This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

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

REGD , NO . D. L. (N ) 04/0007/2003-05

सममेत्र जबते भारत का राजपत्र The Gazette of India

प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक

WEEKLY

सं० 43]

नई दिल्ली, अक्तूबर16 अक्तूबर 22 , 2005 , शनिवार/आश्विन 24-आश्विन 30, 1927 NEW DELHI, OCTOBER 16- OCTOBER 22, 2005 , SATURDAY/ASVINA 24- ASVINA 30, 1927 No. 43]

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)

वित्त मंत्रालय

(राजस्वविभाग )

(सीमा शुल्क एवं केन्द्रीय उत्पाद शुल्क आयुक्त का कार्यालय ) सेलम, 19 मई , 2004 संख्या 1 /2004-सीमा शुल्क ( एनटी ) का. आ. 3799.- सीमा शुल्क अधिनियम, 1962 की धारा 152 खण्ड ( ए) के अंतर्गत भारत सरकार, वित्त मंत्रालय , राजस्व विभाग , नई दिल्ली के दिनांक 1 जुलाई, 1994 के अधिसूचना संख्या 33/94- सीमा शुल्क ( एनटी) के अधीन अधोहस्ताक्षरी को प्रत्यायोजित शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैं , नजीब शाह, आयुक्त, सीमा शुल्क एवं केन्द्रीय उत्पाद शुल्क, सेलम एत‌द्वारा तमिलनाडु राज्य, सेलम ज़िला, ओमलूर तालूक के पागलपट्टी ग्राम को सीमा शुल्क अधिनियम 1962 की धारा 9 के अंतर्गत 100 % निर्यातोन्मुख एक्क (ई.ओ.यू.) के गठन के सीमित उद्देश्य से भाण्डागरण स्टेशन के रूप में घोषित करता हूँ । जैसा कि वाणिज्य एवं उद्योग मंत्रालय , वाणिज्य विभाग, मद्रास निर्यात प्रक्रिया क्षेत्र , चेन्नैई द्वारा अनुमोदित है ।

[फा.सी. सं- VIII/40/05/2004- सीमा शुल्क नीति]

नजीब शाह, आयुक्त 3016 GI/2005

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(Department of Revenue)

(OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE )

Salem, the 19th May , 2004 No. 1 /2004- CUSTOMS (NT)

S.O. 3799.- In excercise of the powers delegated to the undersigned vide Notification No. 33 /94- Cus (NT) dated Ist July , 1994 by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance , Department of Revenue , New Delhi under Clause (a) of Section 152 of the Customs Act , 1962, I , Najib Shah , Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Salem hereby declare Pagalpatti Village of Omalur Taluk , in the District of Salem, State of Tamil Nadu , to be a warehousing station under Section 9 of the Customs Act, 1962 for the limited purpose of setting up of 100 % Export- oriented Unit, as approved by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry , Department of Commerce , Madras Export Processing Zone, Chennai .

[ F. C.No. VIII/40/05/2004 -Cus.Pol ] NAJIB SHAH , Commissioner

(11495) 11496

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ ASVINA 30 , 1927

सेलम, 29 जून, 2004

संख्या 02/2004-सीमा शुल्क ( एनटी ) का. आ. 3800.-सीमा शुल्क अधिनियम, 1962 की धारा 152 खण्ड ( ए) के अंतर्गत भारत सरकार, वित्त मंत्रालय , राजस्व विभाग , नई दिल्ली के दिनांक 1 जुलाई 1994 के अधिसूचना संख्या 33/94-सीमा शुल्क( एनटी ) के अधीन अधोहस्ताक्षरी को प्रत्यायोजित शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैं, नजीक शाह, आयुक्त , सीमा शुल्क एवं केन्द्रीय उत्पाद शुल्क, सेलम एक्द्र‌द्वारा तमिलनाडु राज्य, ईरोड ज़िला, पेरून्दुरै तालूक के इन्गूर ग्राम को सीमा शुल्क अधिनियम 1962 की धारा 9 के अंतर्गत 100% निर्यातोन्मुख एक्क (ई.ओ.यू.) के गठन के सीमित उद्देश्य से भाण्डागरण स्टेशन के रूप में घोषित करता हूँ । जैसा कि वाणिज्य एवं उद्योग मंत्रालय, वाणिज्य विभाग , मद्रास निर्यात प्रक्रिया क्षेत्र, चेन्नैई द्वारा अनुमोदित है ।

[फा. सी. सं . VIII/40/ 06/2004- सीमा शुल्क नीति]

नजीब शाह, आयुक्त Salem, the 29th June, 2004 No. 02/2004-CUSTOMS ( NT)

S.O. 3800. In excercise of the powers delegated to the undersigned vide Notification No. 33 /94- Cus (NT) dated 1st July, 1994by the Goverment of India , Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue , New Delhi under Clause ( a) of Section 152 of the Customs Lat. 1962, 1 , Najib Shah, Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Salem hereby declare Ingur Village of Perundurai Taluk, in the District of Erode, State of Tamilnadu , to be a warehousing station under Section 9 of the Customs Act , 1962 for the limited purpose of setting up of 100% Export-oriented Unit, as approved by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry , Department of Commerce , Madras Export Processing Zone, Chennai.

[F.C. No. VIII/40/06/ 2004-Cus . Pol . ] NAJIB SHAH , Commissioner सेलम, 21 मार्च, 2005

संख्या 01 /2005-सीमा शुल्क ( एनटी ) का. आ. 3801.-सीमा शुल्क अधिनियम , 1962 की धारा 152खण्ड ( ए) के अंतर्गत भारत सरकार, वित्त मंत्रालय , राजस्व विभाग, नई दिल्लीके दिनांक 1 जुलाई, 1994 के अधिसूचना संख्या 33/94-सीमा शुल्क (एन टी ) के अधीन अधोहस्ताक्षरी को प्रत्यायोजित शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैं , एस. राजकुमार, आयुक्त, सीमा शुल्क एवं केन्द्र उत्ताद शुल्क, सेलम एतद्‌द्वारा तमिलनाडु राज्य, नीलगिरि जिला, कुन्नूर तालूक के हुभत्तलै ग्राम को सीमा शुल्क अधिनियम 1962की धारा 9 के अंतर्गत 100% निर्यासोन्मुख एवक ( ई.ओ.यू. ) के गठन के सीमित उ‌द्देश्य से भाण्डागरण स्टेशन के रूप में घोषित करता हूँ। जैसा कि वाणिज्य एवं उद्योग मंत्रालय, वाणिज्य विभाग, मद्रास निर्यात प्रक्रिया क्षेत्र , चेन्नैई द्वारा अनुमोदित है ।

[फा. सी. सं. VIII/40/ 03/2005- सीमा शुल्क नीति]

एस . राजकुमार, आयुक्त

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] Salem , the 21st March , 2005 No. 1/2005 - CUSTOMS ( NT)

S.O. 3801. In excercise of the powers delegated to the undersigned vide Notification No. 33/94- Cus (NT) dated 1st July, 1994 by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance , Department of Revenue , New Delhi under Clause (a) of Section 152 of the Customs Act , 1962 , I , S. Rajkumar, Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise , Salem hereby declare Hubhathalai Village of Coonoor Taluk in the District of Nilgiris , State of Tamilnadu , to be a warehousing station under Section 9 of the Customs Act, 1962 for the limited purpose of setting up of 100% Export-oriented Unit , as approved by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry , Department of Commerce , Madras Export Processing Zone , Chennai .

[F. C. No. VIII/40/03 /2005 -Cus . Pol .] S. RAJKUMAR, Commissioner सेलम, 21 मार्च, 2005

संख्या 02/2005-सीमा शुल्क ( एनटी ) का. आ. 3802.-सीमा शुल्क अधिनियम, 1962 की धारा 152 खण्ड (ए) के अंतर्गत भारत सरकार, वित्त मंत्रालय, राजस्व विभाग , नई दिल्ली के दिनांक 1 जुलाई, 1994 के अधिसूचना संख्या 33/94- सीमा शुल्क ( एनटी ) के अधीन अधोहस्ताक्षरी को प्रत्यायोजित शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैं, एस. राजकुमार, आयुक्त, सीमा शुल्क एवं केन्द्रीय उत्पाद शुल्क, सेलम एत‌द्वारा तमिलनाडु राज्य, सेलम जिला, मेट्टूर तालूक के पोट्टनेरी ग्राम को सीमा शुल्क अधिनियन 1962 की धारा 9 के अंतर्गत 100% निर्यातोन्मुख एक्क (ई.ओ.यू. ) के गठन के सीमित उद्देश्य से भाण्डागरण स्टेशन के रूप में घोषित करता हूँ। जैसा कि वाणिज्य एवं उद्योग मंत्रालय , वाणिज्य विभाग, मद्रास निर्यात प्रक्रिया क्षेत्र, चेन्नैई द्वारा अनुमोदित है ।

[ फा. सी. सं. VIII/40/04/2005- सीमा शुल्क नीति]

एस . राजकुमार, आयुक्त Salem, the 21st March, 2005

No. 02/ 2005 - CUSTOMS ( NT)

S.O. 3802. In excercise of the powers delegated to the undersigned vide Notification No. 33 /94- Cus (NT) dated 1st July, 1994 by the Government of India , Ministry of Finance , Department of Revenue , New Delhi under Clause (a) of Section 152 of the Customs Act, 1962 , I , S. Rajkumar, Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Salem hereby declare Pottaneri Village of Mettur Tajuk, in the District of Salem, State of Tamilnadu, to be a warehousing station under Section 9 of the Customs Act . 1962 for the limited purpose of setting up of 100 % Export- oriented Unit, as approved by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Department of Commerce , Madras Export Processing Zone, Chennai .

[F.C. No. VIII /40/04/2005 -Cus . Pol . ] S. RAJKUMAR , Commissioner 11497

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

सेलम, 29 मार्च, 2005 संख्या 03/2005 - सीमा शुल्क ( एनटी )

का. आ. 3803.-सीमा शुल्क अधिनियम , 1962 की धारा 152 खण्ड ( ए ) के अंतर्गत भारत सरकार, वित्त मंत्रालय , राजस्व विभाग , नई दिल्ली के दिनांक 1 जुलाई, 1994 के अधिसूचना संख्या 33/94- सीमा शुल्क ( एनटी ) के अधीन अधोहस्ताक्षरी को प्रत्यायोजित शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैं, एस. राजकुमार , आयुक्त, सीमा शुल्क एवं केन्द्रीय उत्पाद शुल्क, सेलम एतद्‌द्वारा तमिलनाडु राज्य, नामक्कल ज़िला, तिरूच्चेन्गोड़ तालूक के कीलपालयम ग्राम को सीमा शुल्क अधिनियम 1962 की धारा 9 के अंतर्गत 100% निर्यातोन्मुख एक्क(ई.ओ.यु. ) के गठन के सीमित उद्देश्य से भाण्डागरण स्टेशन के रूप में घोषित करता हूँ । जैसा कि वाणिज्य एवं उद्योग मंत्रालय, वाणिज्य विभाग , मद्रास निर्यात प्रक्रिया क्षेत्र, चेन्नैई द्वारा अनुमोदित है । [फा. सी. सं- VIII/40/05/ 2005 सीमा शुल्क नीति]

एस. राजकुमार, आयुक्त Salem, the 29th March, 2005

NO . 03/2005 -CUSTOMS (NT)

S.O. 3803.- In excercise of the powers delegated tothe undersigned vide Notification No. 33 /94 - Cus . (NT) dated 1st July, 1994 by the Government ofIndia, Ministry ofFinance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi under Clause (a) of Section 152 of the Customs Act, 1962, I , S. Rajkumar, Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Salem hereby declare Kilapalayam Village of Tiruchengode Taluk, in the District of NAMAKKAL , State of Tamilnadu , to be a warehousing station under Section 9 of the Customs Act, 1962 for the limited purpose of setting up of 100% Export Oriented Unit, as approved by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Department of Commerce, Madras Export Processing Zone, Chennai .

