This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

रजिस्ट्रीसं० डी० एल० ( एन ) 04/0007/2003-05

REGD. NO . D. L. (N) 04/0907/2003- भारतको राजपत्र The Gazette of India

प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक

WEEKLY

सं० 36]

नई दिल्ली, अगस्त28 सितम्बर 3 , 2005 , शनिवार /भाद 6- भाद्र 12, 1927

No. 36 ] NEW DELHI , AUGUST 28 SEPTEMBER 3, 2005 , SATURDAY/BHADRA 6- BHADRA 12 , 1927 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 maybe 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)

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

वित्त मंत्रालय (राजस्वविभाग )

(Department & Revenue)

आदेश

ORDER

नई दिल्ली, 12 अगस्त, 2005

New Delhi , the 12th August, 2005

STAMPS

का० आ० 3093. भारतीय स्टाम्प अधिनियम, 1899 (1899 का2) की धारा 9 की उप - धारा ( i ) के खण्ड (ख ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार एत‌द्वारा आन्ध्र बैंक, हैदराबाद को मात्र बीस लाख रुपये का समेकित स्टाम्प शुल्क अदा करने की अनुमति प्रदान करती है , जो उक्त बैंक द्वारा जारी किए जाने वाले मात्र दो सौ करोड़ रुपए के समग्र मूल्य के प्रत्येक दस- दस लाख रुपये के असुरक्षित, गैर- परिवर्तनीय विमोच्य गौण ऋण बन्धपत्रों ( ई श्रृंखला- पांचवाँ निर्गम ) पर स्टाम्प शुल्क के कारण प्रभार्य है ।

S.O. 3093.- In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) of Sub -section ( 1 ) of Section 9 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of 1899), the Central Government hereby permits Andhra Bank, Hyderabad to pay consolidated stamp duty of rupees twenty lakh only on account of the stamp duty on Unsecured Non- Convertible Redeemable Subordinated Debt Bonds ( ' E' Series- Fifth Issue) of rupees ten lakh each aggregating to rupees two hundred crore only, to be issued by the said Bank .

[सं. 27/ 2005 - स्टाम्प/फा. सं. 33/4/2005-बि.क. ]

[No. 27/2005 - STAMP/F. No. 33/4/2005 -ST] आर. जी. छाबड़ा, अवर सचिव

R.G. CHHABRA, Under Secy.

2498 GI/ 2005

(9751) [PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12 , 1927

-9752

केन्द्रीय त्यक्ष करबोर्ड नई दिल्ली, 17 अगस्त, 2005

(आयकर )

inthe form ofjewellery, furniture etc. ) for any period during the previous years relevant to the assessment years mentioned above other wise 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. 3094.-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 " विक्टोरिया टेकनिकल इंस्टीट्यूट, 765, अन्ना सलै, चेन्नई -600002" को कर निर्धारण वर्ष 2002-2003 से2004-2005 तक के लिए निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुए उक्तउपखंड 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 the 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 a charitable organisation . [Notification No. 191 /2005 /F. No. 197/29 /2005 - ITA- 1 ] DEEPAK GARG, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 17 अगस्त, 2005 (आयकर )

( 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;

का.आ. 3095.-आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 ( 1961 का 43 ) की धारा 10 के खंड ( 227 ) के उपखंड ( iv ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार एतद्वारा " इंडियन मर्चेंटस चैम्बर, मुम्बई" को कर- निर्धारण वर्ष 1998-1999 से 2000-2001 तक के लिए निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुए उक्त उपखंड के प्रयोजनार्थ अधिसूचित करती है, अर्थात्: -

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

(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;

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

(v ) विघटन की स्थिति में इसकी अतिरिक्त राशियाँ और परिसम्पतियाँ धर्मार्थ संगठन को दे दी जाएंगी ।

[अधिसूचना सं. 191 /2005/फा. सं. 197/ 29/2005- आयकर नि. - 1 ] दीपक गर्ग, अवर सचिव

( ii ) कर निर्धारिती उपर्युक्त कर निर्धारण वर्षों से संगत पूर्ववतीं 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;

CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES New Delhi , the 17th August , 2005 (INCOME TAX)

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

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

S.O. 3094. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-clause (iv) of clause (23C) of Section 10 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961 ), the Central Government hereby notifics the " Victoria Technical Institute, 765, Anna Salai , Chennai -600002 " for the purpose of the said sub- clause for the assessment vear 2002-2003 to 2004-2005 subject to the following conditions , namely :-

(v) विघटन की स्थिति में इसकी अतिरिक्त राशियाँ और परिसम्पतियाँ धर्मार्थ संगठन को दे दी जाएंगी ।

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

[अधिसूचना सं. 192/2005/फा.सं . 197/25/2002- आयकर नि. - 1 ]

दीपक गर्ग , अवर सचिव (ii) the assessee will not invest or deposit its fund (other thanvoluntary contributions received and maintained 9753

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 17th August , 2005

(INCOME TAX)

S.O. 3095.- In exercise of the powers conferred by sub -clause ( iv) of clause (23C) of Section 10 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961 ) , the Central Government hereby notifies the " Inidan Merchants Chamber, Mumbai " for the purpose of the said sub-clause for the assessment year 1998-1999 to 2000-2001 subject to the following .conditions , namely:-

(1) 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 thanvoluntary contributions received and maintained in the form ofjewellery, 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) ofSection 11;

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

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

[Notification No. 192/2005 /F. No. 197/25/2002 -ITA- I ] DEEPAK GARG, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2005

(आयकर)

का.आ. 3096.-सर्वसाधारण की जानकारी के लिए एतद्वारा यह अधिसूचित किया जाता है कि केन्द्रीय सरकार द्वारा आयकर नियमावली, 1962के नियम 6 के साथ पठित आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( ii ) के प्रयोजनार्थ ' विश्वविद्यालय ' की श्रेणी के अन्तर्गत दिनांक 1-4-2004 से दिनांक 31-3-2007 तक की अवधि के लिए बनारस हिन्दू यूनिवर्सिटी, वाराणसी -221005 ( उत्तर प्रदेश ) , जो अंशतः अनुसंधान कार्य- कलापों में कार्यरत है, (और न कि अनुसंधान के लिए एकमात्र मौजूद ' वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान संघ ' के रूप में है ) , को निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन अनुमोदित किया गया है:-

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

(ii ) वित्तीय वर्षों के प्रत्येक वर्ष के लिए जिसके लिए यह 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 आय कर विवरणी दाखिल करने की नियत तारीख कोअथवा 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 उपधारा (1 ) के अन्तर्गत अनुमोदित प्रदान किया गया है ।

(iii) यह संगठन उपर्युक्त पैरा ( ii ) में सदर्भित आय एवं ब्वय खाते के साथ लेखा परीक्षक से प्राप्त एक प्रमाण- पत्र भी संलग्न करेगा:-

(क) जिसमें संगठन द्वारा वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए प्राप्त कीगई उस राशि का उल्लेख किया गया हो, जिसके लिए दानकर्ता धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) खंड ( 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. 193/2005/फा.सं. 203/58/2004- आयकर नि.- II ] निधिसिंह , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 18tin August, 2005 (INCOME TAX)

S.O. 3096. It is hereby notified for general information that the organization Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi - 221 005 (Uttar Pradesh) 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 period from 1-4-2004 to 31-3-2007 under the category, University, partly engaged in research activities (and not as a ' scientific research association' existing solely for research) subject to the following conditions :

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

(ii) For each of the financial years for whichthe approval is being given, the approved organization shall submit a copy of its audited Income and Expenditure account in respect ofthe research activities for which it has been approved under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 35 of Income Tax Act, 1961 te the Commissioner of Income-tax or Director of Income -tax (Exemptions) having jurisdiction, on or before the due date of filing ofreturn 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 toin paragraph ( ii ) above , a certificate from the auditor:-

(a) specifying the amount received by the organization for scientific research in respect of which the donors a re eligible to claim deduction under clause ( i ) of sub -section ( 1 ) ofSection 35 9754

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II - SEC . 3 ( ii) ] (b) certifying that the expenditure incurred was for scientific research .

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 : --

[Notification No. 193/2005/F. No. 203 /58/2004 - ITA - II ] NIDHI SINGH, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2005

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

(आयकर)

(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.

का.आ. 3097.- सर्वसाधारण की जानकारी के लिए एतद्वारा यह अधिसूचित किया जाता है कि केन्द्रीय सरकार द्वारा आयकर नियमावली, 1962के नियम 6 के साथ पठित आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( ii ) के प्रयोजनार्थ ' विश्वविद्यालय कालेज अथवा अन्य संस्था' की श्रेणी के अन्तर्गत दिनांक1-4-2003 से दिनांक 31-3-2006 तक की अवधि के लिए दि वॉलेंटरी हेल्थ सर्विसिस, टी.टी.वी.आई. पोस्ट, ( एडयार ), चेन्नई-600113 , जो अंशतः अनुसंधान कार्य- कलापों में कार्यरत है , ( और न कि अनुसंधान केलिए एक मात्र मौजूद ' वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान संघ ' के रूप में है ) , को निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन अनुमोदित किया गया है:-

(iii) The approved organization shall also enclose with the Income and Expenditure account referred to in paragraph ( ii ) above , a certificate from the auditor: - ( i) अनुमोदित संगठन अपने अनुसंधान कार्य- कलापों के लिए अलग खाते रखेगा ।

(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 ) ofSection 35.

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

[Notification No. 194/2005 /F. No. 203/44/ 2004 - ITA- II ] NIDHI SINGH, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 22 अगस्त , 2005 (आयकर)

(ii ) वित्तीय वर्षों के प्रत्येक वर्ष के लिए जिसके लिए यह अनुमोदन प्रदान किया जा रहा है , अनुदित संगठन अनुसंधान कार्य- कलापों के संबंध में लेखा पसत पाय एवं व्यय खाते की एक प्रति इसके क्षेत्राधिकार वाले यह आयुक्त/आयकर निदेशक ( छूट ) को आय कर विवरण दाखल करने की नियत तारीख कोअथवा 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, 19 की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अन्तर्गत अनुमोदित प्रदान केया गया है ।

(iii ) यह संगठन उपर्युक्त पैरा ( ii ) में सा र्भित आय एवं व्यय खाते के साथलेखा परीक्षकसे प्राप्त एक प्रमाण- पत्र भी संलग्न करेगा:-

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

का.आ. 3098.- सर्वसाधारण की जानकारी के लिए एतद्वारा यह अधिसूचित किया जाता है कि केन्द्रीय सरकार द्वारा आयकर नियमावली, 1962.के नियम 6 के साथ पठित आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( ii ) के प्रयोजनार्थ ' विश्वविद्यालय कॉलेज अथवा अन्य संस्था' की श्रेणी के अन्तर्गत दिनांक 1-4-2001 से दिनांक 31-3-2004 तक की अवधि के लिए हिमालयन संस्थान अस्पताल न्यास , जॉली ग्रान्ट देहरादून-248140 जो अंशतः अनुसंधान कार्य- कलापों में कार्यरत है, ( और न कि अनुसंधान के लिए एक मात्र मौजूद ' वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान संघ ' के रूप में है ) , को निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन अनुमोदित किया गया है :-

[अधिसूचना सं. 194/2005/फा.सं. 203/44/2004- भायकर नि.- II ] निधिसिंह, अवर सचिव (i) अनुमोदित संगठन अपने अनुसंधान कार्य- कलापों के लिए अलग खाते रखेगा ।

New Delhi , the 18th August, 2005 (INCOME TAX)

S.O. 3097. It is hereby notified for general information that the organization The Voluntary Health Services , T.T.T.L. Post (Adyar) , Chennai -600 113 has been approved by the Central Government for the purposes of clause ( ii ) of sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 35 o f the Income Tax Act, 1961 , read with rule 6 of the Income Tax Rules , 1962 for the period from 1-4-2003 to 31-3-20 106 under the

( ii ) वित्तीय वर्षों के प्रत्येक वर्ष के लिए जिसके लिए यह 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 अथवा आयकर निदेशक ( छूट ) को आय कर 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, 9755 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

(आर्थिक कार्य विभाग )

(बैंकिंग प्रभाग )

जिसके लिए इसे आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अन्तर्गत अनुमोदित प्रदान किया गया है ।

नई दिल्ली, 25 अगस्त, 2005

(iii ) यह संगठन उपर्युक्त पैरा ( ii ) में सदर्भित आय एवं व्यय खाते के साथ लेखा परीक्षक से प्राप्त एक प्रमाण पत्र भी संलग्न करेगा:-

का.आ. 3099.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा (संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनोंके लिए प्रयोग ) नियम , 1976 के नियम 10 के उप नियम (4 ) केअनुसरण में, संलग्न अनुबंध में निम्नलिखित बैंकों/वित्तीय संस्थाओं केसूचीबद्ध कार्यालयों/शाखाओं को, जिनके 80 % से अधिक कर्मचारियों ने हिन्दी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, अधूिसचित करती है:-

कार्यालयों/ (ख) जिसमें यह प्रमाणित किया गया हो कि किया गया व्यय वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए ही था ।

शाखाओं की संख्या

क्रम. बैंक का नाम सं.

[अधिसूचना सं. 195/2005/फा.सं. 203/ 15/2005- आयकर नि.- II ]

01 दीपक गर्ग , अवर सचिव

1. स्टेट बैंक ऑफ बीकानेर एंड जयपुर

10 New Delhi , the 22nd August, 2005

2. भारती स्टेट बैंक

(INCOME TAX)

3. युनाइटेड बैंक ऑफ इंडिया

4. यूनियन बैंक आफ इंडिया

5. केनरा बैंक

120

कुल

[फा. सं. 11016/7 /2005-हिन्दी]

रमेशबाबू अणियेरी , संयुक्त निदेशक ( राजभाषा) स्टेट बैंक ऑफ बीकानेर एण्डजयपुर

1. सीमलवाड़ा

S.O. 3098. It is hereby notified for general information that the organization Himalayan Institute Hospital Trust , Jolly Grant , Dehradun- 248140 (Uttranchal) 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 period from 1-4-2001 to 31-3-2004 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 :-

पता:

सीमलवाड़ा

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

जिला-बांसवाड़ा

(राजस्थान)

भारतीय स्टेट बैंक

1. भारतीय स्टेट बैंक ,

गंगा नगर,

मेरठ-250002

2. भारतीय स्टेट बैंक,

(ii, Foreach ofthe 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 offiling ofreturn of income or within 90 days from the date of this notification, whichever expires later.

कंकरखेडा, मेरठ-250001

3. भारतीय स्टेट बैंक,

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

वाणिज्यिकशाखा,

मेरठ-250001

4. भारतीय स्टेट बैंक,

वर्द्धमान एकेडेमी,

मेरठ-250002

(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 ) ofsub- section ( 1 ) ofSection 35;

5. भारतीय स्टेट बैंक,

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

राजेन्द्रनगर,

साहिबाबाद,

[Notification No. 195/2005 /F. No. 203/ 15/ 2005 -ІТА- II] DEEPAK GARG, Under Secy.

जिला- गाजियाबाद-201005 9756

6. भारतीय स्टेट बैंक, एन.ई.पी. जैड, फैज- II , नोएडा, जिला- गौतमबुद्ध नगर-201305 7. भारतीय स्टेट बैंक , वाणिज्यिकशाखा, सेक्टर-18, नोएडा, जिला- गौतमबुद्धनगर -201305 8. भारतीय स्टेट बैंक, गढ़मुक्तेश्वर, जिला-गाजियाबाद-245402

9. भारतीय स्टेट बैंक, एम.आई.सी.आर. , चैक प्रोसेसिंग केन्द्र, 4-कान्वेन्ट रोड, देहरादून- ( उत्तरांचल) पिन-248001

10. भारतीय स्टेट बैंक, महाबलेश्वर शाखा, जिला-सातारा, महाराष्ट्र-412 806

यूनाइटेड बैंकऑफ इंडिया

1. युनाइटेड बैंक ऑफ इंडिया , प्रधान कार्यालय, 11 , हेमंत बसु सरणी, कोलकाता-700001

यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया

1. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, शंकर विहार शाखा, 2-3 , शंकर विहार शापिंग काम्पलेक्स, शंकर विहार, नईदिल्ली-110010

2. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, द्वाराका शाखा, प्लाट नं. 13, बंसल प्लाजा, द्वारका, सेक्टर-6, नईदिल्ली-110045

3. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, अर्मापुरशाखा, अर्मापुर आडिनेन्सफैक्टरी, अर्मापुर, कानपुर-208009

4. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, प्रीतम नगर शाखा, बाल मित्र जू. हाई स्कूल, धूमन गंज, इलाहाबाद-211004

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

5. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, रेड ईगल आर्मी हेडक्वार्टर शाखा , स्टेनली रोड , पोस्ट कैवेलटी लाइन्स, इलाहाबाद -211004

6. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया , कृष्णा नगर शाखा, जमुना देवी बालिका विद्यालय, कृष्णा नगर, कानपुर-208007

7 7. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, आगरा विकास प्राधिकरण शाखा, जयपुर हाऊस, आगरा-282010

8. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया , बी.आर.बी. कॉलेज शाखा, मोहनपुर रोड, समस्तीपुर, जिला-समस्तीपुर, बिहार-848101

9. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, बहादुरपुर हाऊसिंग कॉलोनी शाखा, भूतनाथ रोड, कमला मार्केट , कंकडबाग, पटना-800020

10. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, कटिहार शाखा, विनोदपुर रोड, कटिहार, बिहार-854105

11. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, पौड़ीशाखा, श्रीनगर रोड, पौडी, उत्तरांचल , पिनकोड-246001

12. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, नोडल क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय , कोलकाता, चित्रकूट बिल्डिंग , तीसरा तल, 230ए, आ.ज. चन्द्र बोस रोड, कोलकाता-700 020

13. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, विक्रमशिला ज्ञान मंदिर, 'सरोजनी नगर शाखा, कानपुर रोड, लखनऊ -226008 उत्तर प्रदेश

14. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, खुरदा शाखा, सिविल कोर्ट के सामने, मेन रोड, खुरदा-752 055 ओड़िशा [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

15. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, केउँझर शाखा, जगन्नाथ मार्केट कॉम्पलेक्स, गांधी चौक के पास , केउँसर-758001 ओड़िशा

16. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, अकबरपुर शाखा, अब्दुल्लापुर दोस्तपुर रोड, (नेशनल हार्डवेयर एंव सेनेटरी सेंटर के पास ) ; शहजादपुर, अकबरपुर, जिला अंबेडकरनगर-224122

9757

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

मनमाड़-423 104 जिला: नासिक, महाराष्ट्र

24. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, सेवा शाखा, विशाखापट्टणम, डोर नं. 10-50, 14/3 ( 3 ) , प्रथम तल, वाल्टेयर मेन रोड, विशाखपट्टणम-03 , आन्ध्र प्रदेश

25. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, सिरिपुरम शाखा, विशाखापट्टणम, डोर नं. 10-50, 14/3( 3 ) , प्रथम तल, वाल्टेयर मेन रोड, विशाखापट्टणम-03 , आन्ध्र प्रदेश

केनरा बैंक

17. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, धार शाखा, 2, त्रिमूर्ति नगर, धार , मध्य प्रदेश-454001

18. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, अन्नुपूर्णा शाखा, 726, उषानगर एक्सटेंशन , बजाज टॉवर अन्नपर्णा रोड, इंदौर, मध्य प्रदेश -452009

19. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, श्रीनिवासम्काम्प्लेक्स शाखा, तिरूपति-517 501 , जिला चित्तुर, ( आन्ध प्रदेश )

20. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, बोडकदेव शाखा, यूजी -6 , गॅलॅक्सी कॉम्पलेक्स, ग्रंड भगत्रती होटल के पीछे , बोडकदेव, अहमदाबाद -380 054 21. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, अन्नदा कॉलेज शाखा, अन्नदा चौक, कचहरी रोड, हजारीबाग , ( झारखण्ड) पिन-825301

22. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, बीएस सिटी कॉलेज शाखा, सेक्टर- VI , सेन्टर मार्केट, बोकारो स्टील सिटी, बोकारो ( झारखण्ड) पिन-827006

23. यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, मनमाड शाखा, दुर्गा कॉम्पलेक्स, पहली मंजिल , आजाद रोड,

1. केनरा बैंक, नन्दयाल शाखा , 25/516ए, श्रीनिवासनगर, कर्नूल जिला, नन्दयाल-518 501 आंध्र प्रदेश, कर्नूल

2. केनरा बैंक, पैलकुर्ति शांखा , काटामुरू मंडल, पैलकुर्ति-518464 आन्ध्र प्रदेश, कर्नूल

3.केनरा बैंक, वर्कर शाखा, वर्कर-518643 आन्ध्र प्रदेश, कर्नूल

4. केनरा बैंक, आकुलवारिघानापुर शाखा, एच सं. 12/176, सिनेमा थियेटर के पीछे, पोस्ट एटुरूनगरम, अकुलवारिघानापुर -506 165 आन्ध्र प्रदेश, वारंगल

'5. केनरा बैंक, गुडिवाडाशाखा, एनटीआर स्टेडियम कॉम्पलेक्स, गुडिवाडा-521 301 आन्ध्र प्रदेश, कृष्णा

6. केनरा बैंक, मसाई पेट शाखा, 1-44, नेशनल हाईवे -7 मसाईपेट -502335 आंध्र प्रदेश, मेडक 9758

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

7. केनरा बैंक,

शिवाजीनगर शाखा,

एस सं. 10/1/64-63-65

शिवाजीनगर,

निजामाबाद-503 001

आंन्ध्र प्रदेश , निजामाबाद

8. केनरा बैंक,

पोचम्पल्ली शाखा,

एच सं. 5-31 , पोचम्पल्ली-508 284 आंध्र प्रदेश नलगोंडा

9. केनरा बैंक

नारयणपेट शाखा,

1-1-5, हाई स्कूल रोड, चौरास्ता बाजार, नारायणपेट-509 210

आंध्र प्रदेश महबूबनगर

10. केनरा बैंक

तिरूमला शाखा,

एस एम सी 257 ए एंड बी, तिरूमला हिल्स,

तिरूमला-517 504

11. केनरा बैंक

चन्द्रमौलीनगर, गुंटूर शाखा,

मयूरी होम्स,

चन्द्रमौलीनगर, रिंग रोड,

गुन्दूर-522007

12. केनरा बैंक

बापट्ला शाखा, रेलवे स्टेशन के पास, बापट्ला-522 101

आंध प्रदेश, गुंटूर

13. केनरा बैंक,

वेणुगोपालनगर शाखा,

श्रीनिवासकॉम्पलेक्स,

मेन रोड, वेणुगोपालनगर,

गुंटूर-4

14. केनरा बैंक,

नागुलुवरम शाखा

पेडकंचर्ला से नागुलुवरम-522649 आंध प्रदेश, गुंटूर

15. केनरा बैंक

पेदकाकानि शाखा, नागलक्ष्मी बिल्डिग

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] जंक्शन के पास , मेन रोड

पेदकाकानि-522 509

आंध्र प्रदेश, गुंटूर

16. केनरा बैंक

सूर्यापेट शाखा

1-4-81 , अलंकार टाकीज रोड़

सेर्यापेट-508 214

आंध्र प्रदेश , नल्गोंडा

17. केनरा बैंक

ए आर एम शाखा

5-9-22/1/4 सी एण्ड 4 डी

दमयंती चेंबर्स

आदर्श नगर

हैदराबाद

18. केनरा बैंक

गुंटूर मुख्य शाखां

पी बी 136, हिन्दूकालेज

हाई स्कूल कैंपस गाँधी पार्क के सामने

गुंटूर-522 003

19. केनरा बैंक

एचएसई शाखा

डी नं. 3-6-275, एचएसई बिल्डिंग

हैदराबाद

20. केनरा बैंक

एस आर नगर शाखा

51/3 आरटी , पहली मंजिल मेन रोड, संजीव रेड्डी नगर हैदराबाद -500 038

21. केनरा बैंक

बेलगाल शाखा

मेनरोड

बेलगाल-518462

22. केनरा बैंक

धर्मावरम शाखा

मंजूकॉम्प्लेक्स धर्मावरम-515 671

आंध्र प्रदेश-अनंतपुर

23. केनरा बैंक

केशमपेट शाखा

मंडल डेवलपमेंट कार्यालय के पास

4-47, केशमपेट-509 408

आंध्र प्रदेश, महबूबनगर [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

24. केनरा बैंक

दाबागार्डन शाखा

30-15-160 , बार्ड सं 17

मेन रोड, दाबागार्डन

विशाखपट्टणम

25. केनरा बैंक

पुट्टपर्ती शाखा पुलिस स्टेशन के सामने प्रशांतिनिलयम

पुट्टपर्ती-515 134

26. केनरा बैंक

सैदाबाद कॉलोनी शाखा

एच से 17-1-391/टी/ 223 /ए

सरस्वतीनगर कमान के पास

सैदाबाद कालोनी

हैदराबाद-500 059

27. केनरा बैंक

पुल्मामिडिशाखा

नेहरू मेमोरियल यूथ क्लब बिल्डिंग नवाबपेटसे

पुल्मामिडि-501 112

आर आर जिला, आंध्र प्रदेश

28. केनरा बैंक

चीराला शाखा,

दरबार मेन रोड

चीराला-523 155

आंध्र प्रदेश, प्रकाशम

29. केनरा बैंक

एच खैरावडीशाखा

गनेगंडला मंडल , एच खैरावडी-518 463 आंध्र प्रदेश, कर्नूल

30. केनरा बैंक

कुप्पम शाखा

14-66/1 , बी आर आर कॉम्प्लेक्स आर के रोड, एमपीपी कार्यालय के सामने

कुप्पम -517425

आंध्र प्रदेश, चित्तूर

31. केनरा बैंक

पहली मंजिल

शिरडीनगर पंचायत

शॉपिंग कॉस्प्लेक्स नं . 2

नगर मनमाड रोड

शिरडी-423 109

2498 GI/2005-2

9759

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

32. केनरा बैंक

न्यूओखला इंडस्ट्रीयल एरिया सेक्टर -6 , नोएडा उप्र

33. केनरा बैंक

एस-2 , गामा शॉपिंग कांप्लेक्स

ग्रेटर नोएडा उप्र

34. केनरा बैंक

रफीनगर

कचहरी रोड राय बरेली उप्र

35. केनरा बैंक

स्टेशन रोड गोण्डा-271 002. जिला गोण्डा

उप्र

36. केनरा बैंक

465, मोती नगर उन्नांव-209 801 उप्र

37. केनरा बैंक

सूरज भान विद्या भारती

राजेन्द्र नगर बरेली-243 122 उप्र

38. केनरा बैंक

खीरनी बाग

शाहजहांपुर-242 001

उप्र

39. केनरा बैंक

मुद्रातिजोरी

नं. 3 , काल्विन रोड

इलाहाबाद

उम्र

40. केनरा बैंक

एम आई डी सी अंधेरी ( पूर्व )

आकृति ट्रेड सेंटर,

ऑफिस यूनिट नं 3

ग्राउंडफ्लोर,

रोड नं 7 , मरोल

एम आई डी सी अंधेरी ( पूर्व )

मुंबई -400 093

महाराष्ट्र 9760

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12, 1927

41. केनरा बैंक

एस एस बी दहिसर ( प ) शाखा

कृष्ण कुंज

ग्राउंडफ्लोर

लोकमान्य तिलक रोड

दहिसर ( प) , मुंबई -400 068

महाराष्ट्र

42. केनरा बैंक

पहली मंजिल

बंसल प्लाजा बी विंग

गांधीचौक, मेन रोड

सावंतवाड़ी-416510

महाराष्ट्र

43. केनरा बैंक

ऑर्डिनेंस एस्टेट

ऑर्डिनेंस फैक्टरी

अंबरनाथ ( प ) -421 502

महाराष्ट्र

44. केनरा बैंक

प्लाट नं 1 शांतिनिकेतन

सीएचएस, राणा प्रताप नगर पोस्ट ऑफिस के नजदीक रिंग रोड, खामला

नागपुर-440 022

महाराष्ट्र

45. केनरा बैंक

एमएसएफसी बिल्डिंग

सेनापति बापट रोड

एमएसएफसी शाखा पुणे-411 016

महाराष्ट्र

46. केनरा बैंक

प्लाट नं 1

मधुकुंज की-ऑपरेटिव हाउसिंग सोसायटी पंचवटी,

पुणे-411 008

महाराष्ट्र

47. केनरा बैंक

ई-१ , गणपति प्लाजा शॉपिंग कांप्लेक्स

फूल बाग , भिवाडी

अलवर रोड

राजस्थान

48. केनरा बैंक

मंकज ग्रैंड प्लाजा

मयूर विहार, फेज -1

नई दिल्ली-110092

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] 49. केनरा बैंक

सी-10, 11 कम्युनिटी सेन्टर

न्यूफ्रैन्ड्स कॉलोनी

नईदिल्ली

50. केनरा बैंक

11 , मानव आश्रय

वसुन्धरा एम्क्लेव

औद्योगिक क्षेत्र दिल्ली-110 096

क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय

51. केनरा बैंक पहली मंजिल, महेश्वरी मानशन

तामरकुलम, कोल्लम

केरल, कोल्लम

52. केनरा बैंक

टीसी 31/586

कांजिराविलाकम मंदिर के पास

बीछ रोड, पेट्ट्टा पी ओ

तिरुवनंतपुरम , केरल

53. केनरा बैंक

के पी III/ 128ई , " साजूज्यम"

एन एच बाई पास जंक्शन

कषक्कूट्टम, तिरुवनंतपुरम

केरल , तिरुवनंतपुरम

54. केनरा बैंक

9/102, बेट्टत्तुकवला

एरिक्काड, पुतुप्पल्ली पी ओ

कोट्टयम , केरल

55. केनरा बैंक

XVII/ 1027, 1028, 1029

पोलिमेल टावर्स

आटिंगल-695 101

केरल, तिरुवनंतपुरम

56. केनरा बैंक उदयगिरिकांप्लेक्स

कडप्पाक्काडা कोल्लम -691 008

केरल, कोल्लम

57. केनरा बैंक

महिला बैंकिंग शाखा

टीसी नं. 2/2464

पट्टम एन एच रोड

पट्टम, तिरुवनंतपुरम -695 004

केरल, तिरुवनंतपुरम [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

58. केनरा बैंक

होली फामिली चर्च

फोरन्स चर्च शापिंग केन्द्र पी पी रोड, पूनकुन्नम

केरल, त्रिच्चुर

59. केनरा बैंक

एम आई सी आर केन्द्र द्वितीय मंजिल, स्पेन्सर बिल्डिंग अंचल कार्यालय अनेक्स एम जी रोड, तिरुवनंतपुरम -695001

60. केनरा बैंक .

मुद्रातिजोरी, 15/439ए हास्पिटल रोड, केनरा बैंक बिल्डिंग त्रिप्पूणितुरा -682 301

61. केनरा बैंक

15/614 ए

पेरुमाडन शापिंग कांप्लेक्स पाषुविल

केरल, त्रिश्शूर

62. केनरा बैंक

मेइन रोड पेरुमपिलावु-680519 केरल, त्रिश्शुर

63. केनरा बैंक

प्रिमियर प्रिंटर्स बिल्डिंग बिल्डिंग नं . 207/XIV एन एच 47 , अलुवा रोड अंगमाली-683 572 केरल, एरणाकुलम

64. केनरा बैंक

क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय, 31/1003 द्वितीय मंजिल, अशीस बिल्डिंग मार्केट रोड, पालक्काड-678 014 केरल, पालक्काड

65. केनरा बैंक

ओषलपति रोड वेलंतावठुम -678 558 केरल, पालक्काड

66. केनरा बैंक

डोर नं 5/3420 एम, पहली मंजिल कण्णनकन्डी चेंबर्स आरयेडत्त पालम के पास

9761

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/भाद्र 12, 1927

मावूर रोड, कोषिक्कोड-673 004 केरल, कोषिक्कोड

67. केनरा बैंक मुद्रातिजोरी, मरुदेवी कांप्लेक्स गुडाली, कलपेट्टा-673 121 केरल, वयनाड

68. केनरा बैंक मुद्रा तिजोरी, तिरूर रोड डाउन हिल, मलप्पुरम -676 519 केरल, मलप्पुरम

69. केनरा बैंक

मुद्रातिजोरी,

श्रीविद्या आरकेड कोट्टाचेरी, मवंगल रोड काजंडाड-670 315 केरल, कासरगोड

70. केनरा बैंक

मुद्रातिजोरी, 18/395 समूहम रोड, पीबीसं 554 चालप्पुरम, कालीकट-673 002 केरल, कोषिक्कोड

71. केनरा बैंक

मुद्रातिजोरी, टी पी IV 582 वलपट्टनम रोड साऊथ बाज़ार, कण्णूर-670 002 केरल, कण्णूर

72. केनरा बैंक

अग्रणी बैंक कार्यालय मरुदेवी कांप्लेक्स, मुडाली कलपेट्टा-673 121 केरल, वयनाड

73. केनरा बैंक

अग्रणी बैंक कार्यालय तिरूर रोड, डाउन हिल मलप्पुरम-676 519 केरल, मलप्पुरम

74. केनरा बैंक

अग्रणी बैंक कार्यालय

क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय 18/1067, जेल रोड कालिकट-673 004 केरल, कोषिक्कोड 9762

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12, 1927

75. केनरा बैंक

कूत्ताट्टुकुल्लम पांडसन चेंबर्स , एम सी रोड आईओसी पंप के सामने कूत्ताट्टुकुल्लम केरल, कूत्ताट्टुकुल्लम

76. केनरा बैंक

जे वजे बिल्डिंग कमरा सं 5759 , कुरिशंगल काञिरप्पल्ली केरल, काअिरपल्ली

77. केनरा बैंक होली फामिली चर्च फोरेन्स चर्च शापिंग केन्द्र पीपीरोड, पूर्वकुन्नम-686 506 केरल, पूक्कुन्तम

78. केनरा बैंक

XVII/ 1309 मुल्लक्कल आलुप्पुषा-688 010 केरल, आलुप्पुषा

79. केनरा बैंक

मुद्रातिजोरी , की जे रोड आलप्पुषा-688 010 केरल, आलुप्पुषा

80. केनरा बैंक

अलफोन्स कमर्शियल कांप्लेक्स मार्केट जंक्शन कोट्टारक्करा-691506 केरल, कोट्टारक्करा

81. केनरा बैंक

पी ए सी शापिंग कांप्लेक्स सूर्या रोड केएसआरटीसी बस स्टाप के पास नेडुमंगाड-695 541 केरल, नेडुमंगाड

82. केनरा बैंक

टीसी 2/4-1 प्रथम मंजिल उल्लूर जंक्शन तिरुवनंतपुरम केरल, उल्लूर

83. केनरा बैंक

प्रथम मंजिल,

लक्ष्मी चेंबर्स गणपति कोविल रोड वषुतक्काड, तिरुवनंतपुरम केरल, वषुतक्काड

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] (Department of Economic Affairs) (Banking Division)

New Delhi , the 25th August , 2005 S.O. 3099.- In pursuance of sub - rule (4) ofrule 10 of the Official Languages ( Use of Official Purposes of the Union) Rules , 1976 the Central Government , hereby, notifies the listed offices /branches of the following banks /Financial Institution in the attached annexure , more than 80 % of the staff whereof have acquired the working knowledge of Hindi :-

Sl . Name ofthe Banks

Number ofOffices/ No.

Branches

01 1. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur

2. State Bank of India

10 3. United Bank of India

01 4. Union Bank of India

25 5. Canara Bank

83 Total

120

[F. No. 11016/7/2005 -Hindi ] REMESH BABU ANIYERY, Jt. Director (OL) STATE BANK OF BIKANER AND JAIPUR 1. SIMALWARA

Simalwara Distt . Banswara

Address : (Rajasthan)

STATE BANK OF INDIA

1. State Bank of India Ganganager

Meerut-250002

2. State Bank of India Kankarkhera Meerut-250001

3. State Bank of India Commercial Branch Meerut -250001

4. State Bank of India. Vardhman Academy Meerut-250002

5. State Bank of India

Rajendranagar Sahibabad

Distt- Ghaziabad -201005 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

9763

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3, 2005/भाद्र 12, 1927

6. State Bank of India Ν.Ε.Ρ.Ζ. Phase- II , NOIDA Distt. -Gautam Budh Nager-201305.

7. State Bank of India

Commercial Branch Sector- 18, NOIDA Distt.-Gautam Budh Nagar-201305.

8. State Bank of India Garhmukteshwar Distt. -Ghaziabad-245402.

9. State Bank of India

MICR Cheque Processing Centre 4- Convent Road Dehra Dun. (Uttaranchai) Pin-248001.

10. State Bank of India

Mahabaleshwar Branch, Distt. Satara, Maharashtra -412806 .

UNITED BANK OF INDIA 1. United Bank of India,

HeadOffice

11 , Hemanta Basu Sarani Kolkata -700001 .

UNION BANK OF INDIA .

1. Union Bank of India

Shankar Vihar Branch 2-3, Shankar Vihar Shopping Complex Shankar Vihar Delhi -110010 .

2. Union Bank of India Dwarka Branch Plot No. 13 , Bansal Plaza Dwarka, Sector-6 NewDelhi - 110 045

3. Union Bank of India

ArmapurBranch Armapur Ordinance Factory Armapur-Kanpur- 208 009.

4. Union Bank of India

PreetamNagar Branch Bal Mitra Jr. High School Dhoomanganj Allahabad- 211004.

5. Union Bank of India

Red Eagle Army Headquarter Branch StanlyRoad Post Cavalty Lines Allahabad-211004.

6. Union Bank of India Krishna Nagar Branch Jamuna Devi Balika Vidyalaya KrishnaNagar Kanpur-208007.

7. Union Bank of India

Agra Development Authority Branch JaipurHouse Agra-282010.

& Union Bank of India B.R.B. College Branch MohanpurRoad Samastipur Distt. Samastipur Bihar Pin-848101.

9. Union Bank of India Bahadurpur Housing Colony Branch Bhootnath Road KamlaMarket Kankarbagh, Patna Pin-800020.

10. Union Bank of India

Katihar Branch BinodpurRoad Katihar

Distt. Katihar Bihar, Pin-854105.

11. UnionBank ofIndia Pauri Branch SrinagarRoad Pauri Uttranchal PinCode-246001 .

12. UnionBank of India Nodal Regional Office ChitrakootBuilding 3rd Floor 230 A, A.J.C. Bose Road Kolkata-700020 .

13. Union Bank of India VikramshilaGyan Mandir Sarojini NagarBranch KanpurRoad Lucknow-226008 UttarPradesh.

14. Union Bank of India Khurda Branch Opp. Civil Court MainRoad Khurda - 752 055 Orissa.

15. Union Bank of India KeonjharBranch JagannathMarket Complex Gandhi Chowk Keonjhar -758001 Orissa.

9764

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12, 1927

16. Union Bank of India

AkbarpurBranch

Abdullahpur Dostpur Road

(Near National Hardware & Sanitary Centre) Sahjadpur

Akbarpur

Distt.: Ambedkar Nagar - 224122.

17. Union Bank of India

DharBranch

2TrimurtiNagar Dhar(M.P. -454 001 .

18. UnionBank of India

AnnapurnaBranch 726Usha Nagar Extension Bajaj Tower AnnapurnaRoad Indore (M.P.)-452009.

19. Union Bank of India

Srinivasam Complex Branch

Tirupati517501

Distt. Chitpor (Andhra Pradesh) .

20. Union Bank of India

Bodakdev Branch

UG-6 Galaxy Complex BehindGrand Bhagwati Hotel Bodakdev Ahmedabad- 380054 .

21. Union Bank of India

Annada College Branch

Annada Chowk Katcheri Road Hazaribagh Jharkhand -825301 .

22. Union Bank of India

B.S. City College Branch

Sector-VI Centre Market Bokaro Steel City

Bokaro(Jharkhand)-827006.

23. Union Bank of India

Manmad Branch

Durga Complex Ist Floor AzadRoad Manmad-423 104 . Dist. Nasik Maharashtra

24. Union Bank of India

Service Branch

Visakhapatnam Door No. 10-50-14/3 (3 ) 1st floor Waltair Main Road Visakhapatnam -03 (AP) .

25. Union Bank of India

Siripuram Branch

Visakhapatnam DoorNo. 10-50-14/3 (3 ) 1st floor Waltair Main Road Visakhapatnam -03 (AP).

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

1. Canara Bank

Nandyal Branch

25/516 A Srinivasanagar

Kurnool District

Nandyal-518 501

A. P. , Kurnool .

2. Canara Bank

Pylakurthy Branch

Katamuru Mandal

Pylakurthy -518464

A. P. , Kurnool.

3. Canara Bank

Varkur Branch Varkur- 518643

A.P. , Kurnool .

4. CanaraBank

Akulavarighanapur Branch

H. No. 12/176

PostEturunagaram

Behind Cinema Theatre Akulavarighanapur- 506 165 A.P. , Warangal .

5. Canara Bank

Gudivada Branch

N. T. R. , Stadium Complex Gudivada-521 301 . A. P. , Krishna

6. Canara Bank

MasaipetBranch

1-44 National High Way 7 Masaipet-502 335

A. P. , Medak .

7. CanaraBank

Shivajinagar Branch H. No. 10/ 1 /63-64-65 Shivajinagar Nizamabad-503001

A. P. Nizamabad .

8. Canara Bank

Pochampally Branch

H. No. 5-31

Pochampally-508 284 A. P. , Nalgonda .

9. Canara Bank

Narayanpet Branch

1-1-5, High School Road

Chourastha Bazar Narayanpet-509 210 A. P. , Mahabubnagar.

10. Canara Bank

Tirumala Branch SMC 257 A & B Tirumala Hills Tirumala - 517504.

9765

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

11. Canara Bank

Chandramoulinagar

GunturBranch

Mayuri Homes

Chandramoulinagar

RingRoad

Guntur-522 007

12. Canara Bank

BapatlaBranch

Near Railway Station

Bapatla- 522 101

A. P. , Guntur

13. Canara Bank

Venugopalanagar Branch Srinivasa Complex

MainRoad

Venugopalanagar

Guntur-4

14. Canara Bank

Nagulavaram Branch

ViaPedakancherla

Nagulavaram-522649

A. P. Guntur

15. Canara Bank

Pedakakani Branch

NagalakshmiBuilding Near Junction

MainRoad

Pedakakani -522509

A. P. Guntur

16. Canara Bank

SuryapetBranch

1-4-81 Alankar Takies Road Suryapet-508 214

A.P. Nalgonda

17. Canara Bank

ARM Branch

5-9-22/1/4C & 4D

Damayanthi Chambers Adarshanagar

Hyderabad

18. Canara Bank

Guntur Main Branch PB 136 Hindu College High School Campus Opp.Gandhi Park

Guntur-522003

19 Canara Bank

HSEBranch

DNo. 3-6-275

HSEBuilding

Hyderabad

20. Canara Bank

SRNagarBranch 51/3 RT, First Floor

MainRoad

Sanjeeva Reddy Nagar

Hyderabad-500 038

21. Canara Bank

BelagalBranch

MainRoad

Belagal-518462

A. P. , Kurnool

22. Canara Bank

Dharmavaram Branch

ManjuComplex

Dharmavaram- 515671

A. P. , Ananthapur

23. Canara Bank

Keshampet Branch

NearMandal Development Office

4-47Keshampet-509408

A. P. , Mahabubnagar

24. CanaraBank

Dabagarbens Branch

30-15-160 , Ward No. 17

MainRoad

Dabagardens

Visakhapattanam-20

25. Canara Bank

PuttaparthyBranch

Opp. Police Station

Prashanthi Nilayam

Puttaparthy -515134

26. Canara Bank

Saidabad Colony Branch

H. No. 17-1-391 /T/223 /A

Near Saraswathinagar Entrance

Saidabad Colony

Hyderabad-500059

27. CanaraBank

Pulmamidi Branch

NehruMemorial Youth Club Bldg.

ViaNawabpet Pulmamidi -501 112

RRDist. AP.

28. Canara Bank

Chirala Branch

Durbar Main Road

Chirala-523 155

A. P. , Prakasam

29. Canara Bank

HKhairawadi

Ganegandla Mandal

HKhairawadi- 518 463

A. P. Kurnool .

9766

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3, 2005 /BHADRA 12, 1927

30. CanaraBank Kuppam Branch

14-66/1, BRR Complex

R. K. Road Opp. MPP Office

Kuppam-517425

A. P. Chittoor

31. Canara Bank

1stFloor ShirdiTown Panchayat Shopping Complex No. 2 TownManmad Road Shirdi-423 109

32. Canara Bank

New Okhla Industrial Development Authority Sector-6Noida U. P.

33. CanaraBank

S-2Gama Shopping Complex

GreaterNoida U.P.

34. Canara Bank

KatcheryRoad

RafiNagar Raebareli U.P.

35. Canara Bank

Station Road Gonda-271 002 Distt. Gonda

U.P.

36. CanaraBank

465,MotiNagar Unnao-209 801

37. Canara Bank

Suraj Bhan Vidya Bharti

RajendraNagar Bareilly-243 122.

38. Canara Bank

KhiraniBagh

Shahjahanpur- 242001 U.P.

39. Canara Bank

CurrencyChest

No. 3 ColvinRoad

Allahabad

U.P.

40. CanaraBank

MIDC Andheri (E) Branch

Akruti Trade Centre Office Unit No. 3

Ground Floor RoodNo. 7 Marol MIDC

[PART II SEC . 3 (ii) ] Andheri (E)

Mumbai -400093 Maharashtra

41. CanaraBank

SSB Dahisar (W) Branch

Krishna Kunj

Ground Floor Lokmanya Tilak Road

Dahisar(W) Mumbai -400 068

Maharashtra

42. Canara Bank

1st Floor, Vasant Plaza "B" Wing Gandhi Chowk

Sawantwadi -416 510

MainRoad Maharashtra

43. Canara Bank

Ordinance Estate

Ordinance Factory Ambernath (West) -421 502 Maharashtra

44. Canara Bank

PlotNo. 1 , Shantiniketan

CHS, Near Rana Pratap Post Office

Ring Road, Khamala Nagpur-440022 Maharashtra

45. Canara Bank

MSFC Branch

MSFCBuilding

Senapathi Bapat Road Pune-411016 Maharashtra

46. Canara Bank

PlotNo. 1

Madhukunj Co -operative Housing Society

Panchawati Pune-41108 Maharashtra

47. Canara Bank

E-9, Ganapati Plaza Shopping Complex

Phool Bagh

Bhiwari

AlwarRoad

Rajasthan

48. Canara Bank

Pankaj Grand Plaza

MayurVihar Phase- 1

New Delhi -110092 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

9767

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3, 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

59. Canara Bank

49. Canara Bank

C-10 , 11 Community Centre New Friends Colony

NewDelhi

50. Canara Bank

MICR Centre

SecondFloor, SpencerBuilding

CircleOfficeAnnexe

MGRoad, Thiruvananthapuram-695 001

60. Canara Bank

11 , Manav Ashray Vasundhara Enclave Institutional Area Delhi-110096

51. Canara Bank

Regional Office

FirstFloor,

Maheswari Mansion Thamarakulam, Kollam-691001 Kerala, Kollam

Currency Chest, 15/439 A

HospitalRoad

CanaraBank Building

Tripunithura-682301

61. Canara Bank

15/614A-

PerumadanShopping Complex

Pazhuvil

52. Canara Bank

Kerala, Trissur

62. Canara Bank

TC31/ 586 Near Kanjiravilakam Temple Beach Road, Pettah P. O. Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala MainRoad

Perumpilav-680519

Kerala, Trichur

63. Canara Bank

53. CanaraBank

KP III/ 128 E, " Sayoojyam" NH By Pass Junction Kazhakuttam, Thiruvananthapuram Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram

Premier Printers Building

Building No. 207/XIV

NH47 , Aluva Road Angamali -683 572 Kerala, Ernakulam

64. Canara Bank

54. Canara Bank

9/102, Vettathukavala Erikkad, PuthupallyP.O. Kottayam, Kerala

55. Canara Bank

XVII/ 1027, 1028, 1029 Polymel Towers Attingal-695 101 Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram

Regional Office, 31/1003

SecondFloor,

AzeezBuilding

MarketRoad, Palakkad-678014 Kerala, Palakkad

65. Canara Bank

Ozhalapathy Road, Velanthavalam-678558

Kerala, Palakkad

66. Canara Bank

56. Canara Bank

Udayagiri Complex

Kadappakada Kollam-691008 Kerala, Kollam

57. Canara Bank

MahilaBanking Branch

Door No. 5/3420 M, First Floor

Kannan Kandy Chambers NearAreyadath Palam Mavoor Road, Kozhikode-673 004 Kerala, Kozhikode

67. Canara Bank

TC No. 2/2464

Pattom N H Road Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram-695 004 Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram

CurrencyChest

Marudevi Complex

Gudalai , Kalpetta-673 121 Kerala, Wynad

68. Canara Bank

58. Canara Bank

Holy Family Church

Forance Church Shopping Centre PP Road, Poonakunnam

Kerala, Trichur

2498 G1/2005-3

Currecy Chost, Tirur Road

DownHill,

Malappuram-676519

Kerala, Malappuram THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12, 1927

9768

69. Canara Bank

CurrencyChest,

Sri Vidya Arcade

Kottacherry,

MavangalRoad

Kanhangad-670315

Kerala, Kasargod

70. Canara Bank

CurrencyChest,

18/395 , Samooham Road, PB No : 554 Chalapuram, Calicut-673002 Kerala, Kozhikode

71. Canara Bank

Currency Chest, TP IV 582

Valapattanam Road

South Bazar, Kannur -670002 Kerala, Kannur

72. Canara Bank

LeadBank Office

Marudevi Complex

Gudalai , Kalpetta -673 121

Kerala, Wynad

73. Canara Bank

LeadBank Office

TirurRoad, Down Hill

Malappuram- 676519

Kerala, Malappuram

74. Canara Bank

LeadBank Office

Regional Office

18/1067, Jail Road Calicut-673004

Kerala, Kozhikode

75. Canara Bank

Koothattukulam

Padson Chambers ,

MC Road

NearIOC Pump

Koothattukulam

Kerala, Koothattukulam

76. Canara Bank

J & J Building

Room No. 5759, Kurisingal Kanjirapally

Kerala, Kanjirapally

77. CanaraBank

Holy Family Church

Forance Church Shopping Centre PP Road, Ponkunnam-686 506.

Kerala, Ponkunnam

78. Canara Bank

XVII/ 1309

Mullakkal

[PART II-SEC, 3 (ii )] Allapuzha-688010

Kerala, Allapuzha

79. Canara Bank

Currency Chest , B J Road

Allapuzha -688010

Kerala, Allapuzha

80. Canara Bank

Alphonsa Commercial Complex

MarketJunction

Kottarakkara-691506

Kerala, Kottarakkara

81. Canara Bank

PAC Shopping Complex

Soorya Road

Near KSRTC Bus Stand

Nedumangad-695 541

Kerala, Nedumangad

82. Canara Bank

TC 2/4-1 , Ist Floor

Ulloor Junction

Thiruvananthapuram

Kerala, Ulloor

83. Canara Bank

1st Floor, Lakshmi Chambers

Ganapathi Koil Road Vazhuthacaud,

Thiruvananthapuram

Kerala , Thiruvananthapuram.

इस्पात मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 22 अगस्त, 2005

का०आ ० 3100.-राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम , 1976 ( यथा संशोधित , 1987 ) के नियम 10 के उप-नियम (4 ) के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा इस्पात मंत्रालय के प्रशासनिक नियंत्रणाधीन फैरो स्क्रैप निगम लिमिटेड की विशाखापत्तनम इकाईजिसके 80 प्रतिशत से अधिक कर्मचारीवृन्द ने हिन्दी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, को अधिसूचित करती है ।

[सं . ई. 11011/6/2001-हिन्दी]

आशुतोष बरनवाल, निदेशक MINISTRY OF STEEL

NewDelhi , the 22nd August, 2005 S. O. 3100. In pursuance of sub -rule (4) of Rule 10 oftheOfficial Language (Use for official purpose of the Union) Rules, 1976 (as amended, 1987) the Central Government hereby notifies the Vishakhapatnam Unit of Ferro Serap Nigam Limited under the administrative control ofMinistry of Steel , where more than 80% staff have acquired working knowledge ofHindi .

[No. E. 11011/6/2001 -HINDI] ASHUTOSH BARANWAL, Director 9769 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

उपभोक्तामामले, खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय

(उपभोक्तामामले विभाग )

भारतीयमानक ब्यूरो

नई दिल्ली, 10 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3101 :- 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 जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं:-

अनुसूची

स्थापित तिथि

स्थापित भारतीय मानक( कों) की संख्या

क्रम संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

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

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

जून, 2005

आईएस 2329:1985

आईएस 2329: 2005/ आईएसओ 8491: 1998 धात्विक सामग्री नलिका- (समस्त अनुभाग )- बंक परीक्षण ( दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

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

[संदर्भ: एमटीडी 3 /टी-77 ]

एस. के. गुप्ता, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख ( एमटीडी) MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs)

BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS

New Delhi , the 10th August , 2005

S. O. 3101.-In pursuance of clause (b) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standard Rules , 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:

SCHEDULE

Date of Established

Sl . No.

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

No. & year of the Indian Standards Established

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

June 2005

IS2329 : 1985

IS 2329 : 2005/ISO 8491 : 1998 Metallic Materials - Tube (InFull Section) - Bend Test (Second Revision )

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] Offices:Ahmedabad, Bangalore , Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar , Coimbatore, Guwahati , Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.

[Ref: MTD 3 /T- 77 ]

S. K. GUPTA, Scientist ' F ' & Head (MTD)

नई दिल्ली, 10 अगस्त , 2005

का.आ. 3102.- 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 जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं : -

अनुसूची

स्थापित तिथि

स्थापित भारतीय मानक( कों ) की संख्या

नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा अतिक्रमित भारतीय मानक अथवा मानकों, यदि

क्रम संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

कोई हों, की संख्या और वर्ष

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

31मई , 2005

आईएस 2335: 1985

आईएस 2335 : 2005/आईएसओ 8493: 1998 धात्विक सामग्री- नलिका- गुल्ली प्रसार परीक्षण ( दूसरा : पुनरीक्षण

इस भारतीय मानक की नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़ , हैदराबाद, जयपुर , कानपुर, नागपुर, भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन, १ , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली -110002, क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों: नई मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी, म, पुणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: एमटीडी 3/टी-77 ]

एस. के. गुप्ता, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख ( एमटीडी)

New Delhi , the 10th August , 2005

S. O. 3102. In pursuance ofclause (b) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standard Rules , 1987 , theBureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:

SCHEDULE

Date of Established

Sl . No.

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

No. & year of the Indian Standards Established

(4)

(3)

(1)

(2)

IS2335: 1985

31 May, 2005

IS 2335 : 2005/ISO 8493 : 1998 Metallic Materials-Tube- drift expanding test (SecondRevision)

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

[Ref: MTD 3 /T -77 ]

S. K. GUPTA, Scientist ' F ' & Head (MTD) 9771 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1.927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 10 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3103.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं :-

अनुसूची

स्थापित तिथि स्थापित भारतीय मानक(कों) की संख्या

क्रम संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

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

(4)

(3)

(1)

(2)

31 मई, 2005 1

आईएस 1608: 1995

आईएस 1608: 2005/आईएसओ 6892: 1998 धात्विक सामग्री- परिवेश ताप पर तनन परीक्षण ( तीसरा पुनरीक्षण)

इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन, १ , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली -110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयोंः 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: एमटीडी 3 /टी-77 ]

एस. के. गुप्ता, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख ( एमटीडी)

New Delhi , the 10th August, 2005

S.O. 3103. In pursuance of clause (b ) ofsub- rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987, theBureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:

SCHEDULE

Date of Established

Sl . No.

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

No. & Year of the Indian Standards Established

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

IS1608: 1995

31May, 2005

IS 1608 : 2005 /ISO 6892 : 1998 Metallic Materials-Tensile testing at ambient temperature (ThirdRevision)

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

[Ref: MTD 3 /T-77]

S. K. GUPTA, Scientist 'F' & Head (MTD)

नई दिल्ली , 10. अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3104.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम , 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एत‌द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं :-

9772

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

अनुसूची

स्थापित भारतीय मानक(कों ) की संख्या

स्थापित तिथि

क्रम संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

आईएस 2328: 1983

31 मई, 2005

आईएस 2328: 2005/आईएसओ 8492: 1998 धात्विक सामग्री- नलिका- समतलीकरण परीक्षण ( दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , १, बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयोंः 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: एमटीडी 3 /टी-77 ]

एस. के. गुप्ता, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख ( एमटीडी)

New Delhi , the 10th August , 2005

S.O. 3104. In pursuance of clause ( b ) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987, theBureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against cach :

SCHEDULE

Sl . No.

Date of Established

No. & Year of the Indian Standards Established

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

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

IS 2328 : 1983

31May, 2005

IS 2328 : 2005 /ISO 8492 : 1998 Metallic Materials -Tube- Flatteningtest (Second Revision)

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

[Ref: MTD 3 /T-77 ]

S. K. GUPTA, Scientist ' F ' & Head (MTD) 9773 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3, 2005/ भाद्र 12 , 1927

नईदिल्ली, 4 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3105.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों काअनुमोदन) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग को अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स वेटस्केल्स इण्डिया प्रा . लिमिटेड, मुंबई, पुणे रोड, पुणे-4110034, द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " डब्ल्यू एम -पीसी" श्रृंखला के अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( यांत्रिक प्लेटफार्म का क्नवर्शन किट प्रकार) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " वेट स्केल " है ( जिसे इसमें उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 / 2005 /08 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृत गैज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 300 कि.ग्रा . और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 100 ग्रा . है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

WeightScale

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद भी किया जाएगा । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्मित किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से अधिक और 1000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्यके समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 152 ) / 2001 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 9774

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12, 1927

[PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 4th August , 2005

S.O. 3105. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 ( 66 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections (7 ) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weigh- ing instrument Conversion kit for mechanical Platform ) with " WS -PC " series belonging to medium accuracy ( Accu- racy class - III) and with brand name " WEIGHTSCALE " ( herein referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/ s . Weightscales India Private Limited, Bombay -Poona Road, Poona - 411 034 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005/08

The said model ( see the figure given below) is a strain gauge type load cell based non -automatic weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 300 kg . and minimum capacity of 2 kg . The verification scale interval (e) is 100 g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED ) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts, 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

WeightScale

practices. In addition to sealing the stamping plat , sealing is done to prevent the opening of the machine for fraudulent Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make , and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50 kg . and up to 1000 kg . and withnumber of verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with' e ' value of 1 x 10k, 2x10 or 5 × 10k, where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design , and with the same materials with which, the said ap- proved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 152 )/2001 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 9775 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, -1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 9 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3106.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह प्रधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स ऐजाइल मेजरमेन्ट, सी-66 , ओखला इण्डस्ट्रियल एरिया फेज -1 , नई दिल्ली -110020 , द्वारा निर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " ए एम पी" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टोप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " ऐजाइल " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/ 2005/ 166 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गैज प्रकार का लोडसैल आधारित ( टेबल टोप प्रकार का ) अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 600 ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 मि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 10 मि. ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है । '

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

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 53 ) /2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 2498 G1/ 2005-4 9776

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ]

New Delhi . the 9th August, 2005

S. O. 3106. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sus- tained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections ( 7 ) and ( 8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non-automatic weigh- ing instrument ( Table top type) with digital indication of " AMP" series of high accuracy (Accuracy class - II ) and with brand name "AGILE " ( herein after referred to as the said model), manufactured by M/ s . Agile Measurements , C - 66 Okhla Industrial Area, Phase- I , New Delhi - 110020 and which is assigned the aproval mark IND /09/05/ 166 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with a maximum capacity of 600g . and minimum capacity of 200mg . The verification scale interval (e) is 10 mg. It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) indicates the weigh- ing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

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

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg. and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of Img . to 50 mg . and with number of verifica- tion scale interval (n) in the range of 5000 to 50,000 for 'e' value of 100mg or more and with 'e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10 * or 5x10k , where k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufac- turer in accordance with the same principle , design , and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured .

[F. No. WM-21 ( 53 )/2003 ]

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

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

9777

नई दिल्ली, 9 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3107.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स ऐणइल मेजरमेन्ट, सी-66 , ओखला इण्डस्ट्रियल एरिया फेज-1 , नई दिल्ली -110020 , द्वारा निर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " ए एम एफ" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " ऐजाइल " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2005/ 167 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है;

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गैज प्रकार का लोडसैल आधारित ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार का ) अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 2000 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 10 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 200 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

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

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 53 ) /2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 9778

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA2 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)]

New Delhi , the 9th August , 2005

S.O. 3107. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections ( 7 ) ana ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act . the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weigh- ing instrument (Platform type) with digital indication of " AMF " series of high accuracy ( Accuracy class - II ) and with brand name "AGILE" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Agile Measurements , C -66 . Okhla Industrial Area, Phase - I , New Delhi - 110020 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/ 05/167;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform type ) with a maximum capacity of 2000 kg . and minimum capacity of 10 kg. The verification scale interval ( e) is 200g . It has ataredevice with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

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

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

[F. No. WM -21 ( 53 ) / 2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 9779 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 10 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3108.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स वेटक स्केल प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, एम आई जी-189 , एम पी एच बी कालोनी, भारत माता स्कूल के सामने , टाटीबंध , रायपुर, छत्तीसगढ़ द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एस टी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटोप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " शुभम " है जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/ 2005/40 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गैज प्रकार का भार सैल आधारित ( टेबलटोप प्रकार) अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 5 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 10 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 0.5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

SHUBHAM

जाएगा । स्टयाम्पंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद भी किया और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, यह घोषणा करती हैकि उक्तमॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्मित किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि. ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई" मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापान मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा . तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई" मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 , के है, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 9 ) /2004 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 9780

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi, the 10th August , 2005

S.O. 3108.-Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections (7 ) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act . the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic ( Table Top type) weighing instrument with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) and with brand name "SHUBHAM " and " ST" series ( herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Weightec Scale Private Limited, MIG- 189 , M.P.H.P. Coloney. Opp . Bharatmata School, Tatibandh, Raipur , Chhatisgarh and which is assigned the aproval mark IND/09/05/40;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table Top type) with a maximum capacity of 5 kg . and minimum capacity of 10g . The verification scale interval ( e) is 0.5g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) display indicates the weigh- ing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

SHUBHAM

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

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg . with veri- fication scale interval (n ) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg. to 2g . and with the number of verification scale interval (n) in the range 500 to 10000 for ' e ' value of 5g . or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k, k being a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design, and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufac- tured.

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 9 )/2004]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 9781 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005 / भाद्र 12, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 10 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3109.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्तरिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अंतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स वेटक स्केल प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, एम आई जी-189 , एम पी एच बी कालोनी, भारत माता स्कूल के सामने , टाटीबंध , रायपुर , छत्तीसगढ़ द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एस पी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांण्ड का नाम " शुभम " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 /2005/41 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तःमॉडल एक विकृत गैज प्रकार का भार सैल आधारित ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 100 कि.ग्रा . और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 ग्रा . है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 10 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है । स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद भी किया जाएगा ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकारे उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती हैकि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्मित किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि. ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (एन ) और 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई" मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापान मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से अधिक और 300 कि.ग्रा . तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 के , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 9 ) /2004 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 9782

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 10th August, 2005

S.O. 3109.-Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (50 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic (Plat- form type) weighing instrument with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) and with brand name "SHUBHAM " and " SP " series ( herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Weightec Scale Private Limited, MIG- 189 , M.P.H.P. Coloney, Opp. Bharatmata School , Tatibandh, Raipur , Chhatisgarh and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/05 /41 ;

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

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

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section ( 12) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50 kg and upto 300 kg with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg. to 2g . and with the verification interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e' valuc of 5g . or more and with 'e' value 1 × 10k, 2 × 10% or 5× 10k, k being a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 9)/ 2004 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 9783 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 10 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ.3110.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह पाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात को संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स वेटक स्केल प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, एम आई जी-189, एम पी एच बी कालोनी , भारत माता स्कूल के सामने, टाटीबंध , रायपुर, छत्तीसगढ़ द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एस डब्ल्यू" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( वेब्रिज प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांण्ड का नाम " शुभम " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी 09/2005/42 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

SHUBHAM

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गैज प्रकार का भार सैल आधारित ( बेब्रिज प्रकार ) अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 60 टन और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 10 किग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

जाएगा । स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद भी किया और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्मित किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 कि. ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 5 टन से अधिक और 100 टन तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं औरर" ई "" ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10के या 5 × 10 , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य केसमतुल्य हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 (9 )/2004]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 2498 G1/2005-5 9784

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12, 1927

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

New Delhi , the 10th August, 2005

S.O 3110.-Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections ( 7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic (Weighbridge type) weighing instrument with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class -III ) and with brand name " SHUBHAM " and " SW " series ( herein referred to as the said model ) , manufacturedby M/s. Weighted ScalePrivate Limited, MIG- 189, M.P.H.P. Coloniey, Opp . Bharatmata School , Tatibandh , Raipur , Chhatisgarh and which isassigned the approval mark IND / 09/05/42;

SHUBHAM.

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (weighbridge type ) with amaximum capacity of 60 tonne and minimum capacity of 200 kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 10g . It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

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

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 5 tonne and up to 100 tonne with verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 50t) to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5 kg . or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2x10k or 5 × 10k, k being a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design , and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured .

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 9 )/2004]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 9785 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3111.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स नेशनल कारपोरेशन, " नेशनल कार्नर " उधाना दरवाजा, रिंग रोड, सूरत-395002 गुजरात द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " आई एन टी टी" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " इन्टरनेशनल " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2005/ 103 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

National

TABLETOP MODEL

उक्तमॉडल लोड सेल आधारित दोहरी रेंज वाला तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा० और न्यूनतम क्षमता 40 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई) का मान 15 कि.ग्रा. तक 2 ग्रा . और 15 कि.ग्रा. से अधिक और 30 कि.ग्रा. तक 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्तिहै जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करताहै । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

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

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 62 )/2004 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 9786

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 16th August , 2005

S.O. 3111. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over period of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections ( 7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of Model of self indicating , non- automatic dual range (Platform type) weighing instrument , with digital indication of " INTT " series of medium accuracy (accuracy class - III) and with brand name " INTERNATIONAL " ( hereinafter referred to as the model ) , manufactured by M/s. National Corporation , " National Corner " Udhana Darwaja , Ring Road , Surat - 395 002 , Gujarat and which is assigned the approval mark IND /09/2005/ 103 ;

TM National

National

TABLETOP MODEL

The said Model is a load cell based dual range weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 30 kg . and minimum capacity of 40g . The verification scale interval ( e ) is 2g . up to 15 kg and 5 g . above 15 kg . and up to 30 kg . Ithas a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The light emitting diode indicates the weighing result . The instruments operates on 230V and 50Hz alternate current power supply.

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

[F. No. WM-21 (62 )/2004 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 9787 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3, 2005/ भाद्र 12 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 अरास्त, 2005

का.आ. 3112.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और (8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स नेशनल कारपोरेशन, " नेशनल कार्नर " उधाना दरवाजा, रिंग रोड, सूरत-395002 गुजरात द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " आई एन पी एफ" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " इन्टरनेशनल " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2005 /104 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

LATEFORM MODEL

उक्त मॉडल लोड सेल आधारित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1,000 कि. ग्रा० और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकंलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

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

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 62 )/2004 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 9788

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 16th August, 2005

S.O. 3112. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over period of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections ( 7 ) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of Model of self indicating, non- automatic weighing instrument ( Platform type) with digital indication of " INPF " series of medium accuracy ( accuracy class-III ) and with brand name " INTERNATIONAL " ( hereinafter referred to as the model ) , manufactured by M/s. National Corporation, " National Corner" Udhana Darwaja, Ring Road , Surat - 395 002 , Gujarat and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005 /104 ;

National

يما

PLATEFORM MODEL

" INTERNATIONAL"

The said Model is a load cell based weighing instrument (Platform type) with a maximum capacity of 1,000 kg . and minimum capacity of 2 kg . The verification scale interval ( e) is 100 g . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The light emitting diode indicates the weighing result . The instruments operates on 230Volts and 50Hz alternate current power supply.

