1/2

80 10. कोनसीवास

174

17/1

17/2

09 7711 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

राज्यः हरियाणा

तहसीलः रेवाद्दी

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

श्रेत्रफल गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

खसरा/किला संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

संख्या हदबस्त

10. कोनसीवास (जारी ...)

174

12/1

12/2

11. कालाका

177

23/1

2/1

2/2

3/2

11/2

12/1

12/2

20/1

20/2

21/1

21/2

61/1

12. माडिया कलां

178

11/2

12/1 [PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] 7712

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16, 2005/ASADHIA 25,1927

राज्यः हरियाणा

किल्ला:रेवाही

तहसीलः रेवाड़ी

क्षेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

असरा/किला

हेक्टेयर एयर

संख्या

मुसतिज संख्या

12/2

178

12. माडियाँ कलां (जारी ...)

6/1

6/2

24/1

24/2

12/1

19/1

19/2

19/3

00 7713 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

लहसीलः रेवाड़ी

श्रेत्रफल गाँव का नाम

खसरा /किला

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

12. माडियाँ कलो (जारी...)

178

156

157

21/2

179

13. खलीलपुरी

10/1

10/2

6/1

15/3

24/1

25/1

25/2

4/1

4/2

5/1

7/1/1

7/1/2

7/2/1

7/2/2

8/1/2

14/1

65/1

14. माजरा श्यौराज

180

15/1

15/2

4/1

13/1 7714

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

तहसीलः रेवाड़ी

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

हेक्टेयर

वर्गमीटर

एयर

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

खसरा/किला संख्या

180

87 14. माजरा श्योराज (जारी...)

15. फिदेही

204

1/2

10/1

16/1

16/2

1/1

1/2

16/1

16/2

7/1

7/2

8/1

14/1

19/1

22/1

04 7715 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II-- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

तहसीलः रेवाड़ी

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा /किला

गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

15. फिदेही (जारी... )

204

22/3

23/1

1/1

2/1

2/2

11/2

20/1

20/2

25/1

25/2

13/2

17/2

17/3

7/1

7/2

161

162

16 7716

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] तहसीलः रेवाड़ी

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

गाँव का नाम

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/किला

हदबस्त संख्या

वर्गमीटर

मुसतिल संख्या

हेक्टेयर एयर

संख्या

15. फिदेही (जारी... )

204

166

167

69 16. बुडानी

208

23/1

23/2

3/1

3/2

3/3

3/4

9/2

86 17. रामगढ़

209

25/2

5/1

5/2

5/3

6/1

6/2

14/2

22 7717 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

तहसीलः रेवाड़ी

क्षेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

खसरा/किला

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

209

17. रामगढ़ (जारी ... )

17/1

17/2

25/1

25/2

4/1

4/2

5/1

5/2

7/1

7/2

14/1

14/2

17/1

7/1

186

192

5/1

210

18.डावड़ी

6/2

15/1

16/2

19/1/3

211

19. गोकलपुर

19/2

20/1/1

20/2/1

21/1/1

21/1/2

21/2

1993 G1/05-25 7718

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 / ASADHA 25,1927

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

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

राज्यः हरियाणा

गाँव का नाम

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/किला

वर्गमीटर

हदबस्त संख्या

हेक्टेयर एयर

मुसतिल संख्या संख्या

19. गोकलपुर (जारी ... )

211

6/2/1

15/2

16/2

1/1

1/2/1

10/1/3

10/2

20/3

5/1

6/1

15/1

16/1/2

16/2/2

25/1

5/1

6/2

15/1

16/2

25/1

5/1

324

334

90 20.जांटी

212

18/2

23/1

3/1

9/2

12/1

92 21. जाट सायरवास

213

05 7719 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

राज्यःहरियाणा

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

तहसीलः रेवाड़ी

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा /किला

गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

213

21. जाट सायरवास (जारी...)

2/2

3/1

3/2

12/1

12/2

19/1

19/2

15/3

16/1

25/3

1/3

10/1

10/2

7/2

7/3

13/1

123/2

156

22.

8 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] 7720

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिल्लाःरेवाड़ी

तहसीलः रेवाड़ी

क्षेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

मुसतिलसरा/किला

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

संख्या

बस्त सख्या

156

22. डवाना (जारी ... )

13/1

[फा. सं. कार-310 /50/2004-ओ.आर- II ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

NewDelhi , the 5th July, 2005

S. O. 2500.- Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry ofPetroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 3040 dated the 23rd November , 2004, issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Rightof User in Land) Act , 1962 (50 of 1962 ) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act), published in the Gazette of India dated the 27th November, 2004 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land, specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of petroleum products through Mundra - Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline from Mundra in the State of Gujarat to Delhi by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 4th January, 2005;

And whereas the competent authority has , under sub-section ( 1 ) of section 6 of the said Act, submitted report to the Central Government; And whereas the Central Government, after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline , has decided to acquire right of user therein:

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

And further, in exercise of the powers conferredby sub- section (4) of section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Central Government, vest on the date of the publication of the declaration , in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, free from all encumbrances , subject to the conditions imposed vide this Ministry's consent letter no. R- 31015/7/03 OR- II dated 25-11-2004.

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7721 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

SCHEDULE

Tehsil : REWARI

District: REWARI

State : HARYANA

Area

Name of Village

Mustil No.

Hadbast No.

Khasara / Killa No.

Are

Hectare

Square Metre 1. JAITRAWAS

143

1/2

3/1

11/2

6/1

6/2

15/1

15/2

267

125

145

2. BHARAWAS

126

19/1

19/2

19/3

20/2

128

60 7722

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] Tehsil : REWARI

District : REWARI

State : HARYANA

Area

Nameof Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

128

145

06 2. BHARAWAS ( Contd ... )

13/1

13/2

129

138

6/2

8/1

14/1

22/1

139

144

145

5/1

5/2

6/1

6/2

7/1

7/2

13/1

13/2

18/1

23/1 7723 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

State : HARYANA

District : REWARI

Tehsil : REWARI

Area

Nameof Village

Are

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No.

Hadbast No.

Hectare

Square Metre

147

145

2. BHARAWAS ( Contd ...)

1/1

148

1/2

246

613

619

624

625

637

21/2/1

150

3.BHAWARI

17/1

18/1

24/3

25/1

25/2/1

2/1

3/1

6/1

7/1

8/2

9/1

12/1

13/1

13/2

14/1

14/2

16/2

16/3 7724

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA:

JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3(ii) ) Tehsil :REWARI

District : REWARI

State : HARYANA

Area

Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khaзaгa / Killa No.

Are

Hectare

Square Metre

150

17/1

92 3. BHAWARI (Contd ...)

25/1

21/1

21/2/1

77/1

77/2

152

4. KAMALPUR

21/1

21/2

16/1

16/2

22/3

23/1/2

23/2/1

12/1

12/2

19/1

75 7725 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

State: HARYANA

District: REWARI

Tehsil : REWARI

Area

Name of Village

Are

Hectare

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No.

Hadbast No.

Square Metre

19/2

152

4. KAMALPUR (Contd ... )

21/1

3/1

3/2

155/1

157

5. CHHURIAWAS

1/2/2

3/1

10/1/1

10/1/2

10/2/1

10/2/2

11/1/2

21/1

21/2

22/1

23/1

23/2

6/1

7/1

7/2

1993 G1 /05-26 7726

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] Tehsil : REWARI

District: REWARI

State : HARYANA

Area Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

157

5. CHHURIAWAS ( Contd... )

21/1

21/2

02 i

2/1

2/2

12/2

18/2

25/1

25/2

150

159

160

50 6. DHAMLAKA

155

23/2

24/1

24/2

25 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7727 भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Tehsil : REWARI

District: REWARI

State : HARYANA

Area

Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Are

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare

Square Metre

155

46 6. DHAMLAKA (Contd ...)

11/2

11/3

00.

20/2

21/1

15/2

16/1

16/2

171

20/1

7. SHAHBAJPUR KHALSA

20/2

21/1

21/2

25/2

24/2

24/3

272

6/2

11 7728

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

State : HARYANA Tehsil : REWARI

REWARI

District :

Area

Nameof Village

Must No.

Khasara / Killa No.

Are

Hectare

Square Metre

171

13/1

7. SHAHBAJPUR KHALSA

13/2

(Contd...)

19/1

19/2

20/1

20/2

1/1

1/2

1/3

2/1

2/2

3/1

4/2

7/1

7/2

8/1

8/2

9/1

9/2

4/1

4/2

5/1

16/1

16/2

00 7729 [भाग

परस का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

State : HARYANA

District : REWARI

Tell : REWARI

Area

Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Are

Hectare

Khasara / Killa No.

Square Metre

171

7. SHAHBAJPUR KHALSA (Contd...)

35/2

3/1

170

8. BHARIAWAS

3/2

8/1

8/2

12/1/1

12/1/2

12/2

12/3

13/1 7730

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] Tehsil : REWARI

District: REWARI

State: HARYANA

Area

Nameof Village

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No.

Hadbast No.

Are

Hectare

Square Metre

13/2

170

8. BHARIAWAS ( Contd ...)

22/1

188

66 9. MAJRA GURDASS

15/1

0.0

15/2

19/1

22/1

1/1

1/2

10. KONSIWAS

174

17/1

17/2

09 7731 [ भाग II - खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

State : HARYANA Tehsil : REWARI

District : REWARI

Area

Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

174

39 10. KONSIWAS ( Contd ... )

12/1

12/2

177

11. KALAKA

23/1

2/1

2/2

3/2

11/2

12/1

12/2

20/1

20/2

21/1

21/2

61/1

178

12. MANDIA KALAN

11/2

12/1

00 7732

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

District : REWA

Tehsil : REWARI

State: HARYANA

Area

Nameof Village

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Hadbast No.

Square Metre

12/2

178

12. MANDIA KALAN ( Contd ... )

6/1

6/2

24/1

24/2

12/1

19/1

19/2

19/3

00 7733 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3(ii ) ]

State : HARYANA

District: REWARI

Tehsil : REWARI

Area

Name of Village

Are

Hectare

Khasara / Killa No.

Mustil No.

Hadbast No.

Square Metre

178

12. MANDIA KALAN ( Contd... )

156

157

21/2

179

13. KHALILPURI

10/1

10/2

6/1

15/3

24/1

25/1

25/2

4/1

4/2

5/1

7/1/1

7/1/2

7/2/1

7/2/2

8/1/2

14/1

65/1

180

14. MAJRA SHEORAJ

15/1

15/2

54.

24.

4/1

13/1

3 G1/05 27 [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] 7734

JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :

State: HARYANA

District : REWARI

Tehsil : REWARI

Area

Name of Village

Khasara / Killa No.

Are

Mustil No.

Hectare

Hadbast No.

Square Metre

180

14. MAJRA SHEORAJ

(Contd...)

204

15. FHIDERI

1/2

10/1

16/1

39.

16/2

1/1

1/2

16/1

16/2

7/1

7/2

8/1

00.

14/1

19/1

22/1

00 7735 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

State: HARYANA

District : REWARI

Tehsil : REWARI

Area

Name of Village

Are

Hectare

Khasara / Killa No.

Mustil No.

Hadbast No.

Square Metre

204

15. FHIDERI ( Contd ...)

22/3

23/1

1/1

2/1

2/2

11/2

20/1

20/2

25/1

25/2

13/2

17/2

17/3

24.

7/1

7/2

73.

161

162 7736

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] Tehsil : REWARI

District : REWARI

State : HARYANA

Area Name of Village

Mustil No.

Hadbast No.

Khasara / KillaNo. Hectare Are

Square Metre

204

166

84 15. FHIDERI ( Contd ...)

167

69 16. BUDHANI

208

23/1

23/2

3/1

3/2

3/3

3/4

9/2

85 17. RAMGARH

209

25/2

5/1

5/2

5/3

6/1

6/2

14/2

00 7737

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग -खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

District: REWARI

State: HARYANA Tehsil : REWARI

Area Name of Village

Mustil No.

Hadbast No.

Hectare Are

Khasara / Killa No.

Square Metre

209

17. RAMGARH ( Contd ... )

17/1

17/2

25/1

25/2

4/1

4/2

5/1

5/2

7/1

7/2

14/1

14/2

17/1

7/1

10.

166

192

5/1

210

18. DABRI

6/2

15/1

16/2

211

19/1/3

19. GOKALPUR

19/2

20/1/1

20/2/1

21/1/1

21/1/2

21/2

03 7738

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] Tehsil : REWARI

District : REWARI

State : HARYANA

Area

Nameof Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

211

6/2/1

19. GOKALPUR (Contd ...)

15/2

16/2

1/1

1/2/1

10/1/3

10/2

20/3

5/1

6/1

15/1

16/1/2

16/2/2

25/1

5/1

6/2

15/1

16/2

25/1

5/1

324

334

90 20. JANTI

212

18/2

23/1

3/1

9/2

12/1

21. JANTSAIRWAS

213

44 7739 [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Tehsil : REWARI

District: REWARI

State : HARYANA

Area Name of Village

Khasara / Killa No.

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Hectare Are

Square Metre

213

21. JANTSAIRWAS ( Contd... )

2/2

3/1

3/2

12/1

12/2

19/1

19/2

15/3

16/1

25/3

1/3

10/1

10/2

7/2

7/3

13/1

123/2

156

22. DAWANA

8 7740

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

State : HARYANA

Tehsil : REWARI

District: REWARI

Area

Name of Village

Khasara / Killa No.

Mustil No.

Hadbast No.

Hectare Are

Square Metre

156

22. DAWANA (Contd ... )

13/1

[No. R-31015/50/2004-O.R. -II ] HARISH KUMAR , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई , 2005

का. आ. 2501.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि मुन्द्रा (गुजरात) 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 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 अर्जल) अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , उस भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन 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. राम करण शर्मा, सक्षम प्राधिकारी , मुन्द्रा-दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन परियोजना, हिंदुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, मकान संख्या - 1418 , सेक्टर 6 , बहादुरगढ 124507, जिला झज्जर (हरियाणा) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । [भाग -खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

7741

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

अनुसुची

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

तहसीलः रेवाड़ी

गाँव का नाम

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

143

34 1. जैतहावास

49 2. भाडावारा

126

145

128

145

147

148

150

23 3. भवाड़ी

152

28 4. कमालपुर

157 5. छुरियावास

21 6. धामलाका !!!

155

15 15 28

क्षेत्रफल

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

खसरा /किला संख्या

66 18

68 2

00.

75 15/1

272

" 82

19/3

00 4

5/1

1/1

17/1

18/1

2/1

13/2

23/2/1

3/1

6/1

49 4

11/3

45 7742

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

तहसीलः रेवाड़ी

गाँव का नाम

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/किला

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर

इदयस्त संख्या

एयर

संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

171

7. शहबाजपुर खालसा

20/1

20/2

21/1

21/2

25/2

20/1

1/1

3/1

10 8. माजरा गुरदास

21/2

15/2

19/1

22/1

00 9.कोनसीवास

174

97 10. कालाका

177

23/1

39 11. माडियां कलां

178

09 12.खलीलपुरी

179

21/2

28 13. फिदेडी

204

25/1

56 7743 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

जिलाःरेवाड़ी

तहसीलः रेवाड़ी

राज्यः हरियाणा

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

खसरा /किला

हेक्टेयर

वर्गमीटर

संख्या

एयर

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

208

3/3

14. बुडानी

15.रामगढ़

209

25/2

5/3

14/2

211

22/1/1

16.मोकलपुर

16/1/1

16/2

25/1/3

1/2/1

6/2

15/1

94 17.जांटी

212

19/1-3

18. जांट सायरवास

213

4/2

4/1-3

7/1-3

21/1/1

19. डवाना

156

[फा. सं. आर-31015/50/2004-ओ.आर- II ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

NewDelhi , the 5th July , 2005

S. O. 2501.-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;

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 inthe Schedule annexed hereto;

Now, therefore, in exercise of powers conferredby sub-section (1 ) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of 7744

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

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 Ram Karan Sharma , Competent Authority. Mundra - Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline Project , Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited , H. No. 1418, Sector - 6, Bahadurgarh - 124507 , District - Jhajjar (Haryana).

SCHEDULE

State : HARYANA Tehsil : REWARI

District : REWARI

Area

Nameof Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

143

1. JAITRAWAS

15/1

272

145

82 2. BHARAWAS

126

19/3

128

145

5/1

147

1/1

148

94 3.BHAWARI

150

17/1

18/1

2/1

13/2

83 4. KAMALPUR

152

23/2/1

01 7745

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

State : HARYANA

District : REWARI

Tehsil : REWARI

Area

Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

3/1

157

5. CHHURIAWAS

6/1

155

6. DHAMLAKA

11/3

20/1

171

7. SHAHBAJPUR KHALSA

20/2

21/1

21/2

25/2

20/1

1/1

3/1

21/2

188

8. MAJRA GURDASS

15/2

19/1

22/1

174

9. KONSIWAS

8 7746

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

Tehsil : REWARI

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

District : REWARI

Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No. 10. KALAKA

177

35 11. MANDIA KALAN

178

23 12. KHALILPURI

179

11 13. FHIDERI

204

25 14. BUDHANI

208

20 15. RAMGARH

209

37 16. GOKALPUR

211

39 17. JANTI

212

19 18. JANTSAIRWAS

213

50 19. DAWANA

156

2 Stats : HARYANA

Area

Khasara / Killa No. Hectero Are

Square Motre 14

49 23/1

39 23

86 6

09 21/2

73 51

28 1

64 25/1

3/3

52 8

57 25/2

87 5/3

35 14/2

33 22/1/1

16/1/1

86 16/2

64 25/1/3

08 1/2/1

69 6/2

94 15/1

94 5

61 7

10 19/1-3

22 2

42 4/2

25 4/1-3

18 5

84 7/1-3

42 21/1/1

44 23

[No. R- 31015/50/2004-O.R. - II ] HARISH KUMAR , Under Secy.

7747 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई, 2005

का. आ. 2502.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम , 1962 (1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 2917 तारीख 9 नवम्बर, 2004 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 13 नवम्बर, 2004, में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मुन्द्रा-दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन के माध्यम से गुजरात राज्य में मुन्द्रा से दिल्ली तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जबता को तारीख 16 दिसम्बर, 2004 , को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं ;

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने , उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात , और यह समाधान हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए अपेक्षित है , उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चय किया है ;

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए , इस मंत्रालय के सहमति पत्र सं. आर 31015/7/03 ओ.आर- II दिनांक 25/11/2004 द्वारा लगाई गई शर्तों के अध्यधीन सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । 7748

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

अनुसूची

जिला : अजमेर

तहसील : किशनगढ़

राज्य: राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

क्रम सं.

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 2

494(स.नाला)

1. भुंवाड़ा

493(स.नाला)

489(स .चारागाह)

492(स.नाला)

491

490(स.रास्ता)

402

21 2. मुण्डोलाव

448(स.चारागाह)

403

402

400(स.रास्ता)

399/737

386

387

390

377(स. रास्ता)

376(स.पाल)

31(स .नाला)

52(स .रास्ता)

72(स .रास्ता)

67/2

69/1

99(स .रास्ता)

118

106

104

107

154(स.रास्ता)

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7749

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

जिला: अजमेर

तहसील : किशनगढ़

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

क्रम सं.

3 2. मुण्डोलाव (जारी ... )

राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर एयर

167(स.भूमि)

168

169

627/2 3. काढ़ा

613

61.8

619

620

624/1

624/2 }

621

622

627/1/691

654

653/1

653/3

653/2

652 0

643(स.रास्ता)

642/1

367/1 4. देवपुरी

367/2

365/2

385/2

385/3(स.भूमि)

372/1/11

372/1/10

384

386(स.नाला)

383

385/5

408

407/1

407/2

407/3

}

410

415

413

412

418 2 G1 /05-29

00.

0 7750

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ ASADHA 25,1927

राज्य : राजस्थान

जिला : अजमेर

तहसील: किशनगढ

खसरा सं .

गाँव का नाम

कम सं.

3 1

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

426/2(स.रास्ता)

4. देवपुरी (जारी...)

426/1 (स.भूमि)

340 44

323(स. आबादी)

421 0

316 (स.आबादी)

141/2(स.नाला)

139

138

137

135

134 0

145/8 (पी.डब्ल्यू.डी . सड़क)

203

221

197

196

187

194

190/2

193

192

4 5. भारला

81/2

96 0

97 (स .रास्ता)

100

101

104

105(स.रास्ता)

106

107

108

11 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7751

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

जिला : अजमेर

तहसील: किशनगढ़

खसरा सं .

गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

3 1

राज्य: राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

एयर वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर

116/3/2

5. भारला (जारी...)

116/3/1 (स . छापर)

203(स.नाला)

126

127

128

172

170

171

187

162/1

188

162/2

0.0

03 42

147 (स.रास्ता)

1335 6. कट्सुरा

1334

1333

1332

1337 0

1256 (स. रास्ता)

1255 (स.छापर)

1250 (पी.डब्ल्यू.डी)

1249 (पी.डब्ल्यू. डी. सड़क)

1248 (पी.डब्ल्यू.डी)

30 0

49 65

28(स .नडी)

161 00

160 (स .रास्ता)

159

158

157

156

162

163

164

208

211 0

24 61

10.

92 [PART II SEC . 3 (ii) ] 7752

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

जिला : अजमेर

राज्य : राजस्थान

तहसील : किशनगढ़

क्षेत्रफल

खसरा सं .

गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 1

210

89 6. कटसुरा (जारी ...)

212

213(स.रास्ता)

214(स .चारागाह)

218

215

250(स.रास्ता)

247(स.भूमि)

249

238(स.उसर)

257(स.पाल)

0-2

258/1 (स.पाल)

258/3/1

258/3/2

258/6

258/7

258/8

653

7. धौलपुरीया

651

650

647

646(स.रास्ता)

645(स.भूमि)

642/705

642

576

573

572

577

483(स . रास्ता)

492

491

490

535(स. रास्ता)

455

452

451

450

448

427

0 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7753

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

जिला : अजमेर

तहसील : किशनगढ़

खसरा सं .

'गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

3 1

422 7. धौलपुरीया (जारी... )

423

424

426

425

397

395

396

392

390

136 8. कालानाड़ा

134

119

20/3

20/2

20/1

16 राज्य: राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 4

1-7

.00

30(स .रास्ता)

49/3

59 0

237/1/2 (स. छापर)

239

238 0

251/1 (स.छापर)

1/1(स.नदी)

468(स.नाला)

9. टिहरी

387(स.छापर)

388 0

47 7754

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ]

जिला : अजमेर

तहसील : किशनगढ़

राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

क्रम सं.

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 1

389

84 9. टिहरी (जारी ... )

390/1

390/2 }

393

369(स.छापर)

397

398

401

400

402(स.रास्ता)

417

411

1.6

410(स.छापर)

409(पी.डब्ल्यू.डी. सड़क)

408

323(स.रास्ता)

301

299

297

296

298

294

295

293

302

272

303

270

268

266

265

236 (स.रास्ता)

220

208

207

205

210

204

211

201

09 7755

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

जिला : अजमेर

राज्य : राजस्थान तहसील : किशनगढ़

क्षेत्रफल

एयर वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टेयर

ख़सरा सं.

गाँव का नाम

क्रम. सं.

200 (स .रास्ता)

9. टिहरी (जारी ... )

158/477

158

159

161/469

161

163

166

164

165

121 (स.चारागाह)

[फा. सं. आर-31015/43/2004-ओ.आर- II ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 5th July, 2005

S. O. 2502.-Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 2917 dated the 9th November , 2004, issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Rightof User in Land) Act , 1962 (50 of 1962) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act) , published in the Gazette of India dated the 13th November, 2004, the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of petroleum products from Mundra in the State of Gujarat to Delhi through Mundra -Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 16th December, 2004;

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

Andwhereas the Central Government , after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline , has decided to acquire right of usertherein;

And further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -section (4) of section 6 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Central Government , vest on the date of publication of declaration , in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, free from all encumbrances , subject to the conditions imposed vide this Ministry's consent letter no . R- 31015/7/03 OR- II dated 25-11-2004.

7756

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

SCHEDULE Tehsil : KISHANGARH

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

District : AJMER

Sr. No

Name of the Village

Khasara No. 1

3 1 BHUNWADA

State: RAJASTHAN

Area

Hectare Are Sq.mtr .

494( G / L Nala )

493( G / L Nala )

489(G/ L Pasture)

492(G /L Nala )

491

490(G /L Cart Track)

402 2. MUNDOLAV

448(G / L Pasture)

403

402 0

22.

400(G/ L Cart Track)

399/737

386

387

390

377( G /L Cart Track)

376( G/ L Pal)

31(G/L Nala)

48 0

54 81

19 38

52(G/ L Cart Track)

72( G / L Cart Track)

67/2

69/1

79 00

99 ( G / L Cart Track)

118

106

104

107 0

03 09

154(G/L Cart Track)

7757 भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16 , 2005/ आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

State : RAJASTHAN

District : AJMER

Tehsil : KISHANGARH

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr.

Khasara No.

Si No

Name of the Village

167(G/L)

2. MUNDOLAV ( Contd ... )

168

169

627/2

3 KADHA

613

618

619

620

624/17

624/2

621

622

627/1/691

654

653/1

653/3

653/2

652

643(G/L Cart Track)

642/1

367/1

367/2

365/2

385/2

00 93

385/3 (G/L)

372/1/11

372/1/10

384

386(G/L Nala)

383

385/5

08 97

408

407/1

407/2

407/3

410

415

413

412

26 22

418

05-30 7758

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

Tehsil : KISHANGARH

District : AJMER Sr No

Name of the Village

Khasara No. 1

3 4 DEVPURI (Contd ... )

426/2(G / L Cart Track)

426/1(G/L)

340

323 ( G / L Abadi )

421

316(G /L Abadi )

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr. 4

141/2 ( G / L Nala)

139

138

137

135

134 0

08 09

145/8 ( PWD Road)

203

221

197

196

187

194

190/2

193

192

81/2

96 0

18 96

10 92

97 (G / L Cart Track)

100

101

104 0

105(G / L Cart Track)

106

107

108 0

82 7759 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

State : RAJASTHAN Tehsil : KISHANGARH

District : AJMER

Area

Are

Hectare

Khasara No

Sq.mtr .

Sr No

Name of the Village

116/3/2

5. BHARLA ( Contd ... )

116/3/1 (G / L Chhapar)

203(G /L Nala )

126

127

128

172

170

171

187

162/1

188

162/2

147(G / L Cart Track)

1335

25 58 6. KATSURA

1334

1333

1332

19 08

1337

1256(G /L Cart Track)

1255 ( G / L Chhapar )

1250( P.W.D . )

1249( P.W.D Road)

1248(P.W.D)

28(G/ L Nadi )

161

160(G /L Cart Track)

159

158

157

156

162

10 65

163

23 64

164

22 89

208

06 92

211 7760

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

Tehsil : KISHANGARH

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

District : AJMER

Si No

Khasara No. Name of the Village

210 6. KATSURA ( Contd ... )

212

213( G /L Cart Track)

214 ( G /L Pasture )

218

215

250(G / L Cart Trak) State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Hectare Are Sq.mtr. 4

89 0

98 0

96 0

18 0

02 47

247(G /L)

249 0

238(G/L Ussar)

257(G /L Pa!)

02 47

258/1 (G/L Pai)

258/3/1

258/3/2

258/6

258/7

258/8 7. DHOLPURIYA

653

651

650

647 0

09 93

16 02

28 59.

18 60

02 08

646 (G / L Cart Track)

28 56

645( G/L)

642/705

642

576

573

572

577 0

09 94

26 49

29 00

11 40

483( G /L Cart track)

492

491

490 0

17 69

535( G /L Cart track)

455

452

451

450

448

427 0

05 7761

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

District : AJMER Tehsil : KISHANGARH

Khasara No. Name of the Village

S No

422 7. DHOLPURIYA ( Contd ... )

423

424

426

425

397

395

396

392

390

136 8. KALANADA

134

119

20/3

20/2

20/1

16 State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr .

86 0

32 0

34 0

55 0

68 0

64 0

30(G/ L Cart Track )

49/3

19 98 0

98 0

237/1/2 (G / L Chhapar)

239

238

20 0

35 0

251/1 (G / L Chhapar)

1/1(G/L Nadi )

468(G/L Nala)

9. TIHRI

76 0

387( G / L Chhapar)

388

0 7762

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] Tehsil : KISHANGARH

District : AJMER

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Sr No

Khasara No.

Nameof the Village

Hectare Are Sq.mtr .

389

9. TIHRI (Contd ... )

390/1

00 20

390/2

}

393

369 ( G / L Chhapar)

397

398

401

400

402( G / L Cart Track)

417

411

410( G/L Chhapar)

409(( P.W.D.Road)

408

323( G / L Cart Track)

301

299

297

296

298

294

295

293

302

27-2

303

270

268

266

265

236( G / L Cart Track)

220

208

207

09 91

205

210

204

211

201

09 7763

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

State : RAJASTHAN

District : AJMER

Tehsil : KISHANGARH

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr .

Khasara No.

Nameof the Village

Sr. No

200(G /L Cart Track)

9. TIHRI ( Contd ... )

158/477

158

159

161/469

161

24 57

163

16 55

166

164

32 91

165

121(G/L Pasture)

[No. R-31015/43/2004-O.R. -II ]

HARISH KUMAR, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई , 2005

का. आ. 2503.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 3100 तारीख 23 नवम्बर, 2004, जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 4 दिसम्बर, 2004 में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मुन्द्रा-दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन के माध्यम से गुजरात राज्य में मुन्द्रा से दिल्ली तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 09 फरवरी , 2005 , को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं ;

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने, उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात, और यह समाधान हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए अपेक्षित है, उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चय किया है ;

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

31015/7/03 और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए , इस मंत्रालय के सहमति पत्र सं. आर ओ.आर-Ⅱ दिनांक 25/11/2004 द्वारा लगाई गई शर्तों के अध्यधीन सभी विल्लंगों से मुक्त, हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । 7764

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

अनुसूची

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

जिला : पाली

तहसील : देसूरी

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

1. मोरखा

607

604 राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

579(स.रास्ता)

578

575

574 0

24 0

569(स.रास्ता)

557

558

559

560 0

547(स.रास्ता)

534

533 0

532(स.रास्ता)

501

506

505

502

503

504

469

470 0

330(स.नदी)

9(स.नदी)

51 बी का

10 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7765

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

जिला: पाली

तहसील : देसूरी

क्रम सं.

खसरा सं.

गाँव का नाम

52 2. मादा (जारी...)

896 3. सिन्दरली

903 राज्य: राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

900/951 (स.भूमि)

798(स .नाला)

797 (स.भूमि)

795 (स.सड़क)

785 0

*722 (वनविभाग)

725

724

726

721 0

-0-

6.0

753(स.सड़क)

713 0

.30... 88

707 (स. रास्ता)

701

704 0

86(स .नदी)

4. गुडा मांगलिया

101

102

119 0

129(स.रास्ता)

173

174

175

176

177

185

183

190

184

218

221

219

220

263

264

265 1993 G1/05-31

04 80

00 7766

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)]

जिला: पाली

तहसील : देसूरी

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

260 4. गुडा मांगलिया (जारी ...)

259

258

253

254

250

255

249

248

243

242 राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर एयर

281(स.रास्ता)

308

306

307

304

303 0

13 .

310 (स.रास्ता)

311 0

293(स.वाला)

358(स.वाला)

359 5. छोडा

78(स.खराच)

90 6. गुडा पाटीया

89(स.रास्ता)

84 0

116 (स . रास्ता)

117 (सि.वि.नहर)

118

118/199

122/198

127

130

126 0

159(स. रास्ता)

161 (स.भूमि)

161/201 0

01 7767

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

राज्य: राजस्थान

जिला: पाली

तहसील : देसूरी

खसरा सं.

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

हेक्टेयर

167(स. नदी)

6. गुडा पाटीया (जारी... )

131(स.नदी)

7. आना

130 (स.भूमि)

129(स.रास्ता)

120

118

121

88 0

108(सि.वि.नहर)

308

331

330

327

345

346

347

348

351

352

353

-0

377 (स.रास्ता)

379

383

380

386

385

397

384

419(स.रास्ता)

534

545

544

543

539

526(स.भूमि)

524(स.नाला)

501

500

480 (स.रास्ता)

459

460

00 0

92 0

54 0 7768

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

जिला : पाली

तहसील : देसूरी

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

3 7. आना (जारी...)

463

464 राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 4

572(स.रास्ता)

578

581

582 0

584(स.वाला)

585 0

604(स.रास्ता)

608

606

719

720

721

723

724

729 0

0-1

804(स.नदी)

8. सारंगवास

10(स.भूमि)

8 (स.रास्ता)

5(स.भूमि)

2 9. शोभावास

36 0

2(स.नाला)

2/1 (स.रास्ता)

10. नारलाई

1682(स.वाली)

1680

1677

1686 0

61.

1687(स.रास्ता)

1689

74 7769 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/ आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

जिला: पाली

राज्य : राजस्थान

तहसील: देसूरी

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर

खसरा सं .

हेक्टेयर एयर

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

1690 (स.रास्ता)

नारलाई (जारी... )

10.

1662

1658

1657

1656

1654

1810 (स .रास्ता)

1649

1644

1621

1622

1640(स.वाली)

1642

1593(स.रास्ता)

1550

1543

1553

1542

1472

1473

1475

1471

1476

1479(स.रास्ता)

1495

1497

1496

1498

1360 (पी.डब्लू.डी. सड़क)

256 (स.भूमि)

257

258

271 (स.नाला)

भूमि)

249

22.

286

286/2610 (स.भूमि)

285(स.मगरा)

276

279 7770

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25, 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

जिला : पाली

तहसील : देसूरी

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

3 10. नारलाई (जारी ... )

राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर

280(स.चारागाह)

281 0

343(स .रास्ता)

150 11. चकसुजापुरा

151 0

147 (स.मगरी)

146

129 0

, 0

130(स.भूमि)

131

132 0

127(स.रास्ता)

126 0

164(स.रास्ता)

253 0

249/276(स.भूमि)

249

251

250 0

241 (स.मगरी)

242 0

243(स.मगरी)

224(स.वाला)

222

219

218

216 12. ढेलड़ी

196

195

194

193

192

191

190 0

197 (स . नदी)

205(स.भूमि)

213 32

214/293(स.भूमि)

216(स .रास्ता)

147 0

16 7771

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II-खण्ड 3( ii) ]

जिला: पाली

तहसील : देसूरी

खसरा सं.

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

राज्य: राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

146 (स.भूमि)

12. ढेलड़ी (जारी ... )

231.(स.भूमि)

233

234

42 0

13 0

235 (स.भूमि)

54 0

71 (स.भूमि)

77 0

72 0

77/305 (स.भूमि)

。

}

70(स.भूमि)

-0-

69(स.रास्ता)

60 (स. भूमि)

257 13. अटाटिया

250

252

251

254

249

84 0

52 0

82 0

74 0

239 (पी.डब्ल्यू.डी. सस्ता)

116(स.वाली)

116/397

111

62 0

}

13 0

72 0

112(ग्रा.प.)

144

143(स.रास्ता)

142

141

140

139

138 .

149

32 0

49 0

30 0

03.

20 0

149/396

150

135

131

121

124

48 0

84 0

76 0

85 7772

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )]

जिला: पाली

तहसील : देसूरी

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

123 13. अटाटिया (जारी... )

126 राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर

122(स.वाली)

14. केसूली

397 (स.नदी)

399 0

400(स.भूमि)

404

403

404/611

380

405/617

) 0

03.

405(स. रास्ता)

416(स.पाल)

415 0

411 (स.भूमि)

410 (स.भूमि)

372(स .रास्ता)

462(स.भूमि)

463 0

464(स.मगरी)

465(स.भूमि)

466 0

371 (स.रास्ता)

370(स.नदी)

520(स.भूमि)

369(स.पाल)

365

364

362 0

345(स.भूमि)

344(स.रास्ता)

186

187

182

181 0

0 .

169 (ग्रा.प.)

170(स.वाला)

165(स.वाला)

162 0

162/594 (स.भूमि)

7773

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

जिला: पाली

तहसील: देसूरी

क्रम सं.

खसरा सं.

गाँव का नाम

161 14. केसूली (जारी ... )

राज्य: राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

.57(स.वाला)

346(स.भूमि)

152

151/628 (स.भूमि)

151

147

146

145

144 15. डायलाना कलां

11(स.वाला)

488 0

485(स.रास्ता)

69 0

115(स.रास्ता)

162

161

158

149

140

142 16. केरली

289(स.भूमि)

289/299

290

105(स.नदी)

105/322 (स.भूमि)

104(स.भूमि)

17. टोकरला

152(स.भूमि)

68(स.चस्ता)

149

144

146

130 1993 G1/05-32

14 7774

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)]

जिला : पाली

तहसील : देसूरी

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

131 17. टोकरला (जारी... )

132 राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

124(स.रास्ता)

115

109

111

110

108 0

299 (पी.डब्लू.डी. सड़क)

305

306

307

311

316

317

319

320

323

324 0

-0

325(स.भूमि)

326(स.रास्ता)

329 18. कोलर

66(स.नाला)

76(ग्रा.प. )

73 0

72(स.भूमि)

83(स.रास्ता)

87 0

63(स.रास्ता)

158

159

160

12 0

63 7775 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

जिला: पाली

राज्य : राजस्थान

तहसील : देसूरी

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

94 18. कोलर (जारी...)

1365

19. खीवाड़ा

1352(स.वाला)

1353

1335/3

1335/4

1330 (स.भूमि)

1325

25. 68

1323

1324

1321

1320(स.रास्ता)

1262

1252(स .नदी)

1236

1235

1199(स .रास्ता)

1166

1169

1170

1159(स.रास्ता)

1144

1147

1151

1065

1021(स .रास्ता)

1004

1008

1005

972(स.रास्ता)

965

966

847

846

851

852(स.रास्ता)

7776

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

जिला : पाली

तहसील: देसूरी

राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 1

745

19. खीवाड़ा (जारी...)

756(स.रास्ता)

761

762(स. सस्ता )

771

782(स.रास्ता)

793(स.आबादी)

794/1.

794

} 。

20. माताजीकागुड़ा

34 21. सिवास

02- 35

799(स.भूमि)

[फा. सं. आर-31015/50 /2004- ओ.आर- ॥ ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

NewDelhi , the 5th July, 2005

S. O. 2503. Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry ofPetroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 3100 dated the 23rd November, 2004, issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Rightof User in Land) Act , 1962 (50 of 1962) , ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act) , published in the Gazette of India dated the 4th December , 2004, the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of petroleum products from Mundra in the State of Gujarat to Delhi through Mundra- Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 9th February, 2005;

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

And whereas the Central Government , after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline , has decidedto acquire right of user therein;

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

And further, in exercise of the powers conferredby sub- section (4) of section 6 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Central Government , vest on the date of publication of declaration , in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited , free from ali encumbrances , subjectto the conditions imposed vide this Ministry's consent letter no . R- 31015/7/03 OR- II dated 25-11-2004.

7777

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

SCHEDULE

State : RAJASTHAN

District : PALI

Tehsil : DESURI

Khasara No. Name of the Village

Sr. No

607. 1. MORKHA

604 Area

Are Sq.mtr. Hectare

579 ( G/ L Cart Track)

578

575

574

08 0

569 (G / L Cart Track)

557

558

559

560

58 0

65 0

547 (G /L Cart Track)

534

533

80 0

532(G / L Cart Track)

501

506

505

502

503

504

469

470

66 0

06.

330(G/L River)

30 2. MADA

9(G/L River)

05 70 0

04 10 0 7778

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] Tehsil : DESURI

District : PALI

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Sr. No

Name of the Village

Khasara No.

Hectare Are Sq.mtr. 1

6 2. MADA ( Contd ... )

26 3. SINDARLI

896

00 54

903

80 27

900/951 (G/L)

798 (G/ L Nala)

797 (G/L)

795 (G /L Road )

785

722(Forest Deptt.)

725

724

726

721

753 (G/ L Road )

713

707 ( G / L Cart Track)

701

704

14 4. GUDA MANGALIYA

86(G/L River)

101

102

119

19 61

129 ( CartTrack )

173

174

175

176

177

185

183

190

184

218

221

12 01

219

220

263

264

265

20 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii )]

7779

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Tehsil : DESURI

District : PALI

Khasara No. Sr. No

Name of the Village

3 1.

260 4. GUDA MANGALIYA ( Contd... )

259

258

253

254

250

255

249

248

243

242 State : RAJASTHAN Area

Hectare Are Sq.mtr.

00 22

281 (G /L Cart Track)

308

306

307

304

303 0

00 49

05 58

310 (G /L Cart Track)

311 0

293 (G / L Nala)

06.

358 (G/ L Nala)

359 5. CHHODA

78 (G /L Kharach)

90 6. GUDA PATIYA

08 40

89 (G / L Cart Track)

07 04

116 (G /L CartTrack)

00 90

117(Irrig.Deptt. Canal )

118 0

22 68

29 88

118/199

122/198

127

130

126 0

159 (G/L CartTrack)

161(G/L)

161/201

0 7780

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

Tehsil : DESURI

District : PALI Sr. No

Khasara No. Name of the Village

3 6. GUDA PATIYA ( Contd ... )

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] State : RAJASTHAN Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr .

167 (G/L River)

7. ΑΝΑ

06 38

131 (G/L River)

130(G/L)

129 ( G / L Cart Track)

120

118

121 0

03 60

108(Irrig . Deptt. Canal )

308

331

330

327

345

346

347

348

351

352

353 0

46 08

16 69

04 18

06 48

04 68

377 (G /L Cart Track)

379

383

380

386

385

397

384 0

05 40

14 69

01 48

419 (G /L Cart Track)

534

545

544

543

539 0

526(G/L)

16 29

524(G/L Nala)

501

500 0

480(G/L CartTrack)

459

460 0

05 54 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7781

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Tehsil : DESURI

State : RAJASTHAN

District : PALI

Khasara No. Sr. No Name of the Village

3 1

463 7. ANA ( Contd ... )

464 Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr. 4

10 96

14 97

572(G / L Cart Track)

578

581

582 0

41 40

16 28

584 (G/ L Nala)

585 0

30 24

03 88

604 (G / L Cart Track)

608

606

719

720

721

723

724

729 0

05 48

46 80

804 (G/L River)

8. SARANGWAS

10(G/L)

01 08

8 (G /L Cart Track)

5(G/L)

24 9. SHOBHAWAS

36 0

12 17

29 88

05 43

03 81

2(G/L Nala)

2/1 (G / L Cart Track)

10. NARLAI

1682(G/L Nala )

1680

1677

1686

1687 (G / L Cart Track)

1689 1993 G1/05-33

0 7782

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ ASADHA 25,1927

Tehsil : DESURI

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] State : RAJASTHAN

District : PALI

Khasara No. Sr. No

Name of the Village

3 1

Area

Hectare Are Sq.mtr.

20 0

1690(G/ L Cart Track)

10. NARLAI (Contd ... )

1662

1658

1657

1656

1654 0

05 0

01 48

1810 (G / L Cart Track)

1649

1644

1621

1622 0

26 0

04 0

40 0

01 90

1640 ( G / L Nala)

1642

1593 (G / L Cart Track)

1550

1543

1553

1542

1472

1473

1475

1471

1476

75 0

04 40

00 20

20 0

21 41

1479 (G /L Cart Track)

1495

1497

1496

1498 0

36 50

74 0

1360 ( P.W.D. Road)

00 24

256(G/L)

257

258 0

271(G/ L Nala)

} 。

271/2609(G/L)

249

286

00 20

286/2610( G/L)

285 ( G / L Magra)

276

279

20 58

19 7783

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

Tehsil : DESURI

State : RAJASTHAN

District : PALI

Khasara No. Sr. No Name of the Village

10. NARLAI ( Contd ...)

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr.

280(G /L Pasture)

281

00 20

343 (G /L Cart Track)

150 11. CHAKSUJAPURA

151

29 70

147 (G/L Magri)

146

129

00 96

130(G/L)

131

132

127 (G /L Cart Track)

126

02 20

164(G/L Cart Track)

253

249/276 (G/L)

249

251

250

17 28

241 (G/L Magri)

242

243 (G/L Magri)

224 (G/L Nala)

222

219

218

216

196 12. DHELRI

195

194

193

192

191

190

48 0

13 45 0

197 (G/L River)

205(G/L)

213 0

37 0

16 05

214/293 (G/L)

216(G / L Cart Track)

147 0

25 7784

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25, 1927

Tehsil : DESURI

PALI

District :

Sr. No

Knasara No. Name of the Village

3 12. DHELRI ( Contd ... )

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )]

= State : RAJASTHAN Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr. 4

146(G/L)

231 (G/L)

233

234 0

12 42

235(G/L)

71(G/L)

77 0

77/305(G/L)

。

}

06 96

70(G/L)

00 60

69 (G /L Cart Track)

68 0

60(G/L)

61 13. ATATIYA

257

250

252

251

254

249 0

11 57

09 90

03 82

239 ( P.W.D. Cart Track)

116(G/L Nala)

116/397

111

}

112(G/P)

144 0

143 (G /L Cart Track)

142

141

140

139

138

149 0

00 20

149/396

150

135

131

121

124 0

20 50

85 [भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii)]

7785

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Tehsil : DESURI

State : RAJASTHAN

District : PALI

Sr. No

Khasara No. Name of the Village

123 13. ATATIYA ( Contd ... )

126 Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr. 4

06 09

122(G/ L Nala)

14. KESOOLI

04 32

397 (G /L River)

399 0

10 83

400(G/L)

404

403 0

404/611

380

405/617

405 (G/L Cart Track)

00 28

416(G/L Pal)

415 0

02 40

411(G/L)

04 61

410(G/L)

00 72

372(G /L Cart Track)

462(G/L)

463 0

24 40

464(G/LMagri)

465(G/L)

466 0

22 20

371 (G / L Cart Track)

45 18

370(G/L Nadi )

520(G/L)

369 (G /L Pal)

365

364

362 0

00 44

345(G/L)

344(G / L Cart Track)

186

187

182

181 0

35 93

169(G/P)

170(G/L Nala)

06 48

165(G/L Nala)

162 0

30 48

162/594(G/L)

7786

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] Tehsil : DESURI

PALI

State : RAJASTHAN

District :

Area

Are

Khasara No.

Hectare

Sr. No

Sq.mtr. Name of the Village

161

14. KESOOLI ( Contd ... )

08 56

157 (G/ L Nala)

346(G/L)

152

12 09

151/628 ( G/L)

151

147

146

50 83

145

144

15. DAILANA KALAN

11 (G/ L Nala)

488

485 (G /L Cart Track)

0 41

39 04

34 34

04 01

115 ( G / L Cart Track)

162

17 48

161

158

149

140

142

16. KERLI

289 (G/L)

289/299

290

105(G/L River)

105/322(G/L)

104(G/L)

17. TOKARLA

162(G/L)

68 ( G/L CartTrack)

149

144

146

22 48

130

82 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005 /आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7787 State : RAJASTHAN

District : PALI

Tehsil : DESURI

Khasara No. Sr. No

Name of the Village

131 17. TOKARLA ( Contd ... )

132 Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr.

124 (G/ L Cart Track)

115

109

111

110

108 0

14 87

56 0

299 ( P.W.D Road)

305

306

307

311

316

317

319

320

323

324

20 0

00 44

93 0

14 0

20 0

325(G/L)

326(G /L Cart Track)

329

66(G/L Nala)

18. KOLAR

22 32

76(G/P)

36 0

72(G/L)

16 0

83 (G / L Cart Track)

87 0

40 0

00 69

63(G /L Cart Track)

158

159

160

72 0

70 0

52 0

20 0

54 0

0 7788

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] Tehsil : DESURI

District : PALI

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Sr. No

Khasara No.

Name of the Village

Hectare Are Sq.mtr. 1

6 18.

KOLAR ( Contd ... )

08 99

09 30

50 19. KHINWARA

1365

02- 96

1352(G /L Nala)

1353

1335/3

1335/4

1330(G/L)

1325

25 68

1323

1324

02 82

1321

1320 (G /L Cart Track)

1262

1252( G/ L River)

1236

1235

1199 (G /L Cart Track)

1166

28 41

1169

1170

1159 ( G / L Cart Track)

1144

1147

1151

1065

1021 ( G / L Cart Track)

1004

1008

1005

972( G /L Cart Track)

965

13 50

966

847

846

00 69

851

852(G / L Cart Track)

7789 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

State : RAJASTHAN Tehsil : DESURI

District : PALI

Area

Hectare Are

Khasara No.

Sq.mtr .

Sr. No

Name of the Village

745

19. KHINWARA ( Contd ...)

756 ( G / L Cart Track)

761

762 (G / L Cart Track )

771

782(G / L Cart Track)

793(G /L Abadi )

794/1

。

}

794

20. MATAJI KA GUDA

35 21. SIWAS

799(G/L)

[No. R-31015/50A/ 2004 -O.R. -II ] HARISH KUMAR , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई , 2005

का. आ. 2504.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि मुन्द्रा (गुजरात) से दिल्ली तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरशन 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 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 को 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 शिवदत्त गौड़, सक्षम प्राधिकारी , मुन्द्रा- दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन, परियोजना , हिंदुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, डी-7 , लालबहादुर नगर ( पूर्व ) , क्लार्क्स आमेर होटल के सामने, जवाहरलाल नेहरु मार्ग , मालवीय नगर , जयपुर -302017 (राजस्थान) को लिखित रुप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

1993 GI/05-34 7790

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

अनुसूची

जिला: पाली तहसील : देसूरी

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

607 1. मोरखा

578

575

557

560

533

506

502

469

470 2. मादा

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

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 4

53 0

76 0

74 0

96 0

50 0

19 0

49 0

15 0

84 0

9(स.नदी)

45 3. सिन्दरली

903 0

63 0

797 (स.भूमि)

785

725

724

721

713 4. गुडा मांगलिया

119

176

177

218

221

265

259

255

249

243

303

359 5. छोडा

11.

78(स.खराच)

79 6. गुडा पाटीया

116 (स.रास्ता)

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7791 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

जिला: पाली

राज्य: राजस्थान

तहसील : देसूरी

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 2

48 6. गुडा पाटीया (जारी... )

159(स.रास्ता)

167(स .नदी)

7. आना

131(स.नदी)

130 (स.भूमि)

129(स.रास्ता)

330

327

348

351

379

383

385

545

00.

524(स.नाला)

500

464

581

604(स.रास्ता)

609

719

721

724

8. सारंगवास

10(स.भूमि)

9. शोभावास

2(स.नाला)

10. नारलाई

1621

1640 (स.वाली)

1553

1473

1475

1495

1497

1360 (पी.डब्लू.डी . सड़क)

257

258

24 7792

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

जिला : पाली

तहसील : देसूरी

राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 1

286

14 10. जारलाई (जारी... )

279

281

131

59 11. चकसुजापुरा

127(स.रास्ता)

126

164(स.रास्ता)

249/276 (सं.भूमि)

249

250

242

243(स.मगरी)

218

29 12. ढेलड़ी

196

195

194

193

192

205 (स.भूमि)

201

213

214/293 (स.भूमि)

146(स.भूमि)

235(स.भूमि)

69(स.रास्ता)

32 13. अटाटिया

257

250

254

111

144

141

140

149/396

135

121

122(स.वाली)

14. केसूली

397(स.नदी)

7793

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

जिला: पाली

तहसील: देसूरी

क्रम सं.

खसरा सं.

गाँव का माम

380 14. केसूली (जारी...)

राज्य: राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर एयर

405/617

416 (स.पाल)

415

410 (स.भूमि)

463

465(स.भूमि)

520(स.भूमि)

364

362 0

345(स.भूमि)

186

187

182

181

170 (स.वाला)

162/594(स.भूमि)

346 (स.भूमि)

151

147

146

145

70 15. डायलाना कलां

115 (स . रास्ता)

162

161

140

142 16. केरली

105(स.नदी)

105/322 (स.भूमि)

ว

104(स.भूमि)

17. टोकरला

162(स.भूमि)

144

146

130

109

108

307

00 7794

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] तहसील : देसूरी

जिला: पाली

राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 1

6 17. टोकरला (जारी... )

311

317

320

76 18. कोलर

66(स.नाला)

63(स.रास्ता)

)

36 19. खीवाड़ा

1352(स.वाला)

1342

1335/4

1330 (स.भूमि)

1323

1321

1262

1236

1166

1170

1144

1147

1151

1065

1021(स. रास्ता)

1004

1005

966

846

852(स.रास्ता)

756(स.रास्ता)

761

771

793(स.आबादी)

794/1

} 。

794 7795

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

जिला : पाली

राज्य : राजस्थान तहसील : देसूरी

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर

खसरा सं.

हेक्टेयर एयर क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

08 20. माताजीकागुड़ा

[फा. सं. आर. - 31015/50ए/ 2004 ओ.आर.- II ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

NewDelhi , dated the 5th July, 2005

S. O. 2504.-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;

Now, therefore, in exercise of powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of section 3 ofthe 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 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 Shivdutt Gaur, Competent Authority, Mundra -Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline Project , Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited , D- 7 , Lal Bahadur Nagar ( East ) , Opp . Clarks Amer Hotel , Jawaharlal Nehru Marg, Malviya Nagar , Jaipur 302017 ( Rajasthan) .

7796

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

SCHEDULE

Tehsil : DESURI

District: PALI

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Sr. No

Khasara No.

Hectare

Name of the Village

Are Sq.mtr. 1

6 1. MORKHA

607

578

575

557

560

00 96

533

506

502

469

00 15

470

01 84- 2. MADA

9 (G /L River)

00 58

46 3. SINDARLI

903

797(G/L)

785

725

724

721

713

26 4. GUDA MANGALIYA

119

176

177

218

00 69

221

265

259

255

00 48

249

243

303

359

46 5. CHHODA

02 75

78(G/L Kharach)

08 6. GUDA PATIYA

116 (G/L Cart Track)

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7797

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Tehsil : DESURI

District : PALI

Khasara No. Sr. No

Name of the Village

3 6. GUDA PATIYA ( Contd ... )

State : RAJASTHAN Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr. 4

159 (G /L Cart Track)

167 (G /L River)

7. ΑΝΑ

131(G/L River)

130(G/L)

129 ( G/ L Cart Track)

330

327

348

351

379

383

385

545 0

62.

00 99

524(G /L Nala)

500

464

581 0

00 64

604 (G /L Cart Track)

609

719

721

724 8. SARANGWAS

10(G/L)

9. SHOBHAWAS

32 0

2(G /L Nala)

1621 10. NARLAI

1640 (G/L Nala)

1553

1473

1475

1495

1497 0

1360 ( P.W.D. Road)

257

258 1993 GI/05-35

24 7798

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

District : PALI Tehsil : DESURI

Khasara No. Name of the Village

Sr. No

286 NARLAI ( Contd ... )

10.

279

281

131 11. CHAKSUJAPURA

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ] State : RAJASTHAN Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr.

00 59

127 (G/ L Cart Track)

126

00 49 0

164 (G /L Cart Track)

249/276(G/L)

249

250

242

19 0

243 (G/L Magri)

218

196 12. DHELRI

195

194

193

192 0

00 29 0

20 0

58 0

55 0

29 0

205 ( G/L)

201

213 0

93 0

27 0

214/293 (G/L)

146 ( G/ L)

25 0

235 (G/L)

31 0

69 (G/ L Cart Track)

257 13. ATATIYA

250

254

111

144

141

140

20 0

82 0

49 0

52 0

46 0

10 0

149/396

135

121

37 0

56 0

75 0

122(G/L Nala)

14. KESOOLI

397 ( G / L River)

7799

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

State : RAJASTHAN

District : PALI

Tehsil : DESURI

Khasara No. Name of the Village

Sr. No

380 14. KESOOLI ( Contd ... )

Area

Are Sq.mtr. Hectare

405/617

416(G/L Pal)

415

410(G/L)

463

465(G/L)

520(G/L)

364

362

00 60

345(G/L)

186

187

182

181

00 29

170 (G/ L Nala)

05 30

162/594(G/L)

346(G/L)

151

147

146

145

70 15. DAILANA KALAN

69 0

0. 01

115 (G/L CartTrack)

162

161

140

142 16. KERLI

105 (G/L River)

105/322(G/L)

104 (G/L)

17. TOKARLA

162(G/L)

144

146

130.

109

108

307

0 7800

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] Tehsil : DESURI

District : PALI

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Khasara No.

Hectare

Sr. No

Are

Name of the Village

Sq.mtr.

311

17. TOKARLA ( Contd ... )

317

320

18. KOLAR

66(G/L Nala)

63(G/L CartTrack)

03 22

36 19. KHINWARA

1352(G/L Nala)

1342

1335/4

09 65

1330(G/L)

1323

1321

1262

02 70

1236

02 61

1166

1170

1144

1147

1151

1065

1021 ( G /L Cart Track)

1004

1005

966

846

852(G /L Cart Track)

756 (G / L Cart Track)

761

771

793(G/L Abadi )

794/1

00 48

。

}

794 7801 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

State : RAJASTHAN

District : PALI

Tehsil : DESURI

Area

Hectare Are

Khasara No.

Sq.mtr. Name of the Village

Sr. No

20. MATAJI KA GUDA

[F. No. R. -31015/50A/2004 O.R. - II ] HARISH KUMAR, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, दिनांक 5 जुलाई, 2005

का. आ. 2505.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 (1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 3153 तारीख 10 दिसम्बर, 2004 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 11 दिसम्बर , 2004 , में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मुन्द्रा-दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन के माध्यम से गुजरात राज्य में मुन्द्रा से दिल्ली तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की. प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 21 फरवरी , 2005 , को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं ;

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

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए , इस मंत्रालय के सहमति पत्र सं . आर 31015/7/03 ओ.आर- II दिनांक 25/11/2004 द्वारा लगाई गई शर्तों के अध्यधीन सभी विल्लंगों से मुक्त, हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । 7802

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

अनुसूची

जिला : अजमेर

तहसील : पीसांगन

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

3 1

1. गोला

17 राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

30(स.नाला)

28(स.भूमि)

26(स.भूमि)

76मिन

00- 20

} 。

105(स. बरड़ा)

104

103

106

102

100

255(स. बरड़ा)

256

257

272

271

269

270

282

280

279 0

02.

13.

279मिन(स.भूमि)

}

296(स. बरड़ा)

297(स.भूमि)

298 (पी.डब्ल्यू.डी. सड़क)

423

420

421

422 0

424(स.बरड़ा)

7803

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

जिला : अजमेर

तहसील : पीसांगन

खसरा सं.

गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

राज्य: राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर एयर

हेक्टेयर

387 (स.बरड़ा)

1. गोला (जारी ... )

613

612(स. बरड़ा)

611 (स. बरड़ा)

620

。

}

620मिन(स.भूमि)

609(स .बरड़ा)

607

。

}

607मिन

608

603(स.रास्ता)

592

593 0

}

593मिन (स.भूमि)

599

601

624(स.रास्ता)

786

791

792

790 (स.बरड़ा)

801

803

804(स.भूमि)

805

812

813

814

816

820

821

822

823

99 0

16 0

25 0

52 0

} 。

823मिन

5(स.नाला)

914 0

。

}

914मिन

900

902

1163

1164 0

0 7804

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] तहसील : पीसांगन

जिला : अजमेर

राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 1

1165

18 1. गोला (जारी...)

1174

1176(स.भूमि)

1295

1296

1294

1293

1299

1300

1301

1291

1290

-0

1302

1303

1304

1305

1311

1312

1247

1248

1238

1239(स.भूमि)

1239मिन

} 。

1240

89 2. सामला

5010

5013

5012

5024

5028

5023(स .रास्ता)

5018

5021

5135(स.नाला)

5134

5134मिन

5123मिन

5117

5116

5111 (स.भूमि)

5125(स.रास्ता)

5128

44 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7805

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

जिला : अजमेर

तहसील: पीसांगन

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

क्रम सं.

5127 2. सामला (जारी...)

राज्य: राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर

5126(स.नाला)

4533(स.रास्ता)

4535

。

}

4535मिन

4545 3. जेठाना

4524

4526

4529

4546

4546/1

4583

4589

}

-0

4590 मिन (स.बरहा)

4588

4591

4602 }

4612(स.बरड़ा)

4613

4618 0

4620मिन

4620/1

4620मिन

3803(स.रास्ता)

4325

3874

3871

3870

3869

3867

3862

3868

3865

3864

3847

3843

3844 0

3844मिन

3840 (स.भूमि)

1993 G1/05-36 7806

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] तहसील : पीसांगन

जिला : अजमेर

राज्य: राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 1

6 3. जेठाना (जारी...)

3839

3838

3837

3836

3850(स.रास्ता)

3765

3765मिन

。

}

3764(स.खान)

3766

3766मिन

。

}

0-1

3745(स.रास्ता)

3699

3699/1

3699मिन

3696

3695

3689(स.खान)

3688

3688मिन

;

}

2922

3687

3651 (स.भूमि)

3650 (स .रास्ता)

3649

3575(स.रास्ता)

3574(स.भूमि)

3573(स. रास्ता)

3568

3566

3565

3563

3562

2974

2975

2975मिन

} 。

2976

2994मिन

} 。

2993

07 7807 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

जिला : अजमेर

तहसील : पीसांगन

राज्य: राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

हेक्टेयर

खसरा सं.

एयर वर्ग मीटर 1

2992

3. जेठाना (जारी... )

2992/1

2985

} 。

2985मिन

2986

301-3

3014(स.भूमि)

3019(पी.डब्ल्यू.डी.सड़क)

2950(पी.डब्ल्यू.डी.सड़क)

। }

2826

2825

2824

0.6.

2823

2809

2807

2806

2797

2798

2805

2799

2787(स.भूमि)

3068

3071 (स.भूमि)

3065

3077

3077मिन

3092

0.0

3078

} 。

3078मिन

3091

3089

3088

3087

3086

3085

3313(स.रास्ता)

3121

3122

3123

3312

75 7808

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II SEC . 3 (ii )] तहसील : पीसांगन

जिला: अजमेर

राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

3124

3. जेठाना (जारी...)

0-1

3311

3272

3274

3270

3275

3269/5412

3267

3263

3264

86 of

3259

3259/5413

1-5

3257

3258

3240

3239

3238

76 4. मकरेड़ा

2449

2448

2451

2447

2434

2452

2433

2432

2431

2462

2428

2427

2467

2426(स.मोरी)

2409

2410(स.पाल)

2411

2425(स .रास्ता)

2475

2476

2477

2480

.08

2495(स.रास्ता)

2496

21 7809

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

जिला : अजमेर

तहसील : पीसांगन

खसरा सं.

गाँव का नाम

क्रम सं.

2498 4. मकरेड़ा (जारी ... )

2499

2501

2502

2503

2506

2510

2511

2513

2512

2515

2516 राज्य: राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

हेक्टेयर

1.8.

2523(स.रास्ता)

2306

2305

2304

2301

2302(स. बरड़ा)

1612

1611

1613

1580 (स.भूमि)

1513 0

1511 (स.भूमि)

1510 (स.भूमि)

1508(स. नाला)

1484(स .बरड़ा)

1462

1457

1455

1454

1438

1439

1427

1424

1425

1410

1391

1392

1387

1386

42 0

02 0

08 7810

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] तहसील : पीसांगन

जिला : अजमेर

राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

हेक्टेयर

एयर वर्ग मीटर 1

6 4. मकरेड़ा (जारी... )

1385

1384

1383

01.

1377

1382

1378

)

1221(स.रास्ता)

1222

1095

1094

1093

1079

1096

1097

1078

1077

93 5. अर्जुनपुरा खालसा

1मिन

84(स.रास्ता)

106

20 7811 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

जिला: अजमेर

तहसील : पीसांगन

राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

खसरा सं.

गाँव का नाम

हेक्टेयर

क्रम सं.

एयर वर्ग मीटर

138

6. शिवपुरा

138मिन (स.भूमि) 138मिन 140 ( रेल्वे विभाग )

146

147मिन

[फा. सं. आर-31015/57/2004- ओ.आर-II ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

NewDelhi , the 5th July , 2005

S. O. 2505.- Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 3153 dated the 10th December, 2004 , issued under sub -section ( 1 ) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Rightof User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962) , ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act) , published in the Gazette of India dated the 11th December, 2004, the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of petroleum products from Mundra in the State of Gujarat to Delhi through Mundra -Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 21st February , 2005;

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

And whereas the Central Government , after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline , has decided to acquire right of usertherein;

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

And further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section (4) of section 6 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Central Government , vest on the date of publication of declaration , in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, free from all encumbrances , subject to the conditions imposed vide this Ministry's consent letter no. R- 31015/7/03 OR- II dated 25-11-2004 .

7812

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

SCHEDULE

Tehsil : PISANGAN

District : AJMER Sr. No.

Khasara No. Name of the Village

3 1. GOLA

17 State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr .

) 0

30(G/L Nala)

28(G/L)

26(G/L)

76Min

89 0

。

}

105(G/LBarda)

104

103

106

102

100 0

255(G/LBarda)

256

257

272

271

269

270

282

280

279 0

08 37

04 40

279Min(G /L)

} 。

296(G / L Barda)

09 10

297(G/L)

02 04

298( P.W.D . Road )

423

420

421

422 0

26 91

00 20

424(G/ L Barda)

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7813

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Tehsil : PISANGAN

District : AJMER

Sr. No.

Khasara No. Name of the Village

3 1

1. GOLA ( Contd ... )

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr. 4

81 19

387(G/L Barda)

613

612(G/L Barda)

611(G/L Barda)

620

620Min(G/L)

} 。

609(G/L Barda)

607

607Min

608

} 。

603(G /L Cart Track)

592

593 0

593Min(G/L)

599

601 0

19 62

624(G /L Cart Track)

786

791

792 0

07 98

790(G/L Barda)

801.

803 0

804(G/L)

805

812

813

814

816

820

821

822

823

823Min 07

03 24

04 17

} 。

01 44

815(G/L Nala)

914

14Min

900

902

1163

1164 1993 GI /05-37

。

}

66 JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :

7814

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] State : RAJASTHAN

District : AJMER

Tehsil : PISANGAN

Khasara No. Sr. No.

Name of the Village

1165 1. GOLA ( Contd ... )

1174 Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr.

86 0

1176(G/L)

1295

1296

1294

1293

1299

1300

1301

1291

1290

1302

1303

1304

1305

1311

1312

1247

1248

1238

62 0

20 0

45 0

90 0

75 0

63 0

08 0

57 0

32 0

1239(G/L)

1239Min

1240

5010 2. SAMALA

5013

5012

5024

5028 } 。

89 0

66 0

77 0

70 0

26 0

5023 (G / L Cart Track)

5018

5021 0

10 29

63 0

30 0

5135(G /L Nala)

5134

5134Min

}

08 99

5123Min

5117

5116

21 0

5111 (G /L)

5125 (G / L Cart Track)

5128

0 7815

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

State : RAJASTHAN

District : AJMER

Tehsil : PISANGAN

Khasara No. Sr. No.

Name of the Village

5127 2. SAMALA ( Contd ... )

Area

Hectare Are Sq.mtt 4

12 41 0

01 06

5126(G/L Nala)

02 01 0

4533(G/L Cart Track)

4535

} 。

4535Min

4545

4524 3. JETHANA

4526

4529

4546

4546/1

4583

4589

4590

29 70 0'

32 08

25 0

88 0

}

72 0

67 0

08 80 }

4590Min(G/L Barda)

4588

4591

4602 0

70 0

34 55 0

4612(G/L Barda)

4613

4618 0

85 0

4620Min

4620/1

4620Min

3803(G /L Cart Track)

4325

3874

3871

3870

3869

3867

3862

3868

3865

3864

3847

3843

3844

09 24

15 25

15 95

00 20

09 03

04 55

07 80

3844Min

3840(G/L)

7816

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] State : RAJASTHAN

District : AJMER

Tehsil : PISANGAN

Sr. No.

Khasara No. Name of the Village

3 1

3839 3. JETHANA ( Contd ... )

3838

3837

3836 Area

Are Sq.mtr .

Hectare

3850(G/L Cart Track)

3765

3765Min

。

}

3764(G/L Mines)

3766

3766Min

。

}

3745(G/L Cart Track)

3699

3699/1

3699Min

3696

3695 。

}

3689 (G / L Mines )

3688

3688Min

2922

3687

3651(G/L)

3650(G /L Cart Track)

3649

3575(G/ L Cart Track)

3574(G/L)

3573(G / L Cart Track)

3568

3566

3565

3563

3562

2974

2975

03 20

。

2975Min

2976 }

2994Min

2993 。

}

0 7817

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

State : RAJASTHAN

District : AJMER

Tehsil : PISANGAN

Khasara No. Sr. No. Name of the Village

2992 3. JETHANA ( Contd ... )

2992/1

2985 Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr.

2985Min

2986

3013

3014(G/L)

3019(P.W.D.Road)

{

2950(P.W.D.Road)

2826

2825

2824

2823

2809

2807

2806

2797

2798

2805

2799

23 0

38 0

2787(G/L)

3068

25 0

3071(G/L)

3065

3077

91 0

3077Min

3092

3078

48 0

。

}

3078Min

3091

3089

3088

3087

3086

3085

3313(G /L Cart Trak)

3121

3122

3123

3312

19 57 0

30 0

83 0

75 0 7818

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)] Tehsil : PISANGAN

District : AJMER

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Sr. No.

Khasara No.

Are

Hectare

Name of the Village

Sq.mtr. 1

3124

01 94 3. JETHANA ( Contd ... )

3311

3272

3274

3270

15 64

3275

3269/5412

3267

3263

3264

3259

3259/5413

15 68

3257

3258

3240

3239

3238

76 4. MAKRERA

2449

2448

2451

2447

2434

2452

2433

2432

2431

2462

2428

2427

2467

2426(G/L Mori )

2409

2410(G/L Pal)

2411

2425 (G/ L Cart Track)

2475

2476

2477

2480

06 48

2495(G/ L Cart Track)

2496

21 7819

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

State : RAJASTHAN

District : AJMER

Tehsil : PISANGAN

Khasara No. Sr. No.

Name of the Village

2498 4. MAKRERA (Contd ... )

2499

2501

2502

2503

2506

2510

2511

2513

2512

2515

2516

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr.

00 41

34 0

90 0

87 0

13 29 0

63 0

19 51 0

14 0

45 0

2523(G/ L Cart Track)

2306

2305

2304

2301

22 0

28 41 0

87 0

07 12. 0

2302(G/L Barda)

1612

1611

1613 0

24 0

41 0

1580(G/L)

1513

10 0

1511 (G/L)

1510(G/L)

27 0

1508(G/L Nala)

1484(G/L Barda)

1462

1457

1455

1454

1438

1439

1427

1424

1425

1410

1391

1392

1387

1386

70 0

42 0

30 0

79 0

02 0

20 0

32 0

26 0

07 *52

03 08

0 7820

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

State : RAJASTHAN

District : AJMER

Tehsil : PISANGAN

Khasara No. Sr. No.

Name of the Village

1385 4. MAKRERA ( Contd ... )

1384

1383

1377

1382

1378

Area

Hectare Are Sq.mtr. 4

40 0

1221 (G /L Cart Track)

1222

1095

1094

1093

1079

1096

1097

1078

1077

4 5. ARJUNPURA KHALSA

1Min

00 20

84(G/L Cart Track)

106

20 7821 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

State : RAJASTHAN

District : AJMER

Tehsil : PISANGAN

Area

Hectare Are

Khasara No.

Sq.mtr. Sr. No.

Name of the Village

138

6. SHIVPURA

19 15

138Min(G/L)

138Min

140( Railway Deptt.)

146

147Min

147Min-

147Min

[No. R-31015/57/2004-O.R. -II ]

HARISH KUMAR, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई, 2005

का. आ. 2506.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 3036 तारीख 19 नवम्बर, 2004, जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 27 नवम्बर, 2004 , में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मुन्द्रा-दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन के माध्यम से गुजरात राज्य में मुन्द्रा से दिल्ली तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 6 जनवरी , 2005 , को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं ;

और सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन, केन्द्रीय सरकार को रिपोर्ट दे दी हैं ;

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने , उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात , और यह समाधान हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए अपेक्षित है , उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विमिश्चय किया है ;

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए , इस मंत्रालय के सहमति पत्र सं. आर 31015/7/03 ओ.आर- दिनांक 25/11/2004 द्वारा लगाई गई शर्तों के अध्यधीन सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा ।

1993 GI /05-38 [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

7822

अनुसुची

तहसीलः पाटोदी

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः गुड़गाँव

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/किला

गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या संख्या

273

25/1

1. घीलनावास

25/2

1/1

15/1

15/2

25/1

5/1

14/1

14/2

17/1/2

17/2

119

127

129

272

25/2

2. खलीलपुर

21/1

21/2

-C

6/1

15/3 7823 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा तहसीलः पाटौदी

जिलाः गुड़गाँव

श्रत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

एयर वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर

खसरा/किला संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

11 08

272

2. खलीलपुर (जारी... )

25/1

25/2

14/1

14/2

17/1

17/2

18/2

4/1

18/1

18/3

23/1

9/1

9/2

19/1

19/2

21/1

21/2

2/1 ;

7824

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

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

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः गुड़गाँव

श्रेत्रफल गाँव का नाम

हेक्टेयर

वर्गमीटर

एयर

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

खसरा /किला संख्या

272

2. खलीलपुर (जारी ... )

10/1

10/2

368

387

392

393

402

410

00 3. खेतियावास

268

7/2

8/1

8/2

13/1

13/2

24/2

6/1

7/1

7/2

14/1

14/2

17/2

11 7825 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा तहसीलः पाटौदी

जिलाः गुड़गाँव

श्रेत्रफल गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

खसरा/किला संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

12/2

268

3. खेतियावास (जारी ...)

19/1

141

144

2/1

4. बलेवा

271

9/2

10/1

11/2

12/1

176

177

5. बपास

266

15/1

15/2

17/1

17/2/1

17/2/2

4/1

8/1

8/2

9/1

13/1 7826

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

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

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः गुड़गाँव

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

हेक्टेयर

वर्गमीटर

एयर

मुसतिल संख्या

खसरा /किला संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

266

97 5. बपास (जारी...)

223

6. गांगली

267

16/2

22Road

19 7. पहाड़ी

265

2/1

10/1

10/2

25/2

2/1

2/2

11 7827

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा तहसीलः पाटौदी

जिलाः गुड़गाँव

श्रेत्रफल गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

खसय /किला संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

265

7. पहाड़ी (जारी... )

12/1

1/1

52/1

319

320

324/1

8. मौजाबाद

7/1

6/1

24/1

9. डाडावास

8/1 7828

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] तहसीलः पाटोदी

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः गुड़गाँव

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

हेक्टेयर

वर्गमीटर

एयर

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

खसरा /किला संख्या

9. डाडावास (जारी...)

8/2

18/2

10. हकदारपुर

21/1

21/2

22/1

16/1

16/2

25/1

10/2

7/1

7/2

23/1

23/2

25/2

00 7829 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

तहसीलः पाटोदी

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः गुड़गाँव

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

हेक्टेयर

वर्गमीटर

एयर

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

खसरा /किला संख्या

10. हकदारपुर (जारी... )

21/1

21/2

1/1

6/1

6/2/1

6/2/2

४३

17/1

17/2

24/1

24/2

73/2

105

107

11. शेरपुर

14/2

15/1

7/1

7/2

8/1

14/1

23/1

1993 GI /05-39 7830

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16 , 2005 / ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii) ] तहसीलः पाटोदी

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः गुड़गाँव

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा /किला

गाँव का नाम

हेक्टेयर

हददस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या संख्या

एयर वर्गमीटर 11. शेरपुर (नारी... )

23/2

23/3

23/1

23/2

2/1

2/2

3/1

9/1

9/2

9/3

22/1

1/2

11/2

20/1

20/2

21/1

21/2

15/1

15/2

17/1

10 7831 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

तहसीलः पाटौदी

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः गुड़गाँव

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा /किला

गाँव का नाम

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्गमीटर

संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

11. शेरपुर (जारी... )

17/2

24/1

24/2

7/2

13/1

13/2

01. 21

23/1

9/1

9/2

79/1

268

270

305

12. राजपुरा

2/M

10/1

10 7832

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3(ii)] तहसीलः पाटौदी

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः गुड़गाँव

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा /किला

गाँव का नाम

हेक्टेयर

वर्गमीटर

एयर

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या संख्या

12. राजपुरा (जारी... )

11/2

12/1

00.

4/1/1

4/1/2

18/1

18/2

19/1

19/2

16/1

1/1

1/2

20/1

20/2

80 7833 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

राज्यः हरियाणा तहसीलः पाटौदी

जिलाः गुड़गाँव

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

खसरा /किला संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

12. राजपुरा (जारी...)

174

[फा. सं. आर-31015/49/2004-ओ.आर-1 ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 5th July, 2005

S. O. 2506.- Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry ofPetroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 3036 dated the 19th November , 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) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) , published in the Gazette of India dated the 27th November , 2004, the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of petroleum products from Mundra in the State of Gujarat to Delhi through Mundra-Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 6th January, 2005;

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

And whereas the Central Government , after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline, has decided to acquire right of usertherein;

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

And further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section (4) of section 6 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Central Government , vest on the date of publication of declaration , in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, free from all encumbrances , subject to the conditions imposed vide this Ministry's consent letter no. R- 31015/7/03 OR-It dated 25-11-2004.

7834

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

SCHEDULE

Tehsil : PATODI

District : GURGAON

State: HARYANA

Area

Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre 1. GHILANAWAS

273

25/1

25/2

1/1

15/1

15/2

25/1

5/1

14/1

14/2

17/1/2

17/2

119

127

129

87 2. KHALILPUR

272

25/2

21/1

21/2

6/1

15/3

11 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

7835

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Tehsil : PATODI

District: GURGAON

State : HARYANA

Area Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Are

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare

Square Metre

272

2. KHALILPUR ( Contd ... )

25/1

*25/2

14/1

14/2

17/1

17/2

148

18/2

200

243

4/1

18/1

18/3

23/1

9/1

9/2

19/1

19/2

21/1

21/2

2/1

00 7836

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3(ii)) Tehsil : PATODI

District : GURGAON

State : HARYANA

Area

Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

272

10/1

2. KHALILPUR ( Contd ...)

10/2

368

387

392

393

402

410

30 3. KHETIAWAS

268

7/2

8/1

8/2

13/1

13/2

24/2

6/1

7/1

7/2

14/1

14/2

17/2

11 7837 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

State: HARYANA

District : GURGAON

Tehsil : PATODI

Area

Name of Village

Are

Hectare

Khasara / Killa No.

Mustil No.

Hadbast No.

Square Metre

12/2

268

3. KHETIAWAS ( Contd ...)

19/1

141

144

2/1

271

4. BALEWA

9/2

10/1

11/2

12/1

176

177

266

5. BAPAS

15/1

15/2

17/1

17/2/1

17/2/2

4/1

8/1

8/2

9/1

13/1

1993 G1 /05-40 7838

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] Tehsil : PATODI

District : GURGAON

State : HARYANA

Area Name of Village

Mustil No.

Hadbast No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

266

5. BAPAS ( Contd ... )

223

42 6. GANGLI

267

16/2

22Road

19 7. PAHARI

265

2/1

10/1

10/2

25/2

2/1

2/2

53 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7839 भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Tehsil : PATODI

District : GURGAON

State : HARYANA

Area

Nameof Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

265

7. PAHARI ( Contd ...)

12/1

1/1

52/1

319

320

324/1

20 8. MOZZABAD

7/1

6/1

36 S. DADAWAS

24/1

010

8/1

00 7840

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ ASADHA 25,1927

State : HARYANA

District : GURGAON

Tehsil : PATODI

Area Nameof Village

Are

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Hectare

Khasara / Killa No.

Square Metre

8/2

9. DADAWAS ( Contd ... )

18/2

10. HAKDARPUR

21/1

21/2

22/1

16/1

.00

16/2

25/1

10/2

7/1

7/2

23/1

23/2

25/2

12 7841

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

State : HARYANA

District: GURGAON

Tehsil : PATODI

Area Name of Village

Are

Hectare

Khasara / Killa No.

Mustil No.

Hadbast No.

Square Metre

10. HAKDARPUR ( Contd ... )

21/1

21/2

1/1

6/1

6/2/1

6/2/2

17/1

17/2

24/1

24/2

73/2

105

107

16'

11. SHERPUR

14/2

15/1

7/1

7/2

8/1

14/1

23/1 7842

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ ASADHA 25,1927

Tehsil : PATODI

District : GURGAON Nameof Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No.

11. SHERPUR ( Contd ... )

23/2

23/3

23/1

23/2

2/1

2/2

3/1

9/1

9/2

9/3

22/1

1/2

11/2

20/1

20/2

21/1

21/2

15/1

15/2

17/1

[PART II SEC . 3( ii) ] State : HARYANA

Area

Are

Hectare

Square Metre 00

61 00

98 00

05 00

04 00

10 00

31 00

87 00

85 00

20 00

61 00

41 00

67 00

81 00

11 00

22 00

37 00

84 00

27 00

97 00

37 00

11 00

79 00

83 00

05 00

92 00

50 00

10 00

04 00

10 00

44 00

99 00

10 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

7843

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Tehsil : PATODI

District : GURGAON

State : HARYANA

Area Nameof Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

17/2

11. SHERPUR ( Contd ...)

24/1

24/2

7/2

13/1

13/2

23/1

9/1

9/2

79/1

268

270

305

12. RAJPURA

2/1

10/1

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

JULY 16 , 2005/ ASADHA 25,1927

7844

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :

State : HARYANA

District: GURGAON

Tehsil : PATODI

Area

Nameof Village

Hectare Are

Khasara / Killa No.

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Square Metre

11/2

12. RAJPURA (Contd ... )

12/1

4/1/1

4/1/2

18/1

18/2

19/1

19/2

16/1

1/1

1/2

20/1

20/2

55 7845 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Tehsil : PATODI

District : GURGAON

State : HARYANA

Area

Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

66 12. RAJPURA ( Contd ...)

174

[No. R-31015/49/2004-O.R. - II ] HARISH KUMAR, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली , 5 जुलाई , 2005

का. आ. 2507.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि मुन्द्रा (गुजरात) 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 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 दीजाती हैं, इक्चीस दिन के भीतर भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने के लिए उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के सम्बन्ध में श्री शिवदत्त गौड़ , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , मुन्द्रा- दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन्, परियोजना , हिंदुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, डी-7 , लालबहादुर नगर ( पूर्व ) , क्लार्क्स आमेर होटल के सामने, जवाहरलाल नेहरु मार्ग, मालवीय नगर, जयपुर-302017 (राजस्थान) को लिखित रुप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

1993 G1 /05-41 7846

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ ASADHA 25 , 1927

अनुसूची तहसील : पीसाँगन

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ]

जिला : अजमेर

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

3 1. गोला

14 राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

हेक्टेयर

13 0

29 0

27 0

28(स.भूमि)

26(स.भूमि)

76मिन

36 0

77 0

105(स.बरड़ा)

106

102

100

272

269 0

298 (पी.डब्ल्यू.डी. सड़क)

421

422 0

424(स.बरड़ा)

611 (स . बरड़ा)

620 00

620मिन (स.भूमि)

608 } 。

603(स.रास्ता)

592

593 0

{

593मिन (स.भूमि)

599 0

624(स.रास्ता)

786

792 0

804 (स.भूमि)

812

814

816

821

822 0

50 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7847

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

तहसील : पीसाँगम

जिला : अजमेर

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

900 1. गोला (जारी...)

1163

1164

1174 राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

6 0

36 0

34 0

22 0

1176(स.भूमि)

1299

1300

1301

1305

1311

1:239(स.भूमि)

1239मिन

2. सामला

5013

5018

5021

5134 。

}

5134मिन

}

5123मिन

5117

5116 0

5125(स.रास्ता)

5127

4535 0

。

}

4535मिन

4545 3. जेठाना

4524

4529

4546

4546/1

4590 0

4590मिन (स. बरड़ा)

4588

4591

4602

613 0

0.0

462मिन

4620/% 0

4620मिन

4325

3874

3871

3870 0

55 7848

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

तहसील: पीसांगन

जिला : अजमेर

खसरा सं.

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

3867 जेठाना (जारी... )

3865

3843 राज्य : राजस्थाम

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

15 0

46 0

28 0

3840 (स.भूमि)

3836

3745(स .रास्ता)

3696

3695

2922

46 0

32 0

3651 (स.भूमि)

3649

22 0

3573(स .रास्ता)

3565

3563

2974

2976

2992

2992/1

2985 0

2985मिन

2986 00

3019 (पी.डब्ल्यू.डी. सड़क)

। }

2950 (पी.डब्ल्यू.डी. सड़क)

2806

2797

2799

2787 (स.भूमि)

3068

3065

3078 00

。

}

3078मिन

3085 00

3313(स.रास्ता)

3275

3269/5412

3267

3263

3259

3240

3239

3238 00

03 7849

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

राज्य: राजस्थान

जिला : अजमेर

तहसील: पीसाँगन

खसरा सं .

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

2448 4. मकरेड़ा

2434

2431

2427

2409 क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

हेक्टेयर

2425(स. रास्ता)

2475

2476

2477

2480

2496

2506

2510

2513

2515

2523(स.रास्ता)

2306

2305

2301

1611

1580 (स.भूमि)

1513

1511 (स.भूमि)

1510(स.भूमि)

1508 (स.नाला)

1484(स .बरड़ा)

1462

1457

1438

1424

1425

1410

1392

1387

1386

1385

1384

1383

1221(स.रास्ता)

1095

1093

1097

0 7850

TE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 / ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ] तहसील : पीसाँगम

जिला : अजमेर

राज्य : राजस्थाम

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 1

5. अर्जुनपुरा खालसा

138

6. शिवपुरा

138मिन (स.भूमि)

138मिन

140 ( रेल्वे विभाग )

147मिन

[फा. सं. आर -31015/57/2004-ओ.आर-II ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 5th July , 2005

S. O. 2507. 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 ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of 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 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 Gazette of India containing this notification are made available to the public , bject in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land to Shri Shivdutt Gaur, Competent Authority, Mundra - Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline Pro , Hindustan Petrole Corporation Limited, D - 7 , Lal Bahadur Nagar (East ) . Opp. Clarks Amer Hotel , Jawaharlal Nehru Marg , Malviya Nagar , Jaipur- 302017 ( Rajasthan ) .

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7851

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

SCHEDULE

Tehsil : PISANGAN

State : RAJASTHAN

District : AJMER

Khasara No. Sr. No.

Name of the Village

3 1

13 1. GOLA

14 Area

Are Sq.mtr .

Hectare

06 29

28(G/L)

26(G/L)

76Min

86 0

} 。

15 08

105(G/LBarda)

106

102

100

272

269 0

298( P.W.D . Road)

421

422 0

424(G/L Barda)

611 ( G / L Barda)

620

。

620Min(G/L)

608 }

603(G / L Cart Track)

592

593 0

593Min( G/L)

599 } 。

624(G /L Cart Track)

786

792 0

804(G/L)

812

814

816

821

822

50 7852

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] Tehsil : PISANGAN

District : AJMER

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Sr. No.

Are

Hectare

Khasara No.

Name of the Village

Sq.mtr. 1

900

1. GOLA ( Contd ... )

1163

1164

1174

1176(G/L)

1299

1300

1301

1305

1311

1239(G/L)

。

}

1239Min

2. SAMALA

5013

00 83

5018

00 94

5021

5134

5134Min

} 。

5123Min

00 45

5117

5116

5125(G/ L Cart Track)

5127

4535

} 。

4535Min

4545

12 3. JETHANA

4524

4529

4546

4546/1

4590

4590Min (G / L Barda )

4588

4591

4602

4613

4620Min

4620/1

4620Min

} 。

4325

00 97

3874

3871

3870

00 55 7853 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Tehsil : PISANGAN

District : AJMER

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Are

Hectare

Sr. No.

Khasara No.

Sq.mtr. Name of the Village

3867

15 3. JETHANA (Contd ...)

3865

3843

00 28

3840(G/L)

3836

3745(G/L Cart Track)

3696

00 46

3695

2922

00 83

3651(G/L)

3649

3573(G / L Cart Track)

3565

3563

2974

2976

2992

2992/1

2985

00 34

2985Min

2986

3019(P.W.D.Road) 0

2950(P.W.D.Road)

2806

2797

2799

2787(G/L)

3068

04 09

3065

3078

。

}

3078Min

3085

3313 (G /L Cart Trak)

3275

3269/5412

3267

3263

3259

3240

3239

3238

1993 G1/05-42 7854

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

Tehsil : PISANGAN

District : AJMER Sr. No.

Khasara No. Name of the Village

3 4. MAKRERA

2448

2434

2431

2427

2409

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr. 4

2425 ( G / L Cart Track)

2475

2476

2477

2480

2496

2506

2510

2513

2515 0

2523(G / L Cart Track)

2306

2305

2301

1611 0

00 49

1580(G/L)

1513 0

1511(G/L)

1510(G/L)

1508( G/L Nala)

02 09

1484( G / L Barda)

1462

1457

1438

1424

1425

1410

1392

1387

1386

1385

1384

1383 0

1221 (G /L Cart Track)

1095

1093

1097 0

00 10 7855 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Tehsil : PISANGAN

District : AJMER

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Sr. No.

Are Sq.mtr.

Hectare

Khasara No.

Name of the Village

5. ARJUNPURA KHALSA

89 6. SHIVPURA

138

138Min(G/L)

138Min

}

140( Railway Deptt. )

147Min

[No. R-31015/57/2004-O.R. -II ]

HARISH KUMAR, Under Secy.

नईदिल्ली, 7 जुलाई, 2005

का. आ. 2508.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जमा) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया हैं) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 627 तारीख 18 फरवरी, 2005 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 26 फरवरी , 2005 में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में 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 मुंबई- मांगल्या पाइपलाइन विस्तार परियोजना के माध्यम से भारत पेट्रोलियम कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक विस्तार पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 22 अप्रैल , 2005 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी;

और सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधीन, केन्द्रीय सरकार को अपनी रिपोर्ट दे दी हैय

३... केन्द्रीय सरकार ने, उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात और यह समाधान हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिये अपेक्षित है, हमें उपयोग को अधिकार जैन करने का विनिश्चिय किया हैय

अतः अब , केयरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यहू घोषणा करती है अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट उक्त भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाता हैं;

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

अनुसूची

तहसील : सोहना

राज्य: हरियाणा

जिला: गुडगांव

क०

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

3 1.

4/11 घूँघोला

5/8

6/6

13/1

13/2

14/1

14/2

14/3

15/1

15/2

7/11

19/1

19/2

20 क्षेत्रफल हेक्टेयर में

0.1240

0.0240

0.0080

0.0025

0.0405

0.0330

0.0140

0.0840

0.1240

0.1140

0.0385

0.0330

0.0025

0.1240

0.1345

0.0635

0.0150

0.0180

0.0050

0.0025

0.1240

0.0025

0.0255

0.0080

0.0305

0.1170

70(नाला)

2 .

सहजावास

23/20

24/14

25/1

28/1

19 0.0510

0.1420

0.1400 .

0.1000

0.1400

0.0400

0.0965

0.0225

0.1065

0.0080

0.1100

0.1215 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7857

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

28/22 2, सहजावास (जारी..)

44/ 2

23/1

49/3

53/4

17 4

0.1040

0.0080

0.0530

0.0685

0.0965

0.0055

0.1215

0.1115

0.0785

0.0050

0.0760

0.0305

0.1065

0.1115

0.1215

0.0860

0.0800

98 (रास्ता)

0.0660

99(रास्ता)

0.0020

100 (रास्ता)

0.1720

101(रास्ता)

0.0360

102(रास्ता)

0.2890

103 (रास्ता)

29/16 3. बहलपा

35/5

36/11

50/2/1

2/2

9/1

10/3 4. अभयपुर

19/5

15/1

15/2

16 0.0750

0.1165

0.1015

0.0280

0.0130

0.0655

0.0130

0.0330

0.0100

0.0980

0.0100

0.0025

0.0370

0.1065

0.1140

0.0220

0.0785

0.0025

0.1015

0.1140

0.0710

0.0435

0.0840 7858

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25 , 1927

3 4.

19/25 अभयपुर (जारी...)

20/20

38/1

39/5

53/1

11/2

74/3

15/1

16/1

16/2

16/3

73/20

88/1

89/21

101/5 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )]

0.0410

0.0170

0.0560

0.1015

0.1215

0.0050

0.1215

0.0965

0.0010

0.0760

0.0105

0.0885

0.0540

0.1300

0.0020

0.1165

0.0155

0.0385

0.0130

0.0230

0.0530

0.0990

0.0050

0.0025

0.1470

0.1165

0.0305

0.0607

0.0570

0.0070

0.1370

0.0055

0.1395

0.0025

0.0330

0.0600

100 (रास्ता)

0.0200

109 (रास्ता)

5. सरमथला

88/12

89/11/1

11/2

13 0.1120

0.1240

1 0.1240

0.0580

0.0660

0.1240

0.1240 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7859

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

3 5 .

89/14 सरमथला (जारी...)

90/11

15/1

15/2

91/11

12/1

12/2

106 (रास्ता)

155 (रास्ता) 6. रिठौज

37/19

39/2

54/3

55/4

15 4

0.1240

0.1065

0.0910

0.0785

0.0640

0.0175

0.0150

0.0100

0.0030

0.0255

0.0050

0.0080

0.1215

0.0110

0.1015

0.0410

0.0710

0.1115

0.0110

0.1215

0.0710

0.0510

0.1215

0.0180

0.1115

0.0080

0.0180

0.0105

113(रास्ता)

0.0330

127 (रास्ता)

29/23 हरचन्दपुर

33/5/1

5/2 0.0180

0.0430

0.0060

34/8/2

13/2

16/3

25/1

25/2

39/1/1 0.1390

0.0225

0.0815

0.0785

0.0100

0.1420

0.0070

0.0570

0.0350

0.0485 7860

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

3 7.

39/10/1 हरचन्दपुर (जारी.. )

10/2

23 [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)] 4

0.1240

0.0150

0.0660

0.1345

0.0815

0.0070

40/5/2

48/16

52/11

19/2

53/2

7/1

7/2

8/1

8/2

14/2

15/1

15/2

16/1 0.0535

0.0510

0.0105

0.0305

0.1040

0.0785

0.1420

0.0835

0.0685

0.1065

0.0610

0.0305

0.0685

0.0760

0.0020

0.0410

0.0025

0.0760

0.0030

0.0330

91 (रास्ता)

0.0330

101(नाला)

9/1 8. भोंडसी

10/15

16/2

24 0.0390

0.0450

0.1215

0.0480

0.0555

0.0910

0.0340

0.1.980

0.0080

18/3/2

7/1

7/2

8/1

34/4

61/4

78/4 0.0910

0.0550

0.0560

0.0100

0.0880

0.0320

0.0480

0.0020

0.0120

0.0230

0.0420

0.0680

0.0900 7861

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

78/7 8. भोंडसी (जारी...)

107/4

72 खोबरी

127

129

150

160

39 10. जलालपुर

50/1

52/1

52/2

55/1

55/2

72/1

72/2

11/23/1 दमदमा

11.

23/2

16/3/1

7/2

30/1

19/1

32/3

7/2

14/1

14/2

17/1

17/2

25 1993 G1 /05-43

0.1215

0.1090

0.1215

0.0910

0.0305

0.2520

0.2650

0.0400

0.0020

0.2070

0.0960

0.1860

0.0580

0.0870

0.3755

0.1290

0.0990

0.0190

0.1745

0.0675

0.0330

0.0980

0.0450

0.0490

0.0070

0.0080

0.0025

0.0430

0.0250

0.0390

0.0405

0.0200

0.0985

0.0025

0.0020

0.0130

0.0050

0.0090

0.0970

0.0240

0.0550

0.0300

0.1010

0.0240

0.0380

0.0300

0.1340 7862

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

3 11. दमदमा (जारी...)

44/5

52(रास्ता) 12. खेडला

12/8/1

13/2

14/1

14/2

17/5

18/10

19/2

20/1

20/2

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] 4

0.0605

0.0100

0.0710

0.0280

0.0680

0.0075

0.1470

0.0735

0.0630

0.1470

0.0890

0.0330

0.1065

0.0100

0.0330

0.0470

0.1010

31/2/2

17/2

18/1

24 0.1010

0.0025

0.0910

0.1320

0.0480

0.0080

0.1470

38/5/1

6/1

15/2 0.0175

0.0860

0.0020

39/11/1/1

52/2/1

2/2

13/2

60/15

61/21 0.0025

0.0985

0.0150

0.0280

0.0105

0.0280

0.0175

0.0350

0.0025

0.0130

0.0160

76 (रास्ता)

0.0180

0.0100

81(रास्ता)

84(रास्ता)

0.0050

85 (रास्ता)

13. निमोठ

29/19

33/5

34/1

3 0.0100

0.0025

0.0030

0.0910

0.0305

0.0150

0.1240

0.0100 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

3 13.

34/7 निमोठ (जारी...)

35/11 14. राहाका

3/21

14/15

15/2

3/1

3/2

16/1

17/1

18/1/1

1/2

2( नहर)

19/5

31 (रास्ता)

86 (रास्ता) 15. खत्रीका

17/16

18/14

21/1

22/4/2

5/2

7863 4

0.1265

0.0355

0.0050

0.0460

0.0835

0.0390

0.1370

0.0280

0.0685

0.0835

0.0025

0.0130

0.0940

0.1240

0.0060

0.1065

0.0330

0.0835

0.1120

0.1240

0.0410

0.0100

0.0150

0.1240

0.0685

0.0915

0.0190

0.0025

0.0110

0.0230

0.0410

0.0785

0.0590

0.0670

0.0070

0.0330

0.1265

0.1240

1290

0.0020

.0355

0.1115

0.0050

0.1290

0.0885

0.0225

0.0020 7864

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ ASADHA 25,1927

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

15.

23/13

0.0100

खत्रीका (जारी...)

0.1140

0.1290

0.0860

0.0785

0.0100

19(रास्ता)

0.0240

36(नहर)

0.0200

42(रास्ता)

[फा.सं.आर.- 31015 /92 / 2004- ओ आर - II ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the7th July , 2005

S. O. 2508.-Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O.627, dated the 18th February , 2005 , issued under sub -section ( 1 ) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land ) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962 ) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) published in the Gazette of India dated the 26th February, 2005 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land , specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying an extension pipeline for transportation of petroleum products through Mumbai - Manglya Pipeline Extension Project from Manglya ( Indore ) terminal in the State of Madhya Pradesh to Piyala in the State of Haryana and Bijwasan in the NCT of Delhi by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited;

And whereas the copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 22nd April , 2005 ;

And whereas the competent authority has , under sub- section ( 1 ) of section 6 of the said Act, submitted report to the Central government ;

And whereas the Central Government, after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline , has decided to acquire the right of user therein;

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 said land, specified in the Schedule, is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline ;

And further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section (4) of section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government directs that the right of user in the said land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Central Government, vest on the date of the publication of this declaration , in Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, free from all encumbrances .

SCHEDULE

TEHSIL : SOHNA

DISTRICT : GURGAON

STATE : HARYANA S.No.

Area in Hectare

Survey No.

Name of Village

0.1240

GHAINGHOLA

4/11

0.1240 7865

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

4/13 1.

GHAINGHOLA ( Contd ... )

5/8

6/6

13/1

13/2

14/1

14/2

14/3

15/1

15/2

7/11

19/1

19/2

20 4

0.1240

0.0240

0.0080

0.0025

0.0405

0.0330

0.0140

0.0840

0.1240

0.1140

0.0385

0.0330

0.0025

0.1240

0.1345

0.0635

0.0150

0.0180

0.0050

0.0025

0.1240

0.0025

0.0255

0.0080

0.0305

0.1170

70(Drain)

23/20 SAHJAWAS

24/14

25/1

28/1

44/ 2

8 0.0510

0.1420

0.1400

0.1000

0.1400

0.0400

0.0965

0.0225

0.1065

0.0080

0.1100

0.1215

0.1040

0.0080

0.0530

0.0685

0.0965 7866

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

3 2 .

44/9 SAHJAWAS ( Contd ... )

23/1

49/3

53/4

98 (Rasta)

99(Rasta)

100(Rasta)

101 (Rasta)

102 (Rasta)

103 ( Kasta) 3. BAHALPA

29/16

35/5

36/11

50/2/1

2/2

9/1 4. ABHAYPUR

10/3

19/5

15/1

15/2

20/20

38/1

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] 4

0.0055

0.1215

0.1115

0.0785

0.0050

0.0760

0.0305

0.1065

0.1115

0.1215

0.0860

0.0800

0.0660

0.0020

0.1720

0.0360

0.2890

0.0750

0.1165

0.1015

0.0280

0.0130

0.0655

0.0130

0.0330

0.0100

0.0980

0.0100

0.0025

0.0370

0.1065

0.1140

0.0220

0.0785

0.0025

0.1015

0.1140

0.0710

0.0435

0.0840

0.0410

0.0170

0.0560

0.1015

0.1215 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

7867

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

3 4.

38/11 ABHAYPUR (Contd ... )

39/5

53/1

11/2

74/3

15/1

16/1

16/2

16/3

73/20

88/1

89/21 4

0.1215

0.0050

0.1215

0.0965

0.0010

0.0760

0.0105

0.0885

0.0540

0.1300

0.0020

0.1165

0.0155

0.0385

0.0130

0.0230

0.0530

0.0990

0.0050

0.0025

0.1470

0.1165

0.0305

0.0607

0.0570

0.0070

0.1370

0.0055

0.1395

0.0025

1015

100 (Rasta)

109 (Rasta) 5.

SARMATHLA

88/12

89/11/1

11/2

90/11

13 0.0330

0.0600

0.0200

0.1120

0.1240

0.0580

0.0660

0.1240

0.1065

0.0910

0.0785 7868

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

3 5.

SARMATHLA

90/14

15/1

15/2

91/11

12/1

12/2

106 (Rasta)

155 (Rasta) 6.

RITHOJ

37/19

39/2

54/3

55/4

113 (Rasta)

127 ( Rasta) 7.

HARCHANDPUR

29/23

33/5/1

5/2 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] 4

0.0640

0.0175

0.0150

0.0100

0.0030

0.0255

0.0050

0.0080

0.1215

0.0110

0.1015

0.0410

0.0710

0.1115

0.0110

0.1215

0.0710

0.0510

0.1215

0.0180

0.1115

0.0080

0.0180

0.0105

0.0330

0.0180

0.0430

34/8/2

13/2

16/3

25/1

25/2

39/1/1

10/1

10/2

22 0.0060

0.1390

0.0225

0.0815

0.0785

0.0100

0.1420

0.0070

0.0570

0.0350

0.0485

0.1240

0.0150

0.0660

0.1345

0.0815 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7869

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

3 7.

39/23 HARCHANDPUR ( Contd ... )

40/5/2

48/16

52/11

19/2

53/2

7/1

7/2

8/1

8/2

14/2

15/1

15/2

16/1 4

0.0070

0.0535

0.0510

0.0105

0.0305

0.1040

0.0785

0.1420

0.0835

0.0685

0.1065

0.0610

0.0305

0.0685

0.0760

0.0020

0.0410

0.0025

0.0760

0.0030

0.0330

91 (Rasta)

0.0330

101 (Drain)

8. BHONDSI

9/1

10/15

16/2

18/3/2

7/1

7/2

8/1

34/4

61/4

78/4

107/4 1993 G1/05-44

0.0390

0.0450

0.1215

0.0480

0.0555

0.0910

0.0340

0.1980

0.0080

0.0910

0.0550

0.0560

0.0100

0.0880

0.0320

0.0480

0.0020

0.0120

0.0230

0.0420

0.0680

0.0900

0.1215

0.1090

0.1215 7870

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

3 8.

107/7 BHONDSI ( Contd ... )

17 9. KHOBRI

127

129

150

160

39 10.

JALALPUR

50/1

52/1

52/2

55/1

55/2

72/1

72/2

75 DAMDAMA

11.

11/23/1

23/2 [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 4

0.1215

0.0910

0.0305

0.2520

0.2650

0.0400

0.0020

0.2070

0.0960

0.1860

0.0580

0.0870

0.3755

0.1290

0.0990

0.0190

0.1745

0.0675

0.0330

0.0980

0.0450

0.0490

0.0070

0.0080

0.0025

16/3/1

7/2

30/1

19/1

32/3

7/2

14/1

14/2

17/1

17/2

44/5

52(Rasta) 12 .

KHERLA

12/8/1

13/2

14/1 0.0430

0.0250

0.0390

0.0405

0.0200

0.0985

0.0025

0.0020

0.0130

0.0050

0.0090

0.0970

0.0240

0.0550

0.0300

0.1010

0.0240

0.0380

0.0300

0.1340

0.0605

0.0100

0.0710

0.0280

0.0680 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7871

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

3 12.

12/14/2

KHERLA ( Contd ... )

17/5

18/10

19/2

20/1

20/2

22 0.0075

0.1470

0.0735

0.0630

0.1470

0.0890

0.0330

0.1065

0.0100

0.0330

0.0470

0.1010

31/2/2

17/2

18/1

24 0.1010

0.0025

0.0910

0.1320

0.0480

0.0080

0.1470

38/5/1

6/1

15/2 0.0175

0.0860

0.0020

39/11/1/1

52/2/1

2/2

13/2

60/15

61/21

76(Rasta) 0.0025

0.0985

0.0150

0.0280

0.0105

0.0280

0.0175

0.0350

0.0025

0.0130

0.0160

0.0180

0.0100

81 (Rasta)

0.0050

84(Rasta)

0.0100

85 (Rasta)

13 .

NIMOTH

29/19

33/5

34/1

35/11 14. RAHAKA

3/21

14/15 0.0025

0.0030

0.0910

0.0305

0.0150

0.1240

0.0100

0.1265

0.0355

0.0050

0.0460

0.0835 7872

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

3 1

14.

14/16 RAHAKA ( Contd ... )

15/2

3/1

3/2

16/1

17/1

18/1/1

1/2

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

0.0390

0.1370

0.0280

0.0685

0.0835

0.0025

0.0130

0.0940

0.1240

0.1065

0.0330

0.0835

0.1120

0.1240

0.0410

0.0100

0.0150

0.1240

2(Canal)

19/5 0.0685

0.0915

0.0190

0.0025

31 (Rasta)

0.0110

86(Rasta)

15.

17/16 KHATRIKA

18/14

21/1

22/4/2

5/2

23/13

20 0.0230

0.0410

0.0785

0.0590

0.0670

0.0070

0.0330

0.1265

0.1240

0.1290

0.0020

0.0355

0.1115

0.0050

0.1290

0:0885

0.0225

0.0020

0.0100

0.1140

0.1290

0.0860

0.0785

0.0100

19 (Rasta)

0.0240

36 (Canal)

0.0200

42(Rasta)

[Γ.Ν.Κ- 31015/ 92 /2004-OR - II ]

Harish Kumar , Under Secretary [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7873

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 7 जुलाई , 2005

का. आ. 2509.-केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि मध्यप्रदेश राज्य में मांगल्या (इंदौर) संस्थापन से हरियाणा राज्य में पियाला तथा दिल्ली रा ट्रीय राजधानी क्षेत्र में बिजवासन तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए भारत पेट्रोलियम कॉरर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक विस्तार पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

और केन्द्र 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 घोाणा 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 दीपक नन्दी, सक्षम प्राधिकारी, मुम्बई- मांगल्या पाइपलाइन विस्तार परियोजना, भारत पेट्रोलियम कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, 73, प्रताप विला, रोज विला स्कीम, बर्ड सेन्चूरी रोड़, भरतपुर - 321001 (राजस्थान) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

अनुसूची

राज्य: राजस्थान

जिला: भरतपुर

तहसील: कुम्हेर

क्र०

सर्वे नंबर

ग्राम का नाम

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में 1

1293

0.0099 1 बुराबई

1314

0.0395

1020

0.0115

1449

0.0121

1582

0.0085 2 उबार

1062

0.0566

1200

0.0018

1078

0.1139 3 सांतरूक

4668

0.0444

4657

0.0858

4656

0.0181

1257

0.0040

334

0.0040

445

0.0848

4649

0.0030

[फा. सं. आर-31015/81/2004- ओ.आर- II ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव 7874

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 7th July, 2005

S. O. 2509.- 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 Deepak Nandi , Competent Authority, Mumbai-Manglya Pipeline Extension Project , Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, 73 , Pratap villa , Rose villa , Bird Sanctury road , Bharatpur - 321001 ( Rajasthan).

SCHEDULE

DISTRICT : BHARATPUR

TEHSIL: KUMHER

STATE : RAJASTHAN AREA IN HECTARE

SURVEY NO .

S.No. NAME OF VILLAGE

0.0099

1293

1 BURAVAI

0.0395

1314

0.0115

1020

0.0121

1449

0.0085

1582

0.0566

1062

2 UBAR

0.0018

1200

0.1139

1078

0.0444

4668

3 SANTRUK

0.0858

4657

0.0181

4656

0.0040

1257

0.0040

334

0.0848

445

0.0030

4649

[No. R-31015/81/2004- O.R. -II ]

HARISH KUMAR, Under Secy.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7875 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

नईदिल्ली, 7 जुलाई, 2005

का. आ. 2510. केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 553 तारीख 9 फरवरी, 2005 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 19 फरवरी, 2005 में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में 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 मुंबई- मांगल्या पाइपलाइन विस्तार परियोजना के माध्यम से भारत पेट्रोलियम कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक विस्तार पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 26 अप्रैल, 2005 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी ;

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने, उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात , और यह समाधान हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिये अपेक्षित है, उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चिय किया है ;

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

अनुसूची

तहसील: कुम्हेर

जिला: भरतपुर

राज्य: राजस्थान क्र०

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में 1

1287

1. बुरावई

0.0026

1294

0.0999

1288

0.0364

1292

0.0477

1306

0.0527

1307

0.0027

1308

0.1197

1312

0.0074

1317

0.0040

1315

0.0475

1313

0.0707

1066

0.0072

1065

0.0432

1064

0.0163

1046

0.0094

1063

0.0638

1048

0.0040

1049

0.0786

1038

0.0025

1036

0.0782

1051

0.0020

1021

0.0673

1019

0.0081

1016

0.0050

1017

0.0938

1018

0.0338

1364

0.0020

1378

0.0127

1450

0.0666

1452

0.0755

1451

0.0015

1453

0.0315 7876

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

3 1

1454 बुरावई (जारी....)

1499

1498

1511

1512

1509

1508

1507

1517

1518

1519

1592

1591

1590

1555

1556

1589

1557

1581

1580

1583

1586

1585

2676 2 उबार

2677

2673

2675

2674

2651

2652

2653

2654

2648

2634/2862

2640

1111

1112

1113

1114

1115/2868

1118

1116

1117

1119

1120

1121

1122

1055

1077

1187

1189

1188

1191

1197

1196

1195

1201 [PART II SEC. 3 (ii)] 0.0362

0.0543

0.0144

0.0020

0.1046

0.0020

0.0551

0.0094

0.0362

0.1248

0.0104

0.0073

0.1155

0.0013

0.0110

0.0675

0.0332

0.0449

0.0519

0.0254

0.1429

0.0518

0.0768

0.0837

0.0020

0.0685

0.0769

0.0483

0.0135

0.0742

0.0625

0.0020

0.0950

0.0758

0.0250

0.0456

0.0424

0.0023

0.0642

0.1139

0.0156

0.0178

0.0846

0.0134

0..1086

0.0133

0.0020

0.0685

0.0257

0.0053

0.0751

0.0034

0.0153

0.0629

0.0950

0.1050 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7877

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

1202

1071

1064

1063 2 उभार (जारी.....)

1059

1061

1060

1057

1056 3 सान्तरूक

4669

4658

4655

4652

2069

2109

2108

2110

2117

2119

2120

2103

1451

1452

1450

1517

1518

1519

1665

1680

1676

1675

1677

1673

217/5509

379

382

381

383

384

385

340

339

341

338

337

299

333

331

447

446

913

953

959

954

958

956

955 1993 G1/05-45

0.0117

0.0165

0.0010

0.0239

0.0296

0.0455

0.0731

0.0669

0.0229

0.0144

0.0633

0.0957

0.1833

0.0468

0.0174

0.1279

0.1656

0.0795

0.0432

0.0162

0.0123

0.1045

0.0072

0.1169

0.1483

0.0625

0.0224

0.0087

0.1108

0.0072

0.0167

0.0393

0.0226

0.0282

0.0778

0.0116

0.0095

0.1166

0.0115

0.0729

0.0010

0.0056

0.1486

0.0895

0.0187

0.0694

0.0160

0.0547

0.0283

0.0186

0.0629

0.0041

0.0148

0.0482

0.0573

0.0864 7878

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

3 3

947 सान्तरूक (जारी....)

946

945

987

1245

1246

1241

1247

1240/5487

1240

1239

1238

1237

1236

1235

1254

1252

2518

2519

2517

2520

2521

2515

2498

2497

2496

2407

2499

2495

2390

2391

2392

2393

2406

2405

2408

2404

2409

2411

2412

2414

2413

2420

2421

2384

2351

2352

2350

2353

2354

2355

2370

2371

2378

2374

2375

2376

2377 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] 4

0.0307

0.0126

0.0253

0.0178

0.0934

0.0424

0.0150

0.0052

0.0216

0.1116

0.0020

0.1039

0.0333

0.0612

0.0719

0.0020

0.0288

0.0825

0.0110

0.0020

0.0662

0.0620

0.0209

0.0588

0.0517

0.0040

0.0020

0.0661

0.0635

0.0035

0.1026

0.0633

0.0060

0.0254

0.0160

0.0468

0.0242

0.0215

0.0025

0.0947

0.0851

0.0276

0.0259

0.0470

0.0371

0.0370

0.0598

0.0330

0.0835

0.0010

0.0795

0.0726

0.0430

0.0570

0.0040

0.0347

0.0511

0.0020 [ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7879 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

4029

0.0176

3 सान्तरूक (जारी.....)

3655

0.0812

3644

0.0179

3645

0.0467

3646

0.0519

3652

0.0410

3649

0.0010

3651

0.1117

3633

0.0133

3632

0.1228

3623

0.0116

3624

0.0179

3622

0.0023

3625

0.0400

3621

0.0020

3620

0.0253

3619

0.0173

3618

0.0522

3602

0.0615

3603

0.0038

3615

0.0305

3606

0.0898

3605

0.0702

[फा. सं. आर-31015/81/2004-ओ.आर- II ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 7th July, 2005

S. O. 2510.- Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number §.0.553 , dated the 9th February, 2005 , issued under sub-section ( 1 ) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act , 1962 ( 50 of 1962) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) published in the Gazette of India dated the 19th February, 2005 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land, specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying an extension pipeline for transportation of petroleum products through Mumbai - Manglya Pipeline Extension Project from Manglya ( Indore) terminal in the State of Madhya Pradesh to Piyala in the State of Haryana and Bijwasan in the NCT ofDelhi by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited;

And whereas the copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 26th April , 2005.

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

And whereas the Central Government, after considering the saronisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline , has decided to acquire the right of us therein

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 said land, specified in the Schedule , is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;

And further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -section (4) of section 6 of the said Act , the Central Government directs that the right of user in the said land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Central Government , vest on the date of the publication of this declaration , in Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, free from all encumbrances .

7880

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

SCHEDULE

STATE : RAJASTHAN

DISTRICT : BHARATPUR

TEHSIL : KUMHER

AREA IN HECTARE

SURVEY NO .

S.No. NAME OF VILLAGE

0.0026

1287

1 BURAVAI

0.0999

1294

0.0364

1288

0.0477

1292

0.0527

1306

0.0027

1307

0.1197

1308

0.0074

1312

0.0040

1317

0.0475

1315

0.0707

1313

0.0072

1066

0.0432

1065

0.0163

1064

0.0094

1046

0.0638

1063

0.0040

1048

0.0786-

1049

0.0025

1038

0.0782

1036

0.0020

1051

0.0673

1021

0.0081

1019

0.0050

1016

0.0938

1017

0.0338

1018

0.0020

1364

0.0127

1378

0.0666

1450

0.0755

1452

0.0015

1451

0.0315

1453

0.0362

1454

0.0543

1499

0.0144

1498

0.0020

1511

0.1046

1512

0.0020

1509

0.0551

1508

0.0094

1507

0.0362

1.517

0.1248

1518

0.0104

1519

0.0073

1592

0.1155

1591

0.0013

1590

0.0110

1555

0.0675

1556

0.0332

1589

0.0449

1557

0.0519

1581

0.0254

1580

0.1429

1583

0.0518

1586 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

7881 1

1585

BURAVAI (Contd.......)