[F.C. No. VIII/40/05/ 2005 -Cus . Pol . ] S. RAJKUMAR , Commissioner ( कार्यालय मुख्य आयकर आयुक्त )

उदयपुर, 30 सितम्बर, 2005

का. आ. 3804. आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 ( 1961 की 43 ) की धारा 10 के खण्ड ( 23 ग ) की उपधारा ( vi ) के साथ पठित आयकर नियमावली, 1962 के नियम 2 गक के द्वारा प्रदत्त अधिकारों का प्रयोग करते हुए मुख्य आयकर आयुक्त, उदयपुर " पैसिफिक एज्यूकेशन सोसायटी, उदयपुर " को उक्त धारा के प्रयोजन हेतु निर्धारण वर्ष 2003-04 एवं 2004-05 के लिए अनुमोदन करते हैं । परन्तु यह तब जब की सोसायटी आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 की धारा 10 के खण्ड़ ( 23 ग ) की उपधारा (vi ) के साथ पठित आयकर नियमावली, 1962 के नियम 2 गक के प्रावधानों की पुष्टि एवं अनुपालना करती है ।

[अधिसूचना संख्या 07/28/सं. मु.आ.आ./उदय/

आ.अ. (प्रशा. )/2005-06/1593 ]

पी. के. मिश्र , मुख्य आयकर आयुक्त (OFFICE OF THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF

INCOME TAX)

Udaipur , the 30th September, 2005 S.O. 3804. In excercise of the powers conferred by sub- section (vi ) of Clause (23C) of Section 10 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961 ) read with rule 2CA of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, the Chief Commissioner of Income-tax, Udaipur hereby approves "Pacific Education Society, Udaipur " for the purpose of said section for the assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05.

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

[Notification No. 7/28/No . CCIT/UDR/ITO( A )/ 2005-06/1593 ] P. K. MISRA, Chief Commissioner of Income -tax (केन्द्रीय प्रत्यक्ष कर बोर्ड )

नई दिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर, 2005

( आवकर )

का. आ. 3805.-सर्व साधारण की जानकारी के लिए एतद्‌द्वारा 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 अनुसंधान मात्र के लिए मौजूद ' वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान संभ' की श्रेणी के अन्तर्गत दिनांक 1-4-2004 सेदिनांक 31-3-2007 तक की अवधि के लिए मैसर्स डायाबिटीज रिसर्च सेंटर फाउंडेशन, नं. 4 , मेन रोड, रॉबपुरम , चेन्नई 600013 को निम्नलिखित शर्तोंके 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 आब कर विवरणी दाखिल करने की नियंत्त तारीख कोअथवा उससे पहले प्रस्तुत करेगा , जिसके लिए इसे आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अन्तर्गत अनुमोदन प्रदान किया गया है ।

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

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

(ख) जिसमें बह प्रमाणित किया गया हो कि क्रिया गया व्यय वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए ही था ।

[अधिसूचना सं. 209/2005/फा. सं. 203/10/2005- आयकर नि.- II ] निधि सिंह, अवर सचिव (CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES) New Delhi , the 4th October, 2005 INCOME TAX)

S.O. 3805, It is hereby notified for general information that the organization M/ s Diabetes Research Centre Foundation, No. 4, Main Road, Royapuram, Chennai -600013 has been approved by the Central 11498

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005 /ASVINA 30 , 1927

Government for the purpose of clause ( ii ) of sub - section (1) of Section 35 of the Income Tax Act , 1961 , read with rule 6 of the Income tax Rules , 1962 for the period from 1-4-2004 to 31-3-2007 under the category, ' scientific research association'ion' existing solely for research subject to the following condition :-

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

(ii) For each of the financial years for which this 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 I.T. 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 in income .

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

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

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

[Notification No. 209/2005 /F. No. 203 / 10/ 2005 - ITA -II ) ] NIDHI SINGH , Under Secy. नई दिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर , 2005

(आयकर)

का. आ. 3806.-सर्व साधारण 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 दिनांक1-4-2002 से दिनांक 31-3-2005 तक की अवधि के लिए मैसर्स सेंट्रल इंडियन इंस्टीट्यूट ऑफ मेडिकल सांइसिज, 88/2 , बजाज नगर, नागपुर-440010 जो अंशतः अनुसंधान कार्यकलापों में कार्यरत हैं, (और न कि अनुसंधान के लिए एक मात्र मौजूद ' वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान संघ ' के रूप में हैं , को निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन अनुमोदित किया गयाहै :-

(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 आयकर विवरणी दाखिल करने की नियत तारीख कोअथवा उससे पहले प्रस्तुत करेगा, जिसके लिए इसे आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अन्तर्गत अनुमोदन प्रदान किया गया है ।

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

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] ( क) जिसमें संगठन द्वारा वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए प्राप्त की गई उस राशि का उल्लेख किया गया हो, जिसके लिए दानकर्त्ता धारा 35 ( 1 ) ( 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. 208/2005/फा. सं. 203/75/2004- आयकर नि.- II ] निधि सिंह, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 4th October, 2005 ( INCOME TAX)

1 S.O. 3806. It is hereby notified for general information that the organization M/s . Central Indian Institute ofMedical Sciences , 88/2 , Bajaj Nagar, Nagpur- 440010 has been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of clause ( ii ) of sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 35 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 , read with rule 6 of the Income tax Rules , 1962 for the period from 1-4-2002 to 31-3-2005 under the category, ' University College or other Institution' only partly engaged in research activities (and not as a ' scientific research association' existing solely for research) subject to the following condition: ---

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

(ii) For each of the financial years for which this 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 1.T. Act , 1961 to the Commissioner of Income-tax/Director of Income- tax (Exemptions) having jurisdiction, on or before the due date of filing of return in income.

( iii ) The organization shall also enclose with the Income and Expenditure account referred to in ( ii ) above, certificate from the auditor :- a (a) specifying the amount received by the organization for scientific research in respect of which the donors are eligible to claim deduction under Section 35 ( 1 ) ( ii ) .

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

[Notification No. 208 /2005/F. No. 203 /75/ 2004 - ITA - II ] NIDHI SINGH , Under Secy. आदेश नई दिल्ली, 17 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3807.- धन शोधन निवारण अधिनियम , 2002 (2003का 15 ) की धारा 49 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्र सरकार एतद्वारा जुलाई, 2005 के प्रथम दिन से विदेशी मुद्रा प्रबंध अधिनियम , 1999 ( 1999 का 42 ) के तहत उक्त तारीख से तत्काल पहले सहायक कानूनी सलाहकार का कार्यालय धारण करने वाले व्यक्ति को धन शोधन निवारण अधिनियम , 2002 के प्रयोजनार्थ उप- कानूनी सलाहकार के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[फा. सं . 6/2/2005- ईएस ] वी. पी. अरोड़ा, अवर सचिव 11499 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

ORDER

बीमा और प्रत्यय गांरटी निगम ( डीआईसीजीसी ) के निदेशक मण्डल में अंशकालिक गैर- सरकारी निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है । New Delhi, the 17th October , 2005

1. प्रो० प्रकाश जी. आपटे, निदेशक भारतीय प्रबंधन संस्थान, 415, आईआईएमबी कैम्पस क्र्वाटर, बन्नेटघट्ट्टा रोड़, बंगलोर-560076

S.O. 3807. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section (1 ) of Section 49 of the Prevention of Money- laundering Act, 2002 ( 15 of 2003 ) , the Central Government hereby appoints , with effect from the 1* Day of July, 2005 , the Assistant Legal Adviser holding office immediately before the said date under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (42 of 1999) , as the Assistant Legal Adviser for the purpose of the Prevention ofMoney -laundering Act, 2002.

2. श्री नसीर मुंजी, आईडीएफसी के पूर्व प्रबंध निदेशक, एवं मुख्य कार्यपालक अधिकारी, 69, वर्ली, सी फेस , कैम्पेन हाऊस , मुम्बई-400018

[F. No. 6 /2 /2005 -ES] V.P.ARORA, Under Secy.

3. डा० दिलीप नचाने, वरिष्ठ प्रोफेसर, आईजीआईडीआर, जनरल ए.के. वैद्य मार्ग, गोरेगांव ईस्ट, मुम्बई -400065

( आर्थिक कार्य विभाग ) (बैंकिंग प्रभाग) नई दिल्ली, 6 अक्तूबर, 2005

4. डा० अतुल अग्रवाल, सनदीलेखाकार, 401-402, मानसरोवर अपार्टमेंट, 7/90, डी, तिलक नगर, कानपुर-208002

[सं. एफ-7/12/95- बीओ-1 ]

जी. बी. सिंह, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 7th October, 2005 का. आ. 3808.- राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक (प्रबंध और प्रकीर्ण उपबंध) योजना, 1970 के खण्ड 3 के उप- खण्ड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित , बैंककारी कम्पनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन और अंतरण ) अधिनियम, 1970 की धारा 9 की उपधारा 3 ( ज ) और ( 3 क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त अधिकारों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा मेजर ( सेवानिवृत्त ) वेद प्रकाश , निवासी 204/1 नेब वैली , नेब सराय , नई दिल्ली को अधिसूचना जारी होने की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए अथवा उनके स्थान पर किसी अन्य व्यक्ति को नामित किए जाने तक, जो भी पहले हो, सैन्ट्रल बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के बोर्ड में अंशकालिक, गैर- सरकारी निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है ।

[सं. एफ-9/33/2005- बीओ -1 ] जी. बी. सिंह, अवर सचिव

(Department of Economic Affairs) (BANKING DIVISION) New Delhi , the 6th October , 2005

S. O. 3809. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (e) of sub -section ( 1 ) of Section 6 read with clause (ii) of sub -section 2 of Section 6 of the Deposit Insurance andCreditGuarantee Corporation Act, 1961 (47 of 1961 ), the Central Government , in consultation with Reserve Bank of India, hereby nominates the following persons as part-time Non-official. Director on the Board of Deposit Însurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation (DICGC) for a period of three years from the date of notification or unitl their successor are nominated, whichever is earlier .

1. Prof. Prakash G. Apte , Director, Indian Institute of Management, 415 , IIMB Campus Quarters , Bannerghatta Road, Bangalore-560076

S.O. 3808.- In exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section 3 (h ) and ( 3 - A) of Section 9 of the Banking companies (Acquistion and Transfer of Undertakings ) Act, 1970 read with sub - clause ( 1 ) of clause 3 of the Nationalised Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme, 1970 , the Central Government hereby nominates major (Retd . ) Ved Prakash, resident of 204/1 , Neb Valey, Neb Sarai , New Delhi as part- time non-official director on the Board of Central Bank of India for a period of three years from the date of notification or until his successor is nominated , whichever is earlier .