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

[F. No. WM-21 ( 62 )/2004 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 9789 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3113.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स सी ए एस वेईंग इंडिया लिमिटेड, 568 , उद्योग विहार, फेज- V, गुड़गांव, हरियाणा -122016 द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " डी जेड " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " सी ए एस " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2005/ 171 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल विकृति गेज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार का अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 2000 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 4 कि.ग्रा . है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 200 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 290 )/2004 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 9790

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 16th August , 2005

S.O. 3113. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1970 (60 of 1976) nl the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over-periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act . the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with digital indication of " DZ " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class- III ) and with brand name "CAS" (herein referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/ s . CAS Weighing India Limited, 568 , Udyog Vihar, Phase V, Gurgaon, Haryana- 122 016 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /2005/ 171 ;

The said Model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with a maximum capacity of 2000 kg . and minimum capacity of 4 kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 200g . It has atare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The digital Light Emitting Diode (LED) display unit indicates the weighing result . The instruments operates on 230 V, 50 Hz alternative current power supply.

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

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

[F. No. WM - 21 (290)/2004]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director, Legal Metrology 9791.

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3114.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स प्रिसिशन इलैक्ट्रानिक इंस्ट्रुमेंट कंपनी, सं. 77 , स्वर्ण पार्क, मुण्डका, नई दिल्ली द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " जी टी जे " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " गोल्ड टेक " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2004/ 194 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल विकृति गेज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) का है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 200 ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 मि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई ) का मान 10 मि.ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त , कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए भी सील किया जाएगा । और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्मित किया गया है विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 1 मि.ग्रा. से50 मि.ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 5,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि.ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई" मान के लिए 5,000 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान ( एन ) अंतराल सहित 50 कि.ग्रां . तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10%, 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 50 ) /2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 2498 GI /2005-6 9792

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 16th August , 2005

S.O. 3114. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 ( 60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with digital indication of " GTJ " series of high Accuracy (Accuracy class - II ) and with brand name " GOLDTECH " (herein referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Precision Electronic Instruments Company, No. 77, Swaran Park , Mundaka , New Delhi - 110041 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09 /2004/194;

The said Model ( See the Figure given below ) is strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type ) with a maximum capacity of 200 g . and minimum capacity of 200 mg . The verification scale interval (e ) is 10 mg . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) indicates the weighing result. The instruments operates on 230 Volts , and 50 Hz alternative current power supply.

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

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

[F. No. WM- 21 (50 )/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director , Legal Metrology 9793 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005 / भाद्र 12, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3115.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स मैटलर टोलिडो इंडिया प्राइवेट लिमिटेड , अमर हिल, साकी विहार सड़क, मुंबई -400072. द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता वर्ग ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " के बी 60-2आई डी-1 " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " मैटलर टोलिडो " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2004/517 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है

उक्तमॉडल एकल ब्लाक तकनीकी सम्मिलित एक अस्वचालित ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) का तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 60 कि०ग्रा ० और न्यूनतम क्षमता 500 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 10 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आद्येयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

29.8 kg

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्रं के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 100,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से ऊपर और 300 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 * या 5 × 10 , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य केसमतुल्य हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 (236) /2003]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 9794

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 16th August , 2005

S.O. 3115.--Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority , is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections ( 7 ) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform type ) with digital indication belonging to high accuracy (Accuracy class - II ) of ' KB- 60-2-ID1 ' series with brand name " Mettler Toledo " ( herein referred to as the said model ) , manufacturedby M/ s . Mettler Toledo India Private Limited , Amar Hill, Saki Vihar Road , Mumbai - 400072 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2004/517;

The said Model is a mono block technology incorporated non -automatic weighing instrument (Platform type ). Its maximum capacity is 60kg . and minimum capacity 500g . The value of verification scale interval ( e) is 10g . It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Vacuum Florescent Display ( VFD ) indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230V, 50Hz alternative current power supply .

28.8 kg

Further, in exercise of the power conferred by Sub - section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50kg and up to 300kg with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 500 to 100,000 for ' e ' value of 5g. or more and with ' e' value of 1 x 10k, 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k, k being a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 236 )/ 2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director , Legal Metrology 9795 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 16 अगस्त , 2005

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

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स आविष्कार इलैक्ट्रानिक्स वेइंग स्केल्स प्रा. लि. , देवराव - बाबा चावल, अकोला-444001 महाराष्ट्र द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " ए डब्ल्यू ई " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( तोल सेतु प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " आविष्कार " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2004/279 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल विकृति गेज प्रकार का लोडसेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( तोल सेतु ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 20,000 कि०ग्रा ० और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 5 कि.ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

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

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

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 (80 ) /2002 ] पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 9796

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12, 1927

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 16th August , 2005

S.O. 3116. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 ( 60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions :

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub -sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (weighbridge) with digital indication belonging to medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) of "AWE" series with brand name "AVISHKAR " ( herein referred to as the said mode ! ) , manufactured by M/ s . Avishkar Electronics Weighing Scales Pvt . Ltd. , Deorao -Baba Chawl , Akola - 444001 , Maharashtra and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2004/279

The said Model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument ( weighbridge ) . with a maximum capacity of 20,000 kg . and minimum capacity 100 kg. The verification scale interval (e ) is 5 kg . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The light emitting diode display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50Hz. alternative current power supply.

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

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

[F. No. WM - 21 ( 80 )/2002 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director, Legal Metrology 9797 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005 /भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3117.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स आविष्कार इलेक्ट्रानिक्स वेइंग स्केल्स प्रा.लि. , देवराव बाबा चावल, अकोला-444001 महाराष्ट्र द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " ए वी टी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " आविष्कार " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09 /2004/ 280 ममनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल विकृति गेज प्रकार का लोडसेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप प्रकार का) हैं । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 20 कि०ग्रा० और न्यूनतम क्षमता 40 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 2.ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

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

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 80 ) /2002 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 9798

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12, 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 16th August, 2005

S.O. 3117. -Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections (7 ) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic (Table top type) weighing instrument with digital indication of " AVT " series of medium accuracy ( accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " AVISHKAR " ( herein referred to as the said model ), manufacturedby M/ s . Avishkar Electronics Weighing Scales Pvt. Ltd. , Deorao -Baba Chawl , Akola -444001 , Maharashtra and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2004/280;

The said Model is a strain gauge type laod cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) . with a maximum capacity is 20kg. and minimum capacity 40g . The verification scale interval ( e) is 2g . It has a tare device with 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The light emitting diode (LED ) display indicates the weighing result . The instruments operates on 230 volts and 50Hz alternative current power supply.

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

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

[F. No. WM-21 (80)/2002 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director, Legal Metrology 9799 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3118.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स कैनफ्लेक्स इंजीनियरिंग प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, पोस्ट बाक्स सं. 1919 , सी 8/3 , इंडस्ट्रीयल एस्टेट, संत नगर, हैदराबाद द्वारा निर्मित " डब्ल्यू एफ एफ एस " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, स्वचालित भरात्मक भरण मशीन ( वे फिलर प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " कैनन " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2004/ 590 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ;

उक्तमॉडल एक स्वचालित भरात्मक भरण मशीन भार सेल आधारित ( वे फिलर ) भरण मशीन है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 5000 ग्रा० है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 5 ग्रा . है । मरीन को चाय, दालें, आलू, चिप्स, मिष्ठान आदि जैसे मुक्त प्रवाह वाले गैर चिप चिपा, धूल रहित वाले उत्पादों को भरने के लिए डिजाइन किया गया है । इसकी भरण दर 40 भरण प्रति मिनट है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

जाएगा । स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त, मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबन्द भी किया और, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्मित किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जिनकी क्षमता 5 ग्रा. से 5000 ग्राम तक की रें के बीच की है ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 303 )/2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 2498 GI /2005-7 9800

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12. 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 16th August, 2005

S.O. 3118. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to itby the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act . 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections ( 7 ) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act . the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of self indicating , automatic gravimetric filling machine (Weigh Filler -Load cell based ) of " WFFS " series with brand name " CANNON " (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Canflex Engineering Private Limited, Post Box No. 1919, C- 8/3 , Industrial Estate, Sanath Nagar, Hyderabad and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09 / 2004/ 590

The said Model is an automatic grvimetiric filling machine ( Weigh Filler - Load cell based) with a maximum capac ty is 5000g and minimum capacity 5g . It is designed to fill free flowing non - sticky, non -dusty products such as tea pulses, potato chips, confectionery etc. It fills 40 fills per minute . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50Hz alternate current power supply.

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

[F. No. WM-21 ( 303 ) / 2003]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director, Legal Metrology 9801 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3119.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स न्यूजेन टेक्नालाजिस , आई एन सी, 17/229 , महावीर पार्क , कारपोरेशन बैंक के पास, रोहतक रोड, बहादुरगढ़, हरियाणा द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता (यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " एन टी टी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " न्यूजेन " है ( जिसे इसमें उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2005 / 173 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का लोड सैल आधारित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाला अस्वचालित ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 12 कि. ग्रा० और न्यूनतम क्षमता 50 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 1 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आद्येयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आद्येयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

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

फ़ा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 201 )/2004 ] पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 9802

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii) ] ' THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

New Delhi , the 18th August , 2005

S.O. 3119. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -sections (7 ) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non - automatic (Table Top type) weighing instrument, with digital indication of high accuracy ( Accuracy class - II ) and with brand name " NEWGEN " and " NTT " series ( herein referred to as the said Model) , manufactured by M/ s . Newgen Technologies Inc. , 17/229 , Mahavir Park, Opposite Corporation Bank, Rohtak Road, Bahadurgarh , Haryana and which assigned the approval mark IND/09 /05/ 173 ;

The said Model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table Top type) ofhigh accuracy (accuracy class - II) with a maximum capacity of 12 kg . and minimum capacity of 50g. The verification scale interval ( e) is 1g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED ) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volt , 50Hertz alternative current power supply.

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

Further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 5.0kg . with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 100 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 1mg . to 50mg . and with the number of verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 5,000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg . or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10 or 5 × 10k , k being a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved Model has been manufactured .

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 201 )/2004]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 9803 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005 / भाद्र 12 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3120.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा (7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स न्यूजेन टेक्नालाजिस, आई एन सी, 17/229 , महावीर पार्क, कारपोरेशन बैंक के पास , रोहतक रोड, बहादुरगढ़ , हरियाणा द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एन टी पी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " न्यूजेन " है ( जिसे इसमें उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2005 / 174 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का लोड सैल आधारित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ): वाला अस्वचालित ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 2,000 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 4 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 200 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आद्येयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आद्येयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श परिणाभ उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

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

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू. एम. - 21 (201 )/2004]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 9804

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II -SEC . 3 (ii)]

New Delhi , the 18th August , 2005

S.O. 3120.- Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act . 1976 ( 60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections ( 7 ) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act . the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non - automatic (Plat- form type) weighing instrument with digital indication of medium accuracy ( Accuracy class - III) and with brand name "NEWGEN " and " NTP " series ( herein referred to as the said Model) , manufacturedby M/ s . Newgen Technologies Inc. , 17/229 , Mahavir Park , Opposite Corporation Bank . Rohatak Road , Bahadurgarh, Haryana and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /2005/ 174;

The said Model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform type ) of medium accuracy ( accuracy class - III) with a maximum capacity of 2,000kg and minimum capacity of 4kg . The verifica- tion scale interval ( e) is 200g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply;

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

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

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 201 )/2004 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 9805 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3121.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स सनिरा एसोसिएटस, प्रीसीटेक कम्पाउंड, 877/ 3 /बी, जी आई डी सी माकरपुरा, बडोदरा-390010 ( गुजरात ) , द्वारा विनिर्मित " स‌न्फिल-1 /6 " श्रृंखला के स्वचालित भरण मशीन ( पिस्टन फिलर ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " सनफिल " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 / 2004/372 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है । उक्त मॉडल एक स्वचालित भरण मशीन ( पिस्टन फिलर प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 150 मि.ली. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 3 मि.ली. या समतुल्य भार है । इसकी अधिकतम भरण दर 50 थैली प्रति मिनट है । मशीन को अनुमापी श्यान द्रवों को भरने के लिए डिजाइन किया गया है ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू. एम. - 21 (129 )/2004]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 9806

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 18th August , 2005

S.O. 3121. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 ( 60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said Modeł is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions :

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of automatic filling machine (Piston filler type ) of Sanfil- 1 / 6 series with brand name ' SANFIL' ( hereinreferred to as the said Model ) , manu- facturedby M/s. Sanira Associates , Precitech Compound, 877/3/B , G.I.D.C. , Makarpura ,Vadodra - 390 010 , Gujarat and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2004/372 .

The said Model is an automatic filling machine (Pistion filler type) . Its maximum capacity is 150 ml and mini- mum capacity is 3 ml or equivalent weight . It has a maximum fill rate of 50 pouches per minute . The machine is de- signed for filling volometric viscous fluids .

[ F. No. WM -21 ( 129)/2004 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 9807 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3122.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा (7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स एवरी इंडिया लिमिटेड, प्लाट सं० 50-59 , सेक्टर-25, बल्लभगढ़ -121004 हरियाणा, द्वारा विनिर्मित वाले " 4901 " श्रृंखला के स्वचालित भारमितीय भरण उपकरण के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एवरी " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/05/ 334 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

A14326.JPG

उक्त मॉडल लीवर और तुलादण्ड आधारित यांत्रिक प्रकार का स्वचालित भारमितीय भरण उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 50 कि.ग्रा. है । इसमें तुलादण्ड के एक सिरे पर भार बाक्स और तुलादण्ड के दूसरे सिरे पर भार हूपर है । इसकी अधिकतम भरण दर 10 जैम प्रति मिनट है । मशीन को खाद्यान्न, चाय, चीनी, बीज, लवण आदि जैसे उत्पादों को भरने के लिए डिजाइन किया गया है ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट के सीलबंद के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद भी किया जाएगा । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त,, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से, जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 10 कि.ग्रा. से 100 कि.ग्रा. अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू. एम. - 21 (49 )/2004]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 2498 GI /2005-8 9808

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 18th August , 2005

S.Q. 3122. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7 ) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of automatic gravimetric filling instrument of ' 4901 ' series with brand name " AVERY " ( herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Avery India Limited, Plot No. 50-59, Sector - 25, Ballabhgarh , Faridabad - 121 004 , Haryana and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/05 /334;

A14326.JPG

The said Model is a lever and beam based machanical type automatic gravimetric filling instrument. Its maxi- mum capacity is 50kg and minimum capacity is 10kg . It consists of weight box at one end of the beam and weigh hopper at the other end of the beam . It has a maximum fill rate of 10 bags per minute . The machine is designed for filling of products like food grains , tea, sugar, seeds, salts and the like etc.

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

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 49)/ 2004 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 9809 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005/भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3123.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

माक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स गणेश निर्मित सामान्य यथार्थता वर्ग ( यथार्थता जिसके श्रृंखला और ब्राण्ड का नाम अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त इंजीनियर्स एम आई उद्योग नगर , ब्लाक सं. ए/ 5 , गॉड देव मार्ग, भायंदर ( पूर्व ) थाणे -401105 महाराष्ट्र वर्ग- III ) अस्वचालित, संदृश सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( स्प्रिंग संतुलन निलंबी प्रकार ) के माध् " ऐपेक्स" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह आई एन डी/09 /2004/468 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल ( नीचें दी गई आकृति देंखें ) एक निलंबी प्रकार का स्प्रिंग आधारित अस्वचालित सदृश सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी. अधिकतम छमता 100 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 5 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई ) का मान 500 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है ।

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सम्मश्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कर्मफलन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 500 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 1,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान संपल ( रंन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से 300 कि.ग्रा. तक की रेंज की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10%, 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 , के है अत्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक'या शून्यके समतुल्यहैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू. एम. 21 (229 )/2004]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिकं माप विज्ञान । 9810

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12 , 1927

New Delhi , the 18th August , 2005

S.O. 3123. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 ( 60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exetoise of the powers conferred by sub - sections ( 7 ) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hery issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic weighing instrument (Spring balance hanging type ) with analogue indication of ordinary accuracy (accuracy class III) and with series and brand name " APPEX" ( herein referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Ganesh Engineers, M.I.Udyog Nagar , Block No. A/ 5 , God- Dev Road, Bhayandar (East) , District - Thane - 401 105, Maharashtra and which is as signed the approval mark IND/09/ 2004/ 468:

The said Model (See the figure given below) is a hanging type spring based non - automatic analogue weigh- ing instrument with analogue indication and of a maximum capacity of 100 kg and minimum capacity of 5 kg . The verification scale interval (e) is 500g .

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

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section (12 ) of the Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also be cover the weighing instrument of similar make , bad performance of same series with maximum capacity in the range of 50 kg to 300 kg and with number of verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 100 to 1,000 for' e ' value of 500g or more and with ' e ' value 1x10 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k, k being a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design , and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM -21 ( 229 ) /2004 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director, Legal Metrology 9811 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005/भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3124.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का. अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप हैं और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स फेयर पैक मशीनरी प्राइवेट लि. , 1 , तनतई परियार नगर, अयनवरम, चेन्नई -600 023 द्वारा विनिर्मित स्वचालित भरण मशीन ( पिस्टन फिलर) वाले " एफ पी - पी आई " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " फेअरपैक " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्तमॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/ 2003 /695 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है । उक्तमॉडल स्वचालित भरण मशीन ( पिस्टन फिलर ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 ग्रा. है । इसकी अधिकतम भरण दर 10-30 भरत प्रतिमिनट है । मशीन का वनस्पति तेल, ग्रीस, जैली, मुरब्बा, पेस्ट, दही, वनस्पति, मारंग्रेन आदि जैसे अमुक्त बहाव वाले उत्पादों को भरने के लिए डिजाइन किया गया है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू. एम. - 21 (283 )/2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 9812

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

New Delhi , the 18th August , 2005

S.O. 3124.-Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7 ) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of automatic filling machine (Piston filler ) with digital indication of ' FP -PI' series with brand name " Fairpack " ( herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Fair Pack Machineries Private Limited, 1 , Thanthai Periar Nagar , Ayanavaram , Chennai -600 023 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2003/695;

The said Model is an automatic filling machine (Piston Filler ) . Its maximum capacity is 1000g. It has a maxi- mum fill rate of 10-30 fills per minute . The machine is designed for filling non free flowing liquid products like veg- etable oils , grease , jelly, Jam, paste, curds , ghee, vanaspathi , margarine etc. The instruments operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

[F. No. WM- 21 (283 )/ 2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director, Legal Metrology 9813

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3125.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार,उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स फेयर पैक मशीनरी प्राइवेट लि. , 1 तनतई परियार नगर, अयनवरम, चेन्नई, 600023 द्वारा विनिर्मित.स्वचालित भरण मशीन ( आगर फिलर ) वाले " एफ पी-एयू" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " फेअर पैक " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/ 2003/696 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है । उक्तमॉडल स्वचालित भरण मशीन ( ओगर फिलर ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता क्षमता 1000 ग्रा. है । इसकी अधिकतम भरण दर 60 थैली प्रति मिनट है । मशीन को दूध पाउडर कापी पाउडर, गेंहूं आटा, पीसे हुए मसाले, औषधि पाउडर, दन्त पाउडर, रसायन इत्यादि अमुक्त बहाव वाले उत्पादों को भरने के लिए डिजाइन किया गया है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के स्वचालित भरण मशीन भी होंगे जो 2ग्राम से 2 कि.ग्राम. तक की रेंज की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू. एम. - 21 ( 283 )/2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 9814

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927 [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 18th August, 2005

S.O. 3125.-Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of automatic filling machine (Auger filler) with digital indication of ' FP - AU ' series with brand name " Fairpack " ( herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Fair pack Machinaries Private Limited, 1 , Thanthai Periar Nagar, Ayanavaram , Chennai -600 023 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/ 2003/696;

The said Model is an automatic filling machine ( Auger Filler) . Its maximum capacity is 1000g. It has a maxi- mum fill rate of 60 pouches per minute. The machine is designed for filling non free flowing liquid products like milk powder, coffee powder, wheat flour , ground spices , pharamaceuticals powder, tooth powder , chemicals etc. The instru- ments operates on 230 Volts , AC 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

[F. No. WM-21 ( 283 )/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 9815 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3126.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा (7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स फेयर पैक मशीनरी प्राइवेट लि. , 1 , तनतई परियार नगर, अयनवरम , चेन्नई, 600023 द्वारा विनिर्मित स्वचालित भरण मशीन ( कप फिलर ) वाले " एफ पी - सी यू" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " फेअर पैक " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् ठक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2003 / 697 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल स्वचालित भरण मशीन ( ओगर फिलर ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 ग्रा. है । इसकी अधिकतम भरण दर 30 भरण प्रति मिनट है । मशीन को चीनी, चावल, सूजी, कणी, डिटर्जेन्ट, बीज, कृषि उत्पादन , औषधि पाउडर इत्यादि अमुक्त बहाव वाले उत्पादों को भरने के लिए डिजाइन किया गया है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के स्वचालित भरण मशीन भी होंगे जो 2ग्राम से 2 कि. ग्राम. तक की रेंज की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू. एम. - 21 ( 283 ) /2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 2498G1/2005-9 9816

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 18th August , 2005

S.O. 3126. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of automatic filling machine ( Cup Filler) with digital indication of 'FP - CU' series with brand name " Fair pack " (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Fair Pack Machinaries Private Limited, 1 , Thanthai Periar Nagar, Ayanavaram , Chennai -600 023 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09 /2003/697;

The said modél is an automatic filling machine ( Cup Filler) . Its maximum capacity is 1000g . It has a maximum fill rate of 30 fill per minute . The machine is designed for filling non free flowing liquid products like sugar rice, salt , suji, granuals , detergents , pharmaceuticles , seeds , agricultural products etc. The instrument operates on 230 Volts , AC 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

[F. No. WM -21 ( 283)/ 2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/भाद्रपद 12, 1927

II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 29 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 7. 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 2728 तारीख 20 अक्तूबर, 2004 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 30 अक्तूबर, 2004 में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में महाराष्ट्र राज्य में लोणी (पुणे) से पकनी ( सोलापुर) तक हज़ारवाडी के रास्ते पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए मुम्बई- पुणे पाइपलाइन विस्तार परियोजना के माध्यम से हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थीं ;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 06 दिसम्बर, 2004, 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 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 की बजाए , सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त , हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । 9818

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12 , 1927 [PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)]

अनुसूची

तालूका : मोहोळ

राज्य : महाराष्ट्र

जिला : सोलापुर

क्षेत्रफल गाव का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

गट नंबर उप-खण्ड सं.

कम सं.

हेक्टर एयर वर्ग मीटर 1

7 1 कोथाले

143

146

00 04 15

147

00 07 52

148

00 14 01

गट नबर

148,147,146 और

00 00 69

143 के बीच में मेटल्ड

रास्ता

149

00 37 80

150

151

00 11 53

152

00 30 53

गट नंबर 152 और

164के बीच

00 02 02

}

में सेवामार्ग

164

00 19 65

गट नंबर 164 और

165 के बीच

00 01 94

में रास्ता

165

00 13

166

00 11 90

167

00 07

168

00 01 98

169

00 05

170

00 12 54

171

00 07 60

172

00 06 55

173

00 06 50

174

00 03 33

गट नंबर

और

171,172,173

00 02 06

174 के बीच

में नाला

175

00 09 45

176

00 10 99

177

00 16 42

184

00 13 10

185

00 05 9819

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

राज्य : महाराष्ट्र

जिला : सोलापुर

तालूका : मोहोळ

गट नंबर

सर्वे नंबर

गाव का नाम

कम सं.

187 1 कोथाले (निरंतर)

186 2 अंकोली

गट नंबर 368,367 और गाँव सीमा के कोथाले बीच में मेटल्ड रास्ता

368

363

365

364

362

360

359

357

356

353

क्षेत्रफल

उप-खण्ड सं.

मीटर

एयर वर्ग

हेक्टर

6 7

8 5

00 01 72

00 06

02 78

कुल

00 31

00 18

00 07

12 86

00 10 75

00 11

00 88 61

गट नंबर 353

में नाला

351

352

332

404

405

406

407

325

00 03

}

05 63

00 31

26 82

00 15 10

00 03 35

40 84

गट नंबर 325

00 04

}

में कनाल

नाला

00 01

}

गट नंबर 325 और

00 02

गट नबर 325 में

324 के बीच में

गाडी रास्ता

324

323

42 44

08 39

00 9820

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12 , 1927

तालूका : मोहोळ

जिला : सोलापुर गाव का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

गट नंबर कम सं.

4 2 अंकोली (निरंतर)

गट नंबर 323 और

270 के बीच में

ड्रेन

गट नंबर 323 और

270के बीच में

अस्फालटेड रास्ता

270

271

283

284

288

गट नंबर 288 और

104 के बीच में

मेटल्ड रास्ता

104

105

109

101

110

111

112

115

47 3 कुरुल

860

861

862

859

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

क्षेत्रफल उप-खण्ड सं.

हेक्टर एयर वर्ग मीटर 5

6 7 8

00 02 13

00 02

00 20 56

00 47 34

00 23 21

00 18 87

00 03

00 12 49

00 08 48

0000

00 06 97

00 18 36

00 03 40

00 20 21

00 11

00 48 60

00 13 20

00 11 50

00 26 50

00 13 48

00 72

कुल

08 70 96

00 34 62

00 74 39

00 12 39

00 38 22 9821

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005 /भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

राज्य: महाराष्ट्र

जिला: सोलापुर

तालूका : मोहोळ

गट नंबर

सर्वे नंबर

गाव का नाम

कम सं.

857 3 कुरुल (बिस्तर)

845

844

क्षेत्रफल

उप-खण्ड सं.

मीटर

हेक्टर एयर वर्ग

6 7

गट नबर 844 और

00 08

843 के बीच में

गाडी रास्ता

843

842

889

00 22

75.

00 06

गट नंबर 890 और

00 05

890 पै. में प्रमुख

जिला मार्ग 57

890 प

892

891

50 52000

गट नंबर 891 और

00 14

949 के बीच में

गाडी रस्ता

949

947

73 42

गट नंबर 947 और

943 के बीच में

सलंग्न कनाल

943

गट नंबर 943 और

00 07 52

942के बीच में

सलंग्न कनाल

942

1082

1083

1084

1085

1088

1091 पै

1089

1090

00 00 45

00 04 84

00 21

00 01

00 10

00 32 9822

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12 , 1927 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] तालूका: मोहोळ

जिला : सोलापुर

राज्य : महाराष्ट्र

क्षेत्रफल गाव का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

गट नंबर उप-खण्ड सं.

कम सं.

वर्ग

एयर

हेक्टर

मीटर 1

6 7

8 3 कुरुल (निरंतर)

00 03

गट नंबर 1090 और 21 के बीच में राज्य मार्ग 149

00 21 20

00 05 24

00 05 96

}

गट नंबर 22 और 24 के बीच में नाला

00 23 93

00、61 93

00 07 05

00 12 89

गट नंबर 32 और 127 के बीच की भूमि

127

00 03 84

126

00 50 24

123

122

00 27 00

120

00 17 81

119

00 11

137

00 01 58

140

00 16 00

138

00 05 16

139

00 11

116

00 01 00

142

00 10 00

141

00 09 02

गट नंबर 141 और

00 03 01

142 के बीच में अस्फालटेड रास्ता

144

00 41 92

148

00 49 95

151

00 12 00

150

00 48 42

149

कुल

11 05 28 9823

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

राज्य : महाराष्ट्र

जिला : सोलापुर

तालूका : मोहोळ

सर्वे नंबर

गाव का बोम

गुट बंबर कम सं.

237 काटेवाडी

238

236

233

232

231

229

228

227

212

226

225

224

385 5 विखडे बुद्रूक

386

387

388

381

392

393

394

गट नंबर

क्षेत्रफल

उप-खण्ड सं.

एयर वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टर

6 7 8 5

00 53 34

06 51

00 19 64

00 24 52

19 44

15 48

00 28 69

00 20

00 27 78

00 00 52

00 51

00 30 32

00 19 47

03 17

कुल

00 01

00 24

15 07

00 06

00 07

00 04

00 03

388,381,392,393,39

00 01

4,395 और 396 के

बीच में मेटल्ड रास्ता

395

396

397

399

400

404

406

420

421

419

422

423

424 2498 GI /2005-10

00 12 33

15 40

00 15 45

00 12 38

00 14

00 25

00 34

00 27

00 08

00 06

00 37

00 08

00 11 9824

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12 , 1927

तालूका : मोहोळ

जिला : सोलापुर गाव का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

गट नंबर कम सं.

425 5 विरखडे बुद्रूक (निरंतर)

426

427

442

गट नंबर 442 और

गाँव सीमा पोफली के

बीच में सिना नदी 6 पोफली

गट नंबर 151 और

गाँव सीमा विरखडे बु.

केबीच में सिना नदी

151

150

149

148

147

145

143

142

141

138

140

139

135

134

133

131

127

117

गट नंबर 117,118

और 119 के बीच

में नाला

118

119

120

121

123

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

क्षेत्रफल उप-खण्ड सं .

वर्ग

हेक्टर एयर मीटर 5

00 08 36

00 13 41

00 27 02

00 06. 24

00 10 56

03 65 40 कुल

00 14 37

00 19

00 19 51

00 19 44

00 06 29

00 09 48

00 11 76

00 14 00

00 16 42

00 13 50

00 01 86

00 02 14

00 53

00 12 90

00 49 99

00 54 71

00 08 00

00 22 03

91 }

00 08 85

00 08 14

00 10 80

00 28

00 17 64 9825

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

राज्य: महाराष्ट्र

जिला : सालापुर

तालूका : मोहोळ

क्षेत्रफल

गट नंबर

सर्वे नंबर

गाव का नाम

कम सं.

122 6

पोफली (निरंतर)

उप-खण्ड सं.

मीटर

वर्ग

हेक्टर एयर

00 03

04 67

गट नंबर 123 और

122के बीच की

जलबटवारा नलीका

00 18 50

कुल

गट नंबर 28 और गाँव

7 विखडे खुर्द

00 02

सीमा पोफली के बीच

में नाला

00 21. 75

गट नंबर 29 में

00 01 50

जलबटवारा नलीका

43 }

00 01

गट नंबर 43 में प्रमुख

00 02

}

जलबटवारा नलीका

00 11 15

00 01

00 07

00 08

00 14

00 16 79

10 63

}

गट नंबर 92 में प्रमुख

जिला मार्ग 33

100

05 61

00 01 81

00 03 45

00 06

00 11

00 04

00 9826

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

तालूका: मोहोळ

[PART II-SE . 3 )

जिला : सोलापुर

गाव का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

गट नंबर कम सं.

4 7 विरखडे खुदे (निरंतर)

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

114

112 राज्य : महाराष्ट्र

क्षेत्रफल

उप-खण्ड सं.

हेक्टर एयर वर्ग मीटर 5

6 7

13 13

00 05 20

00 04 95

00 07 01

00 05 83

00 07 83

00 06 74

00 04 36

00 05

00 07 34

00 04

00 34 67 कुल 04 38 67 [ फा. सं. आर-31015/23/2004- ओ.आर- ॥ ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर साचव

MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS

New Delhi , the 29th August, 2005

S. O. 3127.- Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.Q. 2728 , dated the 20th October, 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 30th October, 2004, the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right ofuser in the land, specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying extension pipeline for transportation of petroleum products through Mumbai- Pune Pipeline Extension Project from Loni (Pune) to Pakni (Solapur ) via Hazarwadi in the State ofMaharashtra by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 6th 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; 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 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 conterred by sub- section (4) of section 6 of the saidAct, the Central Government hereby directs that the right ofuser in the said land for laying the pipeline shall, instead of vesting in the Central Government, vest on the date of publication ofthis declaration, in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, free from all encumbrances .

9827

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3, 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

SCHEDULE

State : MAHARASHTRA

District : SOLAPUR

Taluka : MOHOL

GatNo.

Survey No.

Sr. No.

Name ofthe Village

143 1 KOTHALE

146

147

148

Area

Sub -Division

Sq.mt

Are

Hectare

No.

00 00

04 15

07 52

14 01

00 69

Metalled Road in

between Gat No

148, 147,146 and

143

149

150

151

152

00 37 80

00 11 53

00 30

02 02

ServiceRoad in

between Gat No

152& 164

164 }

00 19 65

Road inbetween

01 94

}

GatNo

164& 165

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

11 90

00 07

00 01

12 54

07 60

00 06 55

00 06 50

00 03 33

02 06

Nala in between

Gat No 171 , 172,

173& 174

175

176

177

184

185

09 45

10 99

00 16 42

05 23

00 9828

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12 , 1927 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] Taluka : MOHOL

District : SOLAPUR

State : MAHARASHTRA

Sub-Division

Area

GatNo.

Survey No.

Sr. No.

Name of the Village

No. Hectare Are Sq.mt 1

67 8 1 KOTHALE ( Contd.)

187

01 72

186

06 34

Total

78 94 2 ANKOLI

00 02 97

Metalled Road in between V.B. & Gat No 368,367

368

00 00 81

363

00 31 81

365

00 18 00

364

00 07 03

362

00 12 86

360

00 10 75

359

00 26 49

357

00 12 87

356

00 11 94

353

00 88 61

Nala in Gat

00 03 19

No 353 }

351

00 08 90

352

00 05 63

332

00 29 84

404

00 31 08

405

00 26 82

406

00 15 10

407

00 03 35

325

00 40 84

Canal in Gat

00 04 91

}

No 325

Nala in Gat

00 01 60

No 325

}

ÇartTrack in between Gat No

00 02 25

325& 324

}

324

00 42 44

323

00 08 39 9829

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3, 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

State : MAHARASHTRA

District : SOLAPUR

Taluka : MOHOL

Nameofthe

GatNo.

Survey No.

Sr. No.

Village

4 2

2 ANKOLI ( Contd . )

Sub-Division

Area Are Sq.mt Hectare

No.

8 5

02 13

Drain in between

GatNo

323& 270

02 34

Asphalted Road in

between Gat No

323& 270

270

271

283

284

288

20 56

47 34

00 23 21

23 21

Metalled Road in

between Gat No

}

288& 104

104

105

109

101

110

112

115

860 3 KURUL

861

862

859

12 49

14 80

08 48

00 00 40

00 06

00 18 36

03 40

00 20 21

11 26

48 60

00 13 20

11 50

13 48

00 05

00 72 01

08 70 96 Total

00 34

74 39

00 38 22 9830

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :

SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] Taluka : MOHOL

District: SOLAPUR

State : MAHARASHTRA

Area

Gat No.

Survey No.

Sr. No.

Nameofthe Village

Sub -Division No.

Hectare Are Sq.mt 1

857

3 KURUL ( Contd.)

00 36 96

845

52 00

844

00 04 00

CartTrack in

between Gat No

08 64

844& 843

}

843

00 22 50

842

889

00 06 75

MDR - 57 in

between GatNo

00 05 76

}

890 & 890(P)

890(P)

42 50

892

00 00 20

891

00 33 00

CartTrack in

between Gat No

00 14 40

}

891& 949

949

00 00 41

947

00 73 42

Unlined Canal in

between Gat No

00 05 50

}

947& 943

943

00 05 92

Unlined Canal in

between Gat No

00 07 52

943& 942

942

00 18 40

1082

00 00 45

1083

04 84

1084

00 12 18

1085

00 21 30

1088

00 01 50

1091 (P)

10 84

1089

00 61

1090

00 32 67 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

9831

District : SOLAPUR

Taluka : MOHOL

GatNo.

Survey No.

Sr. No.

Nameofthe Village

3 KURUL ( Contd. )

State : MAHARASHTRA Sub -Division

Area

No. Hectare Are Sq.mt 5

00 03 61

SH - 149 in

between Gat No

1090 & 21

00 21 20

00 05 24

00 05 96

Nala in between

Gat No 22 & 24

32 }

00 23 93

00 49 88

00 61 93

00 07 05

Area in between

GatNo

12 89 }

32& 127

127

126

123

122

120

119

137

140

138

139

116

142

141

00 03 84

00 50 24

00 00 36

00 27 00

00 17 81

00 11 00

00 01 58

00 16 00

00 05 16

11 05

00 01 00

00 09 02

00 03 01

Asphalted Road in

between Gat No

141 & 142

144

148

151

150

149 2498G1/2005-11

}

00 41 92

00 49 95

00 12 00

00 48 42 Total

11 05 28 9832

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ]

District : SOLAPUR

Taluka : MOHOL

GatNo.

Survey No.

Sr. No.

Name of the Village

4 1

237 4 KATEVAD

238

236

233

232

231

229

228

227

212

226

225

224

385 5 VIRVADE BUDRUKH

386

387

388

381

392

393

394

Metalled Road in between Gat No 388,381,392,393, 394,395 &396

395

396

397

399

400

404

406

420

421

419

422

423

424 State : MAHARASHTRA

Area

Sub-Division No.

Hectare Are Sq.mt 5

53 34

06 51

19 €4

00 24 52

00 19 44

00 15 48

00 28 69

00 20 50

00 27 78

00 00 52

00 51 49

00 30 32

00 19 47

Total

03 17 70

00 01 84

00 24 06

00 06 05

00 07 60

00 04 91

00 04 47

00 03 54

00 01 86

00 12 33

15 40

00 15 45

00 12 38

14 99

00 25 29

00 34 29

00 27 30

00 08 61

00 06 96

37 17

00 08 43

11 81 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

9833 State : MAHARASHTRA

District : SOLAPUR

Taluka : MOHOL

GatNo.

Survey No.

Sr.. No.

Name of the Village

425 5 VIRVADE BUDRUKH ( Contd. )

426

427

442 Sub - Division

No.

Sq.mt

Area Are

Hectare

00 08

00 13 41

00 06

10 56

}

Sina River in

between Gat No

442&V.B. of

Pophli

6 POPHLI

Sina River in between Gat No 151 & V.B. of VirvadeBk.

151

150

149

148

147

145

143

142

141

138

140

139

135

134

133

131

127

117

Total

}

00 19

00 19 51

00 19

06 29

09 48

01 86

00 02

53 07

12 90

00 49 99

00 24

00 54

00 08

22 03

00 00

Nala in between

GatNo

117,118 & 119

118

119

120-

121

123

00 08 85

00 08 14

00 10 80

00 28 00

17 64

00 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] 9834

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

State : MAHARASHTRA

District : SOLAPUR

Taluka : MOHOL

Arca

Sub -Division

GatNo.

Survey No.

No.

Hectare Are Sq.mt Sr. No.

Nameof the Village

00 03 38

122

6 POPHLI ( Contd.)

00 04 67

Distributary in between Gat No 123 & 122

00 18 50

Total

49 62

Nala in between

7 VIRVADE KHURD

00 02 81

V.B. ofPophli & Gat No 28

}

00 25 78

00 21 75

01 50

Distributary in Gat }

No 29

00 01 37

07 70

00 02, 82

Major Lined Distributary in GatNo 43

11 15

00 01 10

07 45

00 08 22

00 25 10

00 16 79

00 10 63

10 57

00 02. 95

MDR - 33 in Gat No 92

}

05 61

00 01 81

03 45

00 04 97

06 31

04 23

100

09 9835 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii ) ]

State : MAHARASHTRA

District : SOLAPUR

Taluka : MOHOL

Area

GatNo.

Are Sq.mt

Hectare

Sub-Division No.

Survey No.

Sr. No.

Name of the Village

101

7 VIRVADE KHURD ( Contd . )

05 20

102

04 95

103

07 01

104

105

07 83

106

107

108

04 36

109

110

111

114

34 67

112

04 38

Total

[No. R-31015/23/2004-O.R. - II ]

HARISH KUMAR, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 29 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3128.- 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 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. 931 तारीख 4 मार्च, 2005, जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 12 मार्च, 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 16 मई , 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;

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 की बजाए , सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, भारत पेट्रोलियम कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । 9836

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12 , 1927

अनुसूची तहसील: पलवल

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

जिला: फरीदाबाद

क०

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर 1

3 1.

रायदसका

43/11

46/2

13.

62/10

63/5

67/ 2

80/11

81/5

85/1

19 राज्य: हरियाणा

क्षेत्रफल हेक्टेयर में

0.0710

0.0010

0.1150

0.0100

0.1050

0.0270

0.0880

0.1090

0.0180

0.1015

0.0110

0.1125

0.0025

0.0760

0.0385

0.1150

0.0470

0.0025

0.0585

0.1170

0.0810

0.0360

0.1145

0.0025

0.1170

0.0585

0.0100

0.0860

0.0055

0.1125

0.1050

0.0030

0.1040

0.0140

0.0585

0.0155

0.0915

0.1015

0.0860

0.1015

0.0510

0.0430

0.1015

0.1015 9837

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

85/22 1.

रायदसका (जारी...)

93/3

97/4

122(नाला)

123 (रास्ता)

141 (रास्ता)

148 (रास्ता)

202(रास्ता)

6/7 2.

9/4

17/4

20/4

29/4

34/4

44/1 4

0.0885

0.0130

0.0885

0.1015

0.0760

0.0508

0.1015

0.0080

0.0990

0.0130

0.0760

0.0070

0.0230

0.0080

0.0230

0.0280

0.0130

0.0330

0.0935

0.0860

0.0935

0.0860

0.0935

0.0835

*0.0935

0.1190

0.0860

0.0330

0.1190

0.1040 9838

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

3 2.

रून्धी

44/9

45/5

50/3

51/21

61/1

66/3

67/20

76/1

80/ 4

15/1

15/2

81/20

85/2

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

0.0050

0.1065

0.0075

0.1115

0.0280

0.0915

0.0030

0.1190

0.0180

0.0685

0.0470

0.0940

0.0355

0.0470

0.0940

0.0355

0.0835

0.1190

0.0990

0.0205

0.1090

0.1140

0.0075

0.0960

0.0010

0.0025

0.1190

0.0050

0.0885

0.1165

0.0305

0.0330

0.1190

0.0355

0.0550

0.1190

0.0305

0.0810

0.1140

0.0105

0.1050

0.0910

0.1080

0.0025

0.0600

0.0210

0.1190

0.0635

0.0050

0.1190 9839

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

85/8 2.

रून्धी (जारी...)

88/4

212(रास्ता)

213 (रास्ता) सेलौटी

12/10 3.

15/ 2

26/3

29/3

41/3

44/3

56/3

58/3

18 2498 G1/2005-12

0.0150

0.0530

0.1190

0.0490

0.0410

0.0960

0.0100

0.0105

0.0075

0.0040

0.0730

0.0240

0.0965

0.0050

0.1015

0.0960

0.0410

0.0380

0.1015

0.0935

0.0305

0.0935

0.0505

0.0860

0.0885

0.0935

0.0885

0.0935

0.0860

0.0410

0.0585

0.0560

0.0550

0.0380 9840

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

सेलौटी

87 (होडल राजवाह)

89 (रास्ता)

91 (रास्ता) 4.

नांगल ब्रहमन

23/23

34/3

35/4

45/4

69 (रास्ता)

61(नाला) 5.

8/23

छज्जूनगर

15/3

18/3

27/3

30/4

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

0.0610

0.0260

0.0610

0.0450

0.0330

0.0105

0.0025

0.0010

0.0260

0.0620

0.0835

0.0935

0.0685

0.0935

0.0760

0.0020

0.0200

0.0255

0.0050

0.0735

0.1015.

0.1015

0.0930

0.0020

0.0450

0.0585

0.0255

0.0865

0.0960

0.0860

0.1015

0.0615

0.0400

0.1015

0.0010

0.1015 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005 / भाद्रपद 12 , 1927 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

38/10 5.

छज्जूनगर (जारी....

39/5

43/1

9/1

9/2

48/2

51/3

56/5

55/11

20/1

59/1

111 (नाला)

126 (रास्ता)

304(रास्ता)

305 (रास्ता)

4/10 रोनिजा

9841

0.0110

0.0855

0.1015

0.0830

0.0105

0.0960

0.0010

0.0110

0.0585

0.0230

0.1015

0.0885

0.0505

i 0.1015

0.1015

0.0720

0.0240

0.0050

0.0965

0.0885

0.1015

0.0040

0.0915

0.0180

0.0835

0.1015

0.0990

0.0330

0.0010

0.0685

0.1015

0.0940

0.0810

0.0130

0.0055

0.0130

0.0530

0.0990

0.0870 9842

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

3 6.

11/12 रोनिजा (जारी....)

16/1

-19

23/2

28/2

12/1

12/2

34/2

48 (नाला)

49(नाला)

53 (रास्ता) 7.

41/6 किठवाड़ी

58/4

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

0.0120

0.0260

0.0500

0.0300

0.0680

0.0070

0.0920

0.0990

0.0580

0.0785

0.0120

0.0240

0.1015

0.0935

0.0025

0.0690

0.0125

0.0500

0.0170

0.0740

0.0860

0.0710

0.0010

0.0030

0.0505

0.1090

0.0280

0.0810

0.0990

0.0100

0.1015

0.0025

0.0180

0.0585

0.0155

0.0510

0.0055

0.0960

0.1015 9843

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005/भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

58/15

किठवाड़ी (जारी....)

63/5

73/5

72/11

79/1

20/1

20/2

85/1

94(हथीन राजवाह)

6/3 मांदकौल

13/1

13/2

10/5

6/1

6/3

6/4

18/2

18/1

284(रास्ता)

5/1 9. सोफताका

6/2

3 4

0.1015

0.0940

0.0635

0.0330

0.0055

0.0020

0.0510

0.0940

0.1015

0.0610

0.0410

0.1015

0.0610

0.0440

0.1165

0.0155

0.0070

0.0090

0.1190

0.0400

0.1040

0.0240

0.0205

0.0025

0.0620

0.0885

0.0025

0.0180

0.0860

0.0040

0.0025

0.0810

0.0100

0.0185

0.1490

0.1189

0.0070

0.0800 9844

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

3 9.

6/4 सोफताका (जारी...)

7/6

7 10.

हरफली

9/24

10/21/1

21/2

17/1

18/1

2/1

2/2

2/3

2/4

19/ 5

86 (रास्ता)

92( रास्ता) 11.

सहराला

8/14

9/11

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

0.1340

0.1490

0.0020

0.0680

0.1265

0.1490

0.0580

0.0110

0.0580

0.0102

0.1320

0.1465

0.1430

0.0065

0.0180

0.0685

0.1465

0.1265

0.0860

0.0405

0.0490

0.0580

0.0225

0.0480

0.0175

0.1465

0.0455

0.0150

0.0740

0.0885

0.0100

0.0180

0.0870

0.0530

0.0585

0.0030

0.0770

0.0105

0.0935

0.1390

0.1470

0.1350 9845 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3, 2005/भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

0.1400

10/11

11.

सहराला (जारी...)

0.1290

0.0510

0.0260

0.0535

0.0125

0.1470

11/16

0.1470

0.1320

0.0330

20/1

0.0605

20/2

0.0570

12/18

0.1065

0.1470

0.0025

0.0255

0.0180

77 (रास्ता)

0.0025

44/15

बेला

12.

0.0910

0.1015

0.0470

45/5

0.0505

46/1

0.0385

10/1

0.0635

10/2

0.1015

0.0910

0.0075

19/2

0.0040

0:0470

22/1

0.0370

0.1015

63/2

0.1015

0.0380

0.0155

0.0050

297 (रास्ता)

0.0050

298 (रास्ता)

0.0050

299(रास्ता)

[फा०स०आर०-31015/ 01 / 2005-ओ आर-II]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव 9846

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12 , 1927 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )]

New Delhi . the 29th August , 2005

S. O. 3128.-Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 931 , dated the 4th March , 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 12th March , 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 16thMay, 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: PALWAL

DISTRICT: FARIDABAD

STATE : HARYANA S.NO.

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

AREA IN HECTARE 1

RAIDHASKA

43/11

0.0710

0.0010

0.1150

0.0100

0.1050

0.0270

0.0880

0.1090

0.0180

46/2

0.1015

0.0110

0.1125

0.0025

0.0760

0.0385 9847

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

46/17 RAIDHASKA (Contd ...)

62/10

63/5

67/ 2

80/11

81/5

85/1

93/3

97/4

122(Drain)

123 (Rasta)

141 (Rasta)

148 (Rasta)

202 (Rasta) 2498 G1/2005-13

0.1150

0.0470

0.0025

0.0585

0.1170

0.0810

0.0360

0.1145

0.0025

0.1170

0.0585

0.0100

0.0860

0.0055

0.1125

0.1050

0.0030

0.1040

0.0140

0.0585

0.0155

0.0915

0.1015

0.0860

0.1015

0.0510

0.0430

0.1015

0.0885

0.0130

0.0885

0.1015

0.0760

0.0508

0.1015

0.0080

0.0990

0.0130

0.0760

0.0070

0.0230

0.0080

0.0230

0.0280

0.0130 9848

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

3 2.

RUNDHI

6/7

9/4

17/4

20/4

29/4

7 1

34/4

44/1

45/5

50/3

51/21

61/1

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

0.0330

0.0935

0.0860

0.0935

0.0860

0.0935

0.0835

0.0935

0.1190

0.0860

0.0330

0.1190

0.1040

0.0050

0.1065

0.0075

0.1115

0.0280

0.0915

0.0030

0.1190

0.0180

0.0685

0.0470

0.0940

0.0355

0.0470

0.0940

0.0355

0.0835

0.1190

0.0990 9849

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

61/10 2.

RUNDHI ( Contd ...)

66/3

16.

67/20

76/1

80/4

15/1

15/2

81/20

85/ 2

88/4

212 (Rasta)

213/ (Rasta)

12/10 SILAUTI

15/2

13 4

0.0205

0.1090

0.1140

0.0075

0.0960

0.0010

0.0025

0.1190

0.0050

0.0885

0.1165

0.0305

0.0330

0.1190

0.0355

0.0550

0.1190

0.0305

0.0810

0,1140

0.0105

0.1050

0.0910

0.1080

0.0025

0.0600

0.0210

0.1190

0.0635

0.0050

0.1190

0.0150

0.0530

0.1190

0.0490

0.0410

0.0960

0.0100

0.0105

0.0075

0.0040

0.0730

0.0240

0.0965

0.0050

0.1015

0.0960

0.0410

0.0380 9850

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

15/18 SILAUTI ( Contd... )

26/3

29/3

41/3

44/ 3

56/3

58/3

87 ( Hodal Minor)

89 (Rasta)

91 (Rasta) 4.

NANGAL BRAHMAN

23/23

34/3

35/4

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

0.1015

0.0935

0:0935

0.0305

0.0935

0.0505

0.0860

0.0885

0.0935

0.0885

0.0935

0.0860

0.0410

0.0585.

0.0560

0.0550

0.0380

0.0610

0.0260

0.0610

0.0450

0.0330

0.0105

0.0025

0.0010

0.0260

0.0620

0.0835

0.0935

0.0685

0.0935

0.0935 9851

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

NANGAL BRAHMAN (Contd ... ) 45/ 4

69(Road)

61 (Drain)

8/23 CHAJJUNAGAR

5 .

15/3

18/3

27/3

30/4

38/10

39/5

43/1

9/1

9/2

48/2

13 4

0.0935

0.0760

0.0020

0.0200

0.0255

0.0050

0.0735

0.1015

0.0930

0.0020

0.0450

0.0585

0.0255

0.0865

0.0960

0.0860

0.1015

0.0615

0.0400

0.1015

0.0010

0.1015-

0.0110

0.0855

0.1015

0.0830

0.0105

0.0960

0.0010

0.0110

0.0585

0.0230

0.1015

0.0885

0.0505

0.1015

0.1015 9852

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12 , 1927

3 5.

48/18 CHAJJUNAGAR ( Contd ... )

51/3

56/5

55/11

20/1

59/1

111 (Drain)

126 (Rasta)

304 (Rasta)

305 ( Rasta) 6.

ROUNIJA

4/10

16/1

23/2

28/2

12/1 [PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 4

0.1015

0.0720

0.0240

0.0050

0.0965

0.0885

0.1015

0.0040

0.0915

0.0180

0.0835

0.1015

0.0990

0.0330

0.0010

0.0685

0.1015

0.0940

0.0810

0.0130

0.0055

0.0130

0.0530

0.0990

0.0870

0.0120

0.0260

0.0500

0.0300

0.0680

0.0070

0.0920

0.0990

0.0580

0.0785

0.0120 9853

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

0.0240

28/12/2

ROUNIJA ( Contd ... )

34/2

48 (Drain)

49 (Drain)

53 (Rasta)

41/6 KITHWADI

58/4

63/5

73/5

72/11

79/1

11 0.1015

0.0935

0.0025

0.0690

0.0125

0.0500

0.0170

0.0740

0.0860

0.0710

0.0010

0.0030

0.0505

0.1090

0.0280

0.0810

0.0990

0.0100

0.1015

0.0025

0.0180

0.0585

0.0155

0.0510

0.0055

0.0960

0.1015

0.0940

0.0635

0.0330

0.0055

0.0020

0.0510

0.0940

0.1015

0.1015 9854

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12, 1927 [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 1

79/20/1

KITHWADI ( Contd ... )

0.0610

20/2

0.0410

0.1015

85/1

0.1015

0.0610

94 ( Hathin Distributary )0.0610

MANDKAUL

6/3

0.0440

0.1165

13/1

0.0155

13/2

0.0070

0.0090

0.1190

0.0400

10/5

0.1040

6/1

0.0240

6/3

0.0205

6/4

0.0025

0.0620

0.0885

0.0025

0.0180

18/2

0.0860

0.0040

0.0025

0.0810

18/1

0.0100

0.0185

284 (Rasta)

SOFTAKA

5/1

0.1490

0.1189

6/2

0.0070

0.0800

0.1340

0.1490

0.0020

0.0680

0.1265

0.1490

7/ 6

0.1490

0.0580

10.

HARPHALI

9/24

0.0110

0.0580

10/21/1

0.0102

21/2

0.1320

0.1465

0.1430

21/2

0.0065

0.0180 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

11/ 23 HARPHALI (Contd ... )

10.

17/ 1

18/ 1

2/1

2/2

2/3

2/4

19/ 5

86(Rasta)

92(Rasta)

8/14 SAHARALA

11.

9/11

10/11

11/ 16

20/1

20/2

12/ 18

77(Rasta)

44/ 15 BELA

12 .

45/

46/ 1

10/1

10/2

19/2

22/1

63/ 2

297(Rasta) 298(Rasta)

299 (Rasta) 2498 G1/2005-14

9855

0.0685

0.1465

0.1265

0.0860

0.0405

0.0490

0.0580

0.0225

0.0480

0.0175

0.1465

0.0455

0.0150

0.0740

0.0885

0.0100

0.0180

0,0870

0.0530

0.0585

0.0030

0.0770

0.0105

0.0935

0.1390

0.1470

0.1350

0.1400

0.1290

0.0510

0.0260

0.0535

0.0125

0.1470

0.1320

0.0330

0.0605

0.0570

0.1065

0.1470

0.0025

0.0225

0.0180

0.0025

0.0910

0.1015

0.0470

0.0505

0.0385

0.0635

0.1015

0.0910

0.0075

0.0040

0.0470

0.0370

0.1015

0.0380

0.0155

0.0050

[F.N.R - 31015 / 01 /2005 - OR - II ] Harish Kumar , Under Secretary 9856

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12, 1927 [PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) 1

नई दिल्ली, 29 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ . 3129.-केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि मध्यप्रदेश राज्य में मांगल्या (इंदौर ) संस्थापन से हरियाणा राज्य में पियाला तथा दिल्ली राष्ट्रीय राजधानी क्षेत्र में बिजवासन तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए भारत पेट्रोलियम कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक विस्तार पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

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

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

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको इस अधिसूचना से युक्त भारत के राजपत्र की प्रतियाँ साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती हैं, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने के लिए उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के सम्बन्ध में श्री लाल सिंह, सक्षम प्राधिकारी, मुम्बई - मांगल्या पाइपलाइन विस्तार परियोजना, भारत पेट्रोलियम कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड, प्लाट न० फरीदाबाद- 121001 (हरियाणा) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । 590, सेक्टर 21 ए, 9857 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005/भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[ भाग ।।- खण्ड 3 ( ii) 」

अनुसूची

राज्य: हरियाणा

जिला: फरीदाबाद

तहसील: पलवल

क्षेत्रफल हेक्टेयर में

सर्वे नंबर

ग्राम का नाम

क०

0.0105

25/24

रायदसका

0.0105

43/10

0.0120

0.0060

46/3

0.0080

67/2

0.0130

0.0290

0.0100

81/16

0.0065

85/10

0.0130

93/2

0.0025

97/6

0.0380

122(नाला)

0.0225

123 (रास्ता)

0.0075

141(रास्ता)

0.0105

462(रास्ता)

0.0050

35/21

रून्धी

0.0055

44/9

0.0040

50/4

0.0250

0.0365

0.0250

0.0025

61/2

0.0105

0.0220

0.0255

0.0105

67/20

0.0210

76/2

0.0075

0.0050

0.0040

0.0180

80/5

0.0110

0.0355

81/11

0.0360

0.0485

85/8

0.0270

0.0050

107 (रास्ता)

0.0050

188 (रास्ता)

0.0050

179(रास्ता)

0.0075

209 (रास्ता)

0.0075

210 ( रास्ता)

0.0410

217 (रास्ता)

0.0105

427 (रास्ता)

0.0125

428 (रास्ता)

0.0010

12710

सेलौटी

9858

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

12/12 सेलौटी (जारी...)

15/8

56/14

58/4

89 (रास्ता)

91(रास्ता)

333(रास्ता)

340(रास्ता)

341(रास्ता) 4.

नांगल ब्रहमन

23/17

24/1

34/4

35/4

45/7

14 5.

27/4 छज्जूनगर

30/17

38/10

43/2

9/1

48/9

51/16

55/11

59/11

82(रास्ता)

126 (रास्ता)

150(रास्ता)

294(रास्ता)

305 ( रास्ता) 6.

रोनिजा

11/19

28/12/1

12/2

34/2

12/2

48(नाला) [PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] 4

0.0040

0.0025

0.0250

0.0025

0.0075

0.0100

0.0305

0.0380

0.0260

0.0550

0.0275

0.0050

0.0225

0.0105

0.0510

0.0610

0.0835

0.0910

0.0925

0.0675

0.0215

0.0075

0.0085

0.0035

0.0135

0.0025

0.0015

0.0020

0.0045

0.0070

0.0025

0.0060

0.0015

0.0025

0.0055

0.0025

0.0130

0.0055

0.0150

0.0080

0.0030

0.0595

0.0070

0.0330

0.0250

0.0075

0.0040 9859 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

0.0270

49(नाला)

रोनिजा (जारी...)

0.0025

72/1

किठवाड़ी

0.0105

0.0415

0.0200

0.0070

6/3

मांदकौल

0.0025

0.0875

0.0790

0.0150

10/5

0.0460

11/10

0.0570

0.0305

0.1010

0.0200

18/3

0.1125

0.0080

0.1015

0.0025

3/22

सोफताका

0.0130

6/2

0.0105

0.0200

9/23

10.

हरफली

0.0495

0.0510

0.0100

11/18

0.1190

22/1

0.0075

14/1

0.0520

0.0455

0.0125

0.1240

0.0360

0.1450

0.0305

14/14

0.0525

18/1

0.0195

19/6

0.0100

87 (रास्ता)

0.0485

7/16

सहराला

11 .

0.0935

8/6

0.0435

0.0120

0.0530

0.0935

0.1240

0.0105

0.0530

0.0165

0.0075

9/9

0.0530

0.0120

15 9860

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12, 1927 [PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii)] 2

11.

10/11

सहराला (जारी...)

0.0070

0.0960

0.1005

0.0935

0.0530

0.0150

12/18

0.0040

72(रास्ता)

0.0305

81 (रास्ता)

0.0230

91 ( रास्ता)

0.0075

0.0330

8/17 (सहराला नाला)

0.0125

20 (सहराला राजवाह)

12.

बेला

45/5

0.0035

46/21

0.0115

0.0020

297 (रास्ता)

0.0025

298 (रास्ता)

0.0025

299 (रास्ता)

[फा०स०आर०-31015 /01 / 2005-ओ आर-II ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 29th August , 2005

S. O. $129.-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 the 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 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 LAL SINGH, Competent Authority, Mumbai Manglya Pipeline Extension Project, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Plot No. 590, Sector 21A , Faridabad - 121001 (Haryana).

9861 भारत का राजपत्र ; सितम्बर 3 , 2005/भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

SCHEDULE

DISTRICT : FARIDABAD

TEHSIL: PALWAL

STATE: HARYANA AREA IN HECTARE

SURVEY NO .

NAME OF VILLAGE

S.NO.

0.0105

25/24

RAIDHASKA

0.0105

43/10

0.0120

0.0060

46/3

0.0080

67/ 2

0.0130

0.0290

0.0100

81/16

0.0065

85/10

0.0130

93/2

0.0025

97/ 6

0.0380

122(Drain)

0.0225

123 (Rasta)

0.0075

141 (Rasta)

0.0105

462(Rasta)

0.0050

35/21

RUNDHI

0.0055

44/9

0.0040

50/4

0.0250

0.0365

0.0250

0.0025

61/2

0.0105

0.0220

0.0255

0.0105

67/20

0.0210

76/2

0.0075

0.0050

0.0040

0.0180

80/5

0.0110

0.0355

81/11

0.0360

0.0485

85/8

0.0270

0.0050

107(Rasta)

0.0050

188(Rasta)

0.0050

179 (Rasta)

0.0075

209 (Rasta)

0.0075

210 (Rasta)

0.0410

217 (Rasta)

0.0105

427 (Rasta)

0.0125

428 (Rasta)

0.0010

12/10

SILAUTI

9862

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12, 1927 [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] 1

3 .

12/12

SILAUTI ( Contd ... )

0.0040

15/8

0.0025

0.0250

56/14

0.0025

0.0075

0.0100

58/4

0.0305

0.0380

0.0260

0.0550

89 (Rasta)

0.0275

91 (Rasta)

0.0050

333 (Rasta)

0.0050

340 ( Rasta)

0.0050

341 (Rasta)

NANGAL BRAHMAN

23/17

0.0225

0.0105

24/1

0.0510

34/4

0.0610

0.0835

0.0910

0.0925

0.0675

35/4

0.0215

45/7

0.0075

0.0085

CHAJJUNAGAR

27/4

0.0035

0.0135

0.0025

30/17

0.0015

38/10

0.0020

43/2

0.0045

9/1

0.0070

48/9

0.0025

51/16

0.0060

55/11

0.0015

59/11

0.0025

0.0055

82(Rasta)

0.0025

126 ( Rasta)

0.0130

150 (Rasta)

0.0055

294 (Rasta)

0.0150

305 ( Rasta)

ROUNIJA

11/19

0.0080

28/12/1

0.0030

12/2

0.0595

34/2

0.0070

0.0330

12/2

0.0250

0.0075

0.0040

48(नाला) 9863 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

0,0270

49(Drain)

ROUNIJA ( Contd ...)

0.0025

72/ 1

KITHWADI

0.0105

0.0415

0.0200

0.0070

MANDKAUL

6/ 3

0.0025

0.0875

0.0790

0.0150

10/ 5

0.0460

11/ 10

0.0570

0.0305

0.1010

0.0200

18/ 3

0:1125

0.0080

0.1015

0.0025

SOFTAKA

3/ 22

0.0130

6/ 2

0.0105

0.0200

HARPHALI

9/ 23

10.

0.0495

0.0510

0.0100

11/ 18

0.1190

22/1

0.0075

14/ 1

0.0520

0.0455

0.0125

0.1240

0.0360

0,1450

0.0305

14/ 14

0.0525

18/ 1

0.0195

19/ 6

0.0100

.87(Rasta)

0.0485

SAHARALA

7/ 16

11.

0.0935

8/ 6

0.0435

0.0120

0.0530

0.0935

0.1240

0.0105

0.0530

0.0165

0.0075

616

0.0530

0.0120

0.0070

10/ 11

0.0960

0.1005

0.0935

0.0530

0.0150

0.0040

12/ 18

0.0305

72(Rasta)

0.0230

81(Rasta)

0.0075

91(Rasta)

0.0330

8/ 17 ( Saharala Drain)

0.0125

20(Saharala Distri .)

0.0035

45/ 5

BELA

12.

0.0115

46/ 21

0.0020

0,0025

297(Rasta)

0,0025

298(Rasta)

0.0025

299(Rasta)

[F.N.R- 31015 / 01 /2005 -OR- II ]

Harish Kumar, Under Secretary 2498 G1/2005-15 2498 9864

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12, 1927 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] नई दिल्ली , 30 अगस्त, 2005

1 2

701

0.0080

5 वाटी(जारी...)

675

0.0080

406

0.0430

1282

0.0080 का. आ. 3130.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि मध्यप्रदेश राज्य में मांगल्या (इन्दौर) संस्थापन से हरियाणा राज्य में पियाला तथा दिल्ली राष्ट्रीय राजधानी क्षेत्र में विजलसन सतक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादकों के परिवहन के लिए भारत पेट्रोलियम कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक विस्तार पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

1283

0.0080

1388

0.0040

6 धनगांव

266

0.0220

451

0.0080

7 भैंसा

273

0.1080 और केन्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसी पापलाइन 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;

275

0.0080

588

0.0150

0.0080

8 धाना समशाबाद

0.3240. अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार, पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाईपलाईन ( 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 ;

0.0360

0.0250

141

0.0650

151

0.2450

152

0.0650

187

0.3600

188

0.0360 कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है. उस तारीख से जिसको इस अधिसूचना से युक्त भारत के राजपत्र की प्रतियों 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 लाल सिंह समक्ष प्राधिकारी, मुम्बई मांगल्या पाईपलाईन विस्तार परियोजना, भारत पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, 179 , विश्व लक्ष्मी नगर, मथुरा-281004 ( यू.पी. ) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

160

0.0440 अनुसूची

0.0650

इकदन्ता

363

0.0080 राज्य: उत्तर प्रदेश

बमूरी मुहाल गर्दी

तहसील: मथुरा

444

क्रम सं. ग्राम का नाम

जिला: मथुरा सर्वे नं.

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.1584 2

447

0.2520 1. अरहेरा

219

0.0072

440

0.2412 360

0.0160

439

0.1152 377

0.0500

11 बरारी

675

0.1180 379

0.0960

682

0.0280 316

0.0520

659

0.0760 368

0.0144

216

0.0100 162

0.0072

222

0.0060 133

0.0288

219

0.0150 48

0.0040

676

0.0080 50

!! गणेशरा

0.0150

मघेरा

136

679

0.0720

0.1440

139

0.0240

680

0.0080 146

0.0300

690

0.0040 141

0.2880

687

0.0080 337

0.0720

701

0.0060 343

0.1580

12 धाना तेजा

442

0.0040 341

0.0930

451

0.1440 216

0.0100

4 मासूम नगर

452

0.0060 5 वाटी

799

0.0060

535

0.1230 804

0.0150 9865 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/भाद्रपद 12 , 1927

New Delhi , the 30th August , 2005 12

457

0.0100

धाना तेजा (जारी...)

533

0.0080

483

0.0150

493

0.0220

206

0.0540

S.O. 3130.-Whereas it appears to the Central Government that It is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of petroleum products from Mariglys (indore) terminal in the State ofMadhya Pradesh , an extension pipeline to Piyala in the State ofHaryana and Bijwasan in the NCT of Delhi shouldbe laid by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited;

188

0.0580

204

0.0100

208

0.0040

मुहीउद्दीनपुर

Andwhereasit appears to the Central Government that for the purpose ofleying such pipeline it is necessary to acquire the right of user in land under which the said pipeline is proposed tobe laid andwhich isdescribed in the Schedule annexed hereto;

0.0360

पीलुआ सादिकपुर

0.0720

121

0.0360

691

0.0940

0.0150

692

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

684

0.0360

572

0.0360

i 15

34A

0.0810

अडूकी

0.0650

बाकरपुर

0.0220

17 नौगांव

0.0070

Any person , interested in the land described in the said Schedule, may, within twenty one days from the date on which copies of theGazette of India containing this notification are made.. available to the public, object in writing to the acquisition of the rightof user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land to Shri Lal Singh ,Competent Authority , Mumbai - Manglya Pipeline Extension Project , Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, 179, Vishwe Laxmi Nagar, Mathura - 281004 (Uttar Pradesh).