0.0768 2 UBAR

2676

0.0837

2677

0.0020

2673

0.0685

2675

0.0769

2674

0.0483

2651

0.0135

2652

0.0742

2653

0.0625

2654

0.0020

2648

0.0950

2634/2882

0.0758

2640

0.0250

1111

0.0456

1112

0.0424

1113

0.0023

1114

0.0642

1115/2868

0.1139

1118

0.0156

1116

0.0178

1117

0.0846

1119

0.0134

1120

0.1086

1121

0.0133

1122

0.0020

1055

0.0020

1077

0.0685

1187

0.0257

1189

0.0053

1188

0.0751

1191

0.0034

1197

0.0153

1196

0.0629

1195

0.0950

1201

0.1050

1202

0.0117

1071

0.0165

1064

0.0010

1063

0.0239

1059

0.0296

1061

0.0455

1060

0.0731

1057

0.0669

1056

0.0229

3 SANTRUK

4669

0.0144

4658

0.0144

4655

0.0633

4652

0.0957

2069

0.1833

2109

0.0468

2108

0.0174

2110

0.1279

2117

0.1656

2119

0.0795

2120

0.0432

2103

0.0162

1451

0.0123

1452

0.1045 7882

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ ASADHA 25,1927

1450 3 SANTRUK (Contd ...... )

1517

1518

1519

1665

1680

1676

1675

1677

1673

217/5509

379

382

381

383

384

385

340

339

341

338

337

299

333

331

447

446

913

953

959

954

958

956

955

947

946

945

987

1245

1246

1241

1247

1240/5487

1240

1239

1238

1237

1236

1235

1254

1252

2518

2519

2517

2520

2521

2515

2498

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

0.0072

0.1169

0.1483

0.0625

0.0224

0.0087

0.1108

0.0072

0.0167

0.0393

0.0226

0.0282

0.0778

0.0116

0.0095

0.1166

0.0115

0.0729

0.0010

0.0056

0.1486

0.0895

0.0187

0.0694

0.0160

0.0547

0.0283

0.0186

0.0629

0.0041

0.0148

0.0482

0.0573

0.0864

0.0307

0.0126

0.0253

0.0178

0.0934

0.0424

0.0150

0.0052

0.0216

0.1116

0.0020

0.1039

0.0333

0.0612

0.0719

0.0020

0.0288

0.0825

0.0110

0.0020

0.0662

0.0620

0.0209

0.0588 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

3 3 SANTRUK (Contd ...... )

2497

2496

2407

2499

2495

2390

2391

2392

2393

2406

2405

2408

2404

2409

2411

2412

2414

2413

2420

2421

2384

2351

2352

2350

2353

2354

2355

2370

2371

2378

2374

2375

2376

2377

4029

3655

3644

3645

3646

3652

3649

3651

3633

3632

3623

3624

3622

3625

3621

3620

3619

3618

3602

3603

3615

3606

3605

7883

0.0517

0.0040

0.0020

0.0661

0.0635

0.0035

0.1026

0.0633

0.0060

0.0254

0.0160

0.0468

0.0242

0.0215

0.0025

0.0947

0.0851

0.0276

0.0259

0.0470

0.0371

0.0370

0.0598

0.0330

0.0835

0.0010

0.0795

0.0726

0.0430

0.0570

0.0040

0.0347

0.0511

0.0020

0.0176

0.0812

0.0179

0.0467

0.0519

0.0410

0.0010

0.1117

0.0133

0.1228

0.0116

0.0179

0.0023

0.0400

0.0020

0.0253

0.0173

0.0522

0.0615

0.0038

0.0305

0.0898

0.0702

[No. R-31015/81/2004-O.R. -II ] HARISH KUMAR, Under Secy.

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

7884

नई दिल्ली, 7 जुलाई, 2005

का. आ. 2511.- केन्दीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता हे कि मध्य प्रदेश में मांगल्या (इन्दौर) संस्थापन से हरयाणा 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 केन्दीय 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 प्रदत 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 लिये उसमे उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के सम्बन्ध में श्री दीपक नन्दी, सक्षम प्राधिकारी , मुम्बई- मांगल्या पाइपलाइन विस्तार परियोजना, भारत पेट्रोलियम कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, बी-105, इन्द्र विहार , तलवंडी, कोटा 324005 (राजस्थान) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

अनुसूची

राज्य: राजस्थान

जिला: कोटा

तहसील: सांगोद

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

सर्वेनम्बर

क्र० ग्राम का नाम

0.3325

1594

1 धूलेट

0.0220

1570

0.0940

1569

0.0580

1568

0.2025

1548

0.0220

1549

0.0150

1554

0.0075

1553

0.0220

1552

0.2025

1551

0.2745

1546

0.1700

1535

0.0290

1534

0.0220

1533

0.0220

1498

0.1190

1497

0.0150

1430

0.1800

पड़त

0.0720

254

2 चरचड़िया उर्फ काशीपुरा

0.1160

255

0.0580

251

0.3465

249

0.0290

263

0.1015

248

0.1080

264

0.0150

245

0.2740

266

0.1800

268

0.1015

270

0.0360

271

0.0290

272

0.0020

273

0.0875

278

0.1305

279

0.0800

207

0.0075

208

0.1095

206

0.3030

200 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16 , 2005/ आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

199 2 चरंचड़िया उर्फ काशीपुरा (जारी....)

198 3 लोकाहेड़ा

589

589/966

586

587

588

583

582

581

580

579

578

577

579/961

576

575

522/967

573

523

522

519

520

344

438

425

446

447/963

447

448

450

421

422

420

419

418 टोस्या

162/264

162/265

165

166

159

111

106

18 1993 G1 /05-46

7885 4

0.1440

0.0360

0.1305

0.0650

0.0040

0.0435

0.0075

0.1375

0.0220

0.4320

0.0870

0.0720

0.1305

0.0075

0.0220

0.0075

0.0040

0.1520

0.2745

0.0220

0.2815

0.0150

0.1080

0.0290

0.1160

0.0290

0.0220

0.2095

0.0075

0.2315

0.0150

0.0220

0:0290

0.0075

0.1665

0.0150

0.3030

0.0220

0.1015

0.0720

0.2025

0.0290

0.1735

0.1015

0.0150

0.0360

0.0290

0.0150

0.0020

0.0720

0.0075

0.0150

0.2096

0.0650

0.1800 7886

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

19 टोस्या(जारी........

5 टोल्या

104

102

113

114

101

19 6 केशोली

389

390

391

388

396

384

382

368

370

369

363

299

301

361

303

304

311

309

312

313

1 4

0.0075

0.1230

0.0075

0.2025

0.0220

0.0075

0.1735

0.1800

0.0075

0.0220

0.1445

0.0290

, 0.1230

0.0040

0.0075

0.1015

0.0870

0.0040

0.1880

0.2240

0.0040

0.3535

0.0940

0.1375

0.0360

0.0720

0.0220

0.0800

0.0720

0.0075

0.1880

0.2880

0.0870

0.0075

0.2120

0.2315

0.0075

0.0290

0.0360

0.0720

0.1520

0.2460

0.0440

0.0075

0.0360

0.2520

0.2160

0.0720

0.2520

0.0220

0.1095

0.1445

0.2020

0.1735

0.0510

0.0580

0.1520

0.1015

0.1160

0.0360

0.0435 7887 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

0.0360

970

7 बाछीहेड़ा

967

0.0220

968

0.0220

0.0150

964

974

0.2740

976

0.1300

953

0.2615

0.0220

952

0.0650

050

0.1230

951

0.1080

942

0.0360

944

0.0720

945

0.0040

906

0.0075

923

0.0150

8 सारोला

0.0040

0.0360

351

0.0220

9 मांडूहेडा

350

0.0220

347

0.0040

348

0.2895

349

0.0075

346

0.0440

340

0.0435

345

0.0360

329

0.4900

330

0.0580

319

0.0720

320

0.0220

322

0.0020

323

0.0360

324

0.0720

271

0.1590

301

0.0510

300

0.2400

299

0.2520

284

0.0720

286

0.0020

288

0.0875

290

0.0150

291

0.0150

10 हिंगोनिया

532

0.0220

543

0.0020

542

0.0510

541

0.0655

540

0.0580

539

0.0020

537

0.0870

519

0.0945

521

0.0360

539/731

0.0150

518

0.0020

517

0.0650

516

0.0650

515

0.0650

466

0.1165

467

0.0360

468

0.0150

503

0.0075

481

0.0020 7888

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

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

10 हिंगोनिया (जार

482

0.1080

483

0.1300

479

0.0020

478

0.0720

485

0.0150

477

0.0020

273

0,0440

275

0.1800

0275/753

0.0360

275/752

0.1080

284

0.1735

285

0.3175

298

0.0076

300

0.2160

301

6.1080

302

303

9.8730

304

6.0000

0.1100

6.3000

0.0890

0,1375

0.1080

0,0290

0.0655

0.1375

0.0075

21/773

0.1440

21/772

0.1230

0.0720

21/771

0.0150

0.3035

0.1300

0.4470

0.0435

0.0945

11 खेड़ी

318

0.2520

317

0.1590

316

0.0940

315

0.0075

313

0.0075

314

0.0360

12 बिशनपुरा

0.0510

0.0655

0.0870

0.3780

0.2880

0.0510

837

13 गोपालपुरा

0.0720

838

0.0510

839

0.2095

823

0.1950

824/873

0.0075

824

0.0075

770

0.4835

771

0.3105

765

0.0150

767

0.0075

764

0.0655

763

0.0800

762

0.1305 7889

25 , 1927

0.0075

0.0880

6.0100

8.1016

0.1610

0.2025

0.0150

0-1160

0.0600

0.0040

0.0000

0.3600

0.0720

0.0040

0.0075

0.1445

0.1305

0.1950

555

0.0440

504

0.0300

506

0.0076

507

0.4850

517

0.0040

516

514

0.4975

6.8180

621

0.3535

513

0.0075

0.0290

0.0020

0.0360

0.1880

0.1800

0.0510

0.0655

0.0720

0.0655

0.0040

0.4115

0.0075

0.0220

0.0075

14 औंवा

664

0.1230

667

0.1735

663

0.0940

862

0.1305

661

0.0870

647

0.0075

660

0.1520

649

0.2675

658

0.0360

659

0.0020

655

0.0720

656

0.0720

654

9.1235

653

0.0040 7890

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

558

0.0290

14 आँवा (जारी....)

562

0.1950

567

0.0655

570

0.1595

571

0.0360

572

0.0150

574

6.0000

10 जय

167

0.1230

158

0.0150

159

0.1230

0.2075

101

168

0.0720

163

0,1800

181

0.3420

182

0.0200

180

0.2020

178

0.0290

179

0.0075

177

0.1440

176

0.1880

175

0.0580

193

0.0040

174

0.1160

197

0.3350

112

0.1015

198

0.1550

199

0.2975

200

0.2520

0.0150

106/253

0.1160

0.1375

1410

16 पिसाहेड़ा

0.1305

659

0.0075

612

0.2745

606

0.2460

604

0.0075

618

0.2600

619

0.1735

623

0:0580

622

0.0040

624

0.0500

625

0.0580

626

0.1015

645

0.0220

644

0.0290

640

0.1090

639

0.1230

638

0.2455

637

0.0290

657

0.0020

638/1556

0.0510

511

0.0220

513

0.0075

512

0.0150

515

0.0040

514

0.0220

0.1015

136

0.0290

137

0.0150

505

0.2315

494

0.0075

481

0.0360 7891 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

0.0360

422

16 पिसाहेड़ा (जारी...

0.2880

425

434

0.2315

0.0220

435

0.0580

419

438

0.1375

0.0870

439

0.1520

439/1572

0.0220

440

0.2505

415

411

0.0655

0.1800

140

142

0.2315

0.1880

132

168

0.0290

17 बीकोली

0.0020

167

178

0.0290

166

0.1450

165

0.3600

164

0.0510

154

0.3315

0.2455

139

0.0040

140

0.1590

138

135

0.0360

0.0440

735

18 खड़ीपुर

0.0290

660

0.0870

661

662

0.0870

0.1440

664

0.0075

588

0.0440

681

667

0.0580

666

0.0150

668

0.0075

669

0.1520

574

0.0870

0.0150

671

722

0.0290

0.0440

672/740

0.0075

675

0.0220

672/743

0.1095

674

0.1015

413/742

677

0.3475

684

0.0945

683

0.0655

682

0.1305

693

0.0075

681

0.0840

695

0.0840

326

0.0290

0.0510

697

0.0075

696

0,0075

698

0.0655

325

324

0.0075

323

0.0150

0.0430

322

320

0.1440

1730

0.0510

19 खजूरी

1719

0.0870 7892

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /AŚADHA 25,1927

3 19 खजूरी (जारी....)

727

726

724

704

705

703

695

693

692

691

690

640

687

624

627

623

622

650

608

606

609

604/1819

603

601

584

439

440

442

443

444

452

448

414

402

403

404

405

406

407

382

381

378

379

380

376

377

314

317

313

276

262

263

264

273

180

172

173

169

175

174

168

170 [PART II-SEC. 3(ii)] 4

0.0150

0.1095

0.0870

0.1440

0.0075

0.0655

0.1160

0.0150

0.1880

0.0075

0.1880

0.0290

0.0075

0.2095

0.0150

0.0290

0.0220

0.1440

0.1230

0.0220

0.0510

0.0290

0.0945

0.1160

0.0510

0.0150

0.0020

0.0150

0.1305

0.0720

0.0075

0.1015

0.0945

0.0720

0.0220

0.0800

0.0150

0.0655

0.0290

0.0360

0.0875

0.0655

0.0290

0.0075

0.1015

0.0720

0.2160

0.0220

0.0075

0.0150

0.0510

0.0220

0.0150

0.0875

0.0510

0.0040

0.0020

0.0150

0.0075

0.0510

0.0020 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7893

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

167 19 खजूरी (जारी....)

164

159

160

162

156

155

155/1830

37 20 बन्दा

244

230

224

223

225

226

227

206

207

208

218

210

1692 21 कुराड

1693

1691

1689

1685

1686

1683

1682

1680

1681

1673

1672

1671

1671/1936

1669

1668

1651

978

963

962

961

964

965

966

956

956/1927

949

733 22 बृजनगर

1993 G1 /05-47

0.0720

0.0360

0.0075

0.0510

0.1665

0.1955

0.0290

0.0075

0.1015

0.3900

0.0945

0.0720

0.2025

0.1880

0.0360

0.0220

0.2090

0.1520

0.0510

0.1375

0.1230

0.1080

0.0150

0.1230

0.1375

0.0075

0.1800

0.0075

0.1160

0.0150

0.1015

0.2160

0.0290

0.1305

0.0510

0.0800

0.4050

0.0510

0.2815

0.0440

0.1580

0.0720

0.0360

0.1230

0.2315

0.2310

0.0290

0.1580

0.1150

0.0290

0.2810

0.0075

0:0075

0.0360

0.1580

0.0720

0.1800

0.1955

0.2640

0.0075 7894

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

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

732

22 बृजनगर (जारी....)

0.0290

258

0.1550

730

0.0720

262

0.3250

263

0.2880

266

0.1660

267

0.0220

264

0.0290

268

0.0020

269

0.3250

270

0.1880

335

0.0020

336

0.0220

337

0.0150

338

0.0220

330

0.0020

334

0.4260

347

0.0290

346

0.0040

348

0.2430

654

0.0720

655

0.0020

652

0.2270

649

0.0220

648

0.0720

653

0.0040

608

0.0020

609

0.0800

610

0.0020

611

0.0510

616

0.0800

617

0.0720

618

0.0290

619

0.0075

606

0.1450

601

0.0360

589/761

0.0360

589/760

0.0360

591

0.0650

592

0.0220

593

0.1720

589

0.0290

583

0.1000

582

0.0720

580

0.3030

579

0.0150

570

0.0360

572

0.0150

571

0.0290

511

0.0075

512

0.0580

513

0.1080

513/788

0.0360

507/789

0.1300

507

0.0220

506

0.0220

[फा. सं. आर-31015/76/2004- ओ.आर- ।। ]

हरीश कुमार , अवर सचिव 7895 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 7th July, 2005

S. O. 2511.- 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;

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 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 Deepak Nandi , Competent Authority, Mumbai -Manglya Pipeline Extension Project, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, B - 105 , Indravihar, Talwandi , Kota- 324005 (Rajasthan) .

SCHEDULE

STATE : RAJASTHAN

DISTRICT : KOTA

TEHSIL : SANGOD

AREA IN HECTARE

SURVEY NO .

S.No. NAME OF VILLAGE

0.3325

1594

DHULET

0.0220

1570

0.0940

1569

0.0580

1568

0.2025

1548

0.0220

1549

0.0150

1554

0.0075

1553

0.0220

1552

0.2025

1551

0.2745

1546

0.1700

1535

0.0290

1534

0.0220

1533

0.0220

1498

0.1190

1497

0.0150

1430

0.1800

Padat

0.0720

254

2 CHARCHADIYA URF

0.1160

255

.KASHIPURA

0.0580

251

0.3465

249

263

0.0290

248

0.1015

0.1080

264

245

0.0150

0.2740

266

0.1800

268

0.1015

270

0.0360

271

0.0290

272

273

0.0020

0.0875

278

0.1305

279

0.0800

207

0.0075

208

0.1095

206

0.3030

200 7896

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

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

2 CHARCHADIYA URF

199

0.1440

198

KASHIPURA (Contd ....)

0.0360

3 LODHAHEDA

589

0.0360

589/966

0.1305

586

0.0650

587

0.0040

588

0.0435

583

0.0075

582

0.0075

581

0.1375

580

0.0220

579

0.4320

578

0.0870

577

0.0720

579/961

0.0720

576

0.1305

575

0.0075

522/967

0.0220

573

0.0075

523

0.0040

522

0.1520

519

0.2745

520

0.0220

344

0.0220

438

0.2815

425

0.0150

446

0.1080

447/963

0.0290

447

0.1160

448

0.0290

450

0.0220

421

0.2095

422

0.0075

420

0.2315

419

0.0150

418

0.0220

4 TOSYA

162/264

0.0290

162/265

0.0075

165

0.1665

166

0.0150

159

0.3030

111

0.0220

0.1015

0.0720

0.2025

0.0290

106

0.0290

0.1735

0.1015

0.0150

0.0360

0.0290

0.0150

0.0020

0.0720

0.0075

0.0150

0.2095

0.0650

0.1800 7897 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

0.0075

4 TOSYA(Contd...... )

104

0.1230

5 TOLYA

102

0.1230

113

0.0075

114

0.2025

0.0220

101

0.0075

0.1735

0.1800

0.0075

0.0220

0.1445

0.0290

0.1230

0.0040

0.0075

0.1015

0.0870

0.0040

0.1880

0.2240

0.0040

0.3535

0.0940

0.1375

0.0360

389

0.0720

6 KESHOLI

0.0220

390

391

0.0800

388

0.0720

396

0.0075

384

0.1880

382

0.2880

368

0.0870

370

0.0075

369

0.2120

363

0.2315

299

0.0075

301

0.0290

0.0360

361

303

0.0720

304

0.1520

311

0.2460

309

0.0440

312

0.0075

313

0.0360

0.2520

0.2160

0.0720

0.2520

0.0220

0.1095

0.1445

0.2020

0.1735

0.0510

0.0580

0.1520

0.1015

0.1160

32.

0.0360

0.0435

1 7898

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 / ASADHA 25,1927

3 7 BACHHIHEDA

970

967

968

964

974

976

953

952

950

951

942

943

944

945

906

923 8 SAROLA

66 9 MANDUHEDA

351

350

347

348

349

346

340

345

329

330

319

320

322

323

324

271

301

300

299

284

286

288

290

291 10 HINGONIYA

532

543

542

541

540

539

537

519

521

539/731

518

517

516

515

466

467

468

503

481 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] 4

0.0360

0.0220

0.0150

0.2740

0.1300

0.2615

0.0220

0.0650

0.1230

0.1080

0.0360

0.0720

0.0040

0.0075

0.0150

0.0040

0.0360

0.0220

0.0040

0.2895

0.0075

0.0440

0.0435

0.0360

0.4900

0.0580

0.0720

0.0220

0.0020

0.0360

0.0720

0.1590

0.0510

0.2400

0.2520

0.0720

0.0020

0.0875

0.0150

0.0220

0.0020

0.0510

0.0655

0.0580

0.0020

0.0870

0.0945

0.0360

0.0150

0.0020

0.0650

0.1165

0.0360

0.0150

0.0075

0.0020 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7899

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

10 HINGONIYA( Contd .... )

482

0.1080

483

0.1300

479

0.0020

478

0.0720

485

0.0150

477

0.0020

273

0.0440

275

0.1800

275/753

0.0360

275/752

0.1080

284

0.1735

285

0.3175

298

0.0075

300

0.2160

301

0.1080

302

0.2385

303

0.0720

304

0.0360

0.1160

0.3600

0.0560

0.0290

0.1375

0.1080

0.0290

0.0655

0.1375

0.0075

21/773

0.1440

21/772

0.1230

0.0720

21/771

0.0150

0.3035

0.1300

0.4470

0.0435

0.0945

11 KHEDI

318

0.2520

317

0.1590

316

0.0940

315

0.0075

313

0.0075

314

0.0360

12 BISHANPURA

0.0510

0.0655

0.0870

0.3780

0.2880

0.0510

13 GOPALPURA

837

0.0720

838

0.0510

839

0.2095

823

0.1950

824/873

0.0075

824

0.0075

770

0.4835

771

0.3105

765

0.0150

767

0.0075

764

0.0655

763

0.0800

762

0.1305 [PART II-SBC . 3 (ii)] 7900

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25,1927

683

0.0075

13 GOPALPURA ( Contd .... )

0.0290

684

0.0150

685

686

0.1015

0.1510

687

0.2025

693

0.0150

692

0.1160

694

0.0600

695

0.0040

581

0.0040

698

696

0.0600

0.0360

580

0.0190

579

0.0100

578

0.0020

577

0.0800

576

0.3600

575

0.0720

565

0.0040

566

0.0075

570

0.1445

568

0.1305

563

0.1950

561

0.0440

555

0.0360

504

0.0075

506

0.4850

507

0.0040

517

0.0150

516

0.4975

514

0.3535

521

0.0075

513

0.0075

0.0290

0.0020

0.0360

0.1880

0.1800

0.0510

0.0655

0.0720

0.0655

0.0040

0.4115

0.0075

0.0220

0.0075

0.1230

664

14 AANWA

0.1735

667

0.0940

663

0.1305

662

0.0870

661

0.0075

647

0.1520

660

0.2675

649

0.0360

658

0.0020

659

0.0720

655

0.0720

656

0.1235

654

0.0040

653 7901 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

558

0.0290

14 AANWA ( Contd .... )

562

0.1950

567

0.0655

570

0.1595

571

0.0360

572

0.0150

574

0.0360

157

0.1230

15 RAJPURA MAY CHAK

158

0.0150

159

0.1230

161

0.2975

183

0.0720

163

0.1800

181

0.3420

182

0.0290

180

0.2020

178

0.0290

179

0.0075

177

0.1440

176

0.1880

175

0.0580

193

0.0040

0.1160

174

197

0.3350

112

0.1015

198

0.1550

199

0.2975

200

0.2520

106/253

0.0150

0.1160

0.1375

1410

16 PISAHEDA

0.1305

659

0.0075

612

0.2745

606

0.2460

604

0.0075

618

0.2600

619

0.1735

623

0.0580

622

0.0040

624

0.0500

625

0.0580

626

0.1015

645

0.0220

644

0.0290

640

0.1090

639

0.1230

638

0.2455

637

0.0290

657

0.0020

638/1556

0.0510

511

0.0220

513

0.0075

512

0.0150

515

0.0040

514

0.0220

508

0.1015

136

0.0290

137

0.0150

505

0.2315

494

0.0075

481

0.0360

1993 GI/05-48 7902

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

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

422

16 PISAEDA ( Contd ....)

0.0360

425

0.2880

434

0.2315

435

0.0220

419

0.0580

438

0.1375

439

0.0870

439/1572

0.1520

440

0.0220

415

0.2505

411

0.0655

140

0.1800

142

0.2315

132

0.1880

17 DHIKOLI

168

0.0290

167

0.0020

178

0.0290

166

0.1450

165

0.3600

164

0.0510

154

0.3315

139

0.2455

140

0.0040

136

0.1590

135

0.0360

18 KHADIPUR

735

0.0440

660

0.0290

661

0.0870

662

0.0870

664

0.1440

588

0.0075

681

0.0440

667

0.0580

666

0.0150

668

0.0075

669

0.1520

574

0.0870

671

0.0150

722

0.0290

672/740

0.0440

675

0.0075

672/743

0.0220

674

0.1095

413/742

0.1015

677

0.3475

684

0.0945

683

0.0655

682

0.1305

693

0.0075

681

0.0840

695

0.0840

326

0.0290

697

0.0510

696

0.0075

698

0.0075

325

0.0655

324

0.0075

323

0.0150

322

0.0430

320

0.1440

19 KHAJURI

1730

0.0510

1719

0.0870 7903 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

0.0150

727

19 KHAJURI (Contd.....)

0.1095

726

0.0870

724

0.1440

704

0.0075

705

0.0655

703

0.1160

695

0.0150

693

0.1880

692

0.0075

691

0.1880

690

0.0290

640

0.0075

687

0.2095

624

0.0150

627

0.0290

623

0.0220

622

0.1440

650

0.1230

608

0.0220

606

0.0510

609

0.0290

604/1819

603

0.0945

0.1160

601

0.0510

584

0.0150

439

0.0020

440

0.0150

442

0.1305

443

0.0720

444

0.0075

452

0.1015

448

414

0.0945

0.0720

402

0.0220

403

0.0800

404

0.0150

405

0.0655

406

0.0290

407

0.0360

382

0.0875

381

0.0655

378

0.0290

379

0.0075

380

0.1015

376

0.0720

377

0.2160

314

0.0220

317

0.0075

313

0.0150

276

262

0.0510

0.0220

263

264

0.0150

0.0875

273

0.0510

180

172

0.0940

173

0.0040

0.0020

169

0.0150

175

0.0075

174

168

0.0510

0.0020

170 7904

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25,1927

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

19 KHAJURI ( Contd ..... )

167

0.0720

164

0.0360

159

0.0075

160

0.0510

162

0.1665

156

0.1955

155

0.0290

155/1830

0.0075

0.1015

0.3900

0.0945

0.0720

0.2025

0.1880

0.0360

20 BANDA

244

0.0220

230

0.2090

224

0.1520

223

0.0510

225

0.1375

226

0.1230

227

0.1080

206

0.0150

207

0.1230

208

0.1375

218

0.0075

210

0.1800

0.0075

0.1160

0.0150

0.1015

0.2160

0.0290

21 KURAD

1692

0.1305

1693

0.0510

1691

0.0800

1689

0.4050

1685

0.0510

1686

0.2815

1683

0.0440

1682

0.1580

1680

0.0720

1681

0.0720

1673

0.0360

1672

0.1230

1669

0.1580

1668

0.1150

1651

0.0290

978

0.2810

963

0.0075

962

0.0075

961

0.0360

964

0.1580

965

0.0720

966

0.1800

956

0.1955

956/1927

0.2640

949

0.0075

733

22 BRIJNAGAR 7905 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

0.0290

732

22 BRIJNAGAR( Contd .... )

0.1550

258

0.0720

730

0.3250

262

263

0.2880

0.1660

266

0.0220

267

0.0290

264

0.0020

268

269

0.3250

0.1880

270

335

0.0020

0.0220

336

0.0150

337

0.0220

338

0.0020

330

334

0.4260

0.0290

347

0.0040

346

348

0.2430

0.0720

654

0.0020

655

0.2270

652

0.0220

649

0.0720

648

0.0040

653

0.0020

608

0.0800

609

0.0020

610

611

0.0510

616

0.0800

617

0.0720

618

0.0290

0.0075

619

606

0.1450

0.0360

601

0.0360

589/761

0.0360

589/760

591

0.0650

592

0.0220

0.1720

593

0.0290

589

583

0.1000

0.0720

582

0.3030

580

0.0150

579

570

0.0360

0.0150

572

571

0.0290

511

0.0075

512

0.0580

513

0.1080

0.0360

513/788

0.1300

507/789

507

0.0220

506

0.0220

[No. R-31015/76/2004-O.R. - II ]

HARISH KUMAR , Under Secy.

7906

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 16, 2005/ ASADHA 25, 1927

श्रम मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 9 जून , 2005

का०आ ० 2512.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, सी. पी. डब्ल्यू. डी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, जयपुर ( संदर्भ संख्या सी.जी.आई.टी. 35/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं ० एल-42012/122/2003- आईआर ( सीएम- II ) ]

एन.पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी MINISTRY OF LABOUR

New Delhi , the 9th June, 2005 S.O. 2512.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award Ref. CGIT - 35 / 2004 of the Cent. Govt . Indus . Tribunal -cum-Labour Court Jaipur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of C.P.W.D. and their workman, received by the Central Government on 9-6-2005.

[No. L -42012/ 122/2003 - IR (CM-II) ]

N.P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT JAIPUR Case No. CGIT- 35/2004

Reference No. L-42012/ 122/2003 - IR ( CM -II)

Sh . Naresh Kumar Sharma , Khalasi

Through Branch Secretary, Kendriya Lok Nirman Vibhag Workers Union, Kendriya Lok NirmanVibhag, Ajmer

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

AWARD

1. The Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred under Clause ' D ' of sub - section 1 to Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the ' Act' ) has referred the following industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal which runs as under :-

D " क्या कार्यपालक इन्जीनियर ( विद्युत ) जयपुर, केन्द्रीय विद्युत मंडल, केन्द्रीय लोक निर्माण विभाग, मोती मार्ग, बापू नगर, जयपुर द्वारा अपने कर्मकार श्री नरेश कुमार शर्मा, खलासी से दिनांक 1-12-2000 से वायरमैन का कार्य कराया जाना और उसे वायरमैन पद का वेतनमान नहीं दिया जाना एवं स्थायी नहीं किया जाना उचित एवं वैध है ? यदि नहीं, तो संबंधित कर्मचारी किस अनुतोष का हकदार है ? "

2.The workman has pleaded in his claim statement that hejoined the non - applicant department as a temporary khalasi on 1-12-1984 , who was confirmed on 1-2-1993 on this post and the passed his wireman in the year 1999 and got his licence (Annexure 1) on 9-1-2001 and he intimated it to the non- applicant department vide his application (Annexure 2) dt . 17-1-2001 . He has further stated that on retirement ofthe wireman Shri Sheetal Singh and subsequent to that of Shri Mithan Lal on 30-11-2003 , two posts fell vacant. Apart it, eight posts of wiremen were already lying vacant and with effect from 1-12-2000 he was working as wireman and pump driver in pursuance of the oral order of the department . He has pointed out that the pay - scale of the khalasi is 2550-3200 whereas the pay-scale of wireman is 3050-4590 . He has claimed that he was put to work in highergrade of wireman than khalasi , whereas he was paid in the scale of khalasi and has urged that he is entitled to get the salary and other benefits in the pay- scale ofwireman onthe principle of ' equal work equal pay ' w.e.f. 1-12-2000.

Applicant

Versus

The Executive Engineer ( Elec . ) , Jaipur Kendriya Vidyut Mandal , Kendriya Lok Nirman Vibhag, Jaipur

3.Resisting the claim , the non -applicant in his written counter has averred that for the promotion to the post of wireman the licence of a wireman is essential as per the mannual of the non - applicant department, that the workman onhis promotion had joined the post of the wireman w.e.f. 1-6-2004 and he is only entitled to get the salary in the pay- scale of wiremen from this date , that prior to it he was performing his duties as a khalasi only and is not entitled to get the salary and benefits of the post of the wireman prior to 1-6-2004 .

4. On pleading the following points for determination wereframed:

Non -Applicant

PRESENT :

: Sh. R.C. Sharma

Presiding Officer

: Sh . J.L. Shah

Forthe applicant

: Sh. T.P. Sharma

Forthe non - applicant

Date of Award

: 30-5-2005

I. Whether the non - applicant management is extracting the work of a Wireman from the workman Sh . Naresh Kumar Sharma , Khalasi from1-12-2000 without providing him the salary ofthe Wireman ? BOA II. Whether the workman is entitled to get the salary and other admissible benefits to that of a Wireman w.e.f. 1-12-2000 ? BOA [भाग. II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

7907 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

5. In the evidence , the workman has submitted his affidavit and as well as the supplementary affidavit and in the rebuttal the counter affidavit of MW1 Shri H.C. Arora, Executive Engineer has been placed on the record . Both the witnesses were cross - examined by the opposite representatives respectively.

6. The workman has also led the documentary evidence whereas the non- applicant has chosen not to bring on record the documentary evidence.

7. I have heard both the parties and have gone through the record. The point- wise discussion follows as under:-

complaint register is maintained by the department wherein the complaints are entered and are assigned to wireman for carrying them out, who enters them in his worker diary. He has further exhibited the complaint register Ex. W3 which contains the entries from 1-12-2000 to 29-2-2001 and has further stated that he had worked independently as a wireman. The worker diary Ex . W4 contains the entries of thework assigned to him from 1-3-2001 to 13-10-2001 , worker diaryEx. W5from 22-10-2001 to 27-9-2002 and worker diary Ex. W6 from 1-10-2002 to 14-11-2002. Thus , the workman has succeeded to establish that he carried out the functions ofthewireman from 1-12-2000 to 24-11-2002 in pursuance ofthe oral order of the concerned authorities . He has been cross-examined at length, but has stood unshaken .

Point No. I & II

8. Since both these points involve the identical questions of facts , these are discussed together hereunder.

15. Contrary to it, MW1 Shri H.C. Arora has been examined onbehalf of the non -applicant department , who has deposed in his affidavit that the workman is not entitled to get the salary and benefits as a wireman prior to his promotion to the post of wireman. But in his cross- examination he has pleaded ignorance about the functioning of the workman as a wireman and could not be able to answer those pertinent questions which could show that he is well acquainted with the facts of the case. Therefore, no credence can be given to his testimony.

9. The ld . representative for the workman contends that the workman was confirmed on the post of the khalasi on 16-2-1994 , who worked as a wireman w.e.f. December, 2000 and onwards on account of vacant posts ofwireman. Theld representative submits that the workman has proved his case on the basis of the complaint register and diaries. The ld . representative has also admitted the fact that on account ofworkman's transfer, he remained posted outside fromNovember, 2002 to May, 2004 as a khalasi and on his promotion to the post of wireman on 26-5-2004 he had joined the present office.

16. On the basis of the aforesaid evidence , oral as well as documentary, the workman has succeeded to establish that in the capacity of a khalasi he was put to work as a wireman by the department from the period 1-12-2000 to 14-11-2002, for which he is entitled to get the salary and other benefits admissible to a wireman in the aforestated pay - scale of a wireman.

10. Per contra, the ld. representative for the non- applicant contends that the workman was performing the duties of a khalasi , the diaries submitted by him were filled in by himself and he has not been able to prove that he worked as a wireman during the alleged period.

17. In his result , the claim of the workman deserves tobe allowed in this manner .

11. I have heard both the parties and have gone through the record.

12. These facts are undisputed that the workman wasperforming as a khalasi in the department , who passed the test for the post of wireman and got its licence and accordingly intimated the non -applicant department . It is also not in dispute that the claimant remained posted outside the present office as a khalasi during the period from Nov. , 2002tillMay, 2004.

13.Now the question that calls for determination is whether the workman is entitled to get the salary and other benefits in the pay - scale of a wireman for the period in question.

18. Consequently, the reference is answered in the affirmative in favour of the workman and against the non- applicant department to this effect that the action of the non-applicant management in extracting the work of a wireman from the disputant Naresh Kumar Sharma, Khalasi w.e.f. 1-12-2000 and depriving him the salary and the benefits of a wireman is unjustified and illegal . It is further held that the claimant is entitled to get the salary and other benefits in thepay- scale of a wireman w.e.f. 1-12-2000 to 14-11-2002 from the non - applicant department. On the issue ofconfirmation on the post of wireman is concerned, both the parties have not led the evidence on the point which is left open to the department for consideration as per its rules.An award is passed in these terms accordingly.

19. Let a copy of the award be sent to the Central Government for publication under Section 17( 1 ) of the Act .

R.C. SHARMA, Presiding Officer 14. The workman has testified that he was put to work as a wireman on its vacant post and has exhibited the complaint register Ex. W-3 and the Worker Diaries Ex . W4 to W6 . He has stated that as per the oral direction of the concerned authorities he performed the job of a wireman w.e.f. 1-12-2000 and to carry on the work of the wireman a 7908

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II SEC. 3 (ii )]

APPEARANCES :

नईदिल्ली, 9 जून, 2005

Shri K. C. Das , Asst. Admn . Officer ... For the 1st Party- Management

Shri Debendranath Mallick

...For the 2nd Party- Workman

AWARD

का०आ ० 2513.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार सी.आई.एफ.ए. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , भुवनेश्वर ( संदर्भ संख्या 57/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-06-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल-42012/128/2001- आईआर ( सीएम- II ) ] एन. पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी

TheGovernment of India in the Ministry of Labour, in exercise of powers conferred by Clause ( d) of sub -section (1) and sub -section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 ( 14 of 1947) have referred the following dispute for adjudication vide their Order No. L-42012 /128/ 2001 IR(CM - II) , dated 24-04-2002:

New Delhi , the 9th June, 2005

"Whether the action of the Management of CIFA , Bhubaneswar in not giving wages at par with regular employees to Shri Debendranath Mallick, Electrician, Shri Ramesh Dash , Computer Operator , Shri Pinaki Samal , Meteorological Assistant, Shri Binayak Tripathy, Jr. Clerk of CIFA is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief they are entitled to ? "

S.O. 2513.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 57/ 2002) ofthe Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal -cum-Labour Court, Bhubaneswar as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Central Institute of Freshwater Aquaculture (CIFA) , and their workmen, which was receivedby the Central Government on 9-06-2005 .

[No. L-42012/ 128/2003 - IR (CM -II) ]

N. P. KESAVAN , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT BHUBANESWAR

PRESENT :

Shri N.K.R. Mohapatra, Presiding Officer, C.G.I.T. -cum-Labour Court, Bhubaneswar.

2.The shortly stated case of the 2nd Party-Union is that the workmen in question and many other persons are working since long as casual labourers under the Management . The workmen being qualified persons were getting the minimum wages of a skilled labourer while the others were getting the wages of unskilled workers . With the introduction of 1/ 30th minimum pay of regular employees the Management paid each of these workers 1/30th minimum pay of a regular Grade- D employee. Asa result the workers who were earlier getting the wages of askilled labourer used to get their pay like any other unskilled workers . In view of the above disparity the Union raised an Industrial Dispute , which culminated in the present reference. According to the Union these workmen should have been paid 1/30th minimum pay of a Group-C regular employee but not of a Group -D employee as per the memorandum dated 7th June 1988 of the Department of Personnel & Training.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE NO . 57/2002

Date of Passing Award 25th May 2005

BETWEEN :

TheManagement of the Director, Central Institute of Fresh Water Aquaculture (CIFA) , Kausalyaganga,

Bhubaneswar- 751002. 1st Party -Management

AND

2nd Party -Union

3. The Management , in short " CIFA " , has averred on the other hand that the organization CIFA is a unit under the Control of Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi , functioning under the Department of Agriculture , Government of India. The main work is to carry government research work and the scientists required for the research and development work are appointed through a recruitment procedure . Some staff and officers , both in technical wing and office establishment, including the staff in supporting category are also appointed in the above process following the recruitment procedures . But at times some workers /labourers are engaged in daily wage basis as and when required for different type of research related miscellaneous jobs on the basis of requisition received from different Scientists for their respective Their Workman represented through TheSecretary, CIFA Sramik Sangh, P.O. Kausalyaganga, Bhubaneswar.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

projects/schemes . The type of engagement of casual labour is temporary and need based and their engagement is co - terminus with the purpose/ scheme for which they are engaged . With the above pleading it is contended by the Management that the reference is not maintainable in as much as the establishment of CIFA is not an Industry, the main purpose of the organization being research oriented:

In so far as the present workmen are concerned it is further pleaded by the Management that these workers were engaged on daily wage basis for miscellaneous work like any other daily wage workers without due recruitment procedure and that they were never engaged against any designated technical or auxiliary posts as claimed by the Union . It is also contended that the work performed by these workmen was never at par with the duty and responsibility of a regular employees . But as because they were working for more than one year the Management during a conciliation proceeding before the Assistant Labour Commissioner ( Central ) agreed to give them 1/30th pay of Group - D employees in the light of DOPT Memorandum dated 7th June 1988 with effect from June 2000 and therefore the present claim is not tenable both on facts and law. Since , the Government have imposed prohibition for engagement of casual workers against any sanctioned Group-C post , the four workmen in question cannot even otherwise be regularized against any Group -C posts without following the prescribed recruitment procedures as applicable to such Group -C employees so as to make them eligible to get the 1 / 30th pay of that Group

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

ISSUES

( 1 ) Whether the 1st Party - Management comes under the definition of Industry?

( 11 ) Whether the action of the Management of CIFA . Bhubaneswar , is not giving wages at par with regular employees to Shri Debeneranath Mallick. Electrician , Shri Ramesh Dash . Computer Operator . Shri Pinaki Samal . Meteorological Assistant . Shir Binayak Tripathy, Junior Clerk of CIFA is legal and justified?

( III ) If not . to what relief they entitled?.

5.To prove their respective cases only one witness has been examined by each of the parties .

FINDINGS

Issue No. I

6. As the law stands today the case of Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Beards Versus A. Rajappa 1993 GI/05-49

7909

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

and others reported in AIR 1978 SC 969 still holds field in so far the definition of the term " Industry " is concerned. It has been held by the Apex Court in that case that where a complexofactivities, some of which qualifed for exemption, others not , involves employee on the total undertaking , some of whom are not workman or same departments are not productive of goods and services if isolated, even then, the predominant nature of the service and the integrated nature of the department will be the true test. The whole undertaking will be industry although those who are not workman by definition may not befit by the status.

In the instant case it is pleaded that the establishment ofCIFA -Management is purely a research institute having nothing to produce either to satisfy the human wants or forcommerical use etc. It is further contended that , it is an institute of scientist and the daily labourers were engaged only to do the menial work that are necessary for carrying out the research work. This itself shows that with the cooperation of the casual workers the scientists of the establishment are carrying out of their research work which on the other hand speak of the integrated nature of the establishment and as such on the basis of the above findings of the Apex Court the scientists of the CIFA may not be coming under the defination of the term workman butin so far as the engagement of the casual workers the establishment of CIFA, squarely comes under the definition ofthe term Industry and as such the reference is held to be maintainable .

Issue No. II & III

7. Reliancebeing placed on Government of India. Department of Personnel & Training Office Memorandum dated 7-6-1988 it was argüed by the 2nd Party- Union that while considering the 1 /30th pay benefits the Management should have considered the case of the workmen with reference to the minimum pay of a Group- C regular employee as per item ( iv) of the above Memorandum which reads as follows :-

(iv) Where the nature of the work entrusted to the casual workers and regular employees is the same, the casual workers may be paid at the rate of 1/30th of the pay at the minimum of the relevant pay scale plus dearness allowance for work of 8 hours a day .

8. Emphasis being placed on the work " minimum of the relevant pay scale" it was contended by the Union that when the workers were engaged earlier as skilled workers coming under Grade - C regular posts they should have been paid 1/30th pay of that Grade - C. In this connection, it may be stated here then the word " relevant pay scale " as used in item ( iv) of the circular does not mean or refer to the scale of pay of a higher grade promotional post . The basic appointment of the workmen being as casual workers , it itself suggest that they have no right over the posts of a higher grade which are normally filled up either on promotion 7910

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25 , 1927

higher grade which are normally filled up either on promotion from the next below grade or by direct recruitment .

More so except examining one of the claimant - workman the Union has withheld the examination of the other three workmen and therefore , on the basis of the solitary evidence of workman Debendranath Mallick it can not be said that the job performed by other workmen was equal both in quality and quantity with that of regular employees . There is also no evidence adduced from the side of Union as to the exact nature of work , the duties and responsibility of a regular employee so as to cut a balance between the work performed by the workman and the regular Grade -C employee . Therefore, in any view of the matter the workmen are not entitled to get the pay and other service benefits of a Grade - C employee merely on the basis of their educational certificates , which they have filed before the Tribunal .

Therefore , the word " relavant pay scale " can be said to have got its reference only to various pay scales prescribed for the lowest grade i.e. for Grade - D posts . Therefore, the claim of the workers Union that the 1 /30th pay of the four workmen in question should have been fixed on the basis of the minimum pay scale of a Grade - C employee is not acceptable . Even otherwise no cogent evidence has been adduced to show that the work performed by these workmen are similar to that of a regular employee both in quality and quantity. It is the settled law that in a case for equal wage for equal work various aspects are to be taken into consideration such as educational qualification, manner of recriutment, qualitative and quantitative nature of work and the responsibility and accountability of the employees etc. But no evidence worth the name has been adduced from the side of the workmen to satisfy the above requirements. On the other hand , one of the claimant- workman , Shri Debendranath Mallick has alone been examined by the Union on behalf of all other workmen . His evidence shows that after a formal oral test he was engaged initially without any letter of appointment and that no call letter was issued to him to face the above test and that no written order assigning duties to him was also issued and that at the time of above test he was also not required to produce his qualification certificate etc.

9. Ext-A, the conciliation proceeding dated 3-5-2000 shows that under its item No. IV the Management has agreed to give 1 /30th pay at the minimum pay scale of regular posts to those casual workers who are rendering/ performing their service at par with regular nature and those who are not working and the nature of work is different minimum wage as notified by the Government may be payable. During argument it was agreed by the Management that onprinciple the Management has already adopted the Government Circular /Memorandum dated 7-6-1988 referred to above in so far as payment of 1 /30th pay to the casual workers . Referring to few other Government Circulars/ Memorandums issued in respect of engagement of casual workers, it was further argued by the Management in tune with its stands taken in its Written Statement that in view of the Government restrictions not to engage any casual workers against any regular post it is not possible for the Management to accommodate the disputant- workmen against any Grade-C post for the purpose of payment of 1/30th pay of that grade. This argument of the Management , as I find carry no water in as much as the same is totally irrelevant when the present question is only for payment of equal pay at par with regular employees . When admittedly the workmen are being paid the rate of 1 / 30th pay of a Grade-D posts it suggest that the work they perform is similar to that of their counter part regular employee . Therefore , when according to item No. IV of the Government Circular referred to above such casual workmen are to be paid at the rate of 1 /30th of the pay at the minimum ofthe relevant pay scale plus D. A. for work of8 hours a days , it is now to be seen whether the workmen are entitled for any other relief considering their educational qualification and past benefits etc. are concerned.

10. During evidence the Management witness have deposed that earlier these workmen were getting the wages of a skilled labourer . The evidence further shows that Grade - D posts are the lowest paid posts and He further says that he was engaged as an Electrician but no document to justify the same has been filed. From Ext . - 2 it appears that he was simply attached to the electrical section as a casual worker for operational day-to - day activites of electrical maintenance work, pumping of wate supply and day -to-day electrical maintenance work and the official documents (Ext . - 3 and its enclosure) on the basis of which himself and another claimant , Pinaki Samal were allowed 1 / 30th pay of a Grade- D post show that no where they have been designated as the Electrician and Meteorological Assistant respectively, suggesting thereby that these two workmen have simply designated themselves as Electrician and Meteorological Assistant for the purpose of this reference . Similarly in respect of the claimant- workman, Binayak Tripathy no document has been filed to show that he was designated as Junior clerk and the copy of the Muster Roll (Ext . - I ) simply gives a hint that the workman Ramesh Das was being paid wages on daily rate basis as D.T.P. Operator but not as a Computer Operator . Therefore, from the above , specially in the absence of any appointment letter or job allocation order, it can be said that these workmen have simply designed themselves so as to claim parity with regular employees .

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7911

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

this cadre has got four sub- grades such as Grade- I, Grade- II , Grade - III and Grade- IV. According to him Grade - I post is filled up from amongst casual workers conferred with temporary status while the other sub- grades are the promotional post within the same grade . While dealing with the term " relevant pay scale" as appearing under item No. IV of the Government circular referred to above it has been held in the foregoing para that the said term always refers to different pay scale prescribed for different Grade -D posts . The term "mimimum of relevant pay scale" as appearing in the said item No. IV can therefore be construed as the relevant mimimum pay scale against which a casual worker can be adjusted but not to the minimum pay scales prescribed for a Group -D - I post alone. When admittedly the workmen were earlier getting higher wages of a skilled worker as compared to and unskilled worker, they should be paid at a higher rate than an ordinary unskilled worker. Therefore , they are at least to be paid at the rate of 1/30th of the pay at the minimum of the scale prescribed for such sub - grade D - II posts to avoid disparity irrespective of the fact that the said post is a promotional post for sub -grade D - I posts .

11. Reference is answered accordingly.

N. K. R. MOHAPATRA, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 9 जून, 2005

का०आ ० 2514.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , एस. ई. सी. एल. प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, जबलपुर ( संदर्भ संख्या सी.जी.आई.टी. /एल.सी./आर. /86/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल -22012/446/1999- आई आर ( सी- II ) ]

एन.पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 9th June , 2005 S.O. 2514. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. CGIT/LC/ R/ 86/2000 of the Cent . Govt . Industrial . Tribunal -cum- Labour Court Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of SECL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 9-06-2005.

[No. L- 22012/ 446/ 1999 -IR(C - II) ]

N.P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

Case No. CGIT/LC/R/86/ 2000

Presiding Officer: SHRI C. M. SINGH

Union/Workman Sh .Rajesh Pandey, Secretary, Samyukta Koyla Mazdoor Sangh (AITUC) C/O SECL Balgi Branch, Distt. Korba (MP)

Versus

Management The SubAreaManager, SECL , Balgi Project, PO Balgi Colliery, Distt. Korba (MP)

AWARD

Passed on this 2nd June 2005

1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. L-22012/446/ 99 - IR (C - II) dated 29-5-2000 has . referred the following disputes for adjudication by this tribunal:---

"Whether the action of the management of Balgi Project , SECL in denying promotion to Shri Punaram Thakur in Cat- IV w.e.f. 5-12-94 i.e. the date from which his junior Shri Ghanshyam Tripathi was given promotion in cat . IV is justified,? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled ?"

2: After the reference onder was received, it was duly registered on 27-6-2000 and notices were issued to the parties . In this ref nce , 26-5-05 was the date fixed for exparte eviden of management. On this date, no one responded for the parties, no exparte evidence was adduced on behalf of management and therefore , this tribunal left with no alternative but to close the reference for award .

3. As both the parties remained absent on the date fixed for exparte evidence of management , it is quite clearthat the parties have no interest in this reference . Itis indicative ofthe fact that the workman doesnot wantto prosecute this reference.

4. Under the above circumstances , No Dispute Award is passed without any order as to costs .

C. M. SINGH, Presiding Officer 7912

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 9 जून , 2005

का०आ ० 2515.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, डब्लू. सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , जबलपुर ( संदर्भ संख्या सी.जी.आई.टी. /एल.सी./आर./263/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल-22012/494/ 1998- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] एन.पी. केशवन , डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 9th June , 2005 S.O. 2515. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. CGIT /LC/ R/263 / 99 ) of the Cent . Govt. Industrial Tribunal - cum -Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of WCL and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 9-6-2005.

[No. L -22012/494/ 1998 - IR ( CM-II) ] N.P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

Case No. CGIT/LC/R/ 263/99

Presiding Officer : SHRI C. M. SINGH

Union/Workmen The Secretary, R.K. K.M.S ( INTUC) , P.O. Chandametta, Distt. Chhindwara

Versus

The Director ( Personnel) , W.C.L , Coal Estate , Civil Lines , Nagpur(MS)

[PART II--SEC . 3 (ii) ] Shri Anil Kumar Gupta, Optometrist , T& S Gr . " C " of Regional Hospital of WCL , Kanhan Area , PO Dungaria, Distt . Chhindwara (MP) to Sr. Optometrist T& S Gr. B(w.e.f. 1-2-93 ) is justified ? If not , to what reliefthe workman is entitled ? "

2. After the reference order was received, it was duly registered on 16-8-99 and notices were issued to the parties . 25-5-05 was the date fixed in the reference for evidence of workman . On this date , management moved application praying therein that the present dispute be decided in terms of settlement . The management also filed memorandum of settlement Form- H and an affidavit of Shri Gulam Hussain, Personnel Manager (AHQ) Kanhan Area, P.O. Dungaria, Distt . Chhindwara, (MP) . It is stated in the affidavit of Shri Gulam Hussain that during the pendency ofdispute with a view to bring good industrial relationship and harmony, the matter was discussed out of the court between the parties and has been settled. That in pursuance ofthe above settlement , the parties and witnesses signed the settlement deed which has been submitted today. Shri A. K. Shashi , Advocate , the learned counsel for the management submitted that the reference be closed for award and accordingly. No Dispute Award be passed.

3. I have gone through the terms and conditions ofsettlement which are as under : --

(i) That Shri Anil Gupta, Optometrist will withdraw the case No. R/263 / 99 from CGIT Jabalpur as he has already been promoted to post of Sr. Technician ( Refraction/Optometry ) in T& S Gr.B:

(ii) That the promotion order of Shri Anil Gupta for the post of Chief Technician ( Refraction/ Optometry) in T& S Gr. A will be issued after submission of Form H settlement in CGIT, Jabalpur.

(iii) That he will be granted notional seniority inT& S Gr. A w.e.f. 1-11-2004 .

(iv) That he will not raise any dispute arising out of settlement before any Forum/ Court and the issue is settled as full and final ..

Management

AWARD

Passed on this 2nd June . 2005

1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. L - 22012 / 494 / 98 - IR ( CM - II ) dated 26/28-7-99 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal:--

"Whether the action of the management of WCL , CoalEstate, Civil Lines, Nagpur (MS) in not promoting (v) That the named workman /Union will jointly file the settlement before the CGIT Jabalpur with request for Consent Award.

4. The above terms and conditions of the settlement arejust , proper and legal and therefore the Award is passed in terms of settlement with no order as to costs .

5. The copy of the award be sent to the Government ofIndia, Ministry of Labour as per rules .

C. M. SINGH, Presiding Officer [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, जून, 2005

का. आ. 2516.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, आर.ए.पी.एस. 1 एवं 2 प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , जयपुर ( संदर्भ संख्या सी.जी.आई.टी.-63/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42012/236/2003- आईआर ( सीएम- II ) ] एन. पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi , the 9th June , 2005

S.O. 2516. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. CGIT-63 / 2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court, Jaipur as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Rajasthan Atomic Power Station 1 & 2 and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 9-6-2005.

[No. L-42012/236/2003 - IR (CM -II) ]

N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

अनुबन्ध

केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण एवं श्रम न्यायालय,

जयपुर

प्रकरण संख्या:-सीजीआईटी-63/2004 निर्देश संख्या:- एल-42012/ 236/2003 - आईआर ( सी.एम.- II ) सचिव,

राजस्थान अनुशक्ति परियोजना कर्मचारी संघ ( इंटक) , प्रताप सर्कल , रावतभाटा वाया कोटा,

...प्रार्थी रावतभाटा ( कोटा ) 323307

बनाम

साइट डायरेक्टर,

राजस्थान अनुशक्ति पावर स्टेशन 1 व 2,

पो. अनुशक्ति रावतभाटा वाया कोटा,

रावतभाटा (कोटा ) 323307

...अप्रार्थी उपस्थित

श्री आर. सी. शर्मा, पीठासीन अधिकारी

प्रार्थी की ओर से:

कोई भी उपस्थित नहीं

अप्रार्थी की ओर से: सर्वश्री मनीष भंडारी एवं धर्मेन्द्र जैन

18-05-2005

पंचाट की तिथि :

7913

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

पंचाट

1. केन्द्र सरकार, के द्वारा निम्न औद्योगिक विवाद धारा 10 की उपधारा ( एक ) के खंड ( घ) व उपधारा ( 2ए ) , औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम ( संक्षेप में अधिनियम ) के प्रावधानों के अंतर्गत न्याय- निर्णयन हेतु इस न्यायालय को प्रेषित किया गया है:

"Whether the action of the Site Director, RAPS 1 & 2 in not allowing the workman Sh. Arif Ali , JRA - I to appear in the upgradtion examination for the post of JRA- II held on 23-3-2003 was legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?"

2. प्रार्थी संघ की ओर से वाद विवरण के अंतर्गत यह अंकित किया गया है कि प्रार्थी संघ द्वारा समझौता अधिकारी के समक्ष एक विवाद उठाया गया था कि श्रमिक आरिफ अली , कनिष्ठ सहायक -1 (कार्मिक ) , को दिनांक 23-3-2003 को होने जा रही पदोन्नति की लिखित परीक्षा में सम्मिलित किया जाये क्योंकि उसके साथी श्री शैतान सिंह मीणा, कनिष्ठ सहायक -1 ( कार्मिक ) को लिखित परीक्षा में एक ही साथ नियुक्तिके अंतर्गत पात्रता प्रदान की गयी है । किन्तु, उक्त समझौता वार्ता सफल नहीं हो सकी । प्रार्थी संघ ने अग्रतर यह लेख किया है कि विपक्षी संस्थान के मुख्यालय से जारी परिपत्र के द्वारा कनिष्ठ सहायक-1 से कनिष्ठ सहायक-2 में पदोन्नति प्रदान करने हेतु एक लिखित परीक्षा में सम्मिलित होने के लिए परिपत्र जारी किया गया था, किन्तु उसके अनुरूप श्रमिक आरिफ अली, को अनुमति प्रदान नहीं की गयी, जबकि श्री शैतान सिंह मीणा को अनुमति प्रदान कर दी गयी । प्रार्थी संघ द्वारा विपक्षी संस्थान की भेद- भावपूर्ण नीति होना प्रकट किया गया है तथा श्रमिक को कनिष्ठ सहायक-2 ( कार्मिक) के पद पर दिनांक1-4-2003 से पदोन्नति प्रदान करने की मांग की गई है ।

3. विपक्षी संस्थान को प्रतिवाद पत्र प्रस्तुत करने हेतु अनेकों अवसर दिये गये किन्तु उनके द्वारा प्रतिवाद पत्र प्रस्तुत नहीं किये जाने पर दिनांक 11-5-2005 को उनकी जवाबदेही बंद की गयी । 4. विद्वान प्रतिनिधि विपक्षी को सुना गया तथा अभिलेख का अवलोकन किया गया।

5. इस अधिकरण में वर्तमान निदेश प्राप्त होने पर दोनों पक्षों कोनोटिस संप्रेषित किये गये । प्रार्थी संघ की ओर से वाद विवरण डाक के द्वारा न्यायालय को प्रेषित किया गया । जो दिनांक 10-1-2005 को न्यायालय में प्राप्त हुआ । उसके उपरांत न्यायालय द्वारा निश्चित की गयी विभिन्न दिनांकों में से किसी भी दिनांक पर प्रार्थी संघ की ओर से कोई भी उपस्थितनहीं हुआ । स्वयं प्रार्थी भी न्यायालय में उपस्थित नहीं हुआ है । ऐसा प्रतीत होता है कि प्रार्थी संघ अथवा श्रमिक इस विवाद को अग्रिम कार्रवाई में रूचि नहीं रखते हैं । अभिलेख के अवलोकन से यह भी स्पष्ट है कि विवादित परीक्षा दिनांक 23-3-2003 को समायोजित की जाने वाली थी , जिसके पश्चात् इस विवाद की न्यायालय में कार्रवाई प्रारंभ हुई है । अतः ऐसी अवस्था में यह निदेश प्रभावहीन भी हो जाता है । क्योंकि दिनांक 23-3-2003 को होने वाली परीक्षा के समायोजन के उपरांत प्रार्थी संघ [PART II- SEC. 3 (ii) ] 7914

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

AWARD

Passed on 25-5-2005

द्वारा इच्छित अनुतोष विफल हो जाता है । इन परिस्थितियों के अंतर्गत इस प्रकरण में विवाद रहित पंचाट पारित किया जाता है ।

6. पंचाट की प्रतिलिपि केन्द्र सरकार को अधिनियम, 1947 की धारा 17 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अन्तर्गत प्रकाशनार्थ प्रेषित की जाए ।

Central Govt. vide notification No. L- 22012/275/ 1998- IR(C- II) dated 4-6-2003 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

आर. सी. शर्मा, पीठासीन अधिकारी

नई दिल्ली, 15 जून , 2005

"Whether the action of the Management of Food Corporation of India Kurukshetra in terminating the services of Sh. Sher Singh is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief he is entitled to ? "

का. आ. 2517. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एफ. सी. आई. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नम्बर -1 , चंडीगढ़ ( संदर्भ संख्या 81/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 15-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

2. The case taken up in Lok Adalat . The authroised rep. of the workman Shri Ved Parkash withdraw the present reference in Lok Adalat vide his statement recorded on 9-5-05 to this effect . In view of the same the present reference is returned as withdrawn in Lok Adalat . Central Govt . be informed. File be consigned to record.