2. Shri Nasser Munjee , Former MD and CEO I. D.F.C. , 69, Worli Sea Face, Champagne House , Mumbai - 400018

[No. F-9/33/2005 -BO- I ] G.B. Singh , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 7 अक्तूबर, 2005

3. Dr. Dilip Nachane , Sr. Professor, I.G.I.D.R. , General A. K. Vaidya Marg , Goregaon East, Mumbai -400065.

4. Dr. Atual Agarwal , Chartered Accountant , 401-402 , Mansarover Apartments , 7/90 -D, Tilak Nagar, Kanpur-208002

[No. F- 7/ 12/95 -BO - I ] G. B. Singh, Under Secy .

का. आ . 3809. निक्षेप बीमा और प्रत्यय गारंटी निगम अधिनियम, 1961 ( 1961 का 47 ) की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 2 )के खण्ड ( ii ) के साथ पठित धारा 6 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के खंड (ङ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक से परामर्श करके एतद्वारा , निम्नलिखित व्यक्तियों को अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अविध के लिए अथवा उनके उत्तराधिकारी के नामित होने तक, इनमें से जो भी पहले हो, निक्षेप 11500

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ ASVINA 30, 1927 [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] (बीमा प्रभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 7 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3810- बीमा विनियमन और विकास प्राधिकरण अधिनियम, 1999 ( 1999 का 41 ) की धारा 4 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार सर्वश्री गौतम हरि सिंघानिया और विजय महाजन को बीमा विनियमन और विकास प्राधिकरण ( आईआरडीए ) में पार्ट टाइम सदस्य के रूप में 5 वर्षों की अवधि के. लिए या आगामी आदेश होने तक जो भी पहले हो, नियुक्त करती है ।

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by the sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 4 of the Departmental Inquiries (Enforcement of Attendance of Witnesses and Production of Documents ) Act, 1972 ( 18 of 1972) , the Central Government hereby authorises Shri R.P. Singh, Assistant Superintendent of Post Offices (South Sub- division) , Meerut Division U.P. as the inquiring authority to exercise the powers specified in Section 5 of the said Act in relation to inquiry under Rule- 14 of CCS (CCA ) Rules- 1965 against Shri Manohari lal Meena , SPM (U/S) Nehru Road Baraut , Meerut Dn. U.P.

[फा. सं. 11/3/2004- बीमा- IV ] जी. सी. चतुर्वेदी, संयुक्त सचिव

[No. RPB/Vig./Genl/ 219/2004 ] R.R.P. SINGH, Postmaster General (INSURANCE DIVISION)

New Delhi , the 7th October, 2005

पर्यावरण एवं वन मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 6 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3812.- चूंकि राष्ट्रीय पर्यावरण अपीलीय प्राधिकरण के एक सदस्य को, अध्यक्ष के कार्य निर्वहन के लिए प्राधिकृत करना आवश्यक हो गया है;

S. O. 3810. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 4 ofthe Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority Act, 1999 ( 41 of 1999) the Central Government hereby appoints S/Shri Gautam Hari Singhania and Vijay Mahajan as Part - time Members , Insurance Regulatory and Development authority ( IRDA) for a period of 5 years or until futher orders whichever is earlier .

[F. No. 11/3/2004- Ins - IV] G. C. CHATURVEDI , Jt . Secy .

भारतीय डाक विभाग ( कार्यालय पोस्ट मास्टर जनरल , बरेली क्षेत्र )

बरेली, 7 अक्तूबर, 2005

अतः अब, राष्ट्रीय पर्यावरण अपीलीय प्राधिकरण अधिनियम , 1997 ( 1997 का 22 ) की धारा 13 के साथ पठित धारा 6 की उपधारा (2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्री सरकार, एत‌द्वारा राष्ट्रीय पर्यावरण अपीलीय प्राधिकरण के श्री सुधीर मित्तल, सदस्य (अतिरिक्त प्रभार ) को , अध्यक्ष अथवा उपाध्यक्ष की अनुपस्थिति में राष्ट्रीय पर्यावरण अपीलीय प्राधिकरण ( वित्तीय और प्रशासनिक शक्तियां ) नियमावली, 1998 के अंतर्गत यथा प्रदत्त अध्यक्ष , राष्ट्रीय पर्यावरण अपीलीय प्राधिकरण की वित्तीय और प्रशासनिक शक्तियों को प्रयोग करने हेतु प्राधिकृत किया जाता है ।

[फा. सं. जेड-20018/4/ 2005 - सी पी ए ] आर. के. वैश , संयुक्त सचिव

MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS का. आ. 3811.-जैसा कि केन्द्रीय सरकार की यह राय है कि श्री मनोहरी लाल मीना, उपडाकपाल ( निलंबनाधीन ) नेहरु रोड बड़ौत , मेरठ मण्डल उ.प्र. से संबंधित विभागीय जांच हेतु यह आवश्यक है कि श्री राज कुमार शर्मा, भूतपूर्व पोस्टमैन, बड़ौत प्रधान डाकघर को साक्ष्य हेतु सम्मन किया जाए अथवा उनसे कोई अभिलेख मंगाया जाए ।

New Delhi , the 6th October, 2005

S. O. 3812. Whereas it has become necessary to authorize one of the Members of the National Environment Appellate Authority to discharge the functions of the Chairperson;

अतः अब विभागीय जांच ( साक्षीगण की उपस्थिति के प्रवर्तन एवम् अभिलेखों के प्रस्तुतीकरण ) अधिनियम, 1972 ( 1972 का 18वां) की धारा 4 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अंतर्गत प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार श्री आर.पी. सिंह, सहायक अधीक्षक डाकघर ( दक्षिणी उप मण्डल ) , मेरठ मण्डल उ.प्र. को उपरोक्त अधिनियम की धारा 5 का प्रयोग करते हुए श्री मनोहरी लाल मीना उपडाकपाल (निलंबनाधीन ) नेहरु रोड बड़ौत , मेरठ मण्डल उ.प्र. के विरुद्ध सी सी एस ( सी सी ए ) नियम 1965 के नियम-14 के अंतर्गत जांच करने हेतु एतद्‌द्वारा अधिकृत करती है ।

[सं० आरपीबी/विज/जन/219 /2004] आर. आर. पी. सिंह, पोस्टमास्टर जनरल

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section (2 ) of Section 6 read with Section 13 ofthe National Environment Appellate Authority Act, 1997 (22 of1997) , the Central Government hereby authorises Shri Sudhir Mital , Member (Additional Charge ) of the National Environment Appellate Authority to exercise the financial and administrative powers of the Chairperson, National Environment Appellate Authority, as provided under the National Environment Appellate Authority (Financial and Administrative Powers) Rules , 1998 in the absence of the Chairperson or Vice-Chairperson .

DEPARTMENT OF POSTS (OFFICE OF THE POSTMASTER GENERAL , BAREILLY REGION)

Bareilly, the 7th October, 2005.

[F. No. Z -20018/4/2005 -CPA] R.K. VAISH, Jt . Secy .

अंतरिक्ष विभाग

बेंगलूर, 17 सितम्बर, 2005

S. O. 3811. Whereas the Central Government is ofopinion that for the purposes of the departmental inquiry relating to Shri Manohari Lal Meena , SPM (U /S ) Nehru Road Baraut, Meerut Dn . U.P. , it is necessary to summon as witness /call for any document from Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Ex. Postman of Baraut HO.

का. आ. 3813.-केन्द्र सरकार " सिगरेट तथा अन्य तम्बाकू उत्पाद ( व्यापार तथा वाणिज्य , उत्पादन , आपूर्ति एवं वितरण का विनियमन और विज्ञापनों के निषेध ) अधिनियम 2003 की धारा 25 11501

भारत. का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए अन्तरिक्ष विभाग में निम्नलिखित सारणी के कॉलम 3 में दिये गये अधिकारियों को प्राधिकृत करती है जो कि उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 4 के तहत कार्य करने के लिये सक्षम होंगे ।

3 2

प्रधान का. व सा. प्रशाः 11. इसरो दूरमिति, अनुवर्तन तथा

आदेश संचार जाल, 1 क्रास, पीण्या इण्डस्ट्रियल एस्टेट, बेंगलूर -560 058

प्राधिकृत अधिकारी

कार्यालय

क्र.सं.

3 2

प्रधान का व सा. प्रशा.

निदेशक ( का व ब )

1. अन्तरिक्ष विभाग/ भारतीय अन्तरिक्ष अनुसंधान संगठन/सिविल इंजीनियरी प्रभाग,

अन्तरिक्ष भवन, न्यूबी.ई.एल. रोड, बेंगलूर-560 094

12. मुख्य नियंत्रण सुविधा, पो. बा. सं. 66, सालगामे रोड, हासन-573 201

निदेशक 13. राष्ट्रीय एम.एस.टी. राडार सुविधा, गादंकी, पाकला मण्डल-517: 112, चित्तूर जिला, आन्ध्र प्रदेश

निदेशक

कार्यकारी निदेशक

अन्तरिक्ष भवन, न्यूबी.ई.एल. रोड 2. एन्ट्रिक्स कार्पोरेशन, बेंगलूर -560 094

14. उत्तर पूर्वी अन्तरिक्ष उपयोग केन्द्र, अन्तरिक्ष विभाग , भारत सरकार, उमियाम -793 103, मेघालय

रजिस्ट्रार

विशेष कार्य अधिकारी

3फ्लोर,

3. अं . वि. शाखा सचिवालय/ इसरो कार्यालय , लोक नायक भवन, पृथ्वीराज लेन, नई दिल्ली-110003

नियंत्रक 4. विक्रम साराभाई अन्तरिक्ष केन्द्र, इसरो पोस्ट, तिरुवन्तपुरम -695 022

नियंत्रण 5. द्रव नोदन प्रणाली केन्द्र, वलियामला पोस्ट तिरुवनन्तपुरम-695 547

नियंत्रक 6. इसरो उपग्रह केन्द्र,

पो. बा. सं. 17, एयरपोर्ट रोड, विमानपुरा पोस्ट, बेंगलूर-560 017

नियंत्रक 7. अन्तरिक्ष उपयोग केन्द्र, अंबावाडी विस्तार पोस्ट, जोधपुर टेकरा , अहमदाबाद-380 015

नियंत्रक 8. सतीश धवन अन्तरिक्ष केन्द्र, शार, श्रीहरिकोटा रेंज पो. - 524 124, नेल्लूर जिला, आन्ध्र प्रदेश

नियंत्रक 9. राष्ट्रीय सुदूर संवेदन एजेन्सी, अन्तरिक्ष विभाग, भारत सरकार,: बालानगर,

हैदराबाद-500 037

नियंत्रक 10. भौतिक अनुसंधान प्रयोगशाला,

नवरंगपुरा, अहमदाबाद-380 009

15. उन्नत ओंकड़ा संसाधन अनुसंधान संस्थान , 203अकबर रोड, तारबन्ड, मनोविकास नगर पी.ओ. , सिकन्दराबाद -500 009

प्रधाम, एच.आर.डी.