729

0.0060

SCHEDULE

601

0.2660

18 सतोहा असगरपुर

Tehsil:Mathura District : Mathura

1044

0.0550

1046

Area in Hectare

State : Uttar Pradesh S.No. Name Of Village Survey No.

0.0048

1052

0.0720

ARAHERA

319

0.0072 596

0.0080

360

0.0160 620

0.0080

377

0.0500 673

0.0130

379

0.0960 222

0.0150

316

0.0520 220

0.0060

368

0.0144 674

0.0096

2 GANESHRA

162

0.0072 675

0.0150

133

0.0288 659

0.0080

0.0040 597

0.0080

0.0150 19 छडगांव

3 MAGHERA

136

436

0.0200

0.1440

139

598

0.0240

0.0360

145

0.0300 552

0.0100

141

0.2880 559

0.1440

337

0.0720 595

0.0080

343

0.1580 560

0.0290

341

0.0930 561

0.0290

MASUMNAGAR

216

0.0100 [फा०सं०आर०-31015/3 /2005-ओ आर. 11 ]

5 VAATI

799

0.0060 हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

804

0.0150

701

0.0080 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

9866

0.0080

533

DHANA TEJA

0.0080

675

5 VAATI (Contd...)

0.0150

483

(Contd....)

0.0430

406

0.0220

493

0.0080

1282

206

0.0540

0.0080

1283

0.0580

188

0.0040

1388

0.0100

204

0.0220

266

DHANGAON

0.0040

208

MUHIUDDINPUR

0.0080

451

0.0360

PILUA SADIKPUR

0.1080

273

BHAINSA

0.0720

275

0.0080

0.0360

121

0.0150

588

0.0940

691

0.0080

DHANA SHAMSABAD 17.

0.0150

692

0.3240

0.0360

684

0.0360

572

0.0250

0.0810

34A

ADUKI

0.0650

141

0.0650

BAKARPUR

0.2450

151

0.0220

0.0650

152

0.0070

17 NAUGAON

0.3600

187

0.0060

729

0.0360

188

0.2660

SATOHA ASGARPUR 601

0.0440

160

0.0550

1044

0.0650

EKDANTA

0.0048

1046

366

0.0080

BAMURI MUHAL

0.0720

1052

444

0.1584

GARVI

0.0080

596

0.2520

447

0.0080

620

0.2412

440

0.0130

673

439

0.1152

0.0150

222

0.1180

675

11 BARARI

0.0060

220

0.0280

682

0.0096

674

0.0760

659

0.0150

675

0.0100

216

0.0080

659

0.0060

222

0.0080

597

0.0150

219

436

0.0200

0.0080

19 CHHADGAON

676

0.0360

598

0.0720

679

0.0100

552

0.0080

680

0.1440

559

0.0040

690

595

0.0080

687

560

0.0290 701

0.0060

0.0290

561

0.0040

442

12 DHANA TEJA

451

0.1440

[F.N. R - 31015/3/ 2005 -OR - II]

0.0060

452

HARISH KUMAR , Under Secretary

0.1230

535

457

0.0100 9867

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 30 अगस्त , 2005

0.0080

239

1 अरहेरा (जारी...)

0.1440

213

0.1800

212

0.0150

242

0.0400

317

0.0100

241

0.0200

316

0.0120

315

0.4470

314

0.0100

361

0.1520

362

0.3030

363

0.0650

364

0.3080

372

का. आ. 3131.- 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. 1023 तारीख 9 मार्च, 2005, जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 19 मार्च, 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 परियोजनां 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 घोशणा की थी ;

0.0120

369

0.1440

375

0.0080

374

0.1010 और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 30 मई, 2005 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी ;

2 गणेशरा

0.0720

0.0150

0.3320

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

0.2740

0.4400

132

0.1010

141

0.2960

159

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 ;

0.0220

157

0.2310

158

0.1300

161

0.0150

163

0.0720

136

3 मघेरा

0.3600 अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह घोशणा करती है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट उक्त भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाता है ;

137

0.3240

138

0.1080

145

0.1440

337

0.3960

338

0.0360

340

0.0940

343

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह निर्देश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोशणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने की बजाए , सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, भारत पेट्रोलियम कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा ।

0.0510

341

0.0080

336

अनुसूची

0.1800

131

0.1230

227

राज्य: उत्तर प्रदेश

जिला: मथुरा

मासूभनगर

तहसील: मथुरा

0.0450

224

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

सर्वे नं.

क्रम सं. ग्राम का नाम

0.0510

162

0.2520

170

0.0510

115

1 अरहेरा

0.3600

171

0.2680

116

0.0510

172

0.0230

118

0.0150

225

0.0800

119

0.1370

226

0.0360

160

0.0870

228

0.0110

122

0.0360

794

5 वाटी

0.0890

120

0.0080

798

0.1560

222

0.1370

796

0.0160

226

0.0290

797

0.0120

228

0.0080

813

0.0440

221

0.2160

806

0,0300

227

0.0200

807

0.0940

237 9868

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12, 1927 [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii )] 2

4 5

700

वाटी (जारी...)

0.2740

1277

वाटी (जारी...)

0.0800 699

0.1300

1276

0.0440 704

0.0080

1275

0.0800 698

0.0360

1339

0.0100 702

0.1440

1343

0.1590 679

0.0150

1340

0.2160 678

0.1230

1379

0.0100 677

0.0870

1338

0.0230 676

0.0800

1337

0.0080 652

0.0080

1380

0.0650 632

0.0440

1381

0.0720 633

0.3390

1-382

0.0290 628

0.0150

1383

0.0050 618

0.3680

1386

0.0150 617

0.0290

1387

0.1590 608

0.0080

1376

0.0080 607

0.0150

1404

0.0720 606

0.0290

1405

0.0020 447

0.1010

1409

0.0080 446

0.0940

1410

0.0540 445

0.0870

1411

0.0800 444

0.1010

1412

0.0870 443

0.0870

1413

0.0080 436

0.0080

1419

0.0080 431

0.0220

1421

0.0800 430

0.1590

1422

0.0510 429

0.1950

1426

0.0080 428

0.0080

1427

0.0870 426

0.0440

6 तारसी

0.1160 423

0.0080

0.0940 421

0.1300

100

0.0450 422

0.0150

धनगांव

452

0.2310 399

0.1370

453

0.1800 398

0.0080

454

0.1950 397

0.0360

456

0.1660 402

0.0150

455

0.0150 1169

0.0220

457

0.0060 1166

0.0780

449A

0.3240 1170

0.0440

449B

0.0180 1167

0.0150

435

0.0490 1164

0.2090

269

0.2240 1165

0.0200

268

0.1440 1162

0.0800

265

0.0200 1161

0.0080

263

0.2380 1124

0.0870

262

0.0510 1125

0.0020

261

0.0340 1123

0.1080

260

0.2740 1122

0.0030

245

0.0360 1121

0.0080

200

0.0130 1120

0.0510

197

0.0360 1119

0.0080

199

0.0120 1229

0.0150

202

0.1950 1273

0.0360

196

0.0720 1274

0.0080

195

0.2160 1279

0.0220

194

0.0070 1278

0.0650

167

0.0130 9869 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

0.0020

552

0.1950

166

भैंसा (जारी...)

7 धनगांव (जारी...)

551

0.0720

0.1590

165

0.1080

550

0.0100

158

0.0220

517

0.0720

154

0.0220

511

0.2090

155

0.2520

444

0.0200

149

0.0080

440

0.1950

147

0.0510

443

0.1440

146

0.1730

305

0.0780

144

0.1250

276

0.2670

116

0.1080

274

0.0220

145

272

0.0650

0.0220

136

0.1440

270

0.2090

133

259

0.0580 132

0.0010

0.0250

258

0.0230

131

0.0080

200

0.2160

126

0.0100

144

0.2160

125

0.1800

143

0.2890

184

8 सलेमपुर

0.1152

142

0.1080

175

0.0120

0.0100

174

0.0100

173

0.2810

0.1520

513

0.0100

166

512

0.3390

0.1650

164

510

0.3240

0.0050

207

439

0.0080 206

0.3320

277

0.0080

0.2160

205

268

0.0080

0.1010

203

0.0080

269

0.3530

0.0360

199

0.1680

0.0510

156

0.0260

155

0.0740

0.1080

154

0.0800

0.0010

165

0.0080

145

0.0200

210

0.0080

136

0.0080

186

0.2880

132

0.0020

0.0090

0.3600

9 भैंसा

0.0080

134

0.0080

133

0.0080

0.2360

0.0870

639

0.2240 630

0.0360

105

0.0080

0.0020

616

107

0.0120 611

0.2160

0.0080

610

0.0080

609

0.2520

0.1660

607

0.1080

0.0150

635

0.0080

636

0.0510

0.0870

634

0.1160

633

0.0080

0.0720

0.1800

0.0230 629

0.0940

185

623

0.0120

10 धानाशमसाबाद

184

0.0200

0.0080

589

150

0.0360 525

0.0290

0.2670

524

0.1730

0.0800

0.0080

523

0.2880 522

0.2310 9870

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

4 11

इकदन्ता

0.0180

0.0580

0.0360

0.0650

0.2220

0.0010

0.2190

0.0080

0.0250

0.1160

378

0.0216 12 बमूरी-मुहाल गर्दी

405

0.0648

404

0.0864

403

0.1296

402

0.0080

398

0.0040

399

0.0040

445

0.0100

367

0.0936 13 बरारी

207

0.0120

208

0.0460

209

0.0720

210

0.0870

211

0.0700

212

0.0080

213

0.1310

217

0.0480

214

0.0600

215

0.0080

220

0.0800

221

0.0360

218

0.2960

675

0.0400

677

0.0782

682

0.0080

683

0.0130

689

0.0150

688

0.0800

686

0.0360

685

0.0080 14 धानातेजा

165

0.0140

166

0.0100

171

0.0010

172

0.1250

173

0.0090

174

0.0070

180

0.0080

181

0.0050

182

0.1600

184

0.0720

185

0.0150

186

0.0080

187

0.0060

207

0.0500

205

0.0880

495

0.3860

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

497

0.0720

14 धानातेजा (जारी...)

494

0.0080

534

0.0260

151

0.0720

496

0.0020

498

0.0220

536

0.0080

537

0.0150

450

0.0080

449

0.0880

448

0.0360

444

0.1800

443

0.1080

199

0.0780

15 मुहीउद्दीनपुर

200

0.0640

203

0.0690

202

0.0790

209

0.0130

210

0.0470

212

0.0670

214

0.0650

215

0.0240

216

0.0340

222

0.4350

221

0.0710

0.2240

16 पीलुआ सादिकपुर

0.2380

0.0360

0.1240

0.1440

0.2240

0.0100

120

0.2020

122

0.1670

124

0.0120

200

0.0150

203

0.1140

201

0.2370

197

0.0800

158

0.0250

156

0.0080

157

0.0720

164

0.1560

163

0.0360

356

0.0170

685

0.0120

501

0.2300

502

0.2300

497

0.0120

493

0.0850

494

0.0080

482

0.0870

508

0.0010

509

0.1160

468

0.0150

467

0.2170 9671

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड3 ( ii) ]

4 2

522

0.2380 10 पीलुआ सादिकपुर

528

0.1340 (जारी...)

587

0.0970

529

0.2510

0.1310

586

0.0720

570

571

0.0720

0.3380

573

0.2810

574

0.0520

575

583

0.0580

0.0440

586

0.0290

492

530

0.0030

0.1100

491A

491 B

0.0020

175

0.2270 17 अडूकी

173

0.0710

172

0.2380

0.0820

131

0.0360

130

0.0960

0.3030

0.6360

0.4540

171

0.0290

0.0440

0.0650

0.3240

0.0650

0.3030

0.0180 18 बाकरपुर

0.1230 19

0.1370

150

182

0.0150

0.2240

0.0360

188

0.0440

143

0.0650

0.0720

136

0.0150

137

0.0940

0.0870

150

0.0290

0.3600

0.3400

150

100

0.0150

0.2310

101

0.3240

0.0290

1506

0.0072 20 महोली

1484

0.0792

1483

0.0090

1482

0.0060

1481

0.3888

0.0576

1351

2498 GI /2005-16

4 2

1350

0.1584 20 महोली (जारी...)

0.0144

1349

0.0660

1348

1312

0.0936

0.0144

1286

1287

0.0144

1307

0.0385

1306

0.2376

1305

0.0144

1304

0.0792

1262

0.0390

0.0100

1263

1277

0.2880

1278

0.0576

0.0100

1279

0.0360

1285

0.2016

1284

0.0050

1283

1017

0.2304

1018

0.0850

1030

0.0144

0.3888

1036

1035

0.0080

0.0060

1033

0.2448

1034

0.1000

1037

1039

0.0120

0.0144

1044

0.0480

1042

0.1872

1043

0.3456

1045

1046

0.1584

0.0140

1048

0.0100

1050

0.2304

1049

0.0110

1079

752

0.1800

0.0072

733

728

0.1152

0.0648

727

726

0.0648

725

0.1584

723

0.0072

0.0240

720

0.0288

715

713

0.0090

0.0960

719

715

21 नौगांव

0.2740

716

0.0140

0.3030

730

731

0.0260

732

0.4900

668

0.0310

215

0.3750

0.0420

206

0.1290

231 9872

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3, 2005/BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3(i )) 2

4 21

232

0.1080

नौगांव (जारी...)

0.0110

794

सतोहा असगरपुर (जारी...)

233

0.0190

217

0.0360 203

0.0240

728

0.0360 184

0.4610

755

0.0360 32

0.0720

756

0.0360 81

0.6120

757

0.0290 79

0.2090

807

0.0830 78

0.0080

652

छड़गांव

0.1900 65

0.0440

653

0.1140 207

0.0090

654

0.1880 77

0.0590

642

0.3950 13

0.0650

637

0.0170 12

0.0220

641

0.2500 125

0.0080

639

0.3530 1043

0.0580

597

22 सतोहा असगरपुर

0.1230 1045

0.1010

550

0.0960 1053

0.0870

551

0.2670 176

0.0110

554(C/T)

600

0.0220

553

0.2350 628

0.0510

638

0.1080 655

0.0400

555

0.2380 656

0.0370

556

0.0870 657

0.0360

558

0.0230 658

0.0530

557

0.0940 660

0.2130

447

0.0220 668

0.3600

401

0.0270 669

0.0120

440

0.1950 671

0.0800

441

0.0170 219

0.0420

444

0.0440 1042

0.0720

442

0.1590 1050

0.1250

443

0.2020 601

0.0220

435

0.2340 621

0.0150

431

0.3930 627

0.2160

564

0.2810 648

0.1010

445

0.0150 649

0.0150

434

0.0130 654

0.0080

436

0.0080 672

0.1440

24 ओल

136

0.1730 221

0.0220

137

0.1370 218

0.0440

144/2

0.0440 216

0.0280

144/1

0.0940 192

143

0.2550

0.0100 748

145

0.2740

0.0330

110

754

0.0220

0.1010

109

0.2380 758

0.0720

146

0.0230 759

0.0260

108

0.0220 780

0.0330

107

0.1500 761

0.0380

102

0.0090 762

0.0670

149

0.1730 813

0.0110

150

0.0500 806

0.0830

152

0.5910 808

0.0830

189

0.0510 799

0.0710

166

0.1800 9873 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 30th August, 2005 3

411

0.1260

25 जैत

825

0.1130

0.0680

943

0.0180

216

1249

0.0200

412

0.1470

1156

0.0510

0.0320

221

0.2480

354

202/1

0.0100

452

0.1690

1122

0.0230

S. O. 3131.- Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O.1023 , datedthe 9th March , 2005 , issued under sub-section ( 1 ) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition ofRight ofUser in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act ) published in theGazette of India dated the 19th March , 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 pur- pose oflaying an extension pipeline for transportation ofpetroleum prod- ucts 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;

1189

0.0610

337

0.3060

179

0.0040

Andwhereas the copies of the said Gazette notification were made avail- able to the public on the 30th May , 2005;

0.2580

1245

0.0280

186

0.0380

668

Andwhereas the competent authority has, under sub- section ( 1 ) ofsec- tion6 ofthe said Act, submitted report to the Central Government;

0.0970

867

0.1470

948

0.0330

189/1

127

0.0510

Andwhereas theCentral Government , after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipe- line, has decided to acquire the right of user therein;

0.0100

1250

0.1110

1186

0.0180

162/2

0.0710

1186

1294

0.1830

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 1 ) ofsection 6 ofthe said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that the right ofuser in the said land , specified in the Schedule , appendedto thisnotification , is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;

0.0180

904

0.2270

727

0.0220

144/2

727

0.1190

0.0080

147/3

0.0800

124

And further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section (4) of section 6ofthe said Act , the Central Government hereby directs that the right ofuser in the said land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Central Government, vest on the date ofthe publication of this declaration, in Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, free from all encumbrances.

0.0200

289

SCHEDULE

147/2

0.0150

1177

0.3030

Tehsil: Mathura

District : Mathura State : Uttar Pradesh

0.0050

263

Area in Hectare 148

0.0080

SurveyNo.

S.No. Name Of Village

147

0.0200

117

0.0330

115

ARAHERA

0.0510 1164

0.2290

116

0.2680

0.0290

141

118

0.0230 1175

0.0080

0.0800

119

950

0.2190

0.0360

160

0.0110 1258

0.0030

122

120

0.0890

0.0100

1297

222

0.1560

0.0030

1298

226

0.0180 174

0.0800

228

0.0120 [फा०सं०आर०-31015/3 /2005-ओ आर. -11 ]

221

0.0440 हरीश कुमार , अवर सचिव

227

0.0300

237

0.0940

0.0080

239 9874

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

0.1440

ARAHERA ( Contd... ) 213

212

0.1800

242

0.0150

317

0.0400

241

0.0100

316

0.0200

315

0.0120

314

0.4470

361

0.0100

362

0.1520

383

0.3030

384

0.0650

372

0.3080

360

0.0120

375

0.1440

374

0.0080

2 GANESHRA

0.1010

0.0720

0.0150

0.3320

0.2740

132

0.4400

141

0.1010

150

0.2960

157

0.0220

156

0.2310

161

0.1300

163

0.0150

3 MAGHERA

138

0.0720

137

0.3600

138

0.3240

145

0.1080

337

0.1440

338

0.3960

0.0360

340,

343

0.0940

341

0.0510

336

0.0080

131

0.1800

227

MASUMNAGAR

0.1230

224

0.0450

162

0.0510

170

0.2520

171

0.3600

172

0.0510

225

0.0150

226

0.1370

228

0.0870

5 VAATI

794

0.0360

798

0.0080

796

0.1370

797

0.0290

813

0.0080

806

0.2160

807

0.0200

700

0.2740

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

699

0.1300 VAATI ( Contd ..... )

704

0.0080

698

0.0360

702

0.1440

679

0.0150

678

0.1230

677

0.0870

676

0.0800

652

0.0080

632

0.0440

633

0.3390

628

0.0150

618

0.3680

617

0.0290

608

0.0080

607

0.0150

606

0.0290

447

0.1010

446

0.0940

445

0.0870

444

0.1010

443

0.0870

436

0.0080

431

0.0220

430

0.1590

429

0.1950

428

0.0080

426

0.0440

423

0.0080

421

0.1300

422

0.0150

399

0.1370

398

0.0080

397

0.0360

402

0.0150

1169

0.0220

1168

0.0780

1170

0.0440

1167

0.0150

1164

0.2090

1165

0.0200

1162

0.0800

1161

0.0080

1124

0.0870

1125

0.0020

1123

0.1080

1122

0.0030

1121

0.0080

1120

0.0510

1119

0.0080

1229

0.0150

1273

0.0360

1274

0.0080

1279

0.0220

1278

0.0650

1277

0.0800 9875

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

0.1590

165

0.0440

1276

VAATI ( Contd.....)

0.0100

158

DHANGAON (Contd.....)

0.0800

1275

0.0720

154

0.0100

1339

0.2090

155

0.1590

1343

0.0200

149

0.2160

1340

0.1950

147

0.0100

1379

0.1440

146

0.0230

1338

0.0780

144

0.0080

1337

0.2670

116

0.0650

1380

0.0220

145

0.0720

1381

0.0220

136

0.0290

1382

0.2090

133

0.0050

1383

0.0010

132

0.0150

1386

0.0230

131

0.1590

1387

0.2160

126

0.0080

1376

0.2160

125

0.0720

1404

0.2890

184

SALEMPUR

0.0020

1405

0.1080

175

0.0080

1409

0.0100

174

1410

0.0540

0.2810

173

0.0800

1411

0.0100

166

0.0870

1412

0.1650

164

0.0080

1413

0.0050

207

0.0080

1419

0.3320

206

0.0800

1421

0.2160

205

0.0510

1422

0.1010

203

0.0080

1426

0.3530

0.0870

1427

0.1680

0.1160

TARSI

0.0260

0.0940

0.1080

0.0450

100

0.0010

165

0.2310

452

DHANGAON

0.0200

210

0.1800

453

0.0080

186

0.1950

454

0.0020

0.1660

456

0.3600

9 BHAINSA

0.0150

455

0.0080

0.0060

457

0.0080

0.3240

449A

0.0870

639

0.0180

449B

0.0360

630

0.0490

435

0.0020

616

0.2240

269

0.2160

611

0.1440

268

0.0080

610

0.0200

265

0.0080

809

0.2380

263

0.1660

607

0.0510

262

0.0150

635

0.0340

261

0.0080

636

0.2740

260

0.0870

634

0.0360

245

0.0080

633

0.0130

200

0.1800

629

0.0360

197

0.0120

623

0.0120

199

0.0080

589

0.1950

202

525

0.0290

0.0720

196

0.1730

524

0.2160

195

0.0080

523

0.0070

194

0.2310

522

0.0130

167

0.0020

552

0.1950

166 9876

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12, 1927 [PART II-SBC. 3(ii)) 1

4 9 BHAINSA ( Contd..... ) 551'

0.0720

11 EKDANTA

0.0180 550

0.1080

0.0580 517

0.0220

0.0360 511

0.0220

0.0650 444

0.2520

0.2220 440

0.0080

0.0010 443

0.0510

0.2190 305

0.1730

0.0080 276

0.1250

0.0250 274

0.1080

0.1160 272

0.0650

12 BAMURI MUHAL

378

0.0216 270

0.1440

GARVI

405

0.0648 259

0.0580

404

0.0864 258

0.0250

403

0.1296 200

0.0080

402

0.0080 144

0.0100

398

0.0040 143

0.1800

399

0.0040 142

0.1152

445

0.0100 73

0.0120

367

0.0936 74

0.0100

13 BARARI

207

0.0120 513

0.1520

208

0.0460 512

0.3390

209

0.0720 510

0.3240

210

0.0870 439

0.0080

211

0.0700 277

0.0080

212

0.0080 268

0.0080

213

0.1310 269

0.0080

217

0.0480 199

0.0360

214

0.0600 156

0.0510

215

0.0080 155

0.0740

220

0.0800 154

0.0800

221

0.0360 145

0.0080

218

0.2960 136

0.0080

675

132

0.0400

0.2880

677

0.0782 74

0.0090

682

0.0080 134

0.0080

683

0.0130 133

0.0080

689

0.0150 75

0.2380

688

0.0800 59

0.2240

686

0.0360 105

0.0080

685

0.0080 107

0.0120

165

0.0140 71

0.0080

166

0.0100 58

0.0080

171

0.0010 57

0.2520

14 ! DHANA TEJA

172

0.1250 55

0.1080

173

0.0090 41

0.0080

174

0.0070 33

0.0510

180

0.0080 34

-0.1160

181

0.0050

0.0720

182

0.1600

0.0230

184

0.0720 DHANA SHAMSABAD 185

0.0940

185

0.0150 184

0.0200

186

0.0080 150

0.0360

187

0.0060

0.2670

207

0.0500

0.0800

205

0.0880 0.2880

495

0.3860 9877

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005 / भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

0.2380

0.0720

497

14 DHANA TEJA

0.1340

528

0.0080

494

PILUA SADIKPUR 522 (Contd.....) .

(Contd.....)

587

0.0970

0.0260

534

0.2510 151

0.0720

529

0.1310

0.0020

496

586

0.0220

0.0720 498

570

0.0080

536

0.0720

571

537

0.0150

573

0.3380

0.0080

450

574

0.2810

0.0880

449

575

0.0520 448

0.0360

0.0580

583

444

0.1800

0.0440

586

0.1080

443

0.0290

492

0.0780

15 MUHIUDDINPUR 199

0.0030

530

0.0640

200

0.1100

491A

203

0.0690

0.0020

491 B

0.0790

202

0.2270

175

17 ADUKI

0.0130

209

173

0.0710

0.0470

210

172

0.2380 212

0.0670

0.0820

131

214

0.0650

0.0360

130

215

0.0240

0.0960 216

0.0340

0.3030

0.4350

222

0.6360

0.0710

221

0.4540

0.2240

16 PILUA SADIKPUR

0.0290

171

0.2380

0.0440

0.0380

0.0650

0.1240

0.3240 30

0.1440

0.0650

0.2240

0.3030

0.0100

0.0180

0.2020

BAKARPUR

120

0.1670

0.1230

122

19 KHEDIA

0.0120

124

150

0.1370

0.0150

0.0150 200

182

0.1140

203

0.2240

0.2370

201

168

0.0360

0.0800

197

0.0440

0.0250

158

0.0650

143

0.0080

156

0.0720

157

0.0150

136

0.1560

164

0,0940

137

0.0360

163

0.0870

150

356

0.0170

0.0290

0.0120

685

0.3600

0.2300

501

0.3400

150

0.2300

502

0.0150

100

0.0120

497

0.2310

101

493

0.0850

0.3240

0.0080

494

0.0290

482

0.0870

0.0072

1506

20 MAHOLI

0.0010

508

0.0792

1484

509

0.1160

1483

0.0090 468

0.0150

0.0060

1482

467

0.2170 9878

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

4 20

0.3888

1481

MAHOLI (Contd ......)

1351

0.0576

1350

0.1584

0.0144

1349

1348

0.0660

1312

0.0936

1286

0.0144

1287

0.0144

1307

0.0385

1306

0.2376

1305

0.0144

1304

0.0792

1262

0.0390

1263

0.0100

1277

0.2880

1278

0.0576

1279

0.0100

1285

0.0380

1284

0.2016

1283

0.0050

1017

0.2304

1018

0.0850

1030

0.0144

1036

0.3888

1035

0.0080

1033

0.0060

1034

0.2448

1037

0.1000

1039

0.0120

1044

0.0144

1042

0.0480

1043

0.1872

1045

0.3456

1046

0.1584

1048

0.0140

1050

0.0100

1049

0.2304

1079

0.0110

752

0.1800

733

0.0072

728

0.1152

727

0.0648

726

0.0648

725

0.1584

723

0.0072

720

0.0240

715

0.0288

713

0.0090

719

0.0960

715

21 NAUGAON

0.2740

716

0.0140

730

0.3030

731

0.0260

732

0.4900

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

4 21 NAUGAON

668

0.0310

215

0.3750 (Contd...... )

206

0.0420

231

0.1290

232

0.1080

233

0.0190

203

0.0240

184

0.4610

0.0720

0.6120

0.2090

0.0080

0.0440

207

0.0090

0.0590

0.0650

0.0220

125

0.0080 22 SATOHA ASGARPUR 1043

0.0580

1045

0.1010

1053

0.0870

176

0.0110

600

0.0220

628

0.0510

655

0.0400

656

0.0370

657

0.0360

658

0.0530

660

0.2130

668

0.3600

669

0.0120

671

0.0800

219

0.0420

1042

0.0720

1050

0.1250

601

0.0220

621

0.0150

627

0.2160

648

0.1010

649

0.0150

654

0.0080

672

0.1440

221

0.0220

218

0.0440

216

0.0280

192

0.2550

748

0.0330

754

0.1010

758

0.0720

759

0.0260

760

0.0330

761

0.0380

762

0.0670

813

0.0110 9879 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

0.5910

152

24 AOL ( Contd ...... ) .

0.0830

SATOHA ASGARPUR 806

0.0510

189

0.0830

808

(Contd......)

0.1800

166

0.0710

799

0.1260

411

25 JAIT

0.0110

794

0.1130

825

0.0360

217

0.0680

943

0.0360

728

0.0180

216

0.0360

755

0.0200

1249

0.0360

756

0.1470

412

0.0290

757

0.0510

1156

0.0630

807

0.0320

221

0.1900

652

23 CHHADGAON

0.2480

354

0.1140

653

0.0100

202/1

0.1880

654

0.1690

452

0.3950

642

0.0230

1122

0.0170

637

0.0610

1189

0.2500

641

0.3060

337

0.3530

639

0.0040

179

0.1230

597

0.2580

1245

0.0960

550

0.0280

188

0.2670

551

0.0380

668

0.0110

554(C/T)

0.0970

667

0.2350

553

0.1470

948

0.1080

638

0.0330

189/1

0.2380

555

0.0510

127

0.0870

556

0.0100

1250

0.0230

558

0.1110

1186

557

0.0940

0.0180

162/2

0.0220

447

0.0710

1186

0.0270

401

0.1830

1294

0.1950

440

0.0180

904

441

0.0170

0.2270

727

0.0440

444

0.0220

144/2

0.1590

442

0.1190

727

0.2020

443

0.0080

147/3

0.2340

435

0.0800

12.4

0.3930

431

0.0200

26.

0.2810

564

0.0150

147/2

0.0150

445

0.3030

1177

0.0130

434

0.0050

263

0.0080

436

0.0080

148

0.1730

136

24 AOL

0.0200

147

0.1370

137

0.0330

117

0.0440

144/2

0.2290

1164

0.0940

144/1

0.0290

141

0.0100

143

0.0080

1175

0.2740

145

0.2190

950

0.0220

110

0.0030

1258

0.2380

109

0.0100

1297

0.0230

146

0.0030

1298

0.0220

108

0.0800

174

0.1500

107

0.0090

102

0.1730

[F.N. R- 31015/3/2005 -OR - II ] HARISH KUMAR, Under Secretary 149

0.0500

150

2498 G1/2005-17 9880

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12, 1927 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 30 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3132. 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 प्रतियों 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 तहसील: लाजपुरा

जिला: कोटा

क्र०

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नम्बर 1

3 1

गलासा

749

750

746

747

744

745/859

742

743

741

740

730

728

727

720

721

717

714

716

715

687

605

686

618

619

626

620

621

681

680

677

673

676

674

648

668

649

660

652

659

658 2

कादीहेडा

435

434 राज्य: राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.0360

0.0650

0.1230

0.1730

0.3100

0.1370

0.2170

0.2100

0.0290

0.0080

0.2740

0.1370

0.0360

0.2520

0.2810

0.0220

0.2900

0.0080

0.1520

0.2020

0.1450

0.1010

0.1370

0.0290

0.0080

0.3030

0.2450

0.0150

0.2020

0.2450

0.0020

0.2020

0.1450

0.0940

0.1590

0.1370

0.0220

0.3030

0.0220

0.1660 9881

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

3 2

430 कादीहेड़ा (जारी......)

431

426

426/538

425

406

407

362

361

167

166

169

168

185

183

182

184

181

137

116

115

114

102

101

103

100

6644362 65 74

260/987 3 जाखोड़ा

260

261

259

262

257

256

255

247

246

241

242

237

219/870

225

222

216

216/996

214

213

211

338 4 किशनपुरा (केथून)

339

340

337

322 4

0.0720

0.2520

0.2160

0.0150

0.2310

0.0040

0.4550

0.1370

0.0220

0.0290

0.0650

0.0040

0.0150

0.0220

0.1370

0.1300

0.0020

0.0580

0.0220

0.0290

0.0440

0.0360

0.0080

0.1160

0.1080

0.0150

0.0220

0.0150

0.0040

0.3100

0.0580

0.0440

0.0290

0.0220

0.2310

0.0220

0.2100

0.2600

0.0220

0.3960

0.0290

0.0360

0.2390

0.0730

0.0020

0.3250

0.0150

0.2170

0.0040

0.1375

0.2170

0.0440

0.1735

0.0220

0.0150

0.0080

0.2460

0.1950

0.1590

0.0800

0.0040

0.0290

0.1730

0.1230

0.2100

0.0150 9882

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12 , 1927

324 किशनपुरा (केथून) (जारी......)

323

264

267

269

273

274

272

277

282

280 5 गोदलियाहेड़ी

468

470

469

466

465

472

464

463

293/595

453

452

451

450

436

449

300

299

301

278

279

269

268

217

218

215

221

198

179

180

182

183

166

165

151

152

153 6 मोरपा

274

272/372

273

272

267

266

266/434

268

265

262

261

260

253

234

236

252

237

246

246/403

246/402 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ] 4

0.3980

0.0940

0.0290

0.1730

0.0360

0.0440

0.0940

0,0080

0.0290

0.0220

0.1520

0.0360

0.1665

0.0220

0.1520

0.0150

0.1880

0.1450

0.0290

0.0020

0.1800

0.0290

0.0360

0.0800

0.0360

0.0220

0.3320

0.1160

0.4040

0.1590

0.1880

0.0220

0.2240

0.0650

0.1300

0.1730

0.0220

0.0510

0.0580

0.1660

0.1230

0.1800

0.0150

0.1730

0.1950

0.1160

0.2600

0.0290

0.0730

0.0150

0.1300

0.2310

0.0080

0.0800

0.0290

0.2530

0.0150

0.2890

0.0440

0.0150

0.1450

0.0360

0.2160

0.1730

0.0080

0.0080 9883

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

3 2

241 6 मोरपा (जारी........

242

244

243

214

220

217

217/453

272 7 अरनिया

269

271

270

265

212

263

209

191

192

200

193/402

195

194

181

175

174

135

136

142

141

140

145

147

156

147/383

154

153 8

रसूलपुर

72828309876

824 9

ताथेड़

825

822

777

774

773

772

771

770

770/870/928

770/870

541 10 बृजेशपुरा

540

534

536

535

529

520

477

476 4

0.0290

0.1590

0.0650

0.0360

0.0290

0.1160

0.3470

0.0290

0.0360

0.0290

0.0080

0.0510

0.2600

0.3460

0.1100

0.0220

0.0360

0.0080

0.0940

0.2020

0.0600

0.1300

0.0290

0.1450

0.1100

0.0220

0.1010

0.0150

0.0650

0.2100

0.3030

0.1100

0.1880

0.2100

0.0020

0.2310

0.1800

0.0510

0.0440

0.0940

0.1450

0.0580

0.0020

0.1300

0.1100

0.0290

0.0580

0.1300

0.1600

0.3170

0.2600

0.3030

0.0020

0.6280

0.0580

0.0020

0.0220

0.3250

0.0940

0.0440

0.1300

0.2600

0.0220

0.1010

0.0580 9884

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

3 10

479 बृजेशपुरा (जारी........

481

482

475

474

482/547

483

520

461

465

466

467

459

450

451

453

454

455

456

457

411

410

409

386

385

380

349

347

346

276

275

273

274

271

270

284

266

215

216

217

218

219

220

209

210

21 11

पिपल्दा शेखान

255/271

255

256

257

254

253 12

रामखडली

330

329

328

327

295

296

291

292

293

280

276 [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ) ] 4

0.0020

0.0650

0.0440

0.0020

0.0360

0.0290

0.0150

0.3030

0.0150

0.1160

0.0080

0.0150

0.1370

0.1160

0.0940

0.0360

0.0040

0.0290

0.0440

0.0360

0.0220

0.1160

0.1450

0.0040

0.0360

0.2520

0.0150

0.1450

0.0080

0.0150

0.0650

0.0720

0.0080

0.1370

0.0360

0.0440

0.0360

0.0220

0.0040

0.1450

0.0080

0.1160

0.1880

0.0290

0.0040

0.0290

0.0510

0.2670

0.0870

0.1660

0.0360

0.0290

0.0150

0.1800

0.1450

0.0150

0.0510

0.2160

0.0220

0.0040

0.0510

0.0290 9885

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

3 2

277 12 रामखेड़ली (जारी......)

278

279

273

268

269

270

266

271

271/365

265

213

210

211

212

185

183

184

188/380

174

173

172

180

162/379

162

152

151

148

149

150/340

150

58/377

1/374

210 13

नोटाना

209

208

207

206

204

720

719

721

722

723

717

715

716

705

694

693

691

687

2281 14 चन्द्रेसल

2279

2277

2276

2269

361 0.0650

0.0080

0.0440

0.1450

0.0580

0.2240

0.1450

0.0020

0.0510

0.0360

0.0510

0.0290

0.0650

0.1590

0.1100

0.0650

0.2050

0.1300

0.0040

0.2600

0.0650

0.0150

0.0440

0.0290

0.0360

0.0580

0.3470

0.0040

0.0510

0.0080

0.0510

0.0150

0.0800

0.0440

0.0650

0.0940

0.0150

0.0580

0.1880

0.0080

0.1100

0.0720

0.0080

0.0150

0.0220

0.1880

0.3970

0.1520

0.0080

0.2020

0.1950

0.2310

0.0290

0.0360

0.1950

0.1450

0.0720

0.1370

0.4040

0.1800

0.0580

0.1450

0.0360

0.3460

0.0220

0.0080

0.0440 9886

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

3 14

362 चन्द्रसल (जारी.........

2220

2211

2210

2151

2150

2149

2146

2145

2143

2142

2140

2138

2137

2136

2135 15

देवली मच्छियान

270

531

527

526

525

524

520

519

512

508

509

510

511

513

505 16

97 किशनपुरा उर्फ नयागांव

94/524

95/474

775

776

774

772

768

767

769

765

764

759

753

752 17 गावड़ी

637

636

635

634

611

612

609

606

594

593

595 [PART II SEC . 3 (ii) ] 4

0.0440

0.0080

0.4040

0.0510

0.0150

0.0080

0.0440

0.0220

0.2670

0.0800

0.0510

0.0440

0.0940

0.1160

0.0360

0.1010

0.1450

0.1730

0.0360

0.0080

0.0650

0.0080

0.1950

0.0080

0.0150

0.1950

0.2520

0.0510

0.2520

0.0360

0.0150

0.2310

0.0080

0.0150

0.0440

0.3030

0.0360

0.0080

0.3900

0.1880

0.2740

0.0290

0.0720

0.3030

0.0290

0.1230

0.1160

0.0720

0.0290

0.1590

0.1800

0.0290

0.0580

0.3390

0.0580

0.0080

0.0940

0.3250

0.0360

0.0150

0.1950

0.1010

0.1800 9887

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

596

0.230 गावड़ी (जारी..

597

0.02 0

598

0.1660

776

0.0360

769

0.1450

768

0.1520

767

0.2880

716

0.0440

710

0.0940

711

0.1730

712

0.1730

685

0.0510

684

0.0290

683

0.1010

682

0.0940

0.0650

681

680

0.0290

679

0.0290

665

0.0150

293

0.0510

0.0440

292

147

0.1450

146

0.1160

145

0.1590

144

0.0800

143

0.0440

142

0.0080

141

0.0510

0,0360

139

140

0.0720

129

0.0440

130

0.1520

132

0.1370

0.0650

0.4400

(फा० सं०आर०-31015/8/2004-ओ आर-11 )

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 30th August , 2005

S. O. 3132. Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in tha publio interest that for the transportation of petroleum products fromManglya(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 shouldbe laid by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited;

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) Aot, 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 Sohedule 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

TEHSIL : LADPURA

STATE : RAJASTHAN

DISTRICT : KOTA

S.No. NAME OF VILLAGE

AREA IN HECTARE

SURVEY NO.

GALANA

749

0.0360

750

0.0650

746

0.1230

747

0.1730

0.3100

744

0.1370

745/859

2498 GI/2005-18

9888

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12 , 1927

3 2

742 GALANA ( Contd ....... )

743

741

740

730

728

727

720

721

717

714

716

715

687

605

686

618

619

626

620

621

681

680

677

673

676

674

648

668

649

660

652

659

658 2

KADIHEDA

435

434

430

431

426

426/538

425

406

407

362

361

167

166

169

168

185

183

182

184

181

137

116

115

114

102

101

103

100

70 4

0.2170

0.2100

0.0290

0.0080

0.2740

0.1370

0.0360

-0.2520

0.2810

0.0220

0.2900

0.0080

0.1520

0.2020

0.1450

0.1010

0.1370

0.0290

0.0080

0.3030

0.2450

0.0150

0.2020

0.2450

0.0020

0.2020

0.1450

0.0940

0.1590

0.1370

0.0220

0.3030

0.0220

0.1660

0.0720

0.2520

0.2160

0.0150

0.2310

0.0040

0.4550

0.1370

0.0220

0.0290

0.0650

0.0040

0.0150

0.0220

0.1370

0.1300

0.0020

0.0580

0.0220

0.0290

0.0440

0.0360

0.0080

0.1160

0.1080

0.0150

0.0220

0.0150

0.0040

0.3100

0.0580 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

9889

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3, 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

3 2

KADIHEDA ( Contd ......)

JAKHODA

260/987

260

261

259

262

257

256

255

247

246

241

242

237

219/870

225

222

216

216/996

214

213

211

338 KISHANPURA (KETHUN )

339

340

337

322

324

323

264

267

269

273

274

272

277

282

280 5

GODALIYAHEDI

468

470

469

466

465

472

464

463

293/595

453

452

451

450

436

449

300

299

301

278

279

269

268 4

0.0440

0.0290

0.0220

0.2310

0.0220

0.2100

0.2600

0.0220

0.3960

0.0290

0.0360

0.2390

0.0730

0.0020

0.3250

0.0150

0.2170

0.0040

0.1375

0.2170

0.0440

0.1735

0.0220

0.0150

0.0080

0.2460

0.1950

0.1590

0.0800

0.0040

0.0290

0.1730

0.1230

0.2100

0.0150

0.3980

0.0940

0.0290

0.1730

0.0360

0.0440

0.0940

0.0080

0.0290

0.0220

0.1520

0.0360

0.1665

0.0220

0.1520

0.0150

0.1880

0.1450

0.0290

0.0020

0.1800

0.0290

0.0360

0.0800

0.0360

0.0220

0.3320

0.1160

0.4040

0.1590

0.1880

0.0220

0.2240 9890

[PART II-SEC , 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

3 2

217 5

GODALIYAHEDI ( Contd ...... )

218

215

221

198

179

180

182

183

166

165

151

152

153 6

274 MORPA

272/372

273

272

267

266

266/434

268

265

262

261

260

253

234

236

252

237

246

246/403

246/402

241

242

244

243

214

220

217

217/453

28 7

272 ARNIYA

269

271

270

265

212

263

209

191

192

200

193/402

195

194

181

175

174

135

136

142

141

140

145

147 4

0.0650

0.1300

0.1730

0.0220

0.0510

0.0580

0.1660

0.1230

0.1800

0.0150

0.1730

0.1950

0.1160

0.2600

0.0290

0.0730

0.0150

0.1300

0.2310

0.0080

0.0800

0.0290

0.2530

0.0150

0.2890

0.0440

0.0150

0.1450

0.0360

0.2160

0.1730

0.0080

0.0290

0.1590

0.0650

0.0360

0.0290

0.1160

0.3470

0.0290

0.0360

0.0290

0.0080

0.0510

0.2600

0.3460

0.1100

0.0220

0.0360

0.0080

0.0940

0.2020

0.0800

0.1300

0.0290

0.1450

0.1100

0.0220

0.1010

0.0150

0.0650

0.2100

0.3030

0.1100

0.1880

0.2100 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

3 1

156 ARNIYA (Contd ....... )

147/383

154

153 8

RASULPUR

72822309876 9

TATHED

824

825

822

777

774

773

772

771

770

770/870/928

770/870 10 BRAJESHPURA

541

540

534

536

535

529

520

477

476

479

481

482

475

474

482/547

483

520

461

465

466

467

459

450

451

453

454

455

456

457

411

410

409

386

385

380

349

347

346

276

275

273

274

271

270

284

9891 4

0.0020

0.2310

0.1800

0.0510

0.0440

0.0940

0.1450

0.0580

0.0020

0.1300

0.1100

0.0290

0.0580

0.1300

0.1600

0.3170

0.2600

0.3030

0.0020

0.6280

0.0580

0.0020

0.0220

0.3250

0.0940

0.0440

0.1300

0.2600

0.0220

0.1010

0.0580

0.0020

0.0650

0.0440

0.0020

0,0020

0.0360

0.0290

0.0150

0.3030

0.0150

0.1160

0.0080

0.0150

0.1370

0.1160

0.0940

0.0360

0.0040

0.0290

0.0440

0.0360

0.0220

0.1160

0.1450

0.0040

0.0360

0.2520

0.0150

0.1450

0.0080

0.0150

0.0650

0.0720

0.0080 9892

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

3 10

266 BRAJESHPURA ( Contd ...... )

215

216

217

218

219

220

209

210

21 11

PIPALDA SHEKHAN

255/271

255

256

257

254

253 12 RAMKHEDLI

330

329

328

327

295

296

291

292

293

280

276

277

278

279

273

268

269

270

266

271

271/365

265

213

210

211

212

185

183

184

188/380

174

173

172

160

162/379

162

152

151

148

149

50/340

150

58/377 4

0.0080

0.1370

0.0360

0.0440

0.0360

0.0220

0.0040

0.1450

0.0080

0.1160

0.1830

0.0290

0.0040

0.0290

0.0510

0.2670

0.0870

0.1660

0.0360

0.0290

0.0150

0.1800

0.1450

0.0150

0.0510

0.2160

0.0220

0.0040

0.0510

0.0290

0.0650

0.0080

0.0440

0.1450

0.0580

0.2240

0.1450

0.0020

0.0510

0.0360

0.0510

0.0290

0.0650

0.1590

0.1100

0.0650

0.2050

0.1300

0.0040

0.2600

0.0650

0.0150

0.0440

0.0290

0.0360

0.0580

0.3470

0.0040

0.0510

0.0080

0.0510

0.0150

0.0800

0.0440

0.0650

0.0940

0.0150 9893

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

3 2

57 12

RAMKHEDLI (Contd ......)

1/374

210 13

NOTANA

209

208

207

206

204

720

719

721

722

723

717

715

716

705

694

693

691

687

2281 CHANDRESAL

2279

2277

2276

2269

361

362

2220

2211

2210

2151

2150

2149

2146

2145

2143

2142

2140

2138

2137

2136

2135

270 DEVLI MACHHIYAN

531

527

526

525

524

520

519

512

508

509

510

511

513

505

97 KISHANPURA URF NAYAGAON

94/524

95/474 4

0.0580

0.1880

0.0080

0.1100

0.0720

0.0080

0.0150

0.0220

0.1880

0.3970

0.1520

0.0080

0.2020

0.1950

0.2310

0.0290

0.0360

0.1950

0.1450

0.0720

0.1370

0.4040

0.1800

0.0580

0.1450

0.0360

0.3460

0.0220

0.0080

0.0440

0.0080

0.4040

0.0510

0.0150

0.0080

0.0440

0.0220

0.2670

0.0800

0.0510

0.0440

0.0940

01160

0.0360

0.1010

0.1450

0.1730

0.0360

0.0080

0.0650

0.0080

0.1950

0.0080

0.0150

0.1950

0.2520

0.0510

0.2520

0.0360

0.0150

0.2310

0.0080

0.0150

0.0440 9894

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

3 16 KISHANPURA URF NAYAGAON

52 (Contd......)

775

776

774

772

768

767

769

765

764

759

753

752 17

GAWDI

637

636

635

634

611

612

609

606

594

593

595

596

597

598

776

769

768

767

716

710

711

712

685

684

683

682

681

680

679

665

293

292

147

146

145

144

143

142

141

139

140

129

130

132

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

0.3030

0.0360

0.0080

0.3900

0.1880

0.2740

0.0290

0.0720

0.3030

0.0290

0.1230

0.1160

0.0720

0.0290

0.1590

0.1800

0.0290

0.0580

0.3390

0.0580

0.0080

0.0940

0.3250

0.0360

0.0150

0.1950

0.1010

Q.1800

0.2380

0.0290

0.1660

0.0360

0.1450

0.1520-

0.2880

0.0440

0.0940

0.1730

0.0510

0.0290

0.1010

0.0940

0.0650

0.0290

0.0150

0.0510

0.0440

0.1450

0.1160

0.1590

0.0800

0.0440

0.0080

0.0510

0.0360

0.0720

0.0440

0.1520

0.1370

0.0650

0.4400

[F.N. R- 31015/8/2004 -OR - II]

HARISH KUMAR, Under Secretary 9895 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005 / भाद्रपद 12, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 2 सितम्बर, 2005

का. आ. 3133.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को.लोक हित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उड़िसा राज्य में पारादीप से पश्चिमी वंगाल राज्य में हल्दिया तक कच्चे तेल के परिवहन के लिए इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए,

और केन्द्रीय सरकार को उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि ऐसी भूमि जिसके भीतर पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में बर्णित है, में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए,

अतः, अन्न, केन्द्रीय सरकार , पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइल ( 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 , उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशाय की घोषणा करती है,

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनूसुची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है , इक्कीस दिन के भीतर भूमि के अन्दर पाइपलाइन बिछाने के संबंध में श्री अरबिन्द घोष, सक्षम प्राधिकारी, पारादीप हल्दिया पाइपलाइन परियोजना, इंडियन ऑयल कॉरपोरेशन लिमिटेड, कसबेरिया, डाकघर- खंजनचक, पूर्व मिदनापुर- 721602 (पश्चिमी बंगाल ) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

2498 GI/2005-19 9896

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRAPADA 12, 1927

अनुसूची

राज्य: पश्चिमी बंगाल

पुलिस थाना: नन्दकुमार जिला: पूर्व मिदनापुर

क्षेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

अधिकारिता सूचि संख्या प्लॉट संख्या हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर (2)

(1)

(3)

(4)

एयर (5)

(6) 71

4138

83 शीतलपुर

2593

4139

2546

92 73

1718

92 भबानीपुर

1717

1670

1675

1677

1676.

1679

1680

2267

2268

1703

1702

1700

1695-

42 पुलिस थाना - चण्डीपुर

799

भग्रबानखाली (भाग- म )

801

802

803

816

817

00 00 00 888

826

2652823556673 पुलिस थाना - खेजुरी

खारन

127

681

682

683

695

698

699

696/1114

पुलिस थाना- भगवानपुर

तेथिवाड़ी

153

448

49 9897 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3, 2005/ भाद्रपद 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

(6)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

449

451

888 00

455

[फा. सं. आर-25011/20/2005 - ओ.आर. - 1 ]

एस. के. चिटकारा, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 2nd September, 2005

S. O. 3133.- Whereas , it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of petroleum (crude) from Paradip in the State of Orissa to Haldia in the State of West Bengal , a pipeline should be laid by Indian Oil Corporation Limited,

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

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 of1962) , the Central Government hereby declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein,

Any person , interested in the land described in the said Schedule may , within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of the notification issued under sub- section (1 ) of section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India , are made available to the general public , object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein or laying of the pipeline under the land to Sri Arabinda Ghosh , Competent Authority , Paradip Haldia Crude Oil Pipeline Project, Indian Oil Corporation Limited. Kasberia , Post Office- Khanjanchak , Purba Midnapur-721602 (West-Bengal) .

9898

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRAPADA 12 , 1927 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

Schedule

PoliceStation :Nandakumar,

NameofVillage

Jurisdiction List No ..

Plot. No.

(2)

(1)

(3)

4138 Shitalpur

2593

4139

2546

1718 Bhabanipur

1717

1670

1675

1677

1676

1679

1680

2267

2268

1703

1702

1700

1695 PoliceStation - Chandipur

799 Bhagabankhali (Part -II) 36

801

802

803

816

817

826 PoliceStation - Khajuri

Khararı

127

681

682

683

695

698

699

696/1114 PoliceStation - Bhagabanpur

Tethi Bari

153

448 449

451

455

District: Purba Midnapur

State:West-Bengal

Area

Hectare

Are SquareMetre (4)

(5)

(6) 00

00 00 8888 00

22652025558673

[ F. No. R-25011/20/2005-0.R. - I ] S. K. CHITKARA , Under Secy.

9899

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

श्रम मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त , 2005

का. आ. 3134.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकारस्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , कानपुर ( यू.पी. ) के पंचाट( संदर्भ संख्या आई. डी. 125/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 8-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/661/1998- आई आर (बी- I ) ]

अजय कुमार, डैस्कअधिकारी

MINISTRY OF LABOUR

New Delhi , the 8th August, 2005

S.O. 3134. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( ID - 125/99 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Kanpur (U.P. ) 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 Contral Government on 8-8-2005.

[No. L- 12012/661/ 1998- IR(B- I))

AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

the then branch manager being fully satisfied of the geniuneness of the proposals. It is stated that the branch was inspected by the internal audit and external audit inspectors but none of them commented against the work and conduct of Sri Saxena. The Assistant General Manager being biased against the workinan trade union activities unilaterallytransferred Sri Saxena against the transfer policy. The representing union of the workman lodged a protest and approached the ALC(C) who inturn restrained the management from transfer. The workman was issued a charge-sheet on 20-9-93 completed the formality of the enquiry where management completely failed to lead any legally convincing evidence in support ofthe larges . It is also alleged that the witnesses of the management produced inthe enquiry failed to substantiate the charges despite that the enquiry officer proved the charges against the workman.Enquiry officer did not prove charge Nos . 1( iii ) 2,3,4,5 and 6. It has also been alleged that on the basis of perverse findings given the enquiry officer charge No. 1(i ) havebeenproved to the effect that the recommendation of the loan were not on the prescribed proforma. It has also been älleged that when the sanctioning authority has sanctioned the loan how at later stage it could be said that the recommendation of the loan were not on prescribed proforma. The punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority reducing the pay of the workman to one stage lower for one year on the basis of perverse finding is arbitrary, unfair, unjust , illegal and hence deserves to be set aside . On the basis of these allegations it has been prayed that the action ofthe management in imposing the above penalty be declared as illegal and unjust and the workman be suitably compensated for mental terture and agony faced for the illegal act of the management by the workman.

BEFORE SRI SURESH CHANDRA, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT, SARVODAYA NAGAR, KANPUR, U.P.

Industrial Dispute No. 125/99 Inthe matter of dispute between:

The General Secretary State Bank of India Staff Association 2/363 Namner, Agra

AND

The Assistant General Manager State Bank of India Region No. III Zonal Office Sanjai Place Agra .

AWARD

1. Central Government Ministry of Labour vide notification No. L- 12012 /661 /98 - IR(B - I) dated 5-5-1999 has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:-

"Whether the action of the AGM and Disciplinary Authority of State Bank of India vide his letter dated 30-6-1997 is justified ? Ifnot to what relief the workman isentitled ?"

3. In reply management has alleged that the present dispute is not a dispute within the meaning of Sec. 2- A of the I.D. Act or within the meaning of section 2-K of the Act as the petty matters have been kept away from the provisions of the Act . Workman made irregularities while submitting his recommendations regarding granting of tractor loan. It is alleged that the workman did not work according to the provisions given in codified book of instructions . The consistent irregularity would amount to misconduct . Sanction of the proposal by the branch manager do not change the nature of the misconduct . As the workman failed to perform according to rules/ instruction he was issued chargesheet but the workman could not prove his innocence rather he admitted his misconduct mentioned in charge No. 1 and on the basis of his admission of misconduct he was rightly punished and the order of the disc . authority dated 30-6-1997 is just, proper fair and in accordance with law. It has further been allegedby the bank that any irregularity could not be traced by the audit party shall not become good conduct automatically. The workman was rightly charge-sheeted bythe bank anddomestic enquiry was properly conducted and on the basis of the admission of the claimant he was held guilty of charge No. 1( i ) and partly ofcharge No.1 (ii ) and thus workman was rightly punished. Bank has denied the fact that the enquiry officer was under pressure . Enquiry officer has rightly held that the recommendations of the 2. Case in short of the workman is that the workman Sri M. N. Saxena while working as officiating Rural Development Officer recommend some of the loan proposals and these proposals were duly sanctioned by 9900

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12, 1927

loan were not on prescribed proforma. It has also been alleged that appraisal report in connection with the said loanswas notprepared by the claimant and admittedly the recommendations were not made by the workman on the prescribed proforma, which tentamount to misconduct. The loanwas inorder it was repaid and there was no loss to the bank are immaterial for the purpose of the present case. Bankhas also denied allegations of perverse finding and the case isbased on the admission of facts and admitted facts need not be proved . It has also been alleged by the bank that in case this Tribunal arrives at a conclusion that thedomestic inquiry was not conducted fairly and properly management be given an opportunity to prove the charges afresh. On the basis of these allegations it has been prayed that the claim of the workman be rejected.

4. After the pleadings were exchanged between the parties a preliminary issue regarding fairness of domestic inquirywas framed vide order dated 19-2-2001 . vide order dated27-3-2002 learned predecessor held that the enquiry report submitted by the enquiry officer being based on no evidence is perverse and is therefore rejected . Thereafter the management was given opportunity to lead evidence insupport ofhis case .

5. The management failed to adduce evidence despite opportunities having been afforded to them and even the management has not cared to pay the adjournment cost for their delayed action and adjournments . Ultimately proceedings were fixed for arguments with the consent theparties.

6. The domestic enquiry has already been set aside by my learned predecessor vide order dated 27-3-02 . In the absence of any other additional evidence to substantiate the charges levelled against the workman by the management , the workman cannot be held responsible for the alleged charges . On going through the record it is clear that this is a case where the workman has been arbitrarily punished for no proved fault of the workman. In any case the trival lapse alleged on the part of the workman whereby the report was not submitted on prescribed proforma for sanctioning the loan though the loan was duly sanctioned by the authority and the repayment of the said loan has alreadybeenmade is of no avail to management . Therefore , evenifthis trival lapse on the part ofthe concemed workman is considered to be proved it cannot be made a reasonable andjust ground for awarding the punishment by the bank . The action of the management, is therefore , not only arbitrary but also a self speaking act of the management to punish the workman for insufficient ground and of no fault atall.

7. There is no evidence worth the name to strengthen the charges as proposed by the management against the workman.

8. In the absence of any evidence the charges having not been proved the action of the management vide letter dt. 30-6-1997 issued by the disciplinary authority proposing punishment of reducing the pay of the workman to one stage lower for one year is held to be arbitrary unfair and unjust which is accordingly liable to be set aside.

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] 9. In view of above the wrokman is entitled for the benefit in terms of money which were withheld arbitrarily by their illegal punishment order.

SURESH CHANDRA, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3135.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार देना बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , बैंगलोर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 55/2002) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 5-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/67/2002- आई आर ( बी.- II ) ] सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 8th August, 2005

S.O. 3135.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref . No. 55/ 2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court, Bangalore as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Dena Bank and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on5-8-2005:

[No. L - 12012/67/2002 - IR (B - II) ] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy. ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT, "SHRAM SADAN" ,

III MAIN , III CROSS , II PHASE, TUMKUR ROAD , YESHWANTHPUR, BANGALORE- 560 022 . Dated: 26th July, 2005

I PARTY

Present: SHRI A.R. SIDDIQUI , Presiding Officer C.R. No. 55/02 II PARTY

TheAsstt . General Manager, Dena Bank , Sona Towers , 1st Floor, 71, Millers Road, Bangalore-560052

Shri D. C. Channegowda, C/o . D. C. Lakkanna, No. 251 , 14th Main, 2nd Cross NagendraBlock, Bangalore-560 050

AWARD

1. The Central Government by exercising the powers conferred by clause ( d) of sub -section 2A of the Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has referred this dispute vide order No. L- 12012/67 / 9901 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

2002/IR (B- II ) dated 24th September 2002 for adjudication on the following schedule:

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the Management ofDena Bank in dismissing the service of Shri D. C. Channegowda is legal and justified ? If not, what reliefthe concerned workman is entitled to?"

severe, harsh and disproportionate to the gravity ofthe charges of misconduct admittedby him, all along . He had expressed his regrets and made an undertakingby his reply dated 2-5-98 that he will not commit such miscondcut in future and therefore, a lenient view ought to have been taken against him keeping in view of the fact that he held a low level post of Cleaner Cum Sepoy (Daftry) and his past record of 12 year service was very much clean and unblemished and that he had about 26 years of future service. At para 12 he submitted that as per new B.P.S dated 10-4-02 which has come into force, three new punishments are newly added for gross misconduct committed by the workman concerned and those are:

2. In his Claim Statement the first party made a request to this tribunal to pass an award holding that action of the Second Party Management Bank in dismissing him from service vide order dated 23-9-99 is illegal and improper and he may reinstated in service to his original post of Cheer Cum Sepoy (Daftry ) with full back wages , continuity of service and all other consequential benefits.

1. Removal from service with Superannuation Benefits,

2. Compulsory Retirement with Superannuation Benefits,

3. Discharge from Service with Superannuation Benefits.

Therefore, the first party is entitled to have the benefits of the new settlement .

4. The management filed its Counter Statement and inter alia contended that the punishment of dismissal imposed upon the first party is very much proportionate keeping in view the gravity of the misconduct committed by him . It contended that the first party during the course of enquiry though participated in the enquiry proceedings taking the help ofUnion General Secretary Shri B. R. Dwarki , pleaded guilty to the charges of misconduct all along and further those charges of misconduct against him were also probed by the management -byproducing oral as well as documentary evidence and that on the basis of the material brought on recortl before the enquiry officer and the plea of guilt made by the first party, enquiry officer submitted his findings holding the workman guilty ofthe charges resulting into the impugned dismissal order, Giving out the facts of the case the management at paras 5 & 6 of the Counter Statement contended as under:-

Para5: That Shri D. C. Channe gowda daftry, Dena Bank, Sjimoga (hereinafter called as first party workman) availed consumer loan ofRs. 20,000/-on 21-12-97 from Shimoga District Cooperative Central Bank Extension Counter, Shimoga (SDCC Bank Shimoga). Two ofthe sub staff of SDCC Bank Shimoga stood as Co-obligants . First party workman produced hissalarycertificates on the Branch letter head and a salary deduction agreement on Rs . 20/- Bond Paperpurportedto have been signed by the Branch manager, Dena Bank Shimoga using Branch manager's stamp at appropriate places . The loan accountwas not conducted satisfactorily and SDCC 3. His case inbrief is that while he was working in the above said capacity, he was issued with the two separate chargesets dated 28-3-98 and 31-3-98 and by filing a common reply dated 2-5-98 he admitted those charges , unconditionally, in terms of clause 19.12 (e ) of B.P.S. However, the management initiated Domestic Enquiry only in respect of chargesheet dated 31-3-98 , he (the first party) pleaded guilty to the charges making a request to consider his case sympathetically awarding a minor punishment ; The enquiry office by his letter dated 30-4-99 submitted his findings holding him guilty of both the charges of misconduct as per chargesheet dated 31-3-98 and during the course of personal hearing held on 20-8-99 on the proposed punishment of dismissal , the first party once again requested the Disciplinary Authority to take lenient view by imposing a punishment lesser than the punishment of dismissal, however , his submission was not considered and he was dismissed from service vide dismissal order dated 20-3-99; that he preferred an appeal and during the course of personal hearing held on 1-6-2000 and 29-12-2000 by the Appellate Authority he made written submision on 1-6-2000 to view the matter sympathetically and to award lesser punishment on the ground that no financial loss was caused to the bank due to the misconduct committed by him . The Appellate Authority however, confirmed the order of the Disciplinary Authority passing an order dated 9-11-01. Therefore, he raised an industrial dispute resulting into the present reference . At Para 9 of the Claim Statement the first party averred that he is not aggrieved by the procedural aspect of holding the Domestic Enquiry and he therefore, concedes the fairness of the Domestic Enquiry and that there is no need to frame additional issue on the saidpoint . He submitted that the punishment of dismissal passed against him however, is illegal and improper amounting to unfair labour practice and victimization as the punishment of dismissal is very 9902

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12, 1927

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]

in view the above conduct of the first party, the fact that he held a very low level post of Daftry and not ignoring the fact that there was no financial loss caused to the management bank . punishment of dismissal be converted into a lesser punishment to do justice in the matter .

Bank issued notice to first party workman with a copytoBranchManager Dena Bank, Shimoga . The SDCC Bank issued a letter to Branch Manager Dena Bank Shimoga enclosing the copy of the loan deduction agreement, calling upon the Branch Manager to deduct Rs.2,666/-from the salary of the first party workman.

8. In support of his submission, learned counsel submitted a decision reported in AIR1984 Supreme Court Page976 and a decision of our Hon'ble High Court reported in 2002 ( 3 ) KCCR SN 252 (DB) page 245. In Syndicate Bank Vs.P. Ramananda Nayak . As noted above , learned counsel for the management was not available when the matter was taken up for argument . Now therefore, keeping in view the averments made in the Claim Statement and the charges of misconduct levelled against the first party stand beyond any doubt during the course of enquiry proceedings . The first question to be considered by this tribunal would be "whether the findings of the enquiry suffered from any perversity " ? As noted above , learned counsel for the first party did not canvass any arguments challenging the findings of the enquiry officer holding the first party workman guilty of the abovesaid two charges .

Para 6: - The branch manager, Dena Bank's Shimoga observed that the salary deduction certificate was not signed by him and he has not authorized the use ofBranch Manager's Stamp. He wrote back to SDCC Bankdenying the execution of the said salray deduction agreement . The SDCC Bank also produced the salary certificate issued on the letter head of Dena Bank Shimoga signed by Branch Manager, Shimoga . This letter was also not issued by the BranchManger, Dena Bank, Shimoga and was not signedby him. He has also not authorized the use ofBranch Manager's Stamp. This brought to the light that first party workman has submitted forged documents to SDCC Bank, Shimoga to avail the loan . The SDCC Bank initiated legal action against first party workman and others ( Co- obligants) and obtained decree under co -operative banking rules ."

5. In the last, the management submitted that the BPS dated 10-4-02 does not come in the way of the action ofthe management in dismissing the workman from service andthat the misconduct committed by him being very grave in nature deserved the punishment of dismissal which punishment ofdismissal does not call for any interference atthe hands of this tribunal.

6.Keeping in view the averments made in the Claim Statement by the first party conceding the fairness of the enquiry proceedings and the submission made by his learned counsel before this tribunal on 21-3-05 that he concedes the fairness of enquiry and therefore , additional preliminary issue may not be framed, this tribunal passed an order recording finding that the Domestic Enquiry conducted against the first party by the Second Party was fair and proper . Then the matter came to be posted to hear onthe perversity of the enquiry findings and the quantum of the punishment . On 6-4-2005, learned counsel for first party filed 13 documents and then were marked as Ex. W1 to W.13. On 16-6-2005 , learned counsel for the first party was heard and case came to be adjourned for arguments to be advanced on behalf of the Second Party, thrice i.e, on 20-6-05, 21-6-05 and 5-7-05. Since the learned counsel for the Second Party did not turn up on the last date of hearing, matter was taken as heard and is posted this day for award .

7. Learned counsel for the first party Shri G. Hegde in his arguments fairly submitted that the first party all along has admitted the charges of misconduct levelled against him making a request to the management to take lenient view against him and therefore this conduct on the part of the first party admitting the guilt from the very inception deserved lenient view. He submitted that keeping

9. From the perusal of the enquiry findings marked before this tribunal on behalf of the first party himself at Ex.M6 , it is very much evident that during the course of enquiry, the first party mincing no words , rather in very clear terms , pleaded guilty of both the charges of misconduct levelled against him . However, the management to be on the safer side produced the oral evidence in the statement of MW1 & MW2 and the documentary evidence at MEX 1 to 4 to substantiate the charges of misconduct levelled against the first party independent of his plea of guilt. Therefore, taking into considerations, the plea of guilt made by the first party and based on the oral and documentary evidence pressed into service on behalf of the Second Party, the learned enquiry officer rightly came to the conclusion that the above said two charges of misconduct have been very much proved by the Second Party and accordingly submitted his above said enquiry findings . As noted above , on the receipt of the enquiry findings, the first party appeared before the Disciplinary Authority during the course of personal hearing on the proposed punishment of dismissal and once again admitting the charges of misconduct made a request to take lenient view against him . He repeated his request during the course of personal hearing held by the Appellate Authority. Not being satisfied with the Appellate Authority order confirming the punishment dismissal passed by the Disciplinary Authority, the first party raised an industrial dispute resulting into the reference in question . Therefore , now the only question to be considered would be as to "whether the punishment of dismissal passed against the first party was severe and disproportionate to the charges ofmisconduct committed by him in the light of the gravity of the misconduct committedby the first party " ? If so , he deserves any lesser punishment as against the punishment of dismissal ? It is not in dispute that from the very beginning of the disciplinary action being taken against the first party by issuing the charge sheet dated 31-3-98 , 9903 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2) AT DHANBAD .