Chandigarh.

[सं. एल -22012/275/98- आईआर ( सी- II ) ]

25-5-2005

एन. पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 15 जून, 2005

New Delhi , the 15th June , 2005

का. आ. 2518. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एफ. सी. आई. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नम्बर-1 , चंडीगढ़ ( संदर्भ संख्या 52/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जोकेन्द्रीय सरकार को 15-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । S.O. 2517.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 81 / 2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court -No . 1 , Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Food Corporation of India , and their workman, received by the Central Government on 15-6-2005 .

[सं. एल-22012/203/98- आईआर ( सी- II ) ] एन. पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi, the 15th June , 2005 [No. L- 22012/275/98 - IR (C - II) ] N. P. KESAVAN , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

S.O. 2518. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 52 / 2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court -No . 1 , Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Food Corporation of India, and their workman , received by the Central Government on 15-6-2005 .

BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT . INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT -1 , CHANDIGARH

Case No. I.D. 81/2004

[No. L -22012/203 /98 - IR ( C- II ) ] N. P. KESAVAN , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, Shri Sher Singh through FCI Karamachari Sangthan , BMS Aggarsain Chowk Mohan Nagar, Kurukshetra.

..Applicant

Versus

PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT - 1 , CHANDIGARH

The Distt . Manager , Food Corporation of India, Kurukshetra . Respondents

Case No. L.D. -52/2004

APPEARANCES :

Shri Pritam Singh through FCI Karamachari Sangthan . BMS Aggarsain Chowk, Mohan Nagar, Kurukshetra .

Forthe workman : Shri Ved Parkash

Applicant For the management : Shri N.K. Zakhmi [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7915 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Versus

ANNEXURE

The Distt. Manager, Food Corporation of India, Kurukshetra .

....Respondents

BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT- 1 , CHANDIGARH

APPEARANCES :

Case No. I.D. 34/2004

For the workman : Shri Ved Parkash .

For the management: Shri N.K. Zakhmi .

Shri Rajesh Kumar through FCI Karamachari Sangthan, BMS Aggarsain Chowk, Mohan Nagar, Kurukshetra .

AWARD

Applicant Passed on 25-5-2005

Versus

TheDistt .Manager, Food Corporation of India, Kurukshetra .

Central Govt. vide notification No. L- 22012/203/98- IR( C - II) dated 4-6-2003 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

....

Respondents

APPEARANCES :

Forthe workman : Shri Ved Parkash .

"Whether the action of the Management of Food Corporation of India Kurukshetra in terminating the services of Sh. Pritam Singh is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief he is entitled to ? "

For the management : Shri N.K. Zakhmi .

AWARD

Passed on 25-5-2005

2. The case taken up in Lok Adalat. The authroised rep. of the workman Shri Ved Parkash withdraw the present reference in Lok Adalat vide his statement recorded on 9-5-05 to this effect . In view of the same the present reference is returned as withdrawn in Lok Adalat . Central Govt. be informed. File be consigned to record.

Chandigarh.

Central Govt . vide notification No. L- 22012/308/98- IR(C- II) dated 4-6-2003 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

25-5-2005

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 15 जून, 2005

"Whether the action of the Management of Food Corporation of India Kurukshetra in terminating the services of Sh. Rajesh Kumar is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief he is entitled to ? " का. आ. 2519. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एफ. सी. आई. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नम्बर-1 , चंडीगढ़ ( संदर्भ संख्या 34/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जोकेन्द्रीय सरकार को 15-06-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-22012/308/98- आईआर ( सी- II ) ]

Chandigarh.

एन. पी. केशवन, डेस्क अधिकारी

25-5-2005

New Delhi , the 15th June , 2005

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer नईदिल्ली, 15 जून, 2005

का. आ. 520. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सी. एस. आई. ओ. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नम्बर-1 , चंडीगढ़ ( संदर्भ संख्या 40/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 15-06-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । S.O. 2519. -In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 34/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum - Labour Court -No. 1 , Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Food Corporation of India , and their workman , received by the Central Government on 15-06-2005.

[सं. एल-42012/207/2002- आईआर ( सीएम- II ) ] [No. L -22012/308/98 - IR( C-II)]

N. P. KESAVAN , Desk Officer

एन. पी. केशवन, डेस्क अधिकारी [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )] 7916

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 20 जून, 2005

New Delhi , the 15th June , 2005

का. आ. 2521.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बैंक ऑफ बड़ोदा 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 8/97 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 17-06-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

S.O. 2520.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 40/2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum -Labour Court -No . 1 , Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the management of Central Scientific Instruments Organisation and their workmen, receivedby the Central Government on 15-06-2005 .

[सं० एल -12012/287/95- आईआर ( बी- II ) ] [No. L-42012/207/2002 - IR (CM - II) ]

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

New Delhi, the 20th June , 2005 ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-1 , CHANDIGARH

Case No. I.D. 40/2003

S.O. 2521.2521 In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 8/97) 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 Bank of Baroda and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 17-6-2005.

[No. L- 12012/ 287/ 95 -IR (B - II) ] Shri Baldev Singh, House No. 263 , Sector 7A, Chandigarh

C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

....Applicant

Versus

ANNEXURE

The Director, Central Scientific Instruments Organisation, Sector - 30 , Chandigarh

Respondents

APPEARANCES:

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT- II , RAJENDRA BHAWAN, GROUND FLOOR, RAJENDRA PLACE , NEW DELHI

Workman with R.P. Rana

For the workman :

R. N. Rai , Presiding Officer

For the management : Shri I.S. Sidhu

AWARD

L.D. No. 8/97

Passed on 25-5-2005

IN THE MATTER OF :

Central Govt . vide notification No. L-42012/207/2002- IR (CM- II ) dated 17-2-2003 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

Sh . Lal Bahadur S /o Sh . Subedar, R/o H. No. 61 , Ram Nagar Colony, Shahjahanpur , U.P.

Versus

The Zonal Manager ,

"Whether the action of the management of CSIO , Chandigarh in terminating the services of Shri Baldev Singh, Security Guard w.e.f. 31-1-2001 is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief he is entitled to ?"

Bank ofBaroda, Zonal Office, Govindganj , Shahjhanpur - 242001.

AWARD

2. The case taken up in Lok Adalat. The workman Shri Baldev Singh withdraw the present reference in Lok Adalat vide his statement recorded on 24-5-05 to this effect . In view of the same the present reference is returned as withdrawn in Lok Adalat . Central Govt . be informed . File be consigned to record.

TheMinistry ofLabour by its letter No. L- 12012/287/ Chandigarh.

95- IR (B - II) Central Government Dt. 07-01-1997 has referred the following point for adjudication.

25-5-2005

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

7917 The point runs as hereunder :-

"Whether the action of the management of Baroda Regional Office , Shahjahanpur in terminating the service of Shri Lal Bahadur, peon w.e.f. 19-11-1994 is just and legal ? If not, what relief is the workman entitled to."

That earlier to this also, the Branch Manager had sent necessary information about the workman to the Regional Office by a letter dt.09-11-1993 , which is on record of the management bank . That when the workman was expecting that his case for being absorbed as a permanent peonwouldbe favourably considered by the Regional Office in view of his long satisfactory service in the existing permanent vacancy of peon at Govindganj Branch where he had been working since November, 1989 and in view of the strong recommendations of the Branch Manager, the Branch Manager told him on 19-11-1994 that the Regional Office had instructed him to terminate his services immediately and asked the workman not to come for duty from the next day. That when thus abruptly terminating the services ofworkman on 19-11-1994 , neither any written order, nor any prior notice was given to him by the management and no reasons were assigned for such abrupt and arbitrarytermination of his services .

The workman has filed statement of claim . In his statement of claim, it has been stated that the workman was initially appointed at Govindganj Branch of the Bank under its Shahjahanpur Region in November, 1989 to work as a temporary peon and he continued to work at the said branch of the bank till 19-11-1994 when his services were terminated by the management . That at the time of his appointment in November, 1989 the workman was required to produce the necessary certificate in support of his age andeducational qualification and caste certificate and his appointment was made after ascertaining his eligibility and suitability for the post of a bank peon. Copies of the School Leaving Certificate and Caste Certificate produced by the workman for the purpose of his appointment are enclosed as Annexure W - 1 and W-2 respectively.

Thatafter termination of his services from 19-11-1994, the management appointed other person in his place at Govindganj Branch. That aggrieved by such unjust and illegal action of the management in terminating his services from 19-11-1994, the workman raised an Industrial Dispute in the matter before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Dehradun on 29-11-1994, but the conciliation proceedings initiated and held by the Assistant Labour Commissioner ended in failure of any settlement of the dispute on 15-06-1995 , leading to the present order of reference of the dispute by the Government to this Hon'ble Tribunal for adjudication.

That even though the posts/vacancy of peon in which the workman was appointed from November, 1989 at Govindganj Branch was permanent and the workman was required to perform the duties of a full- time full- fledged office peon at the said Branch , but he was being paid less than the pay and allowances payable to members of subordinate staff under the Bipartite Settlements , and it was only from January, 1994 that the management started paying to him wages equal to the pay and allowances, payable to members of subordinate staff at the first stage of the prescribed scale .

Though initially the workman was appointed in November, 1989 at Govindganj Branch as a temporarypeon but the post/vacancy of peon in which he was appointed was permanent and so , the action of the management in treating him as a daily wages employees and payment of just lump- sum wages less than the wages payable to members of subordinate staff as per scales of pay and allowances as per Bipartite Settlements was an act of unfair labour practices and exploitation of the poverty and unemployment of the workman . The post/vacancy of peon in which the workman was appointment at Govindganj Branch from November, 1989 being permanent, the workman could not be treated as a casual or daily wager and not evenas a temporary within the definitions of "Temporary Employee " given in clause 20.7 ofthe Bipartite Settlement dt.19-10-1966.

That after the workman had worked for sufficiently long as a temporary peon in the existing and continuing permanent post/vacancy of peon at Govindganj Branch , he request the Branch Manager to take up his case with the Regional Office for being absorbed as a permanent peon and though the branch manager told the workman that his case for absorption as a permanent peon had been taken up by him with the Regional Office and was under their consideration, but he was kept being treated as a temporary peon and so , ultimately, the workman put up a written representation on 05-09-1994 addressed to the Regional Manager, Shahjahanpur for absorption as a permanent peon . That the above representation of the workman was forwarded by the Manager , Govindganj Branch to Regional Office , Shahjahanpur with his letter dt . 07-09-1994 , certifying the work and conduct of the workman as fully satisfactory and strongly recommending his case to the Regional Office . A copy of Branch Manager's letter dt. 07-09-1994, referred to above is enclosed as Annexure W-3 hereto.

It is submitted that since the workman was appointed in an existing and continuing permanent post/vacancy of peon atGovindganj Branch from November, 1989, it could not be said that he was appointed for work of a temporary nature, nor could it be said that he was appointed as an additional workman in connection with temporary increase ofwork of any nature and he certainly was not appointed in any temporary vacancy of any particular permanent 1993 G1/05-50 7918

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)]

caused by the management on a number of occasions in his otherwise continuous service .

The management has filed written statement . In the written statement , it has been stated that the bank herein is Government of India's undertaking in public sector having a network of its branches and offices in India and abroad.

workman. In view of the above facts and also in view of the fact that the permanent post/vacancy of peon at Govindganj Branch in which the workman was appointed from November, 1989 was still existing /continuing at Govindganj Branch on 19-11-1994 when his services were terminated, the termination of his services was clearly un-called- for, arbitrary, malafide unjust and illegal and an act of colourable exercise of their power by the management.

The vacancy in which the workman was appointed from November, 1989 at Govindganj Branch was permanent and the appointment of the workman in the said vacancy was made after duly ascertaining his eligibility and assessing his suitability for the post of a peon , as stated in para 2(b) hereinabove . Therefore when the workman was continued in the said permanent post vacancy of peon at Govindganj Branch not only for three months but for five years thereafter, with no other arrangement being made by the Bank to otherwise fill up the said post/vacancy, the workman had become entitled to be treated as having been appointed as a probationer from the very date of his appointment and to be treated as a confirmed peon after expiry of six months.

Broadly, all employees in the bank are classified into two main categories or cadres and these are (a) ' Non- workmen' i.e. managers , officers and supervisors and (b ) 'workmen', also called ' Award Staff, within the meaning of the term defined u/ s 2 (s ) of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (briefly, ID Act) . The workman of the award staff are also classified into ( i) clerks and ( ii ) sub - staff i.e. class IV such as peons, sweepers , farashers etc. It may be stated with relevance that recruitment & seleciton of persons for appointment as clerks on substantive basis against identified permanent posts or vacancies within the caste strength is made through Banking Services Recruitment Board. The selected persons are given appointment by the bank . The new appointees are in the first instance , places onprobation and after they successfully complete the probatonary period they are confirmed by the appointing or any other competent authority by an order passed in writing to that effect . The regional managers are appointing authority in the cases of clerks .

Therefore, when the workman had worked for five years in a permanent post/vacancy of peon at Govindganj Branch , the termination of his services from 19-11-1994 was violative of the provisions of clause 20.8 of Bipartite Settlementdt . 19-10-1966 , apart frombeing against the spirit ofclauses 20.9 , 20.10 and 20.11 of the said settlement . After theBipartite Settlementdt . 19-10-1966 the bank had agreed to/ decided to absorb such temporary employees who had worked for 240 days or more during any 12 calendar months between01-01-1982 to 31-12-1990 , as confirmed employee without any selection process and without applying the eligibility norms and so , when the workman was appointed after duly ascertaining his eligibility and adjudging his suitability for the post of peon before appointing him from November , 1989 and had also worked for more than 240 days between November, 1989 and December, 1990 the termination of his services from 19-11-1994 by which time he hadworked in a permanent vacancy for a period spread over five years , was clearly malafide, intended to deprive him of the benefit of permanency of service under the aforesaid dispensation.

Inthe case of recruitment of sub - staff or class IV employees the bank , being an establishment in public sector, notifies all substantive vacancies to employment exchanges in compliance of provisions of Employment Exchanges Act , save & to the extent exemption is granted by the Government's appropriate authorities or the DGET. The candidates who are sponsored by the employment exchange ( s) are interviewed by the bank's own seleciton committee and those candidates who are adjudged suitable, are appointed and confirmed in the same manner are the clerks . Sub - staff is also appointed by Regional Managers with the concurrence & approval of Zonal Managers . It may also be stated here with pertinence in passing that the identified permanent strength in clerical & sub - staff cadre isdeterminedby the management of the bank from time to time on considerations such as size of the branch or office and volume of work etc.

Itis submitted that while the workman had worked for 276 days during the period from November, 1989 to December, 1990 in support of which a certificate of the Branch Manager, Govindganj Branch is enclosed as Annexure W/ 4 hereto , the service of the workman was continuous from January, 1991 to November, 1994 when his services were terminated from 19-11-1994 , except for intervening Sundays /Holiday for which wages were not paid to him and the artificial and illegal breaks deliberately

Apart from two All india Industrial Tribunal (Bank Disputes) Awards , popularly known as ' Sastri Award ' and 'Desai Award' , there are all India Bipartite Settlements which have been arrived at between the managements of entire banking industry in the country and their workmen through their respective unions or associations . These awards and settlements regulate employer - employee relations , their respective rights & obligations and the terms & conditions of service of those workmen who have been recruited in 7919 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

date with the Government had prescribed in the scheme , 31-12-1990 was mistakenly notified as the cut off date in the bank's advertisement .

the bank as per procedure pointed out hereinabove on substantive basis and have been confirmed in the bank's service those awards and settlements are not applicable to daily rated ad hoc casual workers like the workman herein.

The Hon'ble Tribunal will appreciate that it is well established law that daily rated ad hoc casual temporary workers whom an employer has engaged or employed in distress such as pending recruitment , selection , appointment and posting of a regular appointee as in the instant case, no indefeasible right can be held to have accrued for such workers to claim even continued engagement or employment, let alone claim for confirmation on the post and they have to move out on the joining of regular appointee . It is submitted that the workman herein isvirtually seeking what is called ' Back door ' entry in the bank's service and since the Hon'ble Supreme Court has , in a number of pronouncements , disapproved and invalidated such ' enteries ' in public sector undertakings , being ingross violation of mandate of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution , this Hon'ble Tribunal would also in its wisdom not allow the workman to succeed in his designs orattempt.

It is stated here with relevance in passing for kind information of the Hon'ble Tribunal that inspite of Government and the bank giving opportunity, the workman herein did not chose to avail the same for compecting in the recruitment process for being considered for absorption on regular basis in the bank's service as a peon against future vacancies as was envisaged in Government's scheme/policy decision. Since the process of recruitment, selection and appointment ofpersons under Government's scheme and subsequent to bank's advertisement was already in progress in 1992 and since its completion was likely to be a long drawn process in view of very large number of application the bank had received in response to its advertisement thereto the management of the bank preferred to engage the workman again as an ad hoc daily rated worker in 1992 pending appointment of regular appointee. The management preferred to engage the workman as he had worked earlier also in 1985 and 1986 as such in the same branch and in so engaging the workman the management adhered to the mandate of law that one ad hocworker should not be replaced by another ad hoc worker on the scheme job .

It was submitted from the date of side of the workman applicant that exhibit W -5 is a letter dated 26-12-1994 written to the Regional Manager, Shahjahanpur for, absorption of dailywager. It has been mentioned in the letter that Shri Lal Bahadur has performed 1096 days as daily wager after December 1990 so he should be absorbed . This letter has beenexhibited in the affidavit of the workman applicant . It has not been denied by the management so it shall be deemed to be admitted as it is supported by affidavit of the workman applicant and no question has been put up regarding W- 5 in the cross examination of the workman applicant.

Itwas further submitted they letter dated 9-11-1993

exhibit W-6 , Branch Mana,

The problem of providing regular employment to those daily rates workers who had worked as peons in public sector banks between 1-1-82 and 31-12-89 but could not be employed on regular basis due to restrictions imposed by the government on further recruitment of people against substantive posts or vacancies in public sector banks , had been engaging the attention of the government for quite sometime past . Thus it was with a view to deal with that problem and to ameliorate the hardships of those unemployed persons that the Government of India, after consideration of all relevant facts and in consultation with the Ministry of Labour, worked out a scheme to deal with that problem . The said scheme as contained in what is called as the ' Approach Paper " allongwith necessary guidelines to give effect to the scheme was circulated to all public sector banks , including the bank herein . A copy of the aforesaid scheme /approach paper alongwith Government's directives is Annexure - I .

rote to the Regional sub -staff in the light of Manager regarding vacancies Circular dated 9-7-1992 and information for filling the vacancies by Shri Lal Bahadur has been mentioned in this letter . This document has also not been denied by the management and no question has been asked regarding this letter so it shall be deemed admitted.

Itwas further submitted that W - 4 is letter dated 07-09-1994 and in this letter also a request has been made for appointment of subordinate staff Mr. Lal Bahadur. This letter has also been exhibited in the affidavit and no question regarding this exhibit has been put by the management in the cross of the workman applicant so this letter shall be deemed to be admitted to the In furtherance of government's above mentioned Scheme/policy decision & directives , the management of the bank issued a circular letterdt . 17-08-1991 to all its branches and offices advising them to abide by the instructions contained therein . A copy of the bank's above letter is appended herewith with relevance as Annexure -2 . In further compliance of Government's scheme, the bank issued an advertisement in Hindi and English national dailies a copy of which is also appended herewith as Annexure -3 for kind perusal ofthis Hon'ble Tribunal with the explanation that in place of 31-12-1989 as the cut off 7920

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 / ASADHA 25 , 1927

management . Thus it becomes quite obvious that the Branch Manager has written letters dated 09-11-1993 W-6 for filling up the vacancies by Shri Lal Bahadur . W-5 isletter dated 26-12-1994 for absorption of Shri Lal Bahadur and W -4 is the letter for appointment of Shri Lal Bahadur as subordinate staff. These three letters have been written to the Regional Manager for absorption and appointment of the workman applicant as subordinate staff and it has been also admitted that he has worked for 1096 days after December 1990.

Itwas submitted from the side of the management that there is approach paper dated 29-09-1988 . In this approach paper it has been specifically mentioned that whereworkmen are retrenched and the employer proposes to take into his employment persons , he shall , in such manner as may be prescribed, give opportunity to the retrenched workmen to offer themselves for reemployment. Such retrenched workmen , who offer themselves for reemployment shall have preference .

It has been further specified in Para 6 (a) as hereunder:

(a) The case of temporary employees who have put in not less than 240 days of temporary service in twelve consecutive months and who are entitled to the benefit of Section 25 F of the ID Act may be decided by entering into settlement with the representative union . It may be pointed out in order to have a binding effect of the settlement on the other parties who are not parties to the settlement , it will be necessary that the settlement should be arrived in course of conciliation proceedings . The terms of the settlement can be negotiated by the management of the bank with its representative union during the conciliation proceedings and may be given effect too in terms of provisions of ID Act .

It becomes quite explicit that temporary employees who have completed 240 days service in twelve calendar months shall be absorbed in conciliation proceedings. The management has not done so in the conciliation procedings before the ALC.

The workman has completed 1096 days work after December 1990 as such in view of Section 25 F of the ID Act the workman deserved to be absorbed according to the approach paper itself. In Annexure - II Page 16 there isreferences of recruitment and absorption of temporary employees . This letter is of 1991. In this letter also there is direction from the Government that those workmen who have worked on temporary basis on any of

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] Branches / Offices in India as Peon for 90 days and more between 01-01-1982 to 31-12-1990 their cases should be considered for regularization after inviting application from them.

Itwas submitted that the side of the management that there is recruitment process and the workman are engaged in view of the heavy load of work or on leave vacancies . This workman was employed as such . I have referred to the letters W- 4 to W- 6 and it has not been mentioned anywhere that the workman applicant was engaged in distress or daily rated worker or an adhoc casual, temporary employee . He has worked in the Bank for 1096 days after 1990 so it cannot be said that any process was pending for recruitment and apointment of newly selected candidates . In view of the Sastri Award and Desai Award after even temporary work of six months an employee should be paid compensation . No compensation has been paid to the workman applicant . According to the approach paper those employees who have worked for more than 240 days should be regularized on the basis of negotiations . No negotiations have been made in this context .

Itwas further submitted that 31-12-1990 was the cut off date in the Bank advertisement . This workman has worked for 240 days in 1989 and 1990 also . In view of this fact also his application should have been considered and he should have been regularly appointed but the management has not done so deliberately whereas in the approach paper there is express provision for regularization of such workmen .

to It was further submitted from the side of the management that Shri Lal Bahadur worked from time to time as daily rated and adhoc casual worker sometimes as water boy and he performed sundry jobs . Sometimes he was engaged as peon. It has been admitted that he was engaged for the first time on 09-11-1989 as water boy and has worked up to 30-12-1989 and then from 09-01-1990 to 08-12-1990 . It has been admitted by the management in the letters referred to above that he worked as daily wager. So he cannot be said to be water boy. The period from 09-01-1990 08-12-1990 is more than 240 days so he has worked in the bank for 240 days prior to the cut off date of 31-12-1990. It has been submitted from the side of management that the workman has never directly applied for employment in the Bank . His name was not sponsored by employment exchange. W-4 to W-6 are the letters sent by the Branch Manager to the Regional Manager for appointment of the workman applicant as subordinate staff and his absorption . The Branch Manager has done so on the request of the workman applicant . So there is no force in the argument of management that he has not applied for substantive post . In W - 4 & W - 5 it has not [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

7921 भारत काराजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

applicant should have been regularized but the management has not done so deliberately and with malafide intentions.

Itwas further submitted from the side ofthe workman thathe should be reinstated with full back wages . He is an unskilled worker and it cannot be presumed that he sat idle for so long period. He has to sustain his livelihood so he mustbe doing some sort of work. His source of livelihood has not been disclosed by he workman applicant . In the circumstances 50 % back wages are sufficient for the ends ofjustice.

been mentioned that he has worked as a water boy . The management has admitted in the written statement that sometimes he was engaged as peon also . In Annexure W-4 to W- 6 he has been mentioned as daily wager and he has worked for 1096 days after December 1990 and according to the Bank's own admission in written statement he has worked from 09-01-1990 to 08-12-1990 as peon so he has completed 240 days before cut off date also and he has completed 1096 days after cut off date . The management has not regularized him . It indicates that the management has idulged in unfair labour practice. In Annexure W-4 it has been specifically mentioned that the workman has worked for 276days from November 1989 to 31-12-1990 . The cut off date was 31-12-1990 so prior to 31-12-1990 the workman has worked for more than 240 days and there is no mention in the letter that the workman applicant has worked as a water boy. In letter dated 17-08-1991 the management has been directed that the workmen who have worked for 90 days between 01-01-1982 to 31-12-1990 should be considered for regular appointment . The management has not followed the direciton of the Government . The management has not followed the guidelines laid down in the approach paper referred to above so in view of the guidelines Anneuire - II and approach paper Annexure - I the workman should have been regularized in view of the direcitons of the Government and the approach paper of the management but the management has not done so . In approach paper Annexure - I and Annexure - II there is no condition that the workman should be sponsored by the employment exchange so the plea of being sponsored by the emplolyment exchange is a false plea taken by the management . The workman applicant has not been paid compensation.

Itwas submitted from the side of the management that the workman in his cross -examination has admitted that he cannot say for how many days he has worked. From the letter of the management it becomes obvious that he has worked for 4-5 years continuously. He is a layman so the management cannot rely on his cross- examination as the management has admitted the working days of the workman applicant . The workman applicant has worked for more than 3 to 4 years continuously and so his services should be regularized . The management has not followed fair practice . The management is a state under Article 12 of the Constitution . Fair procedure from the management is expected in view of the settled law of the Hon'ble Supreme Court My attention was drawn to (2002 ) 3 SCC 25 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the workman should establish by evidence other than affidavit that he has done more than 240 days work. The workman has succeded to prove by the letters of the management that he has worked for more than 240 days so he is entitled to be resinstated/ regularized in view of Section 25 F of the ID Act . AISLJ 5-2002 Page 29 is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case. The law cited by the management is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case .

The reference is replied thus :-

The action of the management of Bank of Baroda . Regional Office , Shahjahanpur in terminating the service of Shri Lal Bahadur, Peon w.e.f. 19-11-1994 is neither just nor legal . The workman applicant deserves to be reinstated with 50 % back wages w.e.f. 19-11-1994. The management is directed to reinstate the workman applicant w.e.f. 19-11-1994 within one month after publication of the Award with 50 % back wages . In case of default the workman applicant will be entitled to 12% interest on the entire back wages .

The Award is given accordingly.

Date: 14-06-2005.

Itwas submitted from the side of the management that the name of the workman has not been sponsored by the employment exchange . In 1987 I LLJ the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that there is no compulsion under the act to make appointments through employment exchange . The appointment of persons sponsored by employment exchange does not restrict the field of choice of appointment but the field of choice is enlarged . Instructions cannot be issued to statutory bodies by the Government . Sponsoring by employment exchange is done so that the freshers may not be taken through back doors . In the instant case that rule is not applicable in corporate bodies in view of the Judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court cited above . In view of Section 25 F of the ID Act and in view of the approach paper and the Government's guidelines the workman

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer 7922

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ] नई दिल्ली, 20 जून , 2005

का.आ. 2522.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार बैंक ऑफ बड़ोदाके प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं ० 2 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 9/97 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 17-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

1 [सं. एल-12012/296/95 - आई.आर. ( बी- II ) ] सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

The workman has filed statement of claim. In his statement of claim , it has been stated that the workman was initially appointed at Khuttar Branch of the management Bank under its Shahjahanpur Region in U.P. November, 1987 to work as a temporary peon and worked there till August, 1988 with intermittent breaks in service. That after August, 1988 , the workman was again given appointment in March, 1989 when he was posted to work as a temporary peon for some time at Khuttar Branch and thereafter at Malika branch till October, 1989 with intermittent breaks and no further employment was given to the workman after October. 1989. The period for which the workman worked as a temporary peon between November, 1987 and October , 1989 at the aforesaid two branches is on record of the bank.

New Delhi , the 20th June , 2005

S.O. 2522.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 9/97) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court , No. 2. New Delhi as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial dispute between the management of Bank of Baroda and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 17-6-2003 .

[No. L- 12012/ 296 / 95 - IR ( B - II) ] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER: CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT- II , NEWDELHI

I.D. No. 9/97

Presiding Officer : R.N. Rai

Thatthough during the aforesaid period the workman had worked as a full time, full - fledged office peon, but he was paid only lump- sum wages at the rate of Rs . 25 /- per day instead of being paid the scale wages prescribed for the members of subordinate staff in the Bipartite Settlements . That after October 1989 , the workman was re- employed a Malika Branch as a temporary peon from 15-01-1990 to 19-02-1990 but again no further employment was given to him after 10-02-1990. That during the period from November, 1981 to February 1990 the workman had worked for a total period of about 20 days at Khuttar and Malika branches and in between the period of his unemployment , during this period , the management had been employing other persons at these two and other branches at Shahjahanpur Region and though the workman continued to approach the management after 10-02-1990 for further employment , but no further employment was given to him after 10-02-1990 , though other persons continued to be appointed as temporary peons at the branches under Shahjahanpur Region after 10-02-1990 also .

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Sh . Ram Kishan S/ o Sh . Het Ram , R/o Village Mohalia , Post Pipariakaptan. Distt. Kheri (Lakheempur ) U.P.

Versus

The Zonal Manager,

That it was only on or about Ist June , 1993 that the workman was asked by Manager, Khuttar branch to report atRegional Office Shahajahanpur branch for an interview with his educational certificates , Caste Certificate and Employment Exchange Registration Card together with the certificates of his past service in the Bank and accordingly. the workman reported at Regional Office Shahjahanpur on 03-06-1993 with the following certificates/documents.

Bank ofBaroda, Zonal Office , Govindganj . Shahajanpur - 242001 .

School Leaving Certificate

AWARD

Mark- Sheet of 8th Class Examination

Caste Certificate of belonging to backwards class

Employment Exchange Registration Card Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L - 12012/296/95- IR(B - II ) Central Government Dt . 7-1-1997 has referred the following point for adjudication .

1 The point runs as hereunder:一

Photo copies of above documents are being enclosed as Annexure W/ 1 to W/ 4 respectively. The workman had also obtained certificates of service from Khuttar and Malika Branches , Photostat copeis of which are also enclosed herewith as Annexures W/ 5 to W/ 10 .

"Whether the action of the management of Bank of Baroda Regional Office . Shahajanhanpur in terminating the services of Shri Ram Kishan , Peon w.e.f. 27-10-1994 is just and legal ? If not, what relief is the workman entitled to ."

That after ascertaining the eligibility of the workman for the post of a peon and judging his suitability therefore , after [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

7923 production of the aforesaid certificates/documents by the workman to the Regional Office, the Regional Office gave a letter dt . 03-06-1993 in the name of Banda Branch , thereby asking the said branch to appoint the workman as Sub-Staff and accordingly, the workman was given appointment as a member of subordinate staff at Banda Branch from 03-06- 1993. A copy of the above Regional Office letterdt . 03-06- 1993 is being enclosed as Annexure W/ 11 hereto.

which the workman was appointed at Banda Branch was permanent, as brought out in sub- para ( h) and (i) of para 2 hereinabove. The post/ vacancy in which the workman was appointed at Banda Branch from 03-06-1993 being permanent , he could not be treated as a daily-wages employee an/ or even as a temporary employee within the meaning of clause 20.7 of the Bipartite Settlement dt. 19-10-1966

That the post/vacancy at Banda Branch in which the workman was appointed from 03-06-1993 was permanent and he was being paid pay and allowances payable at the first stage of the scale wages prescribed for members of subordinate staff under the bipartite Settlements and his name was entered in the staff attendance register alongwith other members of the staff. That as against the strength of 6 clerks and 4-5 officers at Banda Branch at the time of appointment of the workman from 03-06-1993 only one permanent peon, namely Shri Pramod was working at Banda Branch and no permanent peon had been appointed in place ofthe other permanent peon who had been transferred to another Branch on his promotion as Clerk and thus , the post/vacancy of peon in which was appointed from 03-06- 1993 then was an existing , permanent vacancy continuing since the promotion and transfer of the other permanent peon . Shri Sandeep Kumar Jaswal .

It issubmitted that the workman was appointed at Bandabranch from 03-06-1993 in an existing and continuing permanent vacancy of peon arising from transfer of a permanent peon from Banda Branch on his promotion to clerical cadre before the appointment of the workman. Therefore , it could not be said that the workman was appointed for work of a temporary nature , nor could it be said that he was appointed as an additional peon in connection of temporary increase of work, and as the vacancy itself was permanent , it is also clear that the workman was not appointed as a substitute in the temporary vacancy of any particular permanent workman. It is submitted that in view of the above facts and also in view of the fact that the permanent vacancy in which the workman was appointed at Banda Branch from 03-06-1993 was still existing at the time of termination of services of workman from 27-10-1994 , the termination of his services from 27-10-1994 was arbitrary, malafide , hence unjustified and illegal.

Because in terms of clause 20.8 of the Bipartite Settlementdt . 19-10-1966 , a workman could not be continued as a temporary employee for more than three months during which the bank has to make arrangement to fill the vacancy permanently. The said clause reads as under:--

"20.8. A temporary workman may also be appointed to fill a permanent vacancy provided that such temporary appointment shall not exceed three months during which the bank shall make arrangement for filling up the vacancy permanently. If such a temporary workman is eventually selected for filling up the vacancy, the period of such temporary employment will be taken into account as a part ofhis probationary period. "

That during the period of working at Banda Branch, I was deputed to work at Dhaka Ghanshyam Branch from 12-12-1993 to 31-12-1993 in the exigencies of work at Dhaka Ghanshyam Branch . That when he had worked continuously at Banda Branch for about 22 months from 03-06-1993 to the full satisfaction of the management about he work and conduct, his services were abruptly terminated from 27-10-1994 just by oral orders of the Branch manager that he had been instructed by the Regional Office to discontinue his services . No prior notice , nor any reasons were given to him by the management when thus abruptly terminating his services from 27-10-1994. That aggrieved by such arbitrary, unjust and illegal termination of his services by the management from 27-10-1994 , the workman raised and industrial dispute in the matter before the Assistant Labour Commissioner ( Central ) Dehradun on 19-11-1994, but the conciliation proceedings initiated and held by the Assistant Labour Commissioner ended in failure of any settlement of the dispute on 15-06-1995, leadingto the present order of reference made by Government for adjudication of the dispute to this Hon'ble Tribunal.

That the facts of the case being as briefly stated above , the action of the management in terminating the services of the workman w.e.f. 27-10-1994 when he had already become entitled to be treated as permanent peon is liable to be held as unjustified and illegal and to be set aside on the following , amongst . other GROUNDS .

During the year 1987 to 1990. the workman was employed to work in temporary vacancies of peon at Khuttar and Malika Branches, the post/ vacancy of peon in

The vacancy in which the work had been appointed atBanda Branch from 03-06-1993 being permanent and the appointment of the workman against the said permanent vacancy having been made after duly ascertaining his eligibility and judging his suitability for appointment as peon by the Regional Office , as brought out in sub -paras (f) and(g) ofpara 2 hereinabove , and the workman having been continued beyond three months with no other arrangement being made by the bank to fill up the vacancy by appointing any other selected person, the workman was deemed to have been selected for filling up the existing permanent vacancy of peon at Banda Branch and accordingly to be deemed on probation from 03-06-1993 and to be treated as a permanent peon from 03-12-1993 i.e.

7924

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA after completion of six months from the date of his appointment.

In view of the above , the termination of services of the workman from 27-10-1994 without compliance with the rules governing termination of permanent employees in the Sastry and Desai Awards and in the Bipartite Settlements was invalid .

It is submitted that even though the above provisions in the Bipartite Settlements were intended to be applicable to the then temporary employees , but the principle agreed to/recognised in the said provisions could not be given a go-by by the management after the Bipartite Settlementdt. 19-10-1966 and it was not and could not be the meaning of the said provisions that the management could restart the unfair practice ( which was rectified in the Bipartite Settlementdt . 19-10-1966) by employing and continuing the employment of persons a temporaries in permanent vacancies and infinitum. Therefore, when the workman had worked not only for 240 days but for about 20 months in a permanent vacancy after being duly approved by Regional Office for appointment before 03-06-1993, the termination of his services from 27-10-1994 which was without any valid/reasonable cause was also in violation of the aforesaid recognized principle and against the spirit of clauses 20.9 , 20.10 and 20.11 ofthe Bipartite Settlementdt . 19-10-1966.

The action of the management in temrinating his services from 27-10-1994 was invalid also for the reason of being in breach of S. 25G of the Industrial Disputes Act in as much as while terminating the services of the workman, persons , junior to him working as temporary peons in branches under the same Region were continued in service. The temination of services was malafide and bad in law in thatimmediately after terminating the services of workman the management gave employment to other persons at the same branch in the same vacancy as well as at other branches under the Region, thus thwarting the right of workman under Section 25H also . In fact , several persons who had worked as temporaries for much lesser period than the workman including those junior to the workman among such persons were even absorbed as permanent peons . Because the action ofthe management in terminating services ofworkman from 27-10-1994 after he had worked sufficiently long in permanent vacancies also constituted an unfair Labour practice within the meaning of item ( 10 ) ofthe Fifth Schedule to the Industrial Disputes Act namely "To employ workmen as badlis , casuals andtemporaries and to continue them as such for years with the object of depriving them of the status and privilegs of permanent workmen " and since such and other unfair Labour practices enumerated in the Fifth Schedule had been statutorily prohibited by Section 35 - T of the 1.D. Act , the action of management in continuing the workman as temporary in permanent vacancies for long and then abruptly terminating his services w.e.f. 27-10-1994 was bad in law for the reason ofbeing violative of S. 25- T of the 1.D. Act read with the Fifth Schedule thereto .

[PART 11- SEC. 3 ( ii) |

JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

Broadly, all employees in the bank are classified into two main categories or cadres and these are ( a ) Non -workmen i. e. managers, officers and supervisors and (b ) workmen'. also called Award Staff, within the meaning of the term defined u/s2( s) ofthe Industrial Disputes Act . 1947 (briefly. ID Act ) . The workmen or the award staff are also classified into ( i ) clerks and (ii ) sub - staff i.e. class IV staff such as peons . sweepers , farashers etc. It may be stated with relevance that recruitment & selection of persons for appointment as clerks on substantive basis against identified permanent posts or vacancies within the caste strength is made through Banking Services Recruitment Board . The selected persons are given appointment by the bank . The new appointees are in the first instance . placed on probation and after they successfully complete the probationary period they are confirmed by the appointing or any other competent authority by an order passed in writing to that effect . The regional managers are appointing authority in the cases of clerks .

In the case of recruitment of sub - staff or class IV employees the bank , being an establishment in public sector, notifies all substantive vacancies to employment exchanges in compliance of provisions of Employment Exchanges Act, save & to the extent exemption is granted by the government's appropriate authorities or the DGET. The candidates who are sponsored by the employment exchange ( s ) are interviewed by the bank's own selection committee and those candidates who are adjudged suitable. are appointed and confirmed in the same manner as the clerks . Sub - staff is also appointed by Regional Managers with the concurrence & approval of Zonal Managers . It may also be stated here with pertinence in passing that the identified permanent strength in clerical & sub - staff cadre isdetermined by the management of the bank from time to time on considerations such as size of the branch or office and volume of work etc.

Apart from two All India Industrial Tribunal ( Bank Disputes) Awards , popularly known as Sastri Award and 'Desai Award' , there are All India Bipartite Settlements which have been arrived at between the managements of entire banking industry in the country and their workmen through their respective unions or associations . These awards and settlements regulate employer - employee relations , their respective rights & obligations and the terms & conditions of service of those workmen who have been recruited in the bank as per procedure pointed out hereinabove on substantive basis and have been confirmed in the bank's service those awards and settlements are not applicable to daily rated adhoc casual workers like the workman herein.

The Hon'ble Tribunal will appreciate that it is well established law that daily rated adhoc casual temporary 7925 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्रः जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

future vacancies aś was envisaged in Government's scheme/policy decision . Since the process of recruitment . selection and appointment of persons under Government's scheme and subsequent to bank's advertisement was already in progress in 1992 and since its completion was likely to be a long drawn process in view of very large number of applications the bank had received in response to its advertisement therefore the management of the bank preferred to engage the workman again as an ad hoc daily rated worker in 1992 pending appointment of regular appointee . The management preferred to engage the workman as he had worked earlier also in 1985 and 1986 as such in the same branch and in so engaging the workman the management adhered to the mandate of law that one ad hoc worker should not be replaced by another adhoc worker on the scheme job .

workers whom an employer has engaged or employed in distress such as pending recruitment , selection , appointment and posting of a regular appointee as in the instant case , no indefeasible right can be held to have accrued for such workers to claim even continued engagement or employment , let alone claim for confirmation on the post and they have to move out on the joining of regular appointee. It is submitted that the workman herein is virtually seeking what is called'Back door ' entry in the bank's service and since the Hon'ble Supreme Court has , in a number of pronouncements , disapproved and invalidated such entries ' in public sector undertakings. being in gross violation of mandate of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution , this Hon'ble Tribunal would also in its wisdom not allow the workman to succeed in his designs orattempt.

The workman applicant has filed rejoinder . In his rejoinder he has reiterated the averments of his claim statement and has denied most of the paras of the written statement. The management has also denied most of the paras of the claim statement .

Evidence of both the parties has been taken .

Heard arguments from both the sides and perused the papers on the record .

The problem of providing regular employment to those daily rates workers who had worked as peons in public sector banks between 1-1-82 and 31-12-89 but could not be employed on regular basis due to restrictions imposed by the Government on further recruitment of people against substantive posts or vacancies in public sector banks , had been engaging the attention of the Government for quite sometime past . Thus it was with a view to deal with that problem and to ameliorate the hardships of those unemployed persons that the Government of India , after consideration of all relevant facts and in consultation with the Ministry of Labour, worked out a scheme to deal with that problem . The said scheme as contained in what is called as the ' APPROACH PAPER ' alongwith necessary guidelines to give effect to the scheme was circulated to all public sector banks , including the bank herein . A copy of the aforesaid scheme/approach paper alongwith Government's directives isAnnexure - 1 .

Itwas submitted from the side of the workman that he has worked in Khuttar Branch from November 1987 to August 1988 and he was again engaged from March 1989 and he worked up to October 1989. It was further submitted that he was again engaged at Banda Branch from (03-06- 1993 and he worked up to 26-10-1994 and his services were terminated on 27-10-1994 without giving any retrenchment compensation so 25 F of the ID Act is attracted. He was engaged on a permanent post so he should be treated as a temporary employee within the meaning of cl . 20.7 of the BPS dated 19-10-1996.

In furtherance of Government's above mentioned Scheme/policy decision & directives , the management of the bank issued a circular letter dt . 17-08-1991 to all its branches and offices advising them to abide by the instructions contained therein. A copy of the bank's above letter is appended herewith with relevance as Annexure -2. In further compliance of Government's scheme , the bank issued an advertisement in Hindi and English national dailies a copy of which is also appended herewith as Annexure- 3 for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Tribunal with the explanation that in place of 31-12-1989 as the cut off date with the Government had prescribed in the scheme , 31-12-1990 was mistakenly notified as the cut off date in the bank's advertisement .

It is settled law that the claimant has to prove that he has worked for 240 days . He cannot be presumed to work for 240 days on his mere assertion in his affidavit . Any employee can file affidavit that he has worked for more than 240 days so only on the basis of affidavit it cannot be deemed proved that he has worked for 240 days . He is to give some other evidence other than his affidavit. The workman applicant has filed letter dated 25-01-1988 which indicates that he has worked for 16 days . He has filed letter dated 28-04-1988 which indicate that he has worked for 35 days. The letter shows that he has not worked continuously from 17-2-88 to 29-4-88 . He has worked for 27 days and from 28-11-87 to 30-11-87 he has worked for 35 days . He has filed certificate dated 04-03-1991 which shows that he has worked from 14th June 1989 to 7th July 1989 for 21 days . Certificate dated 09-04-1991 shows that he has worked for 16 days from 11-09-1989 to 14-09-1989 . The Bank has also given the certificate which shows that the workman has worked for 16 days in 1987, 89 days in 1988 , 2 days in 1989 , 6 days in 1989 and 2 days in 1989. Certificate It is stated here with relevance in passing for kind information of the Hon'ble Tribunal that in spite of Government and the bank giving opportunity, the workman herein did not chose to avail the same for competing in the recruitment process for being considered for absorption on regular basis in the bank's service as a peon against

1993 G1 /05-51 7926

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3( ii ) ]

संख्या 140/1997 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 17-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/266/1996- आईआर ( बी- II ) ] सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 20th June , 2005 dated 04-09-1991 shows that he has worked for 62 days in the year 1989 and 1990. The workman has filed letter dated 03-06-1993 by which he has been sent to the Branch Manager. Bank of Baroda for engagement but there is no proof as to for how many days he has worked. These certificate do not establish the fact that he has worked for 240days.

It was submitted from the side of the management that the workman has admitted that he was appointed by Branch Manager each time as a daily wager. He has further admitted that no letter certifying his attendance and period ofwork for the period 03-06-1993 to 07-10-1994 has been filed by him . As such no documentary proof regarding his working period has been filed by the workman applicant .

S.O. 2523.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. 140/1997 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , New Delhi , No. II as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial dispute between the management of Central Bank of India and their workmen , receivedby the Central Government on 17-6-2005 .

[No. L - 12012/266/ 1996 - IR ( B - II ) ] C. GANGADHARAN . Under Secy:

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER ; CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT- II , NEW DELHI

I.D. No. 140/97

Presiding Officer : R. N. Rai ,

IN THE MATTER OF :

Sh. Suesh Chand Jain , C/o The General Secretary. Central Bank Staff Union Central Bank Building . Chandni Chowk, Delhi - 110006 .

Versus

It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that burden is on the workman to prove that he has worked for 240 days as he has to prove the averments of his claim statement . It has been held in (2002 ) 3 SCC 25 that where the workman claims that he has worked for more than 240 days in the year preceding his termination it was for the claimant to lead evidence to that effect . It has been further held in this case that affidavit is not sufficient evidence for that purpose i.e. for proving the work of 240 days . The workman has filed no documentary evidence to prove that he has worked for more than 240 days in a year. No doubt he has filed affidavit but it cannot be established that he has worked for more than 240 days on the basis of his affidavit as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court . The workman has to substantiate his working for more than 240 days by some other evidence , documentary or oral or admission of the respondent. The respondents have denied that he has not worked even for 90 days at a stretch . the workman has failed to prove that he has worked for 240 days . The burden initially lies on him so the workman has not succeeded in proving the claim statement .

The reference is replied thus: -

The Deputy General Manager. Central Bank of India . Zonal Office . Link House . 4. Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg . New Delhi - 110002 .

AWARD

The action of the management of bank of Baroda Regional Office Shahjahanpur in terminating the services of Shri Ram Kishan , Peon w.c.f. 27-10-1994 is just and legal . The workman applicant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L - 12012/ 266/96 - IR( B - II) Central Government dt. 11-09-1997 has referred the following point for adjudication .

The point runs as hereunder:--

The Award is given accordingly. Date: 13-06-2005 .

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 20 जून , 2005

"Whether the action of the management of Central Bank of India in imposing stoppage of 3 annual increments permanently to Sh . Suresh Chand Jain. Asstt Cashier cum Clerk is legal and justified ? If not, what relief the said workman is entitled .

The Union has filed statement of claim on behalf of the claimant . In the statement of claim , it has been stated that Sh . Suresh Chand Jain ( hereinafter referred to as the workman ) was appointed as an Asstt . Cashier in Clerical cadre in Central Bank of India w.e.f. 28-11-1974 and at all का.आ. 523.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार सेंट्रल 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 नं० 2 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ 7927 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

ofdisciplinary authority dated 27-06-1985 , referred to in the inquiry officer's notice dated 1-10-1985 as the said letter had not been served on the workman till then .

times relevant to this dispute , his service conditions were governed by the provisions of the Sastry Award as modified in the Desai Award and as further modified in the various bipartite settlements entered into between the management of various banks including Central Bank of India and their workmen from time to time.

That on 05-09-1983 when the workman was working atKashmeregate, Delhi Branch of the Bank, he had left the officer at 2.30 PM during the lunch recess , when he was picked up by a a police squad from Madarsa Road near by the Branch where he usually took his lunch and on coming to know about this , the Bank placed the workman under suspension by an order dated 06-09-1983. A copy of which is enclosed as Annexure - W/ 1 hereto.

That while the workman did not receive any reply from disciplinary authority to his objection against he reopening of the already concluded inquiry, nor did he receive copy of disciplinary authority's order dated 27-6-1985 ( copies enclosed as Annexure - W- 8 hereto ) thereby informing the workman that the disciplinary authority had rejected his objection against the reopening ofthe inquiry by an order dated 24-12-1985 , which however, was never received by the workman . That it was after workman's further letter dated 15-1-1986 ( copy enclosed as Annexure - W/ 9 hereto ) that he received from the disciplinary authority a letter dated 29-01-1986 with copy ofhis order dated 27-6-1985 ( copies enclosed as Annexure- W/10 & 11 hereto ) but neither copies of his letter dated 24-12-1985 nor copy of the findings of the inquiry officer of the already concluded inquiry were furnished to the workman with disciplinary authority's above letter dated 29-1-1986 .

That after a lapse of six months since his suspension , hewas served upon a charge - sheet dated 05-03-1984 ( copy enclosed as Annexure - W/2 hereto ) , thereby also instituting a departmental inquiry against him with simultaneous appointment of an inquiry for holding such inquiry against him by an order in the charge- sheet itself. That the inquiry officer had commenced the inquiry on 30-03-1984 and concluded it on 22-11-1984 but when thereafter the workman claimed the payment of subsistence allowance at the rate of his full pay and allowances in terms of clause 5 of settlement dated 08-09-1983 by his letters dated 04-12-1984 and 27-03-1985 , this was declined by the Bank by a letter dated 05-05-1985 (copy enclosed as Annexure - W/3 hereto ) with the reason that " the case is still pending in the court of Sh. H.S. Sharma , Tis Hazari , Delhi . " And his request can be considered only after the receipt of report from police/court authorities of their intention not to prosecute you . " Though by his letter dated 27-03-1985 (copy enclosed as Annexure W/4 hereto) , the workman had also requested the bank not to take any departmental proceedings/ action against him due to pendency of criminal proceedings against him, in view of provisions of clause 19.4 of the bipartite settlement dated 19-10-1966 , but the bank's letter dated 07-05-1985 was silent on this demand of the workman .

That while the workman was still to receive copies ofdisciplinary authority's letter dated 24-12-1985 and of findings of the inquiry officer based on the inquiry held earlier the inquiry officer/proceeded with the reopened inquiry on 20-01-1986 in the absence of the workman . which however, was adjourned by the inquiry officer (without fixing any further date ) with the order that the next date ofinquiry would be informed after the workman received the copies of disciplinary authority's order dated 27-06-1985 and 24-12-1985 . that on receipt of disciplinary authority's letter dated 29-01-1986, the workman sent a letter dated 17-02-1986 to disciplinary authority (copy enclosed as Annexure - W/ 12 hereto ) but while the workman was yet to received disciplinary authority's reply thereto and copy of his order dated 24-12-1985 , the inquiry officer, by a notice dated 27-03-1986 informed the workman thathe would hold the inquiry on 14-4-1986 and on receipt ofabove notice of inquiry officer, the workman wrote a letter dated 3-4-1986 to him (copy enclosed as Annexure- W/13 hereto) thereby pleading that the inquiry should not be proceeded with till disposal of his objections in his letter dated 17-02-1986 by the disciplinary authority.

Thatwhile the workman was not apprised ofthe fate ofthe departmental inquiry held against him and concluded on 22-11-1984 he received from the same inquiry officer a notice dated 1-10-1985 ( copy enclosed as Annexure W/ 5 hereto) thereby informing the workman that the disciplinary authority after submission of his inquiry report on completion of the inquiry by an order dated 27-06-1985 , had remanded back the inquiry to him for calling further evidence on the point of time and place of arrest of the CSE (i.e. the workman) as the disciplinary authority disagreed with the findings on this point . "

That though the inquiry officer had duly received workman's letter dated 3-04-1986 , but he again held a sitting ofthe reopened inquiry on 11-04 1986 in the absence of the workman . That the workman received on 31-05-1986 a letter dated 30-05-1986 from the disciplinary authority ( Annexure - W/ 14 hereto ) thereby all objection ofworkman addressed in his letter dated 17-02-1986 being rejected by the disciplinary authority. That as the workman had also received a memo dated 30-5-1986 asking the workman to attend the reopened inquiry on 12-06-1986 the workman sent a letter dated 3-06-1986 to the inquiry officer (copy enclosed as Annexure - W/ 15 hereto ) thereby That the union and the workman vehemently protested against and opposed the reopening of the inquiry by their letters dated 10-10-1985 and 2-11-1985 respectively (copies enclosed as Annexure - W/6 and 7 ) and also requested for being furnised copy ofthe purported order 7928

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] once again objecting to the holding of the reopened inquiry. The above letter of workman was also endorsed by the union by a letter dated 4-06-1986 to the Bank (copy enclosed as Annexure-W/ 16) .

inquiry officer dated 30-06-1986 in respect of the reopened inquiry and the open dated 19-06-1986 in respect of the original inquiry, which had been held and concluded by him earlier on 22-11-1984 . that the workman appeared before the disciplinary authority on 16-08-1986 to show cause against the orders of proposed punishment and filed his detailed submissions impugning , among others , the validity ofthe reopening of the inquiry after its earlier conclusion on 22-11-1984 , the validity of conduct of such inquiry, the revised findings of the inquiry officer and the orders of the proposed punishment .

That it was 8-1 / 2 month after 16-08-1986 that the workman received a letter of the Regional Manager dated 27-04-1987 with the final order of diciplinary authority dated 25-02-1987 ( copy enclosed as Annexure - W/22 hereto) thereby awarding to the workman the punishment of stoppage of three increments of the workman permanently. The forwarding letter/administrative order of the Regional Manager, Delhi contained a stipulation reading as under :-

That ignoring the above protest letters of the workman and the union, the inquriy officer, by a notice dated 5-06-1986, asked the workman to attend the reopened inquiry on 12-06-1986 before the workman was yet to get disciplinary authority's reply to his letter dated 8-06-1986 ( Annexure -W/ 17) and inquiry officer's reply to workman's letter dated 9-6-1986 ( Annexure - W/ 18) wirtten after receipt ofdisciplinary authority's above letter dated 30-5-1986 . That as the workman was suffering from an acute attack of hial asthma , he sent a letter dated 9-08-1986 ( W/ 18 ) with a medicial certificate annexed thereto ( W/ 18 - A) in support ofhis ailment , expressing his inability to attend the inquiry on 12-06-1986 and also pleading that the proceedings should not be held till the workman's letters to disciplinary authority dated 3-06-1986 and 8-06-1986 were not disposed ofby the disciplinary authoirty.

"Mr. Jain is further adivsed that his reinstatement in Bank's service is subject to Bank's right to take action against him in further if he is punsihed by the court forhis reported involvement in criminal offence ."

That the workman then preferred a departmental appeal dated 12-06-1987 , but it was rejected hy the Appellate Authority of the Bank. That after a prologed trial spreading over a decade , the workman was acquitted of the criminal offences /charges for which he was being tried, by an order dated 12-12-1994 of the Trial Court and after getting its certified copy on 25-2-1995 the workman submitted the same to the Bank with his letter dated 13-3-1995 , thereby requesting the bank to reconsider the order of punishment dated 25-2-1997/27-04-1997 and demanding the withdrawal of the punishment awarded to him by the disciplinary authority copies of workman's letterdate 13-03-1995 and order of acquittal dated 12-12-1994 are being enclosed as ( Annexures - W/23 and 24 hereto ) .

That this union also took up the cause of workman with the management by a letter dated 25-03-1995 (Annexure- W/25 hereto) but as the efforts of the union failed to evoke any favourable response from Management for an amicable settlement of the case , the union raised an industrial dispute in the matter before the ALC ( C) , New Delhi but the conciliation proceeding initiated and held by him also did not materialize into any settlement of the dispute and after the failure of conciliation report dated 18-07-1996 submitted by him to the Government , the Government has referred the dispute for adjudication to thus Hon'ble Tribunal .