16. सेमि कन्डेक्टर कॉम्प्लेक्स

लिमिटेड,

(भारत सरकार का एन्टरप्राईस ) , सेक्टर -72, एस.ए.एस. नगर -160-071 (चंडीगढ़ के पास ) पंजाब

डीन 17. भारतीय सुदूर संवेदन संस्थान , 3 कालीदास रोड, पी.बी.सं. 135, देहरादून-248 001

प्रधान 18. प्रादेशिक सुदूर संवेदन सेवा केन्द्र, 40 मैन, ईश्वरनगर, बनशंकरी , बेंगलूर -560 070

प्रधान 19. प्रादेशिक सुदूर संवेदन सेवा केन्द्र, आई.आई.आर.एस. कैम्पस, पी.बी.सं. 135, सं.. 4 कालीदास रोड, देहरादून-248 001

प्रधान 20. प्रादेशिक सुदूर संवेदन सेवा केन्द्र, सी ए ज़ेड आर आई कैम्पस , जोधपुर-342003

प्रधान 21. प्रादेशिक सुदूर संवेदन सेवा केन्द्र, आई.आई.टी. कैम्पस , खरगपुर-721 302

प्रधान.

22. प्रादेशिक सुदूर संवेदन सेवा केन्द्र, पी.बी.सं. 430, शंकरनगर पी.ओ. , अमरावती रोड, नागपुर-440 010 11502

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005 /ASVINA 30 , 1927

3 23. इसरो संपर्क सेल,

प्रशासन अधिकारी अन्तरिक्ष भवन , प्लॉट सं. 461, 15रोड, खार ( पश्चिम ), मुम्बई-400 052

यह अधिसूचना जारी होने के दिनांक से लागू होगी ।

[फा. सं. 1/5/10/2005 - IV]

डॉ. आर.जी. नड़ादूर, संयुक्त सचिव DEPARTMENT OF SPACE

Bangalore, the 17th September, 2005 S. O. 3813.- In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 25 of " The Cigarettes and other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce , Production , Supply and Distribution) Act , 2003 " , the Central Government in the Department of Space hereby authorizes the officers indicated in Column 3 of the Table given below who shall be competent to act under Section 4 of the said Act :-

Sl . No. Office

Authorised Person 1.

Director(P& B) Department of Space/ Indian Space Research Organisation/Civil Engineering Divison, Antariksh Bhavan , NewBEL Road, Bangalore -560 094

Executive Director ANTRIX Corporation , 2. Antariksh Bhavan, New BEL Road, Bangalore -560 094

Officer on Special Duty

DOS Branch Secretariat/ ISROOffice, 3rd Floor, Loknayak Bhavan, Prithiviraj Lane, New Delhi -110003

Controller 4. Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre , ISRO Post Thiruvananthapuram -695 022

Controller 5. Liquid Propulsion System Centre , Valiamala P.O. Thiruvananthapuram -695 547

Controller 6. ISRO Satellite Centre , P.B. No. 17 , Airport Road, Vimanapura Post , Bangalore-560017

Controller Space Applications Centre, Ambawadi Vistar PO , Jodhpur Tekra, Ahmedabad -380 015

Controller Satish Dhawan Space Center, SHAR, Sriharikota Range PO-524 124 , Nellore District, Andhra Pradesh .

Controller National Remote Sensing Agency , Department of Space , Government of India, Balanagar, Hyderabad- 500037.

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] Sl. No. Office

Authorised Person

Controller 10. Physical Research Laboratory, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad -380 009 .

Head P&GA 11. ISRO Telemetry , Tracking and Command Network, 1Cross, Peenya Industrial Estate, Bangalore-560 058 .

Head P&GA 12. Master Control Facility , PB No. 66 , Salagame Road, Hassan-573 201

Director 13. National MST Radar Facility, Gadanki , Pakala Mandal- 517 112 , Chittoor District , Andhra Pradesh .

Director 14. North Eastem Space Applications Centre , Deptt. of Space, Govt. of India, UMIAM - 793 103 , Meghalaya.

Registrar 15. Advanced Data Processing Research Institute , 203 Akbar Road, Tarbund , Manovikas Nagar PO , Secunderabad-500 009 .

Head, HRD 16. Semi - Conducter Complex Limited, (AGovt . of India Enterprises ) , Sector-72, S.A.S. Nagar - 160 071 (Near Chandigarh ) , Punjab .

Dean 17. Indian Institute of Remote Sensing , 4, Kalidas Road , PB No. 135 , Dehra Dun- 248 001

Head 18. Regional Remote Sensing Service Centre, 40th Main, Eshwarnagar, Banashankari , Bangalore- 560 070.

Head 19. Regional Remote Sensing Service Centre, IIRS Campus , P.B. No. 135 , No. 4 Kalidas Road, Dehradun - 248 001

Head 20. Regional Remote Sensing Service Centre, CAZRI Campus, Jodhpur-342 003.

Head 21. Regional Remote Sensing Service Centre , IIT Campus , Kharagpur- 721 302 11503 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

Authorised Person

Office

Sl . No.

Head

22. Regional Remote Sensing

नईदिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़ चेन्नई मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों:अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, नागपुर , पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं । Service Centre ,

[संदर्भ: सीईडी/राजपत्र ]

जे. सी. अरोड़ा, निदेशक एवं प्रमुख ( सिविल इंजीनियरी) P.B. No. 430, Shankarnagar P.O. , Amaravati Road, Nagpur-440 010

Admn: Officer

23. ISRO Liaison Cell,

MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS , FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs )

(BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS) Antariskh Bhavan, Plot No. 461 , 15thRoad, Khar(West) , Mumbai-400 052 .

New Delhi, the 7th October , 2005 ThisNotification shall come into effect from the date of issue.

[F. No. 1 /5/ 10/2005 -IV] Dr. R.G. NADADUR, Jt. Secy.

S. O. 3814. In pürsttance of clause (b ) of sub- rule ( 1 ) ofRules 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that atmendments to the Indian Standards particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued:

उपभोक्ता मामले, खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय

SCHEDULE

(उपभोक्ता मामले विभाग )

Date from

No. and year

Sl . No. and year of

(भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो )

ofthe

No. the Indian

amendment

Standards

नई दिल्ली, 7 अक्तूबर, 2005

which the amendment shall have effect

(4)

(3)

(1) 、 (2)

का. आ. 3814.-भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गये मानक ( को) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं :

11768: 1986

30 September, 2005

1 September , 2005

अनुसूची

2. 783 : 1985

30 September , 2005

2 September , 2005

होने की

क्रम . संशोधित भारतीय मानक सं. की संख्या और वर्ष

संशोधन लागू तिथि

संशोधनों की संख्या और तिथि

30 September , 2005

1 September, 2005

3. 11769 (Part 1 ): 1987

(4)

(3)

(1) ( 2)

30 September, 2005

1 September, 2005

4. 12078: 1987 1987

1. 11768 : 1986

30 सितम्बर, 2005

1 सितम्बर, 2005

5. 11451 : 1986

30 September , 2005

1 September , 2005

2. 783: 1985

30 सितम्बर, 2005

2सितम्बर, 2005

30 September, 2005

1 September , 2005

6. 11770 (Part 1) : 1987

1 सितम्बर, 30 सितम्बर, 2005

2005.

3. 11769 (भांग 1 ): 1987

30 सितम्बर,

4. 12078 : 1987

2005

1 सितम्बर, 2005

5. 11451 : 1986

30 सितम्बर, 2005

1 सितम्बर, 2005

6. 11770 ( Part 1 ) :

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

30सितम्बर, 2005

1 सितम्बर, 2005

1987

[Ref: CED/Gazette]

J. C. ARORA, Director & Head ( Civil Engg.) इन संशोधनों की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो मानक भवन , १ बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों,

3016G1/05-2 11504

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005 /ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3815.-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 प्रिज्म इन्स्ट्रूमेंट्स एंड कंट्रोल्स, कल्पतरु सर्वे नं. 32 , विद्यापीठ के पीछे, अम्बेगांव ( बी ), पुणे -411046 द्वारा विनिर्मित" प्रिज्म -01 " श्रृंखला केस्वतः सूचक, स्वचालित भरण मशीन के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " प्रिज्म-01 " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2004/ 311 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है । उक्तमॉडल स्वचालित भरण, मशीन है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 5 कि.ग्रा. है । यह मुक्त प्रवाह वाले उत्पादों जैसे इसबगोल चूर्ण, धनिया चूर्ण, ग्लूकोज, चीनी, मसाले , चाय आदि को भार के आधार पर भरने के लिए प्रयुक्त होते हैं ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 299 )/2002 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11505 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi, the 4th October , 2005

S.O. 3815.-Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of self, indicating Automatic Filling Machine of " PRISM -01 " series and with brand name " PRISM-01 " (hereinafter referred to as the said model ), manufactured by M/s . Prism Instruments & Controls, Kalpatru , Survey No. 32, Behind Vidyapeeth, Ambegaon (B), Pune-411046 and which is assigned the approval mark iND/09/2004/311;

The said model is an automatic filling machine with a maximum capacity of 5 kg. It is used for filling the free flowing products like Isabagol Powder , Coriander Powder , Glucose, Sugar, Spices , Tea etc. on weight basis . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Herty alternate current power supply.

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

[F. No. WM-21 (299 )/2002 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 11506

THE GAZETTEOF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005 /ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II SEC . 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ 3816.-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 मांनक 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 कीं उप- धारा (7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स डेनियल मेजरमेंट एंड कंट्रोल ( इंडिया ) प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, चतुर्थ तल, राजीव टावर, ओल्ड पाडरा रोड, बडोदरा -390020, गुजरात द्वारा निर्मित " बैच कंट्रोलर इलैक्ट्रानिक प्रिसेट ( द्रव्य हेतु मीटर जल से इतर ) के मॉडल का, जिसका ट्रेड नाम " डानलोड 6000 " और श्रृंखला " डी एल- 6000" है और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 11/ 2005 /797 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है । उक्तमॉडल एक इलैक्ट्रानिक मापन प्रणाली है जिसका प्रयोग द्रव प्रबाह मीटरों तथा टैंकर ट्रकों, रेल टैंक और टैंक नौकाओं जैसे चल टैंकों को लदान टैंकर भण्डारों से रिफाइण्ड हाइड्रोकार्बन उत्पादों जैसे द्रवों के लिए द्रव बैच डिलीवरी प्रणाली में प्रयुक्त अन्य उपस्करों के साथ किया जाता है। यह प्रवाह मीटर के स्पन्दन स्रोत से इलैक्ट्रानिक स्पन्दनों को प्राप्त करता है और उनकी गणना करता है और इसमें स्थापित के फैक्टर का प्रयोग करके उनको आयतन में परिवर्तित करता है । यह चार प्रवाह मीटरों , चार नियंत्रण वाल्वों के प्रचालन और चार उत्पादों की डिलीवरी तथा छः योजक अतःक्षेपकों तथा योजक मीटरों को एक साथ मॉनीटर और नियंत्रित कर सकता है । परीक्षण ओ आई एम एल आर-117 " द्रवों के लिए मीटर- जल से इतर" में निर्धारित सामान्य मानदण्डों के अनुसार किया गया । तकनीकी ब्यौरे नीचे दिए गए हैं :-

मॉडल सं डी एल 6000, यथार्थता वर्ग 0.3 न्यूनतम माप मात्रा 2000 लीटर पर्यावरणीय वर्ग - सी सूचक की किस्म एल ई डी विद्युत आपूर्ति- 230 बी, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रचालन तापमान सीमा 20°सें. से 65°से. आर्द्रता सीमा - 5 से 95 % गैर- संपीड़न

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अलावा, कपटपूर्ण कार्यों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से बचाने के लिए भी सील किया जाएगा ।

[ फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 23 )/2004]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11507 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/ आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the , 4th October, 2005

S.O. 3816.--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 batch controller- electronic preset (meters for liquids -other than water) with of trade name " Danload 6000 " and of series " DL -6000 " with digital indication, manufactured by M/s . Daniel Measurement and Control (India ) Private Limited, 4th Floor, Rajiv Tower, Old Padra Road, Vadodra- 390020 , Gujarat and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 11 /05/797;

The said model is an electronic measuring system used along with liquid flow meters and other devices used in liquid batch delivery system for the liquids like refined hydro carbon products from loading terminal storage tanks to mobile tanks such as tanker trucks , rail tank and tank barges . It receive and count the electronic pulses from the pulse source of the flow meter and convert them into volume using the k- factor set in it. It can monitor and control operation of up to four flow meters , up to four control valves , delivery up to four products and up to six additive injectors and additive meter simultaneously . The test was conducted as per the general norms laid down in the OIML R 117- " Meters for liquids-other than water " . The technical details as follows :-

Model No. - DL-6000

Accuracy Class -0.3

Minimum measured quantity - 2000 litre

Environmental Class - C

Type of Indication-LED

Power Supply - 230 V, 50 Hz

Operatingtemperature limit - 20 °C to 65 ° C

Humadity limit - 5 to 95% non-condensing.