PRESENT

Shri B. Biswas, Presiding Officer.

Inthe matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10 (1)

(d) ofthe I.D. Act,, 1947

Reference No. 102 of 2003

PARTIES

Employers in relation to the management ofZonal Manager , Central Bank of India and their workman.

APPEARANCES:

: None

Onbehalfofthe workman

: None

Onbehalf of the employers

State : Jharkhand

: Industry: Coal .

Dated, Dhanbad, the 19th July, 2005 .

AWARD

he by submitting his reply to the chargesheet admitted the charges of misconduct in no uncertain terms . He went on admitting the charges at every stage of the proceedings culminating into the order passed by the Appellate Authority confirming the punishment of dismissal . It is again not in dispute that the misconduct committed by the first party has not resulted into any financial loss to the management bank. Of course it is also not in dispute that the past record of the service of 12 years was without any blemish and adverse remarks against the first party. Therefore, keeping in view above factors , the nature of misconduct and so also not loosing the sight of the fact that he held a lowest post of Cleaner Cum Sepoy(Daftry) . The aforesaid observations made by their Lordship of our Hon'ble High Court in the last Para of the above said decision , it appears to me that ends ofjustice will be met if the punishment of dismissal is reduced to punishment of termination of his services w.e.f. the date of order of dismissal made by the Disciplinary Authority so as to enable him to get terminal benefits towards the services rendered by him. Accordingly reference is answered and following award is passed.

AWARD

The Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 )(d) of the I.D. Act . , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 12011/ 143/2003 - IR (BII), dated the 29th September, 2003.

The order ofpunishment of dismissal dated 20-3-99 passed against the first party is hereby replaced by order oftermination of his services w.e.f. 20-3-99 . He shall be entitled to terminal benefits . No order to cost .

SCHEDULE

(Dictated to PA transcribed by her corrected and signed by me on 26th July 2005) .

A.R. SIDDIQUI , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2005

"Whether the action of the management of Central Bank of India in reverting Shri Arun Prakash. Poddar, Shri VijayNarain Singh and Shri Ganesh Dutt Sharma from CTO to Clerk by interpreting Clause 52.3.2 along with52.3.6 correct and justified ? If not , what relief áre the workmen entitled to ? "

का. आ.3136.- 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 नं 2 धनबाद के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 102/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 03-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -12011/143/2003- आई आर ( बी.- II ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 8th August, 2005

S.O. 3136.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 102/ 2003) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court, No. 2 , Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employer in relation to the management of Central Bank of India and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 03-8-05.

2. In this case neither the concerned workmen nor their representative is found present . None also appears onbehalf of the management . It transpires from the record that the instant reference is pending since 2003 for disposal. Italso further transpires that consecutive notices and show cause notice were issued to the concerned workman/sponsoring union. As per Rule 10 (B) of the I.D. Central Rules , 1957 it is mandatory on the part of the concerned workman/sponsoring union to file Written Statement on their behalf within 15 days from the date of receipt of the order of reference . The concerned workmen/ sponsoring union not only violated the said provision of Rule but also did not consider necessary to respond to the notices issued by this Tribunal . Gesture of the workmen/ sponsoring union if is taken into consideration will expose clearly that they are not interested to proceed with the hearing ofthis case. Hence the case is closed. Accordingly a ' No dispute ' Award is passed in this reference presuming non-existence of any industrial dispute between the parties .

[No. L- 12011/ 143/2003 - IR (B- II) ]

B. BISWAS, Presiding Officer C. GANGADHARANA, Under Secy.

2498 G1/2005-20 9904

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3137.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 कां 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 बैंगलोर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 32/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 05-08-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[संः एल-12012/15/2001- आई आर(बी- II ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 8th August , 2005

and worked for about 257 days in 1982,194 days in 1983 and 120 days in the year 1984 as a Sub Staff; that apart from the above dates he worked continuously on daily wagefromMarch 1995 to February 1996 for a period of249 days as a sub staff to the utmost satisfaction on the officials ofthe Second Party Bank inviting no adverse remarks during the above said period; that during the month of February 1996 the Second Party all of a sudden refused to provide work to the first Party without assigning any reason much less holding any enquiry and several representations made by him to the Second Party claiming work on daily wage basis gone in vain as no action was taken by the Second Party in that regard; that on account of refusal of the workby the Second Party, the first party and his family have been put to great hardship ; that in case services of first party are to be regularized no hardship will be caused to the Second Party. On the other hand it is the first party and his family will be put to hardship without any employment and the earnings of the first party.

S.O. 3137. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 32/ 2001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court , Bangalore as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Canara Bank and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 5-8-2005.

[No. L - 12012/15/2001 - IR (B - II) ]

C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT

" SHRAM SADAN",

III MAIN , III CROSS, II PHASE , TUMKUR ROAD , YESHWANTHPUR, BANGALORE-560022

Dated: 21st July, 2005

PRESENT : SHRI A.R. SIDDIQUI

Presiding Officer

C.R. NO . 32/01

I PARTY

II PARTY

Shri Prakash Prabhu ,

The Managing Director,

Sri Ganesh Nilaya, No. 58, Canara Bank, CB,

Bannerghatta Post,

Head Office , No. 112 , J.C.

Road

Bangalore-560083

Bangalore-560002

AWARD

1. The Central Government by exercising the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub - section 2A of the Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has referred this dispute videorder. No. L- 12012/ 15/2001/IR(B - II) dated 27thApril, 2001 for adjudication on the following schedule:

schedule

"Whether Shri V. Prakash Prabhu , former daily wager

isjustified in claiming regular employment from the Management of M/s . Canara Bank, Bangalore? If not , what relief the disputant is entitled for?"

2. The case of the first party workman , as made out in the Claim Statement , in brief, is that he was working under the Second Party as, Daily Wage worker since 1982

3. The Second Party management filed its Counter Statement and interalia contended that it is a Nationalised Bank having several branches across the country. The persons seeking employment to the bank are to follow the prescribed procedure and the service conditons governed by Sastry Award, Desai Award and Bipartite Settlement entered into between the Bank representative and All India Unions representing the workmen; that the bank has adopted a policy of engaging daily wagers to meet the exigencies and for smooth functioning of the bank, it will engage daily wagers in the leave vacancy of the subordi- nate staff as well as whenever there is any temporary increase in the workload . For this purpose a panel of Daily Wagers will be maintained at the District Level empanelling the daily wagers to fulfill their requirements as qualifications , age etc. and sponsored by the Employment Exchange subject however, to the merits going through process of selection by an interview. These Daily Wagers are engaged on day to day basis and they will be eligible daily wages for the day of their engagement . This being the case , the first party was never engaged as a daily wager nor empanelled in the list of daily wagers nor by way of process by Employinent Exchange . However, he was engaged as a Coolie on casual basis by Second Party's Town Hall branch to meet temporary exigencies. Even otherwise the first party is not eligible for empanelment as a daily wager since he was engaged only as a Coolie for a period of less than 240 days on casual basis intermittently during the years 1995 , 1996. He did not work for 240 days in any 12 calendar months. He was engaged only for 159 days and paid Coolie charges towards his work during the period 1995 , 1996. Therefore , he cannot claim or raise disptue as discontinuation of his engagement by the Second party, did not attract any provisions of the ID Act or any other law. Moreover , his services were discontinued during the year 1996 and whereas , he raised the dispute after a long delay and that itself shows lack of bonafides of his claim. The management denied the contentions of the first party that he worked under it during the years 1982, 1983 & 1984 for 257 days , 194 days and 120 days , respectively. It contended that the first party was engaged भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

only as a Coolie purely on casual basis only for 159 days intermittently during the period from 15-4-1995 to 16-2-1996 to meet the temporary exigencies . The management also denied the contention that the first party made several representations seeking employment and there was no action taken by it on such representations . The management finally requested this tribunal to reject the reference.

4.Now therefore, in the light ofthe above , the points as per the reference to be gone into would be- "(1 ) Whether the first party said to be former daily wager is justified in claiming regular employment from the management ?

(2) If not, to what relief the first party is entitled to?"

5.During the course oftrial after filing of the Counter Statement by the management, the matter came to be posted for evidence to be adduced by the first party as burden of proof as per the above said point was cast upon the first party. It is very unfortunate to note that the first party who made appearance through counsel before this tribunal remained absent through out the trail and there was also no representation on his behalf even by his counsel . He failed to adduce evidence when the matter was posted for the above said purpose and therefore, the Second Party Management was called upon to lead evidence in support of the various contentions taken by it in their Counter Statement . Onbehalf of the Second Party the Management examined one witness MW1 and got marked 4 documents at Ex. Ml to M4.

6. The management witness in his affidavit byway of Examination Chief almost , reiterated the various contentions taken by the management in its Counter Statement . His averments at para 4 of the affidavit relevant for the purpose and his statement in further examination chief referring to the aforesaid four documents are as under:-

Para 4 : I submit that I have produced three registers calledas General Charges Paid Registers for the period from (1) 2-6-94 to 6-3-95, (2) 7-3-95 to 8-11-95 and (3) 9-11-95 to 13-7-96 , the said 3 registers may be marked as Exhibit M1 , M2 and M3 . That these 3 exhibits , show the charges and amounts paid to daily wagers , coolies and towards other expenses, as shown in said registers , that out of these 3 registers Ex . M1 is produced for the purpose of continuity with the other 2 registers i.e. Exhibit M2 and Exhibit M3, infact the period relating to the intermittent engagement offirst party as Coolie for a total period of161 days spreading between the period 1-4-95 to to 28-2-1996 are found in Exhibits M2 and M3 registers (i.e. at page Nos . 32, 39, 44, 48, 53, 62, 67, 74, 79, 83, 87, 93 , 98, 105, 109, 113 , 127, 132, 136, 147, 152, 157, 162, 165 and 185 of Exhibit M2 and the said entries relating to the first party in the said pages are marked as Ex. M2 Series). (Similarly at page Nos . 4, 5, 37, 41 , 62, 63, 74 and 85 of Exhibit M3 and the said entries relating to the first party in the said pages are marked

9905 as Exhibits M3 series) . I submit that Exhibit M2 and M3 shows that the first party was engaged as a Coolie intermittently for 161 days during the aforementioned period of 1-4-95 to 28-2-96 and coolie charges for 161 days are paid to the first party. That infact the first party is paid coolie wages through relevant vouchers basing on the relevant entries at Exhibit M2 and M3 , however those vouchers are not available with the Second Party Branch, since they are misplaced at the time of transfer from one godown to the other godowin of Second Party branch. However Exhibits M2 and M3 are the Registers maintained in the usual course of business and they give true and correct picture as to how many days correctly the first party was engaged by the Second Party branch. I have produced attested True Copy ofDistrict Dailywagers list relating to Bangalore for the period 1983 to 1997 to show that the first party is not included in the said dailywagers list, since the first party was not engaged as a daily wager, the said daily wagers district -wise list relating toBangalore is marked as ExhibitM4. Statement in Further Examination Chief:

"Today we have filed three General Charges Paid Registers for the period from 02-06-1994 to 06-03- 1995, 07-03-1995 to 08-11-19995 and 09-11-1995 to 13-07-1996 respectively marked as Ex. MI to Ex . M3 . The days and wages paid to the first party have beenmentioned in my affidavit with reference to the pages in the said Register as Ex. M2 series , so also I have stated in my affidavit for the days and wages with reference to the pages as per Ex. M3 series.

7. The above said statement of management witness and the documents produced have gone uncontroverted andunchallenged there being no cross examination to the said witness on behalf of the first party as he and his counsel also remained absent on the date , the above said witness was examined . The first party and his counsel again remained absent when the matter was taken up for arguments . Therefore , after hearing the learned counsel for the Second party, the case is posted for award.

8. Learned Counsel for the Second Party in his argument submitted that the statement of MW1 has been very much corroborated by the documentary evidence marked before this tribunal at Ex. M1 to M4 and it is very much established by the management that the first party worked only as a Coolie on daily wage basis , that too, during the period 1995, 1996 intermittently for 159 days and therefore, his claim beforè tlus tribunal to regularize his services is not maintainable.

9. As seen above , as per the point of reference an heavy burden was cast upon the first party to establish before this tribunal that he worked continuously for aperiod of240 days in 12 calendar months preceding his refusal of service by the management bank in order to attract the provisions of 1.D. Act . Though the first party took up the contention that he worked under management during the years 1982, 1983, 1984 for 257 days, 194 days and 120 days respectively and further worked under the managenient as aDaily Wager from March, 1995 to February 156, for a period of249 days , failed to substanti : his case before 9906

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

there is no hesitation in the mind of this tribunal to hold that the claim put forth by the first party is not sustainable and accordingly the reference deserved to be rejected. Hence the following Award is passed.

AWARD

Reference is dismissed . No order to cost .

(Dictated to PA transcribed by her corrected and signed by me on 21st July, 2005. ) A.R. SIDDIQUI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3138.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय 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 नं. 2, धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 38/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 03-08-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं . एल-12011 /208/2001- आई आर( बी-11 ) ] सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 8th August , 2005

S.O. 3138. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. 38/2002 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court No. 2, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Bank of India and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on3-8-2005.

[No. L- 12011 /208/2001 - IR(B -II ) ] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2) AT DHANBAD

PRESENT :

Shri B. Biswas, Presiding Officer

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10( 1) (d) of the I.D. Act , 1947

Reference No. 38 of 2002

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the management of Bank of India and their workman

APPEARANCES :

On behalf of the workman : Mr. T.N. Dubey, General Secretary, Bank of India Staff Association.

Onbehalf of the employers : None State : Jharkhand

Industry : Banking

Dated, Dhanbad, the 11th July, 2005 .

AWARD

this tribunal by adducing any oral or documentary evidence. As noted above , despite the fact that he made appearance through counsel and filed his Claim Statement, remained indifferent to the proceedings before this tribunal all along for a period of more than one year. For the first timecase was posted for evidence of first party on 30-6-04 and the trial was over by 28-06-05, then the argument of the learned counsel for the Second Party were heard and the matter came to be posted for award. The first party took no pains nor bothered about the proceedings before this tribunal . Therefore, having failed to adduce either oral or documentary evidence to substantiate the various ontentions taken by him in his Claim Statement , the first partyhas miserably failed to discharge the burden ofproof cast upon him by way of reference points . However, as seen above, the management on its part has taken pains to bring on record that truth ofthe matter by producing oral and documentary evidence . The above said statement of MWI would make it abundantly clear that the first party was engaged by the Second Party bank as a Coolie intermittently for 159 days during the period 1-4-95 to 28-2-96. This statement MW1 has been fully supported and corroborated by the documentary evidence , viz . the registers called as 'General Charges Paid Registers ' marked atEx. M2 and M3 before this tribunal . MW1 in his aforesaid statement has given the details referring to the various pages in the registers to show as to how many days actually the first party worked under the management bank during the above said period . The entries made in the above said registers , get support to the statement of MW1 . The contention of the management that the first party never worked as daily wager and that he did not figure in empanelment list of Daily Wagers is further proved in the document at Ex. M4 which is the attested copy of Daily Wagers list relating to Bangalore District from 1983 to 1997 . Inhis further examination chief as seen above , MWI has made it clear that the name of the first party never figured in the said daily wagers list during the period from 1983 to 1997. Therefore , the above said oral and documentary evidence produced by the management would establish beyond doubt that the first party was never engaged by the Second Party Management as a Daily Wager in the year 1982 , 1983 , 1984 and that he was engaged by the management as a Coolie on daily wages intermittently for a period of 159 days only during the year 1995 and 1996. The above said evidence pressed into service on behalf of the management would make it further clear that during the year 1995 and 1996 which is the period relevant for the purpose, the first party never worked under the Second PartyManagement either as a Daily Wager or as a Coolie on daily wage basis continuously for a period of 240 days or more so as to claim any relief under the provisions of I.D. Act much less regularization of his services by the Second Party Management . Not only the first party, as noted above , has failed to substantiate his case by producing any oral or documentary evidence but also the oral and documentary evidence produced by the management, referred to supra has gone unchallenged and undisputed on his behalf there being absolutely no cross examination to MW1 much less disputing the genuiness ofdocuments produced by the management . In the result

TheGovt. of India , Ministry of Labour, in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d ) of 9907 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

the I.D. Act. , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No: L- 12011 /208/ 2001- IR (B - II) dated , the 2nd May, 2001 .

SCHEDULE

" Whether the action of the management of Bank of India, Patna in rejecting the application to Shri T.N. Dubeyto become member ofBank of India Retired Employee Medical Assistance Scheme is justified? If not , what relief is the disputant entitled to ?"

Patna for conciliation which ultimately resulted reference to this Tribunal . It is the specific allegation of the sponsoring union that the management illegally, arbitrarily and violating the norms as laid down in the said scheme has refused to accept the membership of the concerned workman. Accordingly the sponsoring union submitted prayer to pass award directing the management to extend the facility for benefit of medical assistance scheme in favour of the concerned workman , and his espouse from the date of his application dt 21-4-2001 along with other consequential benefits if any.

2. The case ofthe concerned workman according to written statement submitted by the sponsoring union in briefis as follows :

The sponsoring union submitted that the concerned workman joined the services of the management as Clerk on 10-10-1965 . They submitted that after completion of35 years of service when he was as special Assistant , he sought for voluntary retirement from service. The competent authority of the Bank permitted the petitioner to retire from service voluntarily and he was relieved from service at the close of the Business hours of 15-12-2000 . On the date of his retirement he attained the age of 58 years . After his retirement from service Bank i.e. the management sanctioned his terminal benefit which he was entitled to draw under service rules and the employees pension regulations 1995 of the Bank. They submitted that the management/Bank has introduced a scheme called "Bank of India Retired Employees Medical Assistance Scheme" which has come into force w.e.f. 4-12-97. The object of the said scheme is to provide financial assistance in meeting partly or fully, within the specified limit, hospitalisation expenses for treatment of specified diseases/ ailments to retired employees and their spouses , where expenditure involved is large and the treatment is taken at hospitals/nursing homes which have been approved by theBank for that purpose . Clause 4 of the scheme provides for membership . They submitted that as per Clause 4(d) of the Medical Assistance Scheme , 1997 its benefit can be availed of by the staff/workmen who voluntarily gets retirement from the Bank's service in terms of the provisions ofBankof India Employees Pension Regulation, 1990 after completion of 55 yrs . of age or 30 years of service in the Bank and not gainfully employed . They submitted that the said medical benefit scheme is one of the welfare measure introduced by the Bank to its retired employees or who would be retiring from service on attaining the age of superannuation . The Bank has introduced this scheme with the sole object of providing financial assistance either partly or fully for treatment of specified diseases within the specified limit to hospitals/nursing home approved by the Bank. They submitted that the concerned workman after his voluntary retirement from service applied for membership of the scheme in the prescribed form along with demand draft valued Rs . 5400 which is equal to halfof the basic salary last drawn by him by his application dt 21-4-2001 . The respondent Bank of its communication dt 9-5-2001 has returned the application and the draft to the petitioner stating that the facility for voluntarily retired employees has since been withdrawn. Being aggrieved with the decision of the respondent Bank the concerned workman raised an industrial dispute before the ALC (C) .

3. Management on the contrary after filing Written Statement-cum- rejoinder have denied all the claims and allegations which the sponsoring union asserted in the Written Statement submitted on behalf of the concerned workman. They submitted that rejection of the application ofthe concerned workman for membership of the " Bank of India Retired Employees Medical Assistance Scheme" was justified. They submitted that the said scheme contains the conditions for being member under it and is administered through a specially constituted managing committee which consists ofGeneral Manager and Deputy General Manager (HR) of the Bank, representative from the Bank of India Officers Association , representative Federation of Bank of India Staff Union and an officer nominated by the General Manager (HR) who acts as Member Secretary. They submitted that as per Clause 4 ofthe said scheme it is evident that the employees getting voluntary retirement under the Bank's Voluntary Retirement Scheme-2000 (VRS -2000) have not been made eligible for membership. The concerned workman Shri T.N. Dubey retiring under V.R.S. 2000 has no locus standi to claim formembershipmembership of the Scheme. They submitted that the concerned workman was a Staff Clerk in the Bank and had taken Voluntary Retirement in terms of Specially devised Scheme known as V.R. Scheme 2000 which was not covered under the said condition . It has been specifically clarified under clause 4 of the said Scheme that the employees closing service of the Bank for other reasons will not be eligible for membership benefits under the Scheme. Thus employees retiring under V.R.S. 2000 is not included under this Scheme . Further they submitted that the managing committee administering the said medical assistance scheme has also taken a considered decision during its meeting held on 20-3-2001 that the employees taking Voluntary Retirement under the Bank's V.R.S. 2000 cannot be admitted as members of the scheme till the fund position of the scheme improves. This decision was conveyed for information to all by Bank's Circular dtd. 4-4-2001 . They further submitted that the said medical assistance scheme is not a statutory scheme and is getting fund out of the Bank's Staff Welfare Fund. The scheme would certainly be rendering unviable if membership is provided to about 7500 persons obtaining voluntary retirement under VRS- 2000 . If it is so then this scheme will certainly be wound up. In view of the facts and circumstances stated above it has been submitted by the management that the claim of the concerned workman for becoming amember of the said scheme cannot be accepted and as such should be rejected straightway.

9908

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12, 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii )] 4. Points to be decided

The following employees are not eligible for Voluntary Retirement under the Scheme:-

"Whether the action of the management of Bank of India, Patna in rejecting the application of Shri T.N. Dubey to become member of Bank of India Retired Employee Medical Assistance Scheme is justified ? Ifnot, what relief is the disputant entitled to ?"

5. Finding with reasons

(a) Specialist Officers /Employees who have executed service bonds and have not completed it , Employees/Officers serving abroad under special arrangements/bonds , will not be eligible for VRS (theBoard ofDirectors may, however, waive this subject to fulfilment of the bond/ other requirements).

(b) Employecs against whom disciplinary proceedings are contemplated/pending or are under suspension .

(d) Any other category of employees as may be specified by the Board. "

The claim of the concerned workman appears to be quite different . The concemed workman pointing out clause 4 (d) of Bank of India Retired Employees Medical Assistance Scheme submitted categorically that he is very much entitled to enrol his name as member of the said Scheme . Clause 4( d ) speaks as follows :-

"Those who have taken voluntary retirement from the Bank's Service in terms of the provisions of Bank of India Employees Pension Regulation , 1990 after completion of 55 years of age or 30 years of service in the bank and not gainfully employed are eligible to enrol their names as members under the said Scheme . "

Considering the facts disclosed in the pleadings of both sides and also considering evidence of WW- 1 and MW- 1 there is no dispute to held that management introduced a scheme which is called as " Bank of India RetiredEmployees Medical Scheme. " The said scheme came intooperationwith effect from 4-12-97 with the sole object ofproviding financial assistance either partly or fully for treatment of specified diseases within the specified limit to hospitals/nursing homes . Clause 4 of the said scheme has providedwho will be eligible to become member under the said scheme. The said scheme has categorised three types ofpensioners who would be eligible for membership. First category is those employees/officers who have retired or would retire from the Bank on completion of 30 years of service . Second category is those employees/officers , who havebeen or will be allowed to retire on medical grounds and the last category is those employees/officers who have retired or will retire on attaining superannuation age of 58 / 60 years . It has been submittedby the concerned workman that after his voluntary retirement as per V.R. Scheme 2000 introduced by the management he submitted application for enrolment for being a member under the said scheme and alongwith the said application duly filled in he enclosed a demand draft amounting to Rs . 5400 which equal to the half of the basic salary last drawn by him. He alleged that inspite of his attaining eligibility to be membership of the said scheme the management has returned by letter dt. 9-5- 2001 the application and draft to the petitioner taking the plea that the facility for VRS employees has since been withdrawn he is not eligible for membership of the said scheme. The letter ofrefusal which was communicated to the concerned workman during his evidence was marked as Ext . W-3. In the said letter it has been disclosed by the competent authority that since the facility has been withdrawn the claim of the concerned workman cannot be considered for enrolment of his name under the said scheme . On the contrary though this reason has been assigned in the letter marked as Ext. W- 3, management in their Written Statement has taken a different plea for not accepting the claim of the concerned workman. They disclosed that in a decision held on 20-3-2001 taken by the managing committee it was decided that the employees taking Voluntary Retirement under the Bank's VRS-2000 cannot be admitted as memebers of the scheme till funds position is improved. They further in para- 13 in the Written Statement disclosed that the competent authority is not in a position to enrolmembership of as many as 7500 retired employees who have got their retirement under VRS-2000 . The VR Scheme during evidence of WW-1 was marked as Ext. W- 1 . The eligiblity criteria for opting V.R. as per the said scheme is as follows :-

The concemed workman disclosed that he joined his service under the management as clerk on 10-10-65 . After successful completion of the probationary period he was confirmed in the post by the management and after completion of 35 years of service when he was special Assistant he sought for voluntary retirement from service. The competent authority of the Bank permitted the petitioner to retire from service voluntarily and he was relieved from service at the close of Business hours on 15-12-2000 . On the date of his retirement he attained the age of 58 years . This witness further disclosed that as per Pension Regulation Scheme, 1995 introduced by the management he is eligible for Pension and he is drawing Pension under the said Scheme. Disclosing this fact the concerned workman submitted that in no circumstance the competent authority can refuse to allow him to become amember particularly when he fulfils the conditions for membership as laid down in clause 4 (d) of the Bank of India Retired Employees Medical Assistance Scheme. The plea which has been taken by the management is that as it is not possible to enrol 7500 employees who have been retired under V.R. S. -2000 to become members of the said scheme due to shortage of fund they could not consider the claim of the concerned workman . As per the eligibility criteria ofV.R. Scheme an employee who completed 15 years of service or 40 years of age as on 1-11-2000 is eligible to submit Voluntary retirement under V.R. Scheme 2000 . Therefore , as per the said scheme an employee who fulfils criteria(a) is eligible to get benefit of the said V.R. Scheme . Clause 4 of Bank of India Retired Employees Medical Assistance Scheme, however does not provide any facility to enrol the name of any retired employee who gets "All permanent employees ofthe Bank with 15 years of service or 40years of age, as on 01-11-2000.

9909

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 8th August, 2005

S.O. 3139. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 49/2003) 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 Small Industries DevelopmentBank of India and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 03-8-2005.

[No. L- 12011/242/2002- IR (B-II) ] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT- IL, RAJENDRA BHAWAN, GROUND FLOOR, RAJENDRA PLACE , NEW DELHI

L. D. NO . 49/2003

Presiding Officer : R. N. RAL

Inthe Matter of:-

ThePresident, DelhiMazdoor Sangathan (Regd . ) , PlotNo. 1 , Udasin Mandir, AramBagh, Paharganj , NewDelhi.

VERSUS

TheChiefManaging Director,

Small Industries Development Bank of India, Vedeocon Tower, Jhandewalan Extension, NewDelhi .

voluntary retirement on completion of 15 years of service or attaining 40 years of age as on 1-11-2000 . The case of the concerned workman should not be equated with the eligibility criteria as laid down under Voluntary Retirement Scheme. It is seen that the concerned workman opted for his voluntary retirement after completion of his 35 years of service particularly when he got his eligibility to draw Pension as per Bank of India Pension Regulation, 1995 . Even if this Voluntary Retirement Scheme 2000 was not introduced by the management as per clause 4(d) of the said Medical Assistance Scheme the concerned workman would get his eligibility to enrol his name as member under Medical Assistance Scheme on his tendering resignation his voluntary retirement otherwise . Therefore , it is clear thatspecial Voluntary Retirement Scheme 2000 did not affect the eligibility criteria to get membership ofthe concerned workman under the said Medical Scheme . Considering this fact there is sufficient reason to believe that taking the plea ofthis V. R. Scheme of2000 the competent authority intended to ignore the claim ofthe concerned workman for enrolling hismembership under the said Medical Assistance Scheme which I consider is absolutely illegal arbitrary not onlybut also it violated the principle of natural justice . The management as per the said Medical Assistance Scheme is bound to enrol membership of the employee who have got their voluntary retirement otherwise or under the special scheme if it is found that the said employee has fulfilled the condition as laid down under clause 4 ofthe Bank of India Retired Employees Medical Assistance Scheme. After careful consideration of all the material facts I find sufficient ground to hold that management illegally and arbitrarily refused to enrol the name of the concerned workman as member of the Employees Medical Assistance Scheme particularlywhen it has been proved beyond all shadow of doubt that he has fulfilled the condition as laid down in clause 4 (d) of the said scheme.

AWARD

Inthe result, the following Award is rendered:-

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L-12011 /242/ 2002/ IR (B - II ) Central Government dt . 22-04-2003 has referred the following point for adjudication.

The point runs as hereunder:-

"The action of the management of Bank of India, Patna in rejecting the application of Shri T.N. Dubey tobecome member of Bank of India Retired Employee Medical Assistance Scheme is not justified . Consequently, he is entitled to be enrolled as member of the Bank of India Retired Employees Medical Assistance Scheme if he re -submits the application inthe prescribed form duly filled in along with the subscription within three months from the date of publication of the Award in the Gazette of India . "

B. BISWAS, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2005

"Whether the action of the management of Small Industries Development Bank of India, New Delhi in not regularizing the services of S/Shri Ram Avtar . S/o. Ram Chander, Rajesh, S/o Late Nathu Ram, Raju S/o Dharma, Naresh Kumar, S/o Late Bishambar and Om Prakash S/o Nanak Chand from the date of their initial appointment is just , fair and legal ? It not, what reliefthe concerned workmen are entitled to and from which date?".

The reference was received in 2003 and notice was issued to the President of the Organization. He did not turn up.He has not filed statement of claim . Notices have been sent again on 27-04-2005 still none has turned up . No statement of claim has been filed .

No dispute award is given.

का. आ. 3139.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार स्मॉल इंडस्ट्रीज डेवलपमेंट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं.-2 नई दिल्लीके पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 49/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 03-08-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

Date: 26-07-2005 .

[सं. एल -12011 /242/ 2002- आई आर ( बी.- II ) ]

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव 9910

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2004/BHADRA 12, 1926

नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3140.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार विजया बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय , बैंगलौर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 18/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 5-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं० एल-12012/152/2000- आई आर( बी. II ) ]

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] 2. While challenging the impugned punishment order terminating his services , in his Claim Statement at paras 3 to 5, the case made out by the first party workman reads as under:-

सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 8th August, 2005

S.O. 3140. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 18/2001) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court Bangalore as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Vijaya Bank and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on5-8-2005.

[No. L- 12012/152/2000 - IR(B- II) ] C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT

SHRAM SADAN" III MAIN, HI CROSS , II PHASE , TUMKUR ROAD, YESHWANTHPUR, BANGALORE- 560 022.

Dated: 27th July 2005

PRESENT :

SHRIAR. SIDDIQUI Presiding Officer

C.R. No. 18/01

IParty

IIParty

The Regional Manager, VijayaBank, VB,HeadOffice, 41/2, M.G. Road, TrinityCircle, Bangalore-560001

The General Secretary, Vijaya Bank Employees Association, No. 67 , 2nd Floor, K.G.Road, Shantinagar, Bangalore -560 027

AWARD

1. The Central Government by exercising the powers conferred by clause ( d ) of sub - section 2 A of the Section 10 ofthe IndustrialDisputes Act, 1947 has referred this dispute vide order. No. L -12012/ 152/2000/IR (B - II ) dated 12th February 2001 for adjudication on the following schedule :

SCHEDULE

"WhetherM/s. Vijaya Bank is justified in terminating the services ofShri S. Krishna Mogera, Clerk, Bhatkal Branch? If not , what relief the workman is entitled to?"

Para 3 :-That the workman was working as clerk at Bhatkal Branch , he has been performing his duty with honesty, integrity, devotion and diligence . He has blemishless service . On 29-8-96 the Second Party issued a charge sheet alleging that the workman is remaining absent from duty unauthorizedly and very frequently without prayer sanction of leave and without even intimating the authorities in disregard to the leave rules of the bank . it is alleged that the workman is unauthorisedly absent for 298 days on 63 occasions from 5-4-94 to 9-3-96. It is further alleged that he has submitted leave application belatedly in violation of leave rules, he also submitted leave application and medical certificate after reporting of duty.

Para 4 : That the workman has not submitted any reply to the charge sheet , the Second Party conducted the enquiry. The Second Party examined one witness and 63 documents . The enquiry officer held that all the charges are proved . It is relevant to submit that the workman was not given any opportunityto cross examine the witnesses . On 29-9-07 a notice proposing punishment of removal was served on the workman . They submitted a reply dated 8th October 1987. In the reply he requested that he may be given an opportunity to continue his service. He also submitted that the absence is due to distress and his family problems . The disciplinary authority without considering the reply has passed the order ofremoval the same is illegal. The workman submitted an appeal to the appellate authority on 3-1-98 the Appellate Authority has not considered the appeal on its merits . The First Party Union raised a dispute before the consolation Officer under the ID Act . The Second Party filed a counter Statement before the consolation officer and stated that the workman absent for several period from 1989. It is relevant submit that in respect of the allegation of absence from 1989 to 1993 a charge sheet was issued and the matter was closed after issuing punishment of withdrawal of one increment . Therefore , the consideration the allegation for absence from 1989 to 1993 is vitiated the process of decision making in imposing the penalty. Therefore , the workman is entitle for the relief claimed .

Para 5 :-That the medical certificate and leave application submitted by the workman was not consideredby the Second Party. Therefore, the enquiry held against the workman is in violation of the Principles of Natural justice and contrary to the facts . Wherefore, the first party prays that this court be pleased to answer the reference in favour of the 9911 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

(2) Preparing deposit receipt and other connected work indeposits.

(3) Writing sub-days,

workman and declare that the order of removal dated 22-12-97 is illegal and to grant all consequential benefits in the interest of justice and equity. "

(4) Writing day books and General Ledger,

(5) Preparing statements & returns

(6) Assisting in loans, bills department

(7) Other Miscellaneous work .

3. The Second Party Management bank filed its counter statement and resisted the Claim of the first party interalia contending that the first party joined its services as a sub staff on 2-11-73 and was promoted as Clerk on 1-7-81 and his total period of service was 24 years as on the date he was removed from service. At Para 5 ofthe Counter statement, the nature of the duties of Clerk would have been carried out by the first party workman are given as under:

(1) Working in the Counter in SB , Current Deposits etc. , like preparing slips entering the ledger, entering cheques in ledger ,

4. At Para 8, the management contended that while working as a Clerk the first party remained unauthorisedly absent fromduty for a total number of491 days on different occasions between 31-7-89 and 4-2-93 . He was charge sheeted and was punished for his unauthorized absence and allied acts of proven misconduct as many as 7 occasions . The details of the punishment imposed on the first party are given as under:-

Nature of Punishment and date

No. of charges

Sl. No.

Charge Sheet No. &date.

Poriod of unauthorized absence

Clause/subclause of Chapter XIX of Bipartite Settlement , 1966 under which he was charge sheeted

Outcome ofthe Depart- ment at enquiry

19.7(a) 19.5(e)

MNZ/IRS /CS/44/89 dated 10-10-89

23 days between 31-7-89 and 31-8-99

Proved In all Stoppage of one increment temporarily for a period of six months vide firal order No. MNZ/ IRS / 24556/ 89-90 dated 17-3-90 .

Proved

19.7(a)

29 days

19.5( e)

MNZ / IRS / CS/53/89 dated 12-12-89

between 7-10-89 and 13-11-89

In all Stoppage of one incre- ment for a period of one year temporarily vide Final Order No. MNZ / IRS / 3754 / 9091 dated 28-5-90

Proved

19.7(a)

19.5(a)

3. MNZ/IRS /CS/6 /91 dated 13-12-91

19.5 (e)

24days between 4-1-90- and 17-11-90

In all Stoppage of one incre- ment temporarily for a period of six Months vide final order Nc . MNZ / IRS/ 8704/91-92 dated 9-8-91 and MNZ /IRS / 11484/91-92 dated 18-9-91

161 days

19.7(a) 19.5(e)

4. MNZ /IRS / CS /45/91 dated 30-10-91

Proved In all Stoppage of one incre- ment temporarily for one year vide final order. No. MNZ /IRS/ 23087/91-92 dated 14-3-92 between 21-3-91 and 23-9-91

19.7(a)

141 days

19.7(d)

5. PER/ IRD/ CS / 72/92 dated 21-8-92

19.5(e)

Proved In all punishment of stoppage of two increments permanently vide final order No. PER/IRD/ 988/93 dated 27-2-93

19.5 (j )

between 30-9-91 and 11-5-92

19.6 (f).

19.7(a)

17 days

19.5( e)

6. PER/ IRD/ CS/243/93 dated 5-10-93

19.5(j )

19.5(f)

between 16-6-93 and 17-8-93

Proved In all one increment was stopped temporarily for a period of six months vide order No. PER/IRD / 1993 /94 dated 8-6-94

19.5 ( i )

19.7(a)

19.5(e)

7. PER/ IRD/CS / 19/94 dated 21-3-94

19.5 (j )

19.5(f)

16 days between 8-11-93 and 4-12-93

Proved In all imposition of punish- ment of Censure and Stoppage of one increment permanently was ordered vide final order No. PER/ IRD/ 121 /96 dated 28-1-95 2498 G1/2005-21 9912

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2004/BHADRA 12 , 1926

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii )|

enquiry the management produced oral and documentary evidence and the learned Enquiry Officer based on the material placed before him submitted his findings holding the workman guilty of all the four charges. The first party having received the enquiry report , by his letter dated 15-9-97 the first party did not wish to submit any representation with regard to the enquiry report . Therefore , taking into consideration, the past service records of the workman and gravity of the misconduct committed by him. the Disciplinary Authorityby its order dated 20-9-97 proposed the following punishments :-

Punishment

Charge

Charge No. 1: Stoppage of one increment temporarily for a period of six months .

5. The management further contended that the Disciplinary Authority in all the 7 occasions treated the unauthorized absence of the workman as loss of pay and advised him not to repeat such or similar misconduct in future. The first party failed to mend his attitude . He once again remained absent from duty unauthorisedly for a period of 298 days on 63 occasions between 5-4-94 to 11-3-96.He failed to report for duty despite the directions givenby the management . He went on submitting leave applications belatedly, some times , on medical grounds a and some times on the ground ' Urgent work ' and ' on Domestic Urgent Work ' . Therefore, in the light of the above said circumstances , the management decided to initiate disciplinary enquiry proceedings against the first party for 8th time and accordingly charge sheet dated 29-8-96 was issued to him listing the following four charges:--

Charge No. 2: Renioval from the service of the Bank with Superannuation benefits as would be due otherwise at this stage and without disqualification from future employment .

(1) That he is alleged to have remained absent from duty unauthorisedly without adhering to the leave rules of the bank which would amount to minor misconduct under sub -clause ( a ) of Clausc 19.7 ofChapterXIX of the Bipartite Settlement , 1966.

ChargeNo. 3: Removal from the service of the Bank with Superannuation benefits as would be due otherwise at this stage and without disqualification from future employment .

(ii) That his alleged habitual act of remaining absent from duty, unauthorisedly would amount to his having committed the gross misconduct under sub-clause ( f) clause 19.5 of Chapter XIX of the Bipartite Settlement, 1966.

ChargeNo. 4: Stoppage of two increments permanently.

(iii) That his alleged act of non compliance of lawful and reasonable instructions of his officials superiors would amount to his having committed the gross misconduct under sub- clause (3 ) of Clause 19.5 of Chapter XIX of Bipartite Settlement, 1966.

(iv) That his alleged action of remaining absent unauthorisedly and continuously without any intimationto the Second Party for a period of48 daysfrom 11-9-95 to 28-10-95 would amount to his having committed the gross misconduct under sub - clause (p) of Clause 19.5 of"Bipartite Settlement, 1966" .

7. Those punishments were to run concurrently. The order proposing the above said punishment was communicated to the first party and he was given an opportunity of hearing . He submitted his representation dated 8-10-97 requesting that he may be given an opportunity to continue in the service with an assurance that he wouldbe regular in his duties in future . Not being satisfied with the reply of the first party and after going through the entire connected records and his past service records , the aforesaid punishment orders were confirmed by the Disciplinary Authority vide order dated 29-11-97 . AtPara 27 of the Counter Statement , the management contended that the Domestic Enquiry conducted against the first party is in compliance with the provisions of above said settlement and also in accordance with the principles of natural justice. At para 28 it contended that the first party since failedto mend his ways or reform himself despite being charge sheeted and punished as many as 7 times for his unauthorised absence , as a last resort , the disciplinary authority decided to take a punitive action against the first party as on account of long and frequent unauthorised 6.That the first party submitted his explanation dated 14-9-96 admitting the charges voluntarily and unconditionally requesting the disciplinary authority to treat the matter under Clause 19.12 (e) of Bipartite Settlement of1966.His request to treat the matter under Clause 19.12( e) ofthe said settlement was rejected as he did not deserve such a treatment. Therefore , enquiry officer was appointed on the aforesaid charge sheet , during which enquiry, once again the first party admitted the charges of misconduct and participated in enquiry proceedings . During the भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

absence of the first party, the management bank business was dislocated and disrupted. He has been awarded punishment of removal from service after weighing the pros and cons of the need to show compassion and need to maintain organisation efficacy. The punishment therefore, was commensurate with the gravity of the misconducts committed by the first party. There cannot be any compromise in the guise of sympathy in a case of such a gross indiscipline. Therefore , the management requested this tribunal to dismiss the reference .

8.Keeping in view the respective contentions ofthe parties with regard to the fairness and validity of the enquiry proceedings, this tribunal on 4-6-04 framed the following Preliminary Issue:

"Whether the Domestic Enquiry conducted against the first party by the Second Party is fair and proper?"

On8-2-2005 , learned counsel for the first party filed a memo conceding the fairness of the enquiry proceedings and therefore , finding was recorded to the effect that Domestic Enquiry held against the first party was fair and proper. And the matter came to be posted to hear on merits of the case .

9. On 16-6-05 and 7-7-05 , learned counsels representing the respective parties since remained absent , arguments on merits were taken as heard and case is posted this day for award.

10. Keeping in view the finding recorded by this Tribunal holding the Domestic Enquiry held against the first party by the Second Party is fair and proper, the next two questions to be gone into by this tribunal would be as to " Whether the findings of the Enquiry Officer suffered from any perversity and as to whether the punishment imposed upon the first party removing him from service was disproportionate and not commensurate keeping in view the misconduct committed by him " ?

11. In order to appreciate the question about the perversity of the findings , it appears to me worthwhile to bring on record the very observations made and the reasonings assigned by the learned Enquiry Officer on charges 1 to 4 levelled against the first party found on pages 3 to 7 of the enquiry report running as under:-

Charge No. 1 : MW1 i.e. Shri B: Vishwanath Shetty , the incumbent Branch Manager of Bhatkal branch at page No. 3 of Enquiry Proceedings had deposed that he is fully aware of the circulars and guidelines prescribed by the bank vide codified circular Nos . 65/93 and 101/93 and had explained briefly the sailent features thereof.

Before dwelling upon the alleged lapses on the part of CSE, let me discuss here the relevant provisions

9913 of" Leave Rules " of the Bank laid down in HO codified Circulars No. 65/93 and 101/93 , which have bearing onthe charges levelled against CSE .

An employee who desires to obtain leave of absence , other than casual leave, shall apply in writing to the Branch Manager in the prescribed leave application Form ( 11-98) . Such application for privilege Leave shall be made not less than one month before the date from which the leave is to commence , except in urgent cases or unforeseen circumstances including illness when it is not possible to do SO.

(ii) No leave or extension of leave shall be deemed to have been granted unless an order to that effect is passed and communicated to the employee concerned.

(iii) Leave of all kinds cannot be claimed as of right, when the exigencies of service so require , discretion to refuse or revoke leave of any description is reserved to the authority granting it.

(iv) An employee other than a member of the Executive Committee of a registered Trade Union ofBank Employees will not be entitled totake privilege leave or more than 3 occasions ina calendar year .

(v) Even in the case of casual leave , ordinarily, the previous permission of the sanctioning authority shall be obtained before taking such leave and when this is not possible , the said authority shall be informed as soon as practicable in writing or if writing is not possible, orally or through any person, ofthe employee's absence. In any event , a written application shall be submitted to such authority latest on the date of the employee resumes duty or enter in the Casual Leave Card , as the casemaybe.

(vi ) Staff members seeking leave on medical grounds should invariably submit medical certificate alongwith leave application or within 3 days from the date of application seeking leave on medical grounds . In case an application for Sick Leave is submitted after inordinate delay without proper justification, the delay cannot be condoned and period of absence upto the date of receipt of leave application should be treated as unauthorised absence and hence on loss of pay.

9914

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2004 /BHADRA 12 , 1926

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii )] (vii) If an employee is absent for more than a day and if there is no leave application from the employee, his/her absence should normally be treated as unauthorised and hence on loss of pay.

CSE only on the date of his resuming duty (barring one or two cases) . In so far as the CSE had submitted the leave applications belatedly non all the 63 occasions which is in contrast to the leave rules of the bank , such action construes habitual and consequently the absence ofCSE in violation of leave rules of the bank becomes unauthorised . Accordingly, I hold that charge No. 2 is proved against CSE.

Onperusal of Ex . Ml to Ex. M63 i.e. leave applications on different dated submitted by the CSE to the branch, it is observed that on all the 63 occasions of absence from duty of the CSE, the leave applications were submitted by him only on the date of his resuming duty. While on the first 3 occasions mentioned in the charge sheet, the reason attributed for the absence of CSE was " medical grounds " , on the remaining 60 occasions, the cause for his absence was 'urgent work' barring one occasion wherein it was" domestic work" .

Comparing the CSE's action of submission of leave applications belatedly as described supra vis -a -vis the leave rules of the bank as narrated herein before , itemerges that the CSE had violated the leave rules ofthebank described earlier.On the first 3 occasions , even though the absence of CSE was on medical grounds and he had the option of submitting the medical certificate within 3 days, but the leave application should have been submitted by him on the date of his absenting from duty itself. In the instant case , by submitting the leave applications only on the day of his resuming duty, CSE had committedbreach of leave rules of the bank and no explanation for his said action was given by the CSE.

Inother cases, the leave applications were submitted by the CSE on the day of his resuming duty and no explanation was offered by him for the same . Moreover, in the first 58 cases ( i.e. Ex . M1 to Ex . M58) CSE had applied for " leave on loss of pay " which means that CSE himself was aware of the fact that he had no leave of any kind to this credit . When the leave record of CSE was in a bad shape , it was absolutely essential for CSE to adhere to the leavė rules of the bank scrupulously and desist from absenting from duty which he had failed to abide relentlessly. From the foregoing discussions , it is quite clear that the absence of CSE on various periods mentioned in the charge sheet is unauthorised and in this regard leave rules of the bank was not adhered to by him . Accordingly, I hold that charge No. 1 is proved against CSO .

Charge No. 2 : I see force in the contentions of Presenting Officer in this regard. Ex. Ml to Ex . M63 do show that the leave applications in respect of his absence on various periods were submitted by the

Charge No. 3 : The Presenting Officer has cited 6 documents viz . Ex . M64, 65 , 66, 67, 69 and 70 in support of the charge . He has further submitted that the CSE was advised in the past by various Disciplinary Authorities to be careful and not to repeat such or similar misconduct in future which are evidenced from Ex . M72 to Ex . M78 . Receipt ofEx. M64, 65 , 66 , 67 , 69 , 70 , 72 to 78 by the CSE is not denied by him . Each letter referred supra addressed to CSE by his controlling authority (Ex. M64, 65 , 66, 67, 69 and 70 ) viz . the Branch Manager, i.e. , MW1 speaks that the CSE had remained absent from duty unauthorisedly without submitting the leave application. But the CSE had disregarded, the said instructions of his controlling authority and continued to be absent from duty unauthorisedly on subsequent occasions also as are evident from Ex . M25 to Ex. M63 . In Ex . M67 and 69 i.e : letters dated 16-9-1995 and 5-12-1995 addressed to CSE by his controlling authority i.e. MW1 , the CSE was instructed to report back for duty immediately, whereas , it is observed from Ex . M53 and Ex. M57 i.e. leave applications dated 30-10-95 and 14-12-95 that the CSE continued to be absent from duty unauthorisedly till 28-10-95 and 13-12-95 respectively, which implies that CSE had disobeyed the instructions of his official superior. (Ex.M66) addressed to him by the RM, RQ- Shimoga calling for his explanation in respect of his unauthorised absence . Further, from Ex. M-72 to Ex. M-78 i.e. copies of the proceedings of various Disciplinary Authorities in the matter ofdisciplinary proceedings initiated against CSE in the past , it is observed that while imposing appropriate punishment to CSE for his proven misconduct of unauthorized absence and disobeyal of lawful and reasonable orders of the management etc. , the CSE was advised not to repeat such or similar misconduct in future. Even though the CSE was repeatedly advised for 6 times subsequent to the first order dated 17-2-1990 not to repeat his above misconduct , the records placed before the enquiry reveal that CSE had unheeded to such advice and the misconduct on his part recurred again and again . From the 9915 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/भाद्र 12, 1927

foregoing discussions , I hold that charge No. 3 is proved against CSE.

Charge No. 4 : It is observed from Ex. M -53 i.e. leave

application dated 30-10-1995 that the CSE had remained absent from duty from 11-9-95 to 28-10-95 for which the leave application was submitted by him on 3-10-95 only, which means that in respect of his absence for such a long duration of 48 days there was no intimation to the branch till the CSE had resumed duty on 30-10-95 . Such conduct of CSE is a breach of leave rules of the Bank and his absence for the above period construes unauthorised. Accordingly, I hold that charge No. 4 is proved against CSE.

The CSE in his oral submissions at the enquiry has stated that though in some cases of his absence necessary medical certificates were got produced by him, he was really sick. Besides , he had said that his mother and wife were not keeping good health and hence he could not attend the office on few occasions which was intentional and for such action he may be pardoned.

12. As couldbe read from the Enquiry Report , in order to substantiate the charges of misconduct against the first party, the management examined one witness as MW1 and got marked in all 82 documents at Ex. MEX1 to MEX 82. As could be read from the enquiry proceedings as well as the enquiry findings , the first party did not choose to cross examine the management witness nor challenged the genuniess or veracity of the documentary evidence produced by the management . Learned Enquiry Officer as could be read from his findings dealt in with the above said evidence pressed into service on behalf of the management , concerning 4 charges of misconduct leveled against the first party and rightly came to the conclusion that all the aforesaid 4 charges have been established by the management by sufficient and legal evidence . That apart as noted above, from the very beginning itself i.e. while giving reply to the charge sheet and then during the course of enquiry, the first party has admitted the charges of misconduct voluntarily and unconditionally as could be read from the proceedings of the enquiry and the very explanation. submitted by the first party to the aforesaid charge sheet . Therefore, findings ofenquiry holding the first party workman guilty of the charges since is based on sufficient and legal evidence coupled with the admission of guilt made be the first party, by no stretch of imagination it can be said that they suffered from any perversity.

13. Now coming to the question on the punishment order, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and the blatant attitude adopted by the first party in remaining himself absent from duty unauthorizedly quite frequently dislocating and disturbing the services being rendered by the banking institution and so also keeping in view the fact that the first party did not mend his ways and attitude after having been punished as many as on 7 occasions , the management in my opinion was left with no alternative but to get rid of the services of the first party. There was no point in allowing the first party to continue in service he never bothered for his duties showing scant respect to the directions issued to him to report duty, immediately.

I do not see any merit in the above representation made by the CSE. In the absence of medical certificate in support of his purported illness , the contention of CSEthat he was really sick on some occasions cannot be accepted. The CSE's place of residence is apparently inBaindur which is hardly 20 Kms away from Bhatkal branch. If the CSE really had genuine and pressing domestic problems , he could have apprised the Branch Manager of his difficulties in attending the office and took the latter's permission for his absence . He could have sent letters to the Branch Manager explaining his difficulties which also he had failed to do . No evidence was produced by him to substate that under certain compelling circumstances he was prevented from apprising the facts either orally or in writing to the controlling authority and submission of his leave applications in time in consonance with the leave rules of the bank . His other contentions also do not bear any force. Consequently, all the charges against CSĘ stand.

Conclusion : On analyzing all aspects of the case

14. As could be seen from the enquiry findings , it is on few occasions the first party remained absent from duty unauthorisedly on medical grounds submitting his medical certificates after joining duty but on most of the occasions he went on asking for leave just on the ground 'urgent work ' or 'urgent domestic work' in disregard to the rules enjoined upon submitting the leave applications and sanctioning of leave well in advance before he remained absent from duty. The services of the first party in other words for all purposes had become redundant and he became a discarded element . When he did not mend himself despite being punished on 7 occasions , there was no point in keeping him service when he committed the and giving a thoughtful consideration to the oral as well as documentary evidences adduced before the enquiry. I conclude that all the four charges framed against CSE in charge sheet No. PER: IRD : CS: 39/ 96 dated 29-8-1996 are proved and established. " 9916

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2004/BHADRA 12, 1926

aforesaid misconducts , once again . The Disciplinary Authority in my opinion, in fact has taken a lenient view in terminating the services of the first party by order of removal from service with superannuation benefits without disqualification from future employment. However, in the face of the above said punishment imposed upon the first party as against Charge No. 3 , it appearsto me that the other 3 punishments awarded against the first party as against Charge Nos . 1 , 2 and 4 were not called for . In the result the above said punishment order passed by the Disciplinary Authority can be modified to the above effect . Accordingly, the reference is answered and following award is passed.

AWARD

The punishment order passed by the Disciplinary Authority against the first party removing him from the services ofthe bank with superannuation benefits as would be due otherwise without disqualification from future employment as against Charge No. 3 is hereby maintained . The punishments imposed upon the first party as against Charge Nos . 1 , 2 and 4 stand withdrawn . No. order to cost .

(Dictatedto PA transcribed by her corrected and signed by me on 27th July, 2005 )

A. R. SIDDIQUI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3141.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स के.बी. जेकब एण्ड संस के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में श्रम न्यायालय , अर्नाकुलम के पंचाद [ संदर्भ संख्या 20/1997 ( सी ) ] को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 03-08-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं० एल -35011/1/1997- आई आर ( एम ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव NewDelhi , the 8th August , 2005

S.O. 3141. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award [Ref. No. 20/92 (C) ] of the Labour Court , Ernakulam as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s . K.B. Jacob & Sons . Stevedores and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 03-08-2005 .

[No. L- 35011 / 1 / 1997 - IR(M) ] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM

(IN THE LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM) (Tuesday, the 22nd day of March , 2005) Present : Sri . K.K. Uthran , B.Sc. , LL.B. , PresidingOfficer

Industrial Dispute No. 20 of 1997 (Central )

[PART II-SEC . 3 (i) ] Between:

M/ s . K.B. Jacab & Sons , Stevedores, Cochin-682 001 .

And

The workman of the above concern represented by the JointSecretary, Cochin Thuramugha Thozhilali Union , P.B. No. 183 , Kochi -682002.

Representations :

: For Management Sri . P.R. Leslie Stephen, Advocate,

Ernakulam.

: For Unjon Sri P.F. Thomas ,

Advocate,

Ernakulam.

AWARD

This reference was made by the Central Government of India as per letter No. L- 35011 / 197 - IR (Misc . ) dated 10-7-97 . The dispute is between M / s . K.B. Jacob & Sons and their workman .

The dispute referred is:

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management M/ s . K.B. Jacob & Sons , Stevedores , Cochin -682 001 in terminating the service Shri T.V. Shanmugham , arbitrarily when he has put in more then 40 years of service, is just , proper and legal ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled to? "

2. The union filed claim statement raising the following:-

The management M/ s. K.B. Jacob & Sons are stevedors in the Cochin Dock Labour Board . They denied employment to Sri . T. V. Shanmugham who was employed as rigger and worker attending gear transport to and from the steamers berthed in the wharves in the Island as well as stream berths . He was to retire from the service on 12-11-1996 on attaining the age of 60 years according to the management even though there was no stipulated. He was denied employment by the management since 1-2-1995 and was not paid any subsistence allowance during the period of non- employment . He was not paid any gratuity or compensation for termination of services without any justification or reason by the management . On complaints by the union various conferences were convened by Assistant Labour Commissioner ( C) but a settlement could not be effected since the management avoided attending conferences. So the disputé was referred for adjudication by the Government by order No. L- 35011/ 1 /97 /FR ( Misc . ) dated -10-7-1997 in exercise of its powers conferred by clause ( d) of sub section ( 1 ) and sub section ( 2 ) A of Sec . 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 .

The workman was employed under the management from 1955 onwards continuously without any break of service . He was employed as a rigger and also for [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

attending gear transport to and from the steamers berthed in the wharves in Island as well as stream berths . For about 20 years hand- carts were used for transport of gears . There were 2, 3 other casual workers to assist Shanmugham to the transport of gears . Subsequently a tempo van was purchased and hand -carts were replaced.

All the employees under the management stevedors were registered in the pool on the formation of the USA pool . The workers so registered belonged to the categories of foremen, non -DLB and general purpose mazdoors . The management required the worker to be with them. So he did not get registered in the USA pool . Hisservices were required by them. So he continued with the employer. However the management denied employment to the worker from 1-2-1995 without any justification or reason . Wage arrears were due to him and all wages for five ships for attending to destuffing works . He continued unemployed till his date of retirement . According to the practise available among the stevedors the employer was liable to pay subsistence allowance to the employees in case he was not employed and that was not paid . The worker was not paid terminal benefits due to him as gratuity as well as retrenchment compensation on reaching the age of 60, while in the contract of employment there was no such stipulation . The workman was denied these entitlements arbitrarily and without any justification . Since the management failed to attend the conciliation proceedings a settlement could not be effected and the dispute resolved. The workman is entitled for his wages for the period he was kept out of employment as well as legal terminal benefits and other fringe benefits .

3. The management filed written statement raising the following contentions :-Claim statement filed by the union is not maintainable either in law or in facts and the same is liable to be dismissed .

All the averments and allegations made in the claim statement are denied by the management except which are specifically admitted hereunder.

It is true that the management by name M/ s . K.B. Jacob and Sons are stevedors in the Cochin Port . But the allegation that the management denied employment to T. V. Shanmugham who was alleged to be employed as rigger and work attending the gear transport to and from the steamers berthed in the wharves in the Island as well as stream berth is not correct and denied by this opposite party.

The allegation regarding the retirement from service on 12-11-1996 on attaining 60 years of service is wrong and denied . It is submitted that T. V. Shanmugham was not appointed by the management for any regular work as alleged . He was not a worker under the management . The same can be proved by the relevant documents .

The allegation that the management denied employment to T.V. Shanmugham since 1-2-95 is not correct . He was not a worker of the management and so there is no question of denial of employment . There is no question of payment of backwages or any other amount during the period of alleged non employment ,

9917

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/भाद्र 12, 1927

payment ofBonus gratuity or compensation or any other amount .

Sri T.V. Shanmugham was not appointed by the management . There is no employer - employee relationship by the management with the above mentioned Shanmugham . Whenever we get orders for loading or unloading of consignment in relation to any ship which berthed in any Berth in Cochin Port under our contract we used to engage a person to carry the appropriate gears from Godown necessary for the purpose of loading or unloading between 7 and 8 in the morning and between 5 and 6 in the evening. The duration of such work does not exceed one hour and the payment is made immediately on piece rate basis and there is no further engagement of this person and sometimes Shanmughan was also engaged in that work . Hisallegation that he was not included in the pool is absolutely false .

The allegation that T. V. Shanmugham was appointed by the management from 1955 -onwards is not correct . The allegation that wages arrears were due to him is not correct and denied . the allegation that Mr. Shanmugham did not get registered in the U.S.A. Pool because his service were required by the management and he was continued with the employer is not correct and denied .

The averments that two - three other casual workers were employed for the works of the management is not correct. All the casual labours who were working in various categories under all the licensed stevadore were taken into the United Stevadorse Association of Coching (P) Limited ( U.S.A. Pool) which was formed in 1983. What was left with us was only our office staff.

The workers were getting their remuneration and all other service benefits as per the terms and conditions approved by the United Stevadorse Association Pool ( USA Pool ) . Subsequently when the container system was adopted and the work load was shifted from port area to various Exporters premises there was not enough work to continue as stevador so the management did no review stevedores licence from 31-12-1995 and by Communication dated 22-1-1996 vide No. A1 /F/39 /5KBJ/967 the Cochin Port Trust informed the management that the licence ceased and thereafter no work was accepted or done by the management .

The stoppage of work and retrenchment of Employees were duly intimated by the management to the Government Secretary, Labour Department. Shri T.V. Shanmugham was not a worker of the management , no amount is due to him , he is not entitled to get any amount as gratuity arrears , compensation for leave wages and for payment of retrenchment compensation. There was no employer and employee relationship with T. V. Shanmugham and Management.

4. The evidence in this case consists of the testimony of WW1 and Ext . W1 to W7 and Ext . W8 series (73 in numbers ) on the side of the union and the 9918

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2004/BHADRA 12 , 1926

testimony of MW1 and Ext . M1 series , M2 to M5 on the side of the Management .

5. The following points arise for determination:

1. Whether the workman Sri T. V. Shanmugham was employed under the management ?

2.. Whether the action of the management M/ s K.B. Jacob and Sons , Kochin in terminated the service of the workman Sri . T.V. Shanmugham is just, porper and legal ?

3. If not what relief the workman is entitled ?

6. Point Nos . 1 to 3 -The management is a stevedores in the Cochin Dock Labour Board. The union's case is that the workman has employed as rigger worker attendinggear transport to and from the steamers berthed. It is also the case of the workman he was to retire on 12-11-1996 on attaining superannuation at the age of 60 years. It is also the case of the union that the workman was deniedemployment by the management from 1-2-1995 and was not paid subsistance allowance during the course of employment as provided under the contract of employment. He was not paid any gratuity or compensation for termination of service. The management denied the claim of the workman . The management contended that the workman was not a workman employed under the management. According to the management the workman wasworking on piece rate basis and the work only extended between 7 to 8 A.M. and between 5 to 6 P.M. and that he was engaged only occasionally. But he was not regularily employed.

7.Theworkman was examined as WW1 . He explained. the nature of his work which was within the Cochin Port Premises and the recognised steamer using the gears lifted the goods to the ship berthed in the Dock and also unloaded the goods from the ships and stopped in the godown. The photo pass issued under authority under the management as a stevedors employee to under the protectedarea of the Cochin Port . Ext . WI is such a photo pass issued to the workman in the year 1963. Ext . W2 is a wharves entry pass issued to the workman to reach the wharves were the ships and berths. Ext . W2 was valid up to31-12-1995. Ext. W3 is another entry pass which is valid up to 31-12-1993 and Ext . W4 is a wharves entry pass valid upto 31-12-1996 . Exts . W1 to W4 would show that the workmanwould show that under the management entered the post premises and the wharves at least from 1993 to 1996. Ext . W5 is the gear transporting charges to the workmanissued by the management . Ext. W5 is the wages from January to September 1989. Ext. W7 is the calculation ofwages ofthe workman for the period ending on 20-3-95. W8 series are duty slips issued to the workman for the period 18-11-1992 to 1-10-1996. These documents also prove that the workman was attending the duties attached to stevedores for loading and unloading of goods and that hewas also paid wages . The managements contended that . the workman is in this case as a casual employee . But according to the union the workman is a permanent employee and his work is regular and he worked for a long period continuously and without any break of service .

[PART II SEC. 3 (ii) ] 8. The management is relying Ext . M1 series and M2 to M5 . Ml series are vouchers for payment of certain amounts to the employee on 3-11-1988 , 4-11-1988 and 7-11-1998 .M1 series are vouchers for the payment of small amounts. Ext. M2 is the letter dated 22-11-96 issued by the TrafficManager to the Cochin Port Trust. Ext. M3 is the memorandum of settlement dated 8-12-1982 filed by the Regional Labour Commissioner, Madras which relates to the creation of USA pool . Ext . M4 is the bonus register kept by management for payment of bonus to the workers from 1-4-1975 to 1978. Ext . M5 is the service records maintained by the management . Admittedly the Port Trust had issued licence to the management for the purpose of carrying stevedoring .An employee carying gears from Port Cochin office to the Cochin Port Trust and returned the same after work. This also fortified the case of the union that the workman was an employee under the management . The contentionof the management is that they have closed the furiction of the institution as there was no work due to implementation of container system . If the management has closed down the establishment. It is the duty of the management to give compensation and termination benefits to the workman . In the circumstances and for the above discussion I find that the workman was employed under the management and that terminating the service of the workman is not justified and legal. Since the management closed the work the question of reinstatement does not arise and instead of reinstatement the workman can be compensatedby payment of compensation of Rs . 75,000/- to the workman.

In the result, an award is passed holding that the termination of the service of the workman Sri T.V. Shanmughan is not just , proper and legal. The management is directed to pay the compensation of Rs . 75,000/- to the workman within one month from the date ofpublication of the award in the Official Gazette failing which the workman is allowed to realise the amount ofRs . 75,000/- with interest therein at 10% per annum from the date of publication of the award till realisation.

(Dictatedto the Confidential Assistant , transcribed and typed out by her, corrected by me and passed this the 22nd day ofMarch , 2005)

Ernakulam.

K.K. UTHRAN , Presiding Officer APPENDIX

Witness Examined on the side of the Management :- MW1Sri , KB . Prakash. Witness Examined on the side of union :- WW1-Sri . T. V. Shanmughan Exhibits marked on the side of Management :-

Ext. M1 series (3 Nos. ) Vochers given by the workman for receiving the payment for the works done .

Ext. M2 -Notice dated 22-1-96 from the Cochin Port Trust to the management cautioning against non- renewal of stevedoring licence .

9919 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

Ext. M3 Copy of memorandum of settlement dated 8-12-82 between the union and representation ofStevedors .

shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of FCI and their workmen, which was receiveu by the Central Government on 8-8-2005 .

[No. L-22013/ 1 /2005 - IR(C-II) ] Ext.M4 -Bonus Register of Management for the period of 1-4-75 to 1978 .

N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer Ext.M5 -Service records of Management.

ANNEXURE

Ext. M6 -Wage Register of management for the period of1-4-81 to 31-10-81

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT

AT HYDERABAD

Ext.M7 -Bonus Register of Management for the period 1979 to 1990

Present: Shri T. Ramachandra Reddy, PresidingOfficer

Ext.M8 -Muster roll of the management for the period 1995 to 1996 .

Dated: the 15th July, 2005

Ext. M9 -Wage register of management for the period 1995 to 1996.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C.LD. NO . 167/2003

Between:

Ext. M10-Register of casual labour of the Management fortheperiod of I - 1-1982 to 31-7-1982.

K. Ramalingaiah S/o, Mattaiah

R/o Nidamandur, Nalgonda Distt.

Petitioner Ext. M11 -A certificate dated 16-11-2002 issued from CochinPort Trust regarding issuance ofWharf entry para/photo identity goods .

AND

Exhibits marked in the side of Union :-

The Senior Regional Manager ,

M/s.Food Corporation of India,

Ext. W1 -Aphoto identity card ofthe workman Sri . T.V. Shanmughan issued by Cochin Port Trust. HacaBhavan, Hyderabad.

1. The District Manager,

Ext. W2 -Photo copy of another identity card of the workman issued by Cochin Port Trust .

M/s. Food Corporation of India, Nalgonda, Nalgonda Distt.

Respondents Ext. W3 -Photo copy of photo identity card issued to theworkman with validity date up to 31-12-1993 .

Appearances:

Ext. W4 -Photo identity card of workman issued by CochinPort Trust valid upto 31-12-95 .

For the Petitioner : M/ s J. Kanakaiah, Advocate

For the Respondent :

Ext. W5 -Photo copy of a list of gear transporting charges to the workman .

M/s BG Ravinder Reddy and BV Chander Sekhar, Advocates AWARD

Ext. W6 -A list of charge rates of workman for the period of1988-89 .

This is a case taken under Sec . 2A(2 ) of the I.D. Ext. W7 -A chit showing wage arrears etc. of the workman w.e.f. 1-1-1993 .