That, in spite of workman's above letter dated 9-06-1986 (W/ 18 ) the inquiry officer held the reopened inquiry on 12-06-1986 , which he adjorned to 18-6-1986 after recording the report of a private doctor, which had been obtained by Kashmeregate Branch at the instance of Regional Office of the Bank. That on receipt of minutes of the proceedings held by the inquiry officer on 12-06-1986 the workman who was still confined to bed with bronchial asthma, sent a telegram to the inquiry officer informing him of his illness and inability to attend the inquiry on 18-06-1986 , followed by a letter with a medical certificate to the same effect , which both were received by the inquiry officer and recorded by him in the proceedings of the reopened inquiry, held by him ex -parte in the absence of the workman on 18-06-1986 and concluded the inquiry on the same date . That on receipt of the minutes of the ex- parte proceedings held on 18-6-1986 , the workman sent a letter dated 26-06-1986 to the enquiry officer (Annexure- W/19), thereby reiterating his objections to the validity of the reopening of the inquiry and stating his objections to the validity of the conduct of such inquiry and once again requesting for being furnished a copy of the findings of inquiry officer submitted by him after the earlier conclusion ofthe inquiry. That it was after the workman's above letter dated 26-06-1986 (W/ 19) that the workman received from disciplinary authority a letter dated 16-06-1986 forwarded with Kashmeregate Branch letter dated 25-06-1986 (Annexure -W/ 20 ) which was in reply to workman's letter dated 8-06-1986 ( W/ 17 , ) advising the workman to attend the inquiry, failing which the inquiry " will be proceeded ex-parte by the inquiry officer " .

That without anything more, the disciplinary authority issued to the workman's a show cause memo of proposed punishment dated 17-07-1986 ( Annexure- W/ 21 ) together with copies of reports /findings of the

That the facts of the case being as briefly set out hereinabove, the impugned action of the management is to be held as illegal and unjustified since in the opinion of management the workman had committed offence involving moral turpitude, as evident from the suspension memo [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25 , 1927

7929 dated 6-09-1983 , it had acted illegally and in violation of provision of clause 19.04 of BPS dated 19-10-1966 by initiating disciplinary proceedings againt the workman vide charge - sheet dated 5-03-1984 , and commencing departmental inquiry from 30-03-1984 which was barred by provision of aforesaid clause. The management had acted illegally and in violation of clause 19.1 of the BPS dated 19-10-1966 and principles of natural justice by instituting departmental inquiry against the workman by an order in the charge - sheet itself without before giving him any opportunity to give his explanation against the charges as appearing in the charge-sheet . The inquiry officer after conducting the inquiry, had submitted his inquiry report/findings to the disciplinary authority, holding the main charge against the workman as not fully proved, but the disciplinary authority, instead of acting on the basis ofthe inquiry report/findings of the inquiry officer which he had submitted after a full fledged inquiry illegally reopened the inquiry for collection/ producing some additional evidence in support of the charges which action ofthe disciplinary authority was utterly malafide , vexatious and illegal and not permissible under any provisions of the Award and BPS governing the service conditions of the workman.

The disciplinary authority had further acted illegally and in violation of the principles of natural justice by making order for reopening the inquiry without giving any prior opportunity to the workman to convass against such decision and without even furnishing to him a copy of the inquiry officer's report/findings based on the inquiry earlier held against the workman . The sole and only purpose for reopening the inquiry, being to procure some evidence which would prove an otherwise false and baseless charge framed against the workman, the order for the reopening ofthe already concluded inquiry was in colourable exercise of executive fiat of the management and not in any bonafide exercise of power under the rules .

orderdated 27-06-1985 with his letter dated 29-01-1986 and though on receipt of copy of the said order , the workman addressed a detailed letter dated 17-02-1986 to the disciplinary authority, protesting and convassing against the reopening of the inquiry, but while the disciplinary authority kept a discreet silence for more than three months on workman's letter dated 17-02-1986, the inquiry officer did not wait even for disposal of workman's above letter and went on fixing one date after another for holding the reopened inquiry, thus acting most unfairly and arbitrarily. All the pleas ofthe workman and the union as to the invalidity of the order for the reopening of the inquiry and the invalidity of such reopened inquiry were most arbitrarily rejected by disciplinary authority by a letter dated 30-05-1986 which came when the reopened inquiry had already been held ex -parte on several dates by the inquiry officer. It is evident that the disciplinary authority had deliberately delayed his decision on the workman's plea against the reopening of the inquiry with the malafide intention of completing such reopened inquiry by keeping the workman in suspense , on tenterhooks . The Union had taken up the question of invalidity of the reopening of the inquirywith the Bank's higher authorities i.e. The Dy. General Manager and General Manager and copies of this letter dated 04-06-1986 were sent to the disciplinary authority and inquiry officer also with the request not to proceed further till the decision of the higher authorities on the points raised by the union, and the workman too , after receipt of discipliner's letter dated 30-05-1986 had addressed a letter dated 08-06-1986, disputing his reasons for reopening the inquiry and demanding cancellation of the reopened inquiry and had also sent a letter dated 09-06-1986 to the inquiry officer with copy of his above letter dated 08-06-1986 , requesting the inquiry officer also not to proceed further with the reopened inquiry till decision of disciplinary authority on hisletter dated 08-06-1986 , and the decision of higher authorities on union's letter dated 04-06-1986, but the inquiry officer, ignoring all the above letters again proceeded with the reopened inquiry on 12-6-1986.

Apart from not furnishing to the workman copy of the inquiry officer's report , the disciplinary authority did not furnish to the workman even his order dated 27-06-1985 by which the disciplinary authority hard decided to reopen the inquiry and the workman was informed about the said order of the disciplinary authority only in the inquiry officer's notice dated 01-10-1985 , fixing the date for holding the reopened inquiry and copy of the said order dated 27-06-1985 was not made avilable to the workman even after the union's letter dated 10-10-1985 and workman's letter dated 02-11-1985 , with the result that the workman was disabled from knowing the reasons of the disciplinary authority for reopening the inquiry and from convassing against such decision and its reasons before the inquiry officer proceeded to hold the reopened inquiry on 20-01-1986.

Itwas only after the start of the reopened inquiry that the workman received a copy of disciplinary authority's

The inquiry officer held the reopened inquiry ex-parte on 12-06-1986 in the absence of the workman even ignoring his request for adjournment on account of his suffering from acute asthmatic trouble in support of which, the workman had submitted a medical certificate from a qualified and competent doctor with his application dated 09-06-1986 for adjournment, which was duly received by the inquiry officer before 12-06-1986 . In order to carry out his malafide pre-decision to proceed and conclude the reopened inquiry ex -parte behind the back of the workman and acting at the instance of DA, the inquiry officer acted on the report of a private doctor about the physical condition of the workman , which was obtained by the manager of Kashmeregate Branch at the instance of the Bank's Regional Office , it is submitted that even if the inquiry officer wanted to reply on the said purported report of a private doctor engaged by the management in THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

7930

preference to the medical certificate of the doctor under whose treatment the workman was , he could not do so without giving to the workman an opportunity to show that he was actually not physically in a position to attend the inquiry on 12-06-1986 , when the inquiry officer had proceeded ex -parte .

In continuation of the same arbitrary fashion the inquiry officer held further ex - parte inquiry on 18-06-1986, ignoring the workman ; telegram and letter dated 17-06-1986, ignoring whereby he had again expressed his physical inability to attend the inquiry due to his serious ailment , supported by a medical certificate sent with his letter which was duly received by the inquiry officer before he decided to proceed ex - parte on 18-06-1986 . The inquiry officer concluded the reopened inquiry ex- parte in the absence of the workman on 18-06-1986 itself after recording the arguments of the management's Presenting Officer on the same date and without fixing any date for presentation of the workman's case/evidence in rebuttal to the management's evidence adduced in the reopened inquiry.

It was after the ex -parte conclusion of the reopened inquiry on 18-06-1986 in the aforesaid arbitrary manner by the inquiry officer, that the workman received with a letter dated 25-06-1986 a letter dated 16-06-1986 from the disciplinary authority rejecting the workman's pleas as stated in his letter dated 08-06-1986 in a cryptic, unreasoned and arbitrary manner and just by way of trying to justify the otherwise illegal and unjustifiable reopening of the inquiry. Because though on receiving copy of the ex - parte preceding held by the inquiry officer on 18-06-1986 , the workman had addressed a letter dated 26-06-1986 to the inquiry officer, reiterating his objections against the reopening of the inquiry and also about the illegalities in the conduct of the reopened inquiry, but without any response to the workman's above letter dated 26-06-1986 either from the inquiry officer or from the disciplinary authority, and without anything more , the disciplinary authority issued to the workman a show cause memo dated 17-07-1986, thereby proposing the workman's dismissal from service by way of proposed punishment , which was based on the findings of the reopened inquiry submitted by the inquiry officer.

The findings of the inquiry officer on which the disciplinary authority had acted to propose the punishment by the show cause memo dated 17-07-1986 and the concurring observations / findings of disciplinary authority were utterly perverse and unsustainable being base on no sustentative /legally admissible evidence : Because though in reply to the show cause memo dated 17-07-1986 the workman had made detailed submissions to the disciplinary authority on 16-08-1986 , thereby impugning the validity of the order for the reopening of inquiry, the validity of the very conduct of such reopened inquiry, the findings of the inquiry officer based on such inquiry and the order of proposed punishment made by the disciplinary authority,

[PART II- SFC. 3 ( ii ) ] but all the submissions of the workman were arbitrarily rejectedby the disciplinary authority in his final order dated 25-02-1987 , communicated to the workman with Regional Office, Delhi order dated 27-04-1987.

While the disciplinary authority passed the order dated 25-02-1987 without applying his mind to the workman's submission dated 16-08-1986 against the show cause memo dated 17-07-1986, the punishment ofstoppage ofthree increments of the workman imposed by the final order dated 25-02-1987 was not only unduly harsh and disproportionate if viewed in isolation from the facts on which the criminal case was initiated and was pending before the trial court and as a matter of fact , there was no case for imposing even this punishment on the workman , more particularly because the reopened inquiry on the basis of which the workman was punished was not only impermissible and illegal , but was also unfair and was held in complete violation of the principles of natural justice. Because when the management had, in the Regional Office order dated 27-04-1987 reserved its right to take action against the workman in future if he was punished by the Court(criminal court ) for his alleged involvement in criminal offence and the charges framed in the charge- sheet of the Bank and the charges for which he was facing trial had been interlinked by the management to take disciplinary action against the workman , fairness and enquiry demanded that the management should have withdrawn the punishment imposed on the workman by order dated 25-02-1987, afte the acquittal of workman by the trial court by order dated 12-12-1994 , but the management . far from itself remedying the wrong done to the workman through departmental action, kept a discreet silence on the workman's and unions letters / representations submitted to the management for withdrawal of the punishment imposed on him by order dated 25-02-1987 .

The action of the management in imposing the punishment of stoppage of three annual increments of the workman , Shri S.C. Jain permanently by orders of disciplinary authority dated 25-02-1987 and in not withdrawing the said punishment in spite of his acquittal by order of the trial court dated 12-12-1994 is illegal and unjustified and deserves to be set aside by Hon'ble Tribunal.

The management has filed written statement . In the written statement the bank humbly submits that the penalty imposed upon the workman has been done so after a proper inquiry was held by the management in which full opportunity was given to the workman to defend himself It is further submitted that the charges against him (workman) was duly proved in the departmental inquiry held against him. In the inquiry. it was proved that Shrı Jain had left the Branch premises at about 2.30 PM on 5th September, 1983 and did not return to the Branch even after the closing hour of the Branch . On the same day , at about 6.30 PM he was arrested by the police at a brothel house .

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

7931 Shri Jain was suspended by a memo dated 6th September 1983 for the two reasons each as follows :-

(a) For leaving office without pre- information, leaving cash openand unguarded along with the cash safe and strong room keys etc.

(b) For his reported involvement in some criminal cases .

premises at about 2.30 PM on 5th September 1983 and did not return to the Branch even after the closing hour of the branch . Further, he had no intention to return to the branch immediately after his lunch break. It is proved in the inquiry that he was arrested at about 6.30 PM by the police on the said date at a brothel house . It is thus denied that the workman was picked up by the police squad from the Madarsa Road, from where he usually took lunch. It is , however, correct that the workman was placed under suspension vide memo dated 6th September 1983.

The workman was given a memo on 4th/8th October 1983 to which he submitted a reply and the reply was not found satisfactory. Hence it was decided to hold a departmental inquiry against him. Accordingly a charge sheet was issued to him on 6th March 1984. The charge against the workman was as follows :-

"that on 5th September, 1983 , Shri Jain, Asstt. Cashier atKashmere Gate Branch , left office premises at 2.30 PM without prior information when the cash was still open and untallied. Although lunch hour was over at 3.00 PM, he did not return to the office till closing hours of the Branch and even thereafter . In order to close the cash, the cash cabin of Shri Jain had to be broken open and it was found that Shri Jain had left the cash box unlocked and the keys of the cash safe and strong room , door were also found lying with the lock . "

Before the charge sheet was issued to the workman on5thMarch 1983 a memo was served upon him on 4th/ 8th October 1983 as mentioned in the Annexure - W2 filedby the workman. The workman submitted his explanation on 5th November 1983. Since his reply was not found satisfactory, a charge sheet was issued to him on 5th March 1984. The departmental inquiry against the workman was concluded only on 18th June 1986 and not on 22nd November 1984, as mentioned in para 3 (b) of the statement of claim . That in so far as the suspending of the departmental inquiry against the workman is concerned on account ofthe pendency of the criminal case it is submitted that since the departmental inquiry was in respect of a charge different from the criminal trial , the management did not deem it necessary to keep the departmental inquiry pending till the disposal of the criminal case . In this view of the matter, we may inform that full wages were paid to him by the bank .

Adepartmental inquiry was held. During the course ofthe inquiry, full opportunity was given to the workman concerned, viz . he was given copies of the documents produced by the management . In the inquiry, he was allowed to cross -examine the witnesses produced by the management ; he was allowed to rebut the charges leveled against him by producing documentary and oral evidence in support thereof. This apart , during the course of the inquiry, all the principles of natural justice was adhered to. That on the basis of the entire evidence , documentary as well as oral , inquiry officer came to the conclusion that the charge against the workman had been duly proved and he accordingly submitted a report .

Itis submitted that a perusal of the same shows the fairness with which the entire inquiry had been conducted. Even when the workman raising any objection , the disciplinary authority remitted back the inquiry to the inquiry officer . The charge in the departmental inquiry against the workman was different from the charge against theworkman in the criminal trial. He was suspended mainly for his leaving office without permission, leaving cash open and unguarded along with the cash safe and strong room. keys and hence there was no need to keep the departmental inquiry in abeyance awaiting the decision of the criminal case. In these circumstances , clause 19.4 of the BPS would not apply. It is denied that the action of the management is illegal and in violation of clause 19.1 of the BPS or the principles of natural justice. The workman was given a memo dated 4th/8th October, 1983 calling for his explanation. The workman had submitted his explanation on 5th November 1984. On pursuing the said explanation given by the workman , the management came to the conclusion that his reply was not satisfactory and accordingly it was decided to hold a departmental inquiry. Hence it is incorrect to state that the departmental inquiry was instituted without giving any opportunity to the workman to given an explanation to the charges framed against him.

That disciplinary authority accordingly issued a show cause notice to him informing him of the proposed penalty and calling for his reply. The workman was also given an oral hearing by the disciplinary authority. After persuing the reply of the workman and also having regard to the oral submissions made by the workman, the disciplinary authority awarded the penalty of stoppage of three increments permanently. The workman thereafter preferred a departmental appeal which too was rejected . That in these circumstances , it is submitted that the workman having had full opportunity before the departmental inquiry before the penalty was imposed , this Hon'ble Tribunal may not be inclined to interfere in the matter. That the Bank controverts each and every contention , averment and allegation made in the statement of claim, which is contrary to and against the true facts and circumstances of the case set out herein above and hereinafter.

It has been proved in the departmental inquiry conducted against Shri Jain that he had left the Branch

It is denied that the proceedings of the departmental inquiry were arbitrary and illegal . As clarified above, the scope of the departmental inquiry was completely different from the inquiry held by the criminal court . Hence there was no need to keep the departmental inquiry in abeyance.

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

7932

faced the criminal trial. In fact, the court had gone to the extent ofsayingthat even if both departmental and criminal trial are in respect of the same charge and if a delinquent employee is acquitted by the criminal court , he can still be inflicted penalty in the departmental proceedings.

The disciplinary authority is fully competent to not to agree with the findings of the inquiry officer and he could have, on the basis of the evidence , taken a different view from the inquiry officer and imposed penalty upon the workman . However, in all fairness since he was in disagreement with the findings of the inquiry officer , he remitted the matter back to the inquiry officer to give opportunity to the workman, and the management to lead fresh evidence. Thus, it is denied that the action ofthe disciplinary authority in remitting the matter was malafide, vexatious , illegal and not permissible under the BPS awards governing the service conditions of the workman .

It is denied that the order dated 21st February, 1987 ofthe disciplinary authority is illegal and unjustified and deserves to be set aside . Rather the punishment was awarded for the misconduct proved in an inquiry and it was not the result of any criminal proceeding against him. Such punishment could not have been withdrawn in view of the acquittal in the criminal case which was totally independent of it.

The workman applicant has filed rejoinder. In his rejoinder he has reiterated the averments of his claim statement and has denied most of the paras of the written statement . The management has also denied most of the paras ofthe claim statement .

Evidence of both the parties has been taken.

Issue regarding fairness of the inquiry was not pressed as preliminary issue so the award is given on the entire merits and documents on the record evidence in the inquiry and evidence in the Court.

It is not necessary that the disciplinary authority must give a show cause notice to the workman before the matter is remitted back to the inquiry officer. The workman has not quoted any provision of the BPS or the award which necessitates that the disciplinary authority give him an opportunity before remitting the matter back for further inquiry. It is denied that the reopening ofthe inquiry was a colourable exercise of executive fiat of the management : It is denied that the action was not bonafide . Reasonfully shown in para D above . The order dated 27th June 1985 of the disciplinary authority was sent to Shri Jain along with a letter dated 29th January 1986 , of thedisciplinary authority. This is admitted by the workman himself in the preceding paragraphs of the statement of claim (Para 2h) .

Heard arguments from both the sides and perused the papers on the record.

It was submitted from the side of the workman applicant that pursuant to the charge inquiry was held and the claimant participated in the inquiry and the Inquiry Officerdid not find the charges proved . The claimant was exonerated of the charges and findings of the inquiry officer were sent to the disciplinary authority, the Chief Manager, Zonal Office , Lucknow. The disciplinary inquiry diferred with the findings of the inquiry officer and he remitted the inquiry to Shri B.P. Tandon, the inquiry officer for inquiring into the matter after calling further evidence on the above issue giving proper opportunity to both the parties and to submit afresh findings to the disciplinary authority at the earliest.

The representation of the workman dated 17th February, 1986 was replied to by the disciplinary authority vide letter dated 30th May, 1986. No prejudice for this normal delay is shown to have occurred to the workman. All the action taken by the bank were in accordance with principles of natural justice . The inquiry was proceeded with by the inquiry officer because there was no stay from any court against the inquiry and there was no reason for not proceeding with the reopened inquiry. The management had got the workman medically examined from other competent doctor and only after the inquiry officer was satisfied that the workman concerned was shamming illness in order to delay the inquiry, the inquiry officer proceeded withthe inquiry.

It was further submitted that the disciplinary authority passed an order of re - opening the inquiry and taking additional evidence on 27-06-2005. The claimant has objected to the re - opening of the inquiry as he was exonerated in the inquiry but the disciplinary authority did not dispose of his application. In the meantime , the inquiry officer held inquiry ex - parte and found the charge regarding his arrest at 6.30 PM proved and sent the inquiry report .

It was further submitted that the workman applicant has written letters to the inquiry officer giving certificate of illness but the management sent a private Doctor and got him examined. The private Doctor gave the opinion that the CSE is in a position to attend the inquiry . The claimant has sent certificate regarding his illness but it was not considered. The certificate is from a registered medical practitioner and a private Doctor cannot call into question the certificate sent by the CSE but the management in order to deprive the workman from taking part into the inquiry It is submitted that there was no justification for Shri Jain not to attend inquiry on 18th June . 1986. Only for this reason he was preceded with ex - parte . The workman had intentionally not participated in the proceedings and tried to stall it for one reason or the other . It was for this reason that he was proceeded with ex -parte and once he has been set ex - parte , there was no question of fixing the case/evidence for rebuttal to the management evidence . The penalty imposed upon the workman was for the charges proved against him in the departmental inquiry held against him. In so far as the order dated 27th April , 1987 , of the Regional Officer is concerned, it referred to the trial pending against the workman. Hence , there is no justification to demand that the punishment in order dated 25th February , 1987 should have been withdrawn after the acquittal ofthe workman by the trial court . As submitted above , the departmental inquiry held against the workman was on a charge completely different from the charge for which he 7933 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

got him examined from a private Doctor and on his opinion proceeded ex -parte and did not consider the application of the workman applicant so the workman applicant was deprived of the opportunity to cross examine the management witness and he was also deprived of the opportunity ofproducing evidence in defence . He found charge no. 3 proved . This charge was regarding absence ofthe workman applicant to the office till closing hours of the Branch and even thereafter .

arrested all the persons and they were produced in the Court. This is the brief story of the prosecution regarding the raid and subsequently lodging of the First Information Report(FIR) and investigation. The Trial Court disbelieved the story of the Police and acquitted of the accused. As such the averment on which the charge was established against the claimant was not reliable and was thrown away bythe Trial Court. In case there is judgement of the Trial Court of acquittal and there is inquiry on the said set of facts the judgement of the Trial Court will prevail .

Itwas further submitted that the inquiry officer found the charges proved on the alleged false story concocted by the Police and the same version was put up before the Trial Court but the Trial Court found the story of the Police unbelievable and concocted so the accused were acquitted. This is the case of spot arrest still the CSE was acquitted. The management has admitted the acquittal of the CSE in the Police case. On the Police version of the story the inquiry officer came to the conclusion that the CSE was arrested at 6.50 PM but the prosecution story has failed. The story given by the prosecution has not been believed by the Trail Court so it cannot be said that the CSE was arrested at 6.50 PM . In the previous inquiry the CSE has examined the defence witnesses who were présent on the spot and they have stated that the CSE was arrested at 3.00 PM from the neighbourhood of the Bank . Except of Shri T.R. Wasim no other witness has been examined . He investigated the case and Trial Court found his case false so thearrest of the CSE cannot be proved to be at 6.30 PM.

Itwas further submitted by the claimant that no role hasbeen assigned to the CSE for running the Brothel House . He has not received any money. Had he been co- owner of theBrothel House , he should have received the 50 % of the. share but the story of the Police is that he did not get any amount . It appears quite unnatural that an employee of a bank will go to the Brothel House leaving the Bank for no gains ofhis own . The raid was made at 6.00 to 6.30 PM. The CSE can do it after the closing hours of the bank so the story ofthe Police appears to be false and concocted and the CSE has been falsely implicated in the story. If the Police story is found false there is no other evidence in the inquiry proceeding to hold that the CSE was arrested at 6.50 PM. In the circumstances the CSE was arrested at 2.30 PM and thatwas the reason that he could not come to the bank within time . He has locked the cash cabin as he has gone for 2 hours for lunch and in the meantime he was arrested by the Police so he could not come so there is no element of negligence as every employee is free to go for lunch and resume duty after lunch since the CSE was arrested he could not come to resume his duty. The Police has falsely arrested him so it cannot be said that he was absent from duty negligently but he was complelled by the circumstances not to resume his duty.

I have gone through the inquiry proceedings . The CSE has sent letter regarding his sickness and there is no rule that the certificate of the claimant should be rejected and he should be examined by another private Doctor at the instance of the Bank and the Doctor's opinion was Thebriefcase is that the CSE left the office premises at 2.30 PM without proper information when the cash was still open and untallied. The CSE has gone for lunch and there was no provision for taking permission or giving proper information for going to lunch so this charge was not found proved . Admittedly he has locked cash cabin. The cash box inside the cabin was open. The 2nd charge is that he did not return till the closing hours of the Branch and even thereafter. As a consequence the cash cabin was broken open and the cash box was found unlocked and keys of the cash safe as such the workman has locked the cash cabin . The cash cabin was broken open and cash box was found open . However, there was not shortage of cash so no loss has been caused due to this negligence of the workmanapplicant . The inquiry officer has given his finding that the CSE was arrested at 6.30 PM whereas the case of the CSE is that when he went for lunch the Police arrested him so he could not return to the Bank . He was under Police Custody and beyond his control to go to the bank. He requested the Police but the Police did not listen to the request of the applicant so he could not return to the Bank at 3.00 PM or on the time ofclosing hours or even thereafter so there was no negligence on this part . The Police has arrested him onfalse ground at 3.00 PM and taken him in custody to a different place so he could not come to the Bank. The workman applicant was prosecuted and the Hon'ble Trial Court disbelieved the story/ the version of the Police and he was honourably acquitted by the Trial Court. The workman applicant was found guilty of leaving office at 3.00 PM and not returned upto 6.30 PM on the sole evidence of Shri P. R. Bhasin , ACP, Special Branch , Police Hqrs . , New Delhi . His examination in Chief was recorded during the course of inquiry. He has stated in his examination in chief that H. No. 1619, Madarsa Road, Kashmiri Gate was being used at prosecution Brothel by one Shri S.C. Mehra . Shri Anil Kumar Gupta was sent a decoy customer after giving him two currency notes of Rs . 50 /- denomination each . The decoy customer told ACP that when he went to H. No. 1619 he found one person standing at the gate , later on gave his name as Suresh Chand. he was told by Shri Suresh Chand that he will have to pay Rs . 100/- and the four Girls Namely Sunita , Ashi , Pushpa Rani and Dulari came and Mr. Gupta was asked to choose the girl . He handed over two notes of Rs . 50/- denomination to Shri Mehra . Shri Mehra paid Rs . 50/ - to Asha and asked her to go with Mr. Gupta in adjoining room for his enjoyment and he told Shri Suresh Chand that his commission would be given after sometime. The case was registered against Sh . S.C. Mehra and Shri S.C. Jain and the four Girls and the ACP investigated the matters . He

1993 GI /05-52 7934

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

relied and the CSE was found fit to turn up in the inquiry. evidence in both cases are common with no variance the evidence is on the same set of facts . In case the departmental proceedings and the Criminal case is based on the same set of facts and the evidence in both the proceedings in common without there being variance it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that it was unfair and unjust to allow the findings of inquiry proceedings to stand. In this case also the inquiry has proceeded ex -parte. The same evidence has come in the inquiry as well as in the Criminal Trial . The ACP has been examined in the domestic inquiry and ACP has been examined in Trial Court also . The domestic inquiry is based on the FIR lodged by the ACP and the ACP has also appeared in the inquiry so there is same set of facts in the domestic inquiry as well as in the Criminal Trial i.e. the version furnished by the prosecution. The inquiry officer based his finding on the story of the prosecution and held that the CSE was arrested at 6.30 PM . The same evidence was given before the Trial Court also . In the circumstances according to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court cited above the findings of the inquiry proceedings cannot stand . The inquiry is to be set aside. The Hon'ble Court has further held that the inquiry was ex - parte . The ex- parte inquiry is vitiated as the basic right of the natural justice was violated. In the instant case also as has been discussed above the inquiry was held ex - parte deliberately and without providing opportunity to the CSE so the CSE has been deprived of his basic right and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court Supra the inquiry is to be set aside .

The private Doctor has also found him suffering from Asthama but he has given his opinion that he is in a position to come to the inquriy proceedings. The private Doctor admitted that he was suffering from Mild Asthama of such vigour that he can work and join his duty. He was not sufferingfrom any physical deformity and mental abnormality . The case of the CSE is that he sought leave from attending the inquiry as he was suffering from Asthama and the private Doctor also found him suffering from . Asthama. An employee who is suffering from Asthama cannot be compelled to take part in the inquiry proceedings as Asthama is a very serious disease and it can be aggrevated at any time so it was natural that the CSE sent application for leave on the ground of his sickness but the inquiry officer believed the report of the other Doctor and held the inquiry exparte. The inquiry officer has held that the CSE is trying to avoid facing the inquiry and after recording reasons he has proceeded ex -parte so the inquiry was held ex -parte by the inquiry officer without giving proper opportunity to the CSE . The CSE has sent telegram on 11-6-1986 and on 12-6-86 but the inquiry officer rejected his application for sick leave and despite receiving telegram on 12-6-1986 he proceeded the inquiry ex - parte so it cannot be said that the CSE deliberately avoided the inquiry or he went away from inquiry but he was willing to take part in the inquiry and he sent telegram on 11-6-1986 and 12-6-1986 but despite the telegram the inquiry officer held the inquiry ex -parte on 12-6-1986 . It appears from the conduct of the inquiry officer that he was highly biased and he wanted to conclude the inquiry ex-parte in the absence of the workman applicant so he did not give him even one days time and held the inquiry ex -parte.

The CSE was found absent from 2.30 to 6.30 PM . It is not the case of the respondent or the Police that he was in a drunken state . There is no purpose of his visiting the said Brothel House . It is not natural that an employce will go to a Brothel House for doing nothing . There is no allegation against him even in the Police report so it is proven fact that he was arrested at 2.30 or 3.00 PM while having lunch by the Police and that was the sole reason that he could not resume his duty after lunch being in Police custody. The inquiry is liable to be set aside and it is setaside hereby.

The reference is replied thus :

It was further submitted from the side of the management that principles of natural justice have been followed . Sufficient opportunity has been given to the CSE but as stated above the CSE was neither given sufficient opportunity nor he was given opportunity to produce evidence in his defence . The inquiry was held ex-parte on 12-6-1986 and the inquiry officer gave his findings on 13-6-1986 so he concluded the entry inquiry hastily as he was determined to hold the charges proved without giving opportunity to the CSE . The objections of the CSE regarding re - opening of the inquiry was not considered and in the meantime inquiry was held to punish the CSE so the inquiry is vitiated and it cannot be relied upon in view ofthe acquittal of the workman applicant .

Itwas further submitted from the side of the CSE that he was not informed of the particulars ofthe charges against him. The inquiry is vitiated on this count also in view of 2000 - I- LLJ . He was not given personal hearing . The inquiry vitiates on this ground also .

The action of the management of the Central Bank of India in imposing stoppage of three annual increments permanently to Shri Suresh Chand Jain . Asstt . Cashier- Cum-Clerk is neither legal nor justified . The order of deduction of three annual increment permanently is held illegal and unjustified and the management is directed to pay to the claimant all his wages deducted as a result of withholding three annual increments permanently within two months from the date of publication of the Award . In case the management fails to make payment of the entire back wages withheld illegally, the workman will be entitled to 12% interest over his entire wages .

The Award is given accordingly.

Date: 14-06-2005 .

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer It is true that acquittal of delinquent officer by Criminal Court will not conclude the departmental proceedings on the same charge . Domestic inquiry can be still held in view of 1999- I- LLJ 1313. It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in JT 1999 (2 ) SC 456 that if [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7935

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 20 जून, 2005

का.आ. 2524- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार साम एविएशन (प्रा. लि. ) के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नई दिल्ली -1 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 99/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 17-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -11012/ 2/2003- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ]

एन. पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 20th June, 2005

S.O. 2524. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 99/ 2003) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, New Delhi - I now as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Sam Aviation (P. ) Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 17-6-2005.

[No. L- 11012/2 /2003 - IR( C -I ) ] N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT, NEW DELHI Presiding Officer: Shri S. S. Bal

I. D. No. 99/2003

In the matter of dispute between:

1. Shri Avtar Singh S/o Sh . Narain Singh , 2. Shri Puran Singh S/ o Sh . Mathan Singh 3. Shri Sudesh Bera S/o Sh . Subhash Chandra Bera , 4. Shri Inder Pal Singh S /o Sh. Than Singh 5. Shri Sumer Singh S/o Sh. Birju Singh 6. Shri Mantosh Singh S/ o Sh . Man Singh 7. Shri Budhadev S/o Sh. Chitaranjan 8. Shri Satyavan S/o Sh . Karan Chand 9. Shri Satpal Singh S/o Sh . Raghuvir Singh 10. Shri Arvind Kumar S/o Sh . Attar Sing 11. Shri Mahavir Singh S/ o Sh . Bishamber 12. Shri Shiv Kumar S /o Sh. Bane Singh 13. Shri Hariman S/o Sh. Ram Khialari

Shri Somvir S /o Sh. Krishan 14.

15. Shri Sunil Kumar S/o Sh . Mahavir Singh 16. Shri Suresh Kumar S /o Sh. Ramesh Kumar 17. Shri Ajeet Singh S/o Sh. Om Prakash 18. Shri Surender Singh S/ o Sh . Beni Singh 19. Shri Naresh Kumar S/ o Sh . Mahender Singh 20. Shri Virender Singh S/o Sh. Bulla Ram 21 . Shri Ravinder Singh S/ o Sh . Ant Ram 22. Shri Sunil Kumar S /o Sh . Fakir Chand 23. Shri Gopal Singh S/o Sh . Chandan Singh Through Adhyakash, Airport Employees Union , 3 , V.P. House NewDelhi Workmen

Versus M/s. Sam Aviation (P) Ltd. Sam Complex RZB 1A, Masoodpur, Behind G. D. Goenka Public School , Vasan Kunj , New Delhi -70 APPEARANCES : 19 Workman in person . Shri Jaideep Mirchandani M.D. For the Management Management

AWARD

The Central Government in the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L- 11012/ 2/2003 - IR( C - I) dated 27-6-2003 has referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal foradjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of M/s . Sam Aviation (P) Limited New Delhi to lay off/ terminate 25workmen (as per list ) w.e.f. 1-7-2002 is justified? If not , to what relief are the said workmen entitled ?" 2. Notices were sent to the parties for filing claim statement and on 9-10-2003 claim statement on behalf of 23 workmen was filed and for filing of written statement the case was adjudication to 15-12-2003 . On 15-12-2003 . On 20-1-2004 , 29-3-2004, 1-6-2004 and 24-8-2004 none for the management appeared and case was adjourned to 16-9-2004 for filing of W.S. On 16-9-2004 Shri Jaideep Mirchandani M.D. for the respondent appeared and requested for adjournment for filing written statement . The casewas adjourned to 30-11-2004 for filing wrirren statement and payment of cost and on 30-11-2004 also written statement was not filed and case was adjourned to 8-2-2005 for filing of W.S. On 8-2-2005 written statement was filed and rejoinder was filed on the next date i.e. 3-3-2005 and for filing of documents , admission denial case was adjournedto 2-5-2005 .

3. On 2-5-2005 the 17 workmen appeared out of 23 workmen who have filed claim statement after notice and Shri Jaideep Mirchandani, M.D of the management appeared and he offered to compromise the matter with 17 workmen present on that day and he was willing to compromise the matter with the workmen on payment of three months salary in full and final settlement of the claims in reference to each of the workman which the 17 workmen present on that date accepted the offer made by the M.D.

7936

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नई दिल्ली- I के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 54/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 17-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-11012/38/98- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एन. पी. केशवन , डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 20th June , 2005

S.O. 2525.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No.54 / 99 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court , New Delhi - 1 now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Air India Ltd. and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 17-6-2005.

[No. L- 11012/38/ 9 - IR ( C - I) ] N.P. KESAVAN , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, NEW DELHI Presiding Officer : Shri Sant Singh Bal

I. D. No. 54/99

Inthematter of dispute bwtween: Shri Ramesh Chander through All IndiaGeneral Mazdoor Trade Union (Regd. ) 163 'Balmukhand Khand Giri Nagar, Kalkaji , New Delhi - 110019

Workmen

Versus

1. The General Manager, M/s. Air India Limited, Hansalaya Building , 6th Floor, 12 Barakhamba Road' NewDelhi - 110001

2. The Manager

M/s.Ex-Servicemen Transport Limited, Yashwant Place, 62, Chankayapuri . NewDelhi.

Management

APPEARANCES :

AWARD

1 of the management respondent and each of them received the payment of three months salary and stated that the matter was settled and they did not have other claim left with the management as they received their salary as stated and their claim stood satisfied as they received three months salary in full and final settlement oftheir claim and on6-5-2005 again Shri Sombir Singh and Satpal Singh also received three months salary on 6-5-2005 in full and final settlement oftheir claim and stated that their claims against the respondent stood satisfied and they stated that no claim left qua their claim and reference stood satisfied in pursuance of that compromise . I was informed that three other workmen namely Shri Kumar, Sudesh and Swadesh were not present to receive paynment and they would or could appear in the office of the management on any day during office hours and receive and collect the payments from the management on 13-5-2005 or any other subsequent convenient date and on making payment to the said persons management was directed to inform the court and submit its report about the payment by 15th of May, 2005 and in view of the payment made to the workmen as stated above and undertaking given by M.D. of the management- respondent that payment shall be made to other claimants as stated the claims of the workmen stood satisfied . Perusal of the record shows that Rakesh Kumar, Puran Singh and Mahinder Singh has given their resignation with their free will . Shri Budha Dev has not appeared through his name appeared in the claim statement of claimant who filed claim statement and with respect to three claimants namely Shiv Kumar , Swadesh and Sudesh. Shri Jaideep Mirchandani M.D. of the management stated that they could collect or receive payment of three months salary in full and final settlement of their claim under reference from the office of the management . However, Puran Singhat Sl. No. 8 , Rakesh Kumar at Sl . No. 11 and Mahinder Singh at Sl . No. 24 ofthe list of workmen attached with the order of reference have not preferred to file statement of claim before this Tribunal as they are stated to have resigned from their job on their own free will as per para 3 of the written statement. Shri Budha Dev at Sl . No. 16 of list of workmen reference order filed statement of claim has not appeared to pursue his claim . Thus in view of the above , therefore , the settlement has arrived with the above mentioned 22 workmen- claimants in full and final settlement of their claim under reference . Other claimants have not filed their claim or pursued the claim. Hence the reference stands disposed between the parties have substantially settled and there appears to be No dispute between the workmen/ claimants and No Dispute Award' is accordingly passed.

Dated: 15-5-2005

The Central Government in the Ministry of Labour vide its order No. L- 11012/ 38 /98 - I.R . ( C - 1 ) dated 17-2-99 hasreferred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal foradjudication :-

S. S. BAL, PresidingOfficer नई दिल्ली, 20 जून, 2005

का.आ. 2525-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एअर इंडिया

"Whether the security guards working as contract labourer in the Estt. of M/ s . Air India Ltd. for number ofyears just before judgement of Supreme Court in "Air India Statutory Corpn . etc. " are entitiled for preferential treatment in the Estt . ? " 7937 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

2. After receipt of the reference notices were sent to the parties and in response the summonus both the parties appeared and workman filed his claim statement stating that he was appointed as Suraksha Guard w.e.f. 17. - 12-86 . He was working on the post of Security Guard in the respondent management since 17-12-86 and he was appointed through M/ s . Marshal Securities and Detectives Limited and was drawing Rupees One thousand fifty only. he was under the control of the respondent and the management respondent were exploiting through contract labour. In fact he was working for the management Air India and the agreement of Air India with the contractor as agreement of contractor M/ s . Marshal Securities Guard and Detectives Ltd. is sham and bogus. His services were terminating illegally by management on 12-3-93 and he is entitled to reinstatement with full back wages . He claimed that he shall be regularised in his service of SecurityGuard.

who have been found to be eligible and fit for employment by Air India of waiting list . It was open for the present workman to get him self employed in the said list but for reasons best known to the workman he never applied for employment and however, few of the similarly placed complainants have already availed of the aforesaid scheme and after having completed required formalities have submitted with the company. It is further submitted that appointment , placement , supervision, payment ect . were being controlled by contractors and accordingly no employer/ employee relationship ever exist between Air India and workman . The allegation about dispensing with the services ofthe claimant by the respondent in violation of the Supreme Court order is claimed to be baseless incorrect and denied . The 13 petitioners in petition No. 219/95 titled as Masih Charan Vs. AI are still doing sweeping and cleaning job and the said judgement is not applicable in the present case. It is denied that the workman is entitled to any relief for an employment . It is further stated that the workman is not entitled to any relief for unemployment benefit or employment with the respondent. It is once more stated that workman was employee of contactor and stopped reporting for work since 12-3-93 . It is denied that one workman is entitled to back wages .

4. Perusal of the record shows that burden to prove that Security Guard working as contract labour in the establishment of the Air India respondent for number of years which is before judgement of S.C. in Air India Statutory Corporation etc. are entitled to preferential treatment in the establishment was on the workman but the workman has been proceeded ex parte and have not placed any material on record to show that they are so entitled to preferential treatment or any benefit of regularisation/ absorption in service of the respondent . It appears that the workman association has based claim of the workman for regularisation/ absorption/ reinstatement with full back wages on the decision of Air India case reported in Air India Statutory Corporation Vs. United Labour Union in 1996 JTI II S.C. On the contrary the case ofthe management respondent is that the workman is not entitled to the relief ofabsorption or regularisation in service/ reinstatement in service with back wages as claimed.

5. I have perused the decision reported in Steel Authority of India case Supra wherein the previous decision of the Supreme Court in Air India Supra has been over ruled and the said decision no longer holds good. Hence the claimant who has preferred his claim on the basis of the said decision the Air India Statutory Corporation case report 1996 JTI ( ii) SC is not entitled to relief of regularisation and reinstatement with full back wages as claimed or any other preferential treatment in the establishment . The reference is thus answered . Award is passed accordingly.

Dated: 25-5-2005

S. S. BAL , Presiding Officer 3. The management contested the case by filing reply and pleaded that there did not exist any relationship between the workman and the management . Workman was the employee of M/s . Marshal Securities & Detectives Limited ( Contractor) who was awarded a contract by Air Indiafor providing watch and ward services . The contractor used to deploy his workers to different establishments and since the workers provided to the Air India through contractor were the employees of contractor also a corpus ofworkers kept on changing frequently Air India has no record of the period of employment of each worker and for that matter of the workmen therein . The workman was under the direct supervision of the said contractor. It is denied that the management respondent was having any control or his services were terminated by the ; management as claimed by the claimant . The workman was not employee of the management. It is further stated that the workman stopped reporting for work with M/ s . Marshal Securities and Detectives Ltd. since 12-2-93 with whom contract with the said contractor M/s . Marshal Securities & Detectives Limited came to an end on 15-6-96 and has not been renewed. It is also denied that the workman is not working anywhere for want of knowledge . The claim of workman for permanent employment with Air India is no longer relevant in view of S.C. Judgement in Air India Statutory Corporations case and action taken by the respondent in compliance thereof. It is further avered that the respondent has already regularised contractor labour as per directions of the Supreme Court and the claim of the workman is in fructuous in view there of without prejudice to the above it is further averred that the respondent is preparing a wait list for casual engagement of Security Guards who worked earlier with the Company as and when need arises to meet the requirement arising out of exigency of work from time to time and for consideration against future vacancy in the category of Security i.e. Security Guard in Air India and many persons who worked earlier with Air India as temporary/contract Security Guard applied for and those 7938

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 20 जून , 2005

का.आ. 2526.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एयर इण्डिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय, नई दिल्ली- I के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 133/98 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 17-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-11012/34/97- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ]

एन. पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 20th June , 2005

S.O. 2526. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 133/98) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Labour Court , New Delhi - I now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Air India and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 17-6-2005 .

[No. L - 11012/34/97 -IR (C-I) ]

N. P. KESAVAN , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM -LABOUR COURT, NEW DELHI Presiding Officer : SHRI SANT SINGH BAL

I. D. No. 133/98

In the matter of dispute between :

Shri Madan Lal ,

Workman S/ o Shri Chandgi Ram, H. No. WZ -62 , Raj Nagar, Part- II , Palam Colony, New Delhi - 110045

Versus

The General Manager (Personnel ) ,

AirIndia , Himalaya House , 23, K. G. Marg,

New Delhi - 110001

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 4-3-1991 , and demand of the workman for regularisation by the management as per the Scheme isjustified? If not, to what relief is the said workman entitled and from what date ?"

2. Workman filed statement of claim claiming that he worked as causal loader with the management for total number of 365 days w.e.f. the year 1981 to 1983 and had been working to the entire satisfaction of his management and discharging his duties regularly and sincerely. The claimant had approached after 1985 to the management number of times for his re - engagement . Claimant also approached Shri D.S. Kohli , G.M. (P) and Mrs. Meenakshi Dua, Personal Officer a number of times personally and moved application but claimant was not taken on duty by the management . Thereafter he approached ALC and claimant was not engaged ; that the claimant filed claim in the CGIT and management had filed a scheme for regularisation of the Casual Worker and had agreed to employ and regularise the casual worker who have worked for 240 days upto 31-12-87 . An arbitrary clause was made wherein it was mentioned that such of casuals who have notworked with Air India after 1-1-1986 would not be eligible for consideration under the above scheme . It is further averred that the management has adopted a discriminatory policy/treatment towards the employees and acted in pick and choose manner and workers who had not worked in AirIndia after 1985 have been taken on duty and their services have been regularised . The name of such persons are appended below:

A. Shri Rishi Prakash Staff No. 312

B. Shri Ravinder Staff No. 100

C. Shri Ravi Prakash StaffNo.

D. Shri JhammanLal

E Shri Jai Singh

Management

APPEARANCES :

None for the workman

Ms. Poonam Dass alongwith Sh . Azim Akbar

AWARD

The Central Government in the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L- 11012/34/97 -IR(C-I) dated 3-6-1998 has referred the following Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal foradjudication :

"Whether the action of the management of Air India by not considering the workman Shri Madan Lal , Casual Loader for absorption/ regularisation of his services as permanent loader as per the Scheme approved by the CGIT, New Delhi vide Award dated

1 That the above named persons have not worked with the Air India after 1-1-1986 but they have been regularised whereas in the case of claimant , he is not being considered for employment . That the claimant is very poor person anddoes not have any source of income to earn his day to day livelihood and struggling very hard to earn his bread . That the action of the management in not considering the case of the claimant for re - engagement in violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and it is also averred that junior persons are working with the management , hence the action of the management istermed as arbitrary and illegal .

3. Claim has been contested by filing written statement stating that the claimant has suppressed material facts and true facts are that claimant worked as casual loader with the management during the year 1981 to 1983 from time to time as and when there was exigency ofwork during the year 1985. Some casual labourers who were working with Air India from time to time approached Supreme Court for regularisation of their services . They [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

were referred to CGIT for regularisation vide order dated 4-3-91 who passed an award inter -alia approving the scheme ofthe management for regularisation of the services ofthe casual labourers . This scheme ofthe management was also upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court . This scheme was published in the Gazette of India dated 11-5-1991 . Copy of the same is enclosed as Annexure - I . As per scheme casual labourers who worked with the management from time to time and completed 240 days as on 31-12-87 were eligible to be regularised subject to filling up of vacancies and as perprocedure laid down in the scheme. The scheme further provides that such casuals who have not worked with Air India after 1-1-86 would not be eligible for consideration under the above scheme. It is further averred that the claimant was not eligible as he had not worked with Air India after 1-1-86 and as such he was not considered for regular appointment and was not called for interview on account of non -fulfilment of the eligibility criteria and the claim is liable to be dismissed at the outset; that the present claim also suffers from laches as the same has been filed after a lapse of 13 years . On merits it is stated that the claimanthas worked with the management as casual labour during theperiod 1981 to 1983 from time to time. Rest ofthe contents of para Nos . 2 and 3 are denied . However it is stated that the claimant approached A.L.C. vide representation dated 31-7-96 after lapse of 13 years . The contents ofparas 4 and 5 of claim statement are denied and it is stated that some casual labourers approached Hon'ble Supreme Court and case was referred to the CGIT for adjudication. It is further mentioned as to how the scheme came into being . It is denied that any discrimination has been caused in the matter or the action of the management is arbitrary. The workman is not entitled to regularisation in view of the scheme as he failed to fulfil eligibility criteria as laid down in the scheme as mentioned above and the claim is sought to be dismissed .

4. The workman did not appear on 10-4-2001 and was proceeded against exparte by my learned predecessor .

5. The scheme as mentioned in notification Annexure - I of reply of the management is reproduced as under:

"We propose to draw out a list of petitioners who hadbeenworking with us on causal basis alongwith other casuals in order of seniority of number ofdays actually worked in descending order as per the following criterion :

(1) Total number of days should be calculated as on 31-12-1987 since the reference was made by the Central Government for referring the dispute to the CGIT on 23-9-87 .

(2) Only such of the casuals would be eligible for employment who had actually worked for a total period of not less than 240 days during the entire span of service in Air India as on 31-12-87.

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

7939 (3) Such of the casuals who have not worked with Air India after 1-1-86 would not be eligible for consideration under the above scheme .

(4) Such ofthe casuals against whom there are cases of misconduct would not be eligible for consideration under the above scheme . This is as per the order passed by the Hon'ble Presiding Officer oftheCGIT on 5th January, 1988 .

(5) The casuals should be regularised as per the Corporation's recruitment procedure including the interviews , pre -employment medical examination and verification of character and antecedents by the police authorities etc. Age relaxationwould be give , and

(6) In terms of the above procedure 112 writ petitioners would become eligible for regularisation/absorption subject to Air Inida recruitment procedure over the period of next three years in phased manner. "

6. The onus to prove that the workman Shri Madan Lal was entitled to be regularised in view of the scheme and absorbed as permanent Loader was on him. The claimant in his claim statement has claimed that the scheme formulatedby the management contained an arbitrary clause to the effect that such casuals who have not worked with AirIndia after 1-1-86 would not be eligible for consideration under the scheme because he (claimant ) had completed 240 days in service much prior to 1-1-86 while he worked during the year 1981 to 1983. He further complained that otherworkers namely Rishi Prakash , Ravinder, Ravi Parkash, Jhamman Lal , and Jai Singh who had (also) not worked after1-1-86 have been regularised in service while has been left out.

7. The respondent/ management on the contrary claimed that the scheme formulated for absorption and regularisation of workmen in service by the management was approvedby the CGIT and even upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court which fact has gone unrebutted on record.

8. The grouse of the claimant about the arbitrariness of the clause No. 3 of the aforesaid scheme is threfore otiose . There is no material /evidence to show that some discrimination has been perpetrated by the management in regularisation of the services of the workmen as mentioned above . Moreover, the burden to show that the above clause 3 of the scheme aforesaid suffered from arbitrariness and that the claimant has been discriminated was on him which he has utterly failed to , discharge . Perusal of the scheme shows that the casual labourers who were eligible for absorption and regularisation under the scheme must have worked after 1-1-86 and completed 240 days in all (in total ) during their entire span of service inAir India before 31-12-87. From the averments in the claim statement it is apparent that the workman has worked only upto the year 1983 though he has completed more [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ ASADHA 25, 1927

7940

AND

The General Secretary,

Co-ordination Committee of

SouthMalabar Garamin Bank Staff

Association and Officers ' Congress ,

....Union

Malappuram , Kerala

Representations : -

Sri N. Ramakrishnan , Advocate , Calicut

than240 days even before 31-12-87 and has fulfilled criterion No. 2 but he has not worked after 1-1-86 and has failed to fulfill the criterion No. 3 of the scheme and as such he is not eligible and entitled for consideration for absorption and regularisation as permanent loader in view of the management respondent's scheme approved by CGIT, New Delhi vide Award dated 4-3-1991 and the action of the management in not regularising /absorbing the workman cannot be found fault with and is justified. Reference is accordingly answered and Award is made .

....... For Management S. S. BAL, Presiding Officer

For Union

Sri Srikanth S Nair, Advocate , Calicut

Dated: 25-5-2005

AWARD

नई दिल्ली, 21 जून, 2005

का.आ. 2527.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार साऊथ मालाबार ग्रामीण बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में श्रम न्यायालय कोझीकोडे, केरलस्टेट के पंचाट [ संदर्भ संख्या आई.डी. ( सी ) 1/02 ] को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 20-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

This reference was made by Government of india , Ministry of Labour as per Order No. L - 12011 / 42/2001 IR (B -I) dated 8-1-2002 to adjudicate the dispute between the management , South Malabar Gramin Bank (hereinafter shortly referred as SMG Bank ) and its two workers . The reference was made to adjudicate the justifiability or otherwise the action of the management in denying special leave to the workers and debiting leave without their consent.

[सं. एल-12011/42/2001- आई आर ( बी- I ) ]

अजय कुमार, डैस्कअधिकारी

2. In pursuance of the notice both parties appeared through counsel of their choice and filed their respective statements .

New Delhi, the 21st June , 2005

S.O. 2527.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award [I.D. (C) 1/02 ] of the Labour Court , Kozhikode , Kerala State now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of South Malabar Gramine Bank and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 20-6-2005.

[No. L- 12011/42/2001 -IR (B -I) ]

AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE LABOUR COURT, KOZHIKODE , KERALA STATE

Dated this the 13th day ofMay, 2005

3. As per the statement of union : The General Manager convened a meeting of the Union representatives at the Head Office on 7-2-2000 to discuss about some of the demands raised by the union. Sri K. Rajeev, one of the workman involved in the dispute who was working as Cashier in Atholi Branch was the Vice- President of the union at that time . Since that branch was situated at about 68 Kms away from the Head Office , he had to undertake more than two hours journey to reach the Head Office . Sri Rajeev, after submitting his application to the Manager , proceeded to the head office and attended the discussion. As office bearer, he was entitled to get the benefit of special leave to attend the meeting as per the prevalent practice of the Bank. But later, the management improperly rejected the application for leave and debited one day's leave from his leave account . The action of the management , according to the worker, is illegal , discriminatory and amounts to victmisation .

PRESENT :

SHRI K. BALASUBRAMANIAN, B.Com . , LL.B. , Presiding Officer

L. D. No. (C) 1/02

BETWEEN:

The Chairman,

South Malabar Gramin Bank,

Head Office , Malappuram,

4. Sri K. Abdul Rasheed , the other worker involved in the reference , was working as a clerk in the Vengara branch.After working till 1 p.m. on 2-5-2000 and 3.30 P.M. on 4-5-2000 . He proceeded to attend the discussion after submitting an application and taking permission from the Branch Manager. But the management unilaterally and arbitrarily debited the whole days from his leave account evenwithout informing the worker over the rejection ofhis leave application.

.... Management

Kerala 7941 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

5. Therefore , the union seeks to set aside the action ofthe management in debiting leave from their respective accounts and for granting necessary reliefs.

permitted to participate in the discussion with duty leave and that he was discriminated. There is no contra-evidence from the side of the management .

6. According to the management , the Branch Manager had informed the worker Sri K. Rajeev, that he could proceed only after obtaining permission from the HeadOffice.All other representatives reported at the branch inthe morning for duty and then only proceed to the head office whereas Sri Rajeev never turned up on the day. In the above circumstances through application for duty leave could not be considered, the management by taking a lenient view debited the leave as per rules to avoid any servicebreak .

10. The management has no case that the worker had not entrusted the keys on the previous day as stated by him . Acceptance of keys by the Branch Manager amounts to implied grant of permission to attend the discussion. Management has also no dispute that the worker did not attend the discussion . If the prevalent practice was to grant duty leave for the members of the negotiating team, there is no reason the worker alone was discriminated . So the action of the management in debiting one day's leave for 7-2-2000 from out of the leave account of Sri K. Rajeev is only to be found as illegal and arbitrary.

11. There is no evidence to show that Sri K. Abdul Rasheed was a member of the negotiating team so as to get duty leave. But the management has no case that the worker did not work upto 1 P.M. on 2-5-2000 and till 2.30 P.M. on 4-5-2000 as stated by him . Having worked for the major portion of the working hours , there was no justification in debiting the whole day's account . In this context the learned counsel for the worker contended that the worker left the office only after getting permission of the Branch Mangaer and so it was not proper to debit the whole day's leave from his leave account .

7. Sri Abdul Rasheed was not a member of the negotiating team . He submitted an application to enable him to attend the discussion at the Head Office . The application of Sri K. Abdul Rasheed was forwarded by the Branch Manager to the Head Office with a remark "Permitted and forwarded to H.O. " . This permission could not be treated as an absolute sanction to treat his absence asduty. By doing so the manager had only left the issue to the head office for appropriate decision. As his visit to the head office was not official the management instructed the branch to sanction proper category of leave to him . Since Sri Abdul Rasheed failed to submit any leave application leave was debited from out of his account and his absence was regularised . Therefore , the management prays to pass anaward upholding their action. The evidence consists of oral evidence of WW1 .

8. The points for consideration are :-

(1) Whether the management was justified in denying special leave to the workers involved inthe dispute?

12. No doubt , the Branch Manager passed a remark onthe applications submitted by the worker-' permitted and forwarded to H.O. ' . This means he only provisionaly granted permission subject to the approval and confirmation of the H.O. So the endorsement of the Branch Manager may not in anyway help the worker. To conclude the action ofthe management in debiting the whole days leave is not liable to be approved, whereas it is only just and proper to limit the leave for the half days the worker absented .

(2) Whether the action of the management in debiting their leave without consent was proper andjustifiable ?

(3) Further relief liable to be granted !

13. In the result, an award is passed holding that the management was not justified in denying special leave to Sri K. Rajeev and debiting leave for 7-2-2000 out of his leave account and in debiting 1/2 day's leave out of the leave account of Sri K. Abdul Rasheed . Accordingly the management is directed to make necessary entries in the leave account of the workers .

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant , transcribed by her, revised , corrected and passed by me on the 13th day of May, 2005 .

K. BALASUBRAMANIAN, Presiding Officer APPENDIX

Witnesses examined on the side of the Union : WW1 .... K . Rajeev.

Witnesses examined on the side of the Management : NIL

9. Points : Sri Rajeev, the worker involved in the reference when examined as WW1 , has given evidence in proofofhis case and representing the other worker. It is in evidence that Sri Rajeev was an office bearer of a particular trade union of the Management Bank . There is no dispute that the General Manager convened a discussion of union representative on 7-2-2000 at the head office . The worker deposed thatduring the relevant period he was working as cashier inAtholi branch situated about 65 Kms. away from the Head Office, that he proceeded to attend the discussion as member of the negotiating team only after informing the Manager and after submitting a leave application, that he was given permission by the Manager and had entrusted the Keys of Chest even on the previous evening after closing the day's work and the then prevailing practice was to grant special leave for the whole day. He further deposed that other members of the negotiating team were

Documents marked on either side :

NIL

1993 GI /05-53 7942

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ ASADHA 25 , 1927

AWARD

नई दिल्ली, 23 जून, 2005

The Central Government, Ministry of Labour vide OrderNo. L-44011/5 /2003 - IR (B - II) dated 19-7-2004 has referred this industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication. The Schedule mentioned in that order is-

"Whether the imposition of punishment against Sri S. Pandian, Storesman by the management of Tuticorin Port Trust, Tuticorin is legal and justified ? Ifnot, what relief the workman is entitled to ?" का. आ. 2528.- 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 391/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-44011 /5/2003- आईआर ( बी- II ) ] सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 23rd June , 2005

2. After the receipt of reference , it was taken on file as I.D. No. 391/2004 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 of the Petitioner in the Claim Statement are briefly as follows :-

S.O. 2528. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 391/2004) of the 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 workmen , received by the Central Government on 22-6-2005 .