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

[F. No. WM -21 (23 )/2004]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 11508

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3817.- 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 ताज स्केल इंडस्ट्रीज, गंध बाजार के पास , स्टेशन रोड, वदनगर तालुर, मेहसाना, जिला ( एन.जी. ) वदनगर-384355 के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " ताज' है ( जिसे उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/ 09 / 2005 /486 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

10kgTAJ

તાજુ

ToWeigh

उक्तमॉडल (आकृति दी गई है ) एक काउंटर मशीन है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 10 कि.ग्रा. 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 उक्तअनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण ( काउंटर मशीन ) 500 ग्रा. से 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 146)/2005]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11509 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

New Delhi , the , 4th October, 2005

S.O. 3817. 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 counter machine with brand name " TAJ " (hereinafter referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/s . Taj Scale Industries , Opp . Gunj Bazar , Near Station Road , Tal , Vadnagar , Distt . Mehsana, (N.G. ) , Vadnagar - 384355 , and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005/486;

The said Model (figure given) is a counter machine. Its maximum capacity is 10 kg.

10kg TAJ

ToWeigh

[F. No. WM-21 (146)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 11510

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II SEC . 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3818.-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 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स माइक्रो लाइफ कारपोरेशन, 9442, बरनेक, स्विटजरलैण्ड द्वारा विनिर्मित और भारत में मैसर्स मोरपेन लेबोरेटरीज लि. 416-418 , अंतरिक्ष भवन, 22 , के.जी. मार्ग , नई दिल्लीद्वारा विपणित " एम टी" नम्य टिप प्रकार अंकक सूचन सहित डाक्टरी थर्मामीटर के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " होम हेल्थ" है (जिसे इसमें मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/ 11/2003/254 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र प्रकाशित करती है ।

Digi Flexi

उक्त मॉडल एक नम्य टिप प्रकार का 32° सें . से 43.9 ° सें. की रेंज का अंकक सूचन सहित एल सी डी ( द्रव क्रिस्टल प्रदर्श ) प्रकार का अंकक सूचन के साथ डाक्टरी थर्मामीटर है जिसका लघुतम अंतराल 0.1 से. है । यह 1.5 वोल्ट बटन सेल बैटरी पर कार्य करता है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 100)/2002 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11511

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 4th October , 2005

S.O. 3818.- Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section (7) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby publishes the certificate of approval of the model of Clinical Thermometer with digital indication of series 'MT' flexible tip type (herein referred to as the said model), and with brand name ' HOME HEALTH' manufactured by M/s . Micro Life Corporation, 9442 , Bemeck , Switzerland and marked in India by M/ s Morepen Laboratories Ltd , 416-418 , Antriksh Bhawan , 22 , K.G. Marg, New Delhi and which is assigned the approval mark IND/11/2003/254;

Digi Flexi

The said model is a flexible tip type Clinical thermometer with digital indication of range 32 ° C to 43.9 °C with digital indication of LCD (liquid crystal display) type and the smallest interval is 0.1 °C. It operates on 1.5V button cell battery.

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 100)/2002]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 3016 GI/05-3 11512

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 22, 2005 /ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II SEC . 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर , 2005

का. आ. 3819.-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 यधार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स माइक्रो लाइफ कारपोरेशन, 9442 , बरनेक, स्विटजरलैण्ड द्वारा विनिर्मित और भारत में मैसर्स मोरपेन लेबोरेटरीज लि. 416-418 , अंतरिक्ष भवन , 22 , के.जी. मार्ग, नई दिल्ली द्वारा विपणित " एम टी" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित डाक्टरी थर्मामीटर के माडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " होम हेल्थ" है ( जिसे इसमेंमॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/ 11 / 2003 /255 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र प्रकाशित करती है । उक्तमॉडल एक अनम्य टिप प्रकार का 32° सें. से 43.9 ° सें. की रेंज को अंकक सूचन सहित एल सी डी ( द्रव क्रिस्टल प्रदर्श ) प्रकार का अंकक सूचन के साथ डाक्टरी थर्मामीटर है जिसका लघुतम अंतराल 0.1 ° से. है । यह 1.5 वोल्ट बटन सेल बैटरी पर कार्य करता है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 100 ) /2002]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11513 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the , 4th October, 2005

S.O. 3819. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section (7) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of Clinical Thermometer with digital indication of series ' MT' non -flexible tip type (herein referred to as the said Model ) , and with brand name ' HOME HEALTH' manufactured by M/s . Micro Life Corporation, 9442 , Berneck, Switzerland and marketed in India by M/s Morepen Laboratories Ltd, 416-418 , Antriksh Bhawan, 22 , K.G. Marg, New Delhi and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 11/2003/255 ;

Classic

! The said Model is a non -flexible tip type clinical thermometer with digital indication of range 32 ° C to 43.9 °C with digital indication of LCD (liquid crystal display ) type and the smallest interval is 0.1 °C . It operates on 1.5V bution cellbattery.

[F. No. WM-21 (100)/2002]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 11514

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर , 2005

का. आ. 3820.-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;

Infra Red Thermometer

उक्त मॉडल 32 ° से. से 43.9° से तक की रेंज का अंकक सूचन सहित एल सी डी ( द्रव क्रिस्टल प्रदर्श ) प्रकार का डाक्टरी थर्मामीटर कर्ण थर्मामीटर है जिसका लघुतम अंतराल 0.1 ° से. है । यह 1.5 वोल्ट बटन सेल बैटरी पर कार्य करता है ।

[ फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 100 ) /2002 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11515 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

New Delhi , the , 4th October, 2005

S.O. 3820. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section (7) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby publishes the certificate of approval of Model of Clinical Thermometer with digital indication of series IR ' ( herein referred to as the said Model ) , and with brand name ' HOME HEALTH ' manufactured by M/s . Micro Life Corporation, 9442, Berneck, Switzerland and marketed in India by M/s Morepen Laboratories Ltd, 416-418, Antriksh Bhawan , 22 , K.G. Marg, New Delhi and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 11 /2003/256;

The said Model is a clinical thermometer (ear thermometer) with digital indication of range 32°C to 43.9°C with digital indication of LCD ( liquid crystal display ) type and the smallest interval is 0.1 °C. It operates on 1.5V button cell battery.

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 100)/2002 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 11516

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )]

नई दिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3821.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णिद 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 एशियन स्केल्स एंड इंजीनियरिंग कार्पोरेशन, 27, नित्यानन्द मुखर्जी रोड, हावड़ा-711101 द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " ई डब्ल्यूआई " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( बहु लोड सैल सहित वे ब्रिज प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांडका नाम " ए एस इसी " है ( जिसे उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09/2003 / 295 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

EWI series ccuracy Class )

उक्त मॉडल ( दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का लोड सैल सहित वे ब्रिज तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 टन है 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 प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा पर कार्य करता है ।

सीलबंद किया जाना: स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट की सीलबंद करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंदी की जाएगी ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 कीउप- 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 उक्तअनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण 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 सहित 5 टन से अधिक 50 टन तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 ,के, केके हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 63 )/2000 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11517 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[भाग II-खण्ड 3(ii) ]

New Delhi , the 4th October, 2005

S.O. 3821. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of the self- indicating, non-automatic (Weigh bridge with multi load cell type) weighing instrument with digital indication of " EWI" series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class III) and with brand name " ASEC" (hereinafter referred to as the model ), manufactured by M/ s . Asian Scales and Engineering Corporation , 27 , Nithyanand Mukerjee Road, Howrah- 711 101 and which is assigned the approval mark IND /09 /2003/295;

The said Model (see the figure given) is a Weigh bridge with multi load type load cell weighing instrument with maximum capacity of 30 tonnes and minimum capacity of 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 50 -Hertz alternate current power supply.

Sealing : In addition to sealing the stamping plate , the sealing is also done to prevent the opening of the machine to avoid 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 other weighing instruments of same accuracy class and of same make with maximum capacity above 5 tonne and up to 50 tonne and with number of 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 the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer with the same principles, design and with the same materials with which, the approved said model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM- 21 (63 )/2000 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 11518

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 4 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3822.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स एशियन स्केल्स एंड इंजीनियरिंग कार्पोरेशन, 27 , नित्यानन्द, मुखर्जी रोड, हावड़ा-711101 द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " ई डब्ल्यूआई " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म के लिए कनवर्शन किट प्रकार) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " ए एस इसी" है ( जिसे उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09 /2003 / 296 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

Conversion Kit for Pietform of EWI

Series Medium Accuracy Accuracy Closs III)

उक्त मॉडल ( दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का लोड सैल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 500 कि. ग्रा है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 100 ग्राम है । इसमें एक आषेयतुलन युक्तिहै जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल.ई.डी. ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा पर कार्य करता है ।

सीलबंद किया जाना स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट की सीलबंद करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद की जाएगी ।

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 उक्तअनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्राम या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. से अधिक 1000 कि. ग्रा. तक कीअधिकतम क्षमा 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 ( 63) /2000 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11519 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 4th October, 2005

S.O. 3822. 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 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of the self- indicating, non- automatic (conversion kit for platform type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " EWI" series of naedium accuracy (Accuracy class - III) and with brand name " ASEC" (hereinafter referred to as the model ) , manufactured by M/s. Asian Scales and Engineering Corporation, 27, Nithyanand Mukerjee Road, Howrah-711 101 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /2003 /296 ;

The saidModel (see the figure given) is a (conversion kit for Platform) strain gauge load cell based weighing instrument with maximum capacity of 500kg and minimum capacity of 2kg . The verification scale interval (e) is 100g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 volts and 50-Hertz alternate current power supply;

Sealing : In addition to sealing the stamping plate , the sealing is also done to prevent the opening of the machine to avoid 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 model shall also cover the other weighing instruments of same accuracy class and of same make with maximum capacity above 50 kg and up to 1000 kg and with number ofverification scale interval (n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 5g or more and with ' e' value of 1×10%, 2×10%, or 5 × 10*, k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which, the approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 (63 )/2000 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 3016GI/05-4 11520