Act, 1947 in view of the judgment of the Honble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa , and M/s. Cotton Corporation of India and two others.

Ext. W8 (series-Duty slips (73 Nos. ) issued to workman by the Management from 10-11-92 to 1-2-95.

नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2005

This Petition was filed under Section 2A(2 ) by the Petitioner claiming for reinstatement with full back wages and all attendant benefits .

No. 2. Adetailes counter filed by the respondent No. 1 & का.आ. 3142.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, एफ. सी. आई. प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , हैदराबाद ( संदर्भ संख्या एल. सी. आई. डी. नम्बर 167/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 8-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं . एल-22013/ 1/ 2005- आई आर( सी- II ) ]

एन. पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 8th August, 2005

The petitioner absented himself on several adjourments . On 29-11-2004, the petitioner's counsel reportedthat the petitioner died and their after it is posted for LR's petition. Till 15-7-2005 it is not filed.On 15-7-2005 counsel for petitioner reported that the petitioner died long backbefore November of the last year i.e. 2004 and the LR's are not interested and giving instructions and requested to close the case . In view of the circumstances , the LR's are not brought on record. Hence , the petition is dismissed as abated.

T. RAMACHANDRA REDDY, Presiding Officer Appendixofevidence

No oral or documentary evidence has been adduced on either side.

S.O. 3142. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. L.C.I.D. No. 167/2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal~cum~Labour Court , Hyderabad as

2498 G1/2005-22 9920

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2005

and retrenchment compensation though he has worked more than 240 days of service in a year prior to date of termination ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled and from which date ? " का.आ. 3143 औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, एफ. सी. आई. प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण न. -1, धनबाद (संदर्भ संख्या 94/1993 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जी केन्द्रीय सरकार को 8-8-2005 की प्राप्त हुआ था ।

सं ० एल-22012/405/1990- आई आर ( सी- II ) ] एन.पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 8th August , 2005

2. The case of the concerned workman, in brief, is that he was employed by the District Manager of F.C.I. , Ranchi as casual electrician on 1-10-1984 and subsequentiy his service was utilised at Food Storage Depot, Jamshedpur till 30-9-85 , and on oral instruction he again reported for duty at Ranchi on 30-9-85 and continued to work there upto 31-12-85, but from1-1-86 he was orally stopped from attending his duty. Without compliance of Sec . 25F of the I.D. Act, although he was in service for more than 240 days during 12 calendar months prior to retrenchment , therefore , his retrenchment is void ab- initio and the concerned workman is entitled to be reinstated in service w.e.f. 1-1-86 with full back wages and all other benefits in the time scale ofF.C.I.

S.O. 3143. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 94/1993 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum - Labour Court , No. I, Dhanbad, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of FCI and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 8-8-2005 .

[No. L-22012/405/ 1990 -IR(C- II)]

N.P. KESAVAN , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . I, DHANBAD .

In the matter of a reference U/S . 10(1)(d) of L.D. Act, 1947.

Reference No. 94 of 1993 .

According to the concerned workman, although he performed hisjob throughout the month but his payment/ attendance restricted only upto 18 to 20 days in a month to avoid his regularisation . Further , according to the concerned workman , the Headquarters has decided to regularise all the casual workmen who was in service for 90 days on or before 2-5-86 by Circular dated 6-5-87 , but the case of the concerned workman has not been considered bythe management . The concerned workman has claimed for reinstatement as Electrician with full back wages in time scale of F.C.I. and other benefits from the date of retrenchment and also with regularisation of service .

Parties: Employers in relation to the management of Food Corporation of India, Ranchi . AND

Their Workman.

Present: Shri Sarju Prasad, Presiding Officer.

Appearances:

FortheEmployers: None

For the Workman:

Shri V. Kumar, Authorised Representative.

State: Jharkhand

Industry: Food

Dated, the 22nd July, 2005

AWARD

By Order No. L - 22012 /405F/ 90 - IR( C - II ) dated 12-11-1993 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication tothis Tribunal :

"Whether the action of the District Manager, F.C.I. , Ranchi , is justified in terminating the services of Sri SadhanKumar Das , Electrician, w.e.f. 1-12-85 without paying him notice pay in lieu of one month notice

3. The case of the management , on the other hand, is that the present reference is not legally maintainable. According to the management , Sadhan Kumar Das was engaged as a casual worker during the period from October, 1984 to December, 1985 intermittently as and when required to carry on certain electrical jobs in the capacity of part- time electrician . According to the management , the concerned workman was engaged for 19 days in October, 1984, 20 days in November, 1984 and 21 days in December, 1984. The concerned workman was also engaged for 20 days in January, 1985 and 12 days in February, 1985. Не was not engaged during the months from March, 1985 to November , 1985 and was engaged for 18 days in December, 1985. The concerned workman was engaged on house wiring jobs and maintenance of electrical fans and other equipments installed at Food Storage Depot , Jamshedpur . He was used to be allotted with certain job on day to day basis and after completion of the job he was not required to remain on duty. The concerned workman was carrying on electrical jobs of other buildings and other offices of different persons and companies . The management used to engage him as per requirement and as per convenience ofthe concerned person. According to the management , the concerned workman has not put 240 days service in 12 calendar months preceding his stoppage of work, therefore, 9921 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

he was not entitled to any notice or notice pay as required under Sec . 25F ofthe I.D. Act .

from Jamshedpur F.C.I. to show that no payment was made to the concerned workman from Jamshedpur office . On the contrary, the attendance chart prepared with the initial ofMW- 1-I.B. Choubey, an employee of the management, it is crystal clear that the concerned workman had also workedat Jamshedpur F.C.I. from March, 1985 to November, 1985. Thus , the management has suppressed the evidence regarding working of the concerned workman at Jamshedpur F.C.I. office at the instance of the District Manager, F.C.I. , Ranchi. Thus , from the materials available on record I find that the attendance of the concerned workman during the year - 1985 became 273 days and, therefore, the compliance of Sec . 25 -F of the I.D. Act was mandatory on the part of the management before stopping theconcerned workman from duty. Since the management has not complied with the provision of Sec . 25 -F ofthe I.D. Act, therefore, the stoppage of the work to the concerned workman by the management is ab - initio void and the concerned workman is entitled for reinstatement with full backwages.

4. From pleadings of the parties it is apparent that it is admitted that the concerned workman was engaged as casual electrician by the District Manager, F.C.I. , Ranchi for doing certain electrical jobs . According to the concerned workman , he has completed more than 240 days service in 12 calendar months preceding his stoppage of work. But according to the management , he has not completed 240 days service , therefore , there is no requirement of notice or notice pay in lieu of notice or retrenchment compensation as provided in Sec. 25F of the I.D. Act . It is not disputed if the concerned workman has not completed 240 days work in a calendar year preceding his stoppage of work then certainly he is not entitled to notice or notice pay nor he is entitled for any retrenchment compensation , but if it is proved that the concerned was on duty for 240 days or more in 12 calendar months prior to stoppage of work then certainly the concerned workman is entitled for retrenchment compensation as well as notice or notice pay for one month.

5. Both parties have led evidence, therefore , let us see whether the concerned workman has been in a position to prove that he has worked for 240 days or more than 240 days. MW-1 --I.B . Choubey had worked at District Office , Ranchi from July, 1982 to October, 1990 and he has admitted that statement showing attendance of workman Ext. W- 1 bears his initial . He has also admitted that the job of electrician is in Class- IV. From Ext. W- 1 which bears initial ofMW- 1 it is apparent that the concerned workman has performed duty for 193 days between January, 1985 to December, 1985 i.e. 12 calendar months prior to his stoppage ofwork . The workman has placed his reliance in a ruling of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in AIR 1986 SC 456 in which it has been held that in calculation of 240 days service as required under Sec . 25 -B of the I.D. Act the Sundays and paid holidays shall be taken into account. There are 52 Sundays , 12 Second Saturdays and 16 Gazetted holidays which are paid holidays . Thus , the number of Sundays, Second Saturdays and paid holidays come to 80 days . If the same is added with 193 actual duty then the total attendance of the concerned workman from January, 1985 to December, 1985 becomes 273 days .

7. The concerned workman has also brought on record a circular of the management which has been marked Ext. W-2. Para 4 of this circular dated 6-5-87 is regarding regularisation of casual/daily rated workmen who have completed 90 days service on or before 2-5-86 . Therefore , the concerned workmen has also claimed for regularisation in service . This circular has not been denied by the management . But from the terms of reference I find that this question regarding regularisation of the concerned workman has not been referred to this Tribunal , therefore, it will not be proper for this Tribunal to give any direction regarding regularisation of the concerned workman . This is left open to the management to consider whether they think it proper to regularise the concerned workman as regular workman in case there is any vacancy in Class - IV job and the concerned workman is found fit for the same. But so far the question of action of the management in terminating the service of Sadhan Kumar Das , Electrician, w.e.f. 1-1-86 without paying his notice pay in lieu of one month notice and retrenchment compensation is not justified and the concerned workman is entitled to be reinstated in the same status with back wages as he was working on 31-12-1985 .

8. In the result , following award is rendered--

The action of the District Manager, F.C.I. , Ranchi , is not justified in terminating the services of Sadhan KumarDas , Electrician w.e.f. 1-1-1986 without paying him notice pay in lieu of one month notice and retrenchment compensation . The concerned workman is entitled for reinstatement in the same post as hewas working on 31-12-1985 alongwith full back wages . The management is driected to implement the award within 30 days from the date of publication ofthe award .

SARJU PRASAD , Presiding Officer.

6. The management has produced certain vouchers which are Ext . M - 1 to M - 5 and on that strength it has been submitted that the concerned workman was employed for 20 days in January, 1985, 12 days in February, 1985 and 18 days in December, 1985 totalling to only 50 days in the year 1985. According to the management, the concerned workman had not worked from March, 1985 to November, 1985. So far question of working ofthe concerned workman fromMarch, 1985 to November, 1985 is concerned it is clear case of the workman that he was deputed to work at Jamshedpur F.C.I. office which is under the jurisdiction of District Manager, F.C.I. Ranchi . The management has not produced any evidence from Jamshedpur or any Cash Book 9922

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12, 1927

नईदिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3144.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17के अनुसरण में, भा . को .को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्धनियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , धनबाद- II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 114/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जोकेन्द्रीय सरकार को 4-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं ० एल-20012/237/2000- आई आर ( सी- I ) ]

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] Fireman, to Age Assessment Committee/Medical Board for determination of his date of birth and ignoring the date recorded in his I.D. Card is just and fair? If not, to what relief is the concerned workman entitled? "

2. Case of the concerned workman according to Written Statement submitted by the sponsoring union on his behalf in brief is as follows :-

एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव

NewDelhi, the 8th August, 2005

S.O. 3144 -In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 114/ 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Labour Court. Dhanbad- II, now as shown in the Annexure in the Industual Dispute between the employers in relation to themanagement of BCCL and their workmen, which was receivedby the Central Government on 4-8-2005.

[No. L- 20012/237/2000- IR(C -I)]

S.S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Shri B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer In thematter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1) (d) of the L.D. Act. , 1947

Reference No. 114 of2000

Parties: Employers in relation to the Management of Kustore Area ofM/s . BCCL and their workman .

APPEARANCES

Onbehafof the workman : Mr. N.G. Arun, Organising Secretary R.C.M.S.

Mr. H. Nath , Advocate Onbehalf of the employers

State : Jharkhand

They submitted that as per Service Excerpt and I.D. Card issued by the management to the concerned workmanhe is to be superannuated from service on 2014. But the management without assigning any cogent reason illegally and arbitrarily superannuated him with effect from 1-1-2001 . They disclosed that on receipt of the notice of superannation from the management the concerned workman submitted representation with prayer for rectification ofthe date ofhis superannuation but to no effect . As a result , he raised an industrial dispute through the sponsoring union before the ALC ( C ) , Dhanbad for conciliation which ultimately resulted reference to this Tribunal for adjudication. The sponsoring union accordingly submitted prayer to pass an Award directing the management to reinstate the concerned workman to his service and to superannuate him as perdate of birth given in the Service Excerpt as well as in the I.D. Card with full back wages and other consequential benefits .

Industry: Coal

Dated , Dhanbad, the 11th July, 2005

AWARD

The Govt . of India, Ministry ofLabour, in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10( 1 ) (d ) of the I.D. Act, 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-20012/ 237/2000- IR(C- I) , dated the 29th Sept. , 2000.

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of BCCL Kustore Area in not referring Shri Mohan Ram , 3. Management on the contrary after filing Written Statement-cum- rejoinder have denied all the claims and allegation which the sponsoring union asserted in the Written Statement submitted on behalf of the concerned workman . They submitted that the concerned workman was a permanent employee of Simlabahal Colliery under Kustore Area . They disclosed that as per Form B Register date of birth of the concerned workman was recorded as 1-1-1941 and his date of appointment was recorded as 1973 and the same were duly authenticated by him by putting his L.T.I. They further submitted that in the Service Book of the concerned workman same date of birth i.c. 1-1-41 was recorded and the same also was authenticated by the concerned workman by putting his L.T.I. They disclosed that since the date of birth recorded in the Form B Register as 1-1-41 is neither tampered nor over written it has to be accepted as final considering the fact that FormB Register is a statutory register under the Mines Act . The date ofbirth recorded in the I.D. Card cannot be considred as authentic document and for which there is no scope to determine the age of the concerned workman relying the date of birth recorded therein as it is not a statutory document. They disclosed that since there was no manipulation or variation of date of birth recorded in the Statutory Register, question of sending the concerned workman before the Apex Medical Board for assessment of his age did not arise . They submitted that local 9923 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

management did not commit any illegality or took any arbitrary decision in superannuating the concerned workman with effect from 1-1-2001 after rendering his 60 years of service.

4. POINTS TO BE DECIDED

"Whether the action of the management of BCCL Kustore Area in not referring Shri Mohari Ram, Fireman , to Age Assessment Committee/Medical Board for determination of his date of birth and ignoring the date recorded in his I.D. Card is just and fair? If not, to what relief is the concerned workman entitled ? "

that management manipulating the date of birth of the concerned workman recorded the same as 1-1-41 instead of 1954. The contention of the sponsoring union on the contrary is that I.D. Card which was issued to the concerned workman after joining his service has exposed clearly different date of birth . According to the I.D. Card which during evidence of the concerned workman wasmarked as Ext. W- 1 . It speaks that his date ofbirth was recorded as 1954. This I.D. Card was issued by the Competent Authority, on 7-1-1976. I have carefully considered the writings appearings in the said I.D. Card and it has been exposed clearly that some columns including the column of date of birth were filled up subsequently by fresh ink and in no manner it tallies with the colour and age of the writting in other columns ofthe I.D. Card. Moreover, it transpires that the same were not writtenby the same person. It is the claim of the sponsoring union that as his age has been recorded as 1954 in the I.D. Card, management ought to have referred him to the age assessment committee /medical board for determination of his age afresh. On the contrary from the submission of management it transpires that I.D. Card is not a statutory document and for which any entry made therein bears no authentic value until and unless it is substantiated with cogent document that the age recorded therein was actual age ofthe concerned workman and not the age recorded in the Form B Register . Ld. Advocate for the management further submitted that Form B Register is considered as statutory Register as per Mines Act and therefore , all entries recorded therein are to be considered as authentic and should be binding on both sides until and unless any gross discrepancy is detected. Ld . Advocate further submitted that on the basis of the particulars recorded in the Form B Register service record of the concerned workman was also opened and in the service record the same date ofbirth i.e. 1-1-41 was recorded. Disclosing this factLd. Advocate for the management submitted that in course of hearing the concerned workman has failed to produce a single cogent document to show that his date of birth was actually in the year 1954 and not in the year 1941 as recorded in the Form B Register. It is the contention of theconcernedworkman that in the year 1987 new I.D. Card was issued to him wherein his date of birth was recorded as 1941 and on perusal of the same he brought notice to his union and thereafter submitted representation to the management for rectification of his date of birth. During hearing the concerned workman/sponsoring union has failed to produce a single scrap of paper to show that he submitted representation immediately to the management for rectification of his date of birth after receipt of the new I.D. Card in the year 1987. On the contrary from the document submitted on behalf of the sponsoring union it has been exposed clearly that the sponsoring union raised industrial dispute in the instant case at the fag end of his service . Therefore , it is clear that neither the concerned workman nor the sponsoring union took any step for 5. It transpires from the record that the sponsoring Union with a view to substantiate the claim ofthe concerned workman examined him as WW- 1 . Management also in support of their claim examined one witness as MW- 1 . WW- 1 during his evidence disclosed that he got employment as Wagon Loader at Simlabahal Colliery in the year 1973. He disclosed that hereafter management issued I.D. Card to him wherein his date ofbirth was recorded as 1954. He further disclosed that his C.M.P.F. A/ c . No. ' is 51510 and in the said record also his date of birth was recorded as 1954. This witness further disclosed that in the year 1987 management issued fresh I.D. Card to him wherein his date ofbirth was recorded as 1941 and on perusing the said date ofbirth recorded in the new I.D. Card he submitted representation through union for rectification of his date of birth in the new I.D. Card . He submitted that as management refused to rectify his date of birth he raised an industrial dispute before the ALC ( C) , Dhanbad . On the contrary MW - 1 during his evidence disclosed that at the time of appointment of the concerned workman as Bhatta Fireman at Hard Coke Bhatta at Simlabahal Colliery his date of birth in the Form B Register was recorded as 1-1-1941 . In support of this claim management produced the original Form B Register which during evidence was marked as Ext . M- 1 . The particulars of the concerned workman in the said Form B Register was recorded in SI. No.405 from where it has been exposed clearly that not only his date ofbirth as 1-1-41 was recorded therein but also it exposed when he joined to his service . The concerned workman acknowledged authentication of his particulars recorded therein by putting his LTI. This witness furtherdisclosed that not only in the Form B Register but also in the Service record along with other particulars his date of birth was recorded as 1-1-41 and this fact was also authenticatedby the concerned workman. I have carefully considered the Service Book of the concerned workman and I find authentication of the submission of MW - 1 . Neither from the particulars recorded in the Form B Register nor from the Service Book I have traced out any sign of tampering in the date of birth of the concerned workman recorded therein . The date of birth as 1-1-41 has been recorded very distinctly in the Form B Register and as well as in the Service Book . Therefore , there is no scope to say 9924

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12, 1927

rectification ofhis age as 1954 instead of 1941 after receipt ofthe new I.D. Card . No explanation on the part of the concerned workman or the sponsoring union is forthcoming whythey remained silent for such long years inraising the dispute. It is settled principle of law that J.D. Card cannot be considered as authentic document as it is not a statutory one as per Mines Act . All reliances should be given on the Form B Register relating to the entries made therein as the said register is a statutory document under Mines Act . Therefore , until and unless any contrary is proved that the date of birth recorded in the Form B Register was recorded wrongly there is no scope to ignore the same. As per JJBCCI circular there is scope to refer any workman before Apex Medical Board for assessment of his age if any gross discrepancy is detected in relation to age recorded in different registers maintained by the management . It has been disclosed by the sponsoring union that in the CM.P.F. record the age of the concerned workman was recorded as 1954. In course of hearing the sponsoring union has failed to produce any paper relating to C.M.P.F. record to substantiate their claim . Therefore , excepting I.D. Card marked as Ext . W- 1 no cogent document is forthcoming before this Tribunal in course of hearing relying on which there is scope to draw conclusion that different age of the concerned workman was recorded in different register. I have already made my observation above relating to the authenticity in the matter of recording age ofthe concerned workman therein . A document which isabout (Ext. W- 1 ) 29 years old, its some writings are not to be so distinct as appearing there in comparison to other writings. As such there is doubt if age recorded in the said I.D. Card was actually written same in the year 1976 when it was issued. Therefore , onus was absolutely on the sponsoring union to produce authentic document to show that the year ofbirth of the concerned workman was actually 1954 and not 1941 .

6. In view of the facts and circumstances discussed above I hold that as the date of birth of the concerned workman was recorded distinctly in the Form B Register as well as in the Service Book , I do not find any sufficient ground to disbelieve the same . Moreover, it is clear that just at the fag end of his service career the concerned workman raised this issue with the expectation to gain something from the management by way of extension of his service which cannot be accepted . Accordingly I find no sufficient reason to refer the concerned workman to ApexMedical Board for determinationof his age afresh. In the result, followingAward is rendered :---

"The action of the management of BCCL , Kustore Area in not referring Shri Mohan Ram, Fireman,to Age Assessment Committee/Medical Board for determination of his date of birth and ignoring the date recorded in his I.D. Card is just and fair. Consequently, the concerned workman is not entitled to get any relief. "

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii) ] नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3145.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार, मै . एअर इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नई दिल्ली- II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 132/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 4-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं . एल-11012/152/ 2000- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 8th August , 2005

S.O. 3145. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 132 / 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, New Delhi - II, now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s . Air India and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 4-8-2005.

[No. L - 11012/ 152/2000 - IR (C -I ) ] S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy . ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT II , RAJENDRA BHAWAN, GROUND FLOOR, RAJENDRA PLACE, NEW DELHI Presiding Officer : R. N. RAI

I.D. No. 132/2000 In the matter of:-

Sh. Jagat Singh , Ex. Senior Cleaner, T/3 -A, East Mehram Nagar, Delhi Cantt- 110010.

Versus

M/s .Air India ,

Through the General Manager (HR & P), Catering Cabin Service, IGIAirport, NewDelhi.

AWARD

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L- 11012/ 152/2000 C - 1 Central Government Dt. 29-11-2000 has referred the following point for adjudication .

The point runs as hereunder :-

"Whether the action of the management of Air India indismissing the service of Shri Jagat Singh Staff No. 31162, Sr. Cleaner w.e.f. 26-11-1999 is just and fair? If not, to what relief is the said workman entitled. " [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

The workman applicant has filed statement of claim. In the statement ofclaim it has been stated that the workman joined the respondent establishment as a sweeper on 5-2-1973 and confirmed on 1-8-1973 . Later on he was promoted as Sr. cleaner.

That the workman was placed under suspension pending inquiry vide respondent's letter No. IS/JS/ 1838 dated 5-11-1997 . In this communication, the management informed the workman that during the year 1994 the workman made an application to the HRD department for issuance of a No Objection Certificate for him and his family members namely Smt . Sheela Devi (wife) , Mr. Sanjay (son) and Miss Promila Devi (daughter ) in order to apply for a visa in the Japanese Embassy and a No Objection Certificate was issued to him. It has been alleged that the workman had submitted this NOC with four altered/forged passports for obtaining against these forged/ altered passports in his name and his family members. It has been further alleged that in the application submitted for obtaining this visa, in the application of workman's son Sanjay the photograph ofMr. Naseeb Singh the workman's another son, was affixed . Similarly, the photographaffixed in the application of workman's daughter Promila Devi iş actually not of workman's daughter but of someone else. These forged/altered passports , which the workman mentioned in the visa application as belonging to him and his family members did not belong to him or his family members and was actually issued in the name of Jaswant Singh, Ali Mohammed, Nahar Singh and Simi respectively. It has been further alleged that the workman had applied for visa against these forged/ altered passport in the name of his family members for an illegal monetary consideration ofRs . 32,000. The management sought clarification from workman for misusing the NOC which was issued by the respondent in order to facilitate its employees to use free/ concessional passes, which they were entitled as airlines employees and also applying for a visa on a forged/altered passport . The workman replied to the management vide his letter dated 23-12-1997 denying charge sheet vide letter No. IS/JS/448 dated January 20, 1998 framing the following charges:

(1) Taking bribes or any illegal gratification;

(2) Breach of any law, rules , regulations or orders applicable to the establishment .

The workman replied to the charge sheet and the management received the same on 20-2-1998. In his reply, the workman submitted that during 1994 , he was contacted by S/ Shri Luis Charles , Lawrence and Thomas , who were staff members and they persuaded him to go for a foreign tour along with his family members . The workman informed them that he was not having passports but they assured him that they would help him in getting the passports from the Regional Passport Office, New Delhi in his name and his family members, i.e. Shila Devi (wife) , Sanjay ( son ) , Nasib Singh (son) and Promila Devi (daughter ) . That the

9925

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

workman believed his colleagues and applied for the NOC under bona fide belief. The workman further informed that Shri Luis Charles , the then peon to the these Personnel Manager, Shri D.S. Kohli brought passport forms signed by the workman and his family members . The workman also gave six copies of passport size photographs of each member of his family including himself for the purpose of passports . After sometime , Shri Luis Charles told the workman that the passports were ready and NOC was required to get the visa from Japan Embassy. That the workman gave him the NOC to collect the visa and thereafter the workman received neither visa nor passports. During the year 1995, the workman was informed by the respondent that the workman was called by Shri Ramesh Chander, Inspector, CBI in his office at CGO Complex, New Delhi . The workman went to CBI office and came to know thatNOC submitted by the workman was with altered/forged passports . The workman explained the factual position and his innocence. The workman was never called again forCBI investigation . The workman applied for NOC under a bona fide beliefbut Luis Charles , Thomas and Lawrence deceived him and put him in trouble . Even though, the reply to the charge sheet was quite satisfactory, the management decided to hold an enquiry into the charges levelled against the workman . Accordingly an inquiry committee was constituted vide order No. IS/Con- 9/79 dated 20-4-1998 .

The inquiry committee conducted its proceedings and submitted a report finding the workman guilty of the aforesaid charges. The workman replied to the inquiry committee report vide his letter dated 2-7-1999 and prayed the disciplinary authority to quash the inquiry report as the management failed to prove the charges levelled against the workman .

The disciplinary authority vide its letter No. IS/ JS/ 204 dated 1-9-1999 conveyed to the workman that it proposed to dismiss the workman without retirement benefits . The workman replied to this show cause notice vide his letter 25-9-1999 and requested the management to quash the charge sheet and acquit him as he was innocent.

The management vide its letter No. IS /CON - 9 / JS/ 290 dated 26-11-1999 passed the order holding that the workıhan was dismissed without retirement benefits in full as per clause No. 20 (j ) of the Certified Standing Orders applicable to him. The management vide its letter No. EMP- 1/1/31162 dated 23-2-2000 conveyed to the workman that his services standing terminated with effect from 23-2-2000, in terms of the above said punishment.

The management has filed written statement . In the written statement , at the outset it is submitted that Mr. JagatSingh (hereinafter called the workman) was terminated from service after following the due process of law and in accordance to the principle ofnatural justice . The workman has no cause of action to file the present statement of claim and the same my be dismissed at the outset . However, 9926

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12 , 1927

thebrieffacts of the case in correct perspective are being reproduced herein below :

Thatthe workmanjoined Air India (hereinafter called the management ) as a sweeper in the commerciai department on 5-2-1973 and was confirmed in the service w.e.f. 1-8-1973 hereafter he was selected as a cleaner in cabincatering department on 12-11-1973 and confirmeci w.e.f. 1-5-1974. That the workman had a chequered history isevident from the instances given herein below:-

(a) That the workman was found removing cream packets from the first class gally of Pan Am flight PA 001 on 21-4-1978 and accordingly was issued a letter of warning No. DIS/ 1 /287 dated 25-4-1978 . The said letter is enclosed herein with and marked as Annexure - I .

(b) The workman was also found to be a habitual absentee and thus issued letter of warning No. IS/JS/ 195 dated 13/14-1-1981 . Even after issuance of such warning letter the workman continued to remain absent from his duties , thus compelling the management to charge sheet the workman vide letter No. IS/87/309 dated 14/ 19-2-1990 for remaining absent for 87.5 days during the period of 1-4-1988 to 31-3-1989 , the inquiry committee constituted to enquire into the charges of absenteeism levelled against the workman , found him guilty which the workman also admitted before the committees which awarded punishment of "reduction of two stages in the time scale of pay from Rs . 1,330 to Rs . 1,300 for a period of one year effective 1-10-1990 " vide order no . IS/87 /5925 dated 5 / 10-9-1990 . The said documents are enclosed herewith and marked as Annexure - 2 , 3 & 4.

(c). The workman continued to defy the instructions of the management and continued to remain absent thus compelling the management to issue warning vide letter No. DIS/33 / 31162/24 dated 6-3-1990 and informing him that he was being treated as absent without permission for the period 16-2-1990 to 5-3-1990 . The said letter is enclosed herewith and marked as Annexure-5.

(d) Even after continues warning and punishment the workman in defiance of all instructions of the management remained absent from 104.5 days during the period 1-4-1990 to 31-3-1991 and accordingly he was issued a charge sheet No. DIS/33 /31162/88 dated 21-1-1992 , under which he was charged with the following :

(i) Habitual absence without leave .

(ii) Act Subversive of discipline .

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)] The said letter is enclosed herewith and marked as Annexure -6 .

(e) The enquiry officer in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court on 27-8-1990 in WP No. ib . 637 of 1988 proceeded under the Model Standing Orders and found the workman guilty of the above charges and accordingly awarded the punishment of stoppage of annual increment due on 1-2-1994 and 1-2-1995 vide order No. DIS/33/31162/ 1060 dated 21-9-1993 . The said letter is enclosed herewith and marked as Annexure -7 .

(f) The set pattern of the workman continued and was once again charge sheeted vide letter No. DIS/33 /31162/74 dated 18-9-1992 for remaining absent without permission for 104.5 daysduring the period 1-4-1991 to 31-3-1992 . The inquiry committee thus constituted, found the workman guilty and ordered " suspension on loss of pay and allowances " vide order No. DIS/33/ 31162/ 854 dated 17-8-1993 . The said documents are enclosed herewith and marked as Annexure - 8 & 9 .

Inthe meantime the Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter referred as CBI) , New Delhi registered a case against the workman in the year 1994 for illegal sale and purchase of Indian Passports with valid visa , in connivance with private persons , for monetary gains with the intention oftransporting unauthorized person out the country on thebasis of fake/ forged passports . The CBI then reported the matter to the management vide case No. RC -13/5/94/ SLP/DLI dated 18-7-1994. Thereafter on 5-11-1997 vide letter No. IS/ JS/ 1838 the workman was asked to show cause in writing to the charges contained therein, failing -which further action would be taken in the matter, while suspending him with immediate effect, in view of the seriousness of the misconduct alleged against him . That the reply ofthe workman to the show -cause letter was not found satisfactory and accordingly issued with charge sheet letter No. IS/ JS /448 dated 20-1-1998 levelling the following charges of misconduct under the CSOs .

"Taking bribe or any illegal gratification" .

"Breach of any law, rules , regulation or order applicable to the establishment . "

The proceedings of the inquiry committed were spread over 12 sittings from August, 1998 to March, 1999 and the workman participated in the same , defended by a Defence Counsel of his choice . The committee had recorded thedepositions of the CBI Inspector and the representative ofHRD Department . That the workman was provided full opportunity to cross - examine the witnesses of the management . That it may rightly be submitted that the inquiry was conducted as per the principles of natural justice , equity and fair- play and the contention of the 9927 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

workman that the inquiry was a mere farce is incorrect and baseless. The committee based on the documents taken on record and the deposition of the witnesses found the workman guilty of charges . The workman was served a copy ofthe report and was called to submit his reply as to why the findings of the inquiry committed should not be accepted. The competent authority also perused the inquiry proceedings and the report of the inquiry committee and concurred with the findings of the later. The authority also perused the past record of the workman to find any mitigating or existing extenuating circumstances warranting any reduction is proposed punishment but found none and observed that it was far from being satisfactory.

charges itself. In the second charge rules, regulations or orders applicable to the establishment has not been mentioned. It has not been specifically mentioned as to which rule or regulations or order has been violated by the workman so the workman could not prove his innocence in view of the vague charges. In the domestic inquiry the workman has taken the stand that somebody has fraudulently collected the " No Objection Certificate" from Personnel Department . He has applied for the No Objection Certificate but his passport has expired so he did not received the No Objection Certificate . It has been obtained by someone else. The workman during the inquiry has specifically denied that he did not collect the No Objection Certificate from the HRD Department as he came to know that his Passport No. W160522 has expired on 7-5-1994 and no time was avaiable for the journey. The defence counsel asked the witness Shri S.B. Khatri whether he obtained any signature of the staff against issuance ofNo Objection Certificate . He has replied that signatures are obtained by the concerned staff. He was not holding the charge of that section and he has further stated that he has not receipt so the management has failed to prove that No Objection Certificate was collected by the workman itself. It ispossible that some other interested person would have collected the No Objection Certificate and could have applied for Visa .

That in view of the seriousness of the misconduct committed by the workman and his chequered history, it was proposed to impose the punishment of " dismissal from the service" in terms of Clause 20 (j ) of the CSOs and the workman was called upon to submit his say. The authority found the reply of the workman not satisfactory. It perused the report of the inquiry committee, its proceedings and all relevant papers and concurred with the findings of the inquiry committee . The authority while perusing the reply filed by the workman to the proposed punishment , was of the view that the workman had not brought out any extenuating or mitigating circumstances which could warrant reduction in the proposed punishment and came to the conclusion that the ends of Justice would only be met if the workman was awarded the punishment of "dismissal from the service of the company " and ordered accordingly. It is also submitted that the management has compiledwith the requirement of Section 33 ( ii) (b) of the I.D Act, 1947. The said documents are enclosed herewith the marked as Annexure - 10, 11 & 12.

The workman applicant has filed rejoinder and 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 for deciding it as preliminary issue has not been pressed by the management .

Heard argument from both the sides and perused the papers on the record. Both the parties have filed written arguments also .

It was further submitted that forged Passports bearing No. R178035 , L211399, K69081 & L409593 were submitted along with No Objection Certificate for Visa . The workman did not go to Japanese Embassy. The management witness Shri Ramesh Kumar has stated that the fraudulent Visa application produced before the inquiry committee did not bear the workman's signature. He confirmed that one Mr. Luis Thomas has filed his Visa application in the name of the workman . The management witness has admitted that the signature was not of Shri Jagat Singh but his photo was pasted on the application form. The witness has also stated that the investigation has been closed and concluded so the management during the course ofinquiry has failed to prove that the workman applied for Visa. Mr. Luis Thomas has filed application for Visa in the name of the workman and his family members . In the Visa application the photo of Sanjay, Son of workman, photograph of Nasib Singh, son ofworkman was affixed. There is no photo of the workman's daugher but of somebody else . The findings of the inquiry committee that the charge regarding taking bribe or illegal , gratification is completely erroneous and perverse so it should be quashed on that ground alone .

It was submitted from the side of the workman that Charge No. 1 is regarding taking bribes or any illegal gratification , Charge No. 2 is regarding breach of any law, rules , regulations or orders applicable to the establishment .

The management witness during the course of inquiry has stated that he could not say as to who obtained the NOC from the department . As he was not incharge of that department during that particular period. It was submitted from the side ofthe workman that in case the workman did not obtain the NOC it cannot be said that he Itwas submitted from the side of the workman applicant that the charges are extremely vague and not specific . It has not been mentioned as to how much amount the workman applicant has received by way of illegal gratification . This would have been mentioned in the

2498 G1/2005-23 9928

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12, 1927

gave it to some other person. The application for Visa docs not bear the signature of the workman applicant though his photo has been affixed.

unauthorized persons to foreign countries on the basis of fakeand forged Passports. The CBI reported this matter to the management also. In the light of the information ofthe CBI the workman applicant was issued charge sheet and an inquiry committee was constituted to conduct inquiry. The inquiry committee after giving sufficient opportunity for cross examination the witnesses and production of witnesses by the CSE in defence , concluded the inquiry proceedings and submitted the report and found the charges proved . He was given personal hearing thereafter the punishment of dismissal from service was awarded to the workman applicant.

It was submitted from the side of the management that the workman applicant has replied to show cause notice and in his reply of 23-12-1997 and 20-02-1998 . He has admitted that he obtained the NOC from the department and gave it to Mr. Louis Charles to Collect Visa . The workman has filed document on Sl . No. 2 , Annexure -P - II dated 23-12-1997 addressed to the management and Annexure-P -II In Para No. 3 & 4 it has been stated that after sometime Louis Charles told him that Passports are ready and NOC is required to get the Visa from Japan Embassy. He has further stated in Para-4 that he gave him (Louis Charles) the NOC to collect the Visa and thereafter he neither received the Visa nor the Passport. It was submitted from the side of the workman applicant that the workman applicant has admitted in categorical terms that he obtained the NOC and gave the same to Mr. Louis Charles to collect the Visa. It implies that the workman applicant has also applied for Visa then only he gave him the NOC to collect his Visa. Annexure- IV has been filed by the workman applicant himself in letter dated 20-02-1998 the workman has repeated that he obtained the NOC and he gave it to Mr. Louis Charles to collect the Visa and thereafter he neither received the Visa nor the Passports. In his cross examination also the workman has admitted that it is correct that he submitted his explanation dated 20-02-1998 to the aforesaid charge sheet so the workman applicant admits his letter of reply to show cause notice dated 20-02-1998 and in that letter he has admitted that he obtained the NOC and gave it to Mr. Louis Charles to collect his Visa.

Itwas further submitted from the side of the management that the inquiry committee has mentioned this fact in their findings . It has been admitted in the findings that witnesses during the inquiry have not disclosed regarding the signature for obtaining NOC but he himself asadmitted this fact in his reply dated 23-12-1997 and 20-02-1998 that he obtained NOC and gave it to Mr. Louis Charles. It is on the basis of his admission that the inquiry committee has established the fact that the CSE obtained NOC from the department and he gave it to Mr. Louis Charles to collect the Visa. There may not be his signature onthe application for Visa but , since he gave NOC to Louis Charles to collect Visa he was aware of the fact that application for Visa will be moved on his behalf so he deliberately obtained NOC and gave it to Mr. Louis Charles tocollect his Visa though he has not seen his Passport . He helped and colluded with Louis Charles to obtain Visa fraudulently on the basis of his NOC.

It becomes quite obvious from perusal of the inquiry proceedings that the management has examined two witnesses and they have been cross examined by the defence counsel of the CSE and he has been asked to produce evidence in his defence but he filed final statement . As such principles of natural justice have been followed in the inquiry proceedings . There is no defect in the proceedings conducted by the inquiry committee. It was submittedfrom the side of the workman applicant that during the inquiry it was not established that the workman received NOC from the HRD Department . The case of the workman is that he has no valid Passport so he gave Rs . 1800/- to Mr. Louis Charles along with six copies of photographs of the members of his family to obtain Passports . It is also admitted by the CSE that he applied for NOC but he did not receive the same . The substantial question is whether the CSE has no valid passport as statedby him and whether he received the NOC from the HRD Department or not . So far as the Passport is concerned the CSE himself has filed the Passport ofMr. Nasib Singh son ofthe CSE Jagat Singh , Passport No. A1410103 issued byRegional Passport Office (RPO ) on 27-08-1996 and valid upto 26-08-2006 so it becomes quite obvious that atleast in the name of Mr. Nasib Singh, the own son of the CSE there was valid Passport . The show cause notice was given to the workman applicant on 05-11-1996 and his son Mr. Nasib Singh has a valid Passport on that date as Passport was issued to him on 27-08-1996 so the CSE has a valid Passport at the time of application for NOC . So far as the second point is concerned the workman applicant has admitted in letter dated 23-12-1997 and 20-02-1998 categorically and unequivocally that he obtained the NOC and handed over to Mr. Louis Charles to collect the Visa. It implies that the workmanwas aware of the fact that the applicant for Visa has been moved on his behalf and Passports of all the members ofhis family have been filed along with the Visa application. It is immaterial whether he has put his signature on the Visa application or not . In fact he authorized Mr. Charles to obtain the Visa so it shall be deemed that he was in knowledge of the fact that the application for the Visa has been filed in his name along with valid Passports .

It was submitted that the CBI Inspector during the course of inquiry has admitted that the case is concluded Itwas submitted from the side of the management thatCBI, New Delhi registered a case against the workman in the year 1994 for illegal sale and purchase of Indian Passports with valid Visa in connivance with private persons for illegal gains with the intention of transporting 9929 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

and closed. The management can still proceed in domestic inquiry. In domestic inquiry the sophisticated and strict rules of evidence act are not applicable . There is no allergy to hearsay evidence provided it has reasonable nexus and credibility.All materials which are logically probative for a prudent mind are permissible . It is settled law that the management can proceed in domestic inquiry even if there is acquittal from a court of law. The closure and conclusion of criminal proceedings by the Inspector, CBI cannot prevent the management to conduct the domestic inquiry. Misconduct however, should be proved in the domestic inquiry. I find no force in the argument of the CSE that investigation was closed and concluded so the management cannot conduct a departmental inquiry. The second point raised by the the workman applicant is that the charge sheet is vague. It has not been mentioned in the charge sheet as to how much amount the CSE received by way of illegal gratification.

Itwas submitted from the side of the workman that no amount of illegal gratifiction has been mentioned in the charge sheet . The conspiracy hatched up by Mr. Louis Charles and the CSE was detected by the CBI so the exact amount of illegal gratification cannot be ascertained. He might have sold the Visa to any other person for a heavy amount so it cannot be ascertained as to how much gratification they would have received as the transaction was not complete . They indeed tried to fabricate valuable documents and it is in itself an offence . In such circumstances non - mention of the amount of illegal gratification is not very much material even if this single charge is proved, it will amount to serious misconduct on the part of the workman applicant . My attention was drawn to (2004 ) 8 SCC , this law is not applicable in the present facts and circumstances of the case . In AIR 1976 SC 1080 it has been held that the departmental proceedings do not stand on the same footing in which high degree of proof is required. The departmental proceedings are not strictly governed by the rules of evidence as contained in the evidence act . In view of this citation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court the domestic inquiry was valid even if criminal investigation was concluded and closed.

It was also submitted that the punishment is to hash . It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in (2005 ) 2 SCC that it is not a normal jurisdiction of the superior courtsto interfere with the quantum ofpunishment until it iswholly disproportionate to the misconduct proved. In this case the respondent was found sleeping while on duty and earlier on three occasions he has been found guilty so the Hon'ble Supreme Court refused to interfere with the quantum ofpunishment .

Inthe instant case it is on record that once a warning was given to the workman applicant while he was found removing Cream packets from the first class galley of PAM Flight on 25-04-1978 and he has been warned for habitual absenteeism and he has been awarded punishment of two stages in a time scale ofpay from Rs . 1330/- to Rs . 1300/- for a period of one year 1990. The present misconduct of the workman applicant is a serious misconduct as he wanted to obtain Visa for selling it to other persons so the quantum of punishment is not shockingly dis - proportionate to the grave misconduct of the workman applicant . No interference on that count is required.

The reference is replied thus :-

The action of the management of Air India is dismissing the service of Shri Jagat Singh, Staff No. 31162, Sr. Cleaner w.e.f. 26-11-1999 is just, fair and legal . The workman applicant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.

TheAward is given accordingly.

Dated: 21-07-2005

R.N. RAI , Presiding Officer My attention was drawn to AIR 1984 SC 1805, it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that in case there is misappropriation of employers money by co-workman byusing his cheque book and the dismissed employee did not take part in that conspiracy the dismissed employee cannot be held guilty of misconduct . The Hon'ble Supreme court found it a case of findgins based on no evidence . The Judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case as the workman applicant himself applied for NOC and he obtained the NOC and gave it to Mr. Charles for collecting his Visa so it cannot be said to be un -aware ofthe entire conspiracy. My attention was also drawn to 1982 I LLJ Page 364. This law is not applicable in the present facts and circumstances of the case as no plea of loss of confidence has been taken by the management so this fact stands proved that the workman had a valid passport in the name of his son Nasib Singh so there is no question of getting fresh passport . He applied for NOC and he obtained NOC and he entrusted it toMr. Charles to collect his Visa on his behalf so the CSE has done or caused to be done the entireact . It implies that the CSE authorized Mr. Charles to obtain Passports on his behalf and he also authorized Mr. Louis Charles to obtain Visa on his behalf and he give him NOC so it shall be deemed that he participated in all the proceedings from obtaining passport to obtaining Visa. A person who authorizes and helps another person to commit an illegal act , shall be deemed to have accomplished that act . The CSE and Mr. Charles hatched the conspiracy to obtain Visa offake/ forged passport but they did not succeed in their evil design. The matter was detected by the CBI and the management was informed accordingly so it shall be presumed that the CSE has himself tried to obtain fake and forged passport, moved application for Visa and annexed his No Objection Certificate to that Visa application. All these activities are impliedly done by the CSE as he was fully aware of every stage of the activities.

9930

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3146.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मै . एरियाना अफगान एअरलाइंस 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- I केपंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 8/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 4-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-11012/59/2003- आई आर ( सी -1 ). ]

एस. एस. गुप्ता , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 8th August, 2005

on Shri Rameshwar Clerk of Shri H.L. Kuntar Advocate A/R for the management appeared and filed authority let- ter on behalf of Shri H.L. Kumar and R.P.Malik on behalf of the management .A receipt dated 8-12-99 appears to have been filed/placed on record indicating that the workman Rajesh Kumar Sharma has received a sum of Rs . 77860/- (Rupees Seventy Seven Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty onlyvide cheque No. 648548 dated 8-12-99 drawn on Punjab National Bank in full and final settlement of his dues con- sequent to termination of services and it is also mentioned therein that he shall not claim any further compensation from ArianaAfgan Air lines on account of his termination. Thus it is apparent form the said receipt that the applicant has received the compensation of Rs . 77860/- in full and final settlement of his claims. Even otherwise 1 have no reason to disbelieve the statement made by Shri K.L. Ghai A/R for management that the workman has received the amount of Rs . 77860/ - in full and final settlement of his claims and it appears that for this reason the workman is not appearing and prosecuting this case . The workman appears to have compromised the matter with the manage- ment . Case is , therefore , disposed of. File be consigned to record room. Dated: 29-7-05

S.O. 3146.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 8/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Cour , New Delhi - I now as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management ofM/s . Ariana Afgan Airlines P. Ltd. and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 4-8-2005,

[No. L - 11012/59/2003 -IR (C -I)] S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

SANT SINGH BAL, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2005

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI SANT SINGHBAL : PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, CUM LABOUR COURT : NEW DELHI

In the matter ofdispute between : L. D. No. 8/2004

Shir Rajesh Sharma,

का.आ. 3147.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सी सी एल के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरंण/ श्रम न्यायालय, धनबाद- II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 77/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 4-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

Ex-Cargo Assistant, R/o B5 /43 , Safdarjung Enclave, NewDelhi - 110049.

----Workman

[सं. एल-20012/68/2004- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव VERSUS

New Delhi , the 8th August , 2005 Managing Director, M/ sAriana Afgan Airlines Co. Ltd. , Room No. 210, Ashok Hotel , Chankya Puri , NewDelhi.

-Management

APPEARANCES : None for parties.

AWARD

S.O. 3147. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Govemment hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 77/2004 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court , Dhanbad - II now as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of CCL and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 4-8-2005 .

The Central Government in the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L- 11012/59/2003 -I.R. (C. 1 ) dated 14-1-04 has referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal foradjudication:-

[No. L -20012/68/2004 -IR (C -I ) ] S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy . ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUS- TRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO . 2) AT DHANBAD

PRESENT :

SHRI B. Biswas , Presiding Officer "Whether the demand of workman Shri Rajesh Sharma Ex - cargo assistant for re - instatement of his services upon resuming the Airlines services by the management of M/ s Ariana Afgan Airlines Co. Ltd. is just, fair and legal ? If yes , to what relief is the workman entitled ?"

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1 ) (d) of the I.D. Act. , 1947 REFERENCE . NO . 77 OF 2004 2. Shri Umesh Kumar for the workman appeared on 29-3-05 and moved an application for adjournment and later 9931 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

NewDelhi , the 8th August, 2005 PARTIES :

Employers in relation to the management of CCL's Kalyani Project and their workman.

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalf ofthe workmen : None

On behalf of the employers : Mr. D.K. Verma, Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal .

S.O. 3148. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. 93/96 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court, Dhanbad- II now as shown in the employers in relation to the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of E.C.L.and their workmen, which was receivedby the Central Government en 4-8-2005 .

Dated, Dhanbad, the 19th July, 2005.

AWARD

[No. L. -20012/243/ 1995 -IR(C-I) ] S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO . 2) AT DHANBAD

PRESENT:

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour, in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d) of the I. D. Act. , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L -20012/68/2004 - IR(C- I) , dated, the 2nd July, 2004.

SCHEDULE

Shri B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1) (d) of the I.D. Act . , 1947

REFERENCE NO . 93 OF 1996 "Whether the action of the management of S.D.Q. 1 (Kalyani Project) of M/ s C.C. Ltd, not to provide employment to Shri Roshan Kumar, dependent son of late Nandu Ram workman under para 9.3.2 of N.C.W.A. VI is justified ? If not, to what relief is the said dependent of concerned workmen entitled ? " PARTIES: Employers in relation to the management ofM/s . Hiraram Colliery E.C.L. and their workman.

APPEARANCES :

On behalf of the workmen Mr. D.K. Verma, Advocate Onbehalf of the employers : Mr. B. M. Prasad, Advocate

State: Jharkhand Industry:Coal.

Dated, Dhanbad, the 19th July, 2005

AWARD

The Govt. of India , Ministry of Labour, in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10 (1 ) ( d) of the I. D. Act . , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-20012/243/ 95 - IR(Coal- I) , dated, the 3rd September, 1996.

SCHEDULE

2. In this reference neither the concerned workman nor his representative appeared before this Tribunal . Management, however, made appearance through their authorised representative . Record shows that inspite of issuance of notices and show cause notice consecutively the workman/ sponsoring union failed to turn up before this Tribunal in the matter of taking steps in the instant reference case. As per Rule 10 (B) of the ID . Central Rules 1957 it is mandatory to file Written Statement on the part of the concerned workman within 15 days from the date of receipt of the order of reference . The workman /sponsoring union not only violated the above provision of rule but also did not consider necessary to respond to the notices issued by this Tribunal . Gesture of the workman/sponsoring union if is taken into consideration will expose clearly that they are not interested to proceed with the hearing of this case. Under the circumstances , this Tribumal also finds no reason to adjourn the case suo moto for days together. Hence, the case is closed and accordingly a ' No dispute ' Award is passed in this reference presuming non -existence of any industrial dispute between the parties .

B. BISWAS, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2005

"Whether the action of the management ofHiraram Colliery of M/ s. Eastern Coalfields Limited in superannuating Shri S.K. Ajad Ali , Senior Overman on 1-11-1993 is justified ? If not , to what relief the said workman is entitled to ?"

का. आ. 3148- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार ईसीएल के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध मेंनिर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण श्रम न्यायालय, धनबाद- II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 93/96 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 4-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/243/1995- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ]

एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव

2. In this case both the parties appeared and filed their respective Written Statement, documentsetc. The case then proceeded along with its course . Subsequently, at the stage of hearing Ld. Advocate for the workman submitted that after the death of the concerned workman as no legal heir is appearing for substitution the instant reference may be disposed of on the basis of ' No dispute ' Award. This is a case of 1996. It appears from the record that ample opportunities were given to the legal heirs of the deceased workman for their substitution but they did not consider necessary to take any step . At this stage it is 9932

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

needless to proceed with the hearing of this. Hence , a 'No dispute' Award is passed in this reference presuming non- existence of any industrial dispute between the parties .

B. BISWAS, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3149-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा.को.को. लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद- II, के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 168/98 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 4-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/311/1996- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 8th August, 2005

S.O. 3149- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award Ref. ( No. 168/ 98) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court Dhanbad II now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 4-8-2005 .

[No. L. -20012/311 / 1996- IR( C- 1 )] S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2) AT DHANBAD. PRESENT :

Shri B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer.

Inthematter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1) ( d) ofthe I.D. Act. , 1947

REFERENCE No. 168 OF 1998

PARTIES: Employers in relation to the management ofBlock- 2 area of M/ s . BCCL , and their workman.

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalfof the workman : Mr. K. Chakravorty, Advocate

Onbehalf of the employers : Mr. R. N. Ganguly, Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal.

Dated, Dhanbad, the 19th July, 2005.

AWARD

The Govt of India , Ministry of Labour , in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10( 1 ) (d) of the I. D. Act. , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication videtheir Order No. L- 20012/311 /96 - IR( Coal- I) , dated , the 29th June , 1998 .

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

SCHEDULE

"Whether the demand of the Bihar Colliery Kamgar Union to promote Shri Jai Ram Singh to the post of Grade 'A' with effect from 1994 with all arrears of wages and consequential benefits is justified ? If so, to what relief should be granted ? "

2. In this reference both the parties appeared through their authorised representatives and filed their respective Written Statement, documents etc. In course of hearing Ld. Advocate for the management relying on death certifi- cate of the concerned workman submitted that the concerned workman died on 30-1-2004 and since that date no step has been taken for filing any substitution petition on the part of the representative of the workman . Ld. Advocate who appearing on the side of the workman submitted that in the instant case a ' No dispute ' Award. may be passed as the parties are not insterested to take further step with a view to proceed with the hearing of this case. Representative of the management does not raise any objection. In the circumstances , the case is close and accordingly a 'No dispute' Award is passed in this refer- ence presuming non - existence of any industrial dispute between the parties .

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3150-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार. भा.को.को. लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद- II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 187/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को4-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/348/2000- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव NewDelhi , the 8th August, 2005

S.O. 3150. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 187/ 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court Dhanbad - II now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 4-8-2005.

[No. L. -20012/348/2000- IR(C- I ) ] S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2) AT DHANBAD . PRESENT :

Shri B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer.

Inthe matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1) (d) ofthe I.D. Act . , 1947 REFERENCE No. 187 of 2000 9933 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

PARTIES: Employers in relation to the management ofKustore Area of M/ s . BCCL and their workmen.

APPEARANCES :

3.Management on the contrary after filing written statement-cum -rejoinder have denied all the claims and allegations which the sponsoring union asserted in the written statement submitted on behalf of the concerned workmen.

Mr. S. Sharma

Onbehalfofthe workmen

Mr. H. .Nath, Ld.

Onbehalf of the employer :

Advocate

Industry: Coal.

State: Jharkhand

Dated, Dhanbad, the 13th July, 2005.

AWARD

They submitted that as per provision of Cadre Scheme of the Company, the cases of promotion of employees of E & M Discipline of Kustore Colliery has been considered and those who have been found suitable for promotion have already been promoted to next higher grade/category. They disclosed that as concerned workmen failed to qualify for higher promotion and also as there was no vacancy the management could not consider theirpromotion .

The Govt. of India , Ministry of Labour , in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10( 1 )( d) of the I. D. Act . , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L -20012/348 /2000 (C- I ) , dated , 29th November, 2000.

They submitted that knowing fully well of this fact the sponsoring union raised Industrial Dispute which is not tenable in the eye of law. Accordingly, they submitted prayer to pass award rejecting the claim of the concerned workmen.

SCHEDULE

4. Points to be Decided

"Whether the demand of the union that the workmen Shri Devnand Sharma, Welder Cat . VI , Shri Rama Shankar Prasad Cap lamp Fitter category VI and Shri Chhena Pradhan Mechmical Fitter Grade IV of Kustore Colliery should be considered for promotion in the light ofthe BCCL Circular No. BCCL/PER/ IR/ Auxe cadre/90/9639-789 dated 4-7-90 is justified and legal and whether the action of the management of Kustore Colliery of M/ s . BCCL in denying the promotion to the above workmen by not complying with the above instruction is justified & legal ?

"Whether the demand of the Union that the workmen Shri Devnand Sharma, Welder Cat. VI , Shri Rama Shankar Prasad Cap Lamp fitter category VI and Shri Chhena Pradhan Mechanical Fitter Grade IV of Kustore Colliery should be considered for promotion in the light ofthe BCCL Circular No. BCCL/PER/IR/ Auxe cadre/90 /9639-789 dated 4-7-90 is justified and legal and whether the action of the management of Kustore Colliery of M/ s BCCL in denying the promotion to the above workmen by not complying with the above instruction is justified & Legal ? If not, to what relief are the workmen concerned entitled to ?"

If not, to what relief are the workmen concerned entitled?"

5. Finding with reasons

2. The case of the concerned workmen according to written statement submitted by the sponsoring union on theirbehalf in brief is as follows :

The sponsoring union submitted that concerned workmanDevnand Sharma, Welder Cat. VI is working since 1990 at Kustore Colliery. They submitted that his co-work- ers who are junior to hinı have got their promotions in Assistant Foreman Grade ' C' ignoring the eligibility of the concerned workman to get that promotion.

Itappears from the record that instant case was fixed for ex-parte hearing as neither the sponsoring union nor the concerned workmen inspite of getting ample scope failed to appear and also to adduce evidence with a view to substantiate their claim. It is further seen that inspite of giving sufficient opportunity management also did not consider necessary to adduce any evidence.

Accordingly considering the materials on record let itbe considered if the claim of the concerned workmen as per reference stands on any cogent footing or not .

They submitted that another concerned workman Ram Shankar Prasad is discharging his duties at Kustore Colliery since 1968 as Cap Lamp Fitter. They alleged that inspite of seniority management illegally and arbitrarily is- sued order of promotion in favour of Shiv Shankar Prasad as Asstt . Cap Lamp in-charge in Gr. D superseding the concernedworkman . They submitted that similarly Chhna Pradhan who is Mechanical Fitter has been deprived of getting his promotion in higher grade due to arbitrary deci- sion ofthe management .

They alleged that they raised Industrial Dispute for conciliation as the management illegally and arbitrarily re- fused to consider their promotion inspite of their seniority.

Considering the pleadings of both sides there is no dispute to hold that they are working at Kustore Colliery. Contention of the sponsoring union is that concerned workmanDevnand Sharma is working as Welder in Cat . VI since 1990. They alleged that superseding the claim of this workmanby order ofthe management his juniors have got theirpromotion in Asstt. Foreman Gr. C similarly another workman Rama Shankar Prasad who is discharging his dutiesas Cap lamp Fitter since 1968 was superseded by his junior Shiv Shankar Prasad in Gr . Das Asstt . Cap Lamp incharge. They further alleged that promotion of Chhena Pradhan, Mechnicial Fitter has been with held by the management.

Accordingly, they submitted prayer to pass award directing the management to issue order of promotion in favour ofthe concerned workmen with all consequential benefits.

9934

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12, 1927

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii )]

अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , धनबाद- II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 8/1998 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 4-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/508/1995- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] Onthe contrary as per written statement contention ofthe management is that all promotion of employees under them are considered as per conditions laid down in the Cadre Scheme subject to availability of vacancy. They submitted that question of consideration of promotion does not arise ifthe concerned workmar fails to qualify for promotion.

एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 8th August, 2005

S.O. 3151. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award Ref. 8/1998 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum-Labour Court, Dhanbad - Il now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the Employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 4-8-2005 .

[No. L. - 20012/508/ 1995 - IR( C- I ) ] S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

There is no dispute to hold that Job nomenclature hasclearly formulated the guide line how promotion of a workman in the higher post will be considered by the management . It is the allegation of sponsoring union that workman Dev Nandan Sharma and Ram Shankar Prasad were superseded by their juniors to higher posts . Inspite ofclaiming so the sponsoring union have failed to produce any material evidence that though these two workmen though qualified for promotion management arbitrarily ignoring their claim promoted other workmen who were juniors to them. The sponsoring union also have failed to produce any paper to show that management withheld the promotion of Chhena Pradhan . It transpires Gom their written statement that they have all these allegations against the management but did not consider necessary to adduce evidence for substantiating the allegation in question.

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2) AT DHANBAD

PRESENT :

Shri B. BISWAS, Presiding Officer Itis to be taken into consideration that facts disclosed in the written statement can not be considered as substantive piece of evidence until and unless the same are substantiated by cogent evidence.

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10 (1 ) (d) ofthe I.D. Act . , 1947

REFERENCE No. 8 of 1998

PARTIES: Employers in relation to the management ofBagdigi Colliery of M/ s . BCCL and their workmen.

APPEARANCES :

Record shows that inspite of getting ample opportunity neither the sponsoring union nor the concerned workmen considered necessary to adduce any evidence with a view to substantiate their claims . As such, just relying on the facts disclosed in the written statement there is no scope at all to up hold the contention of the sponsoring union and for which there is no scope at allto give any relief in view of their prayer. As the sponsoring union for their whimsical acts has failed to substantiate the claim in question they are not entitled to give any relief. Onbehalf of the workmen : None

In the result the following award is rendered:

Onbehalf of the employers : Mr. D.K. Verma , Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal.

Dated, Dhanbad, the 12th July, 2005.

AWARD

TheGovt. of India , Ministry of Labour, in exercise of the powers conferred them under Section 10 ( 1 ) (d) of the I. D. Act . , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-20012/508/ 95 - IR (Coal- I) , dated, the 7th January, 1998 .

That the demand of the union that the workman Shri Dev Nandan Sharma, Welder Cat . VI , Shri Ram Shankar Prasad Cap Lamp Fitter Cat. VI and Shri Chhena Pradhan Machanical Fitter, Grade IV of Kustore Colliery should be considered for promotion in the light of the BCCL Circular No. BCCL/PER/IB/ Auxa cadre/90 /9639-789 dated 4-7-90 is not justified and iegal . The action of the management of Kustore Colliery ofM/s BCCL in denying the promotionto the above workmen by not complying with the above instuction is justified & legal .

SCHEDULE

Consequentally, the concerned workmen named above are not entitled to get any relief.

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer

नईदिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2005

"Whether the demand of the Janta Sharmik Sangh, Dhanbad for regularisation of S/ Sh. Arjun Paswan , Lalan Paswan and Kapildeo Paswan as contained in their letter dtd. 10-2-1995 , is legal and justified ? If so , to what relief are these workmen entitled ?" का. आ. 3151- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा. को.को. लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक

2.The case of the concerned workmen according to Written Statement submitted by the sponsoring union on their behalf in brief is as follows :-

9935 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

The sponsoring union submitted that the concerned workmen were declared as delisted Casual Wagon loaders along with large number of workmen at Bagdigi Collieryby the management. They submitted that after delisting those workers management provided regular employment to many delisted workers at different collieries in pursuance of demand of different unions on the basis of settlement excepting the concerned workmen though their case was on the same footing with those workers who were regularised. They submitted that as their names were not included in the said settlement they submitted representation to the management for their regularisation as they put their attendance for more than 75 days during 1973 to 1976. Thereafter on the basis of Notification dt . 15-1-83 management interviewed the concerned workmen along with 15 delisted workmen to ascertain their respective fitness and genuinity for consideration of their regular employment . They disclosed that after the said interview, the Agent , Bagdigi Colliery submitted his report on 8-10-83 to Head Quarters , Koyla Bhawan. Thereafter Dy. C.P.M. (MP & R) of the Headquarter appointed Sri N.P. Sinha and Sri Samar Sinha, Personnel Manager to examine and submit report in view of report submitted by the Agent but till 14-8-86 no action was taken in the light of the report oftheAgent.

coal within the stipulated period of 5 hours . Considering the then existing conditions of management , they used to engage unskilled loader available on a particular day as casual wagon loader for carrying on loading job . After introduction of machanical device from 1976 they discontinued the engagement of casual loader on day to day basis for loading wagons with coal . They disclosed that the concerned workmen placed their claim for performing their job as casual wagon loaders during the period from 1973 to 1976 but failed to produced any docuement indicating their employment as casual wagon loaders during the period in quastion . They could not show any letter of appointment as casual wagon loader or any I.D. Card or any employment record including Bonus Card or document relating to CMPF membership to indicate that theywere on the roll ofBagdigi Colliery as Casual Wagon Loader. They submitted that all the circulars relating to appointment ofBadli Miner/Loader or recruitment of fresh miner/loader were cancelled by the year 1992 as there was surplus manpower in almost all the collieries and after 1992 . there exists no circular for recruitment of workmen out of the casual loaders who worked during the year 1973 to 1976 and put their attendance for 75 days or more in each year. They submitted further that the present demand made by the sponsoring union is a stale demand as no claim can be advanced after 20 years from the discontinuance of workmen of causual employment . Accordingly, the claim for regularisation of the concerned workmen is illegal, unjustified and not maintainable and for which they have submitted their prayer to pass Award rejecting the claim of the concerned workmen.

4. Points to be decided

"Whether the demand of the Janta Sharmik Sangh , Dhanbad for regularisation of S /Sh . Arjun Paswan , Lalan Paswan and Kapildeo Paswan as contained in their letterdt. 10-2-1995, is legal and justified ? Ifso , to what relief are these workmen entitled?"

5. FindingwithReasons

However, vide letter No. 34964 dt . 14-8-86 . Mr. R.P. Singh, Personnel Manager of BCCL H.Q. (MP & R) communicated to the General Manager of Lodna Area to take action being the competent authority for giving regular employment to such casual workers as per recent Circular issued by Director (P ) . Accordingly said R.P. Singh sent the entire file connected with the case of the concerned workmen to Lodna Area office . They disclosed that surreptitiously the said file was found missing . Accordingly new file was reconstructed and the Headquarter constituted a committee of five members under Chairmanship ofDy. CMS, Bagdigi Colliery vide letter No. BCCL/IR/RCA/88/ 6456 dt . 31-5-88. The said committee submitted report on 31-5-88 in favour of the concerned workmen . Thereafter the concerned workmen individually approached the management for their regularisation . The sponsoring union also by letter dt . 1-6-93 requested the management for regularising the concerned workmen but as the management refused to take any action they raised an industrial dispute for conciliation which ultimately resulted reference to this Tribunal for adjudication.

The Sponsoring union accordingly submitted prayer to pass Award directing the management to regularise the concerned workmen in service with retrospective effect along with back wages and other consequential relieves .

3. Management on the contrary after filing Written Statement -cum- rejoinder have denied all the claims ard allegations which the sponsoring union asserted in the Written Statement submitted on behalf of the concerned workmen.

It transprires from the record that the sponsoring unionwith a view to substantiate their claim examined one witness as WW- 1, Management also with a view to establish their claim examined one witness as MW- 1 , WW- 1 during his evidence disclosed that the concerned workman started working as casual wagon loader in the year 1969 and worked there for about 7/8 years contirtuously and thereafter the management without assigning any reason stopped them from work. This witness at the relevant time was the Organishing Secretary of Rashtriya Colliery Mazdoor Sangh. As the management without giving any notice or assigning any reason stopped them from work they took up the matter with the management and in course of talk management assured to provide job to the concerned workmen as casual workers/badli miner/loaders if it is found thatduring the period of their work they put their attendance for more than 75 days in a year. They further submitted that the concerned workmen also appeared in the interview calledby themanagement and submitted all relevant papers in support of their claim . Photocopies of the papers They submitted that during the year 1973 to 1976 there was eratic supply of wagons in the railway siding so much so on some particulars days no wagon used to be supplied for loading of coal whereas on some other days large number of wagons used to be supplied for loading

2498 G1/2005-24 9936

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] submitted by the workmen are marked as Ext. W - 1 to W-1/2 after objection . It has been alleged that though the concerned workmen qualified in the interview management did not offer any employment and as a result of which they took up the matter with the management again and their case was forwarded to the headquarters for decision but the Headquarters did not issue any order. In support of this claim the sponsoring union relied on a report submitted by Dy. C.P.M. photo copy of which was marked as Ext . W- 2.Inspite of that report he submitted that the headquarters did not issue any order for appointment of the concerned workmen and for which they were compelled to raise industrial dispute before the ALC ( C) for conciliation. During cross-examination this witness admitted that the said circular relating to the employment of the casual workers who put their attendance for 75 days in a year during the period 1973 to 1975 was recalled by the management in the year 1992. This witness admitted that as per the document marked as Ext . W-2 one workman Lalan Paswan during 1974-75 put his attendance for 2/3 days respectively.He further admitted that as per the said report name ofthe concerned workmen are appearing in Sl. No. 10, 14 and 16 but without any surname . This witness though admitted that they are equipped with all papers to show that the concerned workmen worked under the management as wagon loader and put their attendance for more than 75 days in each year from 1973 to 1975 , failed to produced any such paper to substantiate the claim of the concerned workmen . This witness further admitted that at that relevant time casual workers were eligible to open C.M.P.F. and they also used to be provided with Bonus card. MW- 1 who was the Personnel manager posted at Bagdigi Colliery during his evidence disclosed that the concerned workmen never worked in any capacity at Bagdigi Colliery during the period from 1969 onwards.He admitted that there was a circular issued by the headquarters to the effect that if any workmen during the period from 1973 to 1976 worked under the management as delisted workers and put their attendance for 75 days in that case their cases for regularisation will be considered by the management . The concerned workmen never submitted any application in view of that circular to the management for their regularisation . This witness further disclosed that the said circular was recalled in the year 1992 and for which it is not operative .