[No. L-44011/5/2003 - IR (B - II) ]

C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Tuesday, the 19th April, 2005

PRESENT : K. Jayaraman,

Presiding Officer

Industrial Dispute No. 391/2004

(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 the Management of Tuticorin Port Trust and their workmen)

BETWEEN

: I Party/Claimant

The General Secretary, Tuticorin Port Employees Trade Union

AND

: II Party/Management

The Chairman, Tuticorin Port Trust , Tuticorin

Appearances:

For the Petitioner : M/ s . P. Ravichandran , Advocates

The Petitioner Union espouses the cause of Sri S. Pandian workman under the Respondent/Management. The said workman joined as Khalasi/Stores on 14-3-80 and subsequently, he has been promoted as storeman and he was discharging his duties to the entire satisfaction of his superiors . After twenty years of service in the Respondent /Management , all of a sudden, he has received suspension order and he was placed under suspension from 19-11-99 . He was informed that in view of the default in discharge of diesel in VOC wharf departmental diesel tank from the Indian Oil Corporation tankers , he was placed under suspension . As a workman , he has nothing todo with the affairs in the event said to have been held on 18-11-99 . Therefore , the suspension made against him is unjustified and illegal . On 18-11-99 the concerned workman was deployed in general shift duty at VOC wharf diesel tank. The normal procedure is the workman in the site has to open the valves at the very bottom of the Indian Oil Corporation tankers so as to discharge the entire quantity of diesel in the takers . The concerned workman also followed the same way on 18-11-99 . The Assistant Store Keeper on duty was also satisfied with his work and he has also signed the trip sheet of Indian Oil Corporation after having verified the tankers and the tankers were released at 16.15 hrs . on 18-11-99 at the same condition by opening the bottom valves of the tankers as if when the diesel discharged to the departmental diesel tank and the valves at the bottom oftankers as procedural formalities are allowed to close at the green gat by Central Industrial Security Force contingent. The records of stock of diesel are also mentioned the same . Therefore , the workman concerned is nothing to do or no way connected as well as not committed in any form of misconduct , misbehaviour or misdemeanour in the incident said to have been held on 18-11-99 . Further, the Central Industrial Security Force contingent either at the wharf or green gate has not reported that the workman involved in the said incident For the Management : M/s . G. Dhamodaran & J. Sathayavathi , Advocates [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7943

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

enquirywas conducted by the Enquiry Officer nominated the Respondent and he has given a finding that the charge framed against the Petitioner has been proved and the Disciplinary Authority cum punishing authority after going through the enquiry proceedings accepted the findings of the Enquiry Officer and has awarded the minor punishment of reducing of three stages in the time scale of pay for a period of four years . Aggrieved with that order, the concerned employee has preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority namely the Chairman of the Respondent/Management . The Appellate Authority, after considering the appeal made by the concerned employee and also going through the enquiry proceedings has passed an order rejecting the appeal dated 18-10-2000. Even after the dispute raised before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central ) , the matter was placed before the Board of Trustees and the Baord after examining the issue resolved to modify the order by passing a considered order reducing the pay of the concerned employee by three stages from Rs . 3025-2845 in the time scale of Rs. 2045-3085 for a period of three years . Therefore , the Petitioner has nothing to say about the departmental enquiry and the concerned workman was offered reasonable opportunity to defend himself before the enquiry. In the departmental Enquiry, the concerned employee has not availed the opportunity either to examine himself or let in any evidence on his side nor filed any document on his side to substantiate his contention . further, in this case , the concerned employee was not awarded any major penalty as alleged by the Petitioner Union. He was awarded with onlyminor punishment of reduction of pay in time scale for a period of three yreas . Further, he was not awarded any punishment disproportionate to the misconduct committed bythe concerned workman for whom the dispute was raised by the Petitioner Union . The misconduct committed by the concerned workman involves loss of value of diesel which is one form of property of the Respondent/Management and that involves heavy loss to the Port Trust. Further, on the complaint before the police authorities , the concerned employee was not acquitted on merits . Therefore , there is no room for interfering with the minor punishment imposed on the concerned workman . Further , section 11A of I.D. Actwill not applicable for this case . Hence , the Respondent prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs.

5. In such circumstances , the points for my determination are ,-

or red handed. Meanwhile , a case was registered in the police station for enquiry and further course of action against the workman concerned and in the case , judicial enquiry was conducted before the Additional District Judge(Executive) of Tuticorin. After a detailed enquiry, the District Revenue Officer cum Additional District Judge dismissed the case on the ground that the case was not proved with documentary and other evidences . While so , in the departmental enquiry, the Disciplinary Authority imposed the major penalty of reduction by three stages from Rs . 3025-2845 in the time scale of pay Rs . 2045-50-2245-3085 for a period of four years w.e.f. 1-8-2000 by his order dated 26-7-2000 . The concerned employee has prefered an appeal to the Appellate Authority in which the appeal was also dismissed. When the matter was referred to Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central ) as industrial dispute and during the conciliation proceedings as suggested by Assistant Labour Commissioner ( Central) , both parties agreed to have a review of the same and in the review before the Board of Trustees held on 17-8-2002 , the board has modified the orderby imposing the punishment of reduction of pay by three stages for a period of three years instead of four years . Not satisfied with the review, the dispute was again raised by the Petitioner union before Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central ) and on its failure of conciliation , the matter was referred to this Tribunal for adjudication . As a storeman the concerned workman must open the valves of the tanker containing three compartments and discharge the required quanitity of diesel from IndianOil Corporation tanker to departmental underground storage diesel tank. The concerned workman has assisted the Assistant Store Keeper to discharge diesel from IOC tanker. He has followed the normal procedure and has discharged the entire quantity of diesel from the tanker containing three compartments , which was also suprevised by the Assistant Store Keeper and after the diesel was discharged and emptied , the tanker was released keeping the bottom valves of three compartments ofthe tanker opened. Even the departmental stock book containing the opening and closing balances clearly establish that the entire diesel was discharged from the tanker . Under such circumstances , it cannot be said that the concerned workman was involved in the incident alleged to have been taken place . Therefore , the Petitioner Union prays that an award may be passed to cancel the orders of the Respondent/Management dated 4-9-2002.

(i) "Whether the imposition of punishment against the concerned workman Sri S.Pandian by the Respondent/Management is legal and justified?

(ii) Towhat reliefthe concerned employee is entitled?" Point No. 1 :-

4. As against this , the Respondent in its counter statement contended that in this case the Petitioner had been given reasonable opportunity before imposing very minor punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority. The concerned employee was served with charge memo dated 10-1-2000 and was given reasonable opportunity to submit his explanation . Not satisfied with the explanation given by the concerned employee , a detailed

6. The charge against the concerned workman in this case is that while the concerned employee was functioning as storeman in the materials management 7944

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )]

there was no loss to the Respondent/ Management . Therefore , the order passed by the Respondent/ Management is unjustified and the punishment imposed onthe concerned workman is not correct and not justified. Further, in the case, the Disciplinary Authority completely ignoring the fundamental formalities , placed the concerned workman under suspension and issued memo and charges to him under major penalty proceedings . Neither the Assistant Executive Engineer (Stores ) nor the Central Industrial Security Force has given any complaint against the workman concerned , therefore , the Disciplinary Authority-cum -Punishing Authority has passed an illegal order. Neither show cause notice nor report of the Enquiry Officer was issued to the concerned workman before imposing the punishment. Further, the driver concerned ofthe lorry has also stated the he has paid Rs . 500/- to the Assistant Store Keeper for concealment of diesel . He has not stated anything against the concerned workman . The Assistant Executive Engineer (Stores ) , Executive Engineer (Stores) who are superiors have also not stated that the concerned workman was involved in the incident . Under such circumstances , the concerned workman who is only astoreman has nothing to do with the incident alleged to have been happened on 18-11-99 and therefore , the finding given by the Enquiry Officer an the order of the Disciplinary Authority are not valid .

division of the Respondent/Management during November , 1999 failed in discharging his duties in unloading of 12KL of diesel from the tanker bearing No. TN - 69A/ 1375 into the underground storage tank of the wharf diesel bunk resulting in unlawful concealment of about 200 litres in the tank of the tanker and thereby caused financial loss to the Port Trust. For this , an explanation was called for from the concerned workman and on not satisfied with the explanation given by the concerned workman, the Respondent/Management has ordered for domestic enquiry and in that enquiry, the Enquiry Officer was appointed and after giving an opportunity to the concerned workman, the Enquiry Officer has given a finding stating that the charges framed against the concerned workman was proved and on going through the findings , the Disciplinary Authority-cum- Punishing Authority has imposed the punishment of reduction of pay by three stages in the time scale of pay for a period of four years and even the appeal preferred by the concerned employee before the Appellate Authority, the appeal was dismissed. When the matter was pending before the conciliation authorities , a review was conducted by the Board of Trustees and in that review the Board has modified the order of the Disciplinary Authority and it passed an order imposing the punishment reducing the pay of workman concerned by three stages in the time scale of pay for a period of three years .

8. In this case, both sides have not examined any parties . On the side of the Petitioner a copy of the agenda item ofBaord meeting dated 20-4-2002 was marked as Ex. W1 . On the side of the Respondent /Management 16 documents namely Ex . M1 to M16 were marked which are enquiry proceedings and also the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority and Appellate Authority .

7. The grievance of the Petitioner Union with regard to the punishment is the concerned employee has nothing to do with the incident happened on 18-11-99 , and it is usual for he concerned workman namely storeman and as per the direction of the Assistant Store Keeper, he has to open the valves at the bottom of the tanker to discharge diesel into the tank maintained by the Respondent/Management . In this case , as usual per the direction of the Assistant Store Keeper, the concerned employee opened the valves of the tanker lorry and discharged the diesel and the Assistant Store Keeper also satisfied with the work of the concerned workman in the discharge of diesel from the IOC tankers and he has also mentioned the same in the invoice and returned to the lorry driver. Thus , it is clear from the documentary evidence that the entire quantity of 12,000 litres of diesel was discharged on 18-11-99 and the stock receipt dated 18-11-99 shows that 12,000 litres diesel was received and therefore , the concerned workman has not involved in the incident and also not committed any misconduct or misbehaviour and it is the argument of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the alleged concealed quantity of diesel in the tanker may be by some other person and not by the workman and also the order passed by the Distrtict Revenue Officer- cum -Additional District Judge in the case filed by the police , it was ordered that the amount is to be recovered from the owner of the lorry and therefore,

9. Learned counsel for the Respondent contended that this case would not be governed by Section 11A of the I.D. Act and this Tribunal can have jurisdiction to interfere with the findings of the Enquiry Officer in this case , only if the findings of the Enquiry Officer are perverse, in the sense , they are wholly unsupported by any evidence. In this case the concerned employee has not disputed the incident that has taken place on 18-11-99 but he says , he has nothing to do with the incident alleged to have been taken place, but from the enquiry, it is clearly established that about 200 litres of diesel was kept in the tanker and on that date the concerned employee was the storeman and the other - man was Assistant Store Kepper and they were in- charge of the discharge of diesel into the Respondent tank. From the enquiry, the Enquiry Officer has come to the conclusion that the Petitioner was also responsible for the loss of the 200 litres of diesel to be discharged from the tanker. Learned counsel for the Respondent contended that with regard to the punishment , this Tribunal in such circumstances would have no jurisdiction to interfere with the punishment on the ground that the punishment is disproportionate to the charges 7945 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

also the Assistant Store Keeper . It is not established before this Tribunal that the concerned employee has been honourably acquitted in that criminal proceedings . Only the benefit of doubt has been given to the concerned employee . Under such circumstances , I find this Tribunal cannot interfere with regard to the punishment imposed by the Respondent/Management at this stage , which is a minor punishment . Under such circumstances , I find this point against the Petitioner Union.

Point No. 2 :-

framed against the concerned employee because it is not a case under Section 11A of the I.D. Act, but it is only Under Section 2K of the Act. Further, it is only in cases of discharge, dismissal by way of punishment Section 11A vests discretionary jurisdiction with the Tribunal to direct reinstatement with or without any terms and conditions as the circumstances of the case may warrant and it does not apply any other minor punishments such as warning , fine, withholding of increments, demotion, suspension etc. and therefore , it is not open to the Petitioner Union to invite this Tribunal to re - appreciate the evidence and take a decision from the Eqnuiry Officer .

13. In view of my foregoing findings that this Tribunal cannot interfere with the punishment imposed by the authorities of the Respondent/Management , I find the concerned employee is not entitled to any relief as claimed by the Petitioner Union . No Costs .

(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 19th April , 2005. )

K. JAYARAMAN , Presiding Officer

Witnesses Examined :-

None

Oneither side

Documents Marked : -

Forthe I Party /Petitioner :

Ex. No. Date

Description

W1 20-04-02 Xerox copy ofthe agenda item ofBoard Meeting

For the II Party /Management :-

Ex. No. Date Description

10. I find much force in the contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent because Section 11A cannot be applicable to the facts and circumstances ofthe case . Only under Section 2k this Tribunal can go into the question . Further, this Tribunal cannot go into the question that punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority is disproportionate to the charges framed against the concerned employee . This Tribunal can interfere with the punishment only when it is established before this Tribunal that the findings ofthe Enquiry Officer are perverse in the sense , they are wholly unsupported by any evidence . But , the learned counsel for the Petitioner has not placed before this Tribunal that findings of the Enquiry Officer are perverse , in the sense , they are wholly unsupported by any evidence . On the other hand , it is clear from the Enquiry Officer's report that from the evidence adduced before the Enquriy Officer he has come to the conclusion that the concerned employee Sri S. Pandian was also responsible for the loss of the diesel on that day. Under such circumstances , I cannot agree with the contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the findings of the Enquiry Officer is perverse and the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority is illegal.

M1 19-11-99 Xerox copy of the letter of Assistant Executive Engineer Stores to Administration dept .

M2 19-11-99 Xerox copy of the suspension order to concerned employee

M3 10-01-00 Xerox copy of the memo with article ofcharges

11. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that the judicial authority namely District Revenue Officer -cum - Additional District Judge in the criminal complaint filed against the concerned employee has come to the conclusion that the charge framed against the concerned workman has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt. Under such circumstances , itcanbe construed that the findings given by, the Enquiry Officer in this case is perverse .

M4 13-01-00 Xerox copy of the acknowledgement for receipt of memo

M5 02-02-00 Xerox copy of the concerned employee to Respondent

M6 15-02-00 Xerox copy of the order of appoint ofEnquiry Officer

M7 01-03-00 Xerox copy of the enquiry notice issued to concerned Employee 12. But , I find there is no substance in the contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner because the findings of the District Revenue Officer- cum -Additional District Judge that the prosecution has not established the fact that concerned employee and the Assistant Store Keeper have also colluded with lorry driver and cleaner with regard to the concealment of the diesel and therefore , he has recommended for departmental action against the concerned employee and 7946

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ]

ANNEXURE

M8 24-04-2000 Xerox copy of the final order ofDRO cum District Magistrate

M9 24-05-2000 Xerox copy of the enquiry report

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT, CHENNAI

M10 26-07-2000 Xerox copy of the order of Disciplinary Authority

Wednesday the 23rd March , 2005 M11

PRESENT:

26-07-2000 Xerox copy of the order of Disciplinary Authority in the case ofA. Sheik Ibrahim

K. Jayaraman , Presiding Officer

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE ΝΟ . 349/2004 M12 28-07-2000 Xerox copy of the concerned employee'sletter Reporting for duty after revocation of suspension order

(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 Canara Bank and their workmen)

M13 18-10-2000 Xerox copy of the order of Appellate Authority

M14

: I Party/Petitioner Nil Xerox copy of the 2A petition filed by Petitioner Union Before Assistant Labour Commissioner ( Central )

: II Party/Management M15

BETWEEN Sri S. Govindarajan AND The General Manager , Canara Bank , Chennai

26-08-02 Xerox copy of the minutes of 3rd ordinary meeting of Board of Trustees

APPEARANCE :

M16

For the Petitioner

M/ s . Kavitha Murugesan an S. Mahendran , Advocates

04-09-02 Xerox copy of the modified order of Baord of Trustees . नई दिल्ली, 23 जून, 2005

For the Management Mr. T.R. Sathiya Mohan Advocate AWARD

The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide order No. L- 12012/3/ 2004 - IR (B - II ) dated 01-06-2004 has referred this industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication . The Schedule mentioned in that order is :-

का. आ. 2529.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार केनरा बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 349/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-6- 2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -12012/3/2004- आईआर ( बी- II ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 23rd June , 2005

"Whether the action of the management of Canara Bank in terminating the services of Shri S. Govindarajan by imposing the punishment of compulsory retirement vide order dated 27-5-2002 is legal and justified? If not , what relief is the workman is entitled to ? "

2. After the receipt of the reference , it was taken on file as I.D. No. 349/2004 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 of the Petitioner in the Claim Statement are briefly as follows :

S.O. 2529. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. 349/ 2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court Chennai as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Canara Bank and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 22-06-2005 .

[No. L - 12012/3 / 2004 - IR (B - II ) ] C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

The Petitioner has joined as an office assistant in the Respondent/Bank in the year 1980 on daily wages. In the year 1994 , he was confirmed in that capacity [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

7947 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

ofthe Petitioner, while rejecting the appeal on 9-6-2002. In the domestic enquiry, no witness has stated that he has been misbehaved with female employees . Further , the alleged incident in the charge sheet , mentioned in the first charge that the management has already given punishment ofstoppage of two increments with cumulative effect and also he was frequently transferred to so many places and for the same charges , the management now imposed the punishment of compulsory retirement from service . The act of Respondent/Bank in imposing several punishments for the same charge is an act of double jeopardy. The Respondent/Management with a mala fide intention and to satisfy few officers of Respondent/Bank has framed the charges and given findings against the Petitioner . Further, the punishment of dismissal from service imposed on the Petitioner is disproportionate to the charges framed against him . Hence, for all these reasons , the Petitioner prays to set aside the order impugned passed by the respondent/ management and to direct the Respondent/Bank to reinstate the Petitioner into service with full back wages and attendant benefits .

permanently in the Respondent/Bank. Apart from his work as a Sub - staff, he has mobilized deposits and he has also been taken part in recovery proceedings for the Respondent/Bank for which also the Respondent/Bank has issued merit certificates . He was transferred to Uttiramerur, Kanjeepuram , Koneripatti , Perungavoor , Hosur, Vengal , Madhara Mangalam and Nainarpalyam and so on and these transfers were made with no fault of the Petitioner and only to satisfy and safeguard certain employees of the Respondent/Bank . While so , when he was working at Vengal on 8-11-2001 , he was issued with charge memo alleging that when he was working as probationary peon from 26-9-94 at Uthiramerur Branch, he wrote an indecent letter to Smt . Lakshmi Seetharaman , clerk of the branch which was also admitted by him and in order to avoid further embarrassment , he was transferred to Kancheepuram Branch. Even in Kancheepuram Branch he has misbehaved with Smt . Srividhya, a clerk of the branch for which he was suspended from service of the bank on 16-3-96 and after enquiry, the punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect was imposed on him and then he was posted to Koneripatti Branch and again, he was transferred at his request to Perungavoor Branch on 31-7-2000 . Despite the above punishment, he has failed to change his attitude and continued to misbehave with female employees . In Perungavoor branch he had once againmisbehaved with Smt . C.S. Vijayalakshmi , an officer, while she was on her way to her home from the branch and also wrote indecent letters outraging her modesty. Thus , his action caused fear in her mind which ultimately affected her performance . On 14-9-2001 the Petitioner quarrelled with the Manager and shouted at him with great disrespect using abusive language and created commotion . Thus by his action he has spoiled the decency and decorum ofthe branch and behaved indecently and thus committed a gross misconduct within the meaning of Chapter XI Regulation 3 Clause (k) of Canara Bank Service Code and ChapterXI Regulation 3 Clause ( m) of Canara Bank Service Rules. The Petitioner's explanation to these charges have not been accepted and disciplinary proceedings were ordered. In the said proceedings , he was not given an opportunity to go through all documents and statements ofwitnesses and also he was not given any opportunity to cross examine the management witnesses in full. The Enquiry Officer has not followed the principles of natural justice while conducting the disciplinary proceedings and has given the finding that the charges were proved. In the domestic enquiry he was not furnished with copies of documents filed before domestic enquiry. Even the Disciplinary Authority without considering the reply given by the Petitioner issued show cause notice stating the Respondent/Management agreed with the findings of the Enquiry Officer and also proposed the punishment of dismissal from service . Even the request made by the Petitioner has not been considered and passed the order ofcompulsory retirement from service on 27-5-2002 . The Appellate Authority also has not considered the pleadings

4. As against this , the respondent in its Counter Statement contended that no doubt , the Petitioner was working as peon of the Respondent/Bank. While working at Uthiramerur branch , he wrote indecent letter to one female employee Smt . Lakshmi Seethaman , Clerk of the branch amounting to outraging the modesty of a women . During the investigation, the Petitioner admitted having written the letter to her . In order to avoid further embarrassment to both , the Petitioner was transferred to Kancheepuram branch . Even while working at Kancheepuram Branch, the Petitioner wrote several nasty and indecent letters to Smt . S. Srividya, clerk of the branch and misbehaved with her. For this , the Petitioner was placed under suspension at the first instance during the year 1996 and after conducting enquiry, the punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect was imposed on him and he was posted to Koneripatti branch. Later, on his request , he was transferred to Peungavoor branch on 31-7-2000 . Despite the above punishments , the Petitioner failed to change his attitude and continued to misbehave with female employees . In Perungavoor branch, he once again misbehaved with Smt . Vijayalakshmi , officer, while she was on her way to home from the branch and he has also written indecent letters outraging her modesty. Hence he was transferred to Hosur branch and subsequently, during June, 2001 he was temporarily accommodated at Vengal branch in view of his request for transfer to the said branch . While he was working in that branch on 6-8-2001 , he wrote a similar letter to Smt . C. Vijayalakshmi . Apart from this , the Petitioner has been in the habit of disobeying the instructions ofBranch Manager. On 5-9-2001 when the Branch Manager instructed him to take ledger out of cupboard, he refused to obey his instruction . Even while he was warning he has replied that 7948

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

Point No. 1 :-

)

6. The charge against the Petitioner in this case is that while the Petitioner working as probationary peon on 26-9-94 at Uthiramerur branch, he has written an indecent letter to Smt. Lakshmi Seetharaman, clerk of the branch which admitted by him and in order to avoid further embarrassment , he was transferred to Kancheepuram branch and even at Kancheepuram branch he has misbehaved with a female employee Smt . S. Srividhya , clerk ofthat branch, for which he was suspended from service and after enquiry, punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect was imposed and even then he has not changed his attitude and when he was transferredto Perungavoor branch, he has failed to change his attitude and misbehaved with one Smt . C. S. Vijayalakshmi , an officer, while she was on her way to home from the branch and also wrote indecent letters outraging her modesty. Further, the Petitioner having been in the habit of disobeying the instructions of Branch Manager particularly, on 5-9-2001 when the Branch Manager instructed him to take ledgers out of cupboard, he refused to obey his instructions and even when the Manager warned him that the matter would be reported to Circle office, he replied in a casual manner that he is ready to face the consequence and on 14-9-2001 he developed quarrel with manager and shouted at him with great disrespect using abusive language and thus , the action of the Petitioner that he has behaved indecently and thus committed gross misconduct and disobeyed the lawful orders of his superiors and therefore , he has committed gross misconduct within the meaning of Chapter XI Regulation 3 Clause (k) & ( d) of Canara Bank Service Rules.

7. For this , the Respondent/Bank has marked 23 documents as Ex . M1 to M23 and the Petitioner has filed Ex . W1 to W18 and neither party has examined any witness before this Tribunal .

8. Though at the first instance , the Petitioner has contended that domestic enquiry has not held in proper wayand principles of natural justice has not been followed . at the time of trial , the counsel for the Petitioner has only argued with regard to punishment imposed by the Respondent/Management and accordingto him, it is disproportionate to the charges framed against the Petitioner.

he was ready to face the consequences . On 14-9-2001 , he developed a quarrel with the Manager and shouted at him with disrespect and used abusive language. In the investigation conducted by the Respondent/Management, it was confirmed. Thus , he has spoiled the decency and decorum of the branch . For all these misbehaviour, he was issued with charge sheet dated 8-11-2001 and since hisexplanation to the charge sheet was not satisfactory, a departmental enquiry was initiated against him. In the enquiry, he was defended by the defence representative , who was well versed in the matter. In the departmental enquiry, he was given full opportunity to defend the charges levelled against him and he was provided with assistance of defence representative and he was given opportunityto pursue the documents filed by Respondent/ Management and was also given opportunity to cross examine all the witnesses examined on behalf of the Respondent/Bank and was also given full opportunity to produce witnesses in support of defence . The enquiry was conducted fully inconformity with the principles of natural justice and the Petitioner never had any grievance regarding the proceedings of enquiry at any stage of enquiry. It is false to allege that no opportunity was given to him. The Enquiry Officer after considering all the submissions made by the Petitioner and going through all the records has come to the conclusion that the charges framed against the Petitioner were proved and the Disciplinary Authority after taking into account the submissions made thereon , the gravity of the misconduct and the past record of service of delinquent employee and circumstances of the case , imposed the punishment of compulsory retirement as envisaged under Chapter XI Regulation 4 Clause (b) of Canara Bank Service Rules by an order dated 27-5-2002 . The appeal preferred against that order by the Petitioner was rightly rejected on 9-6-2003 . The allegation that the Petitioner has effected deposit mobilisation would not absolve of him from the grave misconduct committed by him. Since the charges were proved by direct material evidence against the Petitioner, the Enquiry Officer and the Disciplinary Authority has given such findings . Therefore , the order passed by the Respondent/Management is perfectly legal and justified and the punishment awarded is full having regard to the gravity of the charges proved against him and his past conduct of service. Hence , for all these reasons, the Respondent prays to dismiss the claim with costs .

5. In these circumstances , the points for my consideration are : --

(i ) "Whether the action of the Respondent/Bank in imposing the punishment of compulsory retirement on the Petitioner by an order dated 27-5-2002 is legal and justified ? "

(ii) "To what relief, the Petitioner is entitled ?"

9. The learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the charge sheet itself is an vindictive attempt by the Respondent/Management fo fix the employee as he had tried to vent his grievances through a petition in consumer redressal forum, a petition to Chairman & Managing Director of Respondent/Bank and a petition to High Court ofChennai . He further argued that though the management has alleged that the Petitioner has misbehaved with female members of the branch , meeting a colleague outside the premises and talking with a colleague in bus stop cannot 7949 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

argument sake that these letters were written in indecent manner, it is a personal affair between two employees and the officer must have known the behaviour of the Petitioner and in such circumstances , she would have refused to receive the letters , having known that they are coming from the Petitioner . If really, she has refused to receive letters under Ex . M5 , M6 and M7 then such incident would not have happened . But , on the other hand , the she had lured the employee and induced him to write more letters. If she is really interested in ignoring the employee , she should have rejected and refused to receive the letters . Further , in this case , even assuming that after Ex. M7 namely from the letter of Smt . C.S. Vijayalakshmi , Officer to Deputy General Manager, the Petitioner has been transferred to Hosur . The action was taken by the Respondent/Management only two years after the incident . Under such circumstances , it cannot be said that the contention of the Respondent/ Management is genuine . Only to victimise the Petitioner they have intiated the enquiry . It has not been stated at what point oftime Ex . M5 and M6 have reached the hands of the Respondent/Management. It is clear that after framing the charge and after issuing charge sheet , the Respondent/Management went in search of evidence and captured many documents . Therefore , it is more less an act of victimisation and vindictiveness on the part of Respondent /Management . It can be seen from the documents Ex. M5 and M6 that he got transfer from Perungavoor to Hosur on the allegations of Smt . C.S. Vijayalakshmi to HRM section . Therefore , he has again requested the said lady officer to use her influence to get him transfer to nearer branch of Vengal . Under such circumstances , it cannot be said that the letters contain indecent words and by these letters , the Petitioner has outraged the modesty of the lady officer .

10. But , as against this , learned counsel for the Respondent contended that though the counsel for t Petitioner has made so many allegations that the wordin

in these letters are only a request for the lady officer to use her good offices for transfer of the Petitioner to some nearer place of Vengal , it cannot be contended that the action of the Petitioner to request to marry him , a married woman namely the lady officer, knowing fully well that she has already married a man and it cannot be said that it is not indecent to ask a married woman to marry him again. Under such circumstances , there is no doubt that by these letters he has outraged the modesty of the lady officer. He further contended that even the past conduct of the Petitioner has clearly established that he has misbehaved with female co - employees even at Kancheepuram and Uthiramerur. Under such circumstances , at no stretch of imagination it can be said that by these letters Ex. M3 , M6 andM7 the Petitioner has requested the lady officer to use hergood offices to get transfer to the Petitioner the nearer placeofVengal .

be construed as a misbehaviour and even in this case , if wetake the Petitioner tried to meet Smt . C.S. Vijayalakshmi on her way to home, it does not actually constitute a misconduct, nor even a misdemeanour and since it was committed outside the premises of the bank. Even though itisalleged that the letters which are marked as Ex . M5 , M6 and M7 have written in an indecent manner, on a perusal of these letters it cannot be said that words mentioned in that letters are indecent . Since the said officer Smt . Vijayalakshmi had been affectionate towards the Petitioner and since the Petitioner had been in the habit of exchanging miseries in his personal life to Smt . C.S. Vijayalakshmi and since the said officer had shed tears upon the sad and sorrowful life story of the Petitioner, he has written these letters and it is clear from these letters that there was a clear understanding of each other prevailed between Smt . C.S. Vijayalakshmi and the Petitioner . Since the Petitioner thought that Smt. Vijayalakshmi had been a good hearted and well wisher of the Petitioner, he has written this letter. By this letter, it cannot be said that he has outraged the modesty of the woman . It is his further argument that since the lady officer had talked with the Petitioner about antecedents of his domestic life and since she had come to the rescue of the Petitioner when there were rifts between the employee and the Manager regarding allocation and deputation of duties , since she had requested the Petitioner to accompany her to functions in the bank, adopted / villaged in her two- wheeler as a pillion rider, the Petitioner has written these letters in a decent way and not in indecent way and it is his further argument that if a sub - staff like the Petitioner harass the officer or misbehaved with the officer or gives indecent letter to her, the officer must know how to react or what to do at these circumstances . Even a laywoıvan will act strongly against such instances. But in this case , Smt . Vijayalakshmi , Officer kept quite and allowance the person to harass her for my times and follow her and talk to her many times and to give letters to her many times . In such circumstances , it cannot be said thatthe Petitioner has sent indecent letters or misbehaved with the lady officer. In this society, even if there is a fault onthe part of a female , the society will punish only the male, ifthe female made a hue and cry in public. Similarly, the lady officer now has taken letters sent by the Petitioner has weapon and has raised hue and cry before the higher officers of the Respondent/Bank . Under such circumstances , it cannot be said that by producing these letters or examining the lady officer, the Respondent/ Management has proved the charges framed against the Petitioner. Any how, the punishment impose by the Respondent/Management namely compulsory retirement onthe Petitioner is grossly disproportionate to the charges made against him. There is nothing indecent in the letters ofthe Petitioner and they are highly philosophical and he has addressed Smt . C.S. Vijayalakshmi with high respect and regard. Further, the Petitioner has written these letters only to get transfer from Vengal . Even assuming for

1993 G1/05-54 7950

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] 11. I find much force in the contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent . On a perusal of these letters, I find it is not a request made by the Petitioner to the lady officer to use her good offices to transfer him to the nearest place of Vengal . On the other hand, he has expressed his love and he requested the lady officer to marry him knowing fully well that she has already married. Under such circumstances, by these indecent wordings in the letters, he has outraged the modesty of the lady officer . Further, meeting a lady colleague outside the office premises and talking with a colleague in bus stop cannot be construed as a misconduct or misbehaviour. But, ifa man following a lady officer to her house and also giving letters with indecent wordings must be construed as misbehaviour.

further relied on AIR 2000 SC 1163 U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Subhash Chandra Sharma and Others wherein the Supreme Court has followed its earlier decision and held that " if the punishment of dismissal or discharge as imposed is found to be grossly disproportionate in the light of nature of the misconduct or the past record of the employee concerned involved in the misconduct or is such which no reasonable employer would ever impose in like circumstances , inflicting of such punishment itself could be treated as legal victimisation and in such circumstances the Labour Court/Tribunal or National Tribunal as the case may be can set aside the order of discharge or dismissal and direct reinstatement of the workman on such terms and conditions as it thinks fit, or give such other relief to workman including the award of any lesser punishment in lieu of discharge or dismissal as the circumstances of the case may requied" . The last decision relied on by the counsel for the Petitioner is 2000 I LLJ 1113 where in the Supreme Court has held that " either the punishment imposed by Disciplinary Authority or the Appellate Authority shocks the conscience of the High Court/ Tribunal , it would appropriately mould the relief either directing the Disciplinary Authority or Appellate Authority to reconsider the penalty imposed or to shorten the litigation, it may itself in exceptional and rare case , imposed appropriate punishment with cogent reasons in support thereof." Relying on these decisions , the learned counsel for the Petitioner argued that the punishment imposed by the Respondent/Management in this case is grossly disproportionate to the charges framed against the Petitioner and therefore , this Tribunal can interfere with the same under section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act .

13. Though I find some force in this contention , on a perusal of records and on hearing the arguments of learned counsel on either side , I find since the Petitioner has misbehaved with the lady officer of the Respondent/ Bank and since has has written letters in an indecent manner to the lady officer, I find this Tribunal cannot interfere with the punishment under the circumstances shown before this Tribunal . Therefore, I find the action of the Respondent/ Management in imposing the punishment of compulsory retirement on the Petitioner is legal andjustified .

Point No. 2 :-

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

14. In view of my foregoing findings , I find the Petitioner is not entitled to an relief. No Costs .

15. The reference is answered accordingly.

(Dictated to the P.A.. transcribed and typed by him . corrected and pronounced by me in the open court of this day the 23rd March , 2005 ).

12. Again, the learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the next part of the charge - sheet deals with the alleged misconduct in Vengal branch . The alleged incident said to have been taken place on 14-9-2001 is like a domestic quarrel between husband and wife in and family, wherein they quarrelled with each other and on the next day they will join together and go for outing. From this solitary incident , it cannot be construed as misconduct . It is evident from the deposition of the officer prior to the incident their relationship were cordial and it is also clear from the evidence that since the Manager is slightly handicapped and cannot ride two - wheeler, the Petitioner had driven office vehicle for all official needs of theManager voluntarily without expecting any allowance . It is also the evidence of the Petitioner that Manager had helped the Petitioner financially also and these incidents will prove that there was goodwill among them and there was no ill- will among them even after the incident and it is also evident from the investigation report that some of the staff have not given statements as requestedby Respondent/ Management and from the circumstances it can be learnt that they have been forced to give such evidences before domestic enquiry. Under such circumstances , from such minor incidents it cannot be construed that the Petitioner has misbehaved with the Manager. Therefore . all these circumstances would clearly establish that the punishment given for the charge made against the Petitioner is grossly disproportionate . Under such circumstances , the Tribunal has every power to interfere with the punishment imposed by the Respondent/Management . He has also relied on the rulings reported in 1983 2 SCC 442 Bhagat Ram Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and Others wherein the Supreme Court has held that " penalty imposed must be commensurate with the gravity of the misconduct and that any penalty disproportionate to the gravity of the misconduct would be violative of Article 14 of constitution . " He further relied on the rulings reported in AIR 1985 SC 75 Hussaini Vs. Hon'ble Chief Justice ofHigh Court of Judicature at Allahabad and Others wherein the Supreme Court has held that " lenient view has to be taken in respect of minor charges " . The counsel for the Petitioner

K. JAYARAMAN , Presiding Officer [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

Witnesses Examined:

7951

M4 29-09-00

Oneither side : None

Documents Marked :-

Ex. No. Date Description

W1 Nil Xeroxcopy ofthe Merit Certificates.

W2 Nil

Xerox copy of the letter ofPetitioner to BranchManager

M5 Nil Xeroxcopyofthe letter sent by Petitioner to Smt. C.S. Vijayalakshmi

M6 06-06-01 Xerox copy ofthe letter sent by Petitioner to Smt . C.S. Vijayalakshmi

M7

03-10-00

Xerox copy of the orders of transfer issued to Petitioner.

W3 08-11-01 Xerox copy of the charge memo issued to Petitioner

W4 27-11-01 Xerox copy of the reply given by Petitioner to memo

W5 23-01-02 Xerox copy of the enquiry proceedings W6 07-03-02 Xerox copy of the defence brief.

W7 28-03-02 Xerox copy of the Enquiry Officers' report

W8 25-05-02 Xerox copy of the reply of Petitioner to enquiry report

Xerox copy of the letter from Smt . Vijayalakshmi to Deputy General Manager

M8 26-09-00 Xerox copy of the letter from Branch Manager , Perungavur To Senior Manager, Circle Office

M9 21-09-00 Xerox copy of the letter from Petitioner toManager, Circle Office.

29-09-01 Xerox copy of the investigation report

M10

M11 28-09-01 Xerox copy of the written statement givenby Suresh Kumar

M12 28-09-01

Xerox copy of the order impunged 27-05-02

W10 30-05-02 Xerox copy of the appeal preferred by Petitioner

W11 09-06-03 Xerox copy of the order of Appellate Authority

W12 18-09-03 Xerox copy of the dispute raised by Petitioner before Assistant Labour Commissioner(Central)

W13 Nil Xerox copy of the reply submitted by Respondent before Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central)

W14 18-11-03 Xerox copy of the rejoinder filed by Petitioner

04-12-03

W15

Xerox copy of the reply to rejoinder filed by Respondent

W16 26-12-03 Xerox copy of the failure of conciliation report

01-06-04 Xerox copy of the order of reference W17

03-08-04

W18

Xerox copy of the claim petition filed by Petitioner

For the II Party/Management :-

Ex. Nc Date Description

M1 01-04-96 Xerox copy of the charge sheet issued to Petitioner

Xerox copy of the enquiry proceedings 17-06-96

M3 29-09-00 Xerox copy of the letter sent by Petitioner to Smt. Vijayalakshmi

Xerox copy of the written statement given by Kannaiyan

28-09-01

M13

Xerox copy of the written statement givenby Dayalan

M14 28-09-01 Xerox copy of the oral statement given byGaneshan

M15 Nil

Xerox copy of the oral statement given byPremakumari

28-09-01

M16

Xerox copy of the written statement given by V. Ramadoss

28-09-01

M17

Xerox copy of the written statement givenby Govindarajan

05-09-01

M18

Xerox copy of the letter from Branch Manager, Vengal to Senior Manager. HRM section

10-09-01

M19

Xerox copy of the letter from Branch Manager, Vengal to Divisional Manager . HRM section

21-09-01

M20

Xerox copy of the work allotment letter oner issue

201

M21

X ofthe letter from Petitioner forter to HRM section

M22 05-09-01 Xerox copy of the letter from Petitioner fortransfer to HRM section , Circle Office 16-05-01

M23

Xerox copy of the letter from Petitioner for transfer to HRM section , Circle Office, Chennai .

7952

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ ASADHA 25 , 1927

नईदिल्ली, 23 जून, 2005

18-8-2004 has referred the following dispute foradjudication by this Tribunal :-

का. आ. 2530.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , कैन्द्रीय सरकार 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, जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 95/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

"Whether the claim of Daily Wages Bank Employees " Association that Shri Rajesh Malviya was engaged as a sub - staff by the management of Bank of India during the period from January, 1996 to April , 2001 is correct ? If so, whether the action of management in terminating the disputant from services w.e.f. April , 2001 is justified and legal and what relief is the disputant concerned entitled to?" [सं. एल-12011/89/2004- आई आर ( बी- II ) ] सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 23rd June , 2005

2. After the reference order was received , it was duly registered on 9-9-04 and notices were issued to the parties . The reference was at the stage offiling statemeni of claim by the workman/Union . The workman/Union instead of filing statement ofclaim moved application with the prayer that the reference be closed. Shri A.K. Shashi , Advocate for the management has no objection to the application ofworkman/Union and therefore the reference was closed as the workman/Union had no interest in prosecuting the reference .

S.O. 2530.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 95/2004 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court , Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Bank of India and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 22-6-2005 .

[No. L- 12011/89/2004 - IR (B - II) ] C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

3. Since the parties have no interest in prosecuting and contesting the reference , it is concluded that no dispute is left between the parties . Therefore No Dispute Award is passed without any order as to costs .

4.The copy of the award be sent to the Government ofIndia, Ministry of Labour as per rules .

ANNEXURE

C. M. SINGH, Presiding Office

नई दिल्ली, 23 जून, 2005

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

NO . CGIT/LC/ R/ 95/04

PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI C.M. SINGH

का. आ. 2531.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार केनरा बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्रके संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 414/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । ... Union/Workınan

The General Secretary Daily Wages Bank Employees Association Hardev Niwas . 9. Sanwer Road , Ujjain

[सं. एल -12012/92/2004- आई आर ( बी- II ) ] सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव VERSUS

New Delhi , the 23rd June , 2005

The Regional Manager

...Management

Bank of India, Zonal Office. 18. Shanku Marg . Freeganj , Ujjain

AWARD

S.O. 2531. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 414/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum -Labour Court , Chennai as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Canara Bank and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 22-6-2005.

Passed on this 16th June , 2005

[No. L - 12012/ 92/2004 - IR (B - II)] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. L - 12011 /89/2004 - IR (B - II ) dated 7953 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT, CHENNAI

Wednesday, the 13th April, 2005

Present : K. Jayaraman, PresidingOfficer

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO . 414/2004

(Inthe matter ofthe dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of Sub -section ( 1) and Sub - section (2A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , between theManagement of Canara Bank and their workmen)

BETWEEN

Smt . G. Usha Devi

: I Party/Petitioner

AND

: II Party/Management

TheManager, CanaraBank, Udhagamandalam.

Appearances :

For the Petitioner : M/sAyyar & Iyer,

Advocates

For the Management

drawing wages Rs . 65/- per day and was discharging her duties sincerely. Previously, the mother of the Petitioner namely Smt. Ponnammal was working as Part time employee with the II Party/Management and when she expired, the Petitioner applied to the II Party/Management for the post of sub- staff on compassionate grounds . Though her request was rejected by the authorities, she worked there continuously. While so , the II Party/ Management abruptly without giving any notice , with adhering to the provisions of various statutes terminated the services of the Petitioner on 4-8-2002 for the reasons ly known to the II Party/Management and they appointed fresh candidates in the Petitioner's place illegally. The Petitioner has rendered continuous service with the II Party/Management for more than ten years . The II Party/ Management also violated the Clause 8 of decision arrived atbetween the II Party/ Management and Canara Bank SC/ ST Employees Welfare Association, whereby the II Party/ Management agreed to absorb the part time employees who are working in place of their parents for long in the branches . The action of Respondent/Management in terminating the services ofthe Petitioner, without following the procedures established by law, is against the principles ofnatural justice and also hits the Articles 14, 16 & 21 of Constitution of India and therefore, the order impugned is liable to be set aside . Hence , the Petitioner prays that she maybe reinstated in service with full back wages and other attendant benefits .

: Mr. T.R. Sathiyamohan, Advocate

AWARD

The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide Order No. L- 12012/9 / 2004 - IR (B - II) dated 3-9-2004 has referred this industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication . The schedule mentioned dispute in that order is:-

"Whether the claim of Smt . G. Usha Devi that she was engaged as a part time employee in the Canara Bank branch at Udhagamandalam from 16-4-1992 to 3-2-2002 is correct ? If so , whether her claim for reinstatement with back wages and with continuity of service against the management of Canara Bank , Udhagamandalam is legal and justified ? If not , what relief the concerned workman is entitled to?"

2. After the receipt of the reference, it was taken on file as I , D.No . 414/2004 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 of the Petitioner in the Claim Statement are briefly as follows :-

The Petitioner was employed as part time employee from 16-4-92 and was in continuous service . She was

4. As against this , the Respondent in its Counter Statement alleged that the Mother of the Petitioner namely Smt. Ponnammal was employed as part time employee in Uthagamandalam branch and while she was on leave either on medical grounds or otherwise , she has to make alternative arrangements for cleaning/ sweeping etc. in the branch. In such cases , proportionate wages is to be paid to other person on such of the days concerned and thus Smt. Ponnammal availed leave and she made arrangements for her daughter namely the Petitioner to do the work of sweeping, cleaning the branch . The said Smt . Ponnammal expired on 24-5-2001 and after that the Petitioner was doing the work of sweeping and cleaning whenever required as an interim arrangement until a new part time employee was duly employed as per norms . Though the Petitioner has submitted an application for appointment , she was not apparently eligible for considering as part time employee . Further, she is not a person who is considered to be dependent on her Mother at that time of application . She had been married and her husband was working as Sub- Postmaster at Coonoor post office and voluntarily retired from service of the department by submitting an application under VRS . Further, even as per the application of the Petitioner, her daughter and son are also well employed and were drawing salary of Rs . 6000 and Rs . 7000 respectively per month . Further , as per succession certificate , apart from the Petitioner, Smt . Uma Devi , Sri Donathy and Sri Nagarajan are successors of the late 7954

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25, 1927

Ponnammal and all ofthem are married and reportedly well settled. Therefore , the Respondent/Bank never considered the Petitioner as dependent of the ex - employee namely Smt . Ponnammal and hence rejected the application of the Petitioner for her engagement as part time employee . In the meanwhile , in order to do sweeping and cleaning work, she has been engaged and she was called for work as and when required and the recruitment of part time employee was completed during the first week of August , 2002 and consequently, the Petitioner was not legally engaged to the work of sweeping and cleaning . It is false to allege that the she was engaged as part time employer since 16-4-1992 and she was in continuous service . The Petitioner was never engaged as part time employee as alleged by her. In view of their contention , there is absolutely no substance or merit in the contention of the Petitioner that termination is brought about equally the Petitioner is not also entitled to seek for setting aside the appointment made by the Respondent/Management . Hence , for all these reasons , the Respondent prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs.

5. In such circumstances , the points for my determination are

(1) Whether the claim of the Petitioner that she was engaged as part time employee in the Respondent/Bank branch at Udhagamandalam from 16-4-92 to 3-2-2002 is correct?

(ii) To what relief the Petitioner is entitled ?

Point No. 1 :

6. After filing the Claim Statement and Counter Statement, the matter was posted for filing documents and enquiry for several hearings from 7-2-2005 . After that six adjournments were granted , even though, there was no representation on either side. Both sides have not appeared before this Court to conduct the case therefore , on 4-4-2005, the Petitioner was called absent and set ex-parte. Though the Petitioner alleged in this case that she has worked as part time employee from 16-4-92 to 3-2-2002, she has not produced any documents to substantiate her claim, nor examined herself before this Tribunal to substantiate her claim. Since the burden of proving the fact that she was engaged as part time employee in the Respondent/Bank branch at Udhagamandalam is upon her and since she has not discharged this burden with any satisfactory proof, it cannot be held that she was appointed as part time employee in the Respondent/Bank branch at Udhagamandalam from 16-4-92 to 3-2-2002. Therefore , I find this point against the Petitioner.

Point No.'2 :

7. Since the Petitioner has not proved her case with any document or substantial evidence , I find the Petitioner is not entitled to any relief. No. Costs .

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] (Dictated to the P.A. transcribed and typed by him. corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 13th April , 2005. )

K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer Witnesses Examined :

On either side

None

Documents Marked :

On either side

: Nil.

नई दिल्ली, 23 जून , 2005

का. आ. 2532.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार चेन्नई पोर्ट ट्रस्ट 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 285/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं: एल-33011 / 11/2003- आई आर ( बी- II ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 23rd June , 2005

S.O. 2532. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 285/2004 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Chennai Port Trust and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 22-6-2005.

[No. L - 33011/11/2003 - IR ( B - II) ] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Monday, the 7th March, 2005

PRESENT : K. Jayaraman, Presiding Officer

Industrial Dispute No. 285/2004

[In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of Sub -section ( 1 ) and Sub - section (2A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act . 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , between the Management of Chennai Port Trust and their workmen]

BETWEEN

: I Party/ Claimant The General Secretary The Madras Port Trust EmployeesUnion [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

7955 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

AND

: II Party/Management

The Chairman, Chennai Port Trust , Chennai .

Appearances :

Forthe Petitioner : M/ s . R.P. Panneer Selvam, Advocates

For the Management Sri R. Karthikeyan , Advocate

AWARD

The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide Order L - 33011 / 11/2003 - IR (B- II) dated 12-12-2003 has referred this industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication . The schedule mentioned dispute in that order is:-

"Whether the action of the management of Chennai Port Trust in imposing the punishment of ( a) withholding one increment without cumulative effect , ( b ) withholding one increment with cumulative effect and ( c ) reduction ofpay to the minimum of the scale of pay in respect of Shri R. Gajendran is justified or not? If not justified , what relief he is entitled to?"

2. After the receipt of the reference , it was taken on file as I.D. No. 285/2004 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 of the Petitioner Union in the Claim Statement are briefly as follows :---

and the concerned employee was not given any chance by the Enquiry Officer to prove his innocence in respect ofthe alleged incident dated 9-8-96 . Above all the enquiry proceedings were prolonged for a long period of four years and for all these reasons , the finding given by the Enquiry Officer is totally against the principles of natural justice and illegal . On the second occasion , the Respondent/Management framed the charge stating that on 30-7-98 at about 8.20 hours when the concerned employee came to the West Fire Station , he abused Sri N. Kallappan , Assistant Fire Officer and the concerned employee was asked to submit his explanation for the same and as the explanation given by the concerned employee was not accepted, an enquiry was ordered to be conducted . On that occasion, the concerned employee was posted on third shift on 29-7-98 and on 30-7-98 he was on weekly off. When this was the fact , there was no possibility for the concerned employee to abuse the said AFO. Even in the enquiry, the AFO was asked to produce the relevant general diary, duty roaster and message book connected with this incident. But even though these documents have notbeen produced before the enquiry, the Enquiry Officer has come to a perverse finding without perusing the above said documents and finalised the enquiry proceedings and has given a report stating that charge framed against the concerned employee was proved. Basing on this report, the punishment of withholding of one increment with cumulative effect was imposed by an order dated 30-1-2002 . Hence , the punishment imposed on the concerned employee is illegal and bad in the eye of law. Onthe third occasion , the Respondent/Management has framed another charge stating that on 3-8-98 at about 16.00 hours, the concerned employee came to the office of the FireOfficer & AFO in a drunken condition and abused and threatenedto liquidate the Fire Officer and Assistant Fire Officer at any costs and even in that , an explanation was called for from the concerned employee and the Respondent/Management ordered an enquiry and in that enquiry, he was found guilty of charges levelled against him and the Respondent/ Management imposed the punishment of reduction of his pay to the minimum of scale of pay for a period of one year by an order dated 30-1-2002 . Even in this case , the enquiry proceedings in respect of this charge was finalised only after four years duration . Even though the witnesses have stated that they did notknow anything about the said incident. the Enquiry Officer without giving proper weightage , has come to a wrong conclusion and has given a finding that the guilt framed against the concerned employee was proved . The enquiry proceedings was not conducted in accordance with due process of law . Therefore , the enquiry proceedings conducted by the Respondent/Management is unjust, unfair and against the principles of natural justice . The punishment imposed on the concerned employee on three occasions based on the belated and improper enquiry proceedings by the Respondent/ The Petitioner Union espouses the cause of the concerned employee namely Mr. R. Gajendran, who was employed as a fireman driver under the Deputy Port Conservator of Chennai Port Trust and he has voluntarily retired under VRS on 30-5-2003 . While he was in service , the concerned employee was charge sheeted on the ground that on 9-8-96 he came late for duty by one hour and 40 minutes and on being refused to be taken for duty he abused and threatened Sri N. Kallappan, AFO and he was asked to give explanation . Even though explanation was offered by him , the Respondent/Management has appointed one Enquiry Officer and other proceedings were ordered.After the prolonged enquiry , the Enquiry Officer submitted his report on 4-7-2000 in which he has given a finding that the concerned employee was found guilty of charges framed against him and based on this , the Disciplinary Authority imposed the punishment of withholding of one increment without cumulative effect by his order dated 8-8-2000 . The findings given by the Enquiry Officer is not correct and perverse and against the facts. In the enquiry, witnesses were not properly examined in accordance with the rules of domestic enquiry 7956

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] Management is purely unlawful and against the principles of f natural justice. Hence , for all these reasons, the Petitioner Union prays to pass afi award setting aside the punish- ments imposed by the Respondent/ Management on the concerned employee .

personal hearing, chose to impose penalty of withholding of one increment without cumulative effect by his order dated 8-8-2000. With regard to incident dated 30-7-98 the Assistant Fire Officer namely Mr. N. Kallappan through hissuperior forwarded a complaint alleging that while the AssistantFire Officer was returning from Bharathi docks on 30-7-98 at about 8.20 hours , the concerned employee had come and questioned him as to how he can be posted along with Sub officer Mr.M. Ramalingam in the south fire station and had abused Assistant Fire Officer in bad language and hence Mr. Kallappan requested action to be taken against the concerned employee and on this complaint , a charge was framed against him and the concerned employee was asked to give his explanation and subsequently, an enquiry was ordered and the Petitioner was also asked to nominate his defence assistant and as such he nominated one Mr. G.K. Krishnamoorthy to act as defence assistant. But , subsequently Mr. Krishnamoorthy has withdrawn his consent to act as defence assistant . But , even in spite of repeated reminders by the Enquiry Officer , the concerned employee did not name any defence assistant to assist him in the enquiry. But, on 14-7-2000 the concerned employee produced a letter stating that one Mr. K.R. Bhoopalan Senior Works Clerk ofEngineering Department was willing to appear as defence assistant for him and the enquiry was adjourned for several hearings . On 20-7-2000 Mr. N. Kallappan was examined as witness and the defence assistant also cross examined the said witness. On 31-1-2001 Mr. Kallappan retired from service and subsequently he forwarded a letter dated 12-3-2001 to Enquiry Officer stating that he had retired and his health condition was also bad and the concerned employee had also apologized to him . he wanted to withdraw the petition against the concened employee and the concerned employce had also forwarded a letter dated 12-3-2001 stating that he would behave properly in future. Basing on these things . the Enquiry Officer has forwarded his report that the charges proved against the concerned employee and on the basis of the report of the Enquiry Officer, the Disciplinary Authority issued show cause notice dated 26-12-2001 directing the concerned employee to submit his explanation on or before 10-01-2002 and an opportunity of personal hearing was also ordered . But the concerned employee did not submit any explanation but appeared before the Respondent on 11-1-2002 for personal hearing and requested for leniency and assured that he will not commit such misconduct in future . Therefore , the Respondent though it fit to impose the punishment of withholding of one increment with cumulative effect by an order dated 30-1-2002 . With regard to third incident , the Fire Officer and Assistant Security Officer of Port Trust forwarded a report dated 4-8-98 stating thatthe concerned employce entered into the Fire Officer room on 3-8-98 at about 16,00 hours and started to abusc the Fire Officer and he wanted him to be posted to the watch of south fire station . When the Fire Officer said he 4. As against this , the Respondent in its counter statement contended that the Petitioner has not produced any document to show that the concerned employee was a member of the said union and the union has not let in any evidence to show that they had authorised the Secretary to take up the cause of the concerned employee. With regard to the incident 9-8-96 the Respondent stated that one Mr. N. Kallappan, Assistant Fire Officer forwarded a written report to the Fire Officer & Assistant Safety Officer on 9-8-96 along with the statements of one Kuppusamy, S. Ramu . Velayutham and Ramachandran of the fire department of the Chennai Port Trust stating that concerned employee , working as fireman driver reported late for duty for 2nd shift duty by one hour and 40 minutes and when Mr. N. Kallappan had informed that concerned employee would be taken up for duty only after consulting the fire officer, immediately the concerned employee started abusing the AFO in vulgar language and threatened him with dire consequences . As the act of the concerned employee amounted to serious misconduct and warranted disciplinary action tinder 4 ( 12 ) of Madras Port Trust Employees ( Conduct ) Regulations . 1987. The Respondent placed the concerned employee under suspension and ordered an enquiry. In the enquiry, the concerned employee had denied the incident and therefore , proceedings were ordered against him. The concerned employee was also permitted to engage defence assistant to assist him in the enquiry and at the first instance one Mr. G. M. Krishnamoorthy. Special Assistant Gr. I of Stores department consented to defend the concerned employee during the enquiry. Subsequently. he withdrew from the enquiry and therefore . the Respondent/Management asked the concerned employee to name another defence assistant by its letter dated 7-8-99 . Though the concerned employce intimated that one Khajavalli , Assistant Superintendent of civil department was willing to act as defence assistant, the enquiry was adjourned for various dates as neither the concerned employee nor his defence assistant has turned up for enquiry . Therefore , the enquiry was closed as ex-parte and the Enquiry Officer found the charges as proved and forwarded the findings to the Respondent . Even before the Disciplinary Authority. the concerned employee did not submit any written representation but appeared for personal hearing and in that he did not raise any objection as to the nature of enquiry conducted nor about the ex -parte proceedings . The Disciplinary Authority after taking into consideration of statements of witnesses during the enquiry and the report of the Enquiry Officer and version of the concerned employee during the [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

7957 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

5. In these circumstances , the points for my consideration are-

( i ) "Whether the action of the Respondent/ Management in imposing three punishments withholding one increment without cumulative effect ; withholding one increment with cumulative effect and reduction of pay to theminimum ofthe scale of pay in respect of the concerned employee is justified?"

(ii) " To what relief, the concerned employee is entitled?"

Point No. 1:

6. In this case, three charges were framed against the concerned employee on three different occasions and in the domestic enquiry, it was held that all the charges have been proved and the concerned employee was imposed with the punishment of withholding of one increment without cumulative effect ; withholding of one increment with cumulative effect on the second charge and reduction of pay to the minimum of scale of pay in the third charge . The I Party/Claimant is questioning all these punishments on several grounds .