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii)}

नई दिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3823.-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 ओरबिट्रोन इंटरप्राइजेज, ई-120 , जी आई डी सी इलैक्ट्रिानिक फेज, सेक्टर -26, कोलावाडा रोड, बी एच टाटा टेलिकाम, गांधीनगर, गुजरात द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एस पी टी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण (टेबल टोप प्रकार) के मॉडल का जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " प्रोम्ट" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09/2005 / 53 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृति' गेज प्रकार भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण अंकक सूचन सहित जो लोड सैल सिद्धांत पर कार्य करता है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श तोलम 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 भी 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 है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्तअनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्मित किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे ज़ो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान अंतराल सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मात 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10*, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 (70)/2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11521 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/ आश्विन 30 , 1927

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 4th October, 2005

S.O. 3823. 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 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 " SPT" series belonging to medium accuracy (accuracy class - III) and with brand name "PROMPT" (herein referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/ s . Orbitron Enterprises, E- 120 , G.I.D.C. , Electronics Zone, Sector- 26 , Kolavada Road, B/h Tata Telecom, Gandhinagar, Gujarat and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005/53;

The said Model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument ( table top type) working on the principle of load cell with digital indication of maximum capacity of 30 kg, minimum capacity 100g and belonging to medium accuracy class (accuracy class - III). The value of verification scale interval (e) is 5g.The display unit of Light Emitting Diode (LED) type . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

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

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 12 ) of Section 36- of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 100 mg to 2g and with the numlar ofverification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of Sg or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2× 10k, 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 (70)/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 11522

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)) THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3824.-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 ओरबिट्रोन इंटरप्राइजेज, ई-120, जी आई डी सी इलैक्ट्रानिक फेज, सेक्टर-26, कोप्लावाडा रोड, बी एच टाटा टेलिकाम , गांधीनगर, गुजरात द्वारा निर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " एस पी एच " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड़ का नाम " प्रोम्ट" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09/2005/54 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृति गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) का अस्वचालित ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार का) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 550 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2.5 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 50 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, 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 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्तमॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्तअनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्मित किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100मि. ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान अंतराल सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. से अधिक और 1000 किलोग्राम तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वालें हैं और " ई "र" ई " मान 1 × 10 *,10 , 2 × 10 या 5* या 5 × 10 *, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 70)/2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11523 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

New Delhi , the 4th October, 2005

S.O. 3824. 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 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 " SPH " series of high accuracy (Accuracy Class- II ) and with brand name "PROMPT" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s. Orbitron Enterprises , E- 120 , G.I.D.C. , Electronics Zone, Sector-26, Kolavada Road, B/h Tata Telecom, Gandhinagar, Gujarat and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005/54;

The saidModel is a strain gauge type load cell principle based non -automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) of high accuracy (Accuracy class -II) with a maximum capacity of 550 kg . and minimum capacity of 2.5 kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 50g . 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 230V 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 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 above 50 kg and upto 1000 kg and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 5000 to 50,000 for ' e' value of 100 mg or more and with 'e' valué of 1 × 10 , 2 × 10*, or 5 × 10k, where k is a positive or negative whole member or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design, accuracy and with the same materials withwhich, the said approved model has been manufactured .

[F. No. WM-21 (70)/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology.

11524

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

नईदिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3825.-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 ओरबिट्रोन इंटरप्राइजेज, ई-120, जी आई डी सी इलैक्ट्रानिक फेज, सेक्टर -26 , कोलावाडा रोड, बी एच टाटा टेलिकाम , गांधीनगर, गुजरात द्वारा निर्मित मध्वम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एस पी एच एन " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरणः (लटकने वाला प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " प्रोम्ट" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09/2005/52 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृति गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित माध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) का अस्वचालित ( लटकने वाले प्रकार का) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 100 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 400 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 20 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आघेयतुलन 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, 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 ) 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 मॉडलं 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 सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. से अधिक और 300 कि.ग्रा. तक कीअधिकतम 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 (70 )/2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11525 [भाग II-खण्ड 3(ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

New Delhi, the 4th October , 2005

S.O. 3825. 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 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 (Hanging type) with digital indication of " SPHN" series of medium accuracy (accuracy class - III) and with brand name "PROMPT" (hereinafter referred to as the said model), manufactured by M/s. Orbitron Enterprises , E- 120, G.I.D.C. , Electronics Zone, Sector-26, Kolavada Road, B/h Tata Telecom, Gandhinagar, Gujarat and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005/52;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell principal based non -automatic weighing instrument (Hanging type) of medium accuracy (accuracy class- III) with a maximum capacity of 100 kg. and minimum capacity of400g. The verification scale interval ( e ) is 20g. It has a tare device with 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED ) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230V . and 50Hz alternative current power supply.

In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing shall also be done to prevent 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 above 50 kg . and up to 300 kg. with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g. or more and with ' c' value of1× 10k, 2× 10k, or 5× 10k, where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero, manufactured by the same manufacturer with the same principle , design, and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No: WM-21 (70)/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 11526

[PART II SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

नईदिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3826.-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, किन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स ओरबिट्रोन इंटरप्राइजेज, ई-120 जी आई डी सी इलैक्ट्रानिक फेज, सैक्टर-26 , कोलावाडा रोड, बी एच टाटा टेलिकाम, गांधीनगर, गुजरात द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग-III ) वाले " एस पी सी आर " श्रृंखला के सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( केन प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " प्राक्ट " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09/2005/51 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृति गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) का अस्वचालित ( केन प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 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 व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन 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 ।

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 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 ग्रा . या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान अंतराल सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. से अधिक और 5000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 के , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[ फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 70) /2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11527 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 4th October , 2005

S.O. 3826. 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 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 (Crane type) with digital indication of " SPCR " series of medium accuracy (accuracy class - III ) and with brand name "PROMPT" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Orbitron Enterprises , E- 120 , G.1.D.C. , Electronics Zone , Sector- 26 , Kolavada Road , B /h Tata Telecom , Gandhinagar , Gujarat and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005/51 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell principal based non -automatic weighing instrument (Crane type) of medium accuracy (accuracy class - III) with a maximum capacity of 1000 kg . and minimum capacity of 4kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 200g . It has a taře device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED ) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230V and 50Hz alternative current power supply.

In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing shall also be done to prevent 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 up to 5000 kg and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10 % , 2 × 10% , or 5 × 10k, where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 (70)/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 3016GI/05-5 11528

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3827.-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 ओरबिट्रोन इंटरप्राइजेज, ई-120 , जी आई डी सी इलैक्ट्रानिक फेज, सेक्टर -26 , कोलावाडा रोड, बी एच टाटा टेलिकाम, गांधीनगर, गुजरात द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एस पी सी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म के लिए कनवर्जन किट प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " प्रोक्ट " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09/2005/50 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) का अस्वचालित ( प्लेटफार्म के लिए कनवर्जन किट प्रकार का ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई) का मान 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आघेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन 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 । स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद भी किया जाएगा ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धान ( 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 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 मान अंतराल सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. से अधिक और 5000 किलोग्राम 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 शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 70 )/2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान [ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

11529 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

New Delhi , the 4th October, 2005

S.O. 3827.-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 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 (Conversion kit for Platform) with digital indication of " SPC" series of medium accuracy (accuracy class - III) and with brand name " PROMPT" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model), manufactured by M/s . Orbitron Enterprises , E- 120, G.I.D.C. , Electronics Zone , Sector -26 , Kolavada Road, B/h Tata Telecom, Gandhinagar , Gujarat and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005/50;

The said Model is a strain gauge type load cell principal based non- automatic weighing instrument ( Conversion kit for Platform) of medium accuracy (accuracy class - III) with a maximum capacity of 1000 kg . and minimum capacity of 2 kg. The verification scale interval ( e) is 100g. 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 230V 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 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 above 50 kg and up to 5000 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 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k , or 5 × 10* , 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(70)/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology [PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

11530

नई दिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3828.- 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 जयपुर साइंटिफिक इंस्ट्रूमेंट, एन 7 , संजय टावर, लक्ष्मी मंदिर सिनेमा के पीछे , टेंक रोड, राजस्थान द्वारा उच्च निर्मित उच्च यथार्थता कि वर्ग (यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) बाले " बीषा " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " वीवा" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09/ 2005/267 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गैज प्रकार का भार सैल आधारित ( टेबलटाप प्रकार का ) अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा . है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 2 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन 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 ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद 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 उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 1 मिग्राम से 50 मि. ग्राम तक " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि. ग्राम या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (एन ) सहित 50 किलोग्राम 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 ( 125 )/2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11531 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 4th October, 2005

S.O. 3828. 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 " VIVA " series of high accuracy (accuracy class - II ) and with brand name " VIVA " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufacturedby M/s . Jaipur Scientific Instruments , N-7 , Sanjay Tower, Behind Laxmi Mandir Cinema, Tank Road, Jaipur , Rajasthan and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /2005/267;

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

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

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg. with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of Img. to 50mg. and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 5000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg. or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10%, 2 × 10k , or 5 × 10%, where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufacturedby 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 ( 125)/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 11532

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3829.- 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 उक्तमॉडल 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 जयपुर साइवलिफिक इंस्ट्रूमेंट, एन 7, संजय टावर, लक्ष्मी मंदिर सिनेमा के पीछे, टेंक रोड, राजस्थान द्वारा निर्मित उच्च यथार्थता वर्ग ( यथार्थता वर्ग -11 ) वाले " वीवा " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " वीवा " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09 /2005/ 268 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृत गैज प्रकार का भार सैल आधारित ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार का ) अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 300 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 1 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई ) 20 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आघेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन 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 ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद 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 किउक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्तअनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100मि. ग्राम या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 किलो ग्राम से अधिक और 1000 किलोग्राम तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 x 10 या 5 ×10 के, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 125)/2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11533 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 4th October , 2005

S.O. 3829. 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 model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform type ) with digital indication of " VIVA " series of high accuracy (accuracy class - II ) and with brand name "VIVA " (hereinafter referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Jaipur Scientific Instruments, N- 7 , Sanjay Tower , Behind Laxmi Mandir Cinema, Tank Road, Jaipur , Rajasthan and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005/268;

The said Model is a strain gauge type load cell based non-automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with a maximum capacity of 300 kg and minimum capacity of 1kg . The verification scale interval ( e) is 20g. 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 230V and 50Hz alternative current power supply.

In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing shall also be done to prevent 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 upto 1000kg. with verification 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 × 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 ( 125 )/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 11534

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 22 , 2005 /ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

नईदिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3830.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स परम वेईंग सिस्टम्स , 7 , रामानन्द कॉम्पलैक्स गड़ीतल, हदपसार , पुणे -411028 द्वारा निर्मित सामान्य यथार्थता वर्ग ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) के सदृश्यसूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( मैकेनिकल बेबी कम चाइल्ड वेईंग मशीन- डायल टाइप ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " परम " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09 / 2005 / 819 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृत गैज प्रकार का स्प्रिंग आधारित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 25 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 1 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई ) 100 ग्राम है । माप को डायल द्वारा संकेतित किया जाता है । स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद 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 उक्तअनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्राम या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 1000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 किलो ग्राम 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 शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 323 )/2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11535 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 4th October, 2005

S.O. 3830. 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 salillAct, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of model of non -automatic weighing instrument with analogue indication (Mechanical baby cum child weighting machine-Dial type) of ordinary acca (Accuracy class III ) and with brand name " PARAM" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s. Param Weighing Systems , 7, Ramanand Complex, Gadital , Hadapsar , Pune-411 028 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005/819;

The said model (see the figure given below) is a spring based weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 1kg . The verification scale interval (e) is 100g. The result of measurement is indicated by a dial .