Therefore, as per the claim of the sponsoring union it transpires that the concerned workmen were engaged as casual wagon loaders during the period 1973 to 1976. It is their further claim that management delisted several casual wagon loaders including the concerned workmen without considering their regularisation in service and for which they took up the matter with the management for their regularisation . It is their further contention that the management issued a circular to the effect that the casual wagon loaders who worked for more then 75 days in each yearduring the period 1973 to 1976 will be considered for

their Relying on the said report the representative of the concerned workmen submitted that the names of the three concernedworkmens are appearing in Sl . Nos . 7 , 13 and 14. On the contrary the names appearing in these Sl . Nos are not complete with their surnames for which there is no scopeto draw conclusion if these workmen are the conerned workmen as per the order of reference. On the contrary frompage 6 of the report the name of one Lalan Paswan is appearing at Sl. No. 7 where from it transpires that during the period 1974-75 the said workman worked under the management for 2 days and 3 days respectively. Again in page 7 , names of Lalan , Kapildeo and Arjun are appearing in Sl . Nos . 10, 14 and 15 without disclosing their surname . According to this report total attendance put by them during 1973 to 1976 were 103 days , 76 days and 86days . If the circular issued by the management its taken into consideration it is clear that during the period 1973 to 1976 each worker should put attendance atleast 75 days in a year. Ifthis report is taken into consideration in that case there is no scope to now conclusion that these three persons i.e. Lalan, Kapildeo and Arjun could fulfil the conditions as laiddown in the circular. Again in the same page it transpires that against the nanie of Lalan , Kapildeo and Arjun two persons claiming the same name each appear. It is admitted fact that the said circular was withdrawn in the year 1992 . Therefore , on the basis of the said circular after 1992 there was no scope to consider claim of the concerned workmen . However, before taking into consideration of this fact it has to be established that these three concerned workmen were engaged by the management and worked during the period 1973 to 1976 as casual wagon loaders . They are also liable to establish that they were taken to badli list thereafter . WW- 1 during his evidence disclosed that at that relevant time there was regularisation subject to fulfilment of certain conditions . The sponsoring union submitted that in view of the said circular management though regularised a good number of casual workers did not consider to regularise these three concerned workmen in service and for which they made representations and on the basis of the re -presentations the Agent Bagdigi Colliery submitted his report to the Headquarters on 8-10-83 and thereafterDy. C.P.M. (MP & R) ofHeadquarters appointed Mr. N.P. Sinha and Sarmar Sinha to examine and submit report in view of the report submitted by the Agent . Till 14-8-86 no action was taken in the light of the report of the Agent . They submitted that Mr. R.P. Singh , Personnel Manager BCCL vide letter No. 34964 dt . 14-8-86 communicated the General Manager , Lodna Area to take action being the Competent Authority for giving regular employment to such casual workers as per circular issued by the Director (P). Along with the said letter Mr. R. P. Singh also sent the entire file connected with the case of the concerned workmen to Lodna Area office. As the said file was missing a new file was constructed and the headquarter constituted a committee of five members under Chairmanship of Dy. C.M.E. , Bagdigi Colliery vide letter 9937 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

wormen actually worked under the management as casual wagon loaders during the period in question . I have already discussed the photo copy of the report marked as Ext . W-2. From this report excepting one Lalan Paswan as appearing in page No. 6 I do not find the name of other workmenwith their surname . Onus lies on the sponsoring union to establish that Arjun Paswan and Kapildeo Paswan are the actual and genuine workmen who worked as casual workman under the management . If Lalan Paswan is considered as genuine workman in that case his claim does not stand on the ground that he fulfilled the condition as laid down in the circular in the matter of attendance of 75 days . Actually during the years 1974, 1975 this workman Lalan Paswan gave his attendance for 2 and 3 days only.

No. BCCL/IR/RCA/88/6456 dt . 31-5-88 . The said committee submitted their report in favour ofthe concerned workmen and in view of that report the concerned workmen approached the management for their regularisation in service. The sponsoring union also by letter dt . 1-6-93 requested the management for regularisation of the concerned workmen but the management did not consider necessary to give any importance to their submission. In support of this claim the sponsoring union relied on the report of the management which during evidence was marked as Ext. W-2. provision for opening of C.P.M.F. record for contribution of C.M.P.F. WW- 1 further admitted that management also issued Bonus card to the casual workers for drawing bonus . This witness during evidence though assured this Tribunal to submit all necessary papers did not consider necessary to produce any paper to show that the names ofthe concerned workmen were recorded in the C.M.P.F. record and they contributed their wages towards C.M.P.F. and also they received bonus card . It is the contention of the sponsoring union that the concerned workmen were engaged as casual wagon loaders and performed their duties during the period in question . But in course of hearing they have failed to produce any appointment or any paper to show that they were actually engaged by the management to discharge their duties as casual wagons loaders. There is no dispute to hold that against work the casual wagon loaders used to receive the wages from the management. Naturally if the claim of the sponsoring union is taken into consideration then in that case the concerned workmen also received wages from the management against discharging of their duties but it is shocking to note that the sponsoring union did not submit a single scrap of paper to show that not only they received wages from the management but also they received bonus as per bonus card issued to them . They had the scope to produce papers relating to C.M.P.F. record with a view to support their claim but that too the sponsoring union did not consider to produce.

WW- 1 during evidence admitted that in the year 1992 the said circular issued by the management was recalled and for which it has no effective value. Therefore, when once the said circular was recalled and not in operation there is no scope on the part of the sponsoring union to claim regularisation of the concerned workman relying on the circular in view of the industrial dispute raised by them after recalling that circular . The sponsoring union in course ofhearing examined one trade union leader as WW- 1 but did not consider necessary to examine the concerned workmen. Had that been so there was scope for indentification of the concerned workmen if they actually worked under the management during the period in question. Considering all materials on record there is sufficient reason to say that the sponsoring union in a very reluctantway proceeded with the hearing of this case . Onus was absolutely on them initially to establish that the concernedworkmen were engaged by the management to work as casual wagon loader and secondly their onus was to establish that they actually worked for more than 75 days in a year during 1973 to 1976. I find no hesitation to say that they lamentably trained to fulfil the conditions as mentioned above . Record shows clearly that after recalling the said circular by the management in the year 1992 the sponsoring union raised this industrial dispute . Therefore , onus was on the sponsoring union to establish that even though the circular was recalled the concerned workmen are entitled to get their regularisation but this fact also they have failed to establish in course of hearing.

Inview of the facts and circumstances I find no hesitation to say that the sponsoring union have lamentably failed to establish the claim of the concerned workmen and for which there is no scope to give any relief in view of their prayer . In the result, the following Award is rendered:-

"Thedemand of the Janta Sharmik Sangh , Dhanbad for regularisation of S/Sh . Arjun Paswan , Lalan Paswan and Kapildeo Paswan as contained in their letter dt . 10-2-1995 is not legal and justified . Consequently, the concerned workmen are not entitled to get any relief."

It is,the contention of the sponsoring union that the Agent, Bagdigi Colliery submitted a report to the Headquarter wherein the names ofthe concerned workmen were included . Subsequently they were interviewed by the Headquarter and selected. They submitted that in support of their claim the concerned workmen submitted their credentials which during evidence of WW- 1 were marked as Ext . W- 1 , W- 1 / 1 and W- 1 /2. From these papers there is no scope to arrive into conclusion that these papers were actually submitted to the management in support of their claim as his same neither bear any office seal nor any endorsement ofthe official of the management . Accordingly, considering these documents there is no scope to arrive into conclusion that the concerned workmen were selected in the interview conducted by the management and thereafter they submitted these papers in support of their credentials. Therefore , relaying on these documents there is no scope to arrive into conclusion that the concerned

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer 9938

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii)] THEGAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3152.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार ई सी एल के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , धनबाद- II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 187/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 4-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/121/2001- आई आर ( सी- I ,

एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 8th August, 2005

They submitted that management deployed them as Magazine Clerk against permanent vacancy in the year 1993 and in the year 1997 in that capacity they are working continuously. They submitted as the concerned workman continuously for years together discharged their duties as Magazine Clerk they have got their eligibility to be regularised as Magazine Clerk in clerical Gr . II and accordinlgy they submitted representation to the management through sponsoring union to regularise them in that grade. They alleged that inspite of submitting representation management did not consider their prayer and for which they were compelled to raise Industrial dispute. The sponsoring union accordingly submitted pray to pass award directing the management to regularise concerned workmen T.K. Mukherjee w.e.f. 1993 and Shri J.L. Kumbhjkar w.e.f. 1997 as Magazine Clerk with appropriate seniority and other consequential benefit .

3. Management on the contrary after filing written statement - cum- rejoinder have denied all the claims and allegations which the sponsoring union asserted in the written statement .

S.O. 3152- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes.Act, 1947. ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 187/2001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Dhanbad- II now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of E.C.L. and their workmen, which was receivedby the Central Government on 4-8-2005 .

[No. L-20012/121 /2001 - IR ( C- I) ]

S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL ( NO. 2) AT DHANBAD

PRESENT : Shri B. Bitwas . PresidingOfficer .

Inthe matter ofan Industrial Dispuweder Section 10( 1 ) (d) ofthe I.D. Act, 1947.

Reference No. 187/2001

They submitted that after introduction of Cadre Scheme duly formulated by J.B.C.C.I. there is no scope for regularisation of any time rated or piece rated worker in any clerical post as because the avenue of selection of any workman in clerical post is quite different. They submitted thatthe concerned workmen are time rated helper in Cat. III and are performing the time rated jobs . They alleged that the concerned workmen have made out this case to get a clerical jobs with the help of litigation by circumventing the provisions of Cadre Scheme as well as specific restrictions imposed by the Head Quarter. Accordingly , they submitted that on the basis of state demand no relief couldbe given to thein and for which they submitted prayer to pass award rejecting their claim .

PARTIES : Employer in relation to the management of Mugma Area of M/ s ECL , PO Mugma , Dt . Dhanbad and their workmen .

4. POINTS TO BE DECIDED

APPEARANCES :

Shri S. Bose

Onbehalf of the workmen : Onbehalf of the employer : Shui B.M. Prasad , Ld . Advocate

Coal

State : Jharkhand

Industry :

"Whether the action ofthe management of M/s . ECL innot regularising Sri T.K. Mukherjee and Sri J.L. Kumbhjkar as Magazine Clerk from 1993 and 1997 respectively is fair and justified ? If not , to what relief are the concerned workmen entitled" .

Dated the 12th July, 2005

5. FINDING WITH REASONS

AWARD

The Govt. of India Ministry of labour , in exercise of the powers conferred them under Section 10 ( 1 ) (d ) of the I.D. Act , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L -20012/ 121 / 2001 - I.R. (C -I) 01 - I.R. (C-I) dated, the 10th July, 2001 .

It appears from the record that the concerned workmen or the sponsoring union inspite of giving ample opportunity has failed to appear with a view to substantiate the claim in question the instant reference case was fixed for exparte hearing. In course of exparte hearing management also declined to adduce any evidence .

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of M/ s . ECL in not regularising Sri T.K. mukherjee and Sri J.L. Kumbhjkar as Magazine Clerks from 1993 and 1997 respectively is fair and justified? If not , to what relief arethe concerned workmen entitled ?" .

2. The case of the concerned workman according to written statement submitted by the sponsoring union on their behalf in brief is as follows:

In view of this situation let it be considered if the concerned workmen are entitled to get any relief or not . Considering the peladings of both sides there is no dispute tohold that the concerned workmen are Mining helpers in time rated Cat. II . The contention of the sponsoring union is that being directed by the management concerned workmen T.K. Mukherjee and J.L. Kumbhjkar started discharging their duties as Magazine Clerk from 1993 and 1997 respectively against permanent vacancy . They submitted that in the said capacity they continuously discharged their duties for years together. Accordingly, The sponsoring union submitted that the concerned workmenwere mining helpers in Cat. II of Kapasara Collicry .

9939 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005 / भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 9th August, 2005 they submitted representation to the management for their regularisation as Magazine Clerk in clerical Gr. II from 1993 and 1997 respectively but to no effect and for which they raised Industrial dispute .

S.O. 3153.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 5/2001 ) of the Industrial Tribunal, Udaipur as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the management of M/ s. Mewar Marble Ltd. and their workman, received by the Central Government on 9-8-2005.

On the contrary it is the contention of the management that after introduction of cadre scheme as per J.B.C.C.I. Circular there is no scope of switching over designation of any workman from one cagtegory to one cadre. They submitted that as per cadre scheme there is specific norm for seleciton of any workman in clerical grade, and for which there is no scope for any workman who is in category I or II to get his regularisation directly in clerical grade without facing the seleciton process .

बनाम

-विपक्षी It is the specific claim of the sponsoring union that as per order of the management the concerned workman startedworking as Magazine Clerks from the year specified above against permanent vacancy. In view of that submission onus is on the sponsoring union to establish that management issued necessary order in their favour to work as magazine clerk against permanent vacancy . It is seen that inspite of giving ample opportunity the sponsoring union have failed to produce an iota ofevidence to show that they took up the work of magazine clerk in view of order issued by the management. It is their further contention that in the said capacity they discharged their duties continuously for years together . Inspite of claiming so they have also failed to substantiate the said claim.

[No. L -29012/ 131 /2000-IR (M)] B. M. DAVID , Under Secy. अनुबंध न्यायालय न्यायाधीश, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिकरण एवं श्रम न्यायालय, उदयपुर पीठासीन अधिकारी: उषा अग्रवाल, आर. एच. जे. एस. प्रकरण संख्या: 5/2001 आई.टी.आर. ( के.स. ) रामलाल पिता किशन जी गमेती- केसागुडा, पोस्ट बसा वर्तमान पता निवासी घोरच , राजसमंद । -प्रार्थी मैसर्स मेवाड़ मार्बल्स लिमिटेड, 18 पोलो ग्राउन्ड, उदयपुर द्वारा महाप्रबन्धक । उपस्थित: श्री प्रदीप पालीवाल: प्रार्थी की ओर से । विपक्षी की ओर से कोई उपस्थित नहीं । दिनांक: 12 जुलाई, 2005 पंचाट

Accordingly, it is seen that excepting placing claim for regularisation of the concerned workmen in the post of magazine clerk which comes under clerical grade they have failedto produce any congent paper . It is to be taken into consideration that facts disclosed in the written statement for regularisation as magazine clerk can not be considered as substantive piece of evidence until and unless such claim is substantiated by cogent evidence .

भारत सरकार के श्रम मंत्रालय द्वारा जरिये पत्र क्रमांक: एल- 29012/131/2000/आई.आर. ( एम ) दिनांक 27-3-2001 द्वारा निम्नलिखित प्रसंग इस न्यायालय को अधिनिर्णय हेतु प्रेषित किया गया । In view of the facts and circumstances discussed above I find no hesitation to say that sponsoring union inspite of getting ample opportunity have failed to justify their claim and for which the concerned workman are not entitled to get any relief. In the result the following award isrendered:

"Whether the action of the management of M/ s . Mewar Marbles Ltd. Nizrana, Dt. Rajsamand in terminating the services of Shri Ramlal S/o Shri Krishna ji Ex . Beldar w.e.f. 4-5-1999 is legal and justified? If not, what relief the concerned workmen is entitled to ?" .

"That the action of the management of M/ s . ECL in not regularising Sri T.K. Mukherjee and Sri J.L. Kumbhjkar as Magazine Clerks from 1993 and 1997 respectively is fair and justified. Consequently, the concerned workman named above are not entitled to get any relief."

उक्त आशय का प्रसंग प्राप्त होने पर न्यायालय द्वारा दि. 1-5-01 को प्रकरण संख्या : 5/01 आई.टी.आर. दर्ज रजिस्टर किया जाकर पक्षकारान को नोटिस जारी किये गये, जिस पर प्रार्थी की ओर से क्लेम पेश किया गया व विपक्षी की ओर से जवाब पेश किया गया।

B. BISWAS, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 9 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3153.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मै. मेवाड़ मार्बल्स के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण, उदयपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 5/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-29012/131/2000- आई आर ( विविध ) ]

संक्षेप में क्लेम प्रार्थना पत्र के तथ्य इस प्रकार हैं कि प्रार्थी रामलाल की नियुक्तिबेलदार के पद पर लगभग अप्रैल 1984 में विपक्षी केअधीन दी गयी तभी से उसने विपक्षी को संतोषप्रद सेवाएं प्रदान कि, किंतु प्रार्थी को 15 वर्ष की सेवा काल में अविपक्षी ने बेलदार अर्थात् अनसिकिल कर्मकार का ही वेतन दिया और प्रार्थी को अर्द्धकुशल और कुशल कर्मकार कभी नहीं बनाया दिः 1-4-99 तक प्रार्थी को वेतन लगभग 1500 रु . मासिक था जो न्यूनतम वेतन से भी कम था । निवेदन किया कि प्रार्थी ने अप्रैल 84 से दि. 31-3-99 तक विपक्षी को संतोषप्रद बी. एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव 9940

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

वाउचर की फोटो प्रति प्रदर्शः 1 संलग्न है । प्रार्थी से विपक्षी ने किसी भी खाली कागज पर हस्ताक्षर नहीं करवाये हैं । हस्ताक्षर केवल ग्रेच्युटी भुगतान हेतु वांछित फार्म नं. 1 एवं राशि भुगतान वाउचर पर ही लिये गये हैं । विपक्षी एक पब्लिक लि. कं. है एवं इसमें किसी एक व्यक्ति का ही लाभ निहित नहींहै । विपक्षी ने प्रार्थी के अनपड़ एवं अशिक्षित होने का कोई अनुचित लाभ नहीं उठाया उसे कभी डरा धमकाकर किसी भी खाली कागज पर हस्ताक्षर नहीं लिया गया । प्रार्थी को भविष्य निधि कार्यालय से रु. 22,749 का भुगतान मई 2000 में भेजा गया , अतः प्रार्थी का यह कथन पूर्ण रूप से मिथ्या है कि विपक्षी ने कोई राशि भविष्य निधि में जमा नहीं करायी है । प्रार्थी की सेवाएं निर्धारित आयु पूर्ण करने पर ही समाप्त की गयी है, अतः क्षतिपूर्ति राशि एवं एक माह की अग्रिम सूचना अथवा नोटिस के स्थान पर कोई वेतन देय नहीं बनता है ।है । प्रार्थी को वैध रूप से सेवानिवृत्त किया गया है, अतः किसी भी राशि के भुगतान एवं पुर्ननियुक्ति का दायित्व विपक्षी का नहीं बनता है । प्रार्थना की गयी किप्रार्थी का प्रार्थना पत्र खारिज फरमाया जावे ।

प्रार्थी की ओर से अपने क्लेम प्रार्थना पत्र के समर्थन में स्वयं का शपथ पत्र प्रस्तुत किया गया तथा दिः 6-8-03 को विपक्षी की ओर से किसी के उपस्थित नहीं होने से विपक्षी का प्रार्थी से जिरह करने का अधिकार समाप्त किये जाने का आदेश दिया गया । प्रार्थी की ओर से दस्तावेजी साक्ष्य में वेज स्लिप पी.एफ. स्लिप , भुगतान प्राप्ति रसीद आदि की छाया प्रतियां प्रस्तुत की गयी हैं ।

सेवाएं प्रदान की तत्पश्चात् अचानक, अफारण दिः 1-4-99 को विपक्षी ने प्रार्थी को सेवा पृथक कर दिया । प्रार्थी ने 15 वर्षों तक सतत् सेवाएं प्रदान की और उसके विरुद्ध कभी कोई शिकायत व आरोप नहीं रहा था और उसकी उम्र भी सेवा देने योग्य रही है । निवेदन किया कि प्रार्थी के बाद नियोजित व्यक्ति 1-4-99 के बाद भी कार्यरत थे प्रार्थी को सेवा समाप्ति से पूर्व क्षतिपूर्ति का भुगतान नहीं किया गया, एक माह की अग्रिम सूचना नहीं दी गयी तथा अन्य देय लाभ भी प्रदान नहीं किया गया । सेवा समाप्ति दि. 1-4-99 के बाद प्रार्थी से विपक्षी ने कुछ कागजों पर हस्ताक्षर करवाये और मौखिक रूप से कह दिया कि उसके कार्य की आवश्यकता नहीं है। निवेदन किया कि प्रार्थी अनपढ है और विपक्षी द्वारा उसके अशिक्षित होने का लाभ लेकर उसे डरा धमकाकर कतिपय खाली कागजों पर हस्ताक्षर करा लिये गये, उसका दुरुपयोग विपक्षी द्वारा किस में किया गया यह पता नहीं , किंतु विपक्षी द्वारा समझौता कार्यवाही में 19-2-2000 को यह कहा गया कि पी.एफ. की राशि निकालने का प्रार्थना पत्र दिया गया है । प्रार्थी द्वारा पी.एफ. आफिस में पता करने पर उसको पता लगा कि कोई राशि विपक्षी द्वारा जमा नहीं करायी गयी है । ऐसी स्थिति में प्रार्थी को विपक्षी का असत्य और झूठा चरित्र उजागर होता है । निवेदन किया गया कि प्रार्थी की सेवाएं क्षतिपूर्ति की राशि, एक माह की अग्रिम सूचना अथवा नोटिस एवं नोटिस के स्थान पर वेतन नहीं देने के कारण नैसर्गित न्याय के विरुद्ध होने के कारण सेवाएं अवैध रूप से समाप्त की गयी है । प्रार्थना की गयी कि प्रार्थी की अवैध रूप से समाप्त किये जाने के प्रार्थी सेवा समाप्ति की तिथि से बेरोजगार होने से वरियता, बढी राशि एवं निरन्तरता सहित एवं अन्य सभी लाभों सहित पुर्ननियुक्तिकरायी जावे तथा दावे का हर्जा- खर्चा दिलाया जावे ।

बहस प्रतिनिधि प्रार्थी सुनी गयी व पत्रावली का अवलोकन किया गया हस्तगत प्रकरण में हमें देखना है कि प्रार्थी श्रमिक रामलाल को उसके नियोजक विपक्षी मै. मेवाड़ मार्बल लि. द्वारा दिनांक 4-5-99 से सेवामुक्त करना उचित एवं वैद्य है ?

विपक्षी ने जवाब क्लेम प्रार्थना पत्र प्रस्तुत कर इस कथन को अस्वीकार किया कि प्रार्थी को अप्रैल 84 में बेलदार के पद पर नियुक्ति दीगयी हो । प्रार्थी की नियुक्ति 10 जून 88 को की गयी उस समय प्रार्थी कीआयु 48 वर्ष थी कंपनी के प्रमाणित स्टेण्डिंग आदेश के अनुच्छेद सं. 23 के अनुसार सेवानिवृत्ति उम्र 58 वर्षहै । इस प्रकार प्रार्थी ने 30 मई 1998 को 58 वर्ष की आयु पूरी कर ली थी । कंपनी की आर्थिक स्थिति ठीक नहीं होने के कारण प्रार्थी को 4 मई 99 से सेवा मुक्त किया गया । यह कहना गलत है कि प्रार्थी ने कंपनी में 15 वर्ष तक सेवाऐं प्रदान की । प्रार्थी माईन्सपर बेलदार के पद के लिये उपयुक्त था, अतः उसे उसी पर निरन्तर कार्य पर रखा गया । प्रार्थी को अन्य श्रमिकों के साथ - साथ समय- समय पर वेतन बढोत्तरी एवं केन्द्रीय सरकार द्वारा महंगाई भत्ता की राशिबढाने पर प्रदान की जाती रही है । प्रार्थी का वेतन 1 अप्रैल 99 को 47.86 प्रतिदिन था जो न्यूनतम वेतन से कम नहीं था । प्रार्थी ने सेवा 10जून 88 से शुरू की एवं 4 मई 99 से सेवानिवृत्त किया गया । अतः यह गलतहै कि उसको अकारण दिः 1-4-99 को सेवा पृथक कर दिया हो । प्रार्थी के बाद नियोजित व्यक्ति अगर उन्होंने सेवामुक्ति की आयु पूरी नहींकी है तो निश्चित रूप से सेवा दे रहे होगें । प्रार्थी को सेवानिवृत्ति की तिथिके बारे में लिखित पत्र देने के लिये बुलाया , परंतु उसने पत्र लेने से मना करदिया एवं कहा कि कंपनी के पास जब भी हिसाब करने के लिये राशि उपलब्ध ही तब सेवानिवृत्त कर देना । जब तक ग्रेच्युटी , बोनस एवं बाकी छुट्टीयों पेमेंटे भुगतान नहीं किया जाता है तब तक वह माईन्स पर कार्य करता रहेगा प्रार्थी ने 30 मई 98 को सेवानिवृत्ति की आयु 58 वर्ष पूरी कर ली थी फिर भी उसे 3 मई 99 तक बकाया राशिकी व्यवस्था नहीं होने से सेवा में रखा गया । प्रार्थी को सेवानिवृत्त किया गया अतः क्षतिपूर्ति की राशिके भुगतान का प्रश्न ही नहीं उठता है । प्रार्थी को ग्रेच्यूटीका रु. 7179 , बोनस वर्ष 1997-98 का रु. 1054 एवं बकाया छुटिट्यों के बदले रु. 383 का भुगतान 3-5-99 को किया गया जिसके

हस्तगत प्रकरण में विपक्षी की ओर से कोई मौखिक या दस्तावेजी साक्ष्य प्रस्तुत नहीं कीगयी है, जबकि प्रार्थी की ओर से अपने क्लेम प्रार्थना पत्रके समर्थन में स्वयं का शपथ पत्र प्रस्तुत किया गया है, जिसमें प्रार्थी ने अप्रैल 1984 से विपक्षी के अधीन बेलदार के पद पर नियुक्त होना कथन किया है तथा उसका वेतन 1500 रु. मासिक होना एवं दि.: 1-4-99 को विपक्षी द्वारा अचानक व अकारण सेवा पृथक कर दिया जाना कथन किया है। विपक्षी ने जवाब क्लेम प्रार्थना पत्र में प्रार्थी की नियुक्ति 10 जून 88 से किया जाना कथन किया हैं, परंतु इसकी पुष्टि में कोई दस्तावेजी या मौखिक साक्ष्य प्रस्तुत नहीं की है । अतः यह माने जाने योग्य नहीं है कि प्रार्थी कीनियुक्ति 10 जून 88 को विपक्षी द्वारा की गई हो, बल्कि प्रार्थी की नियुक्तिसर्वप्रथम अप्रैल, 1984 में बेलदार के पद पर विपक्षी के यहां हुई थी। प्रार्थी ने अपने क्लेम प्रार्थना पत्र व शपथ पत्र में दिनांक 1-4-99 को उसे सेवा से पृथक किया जाना कथन किया है, जबकि भारत, सरकार द्वारा प्रेषित प्रसंग में सेवा पृथक दिनांक 4-5-99 दर्शा रखी है तथा विपक्षी ने अपने जवाब क्लेम प्रार्थना पत्र में कथन किया है कि प्रार्थी को 4 मई 1999 को सेवामुक्त किया गया है, अतः यह माना जायेगा कि प्रार्थी को दिनांक 4-5-99 को विपक्षी द्वारा सेवामुक्त किया गया है । विपक्षी ने जवाब क्लेम प्रार्थना पत्र में कथन किया है कि प्रार्थी 30 मई, 98 को 58 वर्ष की आयु पूरी कर ली थी । कंपनी की आर्थिक स्थिति ठीक नहीं होने के कारण प्रार्थी को 4 मई, 1999 को सेवामुक्त किया गया जबकि प्रार्थी को विपक्षी द्वारा सेवानिवृत्ति कीआयु होने पर सेवानिवृति करना था जो कि विपक्षी द्वारा नहीं किया गया है , बल्किप्रार्थी को सेवामुक्त किया है । ऐसी स्थिति प्रार्थी को सेवामुक्त करने से पहले विपक्षी द्वारा धारा 25 एफ. ओ. वि. अधि. के प्रावधानों की पालना किया जाना आवश्यक था जो नहीं किया गया है । अतः विपक्षी द्वारा प्रार्थी श्रमिक को दिनांक4-5-99 को सेवामुक्त किया जाना उचित एंव वैघ नहीं है । 9941 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

BETWEEN :

... Petitioner है ? अब , हमें देखना है कि प्रार्थी श्रमिक क्या राहत पाने का अधिकारी

1.Veera Reddy

AND

The Chief Executive,

M/s.My Home Cements Industries Ltd. , Mellacheru (VI) Kodad (Tq. )

Respondents

Nalgonda District.

APPEARANCES :

For the Petitioner : G. Ravi Mohan Advocate प्रार्थी श्रमिक सेवानिवृत्ति की आयु प्राप्त कर चुका है, ऐसी स्थिति में प्रार्थी को पुर्ननियुक्तिदिलाया जाना उचित नहीं समझते हैं कि बल्कि एकमुश्त क्षतिपूर्ति राशि रु. 12,500 दिलाया जाना उचित समझते हैं । विपक्षी प्रार्थी श्रमिक को इस अवैद्यानिक सेवा समाप्ति के परिणामस्वरुप क्षतिपूर्ति राशि रुपया 12,500 पंचाट प्रकाशन से दो माह में प्रार्थी को अदा करे अन्यथा राशि अदा नहीं होने पर प्रार्थी श्रमिक इस राशि पर 6 प्रतिशत वार्षिक की दर से ब्याज प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी होगा।

For the Respondent : K. Srinivasa Murthy , Advocate AWARD

This is a case taken under Sec . 2 A (2) of the I.D. Act, 1947 in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, reported in W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/s . Cotton Corporation of India and two others .

भारत सरकार के श्रम मंत्रालय द्वारा प्रेषित प्रसंग को उत्तरित करते हुए पंचाट इस प्रकार पारित किया जाता है कि मैसर्स मेवाड़ मार्बल्स लि० निजराना जिला राजसमंद द्वारा श्री रामलाल पिता श्री कृष्ण जी बेलदार को दिनांक4-5-1999 से सेवापृथक किया जाना उचित एवं वैद्य नहीं था । इस अवैद्यानिक सेवा समाप्ति के परिणमस्वरूप प्रार्थी श्रमिक अपने उपरोक्त नियोजक विपक्षी से क्षतिपूर्ति राशि 12,500 ( बारह हजार पांच सौ रुपये ) प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी है । विपक्षी क्षतिपूर्ति राशि 12,500 रु ० प्रार्थी को पंचाट प्रकाशन से दो माह में अदा करे अन्यथा राशि अदा नहीं होने पर प्रार्थी श्रमिक इस राशि पर 6 ( छ) प्रतिशत वार्षिक की दर से ब्याज भी प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी होगा। पंचाट प्रकाशनार्थ भारत सरकार को भेजा जावे ।

पंचाट आज दिनांक 12-7-2005 को खुले न्यायालय में लिखाया

जाकर सुनाया गया ।

उषा अग्रवाल, न्यायाधीश

नई दिल्ली, 9 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3154.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947

2. This Petition was filed under Section 2 (A) ( 2) by the petitioner stating that he studied upto 9th Class and also did ITI and that he was appointed as a load operator inthe respondent industry with intial payment of Rs . 1750 Per month and subsequently enhanced to Rs . 1850 per month basing upon his nature of duties and that he performed his duties at utmost satisfaction of his superior but suddenly terminated his services without giving any notice w.e.f. 5-3-1999 which is illegal and violation of principal of natural justice and contravening the Section 25(F) of ID Act, 1947 Further submitted he is a workman as defined under section 2 (s) of ID Act and he also made an appeal to the Head Office of the respondent at Hyderabad for his reinstatement into service but there is no response and he sought the relief directing the respondent to reinstate him with continuity of service with back wages .

का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार माई होम सीमेन्ट्स इंडस्ट्रीज़ लि० के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों केबीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 126/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-29025/27/2005- आई आर ( विविध ) ]

बी. एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 9th August, 2005

3. The respondent filed a counter and denied the averments made in the application and pleaded that the application is not maintainable under Section 2 (A) (2) of state amendment dealt with the discharge , dismissal or retrenchment of workmen from service. The appropriate government of the respondent is the Central Government and as such the state amendment of Section 2A(2 ) is not applicable.

S.O. 3154. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 126/2003 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum -Labour Court Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of My Home Cements Industries Ltd. , and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 9-8-2005 .

[No. L -29025/27/2005 - IR (M) ]

B. M. DAVID , Under Secy .

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

Present: Shri T. Ramachandra Reddy, Presiding Officer

Dated 29th July, 2005

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C.LD. NO. 126 OF 2003

4. It is further submitted that the applicant was appointed as a trainee and respondent management has got every right to terminate the service during the training ifnot satisfied with the performance of the applicant. The appointment of the applicant as a Regular employee or confirmation depends on his performance during the training and the applicant gets his right as a workman only in the event of confirmation of his services . It- is further stated that he was taken as a trainee load operator on 15-3-1997 with the initial stipend of Rs . 1750 which was enhanced to Rs . 1850 subsequently and that the applicant has acted against the interests of the company during the period of his training and did not change his behaviour inspite of due advise . As such he was terminated vide order dated 5-3-1999 giving one month salary in lieu of notice period. The order sent to the applicant's address was returned with an endorsement not available .

9942

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

5. The applicant filed his affidavit as WW1 in ssupport of his claim and got marked the documents as Ex. W1 to W3 . Ex . W1 is the appointment letter Ex. W2 is enhancing the salary of Rs . 100 per month Ex. W3 is the office copy of the legal notice issued through his advocate.

6.As against his evidence , the respondent examined Shri K. Pradeep Kumar as MW 1 the Deputy Personnel Manager and got marked the documents as Ex.s M1 to M4 . The Ex, M1 is the appointment letter of the applicant astrainee load operator . Ex. M2 is the termination letter. Ex. M3 is the letter ofpetitioner withdrawing legal notice. Ex. M4 is the legal notice issued by the applicant through his advocate.

7. It is sworned by the applicant that he was a technician and appointed as a load operator by the respondent on 15-3-1997 and he was paid intitially Rs. 1750/- per month and enhanced his salary subsequently to Rs . 1850/- per month and that he was terminated on 5-3-99 without assigning any reason and without conducting any enquiry or issuing any chargesheet and therefore he got issued a legal notice dated 23-12-1999 for his reinstatement and there is no reply to that and requested to set aside the termination order and sought the relief for his reinstatement with back wages and continuity of service.

8. The respondent witness has sworned that the applicant was appointed as a trainee load operator under Ex. M1 dated 15-3-1997 with the initial payment of Rs . 1750 per month and subsequently enhanced to Rs. 1850 per month and that the applicant has acted against the interests of the company and advise to change his behaviour but the applicant did not show any improvement inspite of giving several oral warning . As such he was terminated vide order dated 5-3-99 Ex . M2 and he was paid onemonth stipend in lieu of notice period . The applicant has issued a legal notice . But subsequently withdrawn his notice bygiving another letter dated 16-4-2001 Ex. M3 . Headmitted inhis cross -examination that the trainee period of the applicant is only for one year and after expiry ofthe period the training periodwas not extended and further no memo or warning in writing was given to the petitioner regarding unsatisfactory work of the applicant .

9. It is not in dispute that the appointment letter of the applicant shows that he was appointed as trainee load operator and that he was terminated on 5-3-99 . Nearly the applicant has worked 10 days less than two years. It is also not in dispute that the applicant's appointment order Ex. Ml discloses that he will be on training for a period of one year and he is liable to be transferred at any place as andwhen desired by the management .

10. It is also not in dispute that before the expiry of the training period one year, it was not extended to any further period on account of unsatisfactory work of the applicant .Admittedly there are no written warnings about unsatisfactory work of the applicant .

11. The Learned Counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant is a workman within the meaning of the 2(s ) of ID Act and training period of the applicant was not extended within the stipulated period of one year as such it shall be deemed that his services are confirmed and further contended that if the work of the

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] applicant is not satisfied, the respondent would have issued memos in writing and extended the period oftraining within one year and further contended that the respondent appointing workers in the name of trainee and terminating their services without extending at their will and wish and thereby practicing unfair labour practices and further contended that even after expiry of one year training period. the applicant has worked for 10 days less than one year i.c. more than 240days continuously as such he should be deemed to be a workman within the definition of 2 (s) of ID Actand entitled to all the benefits . It is further contended that the applicant was terminated without any enquiry or giving charge sheet is in violation of section 25 ( F) of ID Act requested to set aside the order of the termination .

12. On the other hand , the Learned Counsel for the respondent , vehemently contended that the applicant is onlya trainee load operator and he will not come under the definition of the workman unless he was appointed on regular basis or confirmed after the training period and further contended that the behaviour of the applicant is not upto the expectation and acted against the interests of the respondent company and that he cannot improve his efficiency or behaviour inspite of giving several warnings as such his training was terminated by the respondent with one month pay in lieu of the notice and further contended that the applicant has not filed an appeal to the management at Hyderabad and the legal notice was issued by the applicant was withdrawn subsequently requesting forhis appointment . The Learned Counsel relied upon the decision of the Division Bench of our High Court reported in 2004 -ii LLJ Vijayalaxmi Insecticide and Pesticide Limited, Hyderabad and chairman , Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court, Visakhapatnam, and others wherein it was held that the trainee helper will not come under the definition of Workman under Section 2 ( s) of ID Act .

13. In the said ruling the management engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of pesticides and insecticides as such every employee engaged in relation the production has to be skilled in handling the materials which is dangerous and poisonous . Hence , they recruit the persons as trainees and subsequently they will be recruited uponthe satisfactory work of the trainees . In the said ruling, the persons were appointed initially on a training for a period of one year from the date ofjoining and if they are not confirm in writing within the period of one year, the training will be deemed to be extended and they are liable to be terminated without notice or assigning any reason subject to the period during the training period . The performance of the trainees are reviewed within the stipulated period of one year and their training was extended and ultimately the management terminated the services of the trainees on account of non- satisfaction of the performance during the training period and extended period.

14. In the present case , the training period of the applicant was only one year i.e. from the date of appointment i.e. on 15-3-1997 . The respondent has to review the performance of the applicant before 14-3-1997 and in the event of not satisfying with the work of the applicant , the respondent management is at liberty to extend the training period or terminate the services . But the respondent has not chosen to extend the period of training within the stipulated period of one year . There is no deemed [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

provision of extension of training in the absence of review . Though the respondent claims that the applicant was warned for his unsatiunsatisfactory work , admittedly no written memo was given and further no evidence was adduced to that affect . There is no stipulation in the appointment letter that the training period of the applicant will be extended on account of his unsatisfactory work by reviewing the performance within one year . Further the nature ofthe work of the applicant is only a load operator and services of the applicant cannot be compared with the trainees of the Vijayalaxmi Insecticides and Pesticides . The job of the Applicant does not require much skill as compare to the workers in the said company .

15. In view of the circumstances after completing the training period of one year in the absence of extension , he stands on the same footing as that apprentice or probationer.

16. In view of the fact that the applicant was retained in the services even after completion of one year training period not reviewing by extending the training period without reviewing performance or extending the period and continued in service for about one year even if the stipulated period . He shall be deemed to be a workman within the definition of Section 2 (s ) of ID Act . Whether the applicant is a workman is to be determined with reference to the facts and circumstances of each case and on the material record. The facts in the present case are entirely different with the ruling relied by the Learned Counsel for the respondent. It should be noted on account of termination of the services of the applicant got issued notice through his advocate alleging violation of the legal right and subsequently he has withdrawn legal notice with a fond hope that the respondent will appoint him in their company and he begged for appointment on account of his poverty and liability to maintain three unmarried daughters . The withdrawal letter is of no consequence .

17. Inview of the circumstances , I pass the award thatthe applicant is a workman within the definition of2( s) ofID Act and entitled for reinstatement with 50 % ofback wages of the last pay drawn and the respondent is directed to reinstate the applicant with continuity of services from the date ofhis termination within one month from the date of notification of the award .

Award is passed accordingly. Transmit.

Dictated to Shri P. Kanaka Raju, LDC transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by me on this the 29th day ofJuly,2005.

T. RAMACHANDRA REDDY, PresidingOfficer Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for Witnesses examined for the thePetitioner

Respondent

MW1

Documents marked for the Petitioner Appointment order dt . 15-3-1997

Ex . W 1:

Ex. W 2: Salary enhancement certificate issuedby the ChiefExecutive dt. 31-5-1998

Ex. W3 : Legal Notice dt . 23-12-1999

Documents marked for the Respondent Ex. M 1: Settlementdt. 9-1-95 between Management and Workmen Union

2498 GI /2005-25

9943

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

Ex. M2: Termination of training ofpetitioner.

Letter of petitioner withdrawing legal notice Ex. M3:

dt. 16-4-2001 .

नई दिल्ली, 10 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3155.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार टिस्को के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय , धनबाद- I के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 152/1997 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-20012/190/1996- आई आर ( सी- I ) ]

एस . एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 10th August , 2005

S.O. 3155.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 152/97) ofthe Central Govemment Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Dhanbad -I now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Managernent of Tisco and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 9-8-2005.

[No. L-20012/ 190/ 1996- IR (C -I) ] S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 1 , DHANBAD Inthe matter of a reference U/s. 10( 1 ) (d)(2A) of I.D. Act . Reference No. 152 of 1997

PARTIES: Employers in relation to the management ofJamadoba Colliery of M/s . TISCO .

AND

Their Workmen

PRESENT : Shri Sarju Prasad, Presiding Officer APPEARANCES :

: Shri D.K. Verma, Advocate FortheEmployers

For the Workmen

: Nene .

State : Jharkhand . : Industry : Coal.

Dated, the 21st July, 2005

AWARD

ByOrder No. L- 20012/190/ 96- IR (C-I) dated 27-8-97 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( d ) of sub - sec. (i) and sub-sec. (2A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following dispute to this Tribunal :

"Whether the action of the management of M/s. TISCO in imposing punishment to Sri Ashish Das, M.C. Mazdoor is justified ? If not, to what relief is the concerned workman entitled?"

2. This reference is of the year 1997. But since then neither the sponsoring union nor the concerned workman is appearing to take any step . It, therefore , appears that the concerned workman is not interested to contest the case.

3. Under such circumstances I render a ' No Dispute Award' in the present case .

SARJU PRASAD , PresidingOfficer 9944

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 10 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3156.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सी सी एल के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद- I के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 231/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को9-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[ सं. एल-20012/407/2001- आई आर( सी-1 ) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 10th August , 2005 S.O.3156.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 23 1 / 2001 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court , Dhanbad - I now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of CCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 9-8-2005.

[No. L -20012/407/2001 - IR( C - I) ] S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . I, DHANBAD In the matter of a reference U/ s. 10( 1 ) (d) (2A) ofI.D. Act

Reference No. 231 of 2001

Parties : Employers in relation to the Management ofTopa Colliery of M/ s. C.C. Ltd. AND Their workmen .

Present : SHRI SARJU PRASAD, PresidingOfficer

Appearances

: None

For the Employer

Forthe Workınan : None

State: Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

[PART II- SEC. 3( ii) ] Dated, the 22nd July, 2005

AWARD

1. By order No. L -20012 /407/ 2001 / IR ( C- I ) dated 23-10-2001 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub - sec . ( 1 ) and Sub -section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:

" Whether the action of the management of Topa Colliery ofM/ s . C.C. Ltd. P.O. Topa, Dist . Hazaribagh in not providing employment to the dependent of late Bishundhari Ganjhu is justified ? If not , to what relief is the said dependent of the workman concerned entitled ? "

2. In this reference case since the year, 2002 ncither the sponsoring union not the concerned workman is appearing either to adduce evidence or to take any step. It, therefore , seems that neither the concerned workman nor the sponsoring union is interested to contest the case .

3. Under such circumstances, I render ' No Dispute ' Award in the present reference case.

SARJU PRASAD, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 10 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3157.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सी सी एल के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद- I के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 23/95 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को9-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/261/1993- आई आर ( सी-1) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 10th August, 2005 S.O.3157. - In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 23/ 95) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court , Dhanbad- I now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of CCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 9-8-2005.

[No. L- 20012/ 261/ 1993 - IR ( C -I ) ] SSGUPTA Under Secy.

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2005 / भाद्र 12 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . L, DHANBAD In the matter of a reference U/ s . 10 ( 1 ) (d) (2A) ofI.D. Act

Reference No. 23 of 1995

Parties : Employers in relation to the Management of Pindra Colliery of M/s. C.C. Ltd.

AND

Their workmen .

Present :

SHRI SARJU PRASAD,

Presiding Officer

Appearances :

: Shri D.K. Verma, Advocate Forthe Employers

: None

For the Workman

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal

Dated, the 21st July, 2005.

AWARD

1. By order No. L- 20012 (261 )/93 - IR ( Coal -I ) dated 12-1-95 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub - sec. ( 1 ) and Sub - section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following dispute foradjudication to this Tribunal:

"Whether the action of the management not to allow resumption of duty to Shri Mahadeo Munda w.e.f. 12-11-1987 is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled to "

2. This reference case is of the year , 1995, but since 24-3-2003 the concerned workman is not appearing to take any further step . If, therefore , appears that the concerned workman is not interested to contest the case.

3. Under such circumstances , I render a ' No Dispute ' Award in this present reference case .

9945 भा.को.को. लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद- I के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 23/98 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को9-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/288/1997- आई आर ( सी- I ) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 10th August, 2005

S.O.3158.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 23 / 98) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court , Dhanbad- I now as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 9-8-2005.

[No. L - 20012/288/ 1997 -IR (C- I) ] S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. I, DHANBAD In the matter of a reference U/s . 10( 1 )(d) (2A) of I.D. Act Reference No. 23 of 1998

Parties : Employers in relation to the Management of Mohuda Area No. II, M/s. BCCL.

AND Their workmen . Present :

SHRI SARJU PRASAD, PresidingOfficer

Appearances :

: Shri D.K. Verma, Advocate

: None

For the Employer

For the Workman

State : Jharkhand

SARJU PRASAD , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 10 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3158. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार

Industry: Coal Dated, the 22nd July, 2005 AWARD

By Order No. L - 20012/ 288 /97 - IR ( C- I ) dated 28-5-98 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour 9946

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12, 1927

has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub-section ( 1 ) and Sub -section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , referred the following dispute to this Tribunal :

"Whether the denial to provide light duty to Shri BhimMahato by the management of Mohuda Area No. II, M/ s. BCCL P.O. Mohuda isjustified ? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled"

2. Despite sending notice neither the sponsoring union nor the condemed workman is appearing to take any Step. If therefore appears that neither the concerned workman nor the sponsoring union is interested to contest the case.

3. Under such circumstances, I render ' No Dispute' Award in the present reference case.

SARJU PRASAD, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 10 अगस्त , 2005

का. आ. 3159.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा.को .को. लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरणा/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद ) के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 49/95 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को09-08-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं एल-20012/224/1994- आई आर( सी- I ) ] एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 10th August, 2005

S.O. 3159. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 49/ 95) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Dhanbad- now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 9-8-2005 .

[No. L - 20012/224/ 1994-IR ( C- I ) ] S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy .

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . I, DHANBAD In the matter of a reference U/s . 10 ( 1 ) (d )(2A) of I.D. Act

Reference No. 49 of 1995

Parties : Employers in relation to the Management of Loyabad Colliery under Sijua Area of M/s . BOCL

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )]

AND

Their Workmen

Present :

SHRI SARJU PRASAD : Presiding Officer APPEARANCES :

For the Employers : Shri D.K. Verma, Advocate For the Workman : Shri N.G. Arun , Organising Secretary , RCMS .

State : Jharkhand Industry : Coal

Dated, the 29th July, 2005

AWARD

By Order No. L - 20012/ 224/94 - IR ( Coal-I ) dated 6-6-95 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub - section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947, referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:

"Whether the action of management of Loyabad Colliery ofM/ s . BCCL , Sijua Area in superannuating workman, Smt . Mathuri Chouhan , w.e.f. 1-10-92 is justified? If not to what relief the concerned workman is entitled ? "

2. The case of the sponsoring union , in brief, is that Smt . Mathuri Chouhar , the concerned workman , was a permanent employee of Loyabad Colliery from the year 1972 as a Time- rated worker . The concerned workman made an application to the management in the month of May . 1992 objecting recording of her age as incorrect and imaginary and prayed for correct determination of her age .

3. The further case of the sponsoring union is that the Dy . P.M. Sijua Arca moved a notesheet pointing out variation of age record of the concerned workman in different registers of the company and the same was forwarded by the G.M. (P) at Headquarters for further necessary action, but no action was taken by the management . As per Implementation Instruction No. 76 of JBCCI in such case the concerned workman should have been referred to Apex Medical Board for determination of her correct age, but the management did not do so and superannuated the concerned workman w.e.f. 1-10-92 . Therefore, the action of the management is not justified in superannuating her.

4. The case of the management , in brief, is that Smt. Mathuri was appointed as Wagon Loader at Loyabad Colliery on 10-10-72. Her Identity Card No. is 80364 CMPF Account No. is D/33-257 . Her age in Form 'B' of M/ s . BCCL has been shown as 40 years as on 10-10-1972 . In the Identity Card issued to her date ofbirth has been mentioned as 1932 which was issued to her just after her appointment asWagon Loader . She was served with a service excerpt prepared on 23-6-87 and in that also her date of birth has [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

been mentioned as 1-7-1932 . However, her age is not available in CMPF office . Further , according to the management , although she was served service excerpt in which her date of birth has been mentioned as 1-7-1932, but she did not raise any objection and subsequently she has been superannuated on 10-10-1992 on attaining 60 years of age. Therefore , the action of the management.is justified. However , the management has admitted the assertion of the sponsoring union regarding initiation of the note- sheet . But according to the management, the same was not approved by the G.M.

5. It appears that during the pendency of the case there was a settlement by Joint Committee for referring the concerned workman to Apex Medical Board for determination of her age , but the original settlement paper was not filed in this tribunal , only the xerox copy has been filed.

6.Although the management has stated that in Form 'B' Register the age of the concerned workman has been mentioned as 40 years as on 10-10-72 which has been marked as Ext. M - 1 , but it appears that this Form 'B ' Register is not the original Form 'B' Register and the same does not bear signature of any official of the managementmanage or signature I or L.T.I. ofthe concerned workman . Thus it appears that the management has not produced original Form 'B' Register nor they have produced the record of CMPF to show the age/date of birth mentioned in the same and in the service excerpt also different date of birth has been mentioned. Therefore, in my opinion , in absence of original Form ' B' Register and Record of CMPF as per Implementation Instruction No. 76 of JBCCI the concerned workman should have been referred to Apex Medical Board. Therefore, the action of the management cannot bejustified.

7. In the result , I render following award :-

9947

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005 / भाद्र 12, 1927

संख्या 309/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को09-08-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/193/2000- आई आर( सी-1 ) ] एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi, the 10th August , 2005 S.O. 3160. - In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 309/ 2000 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court, Dhanbad - I now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 9-8-2005 .

[No. L-20012/193/2000- IR(C-I)] S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy .

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, DHANBAD Inthe matter of a reference U/s . 10( 1 )( d) ( 2A) ofI.D. Act Reference No. 309 of 2000

Their workmen .

PARTIES : Employers in relation to the Management of Sendra Bansjora Colliery of M/ s . B.C.C.Ltd. AND PRESENT :

SHRI SARJU PRASAD , Presiding Officer APPEARANCES :

: Shri D. K. Verma, Advocate For the Employers

For the Workman

The action of the management in superannuating the concerned workman w.e.f. 1-10-1992 is not justified . The management is directed to refer her to Apex Medical Board within 30 days from the date of publication of this award and in case the Apex Medical Board finds that she has not attain the age of 60 years on the date of superannuation then she will be entitled for the wages for idle period.

SARJU PRASAD , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 10 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3160.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा.को.को. लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद 1 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ

: Shri P. R. Shukla, Authorised Representative State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal Dated, the 28th July, 2005 . AWARD

By Order No. L - 20012 / 193 / 2000 ( C -I ) dated 18-10-2000 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub-section ( 1 ) and Sub - section (2A) of Section 10 9948

THE GAZETTEOF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii) ] ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , referred the following disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:

reasonable cause is a misconduct . That means if a workman is absent for more reasonable ground then such absence is not misconduct .

"Whether the action of the management of Sendra Bansjora Colliery of M/ s BCCL, in dismissing the service of Sri Bharat Bhuia, M/Loader, w.e.f. 20-2-99 isjustified ? If not to what relief is the concerned workman entitled ? "

2. The case of the sponsoring union , in brief, is that the concerned workman , Bharat Bhuia was a permanent Miner/Loader at Sendra Bansjora , Colliery. He was found absent from 7-1-95 However, he went to resume duty on 17-4-95, but due to detoriating mental condition he was not able to join duty. In wrost condition he was shifted to Ranchi for treatment of Dr. B.B. Singh , Psychiatrist and mental disease Specialist on 19-5-95 . The concerned workman recovered and was declared fit by the physician on 14-4-98 then he reported for duty, but he was not allowed tojoin duty and instead ofthat he was issued a chargesheet on 29-6-98 under clause 26.1.1 of the certified Standing Orders ofthe Company. A departmental enquiry was held and the concerned workman was found guilty by the enquiry officer and thereafter he was dismissed from service. According to the concerned workman, the enquiry was not properly and fairly conducted and since the concerned workman was absent from duty due to a reasonable cause therefore no misconduct as contained in clause 26.1.1 of the Certified Standing Orders has been proved , yet he was illegally held guilty and removed from service. According to him, he is not liable to any punishment.

The stand of the concerned workman is that he was mentally ill and was under treatment of Psychiatrist and mental disease Specialist at Ranchi and for that reason, he was absence . It appears from the proceeding of the enquiry that he has filed medical certificate . The Enquiry Officer has not given any finding that the said medical certificate is not genuine nor the management has asserted or adduced any evidence to the effect that actually the concerned workman was not mentally ill and the medical certificate filed by him is bogus and manufactured for the purpose of this case. The management has produced document during the domestic enquiry that on earlier occasions the concerned workman was issued chargesheets on different occasions and after giving warning he was allowed to resume duty, therefore he is a habitual absentee from duty. It is , no doubt , that there are materials to show that the concerned workman has been very irregular and irresponsible in doing duty but it should not be forgotten that actually he was suffering from mental illness and that is why he was not in a position to behave like a normal man. Dueto mental illness he may be absent for different occasions but all those absents may be misconduct only if two conditions are satisfied that absence is unauthorised and without reasonable cause . In other wards , if absence is for certain reasonable cause the same will not be covered in the definition of misconduct as mentioned in clause 26.1.1 ofthe Certified Standing Orders ofthe company. Therefore. I find that the finding of the Enquiry Officer that the concerned workman was guilty of misconduct as mentioned in clause 26.1.1 of the Certified Standing Orders is not correct. Therefore , the concerned workman is entitled for reainstatement in service , but so far back wage is concerned he is not entitled for the same because his conduct is such thathe remained absent without informing the management andwithout prior permission from the appropriate authority.

7. In the result, following award is rendered:-- 3. The case ofthe management, on the other hand , is hat the concerned workman was regularly absenting from duty without any ryme and reason and in past also his record is very poor. In the year 1992 he was present only 128days, in the year 1993 only 82 days and in the year 1994 only 20 days and thereafter he was absent for more than three years right from 7-1-1995 for which he was issued a chargesheet dated 26/ 29-6-98 . Accordingto the management, a fair and proper enquiry was conducted and on being held by the Enquiry Officer the concerned workman has been dismissed from service . Therefore , his dismissal is justified.

4. The issue relating to fairness and propriety of the domestic enquiry has been taken up as preliminary issue and the same has been held to be fair and proper. Therefore , the matter has been heard under the provision of Sec . 11 -A of the I.D. Act and the point to be decided is whether the misconduct has been proved against the concerned workman under clause 26.1.1 of the certified Standing Orders of the company and if so , whether the

The action of the management of Sendra Bansjora Colliery of M/ s . BCCL in dismissing the concerned workman is not justified and the concerned workman is entitled for reinstatement in service , but without back wages. The management is directed to reinstate him in service within 30 days from the date of publication of the award but without any back wages or consequential benefits . The concerned workman must be deligent to duty failing which the management may take appropriate action against the concerned workman.

SARJU PRASAD , Presiding Officer 5. So far the provision of clause 26.1.1 of the certified Standing Orders of the company is concerned remaining absent unauthorisedly without information and without [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 10 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3161.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, एम.सी.एल. प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, भुवनेश्वर ( संदर्भ संख्या 2/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 10-8-2005 कोप्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -22012/222/2001- आई आर ( सी- II ) ]

एन.पी. केशवन, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 10th August, 2005 S.O. 3161.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 2/2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum -Labour Court, Bhubaneswar as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of MCL and their workman, received by the Central Government on 10-8-2005 .

[No. L- 22012/222/2001 - IR (C -II) ] N.P.KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIALTRIBUNAL- CUM-LABOUR COURT, BHUBANESWAR PRESENT:

SHRI N.K.R. MOHAPATRA, Presiding Officer , C.G.I.T.- cum-Labour Court, Bhubaneswar

Industrial Dispute Case No. 2/2003 Date of Passing Award- 17th July, 2005

BETWEEN:

The Management of the

General Manager, Basundhara Area, MCL, Bankibahal, P.O. Balinga,

9949

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12 , 1927

AWARD

TheGovernment of India in the Ministry of Labour inexercise ofpowers conferred by Clause (d) ofsub -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- 22012/222/ 2001- IR (CM-II) , dated 29-01-2003:

"Whether the action of the Management in terminating the services of Shri Sidheswar Naik with effect from 28-10-2000 who was working as a Caddie inthe Basundhara Golf Club under the Management ofMCL is legal and justified . If not, to what relief he is entitled to ? "

"Whether Shri Sidheswar Naik is justified in demanding regular employment based on his academic qualifications vis - a - vis his, services renderedduring 1-11-1997 to 28-10-2000 under the Management of Basundhara Area ofM.C.L. ? Ifyes , to what relief Shri Sidheswar Naik is entitled ? "

..... 1st Party, Management

Dist. Sundargarh

AND

Their Workman Shri Sidheswar Naik,

2nd Party , Workman

PO. Tikilipara Colony (Basundhara Nagar), Dist. Sundargarh (Orissa), Sundargarh -770076

APPEARANCES :

Forthe 1st Party , Mr. S.P. Gupta,

Area Personnel Manager , MCL

Shri Sidheswar Naik

2. The workınan made a representation to the then Deputy ChiefMinister, Orissa for a job in the establishment ofthe Management . While forwarding it to the Management theHon'bleMinister recommended for ajob befitting the educational qualification of the workman . It is alleged by the workman in the statement of his claim that thereafter he was engaged as a daily rated labour to work as a picker (sorting out the coal pieces according to its sizes ) in the BasundharaArea mines of the Management at Basundhara for about a year from 11-11-1997 and thereafter as an ordinary labour for about 10 months in the construction work of roads and buildings and then as a caddie boy in theGulf Club of the Management at Basundhara Area. As the nature of the above job was not befitting his educational qualification he made several representations both to the Management and other Government authorities for his absorption against a permanent post taking into account his educational qualification and his above experience . Не also wrote to various other authorities against the Management and the Gulf Club regarding its mismanagement etc. and ultimately raised an Industrial Dispute whenhe was refused employment from 18-10-2000. It is claimed by the workman that he being a Commerce Graduate with I.C.S.I. qualification the Management instead ofregularizing his service against any befitting permanent post has terminated him from service vindictively and as such the action of the Management should be declared bad and he be allowed to be regularized against any post befitting his educational qualification.

Management

ForHimself the 2nd

Party, Workman

3. As against the above contention the Management ofM.C.L. has averred that the workman was never engaged by it either to work as a picker in its Basundhara Area Mines or as an ordinary labour in the construction work of roads and buildings or even as a caddie boy in the Mahanadi Gulf Club at Basundhara .According to the 9950

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12 , 1927

Management , there is no relationship of employer and employee between the Management and the workman and as such the case is not maintainable against the Management . In so far as the Mahanadi Gulf Club is concerned it is averred that the same is a registered society having no nexus with the establishment of the Management. It has been formed by the employees of the M.C.L. Management for promoting Gulf within the state and it runs mainly on grants and contribution of the members of the club. As regards the engagement of the workman in that club is concerned it is further averred that he was temporarily engaged in the club on daily rate basis for a shorter period from July 2000 to Sept. 2000 and he was being paid his wages from out of the fund of that club and that the said club not being a part of the establishment of theManagement the workman is not justified to stack his claim against the M.C.L. Management and as such the reference against M.C.L. Management is bad and not maintainable under law .

4. On the basis of the above pleadings of the parties the following issues were framel.

ISSUES

(i) Whether the reference is maintainable against M.C.L. ?

(ii) Whether the action of the Management in terminatingthe services of Shri Sidheswar Naik with effect from28-10-2000 who was working as a Caddie in theBasundhara Gold Club under the Management ofM. C.L is legal andjustified ? If not to what relief the workman is entitled ?

(iii) Whether Shri Sidheswar Naik is justified in demanding regular employment based on his academic qualifications vis - a-vis his services rendering during 1-11-1997 to 28-10-2000 under the Management of Basundhara area of M.C.L. If yes , to what relief the workman is entitled to ?

Issue No. I and II

5. These issues are taken up together as they are interlinked.

Atthe very outset it may be stated that the workman has filed no documents of whatsoever nature to prove that theManagement had engaged him initially as a picker for a period of one year from 11-11-1997 and thereafter for ten months as an ordinary Labour in its building construction work . Rather one of the representations dated 21-12-1999 ofthe workman (Ext. -B) which he had made to the Hon'ble ChiefMinisterof Orissa shows that till such representation was made he was simply working as a Mazdoor under different contractors and as such the workman does not seen to have knocked the door of the Tribunal with a clean hand in so far as his above engagements is concerned.

6. As regards his subsequent engagement as a caddy boy in the Mahanadi Gulf Club at Basundhara area is

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] concerned the workman has equally filed no documents to prove his above employment underthe Gulf Club. He simply says that each month one Shri R.N. Biswas , Dy . Chief Engineer of the Management used to pay his remuneration while working as a caddey boy in the Gulf Club. He is not specific to say for how inany months he used to work there till he was refused employment on 28-10-2000 . The only material , which is available on record is one letter of the Management , which was given to the conciliation officer . It indicates that the workman was engaged in the Gulf Club as a daily wager for a short period and the evidence of Management shows that the workman had only worked from July 2000 to September , 2000 as a Caddie Boy under the above club . The Management have filed the xerox сору of vouchers of the Gulf Club and its bye - law which are available on record un - exhibited. The bye - law shows that the Gulf Club is operating with the grant received from the Management and with the aid of the contribution made by its members who are mostly the offecers of the Management. The business of the club is totally different from the activities of the Management and that is not being centrally managed by the Management . Therefore , the Gulf Club cannot be considered to be a constituent part of the Management's establishment and as such the engagement of the workman under the said club cannot be said to be an employment under the Management .

7. In the evidence the workman has deposed that as a caddie boy he used to dress the ground and carry the sports materials . This itself indicates that he was engaged against casual work and therefore there be no doubt to say that, engagement of the workman was very very Casual . Even if it is presumed otherwise, the engagement of the workman from July to Sept. 2000 can be of no help to hold that he was retrenched . The Mahanadi Gulf Club not being aparty to the proceedings no effective order can be passed against him .

Issue No. III

8. Under this issue it has been asked to examine whether on the basis of academic qualification of the workman and the services he has rendered during 1-11-1997 to 28-10-2000 , the Management should have provided him a regular employment befitting his educational qualification . It has been deposed by the workman that he is a graduate in Commerce with 1. C.S.I. qualification and as such the Management should have accommodated him against a permanent post befitting his above qualification . During trial the workman has admitted that from tiine to time advertisements were being made by the Management or the recruitment of executive personnel but he had never applied for the same . The documents marked Ext . - C also indicates about such advertisements being made for recruitment of medical officers and Management Trainees . Tlus indicates that recruitment against different executive posts are being held through competitive examination and therefore, when while answering the Issue No. 1 and II it 9951

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

has been held that the workman has never worked in the establishment of the Management either as a picker or as a daily labour the Management could under no circumstances would have appointed him against any executive posts by - passing the recruitment procedure on the basis of recommendations made by the then Deputy ChiefMinister , Orissa, as claimed by the workman. It is the settled law that persons engaged on casual basis have no right to be absorbed automatically against any posts of higher rank without passing through regular recruitment tests. In view of the same even if it is presumed that the workman had worked under the Management for number of years the Management in violation of its recruitment rules could not have given him regular appointment befitting his educational qualification purely on the basis of the recommendation of the then Dy . Chief Minister , Orissa, when the workman admits to have had never applied to undergo such recruitment test .

9. Accordingly to sum up , all the issues are answered affirmatively in favour of the Management . The workman is not entitled for any relief.

10. Reference is answered accordingly . Dictated and Corrected by me . N.K.R. MAHAPATRA, PresidingOfficer नई दिल्ली, 11 अगस्त , 2005

का.आ. 3162.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार, यूरेनियम कार्पो ० ऑफ इण्डिया लि० के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों केबीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , धनबाद नं. 1 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 14/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं० एल-29011/75/2001-आई आर ( विविध ) ] बी० एम ० डेविड, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 11th August, 2005 S.O. 3162. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 14/2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum-Labour Court, Dhanbad No. 1 as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the management of M/ s . Uranium Corporation of India Ltd. and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 11-8-2005.

[No. L- 29011/75/2001 - IR (M) ] B. M. DAVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 1, DHANBAD

In the matter of a reference U/S . 10 (1 ) (d ) (2A) of I.D. Act. 2498 GI /2005-26

Reference No. 14 of 2002

PARTIES : Employers in relation to ne management of M/s. Uranium Corporation of India Ltd. AND

TheirWorkmen.

PRESENT :

SHRI SARJU PRASAD, Presiding Officer.

APPEARANCES :

Shri P.R. Rakhit, Advocate Forthe Employers :

None

Forthe Workman:

State: Jharkhand

Industry:Uranium Dated, the 1st August , 2005

AWARD

By Order No. L - 29011 / 75/ 2001 - IR ( M) dated 21-1-2001 the Central Government in the Ministry ofLabour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub-section ( 1) and Sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

"Whether the action of the management not paying difference of Minimum Wages to the workers of M/s. Hari Construction, Contractor of M/s . UCIL is justified ? If not , to what relief the concemed workman is entitled to ?"

2. In this case despite notice sent to the concerned workman, even on 27-7-2005 the concerned workman did not appear to take any step . Therefore, it seems that the concerned workman is not interested to contest the case .

3. As such, I render a ' No Dispute ' Award in the present reference case.

SARJU FRASAD , Presiding Officer. नई दिल्ली, 11 अगस्त, 2005.

का.आ. 3163.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार , यूरेनियम कार्पो० ऑफ इण्डिया लि० के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों केबीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , धनबाद नं. 1 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 282/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[ सं० एल -43012/23/2000- आई आर ( विविध) ]

बी०एम० डेविड, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 11th August, 2005

S.O. 3163. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 282/ 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Dhanbad No. 1 as shown in the Annexure , inthe Industrial Dispute between the management of M/s .

9952

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12, 1927

Uranium Corporation of India Ltd. and their workmen , which was received bythe Central Government on 11-8-2005.

[No. L -43012/ 23/2000 - IR (M)]

B. M. DAVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 1 , DHANBAD

Inthe matter of a reference U/s . 10 ( 1) (d) (2A) of1.D.

Act, 1947

Reference No. 282 of 2000

PARTIES : Employers in relation to the management of M/sUranium Corporation of India Ltd. AND Their Workmen.

PRESENT:

SHRI SARJU PRASAD , PresidingOfficer.

APPEARANCES :

Forthe Employers :

Shri P. R. Rakhit, Advocate

None

For theWorkman:

State: Jharkhand

Industry:Uranium Dated, the 1st August, 2005

AWARD

By Order No. L - 43012/ 23 / 2000 - IR ( M) dated 20-9-2000 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d ) of Sub - section ( 1 ) and Sub -section ( 2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

"Whether the action of management of UCIL, Jaduguda in fixation of basic pay of Sh . Karmaker and three others isjustified ? If not, to what relief the concerned workmen are entitled to ? "

2. In this reference case despite notice being sentto the sponsoring union, even on 27-7-2005 neither the sponsoring union nor the concerned workman appeared to take any step in this case . It , therefore , seems that neither the sponsoring union nor the concerned workman is interested to contest the case .