7. In this case, on the side the Petitioner Union Ex. W1 to W4were marked. Ex. W1 to W3 are papers relating to charges 1 to 3 and Ex. W4 is the Respondent's comments submitted before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) with regard to the dispute raised by the Petitioner. On the side ofthe respondent Ex. Ml to M43 were marked, which pertain to all the enquiry proceedings in the three charges . No witness was examined on either side .

would consider his request , the concerned employee abused the Fire Officer with bad language and threatened to liquidate him at any costs . Based on his report, the Respondent/ Management placed the concerned employee under suspension and ordered an enquiry. In the enquiry one Mr. G.M. Krishnamoorthy, Special Assistant Gr. I was nominated by the concerned employee to assist him as defence assistant . Subsequently, the said person withdrew himself from the enquiry and the Respondent/Management has asked the concerned employee to nominate some other person to assist him during the enquiry and he nominated one Kajavalli , Assistant Superintendent of Civil Engineering department in the enquiry. On 30-4-2001 one Mr. Ramachandran was examined and in the absence of the defence assistant, the concerned employee himself chose to cross examine the witness . Further, the Duty Orderly posted in front of the Fire officer's office on 3-8-98 was examined as a witness , but the concerned employee has not done any cross examination and after closing of the enquiry, the Enquiry Officer has given a finding that charges were proved against the concerned employee except the charge of drunkenness . In the personal hearing before the Respondent/Management the concerned employee did not submit any written explanation , on the other hand, he appeared in person on 25-1-2002 and requested for leniency to be shown in the matter and after a careful consideration of the materials on hand the Respondent / Management chose to impose the punishment of reduction of pay to the minimum of scale for a period of one year and the suspension period was treated as leave eligible for . In all the enquiry proceedings the witnesses were examined and cross examined by Khajavalli , defence assistant who assisted the concerned employee . Therefore , it is false to allege that the witnesses were not properly examined in accordance with the rules of domestic enquiry and therefore , the enquiry proceedings are valid and the same need not be interfered by this Hon'ble Tribunal . In all the proceedings , the concerned employee had not objected about the conduct of enquiry and also about the alleged non -production of documents. In all the personal hearings, the concerned employee pleaded only for leniency and the delay in conduct of enquiry was only due to the fact that the defence assistant was not nominated and due to repeated adjournments taken by the delinquent employee . In all these enquiries , the enquiry was conducted in a fair and impartial manner and as such the averments to the contrary are false . The act of the concerned employee in abusing the superiors without valid reason or provocation and such violent behaviour certainly amounts to misconduct under rules and if such acts are left to go freely and unchecked then discipline cannot be maintained in the organisation like the Respondent/Management . Therefore , the said acts cannot be condoned . In view of the above, the Respondent prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs .

8. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner contended that with regardto first charge , which deals with late coming of the concerned employee on one day and also the incident takenplace on that date . As per the first charge on 9-8-96 , itis alleged that the concerned employee came late for duty by one hour and 40 minutes and on being refused to be taken for duty, he abused and threatened Sri N. Kallappan, Assistant Fire Officer and an explanation was called for from the concerned employee and as the Respondent /Management has not satisfied with the explanation given by the concerned employee , initiated domestic enquiry and in the domestic enquiry, the Enquiry Officer has come to a conclusion that all the charges framed against him were proved beyond doubt and therefore, the Disciplinary Authority has imposed the punishment of withholding of one increment without cumulative effect by an order dated 8-8-2000 . The Petitioner's advocate contended that though the concerned employee furnished the name of the defence assistant Sri S. R. K. Khajavalli , Assistant Superintendent , Engineering Department , the enquiry report of the Enquiry Officer dated 4-7-2000 , reveals that the concerned employee has not furnished any name of the defence assistant and therefore , the enquiry was conducted ex -parte and hence , the version 1993 G1/05-55 7958

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)]

WORKERS ' UNION Vs. MANAGEMENT OF BALMADIES ESTATE wherein the Division Bench ofthe High Court has held that " in a domestic enquiry guilt need not be established beyond reasonable doubt that proofofmisconduct would be sufficient and further, the law is well settled that strict rules of evidence are not applicable in a domestic enquiry. The Court alsó approved what had been said earlier in the case of State ofHaryana Vs.Rattan Singh AIR 1977 SC 1512, wherein the Supreme Court has held that " in a domestic enquiry all materials which are logically provative for a prudent mind are permissible . There is no allergy to hearsay evidence provided it has reasonable nexus and credibility. " Under such circumstances , in this case, the concerned employee remained ex-parte for hearing on 27-12-99 and after going through the previous records of the enquiry and also statements given by witnesses , the Enquiry Officer has come to a conclusion , though the Enquiry Officer has not stated in so many wordings , he has clearly stated that from the statements given by the witnesses , I come to the conclusion and under such circumstances , it cannot be said that the findings given by the Enquiry. Officer is perverse. I find much force in the contention ofthe learned counsel for the Respondent . Further, the learned counsel for the Respondent contended that delay by itself cannot be a ground to quash the proceedings for which he relied on the rulings reported in 1999 4 LLN 354 S. RAJAMANICKAM Vs. TAMIL NADU WARESHOUSING CORPORATION, MADRAS AND ANOTHER, wherein the Madras High Court has held that "this Court has held no grater emphasis could be laid on the delay andwhat is important is tofind out whether in aparticulars case , based on the oral and documentary evidence adduced, the findings ofquilt had been arrived at and unless the delinquent was able to establish that he was unable to defend himself because of the delay the delay by itself would not be a ground to quash the proceedings " In this case , the concerned employee has not stated how he has been prejudiced and how he was unable to defend himself in the enquiry by the delay has not been explained by him and under such circumstances , it cannot be said that because of the delay in passing the order in domestic enquiry he was prejudiced. I find much force in the contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent.

ofthe Enquiry Officer in his enquiry report is not correct one and it is a perverse finding and against the facts of this case. Further, he alleged that witnesses were not properly examined in accordance with rules ofdomestic enquiry and the concerned employee was not given any chance by the Enquiry Officer to prove his innocence in respect of the alleged incident dated 9-8-96 and it is his further contention that due to the prolonged enquiry proceedings for a duration of four years, the concerned employee was not able to give any evidence with regard to the same incident and therefore, the Counsel for the petitioner alleged that the enquiry with regard to 9-8-96 incident is totally against principles of natural justice and therefore it has to be set aside . Learned Counsel for the Petitioner relied on three rulings . The first ruling is reported in AIR 1962 SC 1348 THE IMPERIAL TOBACCO COMPANY OF INDIA LTD . Vs. WORKMEN OF THE COMPANY wherein, the Supreme Court has held that " even though the workmen had withdrawn from the enquiry, whether rightly or wrongly the enquiry should have been completed and all evidence should have been taken ex-parte . The Branch Manager should have appraised the evidence recorded his conclusions and the punishment he intended to inflict and should have called upon the workman to say what he wanted to say against the intended punishment . It was only thereafter that he could proceed to punish the workman. The enquiry which result in dismissal ofthe workman in this case was not a valid enquiry as required by the standing orders " and relying on this authority, the counsel for the Petitioner contended that though on 27-12-99 the concerned cmployee has not appeared before the Enquiry Officer on that ground the Enquiry Officer has held that enquiry has to be conducted ex -parte , but without examining any parties and without analysing the evidence produced before him , he has come to a conclusion that charges have been proved on the ground that delinquent employee has not turned up for enquiry on 27-12-99 and the statements of prosecution witnesses and on not reporting of delinquent employee for the final enquiry, who has failed to furnish alternate defence assistant to defend him in the enquiry, which things have not been discussed at all and therefore, the enquiry report is baseless and perverse and therefore , based on that perverse report, the punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority is not valid in law.

9. Though , I find some force in this contention , I find there is no substance in this contention because only after discussing the statements of witnesses , the Enquiry Officer has come to the conclusion and it was also discussed by the Disciplinary Authority in his report . Under such circumstances . I find there is no point in the contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner.

11. With regardto the second charge dated 30-7-98 in which the concerned employee was charged that on 30-7-98 at 8.20 hours he came to the West Fire Station and abused Sri N. Kallappan , AFO and he was asked to given an explanation and on not satisfying with theexplanation givenby the concerned employee , an enquiry was ordered. With regard to this charge, the learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the Petitioner was posted on 29-7-98 in the third shift and on 30-7-98 he was on weekly off, when this was the fact , there was no possibility for 10. Further. the learned counsel for the Respondent relied on the rulings reported in 2004 II LLJ 645 WORKMEN OF BALMADIES ESTATE , NILGRIS DISTRICT ESTATE 7959 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

such alleged incident . While so, Mr. N. Kallappan, AFO who has got grudge against the concerned employee deliberately fabricated the alleged incident and a charge sheet was issued to him . Even during the enquiry proceedings on 30-6-2000 the Enquriy Officer has asked theAssistant Fire Officer, Mr. N. Kallppan to be present at the next hearing and relevant general diary, duty roster and message book connected with this incident are to be produced, but on the next hearing on 18-7-2000, the documents mentioned above have not been produced before the Enquiry Officer. Therefore , there was no opportunity to peruse the documents to come to a conclusion whether such incident had happend as alleged by the Respondents/Management, on the other hand, without perusing the above said documents , the Enquiry Officerhas come to a conclusion that the guilt of the charge has been proved against the concerned employee and basing on the enquiry report, the Disciplinary Authority imposed the punishment of withholding one increment with cumulative effect by his order dated 31-1-2002 on the concerned employee . Therefore , this punishment is unjust , arbitrary and is also illegal and bad in the eye of law. It is also the argument of counsel for the petitioner that the findings of the Enquiry Officer and also Disciplinary Authority do not reflect the application of mind on their part for want of reasons therein .

cannot be said that the Enquiry Officer has come to a wrong conclusion without going through the documents . on the other hand, the log book or message book were maintained by Port Fire Service control room to record only fire call message and fire tenders movements and other important work related matters only and not to record the abuse committed by the concerned employee towards his superior and therefore . it cannot be contended that by non -production of documents, the enquiry is vitiated. In this case , the aggrieved party was examined and cross examined by the defence assistant of the concerned employee and merely because Mr. N. Kallappan has submitted the letter dated 12-3-2001 that he is going to withdraw the complaint given against the concerned employee, it cannot be said that the management has no right to proceed against the charge . Taking into account the interest of organisation and to maintain discipline in the uniformed service of the Trust , the Enquiry Officer stopped the enquiry with that and found from the records the charges were proved. Even in personal hearing before the Respondent authorities , the concerned employee has not raised anything about the conduct of enquiry or alleged prejudice caused to him by the report , but on the other hand, he has given a letter stating that he will be more careful in future and he may be pardoned for the acts done by him and he had pleaded only leniency and. therefore , these allegations were made only as an afterthought only for the purpose of this case and on that score, it cannot be contended that enquiry is vitiated.

13. On consideration of the entire evidence in this case and also on hearing the arguments advanced on either side, I come to the conclusion that merely stating that documents have not been produced before the enquiry and the complainant has withdrawn the complaint during the enquiry, it cannot be said the enquiry is vitiated.. Therefore , I find much force in the contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent.

14. The next charge framed against the concerned employee is that at 16.00 hour 3-8-98 the concerned employee came to the officee Officer and ASO in a drunkencondition and abusea thereatened to liquidate the FA and ASO at any costs . For this , an emplanation was called for from the concerned employee and even though the concerned exployee has given an emplanation, not satisfying with his explanation, the Respondent/ Management ordered an enquiry and based on the findings oftheEnquiryOfficer, the Respondent authorities imposed the punishment of reduction of his pay to the minimum of scale of pay for a period of one year by an order dated 30-1-2002 .

15. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that even though four witnesses were alleged to have been witnessed the incident , only one witness one Mr.Ramachandran was examined as a witness and he has 12. As against this , learned counsel for the respondent contended that for this enquiry, the concerned emoloyee has nominated one Mr. G. M. Krishnamoorthy to act as his defence assistant and subsequently, he withdrew his consent to work as defence assistant . The concerned employee was then again directed to name a defence assistant to assist him in the enquiry and in spite of operated reminders , the concerned employee did not name any defence assistant to assist him in the enquiry comenced on 30-6-2000 and in the meantime , the concerned employee produced a letter from Mr. K. R. Bhoopalan and he has alleged that he was willing to appear as defence assistant for him in the present enquiry and therefore, the enquiry was adjourned for several hearings and the AssistantFireOfficer namely Mr. Kallappan was examined as a witness and the defence assistant also cross examined the saidwitness and in the meantime , Mr. Kallappan retired on 31-1-2001 and he forwarded a letter dated 12-3-01 stating that since he has retired and his health condition was also bad and the concerned employee Mr. Gajendran has also apologized to him , he wants to withdraw the petition against the concerned employee, further the concerned employee also forwarded a letter dated 12-3-01 stating that he would behave properly in future and considering all these things , the Enquiry Officer has come to a conclusion that charges framed against the concerned employee have been proved . Merely because the documents required by the Enquiry Officer on 30-6-2000 have not been produced before the Enquiry Officer. , it 7960

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3( ii) ]

domestic enquiry was not the same as that of required in Criminal Court and under such circumstances , in the domestic enquiry held against the concerned employee , the charges framed against him have been clearly established and though the concerned employee has questioned these findings before this Tribunal , he has not questioned the same before the Respondent authorities , on the other hand, he has pleaded clemency and only leniency in the punishment . Under such circumstances , at no stretch of imagination, it can be said thatdomestic enquiry was held in improper manner.

stated in his evidence that he did not know anything about the said incident and in his evidence he has stated that one Mr. Nandakumar, fireman must have known the incident and accordingly Mr. Nandakumar was examined as a witness and he deposed that he did not see the delinquent employee inside the FO & ASO's room and with this evidence , the Enquiry Officer without giving proper weightage to the evidence given by Mr. Nandakumar came to the wrong conclusion that the concerned employee was found guilty of charge framed against him and therefore, the entire enquiry proceedings was not conducted in accordance with due process of law and it is his further contention that without considering the allegations of delinquent employee against the complainant namely Mr. N. Kallappan , the Enquiry Officer has concluded that the concerned employee has done the mischief. Therefore, the finding is unjust, unfair and against the principles of domestic enquiry.

17. I find much force in the contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent . In this case , though the counsel for the Petitioner alleged that domestic enquiry was held in an imporper way and no opportunity was given to the concerned employee in the doemstic enquiry , I find from the documents produced before this Court that domestic enquiry held by the Responendt/Management in this case is just and proper and the punishments imposed onthe concrerned employee are justified . As such , I find thispoint against the Petitioner Union .

Point No. 2 :

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

18. In view of my foregoing findings that the punishments imposed by the Responent/ Management on the concerned employee are justified, I find the concerned employee is not entitled to any relief. No Costs .

19. The reference is answered accordingly.

(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court in this day the 7th March , 2005)

K. JAYARAMAN , Presiding Officer

Witnesses Examined :

Oneither side :

None

Documents Marked:

Ex. No. Date Description

16-8-96

W1 Xerox copy of the memo issued to concerned employee

30-7-98

W2 Xerox copy of the Complaint given byMr. Kallappan , AFO

4-8-98 Xerox copy of the report given by FO & AFO

! 16. As against this , the learned counsel for the Respondent contended that allegations with regard to Mr. Ramachandran and Mr. Nandakumar are false . The enquiry against the concerned employee for this incident was conducted in a fair and unbiased manner. The delay inconduct of enquiry was only due to the fact that defence assistant was not nominated by the concerned employee and due to repeated adjournments taken by the concerned employee and the witnesses have deposed the fact that there was argument in Fire Officer's room and the concerned employee left the room in a hurried manner and taking into consideration of this evidence , the Enquiry Officer found that the charge framed against the concerned employee is proved and the Disciplinary Authority thought it fit to impose the punishment of reduction of pay to the minimum of scale of pay by an order dated 30-1-02 and in this case , even during the personal hearing , the concerned employee did not argue on merits but only chose leniency in the above matter and he never questioned the conduct of enquiry and also findings of the Enquiry Officer . Thus , it is clear that the enquiry was conducted in a fair and impartial manner giving due opportunity to the concerned employee to cross examine the witnesses . Under such circumstances , it cannot be said that the domestic enquiry was held in an unfair manner. Itis his further contintion that strict rules of Evidence Act are not applicable to domestic enquiry. It is clearly established that the acts of concerned employee in abusing his superior without any valid reason or provocation and such violent behaviour certainly amounts to misconduct under the rules and if such acts are left to go freely and unchecked , then dicipline cannot be maintained in the organisation and therefore , the acts of the concerned employee certainly amounts to misconduct and amounts to subversive of industrial discipline and such acts of concerned employee cannot be condoned lightly. It is his further argument that standard of rule required in the

W4 30-3-02 Xerox copy of the letter from Respondent/Management to Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7961

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

For the II Party/Management :

Ex. No. Date Description

9-8-96 Xerox copy of the report of FO to Dy. Port Conservator

9-8-96

Xerox copy ofthe letter AFO to Fire Officer

9-8-96

Xerox copy of the letter of Safety Inspector to FO

9-8-96

Xerox copy of the letter of Ramu to FO

9-8-96 Xerox copy of the letter of Velayutham to FO

22-8-96

Xerox copy of the Explanation given by concerned Employee to Respondent

6-9-96 Xerox copy of the memo for revocation of suspension M8

21-11-96 Xerox copy of the articles of charges and annexure

6-2-97

Xerox copy of the letter of concerned employee to Deputy Port Conservator

11-3-97

M10

Xerox copy of the letter of concerned employee for Engagement ofdefence assistant

M11 11-3-97 Xerox copy of the consent letter of defence representative

M12 31-3-97 Xerox copy of the enquiry proceedings

25-4-97

M13

Xerox copy of the enquiry proceedings

M14

2-5-97 Xerox copy of the concerned employee to Deputy Port Conservator

8-7-97

M15

Xerox copy of the enquiry proceedings

7-8-99

M16

Xerox copy of letter of Deputy Port Conservator to concerned employee M17 28-9-99 Xerox copy of the intimation of enquiry proceedings to concerned cmployce

M18 27-10-99 Xerox copy of the intimation enquiry proceedings to concerned employee M19 20-12-99 Xerox copy of the intimation of enquiry proceedings to concerned employec

M20 27-12-99 Xerox copy of the enquiry proceedings

M21 Nil

Xerox copy of the Presenting Officer'sReport

M22

Xerox copy of the report of the FO 30-7-98

M23 10-9-98 Xerox copy of the explanation given by concerned employee

M24

Xerox copy of the letter from Respondent to concerned employée regarding new defence assistant M25 5-10-99 Xerox copy of the reminder to concerned employee

M26 Nil

Xerox copy of the letter from concerned employee nominating defence assistant

M27

14-7-00 Xerox copy ofthe consent letter of defence assistant

M28

26-7-00 Xerox copy of the proceeding of enquiry

M29

12-3-01 Xerox copy ofthe letter of concerned employee to Enquiry Officer M30

12-3-01 Xerox copy of the letter of Ex . Assistant Fire Officer to Enquiry Officer

M31 20-12-01 Xerox copy ofthe Enquiry Officer's report

M32

Xerox copy of the show cause notice 26-12-01 .

5-8-98

M33

Xerox copy of the suspension order M34

18-8-98 Xerox copy of the memo of revocation of suspension M35 11-11-98 Xerox copy of the articles of charges & annexure

M36 2-12-98 Xerox copy ofthe letter of concerned employee for appointment of defence assistant

M37 2-12-98 Xerox copy of the consent letter to defence assistant

M38 24-5-98 Xerox copy of the letter from petitioner to Enquiry Officer M39

6-8-99 Xerox copy of the letter of Deputy Port Conservator to concerned employee

M40

23-8-99 Xerox copy of the letter of concerned employee for appointing a new defence assistant

M41

23-8-99 Xerox copy of the consent letter Nil

M42

Xerox copy of the report of Enquiry Officer

M43

Nil

Xerox copy of the list of punishments .

7962

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 23 जून , 2005

का. आ. 2533.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बैंक ऑफ महाराष्ट्र 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 80/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12011 /28 /2003- आई आर ( बी- II ) ] सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 23rd June, 2005

S.O. 2533. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 80/2003 of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum -Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Bank of Maharashtra and their workmen which was received by the Central Government on 22-6-2005.

[No. L- 12011/28/ 2003 - IR (B - II) ] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Thursday, the 17th March , 2005

Present : K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO . 80/2003 [ In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) ofSub - section ( 1 ) and Sub - section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , between the Management of Bank of Maharashtra and their workmen].

BETWEEN

: I Party/ Claimant The General Secretary Bank of Maharashtra Employees ' Union, Mumbai .

AND

: II Party/Management The General Manager (Personnel) ,

Bank of Maharashtra , Pune .

APPEARANCE :

Forthe Claimant

: M/ s . K. Elango , G. Chamki Raj & Vinoth Kumar, Advocates

For the Management : Mr. V. Gopalakrishnan, Advocate

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

AWARD

The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide Order No. L- 12011/28/2003 - IR (B - II) dated 5-5-2003 has referred this industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication . The schedule mentioned dispute in that order is:-

"Whether the action of the management of Bank ofMaharashtra to impose the punishment ofcompulsory retirement on Sri P. Packiyanathan is legal and justifiable ? If not, what relief is he entitled to ? "

2. After the receipt of the reference , it was taken on file as I.D.No. 80/2003 and notices were issued to both the parties and both the parties entered appearance through theiradvocates and filed their Claim Statement and Counter Statement respectively.

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

The Petitioner Union espouses the cause of Sri P. Packiyanathan who joined the Respondent/Management on19-9-77. as the clerk and he was compulsorily retired by the Respondent /Management . A notice under clause 19.12(e) was issued to the concerned employee alleging thathe had committed misconduct under clauses 19.5 (a) , 19.5( c) and 19.7 (L ) of the Bipartite Settlement. The concerned employee denied the charges alleged against him and gave his explanation dated 29-11-99 . The charges made against the delinquent employee are (i ) engaging in any trade or business outside the scope of duties except with written permission of the bank, which is an act of gross misconduct under clause 19.5 (a) of the Bipartite Settlement ; ( ii ) wilful disobedience of lawful and reasonable orders of the management or of a superior which is an act of gross misconduct under clause 19.5 (e ) of Bipartite Settlement and ( iii ) incurring debts to an extent considered by- management as excessive which is an act of minor misconduct under clause 19.7 (L) of Bipartite Settlement . A departmental enquiry was conducted against the concerned employee . In the departmental enquiry even though the concerned employee demanded the entire list of evidence , exhibits and list of witnesses should be given tohim, the requesttof the concerned employee was turned down and the employee's objection was overruled by the Enquiry Officer . The concerned employee was having staff account No. 30 and he and his wife had a joint S.B. Account No. 4352 in the Respondent/Bank branch . His wife had a business in the name ofHarish & Sakthi dealing in home appliances which was started in the year 1992 . The concerned employee's wife was transferring certain amounts accounted for in her business from the firm's account in Dhanalakshmi Bank , Madurai to her S.B. account in the Respondent/Bank branch at Madurai . The Respondent/Management has not proved the first charge against the concerned employee and no documents were produced to substantiate the claim that the Petitioner has engaged in trade or business outside the scope of duties . The second charge levelled against the concerned 7963 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

the Respondent/Management to reinstate the concerned employee into service with continuity of service, back wages and other attendant benefits .

4.As against this, the Respondent/Management in its counter statement contended that no doubt the concerned employee was working as clerk at Madurai branch ofRespondent/Bank since 10-12-79 but from the beginning, he was not regular in attending the work and he had been awarded with so many punishments for his misdeeds . The concerned employee and his wife Mrs. L. Jothi Sivalalitha hold a joint S.B. Account with Bank of Maharashtra , Madurai Branch and Mrs. L. Jyothi Sivalalitha is the proprietor of M/ s .Harish & Sakthi Trading inconsumer goods and she is also proprietor of M/ s . SPM OffsetPrinters. Though both firms are in the name of his wife, for all practical purposes the concerned employee was looking after the entire business ofboth the business and his wife was the proprietrix ofthe firms for name sake only. During the course of his employment in the Respondent/Bank , the concerned employee borrowed Rs . 75,000/-from M/ s . Abhirami Finance and stood as guarantor for his wife, who borrowed Rs . 1,25,000/- from the same financial company. On 8-1-97, the ChiefManager , Hyderabad Regional Office issued a letter regarding his heavy borrowings and non -payments on its due dated owed by concerned employee as principal debtor and where he stood as guarantor . The Respondent/Bank also received complaint against the concerned employee about his borrowings and other liabilities . Based on the complaints , the Respondent/Bank for investigating the matter deputed an officer exclusively to inspect the reports of excessive borrowings of concerned employee . On 8-1-97, the Chief Manager , Hyderabad Regional Office issued a letter to concerned employee about his borrowings and non - repayments on its due dates and advised him to submit details of borrowings and reasons for on- repayment of loans, but the concerned employee failed to reply to that letter, in spite of several reminders and therefore, the Respondent/Bank issued show cause notice dated 13-11-99 under clause 19.12(e) of Bipartite Settlement . But the concerned employee denied the allegations and therefore , charge sheet was issued on 6-4- 2000 and domestic enquiry was ordered against him . After the enquiry, the Enquiry Officer has given a finding that the charges framed against the concerned employee were proved. Since there are large credits to his staff S.B. Account No. 30, which indicated his involvement in some business activity outside the scope of his employment and the Respondent /Management has imposed the punishment ofcompulsory retirement with superannuation benefits . With regard to second charge , even in spite of so many reminders , he failed to submit details of borrowings , outstanding liabilities and reasons for non- paying loans , financial statement of business run by him and his family members , the bank has come to a conclusion that the concerned employee was in the habit of wilful insubordination and disobedience of lawful of reasonable orders of the management or superiors and has imposed employee was he disobeyed the orders of Chief Manager , Regional Office , Hyderabad, asking him to submit details of borrowings , outstanding liabilities, reasons for not repaying the loans, financial statement ofbusiness run by the employee. Since the employee has not run the business as alleged in the charge sheet, the concerned employee has not produced any document for the said allegations. Further, the request of the concerned employee in this regard to have copies of letter of Chief Manager and his reminders dated 31-1-97 and 12-3-97, the same was not granted to him. Further, during the enquiry , II Part/ Management has withdrawn the document Ex. M51 which was submitted to the Enquiry Officer on 31-7-2000 . This document was a promissory note for Rs . 75,000/- which was executed by concerned employee . The Presenting Officer did not produce any of the complaints that he claimed to have received against the charge sheeted employee and he did not produce the original documents relied on by the bank. The third charge against the concerned employee was that he was incurring debts to anextent considered by the managment as excessive was not proved before the domestic enquiry. They alleged that he had executed a promissory note along with his wife in favour of M/ s . Abirami Finance of Madurai for taking a loan of Rs . 75,000/- and one Mr. P.S.S. Murthy, Madurai had complained that he had taken a loan of Rs . 1,25,000/- in his wife's name and stood as guarantor and that he had borrowed another sum of Rs . 25,000/- from the same person and that one Sri T.R. Kuppusamy of Madurai had complained that he had borrowed Rs . 30,000/- and had not repaid to him. But none of the complaints mentioned by the management were not placed before the Enquiry Officer. therefore , all the three charges have not been established by the Respondent/Management. But , on the other hand, the Enquiry Officer gave his finding on 4-1-2001 holding that all the charges against the concerned employee were proved . Even though, the concerned employee has given his explanation to the Disciplinary Authority for the proposed purnishment of compulsory retirement, the Disciplinary Authority without considering all these objections has imposed the punishment of compulsory retirement on the concerned employee . Even the appeal preferred by the concerned employee before the Appellate Authority was dismissed by an order dated 19-4-2002 . The enquiry findings are vitiated since it was not based on material evidence placed before the Enquiry Officer. The concerned employee was not running any business . Further, there is no bar on his wife running the business as per the terms of Bipartite Settlement. The concerned employee has not borrowed any money for himself and he did not cause any pecuniary loss to the Respondent /Bank . The Concerned employee was victimised for his trade union activities . Even assuming for argument sake that the charges against the concerned employee have been proved, the punishment imposed on him is disproportionate to the charges levelled aginst him. Hence , the Petitioner Union prays to hold that the punishment imposed on the concerned employee as illegal and unjustified and consequently pass an award directing 7964

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] the punishment of brought down by two stages lower in the existing scale ofpay with cumulative effect . With regard to third charge, the since the concerned employee had borrowed heavily from several firms /individuals or stood as a guarantor for loans from outsiders but failed to repay the loans /settle the dues which is considered beyond his means with reference to his salary income from the bank and therefore, the bank imposed the minor punishment of entry of adverse remark against the concerned employee in the personal records . All the punishments imposed by the Respondent/Management is justified and it cannot be said that it is perverse or illegal . Hence , for all these reasons , the Respondent prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs .

much and the same was withdrawn by the Presenting Officer during the enquiry and it is false to allege that it was not withdrawn from the enquiry. The concerned employee has filed insolvency petition filed by M/s . Abirami Finance before the III Additional Sub Judge, Mudurai is a relevant and vital document to show that neither the delinquent employee nor his wife were among those who owed monies that firm, but the Enquiry Officer did not take the same into consideration while giving his findings . The punishment imposed by Respondent/ Management is unfair, unjust and illegal . The concerned employee was victimized for his trade union activities . Any how, the punishment imposed on the concerned employee is illegal and also disproportionate to the offences alleged aginst him . Hence , the Petitioner Union prays that an award may be passed in favour of the concerned employee .

7. In these circumstances , the points for my consideration are :---

(i) "Whether the action of the Respondent/Bank imposing the punishment of compulsory retirement on the concerned employee Sri P. Packiyanathan is legal andjustifiable ?

(ii) To what relief the concerned employee is entitled?"

Point No. 1 :

5. Again, the Respondent in its additional counter statement alleged that it is false to allege that during the enquiry proceedings he was not given chance to inspect the documents or copies of such documents and enquiry proceedings were held against the principles of natural justice and in violation of norms of domestic enquiry. Though there is no monetary loss to the Respondent/ Bank , there is a loss of reputation and goodwill of the Respondent/Bank. Therefore, it cannot be said that the finding given by the Enquiry Officer is vitiated. The Presenting Officer had never withdrawn the document Ex. M51 which was submitted to the Enquiry Officer on 31-7-2000 . Principles of natural justice was observed at every stage of enquiry and during the course of enquiry. Therefore , the punishment awarded is well commensurate with the gravity of the misconduct committed by the concerned employee . The Disciplinary Authority and Appellate Authority have considered all the pleas made bythe concerned employee and held that he was not fit to be retained in service. Therefore, the action taken by the Respondent/Management and also imposition of punishment of compulsory retirement is legal and justified. Hence for all these reasons , the Respondent prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs .

8. In this case , the petitioner Union espouses the cause of one Mr. P. Packiyanathan, a clerk in the Respondent/Bank branch at Madurai , who was compulsorily retired from service on 4-8-2001 for the three charges levelled against him . The First charge is that he engaged in trade or business outside the scope of duties except with written permission of the bank . The second charge is that he wilfully disobeyed of lawful and reasonable orders of the Respondents /Management and the third charge is that he has incurred debts to an extent considered by the Respondent/ Management as excessive . Inthis case, the concerned employee has examined himself asWW- 1 and on his side Ex . W1 to W17 were marked . On the side of the Respondent /Management one Mr. B. K. Balasubramanian, Branch Manager of the Respondent/ Bank at Vijayawada branch was examined as MW1 and on the side of the Respondent Ex . M1 to M16 were marked .

B 6. As against this , the Petitioner Union in its rejoinder contended that Harish & Sakthi was owned by Mrs. L. Jothi Sivalalitha , the wife of concerned employee and this shop been transacting business from the year 1994. Smt. Jothi Sivalalitha has purchased M/s . SPM Offset Printers only in the year 2002 in a public auction conducted by the Debts Recovery Tribunal . She started working as a teacher after 1997 after winding up her business and the concerned employee had not committed any misconduct as alleged by the Respondent/Management . Further, none of the so called complaints made against the delinquent employee were either marked as exhibits by the II Party/ Management during the enquiry or copies were given to delinquent employee . Further , the concerned employee was not given copies of the alleged basic complaints against him even during the enquiry proceedings . The copies of the alleged complaints have been produced for the first time only before this Tribunal. The I Party reiterated that Ex. M51 was marked before the domestic enquiry, wich the II Party/Management relied upon very

9. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that though the first charge levelled against the concerned employee that he has engaged in trade or business outside the scope ofhis duties , there is not even an iota of evidence produced before the domestic Enquiry and the Enquiry Officer has come to the conclusion that this charge has been proved by surmises and the Enquiry Officer has come to the conclusion based on the allegation that he was running the business which attracted large credits to his staff S.B. account No. 30 in the Respondent/Bank branch. No doubt , it is a fact that concerned employee had a staff account No. 30 and he had also a joint S.B. account with his wife in S.B. Account No. 4352 , but it is admitted by the Respondent that the wife of the concerned employee Smt .

7965

जुलाई 16, 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

भारत का राजपत्र:

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

employee and it is his further case that these amounts were also repaid by the borrower. Though , it is alleged that so many complaints were received from outsiders that concerned employee had borrowed many amounts from them, not even a single complaint has been produced before the domestic enquiry and it is false to allege that reputation of the bank has been lost by the action of the concerned employee .

10. For this , the learned counsel for the Respondent contended that though the concern Harish & Sakthi was in the name of his wife , the concerned employee has admitted in his evidence before the domestic enquiry that he was giving/extending mental and manual assistance to hiswife, but in reality, his participation or role in the said business went beyond that he has been deriving monetary benefits out of those business activities . Further, it is his evidence before this tribunal that though he is an income- tax assessee , he has no other independent sources of income except his salary and it is his further evidence that his wife is not an income tax assessee and also before starting Harish & Sakthi business , she was only a housewife . Further, though the concerned employee and his wife has got joint SB account and though his wife had current account No. 325 with Dhanalakshmi Bank in the name of the firm Harish & Sakthi , a perusal of the above account copies will clearly show that there were periodic and frequent outflow of funds from current account of Harish & Sakthi in favour of concerned employee and frequent inflow offunds in the staff SB account No. 30 of concerned employee . When the concerned employee has no other income other than his salary, when his take home salary was only Rs , 5000/- the concerned employee had not given any acceptable or believable explanation for such huge monetary transactions by way of cheques in his staff S.B. account . Further, the concerned employee's wife did not issue cheques in her personal capacity and these cheques were issued by the said firm namely Harish & Sakthi and the concerned employee was the payee of all these cheques and not bearer of these cheques . Further . the cheques were encashed only through his personal staff account No. 30 and not through the joint S.B. Account No. 4352. It is also relevant to note that the concerned employee had paid huge money to third parties including several financial institutions or firms from out of his staff SB account by issuing cheques in their favour. Thus , all these circumstances clearly reveal that the concerned employee was engaged in trade or business outside the scope of his duties and therefore , it cannot be said that the findings given by the Enquiry Officer is perverse .

11. Though, I find some force in the contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent , I find there is no substance in his contention because merely because cheque transactions and money transactions were done through staff SB Account No. 30 which was maintained bythe concerned employee , we cannot assume or presume that the concerned employee was engaged in trade or business outside the scope of his duties . It is established that his wife is engaged in business in the name of Harish Jothi Sivalalitha is the proprietrix of Harish & Sakthi trading inconsumer goods . But it is their allegation that concerned employee was looking after the entire business , but they have not produced any document to substantiate this contention before the domestic enquiry. Though in the additional counter statement they have stated that some ofthe letters were addressed to the concerned employee as ifhe was the proprietor of the firm, this allegation was made as an afterthought and neither they have produced all these letters before domestic enquiry nor before this tribunal . Merely because there was large credits in the concerned employee staff S.B. account No. 30, it cannot be said that concerned employee was running business . Though it is alleged that certain transactions in staff S.B. account No. 30 of concerned employee , from that account it can be seen either large credit has been debited in the said account . Thus , it is clear that the concerned employee was not running the business outside the scope of his employment, on the other hand, it is very evident that business transaction of the concerned employee's wife were operated through the staff S.B. account as well . It is not the case of the Respondent /Management that ' S.B. account of the concerned empoloyee should not be used for other transaction by the employee either for himself or for the members of his family and in such circumstances , there cannot be any legal presumption because heavy accounts have been transacted through concerned employee's staff account, it can be presumed that the concerned employee has engaged in trade or business outside the scope of his duties . Under such circumstances , atno stretch of imigation , it can be said that the first charge framed against the concerned employee has been proved. Further, though MW1 has alleged that another business under the name and style of SPM Offset Printers was owned by comcerned employee , there is no charge with regard to this business. Further , the petitioner produced Ex . W15 and W16 which are the notices of auction published by South Indian Bank Ltd. Madurai in newspaper and also copy of letter dated 27-2-2003 written by Mrs. Jothi Sivalalitha to the South Indian Bank Ltd. , Madurai enclosing for having remitted Rs . 2,00,500/ - towards payment for machines which were auctioned and seeking delivery of them . Therefore , the wife of the concerned employee has purchased the SPM offset printers and the concerned employee has nothing to do with the said business . Further, it is not their case before the domestic enquiry that this business namely SPM Offset Printers was also running by the concerned employee. Under such circumstances , there is no point in the contention of the learned cour.sel for the Respondent that SPM Offset Printers was owned by the concerned employee. With regard to the allegation that some of the cheques issued by concerned employee from joint SB account No. 4352 in the name of concerned employee and hiswife were returned unpaid, even in the explanation, the concerned employee has stated that cheques have been returned since the concerned employee had already repaid the amounts and some of the cheques have presented to the bank without giving prior intimation to the concerned

1903 G105-56 7966

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005 /ASADHA 25, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)]

and his family members , I find the concerned employee has not given any reply for the notice , which is a wilful disobedience of lawful orders of the management or superiors . It is evident that he has deliberately refrained from submitting any details which was called for by his "superior authority and hence, I find the findings givenby the Enquiry Officer cannot be questioned.

& Sakthi . Further, It is clear from the statement of account that all the monies paid into the account has been withdrawn by payment of cheque to third parties . Under such circumstances , the only presumption is the business transaction of his wife were operated through his staff SB Account No. 30. I think, the Respondent/Bank is not Income Tax department for going through the accounts and coming to a presumption that since heavy amounts were paid and withdrawn from the account, a business was run by the concerned employee himself. Learned counsel for the Respondent has not shown before this Tribunal that there is any bar for any employee of the Respondent/Bank not to do heavy cheque transaction through the staff S.B. account . Under such circumstances , I find the Enquiry Officerhas come to this conclusion that the Petitioner was engaged in trade or business outside the scope of his duties isonly on vague inferences to be drawn in the circumstances of the case. There is no clear proof or any documentary evidence to show that the concerned employee has engaged in trade or business outside the scope of his duties . Under such circumstances , I find, the findings of the Enquiry Officer against the first charge is perverse .

15. With regard to third charge namely concerned. employee has incurred excessive debts which I believe based on the allegation that the concerned employee has borrowed certain amount of money from certain persons to run certain business outside the scope of his employment . But, here again , no document was produced before the domestic enquiry to substantiate that the concerned employee has incurred excessive debts . Further , MW1 who was the Presenting Officer before the domestic enquiry has stated that we have not produced any document to show that the concerned employee had borrowed any amount for his business and we have not marked any complaint before the domestic enquiry. Under such circumstances , I find the third charge against the concerned employee that the concerned employee incurred debts to the extend considered by the Respondent/Management as excessive was not proved before the domestic enquiry. No doubt, the concerned employee has produced before this Tribunal to show that he has borrowed Rs . 30,000/- and he has discharged the same and that he has issued four cheques to Mr. T.R. Kuppusamy. It is not proved that such debt can be considered as excessive by the management because no document was produced by the Respondent/ management that how much amount of debt will be considered as excessive by the Respondent/ Bank . Under such circumstances , I find the third charge also was not proved by the Respondent/Management .

12. With regard to second charge levelled against the concerned employee that he wilfully disobeyed the instructions of his superiors is based on the allegation that he had not given any reply to the regional Manager's letter seeking information on the business turn over ofhis family members , the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that since the concerned employee had not run any business , he has not given any explanation and further his request for extension of time has not been granted and no reply was given to his request for extension of time, the concerned employee was of the bona fide view that II Party/Management had not persued this issue and the II Party /Management had not received any complaint in this regard. But without producing any document andwithout any evidence on record , the Enquiry Officer had proceeded to hold that this charge has been proved against the concerned employee .

16. But the learned counsel for the Respondent contended that in a departmental enquiry technical rules of evidence and proof beyond doubt not applicable and even in the rulings reported in 1997 (5 ) SCC 129 THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY VS. UDAYSINGH & OTHERS , the Supreme Court has held that " the preponderance of probabilities and conclusions drawn as a reasonable man from evidence on record is sufficient for the purpose of departmental enquiry. " Under such circumstances, there is ample evidence to show that charges framed against the concerned employee have been proved and hence it cannot be said that the charges have not been proved beyond reasonable doubt .

13. As against this , the learned counsel for the Respondent contended that it is not disputed that the ChiefManager of Regional Office of Hyderabad has called for the concerned employee to submit the details of borrowings, present outstanding liabilities and reasons for not paying the loans and financial statements of business run by the concerned employce and his family members by his letic dated 8-1-97. Though several reminders were given, the concerned employee has not submitted any reply which is clearly a disobedience that too wilful disobedience of the orders of his superiors . Under such circumstances , the findings given by the Enquiry Officer is justifiable and it cannot be questioned by the employee or the petitioner Union and it is also an act of gross misconduct under clause 19.5( c) of Biparite Settlement .

14. Though I have a doubt as to whether the higher officers of the Respondent/Bank can ask with regard to financial statements of business run by the employce

17. Though I accept that preponderance of probabilities and conclusions drawn as a reasonable man from evidence on record is sufficient for the purpose of departmental enquiry, in this case the Enquiry Officer has come to the conclusion without any evidence that the charges 1 to 3 have been proved . As I have already stated except the charge No. 2 with regard to charges 1 and 3 , there is not even an iota of evidence to show that concerned employce is guilty of charges framed against him . Under such circumstances. I find imposition of punishment of [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

7967

W12 24-07-01

compulsory retirement on the concerned employee is not legal andjustified.

Point No. 2 :-

Xerox copy of the proceedings of personalhearing .

W13 31-08-02

The next point to be decided in this case is to what relief the Peitioner is entitled?

Xerox copy of the 2A petition filed beforeAssistant Labour Commissioner (Central).

W14 04-12-02

Xerox copy of the reply filed by Respondent before Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central).

W15 18-02-03

18. Inview ofmyforegoing findings that imposition ofpunishment of compulsory retirement on the concerned employee is not legal and justifiable, I find the concerned employee is tobe reinstated in service . But, in view ofmy finding that the second charge against the concerned employee hasbeen proved, I find the punishment imposed by the Respondent with regard to this charge is upheld. Therefore, I direct the II Party/Management to reinstate the concerned employee namely Sri P. Packiyanathan into service with continuity of service . In these circumstances , I find the punishment imposed by the Respondent with regard to second charge that concerned empkce be brought down by two stages lower in the existing scale of paywith cumulative effect will stand good . With regard to back wages , I find the concerned employee is entitled to back wages from the date of compulsory retirement . No. Costs.

Xerox copy of the notice for auction published by South Indian Bank Ltd. Madurai.

W16 27-02-03 Xerox copy of the communication regarding payment Made by highest bidder in auction .

W17 Nil Xerox copy of the ledger extract of concerned employee's Staff SB account No. 30.

For the II Party/Management:

Ex. No. Date Description

M1

07-05-82

19. The reference is answered accordingly.

(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typedby him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this daythe 17th March , 2005. )

Xerox copy of the letter from Respondent to concerned employee .

M2 15-10-84 Xerox copy of the advisory letter issued to concerned employee.

01-07-88

M3

K. JAYARAMAN , Presiding Officer Witnesses Examined :-

For the I Party/Claimant : WW1 Sri P. Packiyanathan

: MW1 Sri B.K. Balasubramanian Forthe II Party/ Management

Documents Marked:

For the I Party/Claimant :

Ex. No. Date Description

Xerox copy of the memo issued to concerned employee.

M4 03-08-88 Xerox copy of the memo issued to concerned employee.

M5 10-10-88 Xerox copy of the letter from Regional Office , Hyderabad to concerned employee calling for explanation.

M6 04-01-89 Xerox copy of the notice issued to concerned employee.

M7

17-04-93

W1 Nil Xerox copy of the promissory note signed by concerned employee .

W2 Nil Xerox copy of the four cheques issued by concerned employee .

W3 Nil Xerox copy of the I.P. No. 70/98 on the file of Sub -Judge,Madurai .

Xerox copy of the office order issued to concerned employee .

M8 15-11-94 Xerox copy of the charge sheet issued to concerned employee.

M9 27-12-95 Xerox copy of the final order passed by Disciplinary Authority.

M10 08-01-97

W4 29-11-99 Xerox copy of the explanation given by concerned employee before Disciplinary Authority.

Xerox copy of the letter from Regional Office, Hyderabad to concerned employee calling for his explanation .

M11 13-11-99

W5 02-11-00 Xerox copy of the enquiry proceedings.

W6 07-11-00 Xerox copy of the enquiry proceedings .

Xerox copy of the notice from Respondent to concerned employee.

M12 06-04-00

W7 13-11-00 Xerox copy of the enquiry proceedings .

W8 19-11-00

Xerox copy of the charge sheet issued to concerned employee .

M13 04-08-01

Xerox copy of the written arguments filed by concerned employee before EnquiryOfficer.

Xerox copy of the final order of Disciplinary Authority.

M14 Nil

W9 28-02-01 Xerox copy of the findings of Enquriy Officer.

W10 09-03-01

Kerox copy of the pronote issued by concerned employee in favour of Abiramai Finance.

M15 Nil

Xerox copy of the written say of concerned employee On enquiry findings .

W11 10-07-01 Xerox copy of the notice for personal hearing.

Xerox copy of the S.B. Account No. 30

M16 Nil Xerox copy ofthe current account ledger sheet in respect of Harish & Sakthi in Dhanalakshmi Bank Ltd.

7968

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16, 2005/ASADHA 25 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 23 जून, 2005

का.आ. 2534.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार यूको बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण पटना के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 11 ( C)/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-06-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12011/241/2003 - आईआर ( बी- II ) ]

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] Employees Association , Exhibition Road , Patna for adjudication to this Tribunal :

"Whether the claim of UCO Bank Employees Association that Shri Siva Prasad Sah was engaged toperform the duties of sub - staff during 1991-1997 with the management of UCO Bank is correct ? If so, whether the management's action to terminate his from service is justified? If not, justified, what relief is the disputant concerned entitled to ? "

सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 23rd June , 2005

S.O. 2534. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 11 (C) / 2004) of the Industrial Tribunal, Patna (Bihar) as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of UCO Bank, and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 22-06-2005 .

[No. L- 12011/241/2003 - IR (B -II) ]

C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL , PATNA

Reference Case No. 11 (C) of 2004

Management of UCO Bank, Regional Office , Bhagalpur, Sabour Road, Bhagalpur and their workmen Sri Siva Prasad Sah represented by the State Secretary, UCO Bank Employees Association , Exhibition Road , Patna.

For the Management : Mr. P.K. Chatterjee , A.C.O. , UCO Bank .

Forthe Workman

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

Present:

: Priya Saran, Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal , Patna.

AWARD

Patna , dated the 17th June , 2005

By adjudication Order No. L - 12011/ 241 /2003 - IR (B - II) dated 28-6-2004 the Government of India , Ministry of Labour , New Delhi has referred , under clause ( d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub - section (2K) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter to be referred to an the Act' ) , the following dispute between the management of UCO Bank , Regional Office , Bhagalpur Sabour Road, Bhagalpur and their workman Sri Siva Prasad Sah represented by the State Secretary, UCO Bank 2. Worker's case, in short , as we find in his written statement is that he was orally appointed by the management of UCO Bank from 2-11-1991 to discharge the duties of a Peon at Sajour Branch where he used to place ledgers , registers on tables , carry token book, scroll register, take out Cash Box from Strong-Room , Post mail , stitch vouchers etc. and serve tea and water to staff everyday from 10 A.M. to 5.30 P.M. as per Manager's instruction . His payment was initially Rs . 5 per day which was raised from time to time to Rs . 37 at last plus Rs . 10 through other modes . As there was no peon in the Branch he worked as above till 5-4-1997 uninterruptedly before termination . He was neither given any notice/ notice pay nor retrenchment compensation . His termination is covered U/ S . 2 (00) of the I.D. Act. He represented the management for his reinstatement, but no effect . It is further alleged in the W.S. that he worked for over 240 days preceding termination and the management has violated the mandatory provisions U/ S . 25F of the Act besides resorting to unfair labour practice . He has accordingly prayed for his reinstatement , with backwages , regularisation as a peon and other reliefs .

3.Management's case on the other hand as narrated inthe written statement is that no demand was raised before the management , no industrial dispute exits between the parties , no relationship of Master and Servant is between them, the worker was never appointed by the management in any manner whatsoever and the reference is different from demand raised by the union. It is further stated by the management that the worker Shri Siva Prasad Sah was running Atta Chakki and he obtained loan from the Bank for business purposes . At his request for financial help the Bank occasionally utilised him as labourer, sweeper, collie and so on, as required and payment was made to him accordingly. He never worked as a peon and there has been no violation of Sec. 25F or other provisions of the Act.He did not work for 240 days in a calendar year and he is not entitled to any of the reliefs claimed by him . Management has accordingly prayed to answer the reference in their favour.

4. The parties have examined witnesses besides exhibiting some documents in support of their rival claims . Worker'switnesses are WW1 - Siva Prasad Sah , the worker himself and WW2- Arbind Kumar Choubey, Head Cashier, 7969 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

he was asked by the Manager to work in the Bank from 2-11-1991 and he had been regular in service till 24-8-1995 when Ext . W/2 was despatched by the Branch to Divisional Office.

9. The worker stands further supported by WW2 who was posted at Sajour Branch from Feb. , 1992 to October, 2003. While extending full support to the worker, he says that there was no permanent peon in the Branch and he discharged all the duties attached to a peon throughout banking hours .

who was there in Sajour Branch from Feb. , 1992 to October, 2003. Worker's documents are Ext . W. Association's letter dated 20-6-2003 to A.L.C. , ( C) , Patna thereby raising dispute , Ext. W/1 - Worker's representation to Branch Manager dated 3-2-2001 for his reinstatement and permanent absorption , Ext . W/2 , Association's rejoinder dated 10-9-2003 before A.L.C. ( C) , Patna . Ext . W/3- Management's forwarding letter dated 21-6-2003 to A.L.C. (C) , Patna alongwith statement ofwages paid to the worker and Exts . W/ 4 to W/6 payment vouchers to the worker.

5. Management has examined three witnesses in support of their case , who are MW1 - Jiya Lal Pd. Dinkar, MW - 2-Mundrika Pd . Sharma and MW3 - Narendra Prasad Sharma. They are all Bank's Officers . The documents exhibited by the management are Ext. M- Notice from A.L.C. (C), Patna to the parties regarding conciliation, Ext. M/ 1- Loan form dated 17-1-2003 for worker's Atta Chakki business , Ext . M/2 - Statement relating to C.C. AccountNo. 37 of the worker, Ext . M/ 3 - Statement of wages paid to the worker and Ext . M/4 series , fourteen vouchers showing payment to the worker. It may be noted here that Ext . M/3 is one and the same statement as we find in Ext . W/3 .

6. Inview of facts of this case and rival claims ofthe parties , the principal issue before us is whether workman's service was utilised by the Bank in place of a peon /sub- staff from 2-11-1995 to 5-4-1997 , does there exist Master- Servant relationship between the parties and has there been any violation of provisions U/S . 25F of the I.D. Act . We shall now examine the evidance on record in this context.

10. Besides above , statement of wages paid to the worker (Ext . W/3 and Ext. M/3 ) has been filed by both the parties . This document shows that the worker was kept engaged in the Bank from 2-11-1991 to 12-4-1997, and had been quite regular and uninterrupedly discharged the duties on daily wages . Payment appears having being made to him as Collie/Labour/Water fetching charges . The payment has been quite regular at uniform rate throughout for more than five years. Exts . W/4 to W/ 6 are payment vouchers to the worker. Above documents mainly Exts . W/ 2 and W/ 3 coupled with oral evidence placed by the worker clearly establish that the Branch Manager had engaged the worker in absence of any peon in the Branch to discharge the duties as such and run the Bank and the worker remained there engaged on daily wage uninterruptedly for more than five years . These facts definitely establish the relationship between the parties as of Master - Servant . Besides above, we find from Ext . W/3 that the worker served the Bank and worked there for more than 240 days preceding his termination . In view of facts above , his termination is well covered U/ S . 2(00 ) of the Act .

7. As claimed by the worker he was orally appointed bythe management from 2-11-1991 and he discharged all the duties of a permanent peon at Sajour Branch Till 5-4-1997 uninterruptedly on daily wages . He also claims that he worked for more than 240 days in a calendar year prior to his termination. The Management on the other hand claims that there was no Master -Servant relationship between them and the worker was never appointed in any capacity. He was of course occasionally helped by the Bank at his request by way of utilising his services as labourer, sweeper and Collie and moreover he did not work for 240 days in a calendar year . The management has also stated that the worker was loanee and he was running Atta Chakki for which he obtained loan.

11. The management on the other hand has tried to impress through evidence that the worker was never appointed in any capacity. MW1 is an Officer in the Regional Office, Patna . He never remained posted at Sajour Branch. He has come to explain Ext . M/ 1-a Cash credit loan to worker. He says that such type of loan is not given to any staffmember meaning thereby that the worker was not in Bank's service. It can not be lost sight of that Ext. M/ 1 is a dcument dated 17-1-2003 when the worker was already terminated and so, this document and related claim of the Bank become quite irrelavent for the purposes of this case . MW1 further states that Ext . M/ 3 shows payment to the worker through more than one voucher in a day. This also does not help the management in view of worker's assertion that he was paid the daily wage plus Rs . 10 through other modes .

12. MW2 had been the Branch Manager at Sajour from June , 96 to June , 2001. He says that work was taken from the worker in absence of sweeper and also for water and tea fetching but he was never utilised for a full day. He was paid separately for every work done by him. He also says that he was never appointed nor terminated and hewas sanctioned loan for Atta Chakki business . He admits 8. WW1 supports his case in all details and reiterates his claim for reinstatement and regularisation as a peon . He worked in the Bank regularly, which stands supported by the report of the Branch to Divisional Office dated 24-8-1995 through particulars/informations regarding worker (Ext . W/2) . We find noted in this proforma that worker's date of first engangement at Sajour Branch was 2-11-1991 and he was permitted to work there by the Manager. This document well confirms worker's case that 7970

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

initio, as if there has been no termination at all in the eye oflaw.

that neither notice nor compensation was given to him in the circumstances above . The evidence of MW2 appears to be beyond acceptance in view of Bank's documents placed on record as Exts , W/ 2 and W/3 .

17. Besides above , the worker's service was utilised continuously for more than five years on daily wage without absorbing him in regular cadre . This is definitely a sort of unfair labour practice at management's hand .

13. MW 3 is at Sajour Branch since 15-7-2002 and he sanctioned loan to the worker in 2003 for Atta Chakki business . He further refers Ext . M/4 to state that worker was paid through different vouchers on a single day.

14. Management's documents i.e. Exts . M.M/ 1 and M/ 2 are not at all helpful to them so far their claim is concerned , whereas Ext . M/3 and Ext . M/4 stand to the help of the worker .

18. In view of what has been discussed above and evidence and materials on record . I am but to hold that the claim ofUCO Bank Employees Association that the worker was engaged to perform the duties of sub - staff during 1991 to 1997 with the management is quite correct . The management's action to terminate him from service is thoroughly unjustified and against the provisions of law and the worker is entitled to his reinstatment with back wages last paid to him and further absorption in regular cadre as a peon. The management is directed to absorb the worker as a peon besides paying his last wages due as indicated above positively within two months from the date of notification .

19. Award accordingly.

PRIYA SARAN , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 23 जून , 2005

का. आ. 2535.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बैंक ऑफ महाराष्ट्र के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में श्रम न्यायालय , पूणे के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 490/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

15. The evidence on record and the documents particularly Exts. W/2 , W/3 and M/3 go to strongly support worker's case that he was enganged by the Branch Manager at Sajour Branch to work in place of a permanent peon and he discharged all the duties of sub- staff quite regularly for more than five years and he discharged the duties for more than 240 days in a calander year préceding his termination and his termination stands covered U/ s . 2(oo) of the Act . In the facts and circumstances above , the worker is quite entitled to benefits of Sec. 25F of the Act and admittedly neither any notice/ notice pay nor retrenchment compensation was paid to him thereby flouting the provisions of Sec. 25F of the Act. His retrenchment accordingly becomes illegal and void - ab- initio . It goes without saying in the facts and circumstances, above that Master - Servant relationship has been existing between the parties and his retrenchment is bad in law for non -compliance Sec . 25F provisions .

[सं. एल-12011/137/2001- आईआर ( बी- II ) ] सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 23rd June , 2005

S.O. 2535.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 490/2001 ) of the Labour Court , Pune ( Maharashtra ) as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Bank of Maharashtra and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 22-6-2005 .

[No. L - 12011 /137/ 2001 - IR (B - II ) ] C. GANGADHARAN . Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI P. E. HAVAL , PRESIDING OFFICER IIND , LABOUR COURT, PUNE

REF. ( I.D.A. ) NO . 490/2001

IstParty

16. At the time of argument , the learned representative of the management submitted that no Industrial Dispute exists between the parties , that no demand was raised before the management and the reference in different from the demand raised by the union. Ext. W contains many annexures , in shape of representations to the Branch Manager by worker dated 18-1-99, 22-4-98 , 8-5-97 and 22-4-2003 . Copies of former three representations were received by the Branch whereas representation dated 22-4-2003 was sent by Regd . Post . Ext . W/ 1 is another representation to the Branch Manager dated 3-2-2001 for reinstatement and absorption of the worker. From above representations , it becomes quite clear that the dispute was repeatedly raised before the management. As regards other argument one may well understand that the reference is made by the appropriate Govt. after examining all concerned papers and the worker or union has no role to play in the process . We thus find thatthere is no point in any of the arguments taken by the management . It appears to be a clear cut case of violation ofmandatory provisions of Sec . 25F of the Act and in this relation, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has consistently held that such termination is illegal , inoperative and void - ab-

: The Regional Manager, Bank of Maharashtra , BCM , Solapur Regional Office Solapur (Maharashtra ) -413002 .

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7971

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

AND

: IInd Party.

The General Secretary,

Bank of Maharashtra, Karmachari Sangh,

185, Sheniwar Peth , Pune-30.