In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing shall also be done to prevent 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 sories with waximum capacity upto 50kg. and with number of verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 100 to 1,000 for 'e' willeuf 5g. or more and with ' e ' value of I ×10k, 2 × 10k ; or 5 × 10k , k being the positive or negative whole number to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principles , design and with the same terials with which, the said approved said model has been manufactured.

IF. No. WM-21 (323 )/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 3016G1/05-6 11536

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005 /ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)]

नई दिल्ली , 4 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3831.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा (7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स एल.जी. वेइंग सिस्टम, आर जेड -18 , गली नं. 2 , दुर्गा पार्क, नई दिल्ली-110033 द्वारा निर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " एल जीटी" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एल जी " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09/ 2005/389 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

PREMIUM COUNTER SCALE

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का लोड सैल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबल टोप प्रकार का ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 12 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 50 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 1 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ज 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 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 सेजिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण 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 50,000 तक के 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 अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 या 510 , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 134)/2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग Ii- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

New Delhi, the, 4th October, 2005

S.O. 3831.-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 " LGT " series of high accuracy (Accuracy class - II) and with brand name " LG " (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . L.G. Weighing System, RZ- 18 , Gali No. 2, Durga Park, New Delhi - 110033 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005/389 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrurnent (Table top type ) with a maximum capacity of 12 kg. and minimum capacity of 50 g . The verification scale interval (e) is 1 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 and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

In addition 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 powers conferred by Sub - section (12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg. with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 1 mg . to 50 mg and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 5000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2× 10k, or 5×10k, where k is 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 (134)/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY , Director of Legal Metrology 11538

THE GATETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3832.-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 एल.जी. वेइंग सिस्टम, आर जेड-18 , गली नं. 2 , दुर्गा पार्क, नई दिल्ली-110033 द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एल जी पी" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेट फार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एल जी " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09/ 2005 /390 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का लोड सैल आधारित अस्वचालित ( प्लेट फार्म प्रकार का ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 500 कि.ग्रा. है 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 तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है। उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 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 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 'प्रभाण 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 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 100 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " यान 1 10 , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 के, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं । के

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 134 )/2003]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11539

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the , 4th October , 2005

S.O. 3832. 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 (Plateform type) with digital indication of " LGP " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " LG " (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . L.G. Weighing System, RZ- 18, Gali No. 2, Durga Park, New Delhi - 110033 and which is assigned the approval mark IND /09 /2005/390;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non -automatic weighing instrument ( Plateform type ) with a maximum capacity of 500 kg. and minimum capacity of 2 kg . The verification scale interval ( e) is 100 g. It has atare 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 from 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 1000 kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5 g . or more and with ' e ' 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 (134)/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 11540

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005 / ASVINA 30, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर, 2005-

का. आ. 3833.- 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 आकृदि देखें और मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप हैं और इस बात का संभावना है कि सतार 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 लार्सेन एंड टूब्रो लि. , डी ई पी टी, ई बी जी- एस बी यू, 3 /पी डीडी विभाग, पोवई वर्क्स, मुम्बई -400 072 द्वारा निर्मित सदृश प्रदर्शन सहित वितरका पम्प " पेस मेकर- II " श्रृंखला के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एल एंड टी " है ( जिसे उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09/2004/421 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है;

उक्त मॉडल एक सदृश प्रदर्शन सहित वितरक पम्प है और इसमें सामंजस्य के लिए व्यासमापन चक्र सहित घनात्मक विस्थापन मीटर है । इसकी अधिकतम प्रवाह दर १० लीटर प्रति मिनट और न्यूनतम प्रवाह दर 4 लीटर/मिनट है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 999.9 लीटर और न्यूनतम खंड 100 मि.ली. है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज पर कार्य करता है । सामंजस्य रेंज 20 लीटर से अधिक पर 500 मिलि. से 100 मिलि. है । इसका परिचालन दाब 3 कि.ग्रा ./से.मि. है । इसको 7 अंकीय आउट पुट सहित यांत्रिकी योग करने वाला बनाया गया है ।

फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 288 ) /2003 ]

[ पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11541 [ भाग II-खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

New Delhi , the, 4th October, 2005

S.O. 3833. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub -sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of dispensing pump analogue indication ( herein referred to as the said Model) of " PACEMAKER II ' ' series with brand name " L & T " , manufactured by M/ s . Larsen and Toubro Limited, Deptt. EBG-SBU 3 /PDD, Powai Works, Mumbai -400 072 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/ 2004 /421 ;

The said model is a dispensing pump with analogue indication and having a positive displacement meter provided with calibration wheel for adjustment . The maximum flow rate is 90 litre per minute and minimum flow rate is 4 litre/minute . Its maximum capacity is 999.9 litre and the smallest division is 100 ml . The instruments operates on 230 V, 50 Hertz alternate current power supply. The range of adjustments is-500 ml . to +100 ml. over 20 litre . The operating pressure is 3kg/ cm² . It has a built in mechanical totalezier with 7 digit output .

[F. No. WM- 21 (288 )/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 11542

[PART II SEC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3834.-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 इंटरफेस सिस्टम आई एन सी, सी-29, साध नगर, एस टी-9 , पालम कालोनी, दिल्ली -110045 द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता वर्ग ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " आई एफ पी" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " इंटरफेस" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2005/313 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार का ) अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 600 कि.ग्रा . है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2.5 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 50 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 वोल्टऔर 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

जाएगा । स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद 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 उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा . से अधिक और 1000 किलोग्राम तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 के, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्यहै ।.

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 132) /2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11543 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ] .

New Delhi , the , 4th October, 2005

S.O. 3834. 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 saillAct, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non -automatic weighing instrument (Platform type ) with digital indication of " IFP " series of high accuracy (Accuracy class- IF) and with brand name " INTERFACE" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model ), manufactured by M/s . Interface System Inc, C- 29, Sadh Nagar, St- 9, Palam Colony, Delhi - 110045 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005/313;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform type ) with a maximum capacity of 600 kg. and minimum capacity of 2.5 Kg . The verification scale interval (e) is 50 g. It has atare 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 from 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 cories with capacity above 50 kg and upto 1000 kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 5000 to 50000 for wine of 100 mg or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k, or 5 × 10t , where k is a positive or negative whole nuntharar 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 (132)/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 3016GI/05-7.

11544

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii)}

नई दिल्ली, 4 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3835.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स इंटरफेस सिस्टम आई एन सी, सी-29 , साध नगर, एस टी-9, पालम कालोनी , दिल्ली -110045 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " आई एफ दी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " इंटरफेस" है ( जिसे उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2005/312 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित ( टेबलटॉप प्रकार का ) अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 12 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 40 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 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 ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद 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 उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल विर्निर्माण 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 ग्राम या उससे अधकि के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अप्तराल ( एन ) सहित और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 के, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 132 ) /2003 ] पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 11545

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the , 4th October, 2005

S.O. 3835. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribea 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 " IFT" series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class -III ) and with brand name " INTERFACE " (hereinafter referred to as the said Model ), manufactured by M/ s . Interface System Inc, C - 29 , Sadh Nagar , St -9 , Palam Colony, Delhi - 110045 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005/312;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument ( Table top type ) with a maximum capacity of 12 kg . and minimum capacity of 40 g . The verification scale interval ( e) is 2 g . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED ) 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 from opening of the machine for fraudulent practices .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg. with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg to 2g and with verification scale interval (n) in the range og 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5 g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k , or 5 × 10k , where k being 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 ( 132 )/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 11546

THE GALETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 5 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3836.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60.) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स स्टीलयार्ड इंडिया , 723 , 9 मैन, दूसरा ब्लॉक, 1 स्टेज , एच बी आर लेआउट, बंगलौर-560043 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले ' एस आई पी टी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेट फार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " स्टीलयार्ड" है और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09 / 2005/ 825 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृत गैज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित ( टेबलटाप प्रकार का ) अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 कि.ग्रा . है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 4 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 200 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्तिहै। जिसका शतप्रतिशत 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 ।

STEELYARD

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद 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 विनिर्मित किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरणं भी होंगे जो 5 ग्राम या उससे अधिकके " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से अधिक और 5000 किलोग्राम तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 के या 5 ×1010 के,के, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं . डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 220 ) /2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11547

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

New Delhi , the , 5th October , 2005

S.O. 3836.Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority , is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-sections (7 ) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of the self indicating non- automatic (Platform type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of series " SI -PT " of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III) and with brand name " STEEL YARD " manufacturedby M/s . Steelyard India, 723, 9th Main, 2nd Block, 1st stage, HBR Layout, Bangalore - 560043 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005/825 ;

The said Model (see the figure given below) is a strain gauge type load cell based weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 1000 kg. and minimum capacity of 4 Kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 200 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 and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply .

In addition 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 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 same series with inaximum capacity above 50 kg and upto 50,000 kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10000 for ' e' value of 5 g . or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k , or 5 × 10k , k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 (220)/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY , Director of Legal Metrology 11548

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) | THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2905 / ASVINA 30, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 5 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3837.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित्त प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चातू, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देख 1978-78 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 परिस्थित्तियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स स्टीलयार्ड इंडिया, 723 , 9 मैन, दूसरा ब्लॉक, 1 स्टेज, एच बी आर लेआउट, बंगलौर -560043 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता वर्ग ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एस आई-टी बी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " स्टीलयार्ड " है । और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09/ 2005 / 824 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सैल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबलटॉप प्रकार का ) अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक 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 ।

STEELYARD

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद किया जाएगा । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करनी है कि उक्त मॉडल कि अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण-पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से, जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि. ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 5 ग्रा. तक या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( एन ) सहित 50 किलोग्राम तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई" मान 1 ×10 , 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 *, के हैं, जो घनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 (220 ) /2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11549 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 5th October , 2005

S.O. 3837. 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 series " SI - TB " of medium accuracy ( Accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " STEEL YARD " manufactured by M/ s . Steelyard India , 723 , 9th Main , 2nd Block , 1st stage , HBR Layout , Bangalore - 560043 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005/824 ;

The said Model ( see the figure given below) is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type ) with a maximum capacity of 30 kg. and minimum capacity of 100g. The verification scale interval (e) is 5 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 and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

STEELYARD

In addition to ( see the figure given below) sealing the stamping plate , sealing shall also be done to prevent from 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 upto 50 kg upto with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 100 to 10000 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 × 10% , 2 × 10k , or 5 × 10k , k being a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured oy 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 ( 220)/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 11550

[PART II SEC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 5 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3838.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स एशिओर सिस्टम्स, 16/5, मथुरा रोड, फरीदाबाद, हरियाणा-121002 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता वर्ग ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " ए एस -111 " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( वे ब्रिज प्रकार) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एशिओर " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09/2005 /820 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है । उक्तमॉडल एक अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( वे ब्रिज ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 60,000 किग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 किलो ग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 10 किलो ग्राम है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक 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 सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने 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 उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 टन से 150 टन तक " ई" मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 किलोग्राम तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1× 10 , 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 के, के हैं , जो घनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 151 ) /2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11551 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 5th October , 2005

S.O. 3838. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted tot 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 ofWeights and Measures (Approval ofModels ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby publishes the certificate of approval of the Model ofnon -automatic weighing instrument weigh bridge type) with digital indication belonging to medium accuracy (Accuracy class III) of "AS- 111 " series with brand "ASSURE" (herein referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/s Assure Systems, 16/5, Mathura Road, Puidut 121002, Haryana and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005/820;

The said Model is a non-automatic weighing instrument (weighbridge) with a maximum capacity of60,000 kg and minimum capacity of 200 kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 10 kg. It has a tare device with a 100 per cont subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 volts and 50-Hertz alternate current power supply . The load cell is of strain gauge type .