3. Under such circumstances I render a 'No Dispute Award in the present reference case . SARJU PRASAD , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 11 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3164.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, एस. ई. सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्रके 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/119/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं ० एल-22012/425/ 1999- आई आर ( सी- II ) ]

एन. पी. केशवन, डेस्क अधिकारी

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] New Delhi , the 11th August , 2005

S.O. 3164. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/ 119/2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum-Labour Court , Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of SECL and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 11-8-2005 .

[No. L -22012/425/ 1999-IR (C -II) ] N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM -LABOUR COURT , JABALPUR

NO . CGIT/LC/R/ 119/ 2000

PRESENT : Shri C.M. Singh , Presiding Officer TheSecretary,

Janta Mazdoor Sangh (JMS)

Amradani Store Complex,

PO Amlai Colliery,

......Workman/Union Distt. Shahdol (MP)

Versus

The General Manager,

Sohagpur Area of SECL ,

PODhanpuri ,

Distt . Shahdol (MP)

....Management

AWARD

Passed on this 3rd day of August, 2005 1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide itsNotificationNo. L -22012/425/ 99 /IR (CM- II) dated 28-6-2000 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal:

"Whether the action of the General Manager, Sohagpur Area of SECL , PO Dhanpuri , Distt . Shahdol (MP) in not regularising Shri Saffar Khan asDriver is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled ? "

2. After the reference order was received , it was duly registered on 31-7-2000 and notices were issued to the parties to file their respective statements of claim. The order sheet reveals that on 11-6-03 the date fixed in the reference both the parties were represented by their authorised representatives and the workman was directed to file statement of clainı on 6-8-03 . Thereafter , several dates were fixed for filing statement of claim by workman/ union and ultimately on 13-5-05 , the date fixed in the reference , the direction was issued to the workman to file statement of claim on 24-5-05 . It was mentioned in thatorder that no more opportunity shall be given 9953

भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

to workman to file statement of claim . Inspite of the above direction, no one appeared forthe parties on 24-5-2005 the date fixed in the case and it was ordered on the said date that the reference proceeded ex parte against the workman. At the same time, the management was directed to file WS by 29-7-2005 . But on 29-7-2005 the date fixed in the case no one put in appearance for the parties and ultimately this tribunal left with no option but to close the reference for award.

3. It is very clear from the above that the workman has no interest in the reference and at the same time, the management took no interest in getting the reference decided ex parte against the workman/Union . Thus the parties to the reference appear to have no interest in the reference.

4. As mentioned above , as the parties have no interest in the reference therefore . No Dispute Award is passed without any order as to costs .

5. Copy of the award be sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour as per rules.

C. M. SINGH, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 11 अगस्त, 2005

का.आ. 3165.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, ई.सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , आसनसोल ( संदर्भ संख्या 37/1991 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल-22012/99/1991- आई आर ( सी- II ) ]

एन.पी. केशवन, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 11th August, 2005 S.O. 3165.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 37/1991 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum -Labour Court , Asansol as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the manage- ment of ECL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 11-8-2005 .

[No. L-22012/99/91 -IR (C- II)]

N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT , ASANSOL

PRESENT :

SRIMD. SARFARAZ KHAN, Presiding Officer Reference No. 37 of 1991

PARTIES:

Agent, Dalmiya Colliery of ECL, Salanpur, Burdwan

Versus

General Secretary , Coal Mines Employees Union, Dishergarh, Burdwan .

REPRESENTATIVES :

: Sri P. K. Das , Advocate For the Management

For the Union (workman) : None

State:West Bengal Industry: COAL

Dated the 23-06-2005

AWARD

In exercise ofpowers 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 ), Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L-22012/ 99/91 - IR (C- II ) dated 06-12-1991 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal .

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Dalmiya Colliery under the Agent Bonjemehari Colliery of M/s . E.C. Ltd. PO : Salanpur , Dist . Burdwan in non -paying incentive allowances @ Rs.383 to S/Sri Paresh Pramanik and others as per list enclosed is justified ? If not, to what reliefthe concerned workmen are entitled to ? "

After having received the order of the aforesaid reference from the Ministry of Labour, Govt . of India summons through the registered post were issued to the respective parties and in pursuant to the summons both the parties appeared through their representative and filed theirwritten statement in support of their respective claims.

From the perusal of the record it transpires that up to 1-6-99 both the parties took step in the case on their behalf but they left taking step since 9-7-2002. It further reflects from the order sheets of the records that fresh registered summons were issued to the parties and there after Sri P. K. Das , Advocate appeared on behalf of the management but the notice was not served upon the union and the same was returned with the remark "Not Known " from the postal Department . It is clear that the union has failed to take any interest on its behalf. Several opportunities and adjournments were given to the Union for its appearance but to no effect . In this circumstance it is not advisable to keep this old reference pending any more as no purpose is to be served . As such it is hereby .

ORDERED

That let a "No Dispute Award " be and the same is passed . Send the copies of the award to the Ministry of Labour, Govt. of India for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed off.

MD SARFARAZ KHAN , Presiding Officer 9954

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ] नई दिल्ली, 11 अगस्त, 2005

party workman Laxman Namji Kadam that he should be reinstated on his previous post with continuity of services and full back wages .

का. आ. 3166- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार डाक विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में श्रम न्यायालय, सतारा के पंचाट को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-8-05' को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-40012/35/2003- आई आर ( डी यू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi, the 11th August , 2005

S.O. 3166. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award of the Labour Court, Satara as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of Deptt . ofPost and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 11-8-05 .

[No. L-40012/ 35/2003 - IR (DU) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

(2) The case of the second party workman in short is that he joined as A. D. D. with first party on 22-03-1978 . One criminal case bearing No. 249/1998 was pending against second party in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate , Satara . The said Criminal case was decided on 27-11-2000 and second party was acquitted in the criminal case. Second Party submits that he had not committed any offence. Though he was acquitted in criminal case: still first party did not take any step to allow him to join his duties . Second Party further submits that the action which was taken against him by first party was illegal . As first party did not allow him to join his duties , he made reference to the Government of India . He submits that he has worked with first party continuously for 240days . Still first party removed himfrom his services without serving any notice upon him . He was not given any opportunity to defend himself . Therefore , his reference be decided affirmatively and first party be directed to reinstate him with continuity of services and back wages .

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SOU . V. N. SATPUTE , PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, SATARA

Reference I.D.A. No. 11/2003

The Superintendent Post Offices , Department of Posts , atSatara .

FirstParty

Versus

(3) First party filed its Written Say at C- 14 and denied all the contents of statement of claim of the second party categorically . First party submitted that second party wasappointed as Extra Departmental Delivery Agent . He was working on Tetali branch post office since 1978. His job was only to deliver letters , mails to villagers of Tetali branch office. First Party submits that Department of Post isnot an Industry and its workers are not workman and so present case does not come under purview of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 .

Shri Laxman Namaji Kadam ,

R/ o Aapti ,

Tal.: Jaoli ,

Dist.: Satara .

Second Party

C/o A. A. Kale, 120/B, Yadogopal Peth , Near Machi , Satara

CORAM:

SOU . V. N. SATPUTE , Presiding Officer , Labour Court, Satara

Advocates:

(1) Shri M. N. Kulkarni , Advocate for First Party .

(4) First Party submits that while performing his duties second party came in contact with depositors of PostOffice Recurring Deposit accounts . These depositors in good faith used to hand over the money of monthly instalments of their Recurring Deposit Accounts to second party . Though second party was not authorised to do so . he was regularly collected the amountsfrom the depositors , but he did not deposited the said amounts in the post office ; or credited it in respect of recurring deposit accounts; and utilised the same for his private purpose. Healso kept the passbooks of said R. D. Accounts with him and not return.ed to the respective depositors . He has committed breach of trust of depositors .

(2) Shri A. R. Kalal , & Sou . A. A. Kale , Advocates forSecond Party.

JUDGMENT (AWARD)

Date: 29-07-2005)

The abovesaid reference is sent by Government of India, by its order dated 06-03-2003 for adjudication of dispute between both the parties on the demand of second

(5) First party submits that in this way second party misappropriated arnount of R. D. accounts of various depositors to the tune of Rs . 13,975. Disciplinary action was initiated against him and he was kept off duty with effect from 11-08-1997 . Criminal case was also lodged against him. Disciplinary case was finalised and second party was removecl from services with effect from 27-06-2000 . On 27-11-2000 he was acquitted from criminal case.

9955 [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : सितंबर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

02-02-1996 in Civil Appeal No. 3385/86 and 2431/94 arising out of SLP (C) No. 587-588/ 1990-92 . Though first party has taken this objection; it has not filed on record the copy ofjudgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court cited above . It is the contention of first party that as Department of Post is not an Industry , hence , present application i.e. reference is not maintainable .

(6) First party submits that second party was removed from Government's Services as an outcome of the departmental enquiry and not as per the outcome of the Court case . First party further submits that in criminal case also the actual entrustment of money with second party and misappropriation of that money was held proved. Judgment of Court has no impact on departmental enquiry which was already finalised . Further it is submitted that all due amounts are paid to him . Therefore, it is prayed that present reference be rejected.

(11 ) Conciliation proceeding is not filed before Court and therefore it is not possible to find out whether this objection was raised before conciliation officer or not.

(7) On the basis of rival contentions , following issues are framed by my Learned Predecessor at Exh . 0-15 and I answer them with reasons as follows :

ISSUES

FINDINGS

'Yes'

( 1 ) Whether Reference is legally maintainable ?

'No'

( 12) Now the question is whether Department of Post is an Industry within the meaning of definition U/S. 2(j ) of Industrial Disputes Act. For that purpose we have to see the functions carried out by Department of Post . In case ofBangalore Water Supply & Sewerage Board V/s . A. Rajappa and others ; declared in Civil Appeal Nos . 753- 754(T) of 1975; the triple test ofwhether an organisation is an Industry or not is laid down . Industry is defined as Section 2(j ) of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 and explained in D. N. Banerji V/s . P. R. Mukherji has a wide import.

(2) Does the second party prove that termination of his services with effect from 26-09-2000 is illegal and improper ?

'No'

(3) Whether the second party is entitled for re- instatement with conti- nuity and full back wages ?

(4) What Order ?

Asper final order .

(a) Where ( i ) systematic activity , ( ii ) organised by co-operation between employer and employee, the direct and substantial element is commercial , (iii) for the production and/or distribution of goods and services calculated to satisfy human wants and wishes not spiritual or religious but inclusive of material things or services geared to celestial bliss i.e. making , on a large scale , or prasad or ( food) , prima facie , there is an ' Industry' in that enterprise.

REASONS FOR FINDINGS

ISSUE No. 1 :

(b) All organised activity possessing the triple elements mentioned above although , not trade or business , may still be Industry' provided the nature of activity i.e. employer -employee basis , bears resemblance to what we found in trade and business ; Even any Department discharging sovereign functions if they have units which are Industries and they are substantially severable then they can be considered to come within Section 2 (j ) of the Act.

(8) In present case second party Laxınan Namji Kadam examined himself on affidavit at U- 18 . In his evidence he has supported all the contents of his Statement of Claim . He submitted that though he was acquitted in the criminal case bearing no . 249/1998 ; which was filed against him ; still first party has not reinstated him in their services . The decision of Criminal Court was declared on 27-11-2000 . He approached Labour Enforcement Officer , Sangli . He adduced evidence in conciliation proceeding; still he was not reinstated . Further he submits that he has worked for 240 days continuously ; he was not served with a notice ; he was not given an opportunity to defend himself. He has deprived of natural justice.He denied Written Say of first party.

(9) Though ample opportunity was given none on behalf of first party appeared in the Court or cross- examined the witness .

(10) First party in their Written Say raised objection thatpost office or Department of Post is not an ' Industry ' and the employees of post are not workman . This was held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgement dated

(13) As we all know inland letters , postal tickets are sold inpost office . Post office conducts different savings schemes such as Kisan Vikas Patra, National Savings Certificate. In these schemes Postal Department works as agent of Finance Department of Central Government . Post Office gets commission at different rates on different schemes. Post Office charges on money order . All these fucntions are done systematically with cooperation of employees . It provides service to meet the needs of public atlarge . The said activities are like commercial activities . They can not be termed as sovereign functions of Central Government . As far as the activities of Post Office are concerned, they fulfil the triple test laid down in its 9956

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )]

termination of services is illegal or improper. Therefore , I answer issue no . 2 in negative .

ISSUE No. 3 :

landmark judgment cited supra. Therefore , post office is anIndustry within the meaning of Section 2 (j ) of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 and second party is its employee and therefore , reference made to this Court is maintainable .

Accordingly, I answer Issue No. 1 in affirmative .

ISSUE No. 2 :

(17) It is the contention of the second party that as Criminal Court has declared him innocent and discharged from the offences of misappropriation ; first party should reinstate him in their service . He has filed on record the judgment in Criminal Case No. 249/1998 wherein he was charged with the charge of misappropriation . It is true that he was acquitted in that criminal case . Further , if we go through judgment; we find that Criminal Court held that. ' Second Party is guilty for misappropriation ' and observed accused did not deposit the amounts in the post office . He did not make entries thereof in the passbook and thus accused misappropriated the amount which was entrusted to him by account holders in good faith . However , in that case prosecution could not prove that he was handed over the amounts by the depositors while he was working as public servant or agent and thus prosecution could not prove all ingredients of Section 409 of 1. P. C. Act. On that ground, he was acquitted . In that case Criminal Court has further observed that ' offence U/ s . 406 of 1. P. C. Act could be attracted in that case but as he was not charge- sheeted under that section he was not held liable for punishment under that section . '

(14) If we peruse the statement of claim of second party and his oral evidence we find that second party is trying to show that his services were terminated by first party as criminal case was pending against him . It is his grievance that though he was acquitted in the criminal case still first party did not reinstated him in the service . If we peruse Written Say of first party; first party clearly mentioned that as second party was involved in misappropriation of amounts of various depositors ; departmental action under Rule 8 of EDA's (Conduct & Service) Rules, 1964 was initiated against him and second party was kept off duty with effect from 11-08-1997 . It is further stated that the services of second party were terminated on 27-06-2000 and the judgment of Criminal Court in which second party was acquitted was declared on 27-11-2000 and thus second party was removed from services before the judgment of Criminal Court was declared. It is submitted by first party that the removal of second party from services is result of his Departmental Enquiry and not the outcome of Court Case .

(18) Thus after perusing the judgment of Criminal Court, it becomes very clear that accused has committed criminal breach of trust of the account holder who had givenhim amounts in good faith.

(15) Second party has stated in his oral evidence as well as in his statement of claim that he was acquitted from Criminal Court on 27-11-2000. But it is really very surprising thatsecond party has not uttered a single sentence about Departmental Enquiry conducted against him . He has not denied Departmental Enquiry conducted against him in his evidence . He has not denied specifically anywhere in his evidence about the averment made by first party in their Written Say. It is also pertinent to note that second party has nowhere mentioned the date of termination of his services . Further he has not filed on record order of termination of his services ; though it was possible for him . He has tried to show that he was removed from services due to criminal proceeding lodged against. But nowhere he has mentioned anything about Departmental Enquiry conducted against him. He has not denied the date of his termination of services mentioned by first party in their Written Say . Thus it is clear that second party has not come before this Forum with clean hands . He has suppressed many material things from this Court .

(16) In his oral evidence merely stated that first party has illegally removed him from his services . Further he has not adduced any evidence to show what illegality is committed by first party while removing him from his services . He is absolutely silent on this point. Therefore, 1 think that termination of his services is direct result of Departmental Enquiry conducted against him and not due tothe criminal proceeding filed against him . Second party could not prove with sufficient evidence that the

(19) The most important question which arises now is thatwhether the acquittal of any employee in criminal case can have bearing on decision of dismissal taken by management ? There are some fundamental differences between criminal trial and disciplinary proceeding . In criminal trial the charges are to be proved beyond all reasonable doubts ; whereas in the domestic enquiry there is to be preponderance of probabilities while appreciating the evidence and to come to the conclusion whether the workman is guilty or not . The scope of departmental enquiry is very vide. The Apex Court in case of M. Paul Anthony ( Capt. ) V/ s . Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. & Another ; reported in 1999 I CLR 1032 (S. C.) has very clearly made the legal position as follows , " Proceeding in a criminal case and departmental proceeding can proceed simultaneously with a little exception. As we understand . the basis for this proposition is that proceedings in a criminal case and the departmental proceedings operate in distinct and different jurisdictional areas . In the departmental proceeding where a charge relating to the misconduct is being investigated , the factors operating in themind of Disciplinary Authority may be many such as enforcement of discipline or to investigate the level of integrity of the delinquent or the other staff , the standard of proof required in those proceeding is also different [भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : सितंबर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

9957 not entitled for reinstatement with continuity and full back wages as prayed by him. Accordingly, I answer issue no. 3 innegative and proceed to pass following order .

ORDER

The abovesaid reference is hereby answered in negative.

Date: 30-07-2005

Satara

than that required in a criminal case . While in departmental proceeding the standard of proof is one of preponderance of probabilities , in a criminal case , the charge has to be proved beyond reasonable doubts . The little exception may be where the departmental proceedings and the criminal case are based on the same set of facts and the evidence in both the proceedings is common without there being a variance . ' In order to ensure that the conclusion of enquiry officer finding a workman guilty is not to be disturbed despite an acquittal in a criminal trial' .

(20) In case of Najir Ahmed V/s . Government of Andhra Pradesh; Reported in 2001 LIC 3380 ; it was observed that , ' It is now well settled that criminal proceeding and departmental proceeding stand on different footings . Only because an order of acquittal is passed the same by itself can not be a ground for quashing departmental proceeding. The standard of proof required in both the proceeding is absolutely different ' .

(21 ) In another case Ishwari Prasad V/ s . Reserve Bank of India; reported in 2001 III CLR 1083 ; it was observed that , ' Punishment in disciplinary proceeding after acquittal in criminal case is not illegal . The object of two proceeding , the standard of proof required are different . Inspite of acquittal in criminal case , departmental proceeding and disciplinary action can remain unaffected. Supreme Court has laid down in several judgments that order of discharged in criminal case would not in any manner affect the legitimacy ofdisciplinary proceeding or the conclusions which are arrived in the course thereof. ' (22) From the Written Say of first party it appears that the services of second party were terminated on the ground of misappropriation . We have also seen that criminal court observed that second party accepted various amount from various account holder to be deposited in their recurring deposit accounts but actually he did not deposit them in post office nor made it's entries in the passbook . Criminal court has held this charge as proved. It isobserved by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Janata Bazar (SouthKanara Central Co- op . Wholesale Stores Ltd.) Etc. V/ s . Secretary , Sahakari Noukarara Sangha etc .; reported in 2001 ( 1 ) Bombay C. C. 92 (S. C.) that, ' Apparently, it would be an unjustified direction to reinstate an employee against whom charge of misappropriation is established. Aproved act of misappropriation can not be taken lightly even though number of such misappropriation cases remain undisclosed and such employees or others amass wealth by such means . In any case , misappropriation cannot be rewarded or legalised by reinstatement in service with full or part ofback wages . '

(23) In present case though second party was acquitted from criminal case on technical point even Criminal Court held that he has misappropriated the amount ofR. D. account holders . Keeping in view the various case laws discussed above , I think that second party is

V. N. SATPUTE, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 11 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3167-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार डाक विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार, औद्योगिक अधिकरण, अजमेर के पंचाट को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11- 8-05 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-40011/8/2002- आई आर ( डीयू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 11th August , 2005

S.O. 3167.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal , Ajmer as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of Deptt. of Post and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 11-8-05.

[No. L -40011 /8/2002- IR(DU)] KULDIP RAI VERMA , Desk Officer

अनुबंध

न्यायालय श्रम एवं औद्योगिक न्यायाधिकरण , अजमेर ( राज. ) पीठासीन अधिकारी: श्री जी. एस. शेखावत , आर एच जे एस प्रकरण संख्या: सी आई टी आर 10/2002 [रेफरेंस नं. एल-40011/8 /2002 - आई आर( डीयू) दिनांक 3-9-2002 ]

श्रीमती पार्वती देवी पत्नी स्व. श्री मदनसिंह राणावत जरिये श्री एल. एल. खरेरा , केन्द्रीय सहायक सचिव ऑल इंडिया एस. सी. एस . टी. एम्प्लाईज एसोसिएशन , 2018 हजारी बाग , अजमेर प्रार्थी

बनाम

वरिष्ठ प्रवर अधीक्षक, पोस्ट ऑफिस अजमेर मंडल, अजमेर

अप्रार्थी 9958

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] उपस्थित:

तो औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम के प्रावधान इस प्रकरण में लागू नहीं होते हैं और इस न्यायालय को श्रवणाधिकार नहीं है । श्री चंदनसिंह, विद्वान अधिवक्ता, प्रार्थी ।

आदेश

श्री जफर अहमद, विद्वान अधिवक्ता, अप्रार्थी ।

दिनांक: 12-7-2005

निर्णय/अवार्ड

भारत सरकार ने आदेश दि. 3-9-2000 द्वारा निम्न विवाद न्याय निर्णयन हेतु इस न्यायालय को प्रस्तुत किया:

फलतः उक्त विवाद का उत्तर इस प्रकार से दिया जाता है कि पोस्ट एंड टेलीकम्युनिकेशन विभाग ए. आई. आर . 1996 सुप्रीम कोर्ट 1271 के दृष्टांतों में प्रतिपादित सिद्धांतों के अनुसार कल्याणकारी राज्य के रूप में आम जनता को सुविधा उपलब्ध करने के कारण, संप्रभू कर्तव्य में आता है । अतः उद्योग की श्रेणी में नहीं आता है । अतः इस न्यायाधिकरण को उक्त विवाद का श्रवणाधिकार नहीं है ।

जी. एस. शेखावत, न्यायाधीश

नई दिल्ली , 11 अगस्त, 2005

"Whether the applicant Smt. Parvati Devi , W/ o Late Shri Madan Singh Ranwat or her son Shri Jaswant Singh in denying the appointment on compassionate ground by the management of Sr. Suptd. of Post Office. Ajmer isjust and legal ? If not, to what relief the applicant is entitled ?"

का. आ. 3168- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार यूको बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ से 157/91 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-8-05 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/181/91-आई आर ( वी- II ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव नोटिस के उपरांत उभयपक्ष उपस्थित आये । प्रार्थिया ने अपना क्लेम और प्रतिपक्षी ने उसका उत्तर प्रस्तुत किया है । तदुपरांत प्रतिपक्षी ने धारा 9 सिविल प्रक्रिया संहिता के अंतर्गत 25-1-2005 को इस आशय का प्रार्थना पत्र प्रस्तुत किया कि पोस्ट ऑफिस कार्य की संप्रभुता केकर्तव्य के अधीन कार्यरत होने से उद्योग नहीं है । अतः इस न्यायाधिकरण को श्रवणाधिकार नहीं है और इस प्रकार क्लेम निरस्त करने की प्रार्थना कीहै । प्रार्थी श्रमिका ने अपने उत्तर में इसका खंडन किया है ।

New Delhi , the 11th August , 2005 उक्त प्रार्थना पत्र पर भयपक्ष का श्रवण किया । पत्रावली का अवलोकनकिया । ए. आई. आर. 1995 सुप्रीम कोर्ट 2001 में प्रतिपादित सिद्धांतके अनुसार न्यायालय के क्षेत्राधिकार का बिंदु किसी भी स्टेज पर उठाया और निर्णीत किया जा सकता है । ए. आई. आर. 1996 सुप्रीम कोर्ट 1271 में निम्न प्रकार सिद्धांत प्रतिपादित किया है :

S.O. 3168 .-- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 157/91 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , Jabalpur as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to theManagement of UCO Bank and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 11-8-05.

[No. L- 12012/181 /91 - IR( B - II ) ] C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy .

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT , JABALPUR

NO . CGIT /LC/R/ 157/91

Shri C. M. Singh , Presiding Officer

Shri Dhaniram Rajak,

"Having regard to the contentions the question arises whether the appellant is an Industry ? India as a sovereign socialist , secular democratic republic has to establish an egalitarian social order under rule of law. The welfare measures partake the character of sovereign functions and the traditional duty to maintain Law & Order is no longer the concept of the State directing principles of state policy enjoin on the state diverse duties under the part for of the Constitution and the performance of the duties are constitutional functions . One of the duties of the state is to provide telecommunication service to the general public and amenity , and so is one essential part of the sovereign functions of the state as a welfare state . It is not , therefore , an Industry.

S/o Shri Dayaram Rajak, Gangamai Santar , Morar , Gwalior(M. P.) .

Workman

Versus

The Divisional Manager,

UCO Bank , Sarafa Bazar,

इस प्रकार माननीय उच्चतम न्यायालय ने उक्त दृष्टांत में यह सुचारू रूप से प्रतिपादित कर दिया है कि पोस्ट एंड टेलीकम्युनिकेशन विभाग सामान्य जनता की सुविधा उपलब्ध करवाने के कारण कल्याणकारी राज्य के रूप में संप्रभू कर्तव्यों का निष्पादन करता है । अतः वह उद्योग की श्रेणी में नहीं आता । जब प्रतिपक्षी उद्योग की श्रेणी में ही नहीं आता

Lushkar , Gwalior.

Management भारत का राजपत्र: सितंबर 3, 2005/भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

AWARD

Passed on this 28th day of July, 2005 The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. L- 12012/ 181 /91 - IR (B- II) dated 19-9-91 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :

"Whether the action of the management of UCO Bank in terminating the services of Shri Dhaniram Rajak , S/o Shri Dayaram Rajak is justified ? If not , to what relief is the workman entitled ?"

2.Applicant Shri Dhaniram Rajak's case in brief is as follows. That he belongs to a poor family and is a member of backward caste Rajak ( Dhobi ) . He is qualified upto middle class . His name was registered in the employment exchange, Gwalior . When he came to know that some class IV posts were lying vacant in the UCO Bank , he submitted an application to Birla Nagar branch of UCO Bank . The management without giving any written appointment order engaged him on daily rate of wages for performing the duties of the peon . He was paid by vouchers . He worked about 18-19 months in the UCO Bank. He worked continuously from 10th July, 1989 to 30th April, 1990. Thus heworked for more than 240 days in the above period. His services were illegally terminated by the new Branch Manager Shri Goyal by verbal order w.e.f. 30th April, 1990 . He was neither given one month's prior notice in writing indicating the reasons for retrenchment nor he has been paid in lieu of such notice , wages for the period of notice . He was not paid any compensation at the time of retrenchment. Thus the verbal order of his termination is a clear violation of Sec - 25 - F of the I. D. Act , 1947. It is also averred by the applicant that the Branch Manager , Birla Nagar after terminating his services engaged 2 daily rated employees namely Shri Bharat Srivastava and Shri Kayum Khan for different periods . That the applicant submitted representation to Branch Manager Goyal who gave assurance to the applicant but he has not been reinstated. It is prayed by the applicant that the action of the management of UCO Bank terminating his services be held unjustified and directions be issued to reinstate him in services with back wages . He also prayed that the cost be awarded to him .

3.The management of UCO Bank, Gwalior contested the reference and filed their written statement wherein they have denied the averments made by the applicant Shri Dhaniram Rajak . The management has taken preliminary objection in their written statement that the application is misconceived and is not maintainable as the applicant Shri Rajak has no right on seeking the relief claimed. The provisions of I. D. Act, 1947 are not applicable inthis case . It is specifically pleaded that even assuming, though not admitting , the applicant's contention that he was employed casually as stop gap arrangements for a 2498 G1/2005-27

9959 few days not in accordance with the recruitment rules in thatcase too if the recruitment is not in accordance with the service rules , the applicant does not become entitle to regularisation or to benefits of regular appointment particularly when there is no vacancy available for appointment. The management's case in brief is as follows . It isspecifically denied that the applicant worked from. 10th July, 1989 to 30th April , 1990. It is also denied that the applicant worked for 9 months or 240 days or more as averred by the applicant. It is further denied that the applicant's services were terminated by verbal order w.e.f. 30th April, 1990 by New Branch Manager Shri Goyal . The New Branch Manager Shri N. C. Goyal joined the branch in September 1990 and therefore he could not terminate services of the applicant on 30th April, 1990 . The applicant has filed illegible zerox copies of only 2 vouchers dated 16-9-83 and 22-3-90 of Rs . 40 and Rs . 24 respectively towards labour charges . These vouchers do not show that the applicant was continuously employed for240 days or more . It is denied by the management that there was any legal necessity of giving one month's prior notice, salary in lieu thereof or discharge certificate and therefore there was no violation of Sec . 25 - F of the I. D. Act, 1947. Sarva Shri Bharat Srivastava and Kayum Khan were electricians . They were occasionally engaged for maintenance of electrical system at the branch office . It is denied in the Written Statement by the management that no illegality has been committed by the Bank and it is specifically pleaded that the applicant is not entitled to any relief whatsoever.

4.Applicant Shri Dhaniram Rajak in support ofhis case examined himself as WW - I, Shri Gopal WW - II and Shri Rambabu WW- III . The manageinent för defending the reference examined Shri E. K. Mishra MW - I the then Assistant Manager , UCO Bank , Birla Nagar Branch , Gwalior.

5. Both the parties have filed documents in support of their case which shall be referred in the body of this award at the appropriate places .

6. I could not have an opportunity of hearing the argument of the learned counsel for applicant Shri Dhaniram Rajak as no one was present for the applicant on the date of hearing . I have heard Shri M. R. Chandra , Advocate the learned counsel for the management .

7. The parties have filed written arguments . I have very carefullygone through the written argument ofboth the parties.

8. I have very carefully gone through the entire evidence on record .

9.The case of the applicant is that the management engaged him on daily rate wages for performing the duties ofa peon . That he continuously worked for more than 240 days as such . That he was engaged by the management 9960

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii)]

inspire confidence. His witnesses Shri Gopal WW - II and Shri Rambabu WW - III appear to be highly interested witnesses in him . They are not or they were not employees of the same branch of UCO Bank where the applicant claims to be employed as peon . Shri Gopal WW - II deposed that he was appointed in Hanuman Bhandar Canteen - JC Mills on25-2-80 and there he served till April 1995. Shri Rambabu WW. III deposed that he was employed in the new power house department of JC Mills on 27-4-78 and remained employed there till the closure of JC Mills . On being cross- examined, Shri Gopal WW - II admitted that he knows applicant Dhaniram Rajak for the past 30-40 years . Shri Rambabu WW- IIIdeposed during the evidence of his cross - examination that applicant Dhaniram Rajak resides in his Mohalla . Both the above named witnesses admitted during their cross -examination that they were brought to this tribunal for deposing as witnesses by applicant Dhaniram Rajak on his expenses . The averment made in the statement of claim by applicant Shri Dhaniram Rajak is that he worked in UCO Bank continuously from 10th July, 1989 to 30th April , 1990 but the applicant's witness Shri Gopal WW - II in this respect deposed in his affidavit that he saw Shri Dhaniram Rajak continuously working from 13th April , 1989 to 30th April , 1990. This deposition of the witness is not in consonance with the above averment made by the applicant in his statement of claim. Further this witness deposed in his evidence of cross examination that Shri Dhaniram Rajak had told him that he was working in the UCO Bank on monthly salary. Thisevidence of the witness is against the averment made by the applicant in his statement of claim that he was engaged by the management on daily rate of wages . Applicant's witness Shri Gopal WW - II and Shri Ram Babu WW- IIIdeposed that they had their accounts in the UCO Bank, Birla Nagar branch , Gwalior and whenever they used to visit the Bank for operating their account, they saw applicant Shri Dhaniram Rajak working in the said Bank . Shri Rambabu WW- III deposed during his evidence of cross -examination that he used to meet the applicant once or twice in a month in the Bank . Likewise Shri Gopal WW- II inhis evidence of cross - examination deposed that he used to go to UCO Bank once in a month for depositing his savings . Both these witnesses did not depose a word as to on what post , the applicant was employed in the Bank . The above discussed evidence of two witnesses of applicant does not inspire confidence and is insufficient to prove that the applicant continusously worked in the UCO Bank for 240 days because according to their own evidence, they used to visit the Bank for operating their account . Thus the entire oral evidence adduced by the applicant falls short for proving his case that he continuously worked in the UCO Bank for 240 days or more.

without giving any written order. It is denied by the management that applicant Shri Dhaniram Rajak worked continuously for 240 days or more with the management. There is not a single word in the written argument of the applicant to indicate as to how and by what evidence , the applicant's case is proved that he was in the continuous employment of the management for 240 days or more . It has come in the written argument of the applicant that the management has not submitted complete record of applicant's working days and the photostat copies of each voucher and the vouchers of payment made to the applicant do not correctly show the working days of the workman and thus the management has failed to demonstrate its claim that the applicant has not worked for 240 days during his service period. The learned counsel forthe management submitted that it was for the applicant to lead evidence to show that he had in fact worked for 240 days in the year preceding his termination . In this respect, the learned counsel for the management placed reliance on 2002 Supreme Court Cases ( L & S) 367 in the case of Range Forest Officer versus S. T. Hadimani with State of Karnataka and another versus S. T. Hadimani . 1 have very carefully gone through the law cited above . It has been held therein that it was the case of the claimant that he had worked for more than 240 days in the year preceding his termination but this claim was denied by the appellant . That it was then for the claimant to lead evidence to show that he had in fact worked for 240 days in the year preceding his termination. In the case at hand, it has come inthe evidence of applicant Dhaniram Rajak - WW- I that he was appointed by verbal order on daily rate ofwages w.e.f. 10th July 1989 and was allowed to work till 30th April 1990. That he was paid wages by vouchers for different periods and he continuously worked from 10th July , 1989 to 30thApril 1990. He did not depose a word in his evidence of cross- examination on what post he was appointed and whatwas his nature of work in the office of management . Onbeing cross - examined, this witness deposed that he had moved an application seeking service of peon on 13-4-89 and he was given service of waterman, this evidence of applicant Dhaniram Rajak WW - I is contrary to his averment made in the statement of claim wherein it is averred that without giving any written appointment order , the applicant was engaged on daily rate of wages for performing the duties of peon . During the course of evidence of his cross - examination this witness deposed thathe usedto provide drinking water, fill the coolers and used to do cleaning work. That he was used to be paid Rs . 15 or Rs . 24 per day through vouchers . He further deposed that he worked till 30th April , 1990 and during the said period, he was ceased to work once or twice . It clearly means that the oral evidence of the applicant Shri Dhaniram Rajak WW. I to the effect that he was appointed as peon in the office of the management and he Continuously worked as such w.e.f. 10th day of July 1989 to30th day ofApril 1990 for more than 240 days , does not

10. The applicant has filed photostat copies of 2 vouchers of UCO Bank, one isdt . 16-9-89 and the other is 9961

भारत का राजपत्र: सितंबर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[भाग II- खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

vacancy available . In this respect the learned counsel for the management placed reliance on 2004 (9 )/SRJ 103 Supreme Court of India in the case of Pankaj Gupta and Ors . etc. versus State of Jammu and Kashmir and Ors . and 1997 Supreme Court Cases ( L &S ) 1079 in the case of Himanshu Kumar Vidyarthi and Others versus State ofBihar and Others .

Thefollowing was held in the law cited 2004(9 ) SRJ- 103 above:

dated 22-3-90 to show that he received daily rate ofwages from the Bank through vouchers . These photostat copies ofvouchers have not been proved in accordance with law ofevidence and therefore they cannot be read in evidence. Even if only for the sake of argument it is assumed that those copy of vouchers may be read in evidence , in that case too , they are of no help in proving the fact that the applicant worked in the Bank continuously for 240 days or more . Thus the applicant has utterly failed to prove his case that he was in the continuous service of the Bank for not less than 1 year or for not less than 240 days in the preceding year of his termination from service .

"No person illegally appointed or appointed without following the procedure prescribed under the law, is entitled to claim that he should be continued in service."

And the following was held in 1997 Supreme Court Cases L & S 1079, the law cited above :

"Every department of the Government cannot be treated to be industry . When the appointments are regulated by the statutory rules , the concept of industry to that extent stands excluded . The petitioners were not appointed to the posts in accordance with the rules but were engaged on the basis of need of the work . They are temporary employees working on daily wages . Their disengagement from service cannot be construed to be a retrenchment under the Industrial Disputes Act. The concept of retrenchment therefore cannot be stretched to such an extent as to cover these employees . Since the petitioners are only daily wage employees and have no right to the posts , their disengagement is not arbitrary . "

11. Against the above the case of management is that even if it is assumed only for the sake of argument that applicant Dhaniram Rajak was employed on daily rate ofwages as stop - gap arrangement for a few days , in that case too his employment was not according to rules and until the recruitment is made in accordance with the service rules , the applicant does not become entitle to regularisation or the benefit of regular appointment particularly when there was no vacancy available for appointment . Shri B. K. Mishra, MW - I , the then Assistant Manager of UCO Bank , deposed that Shri Dhaniram Rajak was engaged as a labour on daily wage basis from time to time between the periods from 16-9-89 to 22-3-90 according to time to time need and exigencies of his service in the Bank. That his disengagement from 22-3-90 was due to end and want to work in the Bank . It is further deposed by this witness that the applicant was not engaged against any post or vacancy in subordinate cadre and during the period of his engagement and disengagement, there was no vacant post . That his job was not of a regular nature in the Bank,his service was hired by the Bank Manager from the open market on pick and choose basis and for such engagement neither any application was called for nor the applicant submitted any application . The witness further added that the applicant worked in Birla Nagar Branch of UCO Bank for 87 days . This witness has been cross- examined at length by the learned counsel for the applicant. Nothing has come in his entire evidence which may indicate that he has not deposed truthfully; rather his testimony inspires confidence and is trus worthy.

In the case at hand , the applicant has failed to prove by cogent evidence , the nature of work done by the applicant , the designation of post held by him and the hours ofduty he performed . The applicant has also failed to prove that any vacancy was existing on the date of his engagement in service , the notification of vacancy if any was made to the employment exchangeby the management , his name was sponsored by the employment exchange and he was called for any test or interview . Under the circumstances , even if it is assumed for the sake of argument only that the applicant was employed in the Bank, in that case too , according to law cited above , because he was not legally appointed and was appointed without following the procedure prescribed for under the service rules , therefore , he is not entitled to claim that he should continue in service .

13. It has come in the written argument filed on behalf ofapplicant that the provisions of Section 25 - F , 25 - G and 25-H ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 were not complied with by the management and therefore the oral order of the management of terminating his service from 30-4-90 is void-ab- initio . The applicant has failed to prove that he continuously worked for 240 days or more therefore it was 12. There is a photostat copy of Policy and Proceedures to be adopted for recruitment to the subordinate posts in the Bank bearing seal of the UCO Bank, Birla Nagar Branch , Gwalior on record of this reference . The policy and procedure to be adopted for recruitment of subordinate cadre is mentioned therein . It is clear from the perusal of the said document and the evidence of parties on record that the applicant was not recruited according to rules of service . It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the management that the applicant was not recruited according to service rules , therefore , he is not entitled to regularisation or the benefit of regular appointment particulariy when there was no 9962

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12 , 1927

not obligatory on the part of the management to comply with the provisions of Sec . 25 -F ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

14. The learned counsel for the management submitted that there had been no violation of provisions ofSection 25 -G and 25- H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for the reason that Shri Bharat Srivastava and Shri Kayum Khan were engaged like the applicant for repair andmaintenance of electric installations of the Bank during its extreme need and they too were disengaged on completion of need. Moreover they belong to separate category being technical hands to which category applicant Shri Dhaniram does not belong. As per deposition of Shri B. K. Mishra MW - I Shri Bharat Srivastava and Shri Kayum Khan were also engaged like applicant Shri Dhaniram Rajak on maintenance and repair of electrical installations in the Bank during extreme need . But the evidence of the applicant Shri Dhaniram Rajak WW - I is quite silent on the point as to for what purpose Shri Bharat Srivastava and Shri Kayum Khan were engaged by the Bank . But the witness has admitted that both the above named persons were engaged by the Bank prior to him . In view of the above evidence given by Applicant Shri Dhaniranı Rajak WW - I the provisions of Section 25 -G and 25- H are not applicable it this case.

15. For the reasons given above , it is concluded that theaction ofthe management of UCO Bank in terminating the service ofShri Dhaniram Rajak , S/o Shri Dayaram Rajak is justified and the workman is not entitled to any relief. The reference is, therefore , decided accordingly in favour ofmanagement and against the workman Shri Dhaniram Rajak . The parties shall bear their own costs of this reference .

16. Copy of the award be sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour as per rules .

C.M. SINGH, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 12 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3169-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण सं.- II , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई डी-87/ 2002)को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/454/2001- आई आर ( बी-1 ) ]

अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 12th August , 2005

S.O. 3169. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ] Government hereby publishes the Award (I. D. No. 87 / 2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court- II , New Delhi now as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to theManagement of State Bank of India and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 12-8-2005.

[No. L - 12012/454/2001 - IR( B - 1 ) } AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT- II , NEW DELHI I. D. No. 87/2002

Shri R. N. Rai , Presiding Officer In the matter of:

Shri Netra Pal ,

House No. 5, Village , Jamrudhpur, Kailash Colony, Opp . Lady Sri Ram College, NewDelhi - 110048.

Versus

Parliament Street ,

The Regional Manager , State Bank of India , Region - III , New Delhi - 110001

AWARD

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L- 12012 / 454/2001 - IR( B - I) , Central Government dt. 24/31-10-2002 has referred the following point for adjudication .

The point runs as hereunder :

"Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India in terminating the services of Shri Netra Pal, Ex . Messenger by treating him to have voluntarily retired from service w.e.f. 23-07-1994 is just , fair and legal ? If not , what relief he is entitled to and from which date ."

Theworkman applicant has filed statement of claim. in the statement of claim it has been stated that the workman was serving in the post of Messenger with effect from 28-09-1985 . Copy of appointment letter is placed as Annexure -Al with this statement . That the workman's services were confirmed as messenger with effect from 31stMarch, 1986. Copy of confirmation letter is placed as Annexure- B with this statement.

Thatthe workman fell sick on 26th March , 1993 and could not attend his duties , but he has sent his medical 9963. भारत का राजपत्र: सितंबर 3 , 2005/भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II- खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

certificates from qualified Doctor of Mehta Nursing Home and Surgical Centre , C-3176 , Janakpuri , New Delhi . Copy of theMedical Certificate and UPC are placed as Annexure-C (Collectively).

petition is liable to be dismissed on this ground . The claimant has voluntarily retired from the service of the Bank in accordance with Clause 17 of the BPS dated 10-04-1989 . The petitioner at the relevant time had no intention of joining the duties and has voluntarily cessed his job . But now after a gap of more than eight years the claimant had come up with a plea of sickness . In fact , the claimant never sent any application to the Bank for grant of leave to him .

That on slight recovery of workman , a fitness certificate was given by the Doctor and workman reported for duties to Branch Manager , SBI , Palam Colony, New Delhi on 21-09-1994 but he was informed by the Manager that his services have been terminated taking his absence into consideration that the workman has voluntarily retired from service . Copy of the letter showing the workman has retired voluntarily is placed as Annexure -D with this statement .

The terms of service conditions of employees in State Bank of India are covered by Sastry Award , Desai Award and BPS entered into between the management of the bank andAll India State Bank of India Staff Federation . Para 17 of the 5th BPS dated 10-04-1989 provides as under:

That neither any domestic inquiry was held nor any opportunity was given to workman to put his defence . The medical/ sickness of the workman were not taken into consideration without second medical or giving reason for not accepting the same . Thus the workman has been denied natural law ofjustice and has been dismissed from service arbitrarily. This amounts to forcible dismissal and that too without any proper inquiry and without affording opportunities in such a major punishment .

Thatthe workman has suffered the following losses due to alleged dismissal and he submits the following statement of claim :

(a) Reinstatement in service with full back wages .

(b) Salary (Pay & Allowane) from 01-03-1993 till date about nine years at the rate of Rs .

amounting to Rs .....

(d) Promotion as per his counterparties .

(e) Interest on amount due from the date of illegal dismissal till payment.

"When an employee absents himself from work for a period of 90 or more consecutive days without submitting any application for leave or for its extension or without any leave to his credit or beyond the period of leave sanctioned originally/ subsequently or when there is satisfactory evidence that he has taken up employment in India or when the management is reasonably satisfied that he has no intention ofjoining duties . The management may atany time thereafter give a notice to the employee athis last known address calling upon him to report for duty within 30 days of the date of notice . Stating inter alia , the grounds for coming to the conclusion that the employee has no intention of joining duties , the employees will be deemed to have voluntarily retired from Bank's service on the expiry of the said notice . In the event of the employee submitting a satisfactory reply , he shall be permitted to report for duty thereafter within 30 days from the date of the expiry of the aforesaid notice without prejudice to theBank's right to take any action under the law of rules of service ."

The management has filed written statement . In the written statement it has been stated that the claim of the claimant does not disclose any cause of action for challenging to the action of the management in treating the workman as voluntarily retire under Clause 17 of the 5th BPS dated 10-04-1989 . The claim is therefore , liable to bedismissed. That the claim is barred by delay and laches . The workman was voluntarily retired from the Bank's service w.e.f. 23-08-1994 . The workman acquiesced in the order for 8 years . Having accepted his terminal benefits accruing on his voluntary retirement he is estopped from turning around and challenging the same after a lapse of more than 8 years . Hence the petition is liable to be dismissed .

The claimant started absenting himself from duty w.e.f. 26-03-1993 . The Branch vide its letters dated 23-04-1993 asked the petitioner to report for duty at the Branch, but he failed to attend duty in response to the aforesaid letters (photocopy enclosed marked as Annexure - I ) . After that , vide its letter dated 05-03-1994 , the Branch wrote to the petitioner to report for duty within 30 days of receipt of said notice and in case he fails to do so, he shall deemed to have been voluntarily retired from the service on the expiry of the said notice . In the month ofMay 1994, the petitioner sent two medical certificates from 01-04-1994 to 30-04-1994 and 1st May , 1994 to 15th May, 1994 issued by one Dr. R. K. Jethani , RMP , however no leave application was sent with it . Again in the month ofJune , 1994, two medical certificates from 16th May, 1994 to 30th May , 1994 and 31st May, 1994 to 14th June, 1994 issued by Dr. R. K. Jethani , RMP was received by the That there is no employer - employee relationship between the applicant and the answering respondent after his voluntary cessation of service from the bank. Hence , there cannot be any industrial dispute in the matter . The 9964

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12, 1927

Bank. However, no leave application was sent by the claimant . Not satisfied on the medical certificates , the claimant was called to appear before Medical Board on 08-07-1994 vide Branch Letter No. 94/29 dated 28-06-1994 as per his service conditions . However , the claimant voluntarily abstained from appearing before Medical Board. The petitioner was served with a notice vide Branch Memo No. 94/42 dated 23-07-1994 calling upon him to report for duty within 30 days of the date of notice as per his service conditions. However , the claimant failed to report for duty within 30 days of receipt of notice and did not give any explanation for his unauthorized absence . Accordingly, vide its registered notice dated 07-09-1994 the appointing authority i.e. , the respondent no . I wrote to the claimant that as he has failed to report for duty in response to earlier notices of the branch dated 23-07-1994 within 30 days , so it was deemed that he has voluntarily retired from the service of the Bank w.e.f. 23-08-1994 . From this, it can be observed that the employee was first asked to report for duty without delay and when he continued to absent himself from work for a period of more than 90 days consecutively, then he was asked to report for duty within 30 days of notice as per the above mentioned terms of service conditions . When he failed to report for duty within the aforesaid period, then he was deemed to have voluntarily retired from the service of the Bank. It clearly shows that the Bank has taken all the steps and followed the principles of natural justice . It also clearly established that the claimant at the material time had no intention of joining the duties and the story put forward by him is completely a concocted version .

Itisdenied for want of knowledge that the workman fell ill on 26-03-1993 . However , reply given hereinabove in para 4 of the Preliminary Objections is reiterated . It is submitted that the claimant never submitted the medical certificates to the answering respondent which he has filedwith the claim in the Court .

Vidememo dated 23-07-1994 the workman was called upon to report for duties or give satisfactory explanation tohis unauthorized absence within 30 days of the notice. The workman neither reported for duties nor gave any explanations for his unauthorized absence , within the period specified in the memo dated 23-07-1994 . Accordingly as per his service conditions as given in Clause 17 of the EPS dated 10-04-1989 , he was deemed to have voluntarily retired from the Bank's service w.e.f. 23-08-1994. The same was duty communicated to him vide letterdated 07-09-1994 .

The contents of Para 5 are wrong and denied. In reply to the reply given in the Preliminary Objections is reiterated . Further , there is absolutely no need of any inquiry in such type of cases where the claimant has himselfvoluntarily cessed of his services as per his service conditions prevailing at the material time and principles of natural justice is inherent in the memo dated 23-07-1994

[PART II -SEC . 3 (ii )] and full opportunity was granted to the workman to report for duties within the period specified as per his service conditions . The claimant neither reported for duties nor gave any explanation for his unauthorized absence , within the period specified in the memo dated 23-07-1994 . The claimant cannot be allowed premium over his deliberate acts of omissions/ commissions . Further , it is wrong to state that the claimant had ever been dismissed from the Bank's services; rather the claimant has himself voluntarily cessed of his services as per his service conditions prevalent at the material time. It is also wrong and denied that the claimant suffered any kind of losses as stated .

The workman applicant has filed rejoinder . In his rejoinder he has reiterated the averments of his claim statement . The workman applicant has filed affidavit . The management was present on 02-08-2004, 21-09-2004 , 22-11-2005 and 23-12-2004 but thereafter none turned up for cross examination of the workman applicant . On 13-01-2005 cross of the workman applicant was closed in the absence of the management and the case was posted for argument . None turned up from the side of the management even on the date of argument so ex - parie argument of the workman applicant was heard .

It was submitted from the side of the workman applicant that he was serving in the post of Messenger w.e.f. 28-09-1985. Copy of the appointment letter has been annexed . His services were confirmed on 31-03-1986.11e fell sick on 26th March , 1993 and could not attend his duties but he sent medical certificate from qualified Doctor ofMehta Nursing Home and Surgical Center.

It was further submitted that on recovery the workman approached the management for duties but the Branch Manager, SBI , Palam Colony, New Delhi told him that his services have been terminated in view of his absence on 21-09-1994 . The workman applicant has filed affidavit in support of his claim statement and the management has not filed any affidavit so the affidavit of the workman applicant will prevail and the order of voluntary retirement is unjust and unfair .

The workman applicant is a manual worker . He has notdisclosed in his statement of claim as to how he earned hislivelihood . He has not disclosed any source of income. He has filed this ID case after seven years so there is delay and laches on the part of the workman applicant so he is entitled to get 50% back wages only.

The reference is replied thus :

The action of the management of State Bank of India in terminating the services of Shri Netra Pal , Ex . Messenger by treating him to have voluntarily retired from service w.e.f. 23-07-1994 is neither just nor fair nor legal . The workman deserves to be reinstated w.e.f. 23-07-1994 with 50% back wages . The management is directed to reinstate him with 50 % back wages within two months of the [भाग II- खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

9965

भारत का राजपत्र : सितंबर 3 , 2005/भाद्र 12, 1927

publication of the award . In case of default the workman applicant will be entitled to an interest of 6% on his entire back wages as mentioned above .

TheAward is given accordingly.

Date: 10-08-2005 .

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 12 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3170- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 को 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार अमेरिकन एक्सप्रेस बैंक लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण सं.- II , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई डी-74/ 2004) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -12012/17/ 2004- आई आर ( बी -1 ) ] अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 12th August, 2005

S.O. 3170. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (I. D. No. 74/ 2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court- 11 , New Delhi now as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of American Express Bank Ltd. , and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 12-8-2005 .

[No. L- 12012/ 17/2004- IR(B- I) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT- II , NEW DELHI

I. D. No. 74/2004

Shri R. N. Rai , Presiding Officer

In the matter of:

Sh. Parmar Bahadur Thapa , S/o . Sh . Tek Bahadur Thapa, C/ o . Janvadi General Kamgar Mazdoor Union , E-26, Raja Bazar (Old Qtrs .) , Baba Kharak Singh Marg . , New Delhi.

Versus

The Chief Manager ,

American Express Bank Ltd. , Enkay Centre , A , A - I & A - II , Udyog Vihar , Phase-V, Gurgaon-122106.

AWARD

TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No. L- 12012/ 17/ 2004 [ IR(B - 1 ) ] , Central Governmentdt . 13-05-2004 has referred the following point for adjudication .

The point runs as hereunder :

"Whether the action of the management of American Express Bank Limited, Gurgaon in terminating the sevices of Shri Parmar Bahadur Thapa, S/ o Shri Tek Bahadur Thapa w.e.f. 15-05-2003 without any notice/ notice pay/ retrenchment compensation etc. is just and legal ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to ? "

Notice has been sent to both the parties but the workman applicant did not turn up . He has not filed claim statement.

The reference is replied thus :

Theaction ofthe management of American Express Bank Limited, Gurgaon in terminating the services ofShri Parmar Bahadur Thapa, S/ o Shri Tek Bahadur Thapa w.e.f. 15-05-2003 without any notice/notice pay/retrenchment compensation etc. is just and legal.

No dispute award is given .

Date:09-08-2005

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 12 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3171- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में श्रम न्यायालय, नासिक के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई डी ए-25/ 99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-08-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/538/98- आई आर ( बी-1 ) ] अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 12th August, 2005

S.O. 3171.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( IDA No. 25 / 1999) of the Labour Court , Nashik 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 12-08-2005 .

[No. L- 12012/538/98 - IR(B- I ) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer 9966

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12, 1927

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SMT. C. A. NATHANI, PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, NASHIK Reference ( IDA) No. 25/1999

Between

TheRegional Manager , StateBank of India , Region -V, EastStreet, Pune -411001 .. First Party/employer

And

Shri Shashikant Vittal Wade R/o Gosavi Chawl , Room No. 5 , Upnagar, Nashik -422006 Second Party/workman

AWARD

28-6-2005

Thisis a reference sent to this Court by the Ministry ofLabour , Govt . of India under Sec . 10 of the I.D. Act for adjudication of the dispute over the demand of workman for reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages.

2. The workman filed statement of claim Ex . U - 2 . The first party/employer filed written statement Ex . С - 1.

3. Thereafter my 1d . predecessor framed issues at Ex. 0-6 . However , the second party failed to adduce any evidence . I have gone through the documents on record. Thedocuments are xerox copies and not sufficient to grant reinstatement with continuity of service or back wagesto the second party . Hence, I hold that the second party is not entitled to any reinstatement or back wages . Hence , the reference requires to be rejected . Hence , I pass the following order.

ORDER

1. The reference stands rejected . The second party workman is not entitled to any relief including reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages .

2. The award be sent for publication to the concerned authority .

SMT. C. A. NATHANI , Presiding Officer Nashik Date: 28-6-2005

नई दिल्ली, 12 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3172- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार अमेरिकन एक्सप्रेस बैंक लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण सं.- II , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई डी-73/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-08-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/19/2004- आई आर ( बी-1 ) ] अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] New Delhi , the 12th August , 2005 S.O. 3172.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D.No. 73/2004 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court - II , New Delhi now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of American Express Bank Ltd. and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 12-08-2005.

[No. L - 12012/ 19/2004 - IR (B - I ) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER , CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT- II , NEW DELHI R. N. Rai , Presiding Officer 1.D. No. 73/2004

In the matter of:

Sh . Pratap Singh , S/ o Sh . Khem Singh , C/ o Janvadi General Kamgar Mazdoor Union , E-26 , Raja Bazar (Old Qtrs . ) , Baba Kharak Singh Marg , NewDelhi.

VERSUS

The Chief Manager , American Express Bank Ltd. , Enkay Centre , A , A - 1 & A - II , Udyog Vihar , Phase-V, Gurgaon- 122 106

AWARD

TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No. L- 12012/ 19/ 2004 - IR ( B - 1 ) Central Governmentdt . 13-05-2004 has referred the following point for adjudication.

The point runs as hereunder :--

"Whether the action of the management of American Express Bank Limited , Gurgaon in terminating the services of Shri Pratap Singh S/ o Shri Khem Singh w.e.f. 28-03-2003 without any notice /notice pay/ retrenchment compensation etc. is just and legal ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to ?" Notice has been sent to both the parties but the workman applicant did not turn up. He has not filed claim statement .

The reference is replied thus :---

The action of the management of American Express Bank Limited, Gurgaon in terminating the services of [ भाग II- खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

9967

भारत का राजपत्र: सितंबर 3, 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

referred the following point for adjudication .

The point runs as hereunder :---

Shri Pratap Singh , S/o . Shri Khem Singh w.e.f. 28-03-2003 without any notice/notice pay/ retrenchment compensation etc. is just and legal ..

No dispute award is given.

Date : 08-08-2005

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 12 अगस्त, 2005

"Whether the action of the management of Punjab National Bank , Muzaffarnagar , in terminating the services of Shri Neeraj Kumar, Water Boy/Peon w.e.f. 12-04-1999 is legal and justified ? If not, what relief the workman is entitled and from which date ? " का. आ. 3173- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947(1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार पंजाब नेशनल बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. - 2 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 7/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-08-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

The workman applicant has filed statement of claim . in the statement of claim , it has been stated that the workman applicant was appointed in Punjab National Bank, New Mandi , Muzaffarnagar on 01-08-1998 on the post of water boy but the applicant mostly performed the duties ofpeon i.e. to collect the papers of currency chest from R. M. Office , T.R.O. from city branch PNB , Cash collected from Dena Bank, Search of DD Counterfoil from Office , Head Office , Paper and other bank paper, ledgers etc. [सं. एल-12012/277/1999- आई आर ( बी- II ) ] सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 12th August, 2005

That the applicant rendered uninterrupted service from 01-08-1998 to 11-04-1999 . But the opposite party employer terminated his services on 12-04-1999 by oral order.

S.O. 3173.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 7/2000) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court No. II , New Delhi , as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Punjab National Bank and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 12-08-2005 .

That before terminating services of the workman , the employer did not comply with the provisions of Section 25-N of the ID Act , 1947. The employer did not give any notice or notice pay in lieu of notice , retrenchment compensation . No charge sheet was given nor any domestic inquiry was conducted and opportunity of hearing was not granted and principles of natural justice wereviolated .

[No. L - 12012/277/ 1999 - IR (B - 11 ) ] C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT - II , NEW DELHI

R. N. Rai , Presiding Officer

I.D. No. 7/2000

IN THE MATTER OF :

That the workman has performed his duties in the bank for more than 240 days and has been in the service of bank since 01-08-1998 to 11-04-1999 . His service comes in the category of continuity of service and the workman has acquired the status of permanent worker. That as per Grade of IVth Class Worker his salary was Rs . 2700 per month (Basic + DA) . But he was paid Rs . 500 per month till February 1999 and for March 1999 Rs . 770 per month and after this period wages has not been paid inspite of demand.

Shri Neeraj Kumar, S/ o Shri Ram Kishan , R/ o 50- B , Vakil Road, New Mandi , Muzaffarnagar.

That the worker issued registered AD Notice dated 19-05-1999 to the employer and requested to take him on duty with back wages with continuity of service and also made personal request but gave reply notice on 25-05-1999 on false facts .

Versus

That as the applicant/ worker has performed duties for240 days continuously illegal termination of service by oral order is unfair labour practice.

Punjab National Bank, The Chief Manager , PNB , New Mandi Branch , Muzaffamagar .

AWARD

That the opposite party admits the post of worker as water boy in monthly wages payment slips .

TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No. L- 12012/ 277/99-1R ( B - 11) Central Governmentdt . 02-02-2000 has

That the oral termination order dated 12-04-1999 of opposite party is illegal and ab initio void.

2498 GI/2005-28 9968

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 / BHADRA 12 , 1927

That the applicant is the worker and the opposite party is its employer . Termination is illegal and ab initio void and industrial dispute exists in between the parties .

The management has filed written statement . In the written it has been stated that the alleged dispute is not industrial dispute in terms of sec . 2 ( k ) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 as the applicant Shri Neeraj Kumar is not a workman in terms of sec. 2(s) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. He was not appointed by the Bank nor the employer -employee relationship exists between the respondent bank and the applicant as such the claim of the applicant is not maintainable.

Thatthe applicant Shri Neeraj Kumar was working atthe tea - stall of Shri Rejender Kumar who used to supply tea among others , to the staff working in the branch at New Mandi , Muzaffar Nagar. During this period he was engaged for filling of water of the said branch for which thelabour charges were paid to him at the agreed rates out ofthe discretionary powers vested in the branch manager to incur expenses on such like miscellaneous matters like electricity repairs and maintenance , water arrangements for staff and customers , sanitation work etc. whereas the employees of the bank are paid wages out of the "Establishment Expenses" . Hence , the applicant never assumed the status of a employee nor he was paid any wages by the respondent bank . Moreover such persons are excluded from the operation of the Desai Award.

That the applicant was not employed by the respondent bank , the question of termination of services of the applicant does not arise nor the provisions of retrenchment us . 2 (oo) of the Industríal Disputes , Act , 1947 are attracted in the case . As such the conditions precedent to retrenchment of workman employed as laid down- u/ s 25 -N of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 are not required to be observed . Hence the claim of the applicant isnot maintainable .

That the application has been filed by Shri Neeraj Kumar u/s . 10 of the industrial Disputes Act, 1947 which is not maintainable before this Hon'ble Authority as the applicant was not a workman within the meaning of Sec. 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947.

That the applicant has also filed a case before Labour Court , U.P. , Meerut under the U.P. Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 , on the similar grounds . The adjudication proceedings have already commenced in the case but the applicant has concealed this fact before this Hon'ble Authority.

It is stated that since the applicant was never appointed by the respondent Bank as water boy nor there is any post of water boy in the Bank . It is denied that Shri Neeraj Kumar ever performed the duties of peon as alleged or otherwise .

It isstated that since the applicant was not employed by the Bank , the question of violation of Sec 25 - N of

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 or the principles of natural justice does not arise .

The applicant has not been paid any wages by the respondent bank . However , he has been paid only labour charges at the contracted rate of Rs . 500 per month from August 1998 to January 1999 from out of the miscellaneous charges under the discretionary powers of the Branch Manager .Hence , the applicant is not entitled to any wages for this period as there was no employer - employee relationship between the Bank and Shri Neeraj Kumar .

It is stated that the applicant has not served in the Bank as a workman as such the question of continuity of service or termination thereof does not arise . Hence , there is no unfair labour practice in the case .

It is stated that the Branch Managers have been delegated discretionary powers to incur expenses of casual and contractual nature such as electricity repairs , sanitation, arrangement for filling of water etc. Shri Neeraj Kumar was also paid out of labour charges out of this head for making arrangement of water . Hence , it is not admitted that Shri Neeraj Kumar was appointed by the Bank as water boy .

The applicant has filed rejoinder . In his rejoinder he has reiterated the averments of his claim statement and as asserted that he has worked continuously for more than 240 days at the post of Water Boy/Peon . His service was terminated on 12-04-1999 .

Evidence of both the parties has been taken .

Heard arguments from both the sides and perused the papers on the record .

The applicant has rendered continuous service of 240 days so he is a workman in view of AIR 1986 SC 458. It was submitted that the entire wages have not been paid to him and he was being paid Rs . 500 per month initially and thereafter Rs . 750. His termination is illegal and void ab initio . He has not been paid one month's notice and compensation so Section 25F of the ID Act, 1947 is attracted .

Itwas submitted from the side of the management that the workman was engaged for filling water of the said Branch for which the labour charge were paid to him at the agreed rates out of the discretionary powers vested in the Branch Manager to incur expenses on such like miscellaneous matters like electricity repairs and maintenance , water arrangements for staff and customers , sanitation work etc. The employees of the bank are paid out of the establishment expenses . He was not employed by the respondent bank so the question of payment of compensationdoes not arise . He was not a workman under Section 2 ( s) of the ID Act , 1947. He has filed an application inLabour Court (U.P.) .

[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: सितंबर 3, 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

It has been admitted by the management that he has been paid only labour charges at the contracted rate of Rs . 500 per month from August , 1998 to January , 1999. It was submitted from the side of the workman that the management witness has admitted in quite categorical terms that Shri Neeraj Kumar has worked from 01-08-1998 to 11-04-1999. The management has also admitted in written statement that he has worked from August, 1998 to January , 1999 so there is contradiction in the written statement and the admission of the management witness regarding the work of the workman applicant . It has been admitted by the management that he started to work in August , 1998 and the case of the workman is also that he worked from 1st August , 1998 to 11-04-1999 .

In view ofthe clear cut admission ofthe management witness it is proven fact that the workman has worked for more than 240 days so Section 25 F of the ID Act is attracted . It has been also admitted by the management that he was not given any notice or notice pay in lieu of notice and retrenchment compensation . In case he has worked for more than 240 days it was obligatory for the management to give him one month's notice or pay in lieu thereof and retrenchment compensation in view of Para-24 ofthe Desai Award. Even if a workman works for six months he is entitled to get retrenchment compensation . The management has admitted that he worked from 01-08-1998 to 11-04-1999 but no retrenchment compensation has been paid to the workman . The case of the workman is that he performed the duties of water boy as well as peon . The case of the management is that he was only water boy and served water to the employees of the Bank and customers of the Bank . In case it is admitted that he has worked in the Bank continuously for more than 240 days , Section 25 F of the ID Act, 1947 is attracted as the Bank is doubtless an industry and in view of the Desai Award he should have been given retrenchment compensation . Admittedly the management has not given retrenchment compensation .

It was further submitted from the side of the management that he was not posted as per recruitment rules . His name was not sponsored by Employment Exchange . For regular recruitment it is necessary that the name of the workman should be sponsored from the Employment Exchange . So far as sponsoring from the Employment Exchange is concerned it is the duty of the Bank to follow the procedure . Even for temporary appointments the names invariably should be sponsored by the Employment Exchange . The management cannot make the recruitment rules a shield for illegal termination of the services of the workman . In case he has not been appointed as per the recruitment rules the management should have paid him retrenchment compensation in view ofSection 25 F ofthe ID Act, 1947. The recruitment rules cannot be both shield and sword . The service of the workman applicant doubtless has been terminated illegally

9969 and without following the procedure as prescribed in Section 25 F of the ID Act , 1947 .

The management is a state in view of Article 12 of Indian Constitution . The concept of rule of law would lose its vitality if the instrumentalities of the State are not charged with the duty of discharging their functions in a fair and just manner . The management should have acted justly and fairly and not arbitrarily or capriciously . Section 25 F of the ID Act , 1947 is attracted in the facts and circumstances of the present case and it is settled law that ifSection 25 F ofthe ID Act, 1947 is applicable the workman is to be reinstated .

As far as back wages are concerned the workman applicant has admitted that he performed the work of a water boy as well as peon so he is an unskilled workman and in his claim statement he has not disclosed as to what was the source of his subsistence . He should have clarified how he sustained his livelihood during the period of un- employment as such he is entitled to be reinstated with 20% of his back wages .

The reference is replied thus :-

The action of the management of Punjab National Bank, Muzaffar Nagar , in terminating the services of Shri Neeraj Kumar, Water Boy/Peon w.e.f. 12-04-1999 is neither legal nor justified . The management/respondent is directed to reinstate the workman with continuity of service along with 20% back wages within two months from the date of the publication of the Award. In case of default the workman will be entitled to get 12% interest on the entire backwages mentioned above .

TheAward is given accordingly. Date : 08-08-2005 R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 12 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3174-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बैंक आफ बड़ौदा के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार , औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. - 1 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 20/97 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-08-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12011/37/1995- आई आर ( बी- II ) ] सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव New Delhi, the 12th August, 2005

S.O. 3174. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 20/97) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum-Labour Court No. 1 , New Delhi as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to 9970

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

the management of Bank of Baroda and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 12-08-2005 .

[No. L- 12011/37/1995 - IR (B - II) ] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI SANT SINGH BAL, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT, NEW DELHI

I.D. No. 20/1997

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] case was ultimately fixed for evidence of the workmen by way of affidavit vide order dated 21-8-2000 but it appears that none appeared on behalf of the workmen nor filed affidavit in evidence on behalf of the workmen despite several opportunities till today . Workmen were also sent notice for filing evidence vide order dated 24-6-04 but none appeared on behalf of the workmen despite such notices . It appears that the workmen are not interested in prosecution of their case . Hence it would be appropriate to pass No Dispute Award in this case . Hence No Dispute Award is passed in this case . File be consigned to record room.