Corum : P. E. HAVAL

AWARD

(Dt. 3-2-2005)

Thisis a Reference made by Under Secretary under Section 10 1D and 2A of I.D. Act by the Central Government for adjudication of Industrial Dispute between Management of Bank of Maharashtra and Bank of Maharashtra Karmachari Sangh, Solapur mentions in the Schedule which reads as under :

SCHEDULE

"Whether the demand of Bank of Maharashtra Karmachari Sangh, Solapur that second opportunity for the selection of driver to Shri D.D. Tulse , should be offered by the management of Bank of Maharashtra is legal and justified ? If Yes , then what reliefthe concerned employee is entitled to ?" 2. Notices were issued to the parties . The Bank of Maharashtra Karmachari Sangh filed Statement of Claim . As nobody appeared for Ist party inspite of service of notice Exh . 5 , the matter proceeded ex parte against Ist party. Thereafter Bank of Maharashtra Karmachari Sangh is remaining absent and has failed to take steps . Bank of Maharashtra Karmachari Sangh has been remaining absent since long . Bank of Maharashtra- Karmachari Sangh is absent today also . It seems that Bank of Maharashtra Karmachari is not interested. Any prosecuting their claim- case I therefore have no alternative but to disposed of the Reference for want of prosecution by Bank of Maharashtra Karmachari I therefore proceed to pass following order .

ORDER

1. Reference is hereby disposed of for want of prosecution by the Bank of Maharashtra Karmachari Sangh.

2. No. order as to costs .

Place : Pune

P. E. HAVAL, PresidingOfficer Dated: 3-2-2005 .

नई दिल्ली, 23 जून , 2005

का. आ. 2536.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार केनरा बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्रके संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय, चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 291/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-12012/178/2003- आई आर ( बी- II ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 23rd June, 2005

S.O. 2536. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 291/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of CanaraBank and their workman, received by the Central Government on 22-6-2005 .

[No. L - 12012/178/2003 - IR (B- II) ]

C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Tuesday, the 5th March , 2005

Present : K. JAYARAMAN, PresidingOfficer

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 291/2004 (Inthe matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) ofSub - section ( 1 ) and Sub -section (2A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , between the Management of Canara Bank and their workmen) .

BETWEEN

Sri K. Sivadoss ,

: I Party/Petitioner AND

II Party/Management The Branch Manager, Canara Bank , Kilaiyur Branch .

Appearances:

Forthe Petitioner : Mr. N.R. Rajagopalan, Advocate

FortheManagement : Mr. T.R. Sathiyamohan, Advocate

AWARD

The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide Order No. L - 12011 / 178/2003 - IR (B - II ) dated 1-1-2004 has referred the industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication . The Schedule mentioned in that order is :-

"Whether the claim of reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages by Shri K. Sivadoss , 7972

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ASADHA 25 , 1927

part -time employee of Canara Bank , Kilaiyur branch against the management of Canara Bank is legal and justified ? If not , what relief the workman is entitled to ?"

2. After the receipt of the reference, it was taken on file as I.D.No. 291/2004 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 of the Petitioner in the Claim Statement are briefly as follows :-

ThePetitioner joined the services of the Respondent/ Bank in the month ofMay, 2000 as sweeper . The said job is a permanent one and all benefits available to other staff are available to him . The Petitioner discharged his duties . without any blemish or adverse remark and he has discharged his duties to the satisfaction of his superiors from the date of joining the duty. Besides , the duty of sweeper, he was also given some other job like meeting staff requests such as purchasing of coffee , tea etc. While so , on 12-6-2001 the Branch Manager has prevented the petitioner from attending the duty by oral order saying that he was dismissed from service, but he has not given any reason. The said act of the Respondent/Bank is illegal and without any jurisdiction . No enquiry was ordered or conducted by the Respondent/Management as prayed under rule of law. The Petitioner was removed from service due to personal animosity between him and some of the staff. Therefore, he has raised a dispute before the labour authorities . Due to failure of conciliation , the matter was referred to this Tribunal . The act of dismissing the Petitioner from service without any reason , opportunity or order is too harsh liable to be interfered by this Tribunal under section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act . Further , it is illegal and unjustified and therefore , the Petitioner prays this Tribunal to order for reinstatment in service with continuity of service , back wages and other attendant benefits.

28-8-2000 and transferred to Kollaputam branch. In view ofthe said transfer , the vacancy of part time employee in the branch at Kilayur has arisen. The norms for selection of candidates for the post of part- time employee are-age between 18 & 22 years ( relaxation three years for OBC candidates and 5 years for SC / ST candidates) and with regard to qualification , there is no minimum qualification, maximum V standard , however, upto VIII standard can be considered in case suitable candidates with V standard is not available. Further , as per the norms , the Respondent/Bank selects only from the persons sponsored by Employment Exchange . In order to fill up the vacancy of part - time employee in Kilaiyur branch, the branch displayed the vacancy on notice board and invited applications for the applications for the post since there was no nearby Employee Exchange in and among Kilaiyur and the branch had received eleven applications for the post of part-time employee and out of eleven, only four candidates fulfilled the eligibility criteria and therefore, they were called for interview. However, only three candidates attended the interview and among the three , one Mr. Thilagar was selected for the post on daily wages basis and he was engaged from 13-6-2001 . Since the whole process of engagement of part - time employee took considerable time , as a stop - gap arrangement and on temporary basis , persons on daily wage basis particularly because the cleaning and other processes had to continue till such time a part - time employee is engaged as per the norms of Respondents /Bank after duly satisfying the recruitment norms /eligibility criteria . As such , the petitioner was engaged on daily wage basis intermittently and temporarily for the purpose of cleaning and dusting the branch that too only for a few hours in the morning of every working day. This does not vest any claim or right for employment as claimed by the petitioner. It is also significant that while filling up the part time employee vacancy in the branch, the petitioner has also applied for the said post and whose application was among eleven applications received by the branch . Since the petitioner was over - aged ( 29 years ) at that time and over - qualified ( X standard ) , the petitioner was found not suitable for the post . The engagement of petitioner was purely on casual and three was no continuity in his engagement . He has also not completed 240 days of such few hours of engagement . It is false to allege that he has joined the services of the bank as sweeper , since there is no post of sweeper in the Respondent/Bank. The engagement of the petitioner was purely intermittent and occasional and due to contingency that arose for few months because of the temporary vacancy as explained above . It is false to allege that the Branch Manager has dismissed the petitioner from service without any reason etc. Hence . for all these reasons , the respondent prays to dismiss

the claim with costs .

4. As against this , the respondent in its Counter Statement contended, that the Respondent /Bank is a nationalised bank having more than 24 branches all over India . The Respondent/Bank is engaging part-time employee for the purpose of cleaning , up- keeping the branches /offices . These part - time employees are recruited through Employment Exchange on satisfying the norms , procedure and guidelines laid down by Respondent/Bank . The duration of part - time employees work is only for a few hours and after completion of the work, they are free to do any work of their choice . Likewise , in Kilaiyur Branch one Mr. Alagar was engaged as part - time employee for cleaning and sweeping the branch on 1 / 3rd scale wages and subsequently, he was redesignated as sub - staff w.e.f.

7973 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

5. In such circumstances , the points for any determination are -

(i) "Whether the claim of the petitioner for reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages against the respondent/ management is legal and justified ?

(ii) To what relief the petitioner is entitled ?"

Point No. 1:-

were marked as Ex . Ml to M5 . Ex. M1 is the copy ofthe letter from Kilaiyur Branch to Circle Office, Chennai with regard to vacancy arisen for the post ofpart -time employee. Ex. M2 is the copy of letter from Circle Office to the Manager ofKilaiyur Branch. Ex. M3 is the copy of letter fromKilaiyurBranch to Circle Office , Chennai on 2-2-2001. Ex. M4 is the copy of letter dated 19-12-2000 from Kilaiyur Branch to Regional Office, Trichy. Ex. M5 is the copy of letter from HRM Section Circle Office , Chennai to Branch Manager Kilaiyur Branch engagement of Mr.. M. Thilagar as part -time employee . Though the Petitioner has filed four documents , he has not marked these documents in the evidence .

8. The learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the Petitioner who was engaged not only as sweeper but also given the additional jobs such asmeeting the other staff requirements like purchasing of tea, coffee etc. and he was further given duty of opening the bank gate for general public and to close the gate in evening and handover the keys to the Manager, thus , it is not correct to say that dusting and cleaning the premises will take only two hours and from August 2000 to June 2001 , he has worked for more than 240 days . Though, he has not produced any document to show that he has completed 240 days in a continuous period of 12 calendar months before his disengagement, all the documents are with the Respondent/Management and the witness for the Respondent/Mangement has clearly admitted that bonus is given only to regular staff members of the Respondent , while so, it is evident from the document produced by the Petitioner that he has been paid bonus and thus , he has established before this Tribunal that he has worked for more than 240 days in a continuous period of 12 calendar months preceding his termination. Under such circumstances , the termination made by the Respondent/Management is not legal and no procedure has been followed while terminating the services of the Petitioner . Under such circumstances , the Petitioner is entitled to the relief claimedby him.

6. The case of petitioner is that he joined the services of Respondent /Bank during May, 2000 as sweeper and he has discharged his duties without any blemish or adverse remarks . While so , all of a sudden the Respondent /Bank has dismissed hira from service without assigning any reason on 12-6-2001 which is illegal and without any justification . But, as against this , the Respondent contended that no doubt , the Petitioner was appointed on a casual basis for cleaning and sweeping and on that ground , he cannot claim absorption by the Respondent /Bank . Under Kilaiyur Branch of the Respondent/Bank , there was a vacancy of part time employee during August, 2000 and as per the guidelines , the bank has taken initiative to appoint part - time employee for which the Respondent /Bank issued guidelines , norms for selection of candidates . After that the Kilaiyur Branch ofRespondent /Bank has called for applications from the eligible candidates and the bank branch received eleven applications for the post of part - time employee and the petitioner was also one among the eleven applicants . But , since he has was over -aged and over- qualified, he was not considered for the post and out of the eleven candidates only four candidates were eligible and out of these four , three persons attended the interview and out of these three , one Mr. Thilagar was selected as a part - time employee . This process of engagement of part - time employee took a considerable time and for this , stop - gap arrangement has been made and on temporary basis , the petitioner and also three others have been employed intermittently/temporarily for the purpose of cleaning and dusting the branch premises and that too only a few hours in the morning and under this guise , the petitioner cannot claim any absorption or any permanency in the post of part- time employee .

9. But, as against this , the learned counsel for the Respondent contended that the Petitioner has not marked any document before this Tribunal , but on the other hand, he claimed that he has received bonus and the bonus is paid only to the persons who are working as regular employees and therefore, he claims that he is entitled to reinstatement , but he has not established the fact that he has worked for more than 240 days in a continubus period of 12 calendar months preceding his alleged termination . On the other hand, it is established by the Respondent /Management that his engagement was only on casual basis and that too intermittently, To establish his case , the Petitioner has examined himself as WW1 and on the side of the Respondent the present Kilaiyur Branch Manager of the Respondent/Bank was examined as MW1 and on their side five documents

1993 G1/05-57 7974

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

10. I find much force in the contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent . In this case . through the Petitioner contended in Claim Statement that he has completed 240 days in a continuous period of12 calendar months , he has not established this fact with any satisfactory evidence, but he wents to take advantage of the admissions made by the Respondent witness that bonus was given only to regular employees and on that ground, he claims that he has worked for more than 240 days and only because of that he was paid bonus and other things . Even for this fact , he has not established with any satisfactory evidence . Under such circumstances , I find this point against the Petitioner.

Point No. 2 :

11. In view of my foregoing findings that the Petitioner has not established his contention that he has completed more than 240 days in a continuous period of 12months, I find the Petitioner is not entitled to any relief. No Costs.

(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him . corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 5thApril, 2005.

K. JAYARAMAN , Presiding Officer

Witnesses Examined :

Forthe I Party/ Petitioner : WW1 Shri K. Sivadoss

For the II Party/Management : MW1 Sri T. M. Thangaraj

Documents Marked:

Forthe I Party/Petitioner : Nil

For the II Pary /Management

Ex. No. Date

Description

M1 21-08-00 Xerox copy of the letter from Kilaiyur Branch to Circle Office , Chennai .

M2 24-08-00

Xerox copy of the letter from Circle Officeto Kilaiyur Branch Manager.

M3 02-02-01 Xerox copy of the letter from Kilaiyur Branch to Circle Office , Chennai .

M4 19-12-00

Xerox copy of the letter from Kilaiyur Branch to Regional Office , Trichy.

M5 30-05-01

therefore , the persons who have appointed on casual basis cannot claim permanency in the establishment of the Respondent /Management. Further , it cannot be said that the onus is upon the Respondent/Management to prove that the Petitioner has not completed 240 days . He has relied on the rulings reported in 2002 I LLJ 1053 wherein the Supreme Court has held that " In our opinion, the Tribunal was not right in placing the onus on the management without first determining on the basis of the cogent evidence that the Respondent has worked for more than 240 days in a year preceding his termination . It was the case of that claimant that he so worked, but this claim was denied by the appellant. It wasfor the Claimant to lead evidence to prove that he has workedfor 240 days in a continuous period of 12 calendar months preceding his termination. " Relying on this decision, the learned counsel for the Respondent contended that the Petitioner wanted to infer from the vague inferences made by the witnesses for the Respondent and alleged that he has completed 240 days in a continuous period of 12 calendar months , on the other hand, he has not discharged his onus that he has worked for more than 240 days in a continuous period of 12 calendar months before the alleged termination . It is an admitted fact that the Petitioner not appointed to the post in accordance with rules of the bank. But , he was engaged on the basis of need of work. He was only a temporary employee worked on daily wages . In these circumstances , his disengagement from service cannot be construed as retrenchment under Industrial Disputes Act. The concept of retrenchment cannot be stretched to such an extent to cover the workman like the Petitioner. The Respondent/Management has got recruitment rules for appointment even for the part -time employee . It is well settled by the decisions of various High Courts and Supreme Court that persons cannot be permitted to be appointed through back door and then claim permanency in service on the ground that he has completed more than 240 days . Even if he has completed 240 days , it is well settled principle of law that the service although terminated without following the provisions under section 25F of the Act , the same by itself cannot create any right on the concerned workman being permanently absorbed in service . In this case , it is not the contention ofthe Petitioner that he has been appointed for the post ofpermanent part- time employee . It is clearly established by the Respondent that he has been engaged for cleaning and dusting work on temporary basis actually and on that ground, he cannot claim any right to be absorbed by the Respondent/Bank. Further, he has not produced any document to establish his contention that he has completed more than 240 days in a continuous period of 12 calendar months preceding the alleged termination. Under such circumstances , he cannot claim any relief in this industrial dispute.

Xerox copy of the letter from HRM Section, Circle Office to Kilaiyur Branch . Manager.

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7975 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/ आषाढ़ 25, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 24 जून, 2005

का. आ. 2537.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सेन्ट्रल रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , कानपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई.डी. - 216/1997 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-41012/10/97- आई.आर. ( बी-1 ) ]

अजय कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 24th June , 2005

S.O. 2537. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (I.D. No. 216 of 1997) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court Kanpur as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Railway and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 23-6-2005.

[No. L-41012/10/97 -IR (B-I) ]

AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI SURESH CHANDRA

PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, SARVODAYA NAGAR, KANPUR, U.P.

Industrial Dispute No. 216 of 1997

Inthe matter of dispute between :

President,

2. The case in short as set up by the concerned workman is that he was appointed in the services of the Railways on 19-4-71 and was posted as permanent gate Keeper at Gate No. 493 and served the Railway department with utmost honesty. It has been alleged by him that he remained absent from duty during the period 4-9-92 to 2-3-93 due to his illness . The workman produced medical certificate of the doctor under which he remained under medical treatment before the Railway Administration but the administration removed the services of the workman w.e.f. 15-9-95 on the ground of unauthorised absence . It has also been contended by the workman that prior to dispensation ofhis services the workman was not provided with adequate opportunity of his defence , the entire inquiry has been conducted against him in utter violation of the Indian Railway Employees Discipline and Appeal Rules 1968 inasmuch as workman has not been permitted to engage defence representative during the inquiry; he was not provided with the copies of documents relied on charges; he was also not allowed to produce witnesses in his defence and that lastly it is also pleaded by the workman that he was not provided with the copy of inquiry report by the Railway administration which has caused great prejudice in his defence . It has further been alleged that he has not been removed by the disciplinary authority rather some incompetent authority has passed the orders of removal from the service . He has further pleaded that he was not provided with the copies of proceedings held day to day inquiryby the inquiry officer. It is also not clear as to under what circumstances an employee of class III was appointed as presenting officer in the case of workman when he was not competent to act upon as such in disciplinary proceedings against Railway servant. On the basis of aforesaid pleadings it has been prayed that workman is entitled to be reinstated in the service of the Railway administration with full back wages and continuity of service.

RCSRM Congress ,

2/236 , Namneir, Agra

AND

AEN (M)

CentralRailway, Agra

AWARD

1. Central Government, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi , vide notification No. L- 41012/ 10/97- IR-B dated 9-10-97, has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this tribunal :

"Whether the action of the management of AEN (M) Agra Cantt to terminate the services of Sri Sohan Lal Gate Keeper w.e.f. 15-9-95 is legal and justified ? If not to what relief he is entitled to? "

3. Railway administration contested the present case ofthe workman and has also filed written statement against the statement of claim filed by the workman alleging that the workman remained unauthorised absence during the period 4-9-92 to 2-3-93 without any information. It is alleged that the alleged medical certificate is a false and bogus document as such was not admissible in evidence . Further it has been alleged that Railway has hospital for providing medical facility to the Railway employees and if at all the workman was ill he ought to have taken treatment from Railway hospital . It is further stated by the Railway administration that the services of the workman were removed w.e.f. 4-9-92 on account of his unauthorised absence from duty. Workman was served with a memorandum of charges and the workman appeared in the inquiry and moved an application before the inquiry officer that he is not interested in appointing any person to act as hisdefence representative . After providing the workman 7976

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)]

documents in good faith and that he was never apprised of the contents ofthe documents and charges levelled against him.

9. The workman has also filed written arguments in support of his case.

10. Perused the record carefully and also the evidence adduced by the rival parties .

full opportunity of his defence the inquiry officer submitted his report wherein he has found charges as proved against the workman. The workman vide letter dated 6-4-95 issued by the disciplinary authority was asked to furnish his comments over the report of inquiry officer which was enclosedwith it and that the said letter was received by the workman on 12-6-95 whereafter he appeared before the authority but his appeal was dismissed. It has also been alleged that the service record of the applicant workman shows that he is habitual absconder and he was penalised repeatedly and that he never put any attention in service. It has been denied by the Railway administration that charges were not explained to the workman and that no opportunity of his effective defence was afforded to him during the domestic inquiry. On the basis of above pleadings ithas been prayed that the present claim of the workman is liable to be rejected and that the workman is not entitled for any relief.

4. The workman filed rejoinder statement against the written statement filed by the management but nothing new has been alleged therein by the workman except reiterating the facts already pleaded by him in the statement ofclaim.

11. It has not been disputed by the workman that the workman was charge sheeted and punished on earlier occassion also on account of his absence from duty on several occassions . It is also admitted case of the workman that on earlier occassion the workman was removed from service of the Railways on account of his prolonged habit ofbeing absent unauthorisedly from duty but as a gesture ofgoodwill management's competent authority gave him another opportunity to serve and the workman was retained inservice. The workman in para (3 ) ofhis written arguments admits the fact that on previous occassion the workman was found absent from duty and that to remain absent from duty unauthorisedly is a serious charge but the management was pleased to allow the workman to continue onworking after awarding the workman light punishment . It isadmitted case of the workman that during the period in questioni.e. 4-9-92 to 2-3-93 the workman remained absent on account of his illness and also on account of his mental agony due to the death of his only son .

5. Contesting parties lead oral as well as documen- tary evidence in support oftheir respective cases. Whereas workman Sohan Lal examined himself as W.W. 1 , management examined Sri Babu Ram Verma , Section Engineer , Central Rly Agra.

6. Heard the representative of the parties at length and also perused the record carefully.

7. Preliminary issue on the validity and fairness of the domestic inquiry was framed by the learned predecessor and vide order dated 26-4-2000 decided the preliminary issue against the management and a revision petition moved by the management was also rejected by learned predecessor vide order dated 2-8-2000 . Feeling aggrieved with the rejection ofthe review petition as well as the order holding inquiry as unfair and improper the management preferred a writ petition No. 994 of 2001 but the same was also directed to be dismissed vide order dated 10-1-01 by the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad .

12. The workman has relied on a medical certified allegedly issuedby some private medical practitioner which was found fake by the competent authority of the management on the ground that it does not contain the registration number of the doctor which has been incorporated lateron beneth the designation of the alleged authority who issued the certificate. It is very strange that the workman's own statement of claim mentions that he was absent from duty on account of his illness w.e.f. 4-9- 92, whereas the alleged medical certificate filed and relied by the workman mentions that the patient was suffering from tyfoid fever and anemea from 9-8-92 to 2-3-93. Both these dates are contradictory to each other which makes the alleged medical certificate very doudtful . Even the report ofthe medical certificate speak itself that the alleged medical certificate has been manufactured afterwards to sake from the punishment . This certificate also mention a unique report that the patient has not been doing work since 602 days and that this patient is under my treatment . The alleged certificate is purported to have been issued on 2-3-93 . Thus the alleged certificate is nothing but a manufactured document which cannot be relied upon by any person of ordinary prudence.

13. The inquiry report has been signed by the workman and he admits that he has put his signatures on the same. The alleged witness an officer of the department have fully proved the fact service record of the workman 8. The learned predecessor thereafter called upon the management to prove the charges against the delinquent employee and allowed the management to furnish evidence . The management in support of the charges framed against the delinquent employee examined Sri Babu Ram Verma Section Engineer and also filed documents ext M- 1 to M -36 . The workman examined himself who reiterated that he was not afforded opportunity to defendhis case. Regarding his signatures on the documents filed by the management the only explanation advanced onbehalf of the workman is that the workman is a semi literate and ignorant of the proceedings had signed those 7977 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

बनाम

1. मुख्य महाप्रबंधक,

and also the previous punishment awarded to the workman on account of his similar nature of default of unauthorised absence from duties on repeated occassions a fact which has rightly been admitted by the workman.

स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, स्थानीय प्रधान कार्यालय- II , संसद मार्ग, नईदिल्ली-110001

2. सहायक महाप्रबन्धक- III, स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इण्डिया अंचल कार्यालय 5 नेहरू प्लेस , टोंक रोड, जयपुर ।

... अप्रार्थीगण 14. Under these circumstances the management has been able to prove its charges against the delinquent employee to the hilt before this tribunal by oral as well as documentary evidence . The punishment awarded in the above circumstances cannot be said to be harsh or not commensurating to the charges levelled against the workman.

उपस्थिति:

15. For the reasons discussed above it is not a case fit for an award in favour of the workman by directing reinstatement . The workman is not held entitled for any relief.

(1 ) प्रार्थी प्रतिनिधि श्री अनिल मेहता उप. (2) अप्रार्थी प्रतिनिधि श्री के. के. बत्रा उप. अधिनिर्णय

दिनांक 4-3-2005

16. Reference is answered accordingly. SURESH CHANDRA, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 24 जून , 2005

श्रम मंत्रालय भारत सरकार नई दिल्ली ने अपनी अधिसूचना क्रमांक एल. - 12012/466/2001 [ आई.आर. ( बी-1 ) ] दिनांक 23 / 26-3-2002 के जरिये निम्न विवाद वास्ते अधिनिर्णय इस न्यायालय को प्रेषित किया है:-

का. आ. 2538.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण एवं श्रम न्यायालय , जोधपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई.डी. - 12/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-6-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

"क्या मुख्य महाप्रबन्धक भारतीय स्टेट बैंक, स्थानीय प्रधान कार्यालय नई दिल्ली ( 2 ) सहायक महाप्रबन्धक- III , भारतीय. स्टेट बैंक, अंचल कार्यालय जयपुर द्वारा श्रमिक श्री गिरधारीदान को उसके द्वारा की गई अस्थाई सेवा अवधि को पेंशन के लिए क्वालीफाईंग सर्विस में नहीं जोड़ा जाना उचित एवं वैध है । यदि नहीं तो श्रमिक अपने नियोजक से क्या राहत पाने का अधिकारी है ?"

[सं. एल-12012/466/2001- आईआर ( बी- I ) ] अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 24th June , 2005

S.O. 2538. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (I.D. 12/2002) of the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Jodhpur now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of State Bank of India and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 23-6-2005.

[No. L- 12012 /466 /2001 - IR (B -I ) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

अनुबन्ध

औद्योगिक विवाद आंधकरण एवं श्रम न्यायालय ,

जोधपुर

पीठासीन अधिकारी: श्री के. के. गुप्ता, आर.एच.जे.एस.

औ. वि. ( केन्द्रीय ) सं.: 12/2002

गिरधारीदान द्वारा ललित शर्मा

...प्रार्थी

प्रार्थी ने अपना माँग - पत्र प्रस्तुत करते हुए अभिकथित किया है कि प्रार्थी की प्रथम नियुक्ति अस्थाई तौर पर अप्रार्थी संस्थान में शैक्षणिक व तकनिकी योग्यता के आधार पर 1-5-1973 को हुई, प्रार्थी ने 1-5-73 से 28-2-1979 तक लगातार कार्य किया, प्रार्थी की लम्बी सेवा को देखते हुए अप्रार्थी ने प्रार्थी को स्थायी कर्मचारी के रूप में नियोजन में रखा तत्पश्चात् 1-3-79 से लिपिक रोकड़िया पद पर स्वेच्छिक सेवानिवृत्ति योजना के अन्तर्गत दिनांक 31-3-2001 तक स्थाई कर्मचारी के रूप में अप्रार्थी बैंक की पाली मारवाड़ मुख्य शाखा में कार्य किया । अप्रार्थी ने अपने नियोजन में श्रमिक को उसकी सेवा निरन्तरता कालाभ देते हुए प्रार्थी द्वारा की गई अस्थाई सेवा के तमाम लाभ यथा- उपार्जित अवकाश वार्षिक वेतन वृद्धि को पीछे खिसकाकर संबंधित समस्त पूर्व भृति का एरियर राशि सहित उसे भुगतान कर दिया, प्रार्थी ने 31-3-2001 तक कार्य किया । प्रार्थी ने 1-5-73 से 28-2-1979 तक लगातार पांच वर्ष 2 माह 24 दिन तक अस्थाई सेवा का जिसे भी प्राथर्थी द्वारा अप्रार्थी की जानकारी में लाया गया 31-3-2001 तक प्रार्थी द्वारा अप्रार्थी के अधीन कार्य करते हुए 27 वर्ष 3 माह 24 दिन की सेवा पूरी कर चुका है अप्रार्थी द्वारा स्वेच्छिक सेवानिवृति योजना के अन्तर्गत कर्मचारियों से आवेदन माँगे गये । प्रार्थी ने भी अपना आवेदन- पत्र प्रस्तुत किया व अप्रार्थी से निवेदन किया कि उसकी अस्थायी सेवा अवधि को भी पेंशन के लिए कुल सेवा अवधि में जोड़े किन्तु अप्रार्थी ने प्रार्थी वे अध्यक्ष राजस्थान ( स्टेट ) बैंक वर्कर्स आरगेनाईजेशन, एस.बी.बी.जे. सुराणा मार्केट, शाखा पाली , मारवाड़ 7978

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005/ ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)]

द्वारा जिरह की गई । प्रार्थी की ओर से विभिन्न दस्तावेजात की फोटो स्टेट प्रतियाँ पेश की गई ।

दोनों पक्षोंके प्रतिनिधिगण की बहस सुनी, पत्रावली का अवलोकन किया ।

प्रार्थी का यह कथन है कि वह 1-5-73 से 1-3-79 तक अप्रार्थी एस.बी.आई. बैंक पाली में अस्थाई सेवा में रहा, 1-3-79 से 31-3-2001 तक लिपिकरोकड़ीया के पद पर स्थाई सेवा में रहा, 31-3-2001 को स्वेच्छिक सेवानिवृत्ति योजना के अन्र्तगत उसने स्वेच्छिक सेवानिवृत्ति ले ली, पेंशन के व अन्य लाभों के लिए अस्थाई सेवाकाल पांच वर्ष दो माह 24 दिन को नहींजोड़ा गया है, उसका यह सेवाकाल भी सेवानिवृत्ति व अन्य लाभों के लिए जोड़ा जाना चाहिए । अपने कथन के समर्थन में उन्होंने 1987 एस.सी.सी. ( एल एण्ड एस ) 350 आर एल मारवा बनाम भारत संघ 1995 एससीसी ( एल एंड एस ) 365 ए.पी. श्रीवास्तव बनाम भारत संघ 1996 एस.सी.सी. ( एलएंडएल) 646 एम.सी. धौंगड़ा बनाम भारत संघ 1999 ( 4 ) एस.एल.आर. पेज 754 पंजाब एवं हरियाणा उच्च न्यायालय लाभ सिंह बनाम स्टेट आफ पंजाब 1999 ( 2 ) एस.एल.आर. पेज 215 हरियाणा राज्य बनाम श्रीराम व 2005 ( 1 ) डब्ल्यु.एल.सी . राज. पेज 1 राजस्थान राज्य बनाम फारुक अहमद विनिश्चय पेश किये ।

उक्त आवेदन पर कोई ध्यान नहीं दिया, सेवानिवृत्ति के समय पेंशन की गणना करने में अप्रार्थी ने प्रार्थी द्वारा दिनांक 1-5-73 से 28-2-1979 तक की गई सेवा अवधि को पेंशन के लिए कुल अवधि की गणना में नहीं जोड़ा । अप्रार्थी ने स्वेच्छिक सेवा योजना के अन्तर्गत प्रार्थी को एक्सग्रेशिया भुगतान किया व एक्सग्रेशिया केलकुलेशन शीट में परमानेन्ट सर्विस ( बी ) के समक्ष 27 वर्ष 3 माह 24 दिन के स्थान पर 22 वर्ष लिखा । यह कहा गया है कि प्रार्थी द्वारा की गई अस्थाई सेवाकाल की अवधि की भविष्य निधि की राशि अप्रार्थी नियोजन में स्थाई नियोजन प्राप्त करने के पर वात् अंशदान के रूप में प्रार्थी के वेतन से कटौती की गई एवं इतनी ही राशि अंशदान के रूप में बैंक द्वारा भी जमा कराई है तो फिर पेंशन की गणना करते समय उन्हें अस्थाई सेवा के लाभ देने से वंचित वरना पूर्णतः अनुचित एवं अवैधानिक है । अन्त में निवेदन किया किप्रार्थी द्वारा की गई 5 वर्ष 2 माह 24 दिन की अस्थाई सेवा अवधि को पेंशन की गणनाके लिए कुल सेवा अवधि में नहीं जोड़े जाने के अप्रार्थी के कृत्य को अनुचित एवं अवैध घोषित करते हुए प्रार्थी द्वारा की गई अस्थाई सेवा अवधि को पेंशन के लिए कुल सेवा अवधि में जोड़े जाने के आदेश अनुतोष के रूप में जारी करावें , प्रार्थी की पेंशन के लिए कुल सेवा बढ़ने के फलस्वरूप माह अप्रैल 2001 से आज तक की रिवाईज्ड पेंशन की राशिम्य ब्याज अप्रार्थी से दिलाई जावे एवं भविष्य में भी रिवाईज्ड पेंशन का भुगतान प्रार्थी को दिलाया जावे ।

अप्रार्थी का कथन है कि स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया एम्लोई पेंशन फंड के अनुसार ही सभी कर्मचारियों को पेंशन दी जाती है और उसके नियम उपनियम के अनुसार स्थाई कर्मचारी होने पर नियम 7 के अनुसार स्थाई कर्मचारी ही जिस दिन से वह स्थाई होता है उस दिन से उसका सदस्य होता है और उसके पश्चात ही बैंक इस फंड में पेंशन के लिए कन्ट्रीब्यूशन जमा कराना आरम्भ करता है उनका यह भी कहना है कि नियम 20 के अनुसार पेंशन की गणना के लिए जिस दिन से कर्मचारी इस फंड का सदस्य होता है उस दिन से उसकी सेवा की गणना की जाती है । इस तरह से इन नियमों के तहत ही प्रार्थी पेंशन व सेवानिवृत्ति लाभों को प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी है । उनका यह भी कहना है कि एस.बी.आई. के किसी भी कर्मचारी के कोई भी मामले मेंअस्थाई सेवा को पेंशन के लिए गणना में नहीं जोड़ा गया है । अप्रार्थी का यह भी कहना है कि प्रार्थी द्वारा प्रस्तुत न्याय दृष्टांत हस्तगत मामले में लागू नहीं होते क्योंकि इनके तथ्य भिन्न हैं । एस.बी.आई. के पेंशन के नियम व राज्य सरकार व केन्द्रीय सरकार तथा अन्य ओटोनोमस बाडी के पेंशन के अपने अपने नियम होते हैं उन्हीं के द्वारा कर्मचारी सेवाकाल में शासित होता है व उन्हीं के नियमों से पेंशन का हकदार होता है । प्रार्थी के द्वारा कोई भी संस्थान के पेंशन नियम प्रस्तुत नहीं किये गये हैं । जिनके संबंध में न्यायदृष्टांत प्रस्तुत किये गये हैं वे एस.बी.आई. के पेंशन नियमों जैसे नहीं हैं । अतः प्रार्थी द्वारा प्रस्तुत न्याय दृष्टांत उसे कोई सहायता नहीं पहुंचाते ।

अप्राथा की ओर से मांग- पत्र का जवाब प्रस्तुत किया जिसमें प्रारम्भिक आपत्तियों में कहा गया कि प्रार्थी 31-3-2001 को सेवानिवृत हो चुका है , प्रार्थी अप्रार्थी बैंक की सेवा में कार्यरत ही नहीं है तो राज.स्टेट बैंक वर्कस ओरगेनाईजेशन का सदस्य होने का प्रश्न ही नहीं है, मांग- पत्र अध्यक्ष ललित शर्मा द्वारा प्रस्तुत किया गया है जो निरस्त किये जाने योग्य है । प्रार्थी अप्रार्थी सं. 1 द्वारा अप्रार्थी सं. 2 के कार्यालय में कभी भी कार्यरत नहीं रहा, प्रार्थी भारतीय स्टेट बैंक की पाली शाखा से सेवानिवृत्त हुआ है जिसे पक्षकार नहीं बनाया है । आगे जवाब में कहा गया है कि प्रार्थी 31-3-2001 को सेवानिवृत्त हुआ, प्रार्थी को स्थाई रूप से 1-3-79 से अप्रार्थी बैंक में नियुक्त किया गया था , प्रार्थी द्वारा अस्थाई रूप से कार्य किये जाने का कोई उपार्जित अवकाश , वार्षिक वेतन वृद्धि इत्यादि न तो प्रार्थी को देय थी न ही अप्रार्थी द्वारा प्रार्थी को दी गई, प्रार्थी ने अप्रार्थी बैंक में 22 वर्ष निरन्तर स्थाई रूप से कार्य किया है इसलिये पेंशन की गणना उसी अनुरूप की गई है , एक्सग्रेसिया केलकुलेशन- शीट में स्थाई कर्मचारी के रूप में किये गये कार्यों के वर्ष के कोलम में 22 वर्ष अंकित किये गये है जो सही एवं दुरस्त हैं । अस्थाई कर्मचारी की भविष्य निधि में कोई राशि जमा ही नहीं की जाती तो उक्त राशि स्थाई नियोजा प्राप्त करने के पश्चात् अंशदान के रूप में वेतन से कटौती करने काकोई प्रश्न ही नहीं है । अन्त में निवेदन किया कि प्रार्थी ने स्थाई रूप से 22 वर्षों तक अप्रार्थी बैंक में कार्य किया है एवं इसी अनुरूप प्रार्थी को पेंशन का लाभ दिया गया है प्रार्थी को उसके द्वारा की गई स्थाई सेवाओं के अनुरूप पेंशन प्रदान की गई है । अन्त में निवेदन किया कि प्रार्थी का माँग-पत्र सव्यय खारिज किया जावे ।

प्रार्थी व अप्रार्थी ने शपथ पत्रों में अपने मांग पत्र व जवाब में दिये तथ्यों को दोहराया है । जिरह में प्रार्थी ने यह कहा है कि मैं स्थाई कब हुआ तारीख याद नहीं, 1-3-79 स्थाई होने की तारीख मैंने प्रार्थना पत्र में लिखी थी। अप्रार्थी के गवाह कृष्ण कुमार बत्रा ने जिरह में भी यह बात कही है कि 1-5-73 से 1-3-79 तक प्रार्थी बैंक में अस्थाई नौकरी में था ।

मांग- पत्र के समर्थन में प्रार्थी ने स्वयं का शपथ-पत्र प्रस्तुत किया जिस पर अप्रार्थी प्रतिनिधी द्वारा जिरह की गई तथा अप्रार्थी द्वारा कृष्ण कुमार बत्रा का शपथ- पत्र प्रस्तुत किया गया जिस पर प्रार्थी प्रतिनिधि 7979 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

अप्रार्थी के द्वारा एस.बी.आई. में कर्मचारियों को पेंशन जिन नियमों के तहत दी जाती है वे प्रस्तुत किये गये हैं । एम्पलोईज पेंशन फंड नियम के नियम 2 में यह प्रावधान दिया है कि पेंशन फंड के सदस्य से तात्पर्य यह है कि वह व्यक्ति जो कि बैंक की सेवा में हो और इस फंड में सदस्य के रूप में भर्ती किया गया हो, नियम 7 में यह दिया गया है कि सदस्य कौन बनाया जायेगा , प्रत्येक स्थाई कर्मचारी (पार्ट टाईम कर्मचारी को सम्मिलित करते हुए ) जो कि बैंक की सेवा मेंहो वो उस दिनांक से जिस दिनांक से वह बैंक की सेवा में स्थाई किया जाता है पेंशन फंड का सदस्य होगा और वह इसके तहत की गई शर्तों के अनुसार पेंशन का लाभ प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी होगा । नियम 20 के अवलोकन से यह पाया जाता है कि जिस दिनांक से कर्मचारी को पेंशन फंड का सदस्य बनाया जाता है उस दिनांक से उसकी पेंशन के लिए सेवा की गणना की जायेगी । इस तरह से इन नियमों के तहत बैंक के कर्मचारियों की पेंशन के लिए सेवा की गणना उनके सेवा में स्थाई होने की तिथि से की जायेगी ।

जो रिटायर्ड हुआ उन पर भी लागू होगा । हस्तंगत मामले में इस तरह का मामला नहीं है । अतः यह न्याय दृष्टांत प्रार्थी को कोई सहायता नहीं पहुंचाता है । प्रार्थी की ओर से प्रस्तुत 1999 ( 4 ) एस.एल.आर. पेज 754 लाभ सिंह बनाम स्टेट आफ पंजाब इस मामले के तथ्य बिलकुल भिन्न हैं, यह मागला पंजाब सरकार के राष्ट्रीय एमरजेंसी (कन्सेसन ) रूल्स 1965 के संबंध में है और जिसमें इन्क्रामेंट और सीनीयरटी के लिए मिलेट्री में की गई सेवाकाल को जोड़े जाने का प्रावधान है । वह पेंशन के लिए भी जोड़ने के निर्देश दिये गये यहां इस तरह का मामला नहीं है । इसी तरह से 1999 ( 2 ) एस. एल. आर. पेज 215 हरियाणा राज्य बनाम श्रीराम वाले मामले में हरियाणा सरकार से संबंधित है एवं इसमें कन्टीजेन्ट कर्मचारी के रूप में नियुक्ति हुई थी और वह बाद में स्थाई किया गया स्थाई सेवा के पूर्व कीसेवा को सेवाकाल में नहीं जोड़ा गया इसमें माननीय पंजाब एवं हरियाणा उच्च न्यायालय ने यह माना कि प्रार्थी की सेवा कन्टीजेन्ट एम्पलोई के रूप में नहीं रही थी और कन्टीजेन्ट फंड से भुगतान नहीं हुआ था इसलिये उसकी सेवा को जोड़ने का आदेश दिया था यहां इस तरह का मामला नहीं है और तथ्य भिन्न होने से प्रार्थी को कोई सहायता नहीं पहुंचाता । 2005 ( 1 ) डब्ल्यू.एल.सी. राज. पेज 1 राजस्थान राज्य बनाम फारुक अहमद वाला मामला राजस्थान राज्य सरकार की सेवा से संबंधित है एवं इसमें पेंशन का विवाद नहीं है । अतः प्रार्थी के द्वारा प्रस्तुत न्याय दृष्टांतों के तथ्य हस्तगत मामले से भिन्न होने से इस मामले में लागू नहीं होते हैं और उसे कोई सहायता नहीं पहुंचाते हैं ।

प्रार्थी ऐसी कोई स्थिति नहीं बता पाया है जिससे कि अप्रार्थी संस्थान एस.बी.आई. के किसी कर्मचारी की अस्थाई सेवाकाल को उसकी पेंशन की गणना में जोड़ा गया हो तथा पेंशन नियम के प्रावधानों जोकि पूर्व में विवेचित किये जा चुके हैं के अनुसार स्थिति स्पष्ट है कि प्रार्थी के वर्ग के कर्मचारी की संस्थान में स्थाई होने की तिथि से ही पेंशन के लिए सेवाकाल गणना योग्य होगा अर्थात् स्थाई सेवाकाल ही पेंशन लाभों के लिए व पेंशन के लिए गणना योग्य है । अतः अप्रार्थी ने प्रार्थी के स्थाई सेवाकाल को पेंशन के योग्य मानकर पेंशन के लाभ व पेंशन इत्यादि देने में कोई त्रुटि नहीं की है अतः प्रार्थी कोई राहत पाने का अधिकारी नहीं है ।

अधिनिर्णय

अतः यह अधिनिर्णित किया जाता है कि मुख्य प्रबंन्धक भारतीय स्टेट बैंक स्थानीय प्रधान कार्यालय नई दिल्ली, ( 2 ) सहायक महाप्रबंधक, भारतीय स्टेट बैंक अचल कार्यालय , जयपुर द्वारा श्रमिक श्री गिरधारीदान को उसके द्वारा की गई अस्थाई सेवा अवधि को पेंशन के लिए क्वालीफाईंग सर्विस में नहीं जोड़ना अनुचित एवं अवैध नहीं है । प्रार्थी कोई अनुतोष अप्रार्थीगण से प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी नहीं है ।

इस अधिनिर्णय को प्रकाशनार्थ केन्द्रीय शासन, श्रम मंत्रालय, भारत सरकार को प्रेषित किया जाये ।

के. के. गुप्ता, न्यायाधीश प्रार्थी की ओर से प्रस्तुत न्याय दृष्टांत 1987 एस.सी.सी. ( एल. एंड एस. ) 350 आर.एल. मारवा बनाम भारत संघ वाले मामले में केन्द्रीय सरकार से पेंशनेबल पद पर कर्मचारी को स्वायतशासी संस्थामें लिये जाने पर उसकी सरकार में की गई सेवा को उसके पेंशनकाल में जोड़ने का मामला है और सरकार द्वारा 28-10-84 को इस तरह के मामले में सेवाकाल को जोड़ने का आदेश जारी किया गया जिसके अनुसार 28-10-84 के बाद जो कर्मचारी रिटायर्ड हुए उन्हें इस तरह का लाभ दिये जाने का है । माननीय उच्चतम न्यायालय ने यह सिद्धांत प्रतिपादित किया कि तारीख 28-10-84 के पहले सेवानिवृत्त कर्मचारियों को भी लाभ मिलेगा । इस तरह के तथ्य हस्तगत मामले में नहीं है कि जहां एक ही संस्थान में पहले और बाद के कर्मचारियों की पेंशन की सेवाकाल की गणना में अन्तर किया गया हो । 1995 एस.सी.सी. ( एल. एंड. एस. ) 1365 ए.पी. श्रीवास्तव बनाम भारत संघ विनिश्चय के तथ्य भी हस्तगत मामले के तथ्यों से बिल्कुल भिन्न हैं । इस मामले में केन्द्रीय सरकार के अस्थाई कर्मचारी जिसने 20 साल की नौकरी पूरी कर ली है । वह स्वेच्छिक सेवानिवृत्ति लेता है तो उसे पेंशन का लाभ मिलेगा जब कि जनहित में उसे अनिवार्य सेवानिवृत्ति दी गई हो तो उस कर्मचारी को यह लाभ नहीं दिया जायेगा इसको माननीय उच्चतम न्यायालय ने न्यायोचित नहीं बताया और जो लाभ स्वेच्छिक सेवानिवृत्ति कर्मचारी कोमिलते थे वही अनिवार्य सेवानिवृत्त के कर्मचारी को मिलने चाहिये अतः यह न्याय दृष्टांत भी प्रार्थी को कोई सहायता नहीं पहुंचाता । प्रार्थी की ओर से प्रस्तुत न्याय दृष्टांत 1996 एस.सी.सी. (एल. एंड. एस. ) 646 एम.सी. धींगड़ा बनाम भारत संघ वाले मामले में केन्द्रीय सरकार की राज्य सरकार में व राज्य सरकार की केन्द्रीय सरकार में की गई पूर्व की सेवा को पेंशन के लिए सेवाकाल में जोड़ने के लिए 31-3-82 को सर्कुलर जारी किया गया और जिस दिनांक को यह सर्कुलर जारी किया गया उस दिनांक से वह उसके बाद में सेवानिवृत्त होने वाले कर्मचारियों पर यह लागू होने का आदेश दिया गया इसमें माननीय उच्चतम न्यायालय ने यह कहा है क़ि 31-3-82 के पहले 7980

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( 1) ] नई दिल्ली, 24 जून, 2005

AWARD

1. The Central Government , in the Ministry of Labour, vide its Order No L- 41011 / 06/ 95 - IR- ( BI ) dated 23-08-96 , has referred the following industrial dispute to this tribunal for adjudication :

का. आ. 39.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार नार्दन रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई.डी.- 83/1996 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-06-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

"Whether the action of the management of AEΝ .. Northern Railway ( H.Q. ), Tundla in terminating the services of Shri Vijender Singh is legal and justified? If not. to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to ? "

[सं. एल-41011/06/1995- आईआर ( बी-1 ) ]

अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 24th June , 2005

S.O. 2539. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( I.D, No. 83 / 1996) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court New Delhi now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Northern Railway and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 23-06-2005 .

2. Brief facts as culled from the record are that the workman Vijender Singh was appointed as Khalasi with the management on 6-6-83 and he was removed from service contrary to the provisions contained in Section 25-F, G and H of the I.D. Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) . The claimant is unemployed since the removal ofhis services . He has already obtained temporary status of account of having worked for 120 days continuously as such he is entitled to pay / salary like regular workman and the workman has been regularly approaching officers of the management to obtain work but he has not been given any job . He, therefore , claims reinstatement with full back wages with cost and compensation .

[No. L - 41011/06 / 1995 - JR (B -I) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM - LABOUR COURT, NEW DELHI

3. Case was contestedby filing reply by the management Northern Railway denying claim of the workman that he worked on the job of Khalasi as claimed, it is stated that he was not appointed as Khalasi on 6-6-83 nor he was appointed as a causal worker from the said date and as such question of removal from the service does not arise . He has never worked with the management nor he was appointed and as such he has no right to receive any pay, salary wages .

PRESIDING OFFICER : Shri S.S.Bal

I.D. No. 83/96

In the matter of dispute between:

Shri Vijender Singh , Through Adhyaksh .

R.C.S.R.M.S..

2/236 , Namner, Agra -282001.

....Workman

4. Evidence was adduced on behalf of the workman by way of filing affidavit and Shri Krishan Murari , Secretary of the Union Office was examined as WW1 and management evidence was initially closed vide order dated 19-1-98 and thereafter case was fixed for evidence and cross - examination of the case was somehow fixed for evidence of the management and an affidavitof Shri Lalit Kumar Sachdev was taken on record subject to just exceptions and he was examined as MW1 and his statement was recorded as MW1.

Versus

Α.Ε.Ν.. Northern Railway, (Head Quarter) . Tundla ( Firozabad)

5. Case was adjourned for arguments for number of time. Mr. Nanda A/R for the management filed written submissions but none appeared on behalf of the workman and the case was posted for orders and explanation if any on 14-03-05 .

....Management

APPEARANCES :

None for the Workman ,

Shri H.L. Nanda A/R for the management along with

Shri Lalit Kumar Sachdeva.

6. Mr. Krishan Murari Sharma was examined as WW1 in evidence of workman . He stated that services ofthe workman were dispensed with illegally on 16-1-89 and in his affidavit he affirmed the averments made in the claim statement of the claimant- workman. In his [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

cross -examination he (Mr. Krishan Murari Sharma ) stated that the workman was employed on 6-6-83 and worked with the management upto the year 1990 which is contrary to his averments made in his affidavit Ex . WW1 / 1 as mentioned above and contrary to the claim of workman.

7. On the contrary the management vide order dated 1-12-97 was allowed adjournment subject to payment of cost of Rs . 150/ - to adduce evidence and case was adjourned to 19-1-98 when no evidence on behalf of the management was present and cost was also not paid by the management . Hence , the evidence of the management was closed by my ld . predecessor Shri Ganpati Sharma the then CGIT, New Delhi on 19-1-98 . Thereafter , case was adjourned for evidence of the workman and affidavit was filed on behalf of the workman after numerous opportunities on 16-3-98 . Workman's evidence was recorded on 24-4-2000 and thereafter case was fixed for arguments for many hearings and on 6-8-2004 Mr. Nanda A/R for the management requested to place on record affidavit of Assistant Engineer Sh. Lalit Kumar in evidence of the management which were taken on record subject to just exception however, it was not disclosed that the evidence of the management was already closed vide order dated 19-1-98 . The affidavit in evidence of Sh. Lalit Kumar and statement of Sh . Lalit Kumar in evidence of the management cannot be read into evidence as evidence of the management had already been closed vide my 1d. predecessor order dated 19-1-98 as mentioned above and the said order has not yet been set aside and the said order is still operative.

8. Thus according to the workman he was appointed as Gangman ( Khalasi ) on 6-6-83 and his services were dispensed with on 6-10-83 while according to his witness WWI his services were dispensed with on 16-1-89 as stated in his affidavit Ex . WW1 / A but in his cross - examination he stated that his services were dispensed with during the year 1990. Thus there is a discrepancy between the averment made in the claim statement about the dispensing with services of the workman and in the statement and cross - examination of WWI in as much as according to the workman his services were dispensed with on 6-10-83 while according to WW1 his services were dispensed with either on 16-1-89 as stated in his affidavit or during the year 1990 as stated in cross - examination . On the other hand management has denied that workman was ever engaged or appointed as Khalasi -Gangman or he worked for 120 days as claimed. No evidence or material has been placed by the workman showing that he was appointed as Khalasi on 6-6-83 and that he worked upto 6-10-83 and thereafter his services were illegally terminated. In my viewworkman has failed to prove his claim in this regard. that he was appointed as Khalasi on 6-6-83 and his

7981

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 16, 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

services were illegally terminated as claimed by him . Therefore , in the absence of any evidence action of the management cannot be held to be illegal but the same is justified and legal . Hence workman is not entitled to any relief. Reference is accordingly answered and Award is hereby passed.

Dated: 24-05-2005

S. S. BAL, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 24 जून , 2005

का. आ. 2540.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बैंक ऑफ मदुरा के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई.डी. सं. 84/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-06-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/69/94- आईआर ( बी- I ) ] अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 24th June, 2005

S.O. 2540.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( I.D. No. 84/ 2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court , New Delhi now as shown in the Annexure . in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Bank of Madura and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 23-06-2005.

[No. L - 12012/69/ 94 - IR ( B - I ) ] AJAY KUMAR , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT, NEWDELHI

Presiding Officer : Shri S.S.Bal I.D. No. 84/2002

Workman In the matter of dispute between : Smt . Meena W/ o . Babli , R/ o House No. 15. NDMC Quarters , Harijan Basti , Mandir Marg . Punchkuian Road. New Delhi 7982

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 16 , 2005 /ASADHA 25 , 1927

Versus

The Asstt . General Manager ,

Bank ofMadura ,

(Amalgamated with M/s . I.C.I.C.I. Bank )

A- 9, Cannaught Place , New Delhi

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

.....Management

Appearances : Workman in person.

AWARD

The Central Government in the Ministry of Labour . vide its Order No L - 12012/69/ 1994 - IR ( B - I ) dated 23-10-2002 . has referred the following industrial dispute to this tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of Bank Madura . (Now amalgamated with I.C.I.C.I. Bank), in not absorbing Smt . Meena as a regular employee is justified or not? If not , what relief the applicant concerned is entitled to and from which date? " 2. Brief stated facts of the case as called from the statement of claim filed on behalf of the workman are that she was appointed for the job of sweeper - cum - scavenger or in the year 1979 and was getting salary of Rs . 180/ - per month for performing thejob of sweeper and Rs . 50/- PM in addition she was getting for performing the job of scavenger. Her performence was upto the mark and there was no complaint either regarding her work and behavior. She represented to the management for revision of her salary vide representation dated 1-11-86 copy of which is Ex . WW1 / 1 as her salary was very meager . She again made representation for enhancement of her salary vide representation dated 7-8-92 copy ofwhich is Ex . WW1/2 . It is further averred that the workman was performing duty of full time post and was getting salary month by month . The salary was paid to her was less than minimum wages and the management did not regularise her services though she has been working with the management since 1979 uninterruptedly . As such she was entitled to be regularised from the date of her appointed with consequential the benefits. The action of the management is illegal , unjust and it is nothing but unfair labour practice which is prohibited under section 25 - F read with schedule V of the I.D. Act . The management has refused to consider her just and genuine demand therefore , she through her union Delhi Office and Establishment Union C - 4 , B/70 , Pocket 13 , Janakpuri , approached the Appropriate Govt . which initially declined to refer the dispute for adjudication for never in pursuance of the directions of the Delhi High Court in Writ No. 3187/96 on 13-12-2001 , the Appropriate Government made above said reference .

3. Notices were sent to Bank of Madura now amalgamated with I.C.I.C.I. Bank, A-9 , Cannaught Place, New Delhi twice but none for the respondent -management appeared and the management was proceeded exparte on 16-1-2005 . None appeared on behalf of I. C.I.C.I Bank despite notice sent through past . Hence I.C.I.C.I. Bank with which the Bank of Madura was amalgamated was proceeded exparte on 18-10-2004. Meena workman claimant filed her affidavit Ex . WW1 / 1 and made statement to prove representation given to Bank of Madura Ex . WW1 / 1 and 2 for enhancement of salary to Assistant General Manager, Bank ofMadura and Chairman of Bank ofMadura through Bank Manager , Bank of Madura and to Chairman of Bank ofMadura Ex . WW1/ 1 photo copy ofjudgment .

M 4. From the facts narrated in the claim statement it comes out that the claimant Mrs. Meena was initially engaged / appointed as sweeper - cum - scavenger during the D year 1979 and she was given the meager salary ofRs . 250/- PM (Rs. 180/- of the job of sweeping and she was performing the job of scavenging and getting Rs . 70/- for this job . Thus my enquiry further reveal that the I.C.I.C.I. Bank at Connaught Place where earlier the Bank of Madura existed is not allowing the workman to perform her duties as alleged nor they are absorbing her. She has been working in the earlierBank of Madura which is proved from the averments made in her affidavit filed in her evidence ..

5.My enquiry further revealed that the amalgamated bank I.C.I.C.I. Bank branch is not allowing the claimant workmanto perform her duties at the E-9 , Connaught Place branch where the earlier branch of Madura Bank was functioning .To my mind on amalgamation of the Madura Bank with the I.C.I.C.I. Bank the amalgamated bank is under obligation to allow Mrs. Meena Claimant to function as sweeper - cum - scavenger as claimed as the amalgamated Bank has come into the shoe of the earlier bank and it is proved on record that the claimant was uninterruptedly functioning as Sweeper - cum- scavenger since the year 1979 . Her not allowing to function as claimed by her the amalgamated successor bank or branch of the bank amounts to retrenchment of the claimant in terms of section 2(oo) I (b) of the I.D. Act , as she has claimed to have worked for more than 240 days in cach year, her service cannot be dispensed with without notice or notice pay or compensation in lieu of notice. There is no evidence/ Material to show that she has not been issued notice of termination and paid compensation in lieu of notice or retrenchment compensation which is violation of Section. 25-F of the I.D. Act . Thus the I.C.I.C.I. Bank which is a successor bank is under obligation to discharge the liability of the previous bank which has since been amalgamated within respondent, bank and the workman is entitled to reinstatement . It is , therefore, ordered that the respondent bank is directed to reinstate/ absorb the claimant workman Smt . Meena as sweeper w.e.f. the date she was not allowed to work by the amalgamated Bank of the I.C.I.C.I. Bank with full back wages . It is further ordered that the claimant is entitled to minimum wages as prescribed under the minimum wages Act and to consider claim of the claimant workman for regularisation as sweeper favourably and if possible she be regularised as she has been working with previous bank of Madura amalgamated with the respondent 7983 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 16 , 2005/आषाढ़ 25, 1927

के प्रयोजनों के लिए तत्काल प्रभाव से छः मास की कालावधि के लिए लोक उपयोगी सेवा घोषित करती है ।

since 1979 uninterruptedly. Refernce is accordingly answered . Award is hereby passed . File be consinged to record room.

[सं. एस-11017/16/97- आईआर ( पी.एल. ) ] Dated26-5-2005

जे. पी. पति, संयुक्त सचिव S.S. BAL, PresidingOfficer

New Delhi , the 7th July, 2005

नई दिल्ली, 7 जुलाई, 2005

S.O. 2541.- Whereas the Central Government is satisfied that the public interest requires that the services in the Security Paper Mill , Hosangabad which is covered by item 21 of the First Schedule to the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 947 ) , should be declared to be a public utility service for the purposes of the said Act .

का. आ. 2541.- केन्द्रीय सरकार संतुष्ट है कि लोकहित में ऐसा अपेक्षित है कि सिक्युरिटी पेपर मिल , होशंगाबाद में सेवाओं को जिसे औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की प्रथम अनुसूची की प्रविष्टि 21 के अन्तर्गत निर्दिष्ट किया गया है, उक्त अधिनियम के प्रयोजनों के लिए लोक उपयोगी सेवाएं घोषित किया जाना चाहिए ।

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- clause (vi) of clause ( n) of Section 2 of the Indusrial Disputes Act , 1947 , the Central Government hereby declares with immediate effect the said industry to be a public utility service for the purpose of the said Act for a period of six months.

अतः अब, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 2 के खण्ड ( ढ़ ) के उप- खण्ड ( 6 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त उद्योग को उक्त अधिनियम

[No. S - 11017/16 /97 - IR (PL) ] J.P. PATI , Jt . Secy.

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