Date: 02-08-2005

In the matter of dispute between:

Shri Kesar Singh S/o Avtar Singh

Shri Jitender Kumar S/ o Gabri Lal Shri Vimal Kumar S/o Dala Chand

Shri Soran Singh S/o Shiv Charan Singh

Workman

Versus

Assistant General Manager,

Bank ofBaroda, Anchal Karyalaya, 16 , Sansad Marg, New Delhi - 110001

Managernent APPEARANCES None for the workmen .

Shri T. C. Gupta for the management AWARD

The Central Govt . in the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L- 12011 /37/95 - I.R. (B - 11) dated 7-1-97 has referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of Bank of Baroda in terminating the services of Shri Kesar Singh S/o Avtar Singh , Jitender Kumar S/ o Gabrilal , Vimal Kumar S/ o Dala Chand and Soran Singh S / o Shiv Charan Singh w.e.f. 1-8-93 , 4-7-93 , 15-8-94 and 9-4-93 respectively is just and fair ? If not , to what relief the concerned workmen are entitled to ? " 2. After issue of notice the workmen filed claim statement claiming reinstatement with full back wages .

3. The management filed written statement denying the claim ofthe workman stating that the workmen are not entitled to the relief claimed .

4. The workmen filed rejoinder in which they reiterated their claim statement and denied the facts of the written statement .

5. Perusal of the record shows that in the instant case the workmen are not appearing since last so many hearings . Shri R. L. Virmani A/R for the workmen appeared on 8-12-2000 and since then numerous opportunities were granted for workman affidavit but none appeared and the SANT SINGH BAL, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 12 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3175-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार इलाहाबाद बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार , औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, लखनऊ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 43/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-08-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं . एल-12012/296/1999- आई आर ( बी-11 ) ] सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 12th August, 2005

S.O. 3175 .--In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award Ref. 43/2000 of theCentral Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , Lucknow as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial dispute between the management of Allahabad Bank and their worknen , which was received by the Central Government on 12-08-2005 .

[No. L- 12012/296/ 1999 - IR ( B - II ) ] C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy . ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT , LUCKNOW PRESENT

Shrikant Shukla , Presiding Officer I.D. No. 43/2000

Ref. No. L- 12012/296/ 99 / IR ( B - II ) dated : 25-5-2000 BETWEEN

Sh . Liyakat Ali , S/ o Sh . Kudraatulla 832/551 , C. Rajapur, Allahabad AND

TheDy. General Manager,

Allahabad Bank Takshal Talkies , Nadesar , Allahabad (U.P. ) 9971 [भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : सितंबर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

AWARD

TheGovernment of India, Ministry of Labour vide their Order No. L- 12012/296/99 - IR (B - II) dated 25-5-2000 has referred following dispute for adjudication to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court, Lucknow for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management of Allahabad Bank , Allahabad in terminating the services of Shri Liyakat Ali, w.e.f. 15-11-1998 is justified ? If not, what relief the workman is entitled for ?"

The worker's allegation is that he was appointed by Branch Manager of Allahabad Bank, Main Branch (Near High Court ) 22, P.D. Tandon , Allahabad as driver by oral order in October , 1993 and he was not given any appointment letter . He was driving the vehicle No. UMH 4914 at the salary of Rs . 2600 per month and he contiuned working as such but when the worker demanded the parity in the salary with the regular employer he was dismissed on 15-11-98 by oral order . He continued running to the employers but they simply gave assurance but did not take him back on the work. Ultimately the worker on 12-4-99 send the demand letter to the employers who did not reply the letter . The worker filed the dispute before ALC ( C) , Allahabad and on 25-5-2000 the Government of India referred the issue for adjudication . It is further alleged that the worker continuously worked w.e.f. 1993 till his termination . Thus , he worked for 240 days every year. The worker has also alleged that employer did not observe the provisions of Section 25 F of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 nor paid any retrenchment compensation , nor gave any chargesheet nor any departmental enquiry was conducted. The worker therefore prayed that the termination order dated 15-11-98 be set aside and the worker be order to have been continued in service . He has further prayed that employer should be asked to pay the consequential benefits.

according to mandatory provisions of Employment Exchange (compulsory Notification ofvacancies ) Act, 1959 and guidelines issued by Govt . of India from time to time. According to these provision , names of suitable candidates arecalled for from Employment Exchange , who in turn sponsor such names . Recruitment is made from amongst such candidates . Thereafter appointment letters are given subject to furnishings of medical fitness certificate . Thus, oral employment is not contemplated in opposite party bank . Hence , the allegation of the worker that he was oraily employed by the bank , is far from truth. The worker has not alleged as to who used to pay salary to him . There is nothing on record of the bank to show that concerned worker was ever paid salary by the bank . The alleged date of termination is fictitious . Vehicle No. UMH- 4914, belonging to the opposite party bank was given to Chief Manager for the personal use , for which according to rules he was authorised to engaged driver in his individual capacity and for which he was entitled for reimbursement of salary to such driver . As a matter of fact, this vehicle was rendered beyond running condition on 23-2-1998 when Sh . B. Chatterjee , Chief Manager , took over charge in which it remained in same condition . From this , it is obvious that the concerned worker would not have been driving this vehicle in those months . Afterwards , he was not on duty in those days , as such there could not be any occasion for oral termination of his services on 15-11-1998. As vehicle No. UMH -4914 was in the personal use of ChiefManager , it is probable that in terms of bank policy, he would have engaged concerned worker as personal driver . If it is so, the concerned worker would be personal servant of Chief Manager , and not of the bank . In such a case , there could be no privity of contract between the opposite party bank and the concerned worker . Further, opposite party bank would have no control and direction over the worker . The dispute between the personal servant of the officer of the bank and the opposite party bank according to law is not an industrial dispute , this reference is band in law .

The worker has filed the rejoinder and has stated that he was paid salary on vouchers and log book of the vehicle which was driven by the worker is in custody of the opposite party.

The worker did not file any document along with his statement of claim. On the other hand the opposite party bank has filed the Xerox copy of payment vouchers from 30-1-93 to 2-11-98 , total 38 vouchers .

The opposite party has also filed photo state copy ofletter No : CLA/ Admn ./ 59 dated 27-1-2000 addressed to the Dy. General Manager of the bank by the Chief Manager ofthe bank .

The opposite party has filed some vouchers totalling 39 from 27-3-1993 to 20-9-1996 . The bank has also filed following documents :

1. Xerox copy of Bank's Circular StaffNo. 23/23/1264 dtd. 30-12-1980 [ Allahabad Bank ( Officers) Service Regulations , 1979] .

The ChiefManager of the Allahabad Bank, Varanasi has filed the written statement , disputing the claim of the worker . The bank's case is that Sh. Liyakat Ali was never employed by the opposite party bank and therefore no appointment letter of any sort was ever issued to him . It is also alleged that opposite party bank had never paid any salary to the worker . Since the worker was never in the service of the bank therefore there was no question to termination of his services . So far as allegation of demand letter is concerned the same has been admitted by the bank . It is further stated by the bank that it is one of the Public Sector organisations of Govt . of India, in which post of Class - IV employees , like a car driver are filled 9972

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12, 1927

2. Xerox copy of Head Office IOM No. Admn/6 /F - 27 / 3259 dtd. 4-9-1995 , addressed to the General Manager ( UP. ) , all Zonal Head/Executives of Head Office by the Chief Manager (PA ) , Head Officer , regarding Personal Driver .

3. Original Bill of Royal Motor Garage Dt . 20-9-96 , regarding vehicle No. UMH-4914.

Theworker has filed photostat copy of 3 bills of Royal Motor Garage . One of the bills does not contain any date . Other bills are dated 30-12-96 and 31-12-96 . The worker has filed affidavit in support of his case and opposite party has filed two affidavits of Sh . B.D. Chatterjee, Chief Manager and Sh . Panch Dev Upadhyaya , Sr. Manager (Operation) . The worker has been cross- examined by the representative of the opposite party and Sh . B.D. Chatterjee and Sh . Panch Dev Upadhyaya have been cross -examined by the representative of the worker .

Onthe date of argumentent the representative of the opposite party filed the written argument, a copy of which was delivered to the representative of the worker . Worker too filed his written argument in reply to management's argument .

Heard worker's representative and perused the evidence on record .

Firstof all it has to be decided whether the worker was appointed by the opposite party to run its vehicle as alleged by the worker in his statement of claim .

There is no appointment letter to prove that worker wasappointed . It is also not proved that the worker was recruited by adopting regular procedure of recruitment .

The worker has admitted in the cross - examination thathe was not given any appointment letter or termination letter.

The worker has not mentioned the actual date ofhis engagement inthe bank.

The worker has admitted that vehicle No. UMH- 4914 belonged to the bank, which was used by the Chief Manager . The worker has denied that he was paid by the ChiefManager , instead he has stated that he has paid by thebank.

Theworker has also stated in his cross- examination that his name was not sponsored by the employment exchange . He simply said that he was kept by the Chief Manager , Sh . Parsada Rao . The worker was suggested thathe was driver of Chief Manager , but the worker denied in cross - examination and stated that he was driver of the bank.

Sh . B. D. Chatterjee , the Chief Manager of the Allahabad Bank has stated in his affidavit that " According to circular ofAllahabad Bank , a Chief Manager is provided

[PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

with a car for personal use with the option either to drive the car himself or to engage personal driver for which he was to be reimbursed by the bank . " No question had been asked by the representative of the worker on the above statement .

Sh . Panch Dev Upadhyaya , Sr. Manager (Operation) ofthe Allahabad Bank in para 2 to 7 of his attidavit has stated as under :

"2. That Shri P. V. V. Prasada Rao had remained posted as Chief Manager at Allahabad Bank , Main Branch , Civil Lines , Allahabad from January , 1993 to June, 1994.

3. That Shri P. V. V. Prasada Rao was provided with car No. UMH -4914 for his personal use in terms of circular issued by Head Office of the opposite party bank.

4. That Shri Rao had engaged the concerned workman as personal driver and he used to pay salary to the concerned workman in his individual capacity for which he was reimbursed by the Bank in terms of the circular aforesaid .

5. That after the transfer of Shri P. V. V. Parsada Rao , Shri R. S. Srivastava was posted as Chief Manager atMain Branch , Civil Lines , Allahabad from July , 1994 to January, 1998 .

6. That the concerned workman contacted Shri R. S. Srivastava and had agreed to work on the same terms and conditions under which he had worked with Shri Rao .

7. That there was no relationship of master and servant between the opposite party bank and the concerned workman . The opposite party bank had no authority either to discharge or disengage the concerned workman nor had any authority to punish him. Thus , the opposite party bank had no control or direction over the concerned workman . " Sh . P. D. Upadhyaya has been cross - examined by the representative of the worker. His cross - examination is asunder :

" 1. लियाकत अली मेरे कार्यकाल में बैंक में कर्मचारी नहीं थे । लेकिनलियाकत अली मुख्य प्रबंधक पी. वी. वी. प्रसादाराव के निजी ड्राईवर थे तथा उसके बाद वे मुख्य प्रबंधक आर. एस. श्रीवास्तव के निजी ड्राइवर थे ।

2. चूँकि ये मुख्य प्रबंधक के निजी ड्राइवर थे अतः मैंने लियाकत अली को बैंक के कार्य से कभी कहीं नहीं भेजा ।

3. इन्द्रजीत भी कभी बैंक के ड्राइवर नहीं थे । न ही कभी बैंक द्वारा इन्द्रजीत व लियाकत को भुगतान किया गया । मैं इन्द्रजीत व उसके पिता का नाम इत्यादि नहीं जानता । 9973 [ भाग II- खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: सितंबर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

4. यह कहना गलत है कि लियाकत 15 नवम्बर सन् 98 से बैंक केड्राईवर थे । यह भी कहना गलत है कि हमने झूठा शपथ पत्र दिया। यह भी कहना गलत है कि हमने कभी लियाकत अली को निकाला।"

From the documentary evidence and the oral evidence it is proved that the Chief Manager is provided with a car for personal use with the option either to drive the car himself or to engage personal driver for which he was to be reimbursed by the bank.

concerned workman. Had the opposite party bank been in need of Driver, they would have adopted the procedure as pointed out earlier . The admission of the concerned workman that he was engaged by Prasada Rao lends credence to the version of opposite party bank that the concerned workman would have been engaged by the ChiefManager as his personal driver, as was permissible under the above quoted circular. Further had he been appointed by the opposite party bank, he would have been paid wages directly and his attendance would have beenregistered. Further , there is no evidence to show that opposite partybank had any control over him. The papers , which were got filed by the concerned workman would not lend any support to his case as by merely getting the vehicle repaired would not confer the status of employee of the opposite party bank.

Xerox copy of the payment vouchers of the bank dtd. 30-1-93 , 27-2-93 , 30-8-93 , 30-11-93 are the vouchers forpayment of Rs . 1250 in the name of Sh . Parsada Rao being driver's salary. This goes to show that Sh. Parsada Rao received payment against above vouchers as reimbursement for driver's expenses .

The worker's representative has argued that the worker used todrive the vehicle of the bank during the tenures of Sh. Parsada Rao , B. D. Chatterjee, Panch Dev Upadhyaya and R. S. Srivastava and this gets support from the vouchers filed by the bank . It is argued in written argument that worker used to sign the vouchers . Since vehiclebelong to the bank and worker drived the vehicle therefore it will be deemed that he had been in service of the bank . The representative of the worker has stated that action of thebank is arbitrary and illegal .

Vouchers dated 27-3-93 , 29-4-93, 29-5-93 , 2-7-93 , 31-8-93, 21-9-93, 28-1-94, 28-2-94, 23-3-94, 30-4-94,28-5-94 are also in the name of Parsada Rao towards driver's expenses . Vouchers dated 31-1-95, 28-2-95, 30-5-95 , 31-7-95, 31-10-95, 31-1-96, 7-3-96, 19-3-96, 30-3-96, 27-4-96, 2-5-96, 18-5-96, 14-6-96, 1-7-96, 31-7-96, 31-8-96, 1-10-96, 2-12-96, 1-3-97, 2-4-97,3-5-97, 3-6-97,3-7-97, 2-8-97,2-9-97, 1-10-97 , 1-10-97, 1-11-97 are in the name of Sh R. S. Srivastava . Similarly vouchers dtd . 30-7-94, 31-8-94, 27-9- 94, 29-3-94, 30-11-94, 30-12-94, 3-3-95, 1-5-95 , 29-6-95 , 30-8-95, 23-9-95, 31-10-96, 20-1-97, 1-2-97, 19-4-97,2-12-97, 2-1-98 , 31-1-98 are in the names of Sh . R. S. Srivastava towards the payment of driver charges .

Vouchers dated 29-2-98 , 1-6-98 , 2-7-98 , 1-8-98 , 2-9-98 , 5-10-98 , 2-11-98, 1-5-98 are in name of Sh. B. D. Chatterjee, Chief Manager. None of the vouchers are in the name ofworker Liyakat Ali .

Further, from the evidence on record it is proved that the ChiefManager of the bank was allowed to engage the personal drivers the expense of which was to be reimbursedby the bank. There is no privity of the contract betweenworker and the bank . The bank has not paid salary to the worker . The worker drove the vehicle of the bank which was given to Chief Managers for their personal use and if Chief Manager employs any driver for whom he obtain reimbursement then there is absolutely no relationship of employer and employee in between the bank and the worker. In the circumstances I come to the conclusion that the worker was not in the employment of bank rather he was in employment of the Chief Manager for executing his personal needs .

The management representative has argued that the management has proved that Sh. Liyakat Ali was engaged by Sri Parsada Rao as his personal driver for his exclusive use of bank's vehicle . Further , Chief Manager was reimbursed for the wages which he used to pay to his driver. Shri B. D. Chatterjee, the then Chief Manager, has corroborated him about providing vehicle for his exclusive use and manner of engagement of personal driver from the said vehicle . There are vouchers , which go to show thatmoney was paid to ChiefManager in lieu of wages he used to pay to his driver . These vouchers also bear the signatures of the ChiefManager .

The representative of the management has also argued that the worker in his cross -examination has admitted that his name was not forwarded by the employment exchange and that he was appointed by Sh. Parsada Rao , the then Chief Manager. There are guidelines issued by Govt . of India regarding recruitment of Class - IV employees . According to these guidelines , appointment should not be made without inviting names from employment exchange . On the face of these guidelines , it is not imaginable that the applicant would have been appointed by the opposite party bank at all. Hence , his case ofhaving been appointed by the opposite party bank isnotproved.

The representative of the opposite party has argued that there are no vouchers to show that concerned workman was paid wages through vouchers directly by the opposite bank. There is exhibit M -40 Circular No. 23 / 1264, dated 30-12-1980, which would go to show that Chief Managers were entitled for car for their exclusive use and the expenses for the same will be reimbursed to them by the Bank. It is submitted that the evidence of opposite party bank is entitled for greater weight than that of

It is true that in the circumstances of the evidence ofcase that if a Chief Manager has to employ a driver for 9974

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

ANNEXURE

personal use he shall not go for adopting procedure which isapplicable for recruitment in the bank. The circumstances go to show very clearly that he worked as personal driver ofthe CheifManagers and he was not at all in the service ofthe bank .

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT- II , NEW DELHI

R. N. Rai , Presiding Officer I.D. No. 48/2002

In the matter of:

Inthe identical case 1978 Supreme Court Cases ( L & S) 353 Punjab National Bank Vs. Ghulam Dastagir it was held that car driver engaged by Area Manager of Bank for which allowance was given to him was not ' workman ' of the bank even though the car was maintained at the bank's expenses . The control and direction of the driver did not rest in the Bank

Shri Ashok Kumar , S/o . Shri Om Prakash , R/o . Block -C- 65 , Welcome Colony , Seelampur- III , Delhi- 110053 .

VERSUS

1. The General Manager (P) , Oriental Bank of Commerce, B-Block , Connaught Place , New Delhi - 110001

2. The Sr. Manager , Oriental Bank of Commerce . ThamarBuilding, NayaBazar, Delhi- 110006 .

AWARD

In the circumstances of the case I come to the conclusion that worker was engaged by the Chief Manager ofthe Allahabad Bank for driving bank's vehicle for his personal use . Salary of the driver was disbursed to the Chief Managers and no salary was paid to the worker by theBank. The worker has concocted the false and frivolous case against the bank management . Sh . Liyakat Ali is not covered in definition of workman as defined in Section 2(S) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. There is no relationship of master and servant between Allahabad Bank and Sh . Liyakat Ali . Sh . Liyakat Ali was not the employee of the bank and was never been engaged as such. Therefore there is no question of any termination by the bank . Issue is answered accordingly . Sh . Liyakat Ali isnot entitled to any relief whatsoever.

SHRIKANT SHUKLA, Presiding Officer

Lucknow 9-8-2005

TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No. L- 12012/59/ 2002- IR ( B - II ) Central Government dt . 07-07-2002 has referred the following point for adjudication : - नई दिल्ली, 12 अगस्त, 2005

The point runs as hereunder :-

"Whether the action of the General Manager , Oriental Bank of Commerce , E-Block , Connaught Place, New Delhi- 110 001 in stopping from duty (refusing employment) to Shri Ashok Kumar, Sweeper is valid, reasonable and justified ? if not, whatrelief the workman is entitled to ? " का. आ. 3176- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947. ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार ओरिएण्टल बैंक ऑफ कॉमर्स के प्रबंधितंत्र 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 48/2002) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-08-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

सं.एल-12012/59/2002- आई आर ( बी-11 ) ] सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 12th August, 2005

Theworkman applicant has filed statement of claim . In the statement of claim it has been stated that on 01-05-1994 , the workman was appointed as Safai Karamchari on compensatory grounds after the demise of hisgrand father , an employee of the management . However, the workınan was initially appointed on Daily Wages of Rs . 40 per day which gradually were enhanced to Rs . 50 per day . The duty hours of the workman with the management no . 2 were from 9.00 A.M. to 5.00 P.M. as voucher annexed P - 4 to P- 18 .

S.O. 3176-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 48/2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court, New Delh No. II as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial dispute between the management of Oriental Bank of Commerce and their workmen , which was received bythe Central Government on 12-08-2005 .

[No. L- 12012/ 59/2002- IR ( B - 11 ) ] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

That the workman performed his duties honestly, diligently and to the entire satisfaction of the management as during the course of his employment there has not been any kind of complaint from anybody of the management, for about six years . The workman applicant raised his claim for regularjob instead of daily wages with -9975

भारत का राजपत्र : सितंबर 3 , 2005/भाद्र 12, 1927

[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

appointed with the management and hence the whole reference is liable to be rejected on the short ground alone .

the management , but the workman was being put off by the management on one pretext orthe other.

Thatsince 01-05-1994 to 08-03-2000 the workman performed his duty regularly , but the management in the morning of09-03-2000 did not allow the workman to resume his duty without any rhyme or reason . The management instead of acceding to the lawful demand of the workman for issuing regular job on monthly basis, illegally and unjustifiably terminated the services ofthe workman . Thus the workman is unemployed since 09-03-2000 .

It issubmitted that the claimant was not an employee of the management . The claimant was only engaged on dailywages for an hour or so and he was paid for the work which he performed . It is wrong and vehemently denied that the claimant was appointed with the management as alleged . The vouchers annexed to the claimant as P-4. to P-18 would itself show that the claimant was not engaged by the management . The vouchers even do not relate to hisname.

That on 01-05-2000 the workman gave a demand notice to the management, but the management failed to giveany reply or regular job to the workman. The workman further sent demand notice dated 15-05-2000 under Regd. A.D. and UPC which were duly served upon the management as Annexure P -2 & P -3 . The management choseto remain mum and failed to reply the said demand notice also .

Itis submitted that the claimant has himself admitted that he is applying for a job with the management and hence there could be no employer and employee relationship between the parties . It is submitted that the appointment in the management - bank is done as per the recruitment policy/government guidelines and through the Employment Exchange and therefore , there was no occasion for appointment of the claimant as an employee with the management.

That the workman filed a claim petition before the ALC for conciliation proceedings , which were returned for want ofjurisdiction . That the Learned Under Secretary , Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide letter No. nil dated 07-07-2002 has been pleased to refer the reference to this Hon'ble Tribunal as Annexure-P - 1 and copy to theworkmanto file his claim before this Hon'ble Tribunal , hence this claim .

Itiswrong and vehemently denied that the claimant had worked with the management from 01-05-1994 to 08-03-2000 as alleged . In fact , the engagement of the workman was only casual in nature on intermittent days for which payment has been made to him. Hence the averments made in this para are wrong and denied. The claimant was never appointed as temporary or permanent employee with the management and hence the question of termination of service does not arise .

That despite best efforts the claimant has not been able to secure any alternative job and is unemployed till date . That the action of the management is illegal , unjustified and the claimant is entitled to be reinstated with continuity ofservice with full back wages on regular postof Safai Karamchari.

Itisspecifically submitted that no notice has been received from the claimant. Even assuming that such notice has been received, the same would not give any vested right to the claimant. The claimant has himself admitted that he had applied for regular job with the management and hence his contention that he has worked regularly andperformedduty on regular basis from 1994 to 2000 is unbelievable .

It is, therefore, requested that the management by an Award be directed to reinstate the workman/claimant as Safai Karamchari in regular post with continuity of service and full back wages with all other benefits for which the claimant is found to be entitled under the law .

Ittranspires from the perusal of the order sheet that the workman applicant has not been turning up for a long time. Notice was sent to him . He appeared but he has not filed rejoinder. He has not filed even affidavit in support of his claim statement. He has not proved his claim statement.

The reference is replied thus:-

The action ofthe General Manager, Oriental Bank of Commerce,E-Block, Connaught Place , New Delhi - 110001 in stopping from duty (refusing employment) to Shri Ashok Kumar , Sweeper is valid , reasonable and justified . The workman applicant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.

The award isgiven accordingly.

Date:09-08-2005.

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer The management has filed written statement. In the written statement it has been stated that there never existed any employer - employee relationship between the management and the workman and hence the present reference is not maintainable in the absence ofemployer- employee relationship between the parties . The management submits that the claimant was only engaged for doing the sweeping work for an hour or so on a particular day and there was no question of his being . appointed in the service of the management . The management submits that it has its own recruitment policy and guidelines and the recruitment for the management- bank is done as per the Government guidelines through the Employment Exchange . The claimant was never

2498G1/05-29 9976

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 12 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3177-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, एल. आर. एस. आई. टी. ए. डी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नम्बर- II , नई दिल्ली ( संदर्भ संख्या 135/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । सं. एल-42012/233/2003- आई आर ( सी- II ) ] एन. पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi , the 12thAugust , 2005

S.O. 3177. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 135/ 2004) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court No. II, New Delhi as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between management of Lala Ram Sarup Institute of Tuberculosis and Allied Diseases , and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 12-8-2005.

[No. L-42012/233 /2003 - IR(C -II) ] N. P. KESAVAN , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT - II, NEW DELHI I. D. No. 135/2004

Shri R. N. Rai , Presiding Officer

In the matter of:

The General Secretary, Hospital Karamchari Panchayat (Regd. ) , LalaRam Sarup Institute of Tuberculosis & Allied Diseases , Sir Aurbindo Marg, NewDelhi - 110030.

Versus

TheDirector, LRSITAD (Lala Ram Sarup Institute of Tuberculosis and Allied Diseases) , SirAurbindoMarg, New Delhi - 110030.

AWARD

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L- 42012/ 233/2003 - IR(CM- II) , Central Government dt. 29-07-2004 has referred the following point for adjudication .

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii)] The point runs as hereunder:

"Whether the action of the management of Lala Ram Sarup Institute of Tuberculosis and Allied Diseases , Sir Aurbindo Marg, New Delhi in terminating the servicesof S/Shri Rakesh, Mukesh, Ravinder , Hotam Chand, Nikhilesh and Joginder, all Ex- Ward Boys (daily wager) , w.e.f. 16-01-1999 is legal and justi- fied ? If not, to what relief are the workmen entitled and from which date . "

It transpires from perusal of the order sheet that notice to the workman was sent to file claim statement but the workman applicant has not turned up. The management was also not present . The workman applicant has not filed claim statement despite service of the notice.

No dispute award is given.

Date: 10-08-2005

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 12 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3178--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 नम्बर- II , नई दिल्ली ( संदर्भ संख्या 97/2004) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42012/56/2003- आई आर ( सी- II ) ] एन. पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 12th August , 2005

S.O. 3178. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 97/ 2004) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court No. II, New Delhi as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between management of Central Public Works Department , and their workmen, which was receivedby the Central Government on 12-8-2005.

[No. L-42012/56/2003 - IR(C- II) ] N. P. KESAVAN , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT - II, NEW DELHI L. D. No. 97/2004

Shri R. N. Rai , PresidingOfficer

In the matterof:

The Deputy General Secretary, All India CPWD Employees Union , Lodi Colony, Enquiry Office, CPWD , New Delhi - 110003 .

9977

भारत का राजपत्र: सितंबर 3 , 2005/भाद्र 12, 1927

[भाग II- खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

Versus

The Director General of Works , CPWD, Nirman Bhawan , New Delhi- 110011 .

AWARD

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L-42012/56/ 2003 - IR(CM - II ), Central Governmentdt. 27-05-2004 has referred the following point for adjudication .

The point runs as hereunder :

"Whether the workman Shri Ashwini Kumar is entitled for reinstatement /absorption and regularization consequent upon abolition of contract labour system ? If yes , to what relief the workman concerned is entitled to and from which date ?" Ittranspires from perusal of the order sheet that notice to the workman was sent to file claim statement but the workman applicant has not turned up . The management was also not present . The workman applicant has not filed claim statement despite service of the notice.

No dispute award is given.

Date : 10-08-2005

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 12 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3179-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, टी बोर्ड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नम्बर- II , नई दिल्ली (संदर्भ संख्या 83/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42012/101/ 2002- आई आर ( सी- II ) ] एन . पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi, the 12th August , 2005

S.O. 3179.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 83/ 2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court No. II , New Delhi as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Tea Board, Ministry of Finance , and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 12-8-2005.

[No. L-42012/ 101 /2002--IR(C- II)] N. P. KESAVAN , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT- II, NEW DELHI

I. D. No. 83/2002

Shri R. N. Rai , Presiding Officer

2498 GI/2005-30

In the matter of:

Sh . Chet Ram S/o Shri Sohal Lal , R/o 17/412, Kalyan Puri , Delhi- 110091

Versus

The Secretary,

TeaBoard, Ministry of Finance ,

Kailash Building,

12thFloor ,

Connaught Place,

NewDelhi - 110001 .

AWARD

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L-42012/ 101/2002 - IR (CM - II ) , Central Government dt. 31-10-2002 has referred the following point for adjudication .

The point runs as hereunder :

"Whether the action of the management of Tea Board, Ministry of Finance , New Delhi in terminating the services of Shri Chet Ram , Daily Wager w.e.f. 17-05-1997 is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief he is entitled to and from which date ? " Ittranspires from perusal of the order sheet that notice to the workman was sent but the workman applicant has not turned up. The management has been present all along. The workman applicant has not filed claim statement despite service of the notice.

No dispute award is given .

Date: 10-08-2005

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 12 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3180- 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 नम्बर- II , नई दिल्ली ( संदर्भ संख्या 134/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42012/177/2003- आई आर ( सी- II ) ] एन. पी. केशवम , डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 12th August , 2005

S.O. 3180.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 134/ 2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court No. II , New Delhi as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the Management of 9978

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

Central Public Works Department , and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 12-8-2005.

[No. L-42012/ 177/2003 - IR(C- II ) ] N. P. KESAVAN , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT- IL, NEW DELHI

I. D. No. 134/2002

Shri R. N. Rai , Presiding Officer

In the matter of:

The President, All India CPWD Karamchari Union, PlotNo. 1, Udaseen Mandir, Aram Bagh, Paharganj , New Delhi-110055 .

Versus

The Executive Engineer (Civil), CPWD, Smt. Suchita Kriplani Hospital & LadyHardingMedical College -Division , NewDelhi-110001.

AWARD

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L-42012/ 177/2003 [ IR( CM- II) ], Central Government dt. 30-07-2004 has referred the following point for adjudication.

The point runs as hereunder :

"Whether the action of the management of CPWD andthe contractor is sham ? If so , the demand of the CPWD Karamchari Union for absorption/ regularization of the services of S/ Shri Dhani Ram , S/o Ram Bharose , Sunil S/o Rajinder , Vijay S / o Rajinder , Kamal Singh S/ o Shri Lalji, Vicky S/o Prem, Anand Prakash S/o Lalji and Ram Kumar S / o Ram Kishan in the establishment of Central Public Works Department, Smt . Suchita Kriplani Hospital and Lady HardingMedical College Division, New Delhi is legal and justified and to what relief these workmen are entitled ?"

Ittranspires from perusal of the order sheet that notice to the workman was sent to file claim statement but the workman applicant has not turned up . The management has been present all along. The workman applicant has not filed claim statement despite service of the notice.

No dispute award is given .

Date: 10-08-2005

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii)] नई दिल्ली, 12 अगस्त, 2005

का. आ. 3181-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, ए. आई. आर. प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नम्बर- II , नई दिल्ली ( संदर्भ संख्या 138/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42012/288/2003- आई, आर ( सी- II ) ] एन. पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 12th August, 2005

S.O. 3181.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 138/2004) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court No. 2 , New Delhi as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of All India Radio and their workmen , receivedby the Central Government on 12-8-2005.

[No. L-42012/288/2003 - IR(C- 11 ) ] N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT - II, NEW DELHI I. D. No. 138/2004

Shri R. N. Rai , Presiding Officer

In the matter of:

Shri Shyam Lal & Others ,

C/ o The President , All India Radio C. C. W. Employees Union (Regd. ) , Plot No. 1 , Aram Bagh near Udasin Mandir , Paharganj , .

NewDelhi - 110055

Versus

1. The Director General ,

All India Radio (Prasar Bharti) , Akashvani Bhawan , Parliament Street, New Delhi- 11001 .

2. M/ s . Gaur Contractors , Through its Proprietor , B-2/208, Jagatpuri , Pandari Road ,

Delhi.

[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : सितंबर 3, 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

9979 AWARD

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L-42012/ 288/2003 [ IR(CM- II)] , Central Governmentdt. 17-08-2004 has referred the following point for adjudication.

The point runs as hereunder :

2000) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court No. II , New Delhi now as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Archaeological Survey of India and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 12-8-05 .

[No. L-42012/244/98- IR(DU) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL- TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT- II, NEW DELHI

I. D. No. 59/2000

Shri R. N. Rai , Presiding Officer

"Whether the contract awarded by the management of All India Radio , Civil Construction Wing, New Delhi to M/s . Gaur Contractors, Pandari Road, Delhi is sham or not ? If so , whether the demand of the Union for regularization/absorption of the services of S/Shri Shyam Lal , Ram Ashrey , Ashok Kumar , Ravi and Dharmender represented by All India Radio CivilConstruction Wing Employees Union , New Delhi in the establishment of All India Radio, Civil Construction Wing is justified ? If so , to what relief the concerned workmen are entitled ? "

In the matter of:

Shri Ram Surat,

Notice has been sent to the workmen applicants twice but they have not tumed up . They have not filed any statement of claim .

C/o Puratatva Sarvekshan Kamgar Union , E-26, O, 1 D Qtr . , Baba Kharag Singh Marg , NewDelhi - 110001 .

The reference is replied thus:

Versus

Dy. Superintendent ,

Archaeological Survey of India, Northern Division No. 2, Safdarjung Tomb , New Delhi - 110003 .

AWARD

The contract awarded by the management of All India Radio, Civil Construction Wing, New Delhi to M/ s. Gaur Contractors , Pandari Road, Delhi is not sham . The demand of the Union for regularization/ absorption of the services of S/Shri Shyam Lal, Ram Ashrey , Ashok Kumar , Ravi and Dharmender represented by All India Radio Civil Construction Wing Employees Union , New Delhi in the establishment of All India Radio, Civil Construction Wing is not justified .

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L-42012/ 244/98 - IR(DU) , Central Governmentdt. 30-05-2000 has referred the following point for adjudication .

No dispute award is given.

The point runs as hereunder :

Date: 08-08-2005

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 12 अगस्त, 2005

"Whether the action of the management of Archaeological Survey of India in terminating the services of Shri Ram Surat w.e.f. 10-09-1997 and not regularizing his services in the time scale is just, fair and legal ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled ?"

का. आ. 3182- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार आर्केलॉजिकल सर्वेऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नम्बर- II , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 59/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

The Union on behalf ofthe workman Shri Ram Surat, S/ o Shri Parsu Ram has filed claim statement . In the claim statement it has been stated that Shri Ram Surat, S/o Shri Parsu Ram was engaged on muster roll performing the duties of maintenance of gardens under the above management and posted in Safdarjung Tomb w.e.f. 23rd April , 1985 and his services were terminated w.e.f. 10-09-1997.

[सं. एल-42012/244/98- आई आर (डीयू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 12th August, 2005

S.O. 3182. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 59/

That the workman Shri Ram Surat been completed 240 days of service in each of the year and worked continuously as per Section 25 (b ) of ID Act , 1947. That at the time of termination of service по notice , notice pay, compensation etc. was given to the workman.

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

9980

the gardens . It is false and baseless that he has been working at Safdurjung Tomb continuously since 23rd April , 1985 and his services were terminated w.e.f. 10-09-1997.

That another set of juniors to the workman Ram Surat were retained in service and even their services were regularized in respect of Shri Dalbir Singh , Shri S. Prasad who were recruited in the year 1992 and were given temporary status in the year 1994 w.e.f. 01-09-1993 in the pay scale of Rs . 750-940 so violated the provisions of ID Act, 1947.

That the workman was retained as daily rated on muster roll with a view to deny them the permanent status and privileges for years together which is also unfair labour practice as envisaged in items 10 of 5th schedule of Section 2(ra) ofthe ID Act, 1947 That the management is executing, performing the works of maintenance of building and operation , gardening , monuments , plantationsetc. of Archaeological Survey of India and is covered under the definition of 2 (g ) of Payment of Wages Act and being the workman under the above Act. So the workman is also covered under Industrial Employment ( Standing Orders ) Act, 1946 .

That Shri Ram Surat agricultural casual labour has not completed 240 days continuous service in any of the year and Section 25 (b) of ID Act, 1947 is not applicable in any way for the agricultural casual labourers of Archaeological Survey of India . The engagement ofdaily wages employees are undertaken in Archaeological Survey of India for disposal of seasonal garden work on need basis which is not covered under the Industrial Employment Act because the Horticultural Branch of Archaeological Survey of India is not a profit earning department . In the judgment of Hon'ble CAT , Cuttack in M. A. No. 266/96 arising of O. A. No. 192/96 on 16-12-1996, it has been mentioned that " Archaeological Survey of India and a Government Department relatable to the sovereign function of the Government of India cannot be termed as an Industry . Besides the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its decision under O. A. No. 257 ( 1997), Physical Research Laboratory V/s. K. C. Sharma has not termed as Industry in respect of all departments of Govemment of India .

That the managerment while regularizing and granting permanent status to workman , the services of Ram Surat were terminated with utter violation of the provisions of ModelStanding Orders under Industrial (Standing Orders ) Act, 1946 , and also the provisions of ID Act , 1947. That as per the said standing orders , the workman was entitled to be regularized after completion of 90 days of service but the services of workman were terminated without even following the principles of natural justice .

In the matter of Shri Bhagirath Sharma V/ s . Superintendent, Archaeological Survey of India under dispute C. G. E. I. T/B - 18 /97 in its decision , the Hon'ble Industrial Tribunal and Labour Court , Jaipur has clearly mentioned that the above said Archaeological Survey of India department does not come under the definition of Industry vide Section 2 of ID Act , 1947. That as already stated that daily wages casual labour engaged on seasonal work on need basis for particular period, employment ceases on completion of Muster Roll . Hence, notice for the termination of service is not required .

That the above workman is unemployed and facing starvation due to unfair labour practice adopted by the management . It is submitted that the workman performing same duty and duty hour so he is also entitled to equal pay w.e.f. 07-06-1988 as per policy of Government of India. That as per the policy of the Government of India , all the muster roll workers have been given their wages in the time scale from 01-09-1993 in a temporary status , but this workman was denied even the said facilities . That the action of the management of Archaeological Survey of India in terminating the services of workman w.e.f. 10-09-1997 and not regularizing the services in the time scale attached to the unskilled workman in the category ofGroup " D " is unjust , unfair and illegal .

It is stated that Shri Dalbir Singh was recruited through Employment Exchange in this office against the vacant post . No person in the name of S. Prasad was regularized in this Division during 1994. The question of violation of the provisions of ID Act, 1947 does not arise asitis not applicable in the case of Archaeological Survey ofIndia as already stated in Para- 3 .

It is stated that the daily wages casual labour are engaged for seasonal work of garden on need basis only . Therefore , question of their permanent status does not arise . It also does not come under item 10 of 5th Schedule ofSection 2(ra ) ofthe ID Act, 1947.

The management has filed written statement . In the written statement the management has stated that it is not correct that the engagement of Shri Ram Surat, daily wager was discontinued w.e.f. 10-09-1997, in fact he was discontinued w.e. f. 02-03-1997 as per records submitted in Assistant Labour Commissioner's office because he was engaged on seasonal work on need basis in the gardens for aweek's period at different occasions . Thereafter, his engagement was discontinued and the question of his regularization does not arise as he has not worked for 240 days in any of the year under this establishment .

That it is stated that the daily wages casual labour was engaged on seasonal work on need basis only and not on regular nature of work . Besides , the said casual labour has not worked for 240 days in any of the year , so the policy of Government of India is not applicable in this case. The question of benefits w.e.f. 07-06-1988 does not arise in this case .

That Shri Ram Surat , S/ o Shri Parsu Ram was engaged on muster roll on seasonal work on need basis in 9981

भारत का राजपत्र: सितंबर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[भाग 11- खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

That the termination of services of the daily wages casual labour w.e.f. 10-09-1997 is baseless because he was engaged on seasonal work on need basis only. Wherever there was work , the workman was engaged on Muster Roll and thereafter completion of work automatically it is off without justified work .

The workman applicant has filed rejoinder. In his rejoinder he has reiterated the averments of his claim statement and has asserted that he has worked for more than 240 days in every year so he is entitled to be regularized.

According to the documents filed the workman has worked for 111 days in 1986, 124 days in 1987 , 56 days in 1988 , 134 days in 1989, 102 days in 1990 , 78 days in 1991 , 42 days in 1992, 61.5 days in 1993, 118 days in 1994 , 132 days in 1995, 3days in 1996 and 14.5 days in 1997. The management has filed papers regarding the work done by the workman from 1986 to 1997. These papers are verified by Dy . Superintending Horticulture Survey of India , New Delhi . These papers have not been denied by the workman as such these papers bearing original signature and seal are admissible in evidence . According to the documents referred to above the workman has not completed 240days work in any of the year from 1986 to 1997.

Evidence of both the parties has been taken .

Heard arguments from both the sides and perused the papers on the record.

It was submitted from the side of the workman that he has also filed papers regarding work done by him . These papers are photocopies . They have no seal and signature of the department . There are cuttings at several points and it is not certain that these papers are regarding the work of Shri Ram Surat . The document filed by the workman appliant regarding his working period are only photocopies and these photocopies are not admissible in evidence in view of the admitted certified copies filed by the managemnet. The workman has not filed any other document to prove that he has worked for 240 days in any ofthe years right from 1986 to 1997. The documents filed by the management have neither been admitted nor denied by the workman so these documents shall be deemed to be admitted as there is no endorsement on the document filed by the management referred to above .

It was submitted by the workman that ASI is an Industry in view of the Bangalore Water Supply. It was submitted from the side of the management that ASI is not an Industry . In view of the Bangalore Water Supply ASI is an Industry as there is systematic activity in the department and it has been admitted by the witness of the management and the work is done in co - operation betweent the employer and the employee and the services rendered are calculated to satisfy human wants and engaged wishes . The ASI is not a research institute . It does not perform any sovereign duty. The workman of ASI is engaged in protection and maintenance of ancient monuments so the management carries on systematic human activities and such activities are calculated to fulfill hunan wants and wished so in view of Bangalore Water Supply ASI is an Industry . The law cited by the management is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case . My attention was drawn to AIR 1997 SC 3657 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that Research Laboratory is not an Industry .It was submitted that Horticulture Branch of ASI is not profit earning department . It is established law that an undertaking which is not profit earning is also an industry. The only criteria for an industry is that there should be systematic activity and that activity should be for fulfilment of Human wants and wishes . Systematic activity is discharged by the ASI .

It was submitted that the workman has stated in affidavit that he has worked for more than 240 days . It has been laid down in JT 2002 (2 ST ) 238 that since it is the claim of the respondent that he has worked for 240 days which was denied by the management , it was for the respondent to lead evidence to show that he has in fact worked for 240 days in the year preceding his termination . Filing of affidavit cannot be regarded as sufficient evidence so the Court or Tribunal cannot come to the conclusion merely on the basis of affidavit of the workman that he has worked for more than 240 days . In JT 2001 (3 SC) 326, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has reiterated the same view so it is settled law that the workman has to prove that he has completed 240 days in the preceding year of the termination of his services or in any year during his period of work . The workman applicant has not filed any document admissible in evidence to prove the fact that he has worked for 240 days so in view of law cited above it is a proven fact that the workman applicant has not performed 240 days work in any of the year during his employment . Section 25 F of the ID Act , 1947 is attracted only when he has performed continuous service for not less than one year in any Industry . The workman has not performed 240 days work in any year so Section 25 F of the ID Act , 1947 is not attracted even though he has not It was submitted from the side of the workman applicant that he has performed 240 days in every year right from 1986 to 1997. It is settled law that the burden to prove that the workman has worked for 240 days in the preceding year or in any year lies on the workman applicant . It is the plea of the workman that he has worked for more than 240 days so it is his duty to prove that he has worked for more than 240 days . The substantial question is whether the workman has worked for 240 days in the preceding year of his retrenchment or in any year during his work. The management has filed certified copies of the period for which the workman Ram Surat has worked .

2498 Gl /2005-31 9982

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12 , 1927

[PART II -SEC. 3 (ii )] been paid retrenchment compensation or pay in lieu of notice.

It was submitted from the side of the workman applicant that provisions of 25 G and 25 H have not been followedby the management . Section 25 G provides that if any workman is to be retrenched the workman who has been taken in employment at the last should be retrenched. Section 25 H provides that retrenched workman is to be givenre - employment in case appointment is made.

against that vacancy . It is not the case of the workmen that all the workmen working with him have been regularized . He has mentioned the case of only Shri Dalbir Singh but Shri Dalbir Singh has completed 240 days work so right of regularization has accrued in his favour . No other workman has been appointed so it shall be deemed that he was working on need basis and he was continued till then and when need was over he was not taken on duty. In view of the law cited by the management the workman applicant has not completed 240 days work so he is not entitled to regularization.

My attention was drawn to (2003 ) 6 AD Delhi 256 , FLR 1998 ( 41 ) 50 and 2005 4th AD ( SC) 39. The law cited by the workman applicant is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case . He has not proved that he has worked for 240 days so there is no question of notice pay and retrenchment compensation. He has not performed uninterrupted continuous service for 240 days inany year so Section 25F , G , H & 25B of the ID Act , 1947 are not applicable . The law cited by the workman applicant isnot applicable in the present facts and circumstances of the case .

The reference is replied thus :

The action of the management of Archaeological Survey of India in terminating the services of Shri Ram Suratw.e.f. 10-09-1997 and not regularizing his services in the same scale isjust, fair and legal . The workman applicant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for .

The award is given accordingly.

Date: 10-08-2005.

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 12 अगस्त, 2005

Itwas submitted from the side of the workman that Shri Dalbir Singh wasjunior to the workman but his services have been regularized . Only the case of Dalbir Singh has been cited by the workman. The plea of the management is that he was Supervisor and his name was sponsored by Employment Exchange and there was vacancy of one person and he has performed 240 days work so he was givenappointment . In case Shri Dalbir Singh has performed 240days work even though he was junior to the workman applicant he can be given appointment as a right for regularization has accrued in favour of Shri Dalbir Singh inview of Section 25 F of ID Act, 1947 so it cannot be said that Shri Dalbir Singh junior to the workman was regularized whereas the workman was not regularized . The case of Shri Dalbir Singh is different as he has worked for 240days in a year. The workman applicant in the instant case has not performed duties for 240 days in any ofthe years so his case does not fall at par with Shri Dalbir Singh whom appointment has been given by the management as post of only one workman was vacant . There is no substance in the argument of the A/R of the workman that junior to the workman applicant has been appointed and the management has not followed the direction of the Hon'ble High Court that last come should first go . There isno parity ofrights accrued to Shri Dalbir Singh and the workman so the principles of last come first go cannot be applied in the facts and circumstances of the present case .

का. आ. 3183.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सेंट्रल ऐवियन रिसर्च इंस्टिट्यूट के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों केबीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, लखनऊ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 27/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-8-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -42012/177/99- आई आर ( डीयू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 12th August , 2005 It was submitted from the side of the management that the work of the workman was need based whenever there was need of work his service was taken and weekly payment to him was made . From the documents filed by the workman applicant though photocpies , it transpires that he has been paid for every weeks work . It has been held in AIR 1997 SC 3657 that in case appointment is made onbasis ofneed of work , the termination of such service cannot be construed to be retrenchment and the same is also not arbitrary . The workman applicant has not completed 240 days work and he has been weekly paid. Hisappointment was made on need basis so it cannot be construed that he is a retrenched employee . It has been held in (1997) 4 SCC 88 that Daily wages appointment will obviously be in relation to contingent establishment and itcontinues so long as the work exists . It is not the case of the workman that while he was discharging his duty under the respondent vacancy arose and he was not absorbed

S.O. 3183.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 27 / 2001) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court, Lucknow now as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Avian Research Institute and 9983 [भाग II - खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: सितंबर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 12-8-05.

[No. L-42012/ 177/99 - IR(DU) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, LUCKNOW

PRESENT :

Shrikant Shukla, Presiding Officer

I. D. No. 27/2001

Ref. No. L- 42012/ 177 / 99/ IR (DU), dt. 8-2-2001

Between

Sushil Kumar Saxena , C/o A. K. Saxena ,

668 , Kalicharan Marg,

Subhash Nagar ,

Bareilly(U. P.) .

AND

Director,

Central Avian Research Institute ,

Izatnagar ,

Bareilly (U. P.) .

AWARD

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour referred the following dispute to Presiding Officer, CGIT- cum-Labour Court, Lucknow for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management of Central Avian Research Institute , Bareilly in terminating the services of Sh . Sushil Kumar Saxena, Ex - Technician w.e.f. 25-3-91 isjust , fair and legal ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled and from which date ?"

Opposite party has filed written statement and has stated that the opposite party is not a industry within the meaning ofword as defined under I. D. Act, 1947. Hence, the present reference is incompetent and bad in law. It is alleged that opposite party is a notified department under Rule 14(2) of the Central Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 and the workman is entitled to raise his claim before the Central Administrative Tribunal , Allahabad having the jurisdiction regarding all the service matters of the organisation and the CGIT-cum- Labour Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the claim of the workman . It is alleged that claim is belated . This is admitted that the workman was initially engaged as Casual Technician on dailywages in the Avian Medical Division of the opposite party.As and when the work was available the workman was engaged on daily wage basis . He preferred to work intermittenly and not a regular employee of the opposite party. It is also alleged that workman never worked 240 days in one calander year . The daily wager are not entitled to any benefit of Section 25 of I. D. Act , 1947. The term of dailywager is for a specific period from the beginning of the day upto end of the day and thus they are not entitled to claim duties on next day as and when work is available they are given duty . It is also alleged that the workman himself abondoned the employment and he himself did not come for duty since 25th March, 1991 and since he was a casual daily wager, there was no requirement for the employer under the law to question him for not reporting on duty, nor the concerned workman is required to submit any explanation for not reporting duty. The abandonment ofwork by the workman is also proved by the fact that he did not raise any demand or request for getting the duty. Itis only in the year of 1999 , due to ulterior motives he raised an industrial disputes alleging that his services were terminated. It is also alleged that the workman got better employment and therefore , he left the duty under the respondent establishment and it is only after 9 years for the reasons best known to him , raised an industrial dispute. Theopposite party has therefore prayed that this Tribunal to hold that the reference order is not maintainable and further held that the concerned workman is not entitled to anyrelief.

Theworker inhis rejoinder has denied the allegations ofthewritten statement and has alleged that the opposite party is an industry and Labour Courts are competent to adjudicate the reference . It is also stated in the rejoinder that 10,000 hens and Baters are being maintained in the opposite party and they are sold and even their eggs are sold. The opposite party also organise training and takes training fees. It is also alleged that this Tribunal has jurisdiction toadjudicate the reference . Worker has alleged thataftertermination he continued to approach to opposite party and has been requesting the opposite party for their engagement but he was only assured that he shall be engaged. During the period the worker on 2-7-93 , 95-96 Worker's case in brief is that he was engaged as Casual Tech . w.e.f. 14-8-89 to 24-3-91 with the Central Avian Research Institute , Izatnagar, Bareilly with artificial breaks. But the worker has worked for more than 240 days in a year. It is alleged that the opposite party did not provide any appointment letter . The allegations of the workman is that he was terminated on 25-3-91 without any reason and without any notice or pay in lieu of notice or retrenchment compensation . Worker has also alleged that other casual tech. who were juniors to him have been retained in the service . It is also alleged that juniors P. K. Bajpai , U. K. Tripathi , Chandradhar and Ravi Kumar Goel who were juniors to the worker Sushil Kumar Saxena have been retained and only the worker Sushil Kumar has been retrenched . It is also alleged that work was available but the workman has been deprived of the opportunity to work . Thus , the employer has violated the provision of the I. D. Act , 1947. Worker has therefore prayed that he should be reinstated with back wages and continuity of service.

9984

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005 /BHADRA 12. 1927

and 13-11-97 represented to the opposite party but opposite party did not allow the representation and did not take the worker back in service . Ultimately the worker has filed the dispute before Asstt . Labour Commissio- ner ( C) , Dehradun on 17-6-99. Therefore there is no delay in filing the claim. The worker has denied that he deserted thework he stated that even after termination of service of theworkman, other juniors were retained in service . Worker has denied that he himself left the job . Worker has stressed in his rejoinder that he has been unemployedfrom the date of his termination and he has been pursuing the opposite party for reinstatement .

Worker has filed following documents with his application:

1. Photocopy of letter of Administrative Officer dt. 18-8-89 .

2. Photocopy of order of Administrative Officer dated 25-9-89 .

3. Photocopy of office order issued by Administrative Officer dt. 4-11-89 .

4. Photocopy of office order issued by Administrative Officerdt . 13-12-89.

5. Photocopy of office order issued by Administrative Officer dt. 6-2-90 .

6. Photocopy of details of workman regarding working issued by Sri B. R. Arya , AAO dt. 11-4-90 .

7. Photocopy of letter no . F - 1-7 ( 2 ) / 86 / Part dt.1-6-90

8. Photocopy of letter of Sri D. C. Johari Dean dt. 3rd Sept. 1990 .

9. Photocopy of office order issued by Administrative Officerdt . 11-10-90 .

10. Photocopy of office order issued by Administrative Officerdt. 4-1-91 .

11. Photocopy of office order issued by Administrative Officer dt. 4-2-91 .

12. Photocopy of office order issued by Administrative Officerdt. 14-2-1991 .

13. Photocopy of experience certificate.

14. Photocopy workman's representation dt . 2-7-93 .

15. Photocopy of workman's representation dt.13-11-97.

16. Photocopy of workman's representation sent through Registry/UPC .

17. Photocopy of details of sale of eggs of Baters .

[PART II-SEC. 3 (1 .) ) Theworker has again filed following documents with applicationdt . 27-12-2002:

1. Photocopy of Stay Order issued by Hon'ble ligh Court inwrit petition no . 3760/91 .

2. Photocopy of terininated employee's salary sip for the Month of June 2002 .

3. Photocopy of writ petition filed in High Court between Distt . Cooperative Bank Vs. Labour Court596/90 .

Opposite party has filed following documents, alongwith application dt . 11-10-2002:

1. Photocopy of Central Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 .

2. Photocopy of details worker's working.

3. Photocopy of letter issued by Administrative Officer dt . 18-8-89.

4. Photocopy of order issued by Administrative Officerdt. 25-9-89 .

5. Photocopy of order issued by Administrative Officerdt. 4-11-89 .

6. Photocopy of order of Administrative Officer for workers engagementdt. 13-12-89.

7. Photocopy of worker's engagement application dt. 1-1-90.

8. Photocopy of order issuedby Administrative Officerdt. 6-2-90.

9. Photocopy of worker's representation dt. 26-4-90.

10. Photocopy of order of Employment Exchange orderdt . 11-5-90 .

11. Photocopy ofjoining of workerdt . 15-5-90.

12. Photocopy of worker's under taking dt . 11-5-90.

13. Photocopy of order issued by Administrative Officerdt. 1-6-90 .

14. Photocopy of Worker's representation for engagementdt. 19-7-90.

15. Photocopy of ordersdt . 11-10-90.

16. Photocopy of workers engagement dt . 12-10-90 .

17. Photocopy of workers joiningdt . 12-10-90.

18. Photocopy of worker's application for re- engagement dt. 4-1-91 .

19. Photocopy of Workers application dt . 31-1-91.

20. Photocopy of workers application dt . 4-2-91 .

भारत का राजपत्र: सितंबर 3 , 2005/ भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भांग II- खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

21. Photocopy of management order dt . 14-2-91 .

22. Photocopy of management's order dt . 16-2-91 .

Opposite party has also filed photo copies ofmustor roll from 14-8-89 to 24-3-91 as per the orders ofthe court.

Worker has filed affidavit in support of his case and has been cross examined by the representative of the opposite party.

Opposite party has examined Asstt . Administrative Officer, Sri Shanti Prasad and he has been cross examined.

The parties have filed written arguments .

The parties were invited for oral submission on 4-8-05 but only worker representative turned up , opposite party did not turned up it was believed that the opposite party does not want to forward his oral submissions . Therefore perused the evidence on record and written arguments of the parties . Also heard the representative of theworkman.

First of all this has to be decided whether the opposite party is industry or otherwise . Since jurisdiction of this court has been challenged by the opposite party .

Central Avian Research Institute , Izatnagar, Bareilly is registered under the Society Act, which is constituted by Indian Counsel of Agricultural Research located at New Delhi . This fact has come in the evidence of Asstt. Administrative Officer Sri Shanti Prasad . The witness has also admitted in the cross examination that for running of the institute the services of labours are required systematically . It is also admitted that no gazetted officer are not employed in the institute . The institute is registered under the Society Act is manned by Chairman who is Director General.

The witness of the opposite party has also admitted that the beneficiaries are the agriculturist . It is also admitted that the fairs and exhibition are being organised by the institute where in the Ginny pigs , Baters and Hens are exhibited and those agriculturist who desire to purchase them they purchase the same . It is also admitted that such fairs and exhibition are organised in different parts of the country.

Opposite party has argued that the opposite party institute is purely a research institute and it does not come within the purview of industry. The main emphasis has been laid down government's Physical Research Institute (PRL) , which was not held to be a industry because PRL is purely research organisation discharging government functions though it is taking employees co - operation to achieving its purpose . It has been argued that PRL is a institute under the government of India's Deptt . of Space . It is engaged in pure research in space science . Purpose of research is to acquire knowledge about the formation and evolution of the universe but the knowledge thus

9985 acquired is not intended for sale . The opposite party has filed the case law ( 1997) 4 Supreme Court Cases 257 PRL Vs. K. G. Sharma and others . Relying on the above case law the opposite party tried to impress that the opposite party is purely a research institute . I have gone through the case law cited by the opposite party. PRL is together different institute then that of Central Avian Research Institute . PRL could not be terms as industry because PRL is a institute under the Government of India Deptt . of Space. It is engaged in pure research in space science . The purpose of research is to acquire knowledge about the formation and evolution of the universe but the knowledge thus acquired is not intended for sale . The Labour Court has recorded a categorical finding that the research work carried on by the PRL is not connected with production supply or distribution of material goods or services . The material on record further discloses that PRL isconducting research not for the benefit or use ofothers . Though the results of research work done by them are occasionally published, they have never been sold . There is no material to show that the knowledge so acquired by PRL ismarketable or has any commercial value . It has not beenpointed out how the knowledge acquired by PRL or the results of research occasionally published by it will be useful to persons other than those engaged in such type ofstudy. The material discloses that the object with which the research activity is undertaken by PRL is to obtain knowledge for the benefit of the Department of Space . Its objective is not to render services to others nor in fact it does so except in an indirect manner .

Neither from the nature of its organisation nor from the nature and character of activity carried on by it, can it be said to be an undertaking analogous to business or trade. It is not engaged in a commercial industrial activity and it cannot be described as an economic venture or a commercial enterprise as it is not its object to produce and distribute services which would satisfy wants and needs of the consumer community. It is more an institution discharging governmental functions and a domestic enterprise than a commercial enterprise . PRL, therefore is not an industry even though it is carrying on the activity of research in a systematic manner with the help of its employees as it lacks that element which would make it an organisation carrying on an activity which can be said to be analogous to the carrying on of a trade or business because it is not producing distributing services which are intended or meant for satisfying human wants and needs , as ordinarily understood .

The present institute is different from PRL. This institute is running under the Society Act . The object of this institute is not purely research but object is also commercial as the research work is sold in organising fairs and exhibitions . In the circumstances the status of PRL is together different from Central Avian Research Institute.

9986

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2005/BHADRA 12, 1927

In the circumstances from the evaluation of the evidence I come to the conclusion that opposite party is anindustry.

Opposite party's argument is that this court has no jurisdiction because it is not an industry is not having any substance in it .

The other argument advanced by the opposite party is that the worker was appointed only for specific tenure on the need basis and after completion of the aforesaid tenure his services automatically came to end.

Opposite party has also argued that worker Sushil Kr. Saxena has not worked continuously from 18-8-89 to 25-3-91 the worker fail to complete 240 days in any calendar year.

Admittedly there are no appointment letter and no termination letter and there is no contractual appointment ofthe worker. The worker is disengaged on 25-3-91 . The worker put in 256 working days has been admitted by the management witness Sri Shanti Prasad on 16-6-2004. His relevant answer is as follows :

" मैंने मस्टर रोल की छाया प्रति दाखिल की है । यह मस्टर रोल सही है और पढ़ जा सकते हैं । मई 1990 से मार्च 91 तक मेरे द्वारा दाखिल मस्टर रोल पर अंकित कार्य दिवसों को जोड़ने पर 10माह में 256 दिन कार्य किया जाना प्रमाणित है । " Itisalso admitted that there was no service contract between the management and the worker which is evident ofthe following question answer:

प्र.: क्या कर्मचारी ने कोई सर्विस कांट्रेक्ट निष्पादित किया था कि25-3-91 के बाद उसकी सेवायें समाप्त हो जायेंगी । उ.: नहीं

Besides above facts it is also not disputed that the worker did not work w.e.f. 14-8-89 to 24-3-91 . The facts find corroboration from the own documents filed by the management i.e. mustor roll . Section 25F defines the term of continuous service which is as under:

Definition of continuous service :

1. A workman shall be said to be in continuous service for a period ifhe is, for that period in uninterrupted service, including service which may be interrupted on account of sickness or authorised leave or an accident or a strike which is not illegal or a lock out or a cessation of work which is not due to any fault on the part of the workman.

2. Where a workman is not in continuous service with in the meaning of clause ( 1 ) for a period of one year or six months , he shall be deemed to be in continuous service under an employer:

(a) For a period of one year , if the workman during a period of twelve calendar months preceding the date with reference to which calculation is to be made , has actually worked under the employer for not less than :

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii ) ] (i) one hundred and ninety days in the case of a workman employed below ground in a mine; and

(ii) two hundred and forty days , in any other case .

(b) for a period of six months , ifthe workman during a period of six calendar months preceding the date with reference to which calculation is to be made , has actually worked under the employer for not less that:

(i) ninety five days in the case of workman employed below ground mine; and (ii) one hundred and twenty days in any other case .

Explanation : For the purposes of clause (2 ) the number of days on which a workman has actually worked under an employer shall include the days on which :-

(i) he has been laid off under an agreement or as permitted by standing orders made under the Industrial Employment ( Standing Orders) Act, 1946 (20 of 1946) or under the Act or under any other law applicable to the industrial establishment .

(ii) he has been on leave with full wages earned in the previous years .

(iii) he has been absent due to temporary disablement caused by accident arising out ofand in the course of his employment; and (iv) in the case of a female , she has been on maternity leave , so however , that the total period of such maternity leave does not exceed twelve weeks .

Section 25 F of the 1. D. Act is as under :

Conditions precedent to retrenchment of workers : No workman employed in any industry who has been in continuous service for not less than one year under an employer shall be retrenched by that employer until :

(a) the workman has been given one month's notice inwriting indicating the reasons for retrenchment and the period of notice has expired, or the workman has been paid in lieu of such notice , wages for the period of the notice .

(b) the workman has been paid, at the time of retrenchment compensation which shall be equivalent to fifteen days average pay ( for every completed year of continuous service ) or any partthereof in excess of six months ; and (c) notice in the prescribed manner in service on the appropriate government ( for such authority as maybe specified by the appropriate government by notification in the Official Gazette) .

9987 भारत का राजपत्र: सितंबर 3 , 2005/भाद्र 12, 1927

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

the children to survive and escape of starvation can not be termed as gainfully employed. Any person in the circumstances will like to fill his belly and if in the year 2003 when he was being cross examined, he earned Rs . 1400 to 1500 per month can not be termed to be person gainfully employed .

From the copy of muster roll filed by the opposite party I find that the worker was employed @ Rs . 1200 per month fixed pay upto August 1990 thereafter he has been engaged@ Rs . 25 per day + D. A. Thus his earning was reduced . This is clear cut case of exploitation of labour . I do not agree with the opposite party that the worker himself deserted the job instead 1 find that the worker was removed from service without observing the provision contained in I. D. Act, as provided in Section 25 F of the Act .

Much emphasis have been given to the fact that the worker is not regular . I.D. Act has no distinguishing feature with regard to regular employee or casual employee it is simply laid down the procedure as to how a worker could be retrenched irrespective of the fact whether he is regular or casual employee .

From the facts on record it is proved that the worker has put in more than 240 ılays work prior to his termination . The defence taken by the employer is that the worker himself deserted the employment . The argument is that the worker failed to approach the authority for the job and no application in respect of re - engagement from the side ofthe worker has been received in the office of the opposite party. It is also argued that there is delay in filing dispute before the authorities concerned which shows that the worker was gainfully employed. It is also argued that after 25-3-91 worker failed to approach the opposite party as he was gainfully engaged during his disengagement and it is because of that reason the management has argued that the worker himself deserted the opposite party . Sri Shanti Prasad, AAO of the opposite party has stated that since 25-3-91 there was no casual work available with the opposite party and the worker Sushil Kumar Saxena also did not work thereafter . It is also stated by the witness that the worker did not approach the opposite party for the job . The same witness in the cross examination has stated that Sushil Kumar Saxena was removed on 25-3-91 and at the same time he has stated that he can not tell the reason for his removal. In reply to another question of court witness again said that the worker was removed on 25-3-91 . Admittedly the worker was not given notice as evident from the statement of the cross examination for his removal nor he was paid any compensation or notice pay. The opposite party argument that worker himself deserted is therefore far from truth.

Opposite partyhas relied upon the case law 2004 (2) Supreme Court service law judgement page 384 Pankaj Gupta and others Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir and others wherein it is laid down that a person appointed illegally or appointed without following the procedure prescribed under the law can not claim for regularisation. This law is not applicable to the facts of the case because the issue does not refer for regularisation the issue referred to the court is whether the termination of service is just, fair and legal . Under this issue no regularisation can be granted to the workman .

It has also been admitted by the opposite party witness that other similar workers Sri P. N. Bajpai and others were regularised although witness has stated that they have been regularised through direct recruitment. It is also admitted that they were terminated alongwith Sushil Kumar Saxena the present worker .

From the evidence on the record I come to the conclusion that there is no delay in filing the dispute before the concerned authorities the worker has not deserted the employer and the employer has terminated the services of the worker without observing the procedure laid down under the I.D. Act and therefore such termination can not be held to be just, fair and legal .

Itisalso admitted fact that P. K. Bajpai filed a Writ Petition in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in which the Hon'ble High Court on 8-2-91 stayed the termination . The said order was further extended on 22-4-91 and since the relief prayed by the worker P. N. Bajpai was made available to him the writ was dismissed as infructuous on 12-12-99 .

It is pertinent to point out that the worker in his examination - in - chief termed certain administrative orders as appointment letter this is not true there is no pleadings to the effect that the worker was given any appointment letter or any termination letter.

I, therefore , answer the issue in favour of the workman and hold that the termination of Sushil Kr. Saxena w.e.f. 25-3-91 is not just, fair or legal .

The worker was during the period of his disengagement from the service continued to have meagure earning to meet his requirements and looking to the fact that he was daily rated worker there could be no order as to back wages . However, the opposite party is directed to be reinstated in the service within 2 months from the notification of award with continuity in service .

Lucknow

5-8-2005

SHRIKANT SHUKLA , Presiding Officer Worker has filed photocopy of his application dt. 2-7-93 addressed to opposite party for taking him back in service through UPC. The worker has filed another application addressed to the opposite party on 13-11-97 onUPC . The worker in his affidavitdt. 11-10-01 stated that he sent said representation for reinstaternent but the employer did not reply nor the worker reinstated . The worker has stated in his affidavit that he himself did not desert or leave the job on his own instead he was laid off. Worker has stated in his cross - examination that after leaving the services he was not employed elsewhere . He said that he performed the job of tutor and teaches children and is not engaged in any business , and on this way he earns Rs. 1400 to 1500 per month. He has further stated that after removal from the job he gave four five letters he has denied that his salary is Rs . 5000. If a person engages himself after being terminated from the service to teach

Printed by the Manager, Govt. of India Press , Ring Road , Maya Puri , New Delhi - 110064 and Published by the Controller of Publications , Delhi - 110054, 2005