In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing shall also be done to prevent 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 medium capacity above 5 tonne and up to 150 tonne with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 5kg or more and with ' e ' value 1 × 10k, 2× 10* , 5 × 10k , k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero, manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principles , design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

F. No. WM- 21 ( 151 )/2005]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 3016G1/05-8 11552

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 5 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3839.-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, उक्तअधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स मेटलर- टोलेडो इण्डिया प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, अमर हिल्स, साकी विहार रोड, पवाई, मुंबई-400072 द्वारा विनिर्मित विशेष यथार्थता वर्ग ( यथार्थता वर्ग-1 ) वाले " बी बी के " श्रृंखला केअंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " मेटलर- टोलेडो " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09/2005/605 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

METTLER TOLEDO

उक्त मॉडल मोनो ब्लॉक प्रौद्योगिक आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार का ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 3,100 किग्रा . है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 1 ग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल " ई " 0.01 ग्राम है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । तरल उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद 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 किउक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 1 ग्राम या उससे अधिकके " ई" मान के लिए 50,000 के बराबर या उससे अधिक 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, के हैं, जहाँ धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 154) /2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11553 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

New Delhi, the 5th October , 2005

S.O. 3839. 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 ofWeights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights andMeasures (Approval ofModels) 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 " BBK" series of special accuracy (accuracy class- 1) and with brand name "METTLER TOLEDO" (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Mettler-Toledo India Private Limited, Amar Hills, Saki Vihar Road, Powai , Afumbai -400072 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005/605;

The said model is a mono block technology based non -automatic weighing instrumnent (Table top type) with a maximum capacity of 3100g and minimum capacity of 1g. The verification scale interval (e) is 0.01 g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The liquid crystal diode (LCD ) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230V, 50Hz alternative current power supply.

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

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

[F. No. WM-21 (154)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY , Director of Legal Metrology 11554

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii)] THE GAZTEITE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 5 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3840.-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 कहीं 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 एन टैक इलैक्ट्रानिक्स कम्पनी, 102, राजलक्ष्मी काम्प्लैक्स, 16, विजय प्लाट, गोंडल रोड, राजकोट, गुजरात-360002 द्वारा निर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले "एन टी-2" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एन टैक' है ( जिसे इसमें इसके परचात उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) औरजिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09/05/400 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृति गैज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार का ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 22 किग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रामः है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 2 ग्राम 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, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन 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 ) द्वारा प्रदस शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है किउक्त 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 जो 1 मि. ग्रा. से 50 मि.ग्रा. तक " ई" मान के लिए 100 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि. ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान ( एन ) अंतराल सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 * या 5 ×10 * के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 225)/2004]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11555 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

New Delhi, the 5th October, 2005

S.O. 3840.- 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 ofModels ) 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 " NT2 " series of high accuracy (Accuracy class II) with brand name "N- TECH" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ), manufactured byM/s N-Tech Electronics Co. , 102 , Rajalaxmi Complex, 16, Vijay Plot, Gondal Road, Rajkot, Gujarat - 360002 and which is assigned the approval mark IND /09/05/400;

The said model is a strain gauge type Load cell based non- automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with amaximum capacity of 22 kg and minimum capacity of 100 g . The verification scale interval (e) is 2g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The light emitting diode (LED ) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230Volts , 50Hz alternative current power supply .

In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing shall also be done to prevent 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 instraments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of Img to 50mg and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 5000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10 , 2 × 10k, or 5 × 10*, where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principles, design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM- 21 (225)/2004 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 11556

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 22 , 2005 /ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 5 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3841.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चाद, गृह 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 भाँडल 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 एन टैक इलैक्ट्रानिक्स कम्पनी, 102 , राजलक्ष्मी काम्लैक्स, 16, विजय प्लाट, गोंडल रोड, राजकोट, गुजरात -360002 द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थतः वर्ग- III ) वाले " एन टी -3" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टोप प्रकार) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एन टैक" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09/ 05/401 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एकविकृति गैज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार का ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 5 ग्राम 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, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकन 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 ) 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 जो 100 मि. ग्रां. 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 मान सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले है 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 ( 225 ) /2004 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11557 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

New Delhi , the 5th October, 2005

S.O. 3841. 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 ofModels) 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 " NT- 3 " Series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class III) and with brand name "N- TECH" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s N- Tech Electronics Co. , 102, Rajalaxmi Complex, 16, Vijay Plot, Gondal Road, Rajkot, Gujarat -360002 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/05/ 401;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with a maximum capacity of 30 k..g . and minimum capacity of 100 g. The verification scale interval ( e) is 5 g . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect The light emitting diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230Volts, 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 conferred by sub- section ( 12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg. with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg. to 2g . and with verification scale interval (N) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5 g. or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2× 10%, or 5x10k , 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 (225)/2004 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY , Director of Legal Metrology 11558

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

नईदिल्ली, 5 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3842.-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 बांट 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 एन टैक इलैक्ट्रानिक्स कम्पनी , 102 राजलक्ष्मी काम्प्लैक्स, 16, विजय प्लाट, गोंडल रोड, राजकोट, गुजरात -360002 द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एन पी 3" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एन टैक" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 05 / 402 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृति गेज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेट फार्म प्रकार का) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 कि. ग्रा. है औरन्यूनतम क्षमता 2 किलो ग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 100 ग्राम है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन 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 ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन 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 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 का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन. उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान ( एन ) अन्तराल सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. से अधिक और 5000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 x 10 या 5 × 10 , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूंर्णांक याशून्यके समतुल्य हैं

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 225 )/ 2004 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11559 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30 , 1927

NewDelhi , the 5th October, 2005

S.O. 3842. 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 (Plateform type ) with digital indication of " NP - 3 " Series of medium accuracy ( Accuracy class III ) and with brand name " N- TECH" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s N -Tech Electronics Co. , 102 , Rajalaxmi Complex, 16 , Vijay Plot, Gondal Road, Rajkot , Gujarat -360002 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005/402;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non -automatic weighing instrument (Plate form type) with a maximum capacity of 1000 kg . and minimum capacity of 2kg .. The verification scale interval (e) is 100g.. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The light emitting diod (LED) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts, 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 instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50 Kg and upto 5000Kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5 mg or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k , or 5x10 , where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principles , design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM- 21 (225)/2004]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 3016GI/05-9 [PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

11560

नई दिल्ली, 5 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3843.-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;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स एन टैक इलैक्ट्रानिक्स कम्पनी, 102 , राजलक्ष्मी काम्प्लैक्स, 16 , विजय प्लाट, गोंडल रोड, राजकोट, गुजरात-360002 द्वारा निर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " एन टी-300 " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम ' एन टैक " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/ 09 /05/403 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

000

उक्त मॉडल एक विद्युत चुम्बक बल प्रतिपूर्ति सिद्धांत पर आधारित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार का ) है इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 300 ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 मि. ग्रा. ग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 10 मि. ग्राम है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है। उपकरण 230 बोल्ट , 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टाम्यिग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिका सीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद भी किया जाएगा। गौर केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा ३८ को उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्तमॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत सगी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से, जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के पैसे ही भेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 1 मि. ग्रा. से 50 मि. ग्रा. तक " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 50000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन) और 100 मि. ग्रा. या उसले अधिक के " ई" भार के लिए 5000 से 50,000 तक की रेस में सत्यापन मान ( एन ) अंतराल सहित 50 ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं ओर " ई" मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 के, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्यं हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 225) /2004 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 11561 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

New Delhi , the 5th October , 2005

S.O. 3843.-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 " NT - 300 '' series of high accuracy (accuracy class -II) and with brand name " N - TECH" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s N - Tech Electronics Co. , 102, Rajalaxmi Complex, 16 , Vijay Plot , Gondai Road, Rajkot , Gujarat -360 002 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/05/403;

0.000

R-TECH

The said model is a electro magnetic force compensation based non - automatic weighing instrument ( Table top type) with a maximum capacity of 300g 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) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230Volts , 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 conferred by sub- section ( 12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 Kg with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 100 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 1mg to 50mg and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 5000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg or more with ' e ' 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 principles , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 (225)/2004 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 11562

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ]

पेट्रोलियम ओर प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय ,

नई दिल्ली, 7 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3844.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम ओर खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) की धारा6 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधिन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम ओर प्राकृतिक गेस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ ओर तारीख की नीचे दी गई अनुसूची में यथा उल्लेखित तारीख की अधिसूचना , का .आ संख्या द्वारा उन अधिसूचनाओ से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि के अधिकार के अर्जन का अधिकार प्राप्त किया था ।

ओर केन्द्रीय सरकार ने उक्त अधिनियम का धारा 6 की उपधारा ( 4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , उक्त भूमियों में जो सभी विल्लंगमो से मुक्त है , उपयोग का अधिकार इंडियन ऑयल कॉपोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित किया था । ओर सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने केन्द्रीय सरकार का रिपोर्ट दी है कि विरमगाम से सिध्धपुर तक ( गुजरात राज्य) पेट्रोलियम उत्पाकों के परिवहन के प्रयोजन के लिए गुजरात राज्य के अनुसुची में उक्त विरमगाम , देत्रोज , बेचराजी , महेसाणा , उंझां , चाण्स्मा, पाटण व सिध्धपुर तालुका में स्थित ग्रामों कि भूमियों में पाइपलाइन बिछाई जा चुकी हे अतः इन भूमियों में प्रचालन की समाप्ति की जाए जिसका संक्षिप्त विवरण इस अधिसूचना की संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट किया जाता है ।

अतः अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , पेट्रोलियम पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) नियम , 1963, के नियम 4 , के स्पष्टीकरण 1 के अधिन अपेक्षानुसार उक्त अनुसूची के स्तंभ 7 में उल्लेखित तारीख की प्रचालन की समाप्ति की तारीखों के रुप धोषित करती है ।

अनुसूची

ग्राम का नाम

का.आ.सं.एंव दिनांक

क्रम . स .

1495

हांसलपुर 1.

विरमगाम 01.05.2002

वलाणा

कोटना

नाडीयाना

कन्याला

चणोठिया राज्य

जिला

तहसील

प्रचालन की समाप्तिकी तारीख

09.08.2003 अमदावाद

विरमगाम

गुजरात

09.08.2003 अमदावाद

विरमगाम

गुजरात

09.08.2003 अमदावाद

विरमगाम

गुजरात

09.08.2003 अमदावाद

विरमगाम

गुजरात

09.08.2003 अमदावाद

विरमगाम

गुजरात

09.08.2003 अमदावाद

विरमगाम

गुजरात 09.08.2003 अमदावाद

विरमगाम

गुजरात [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

11563

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30 , 1927

वलाणा

879 13.032003

कन्याला

विरमगाम अमदावाद

09.08.2003 गुजरात

विरमगाम

2056 21.07.2003

चणोठीया अमदावाद

09.08.2003 गुजरात

विरमगाम

1952 10.06.2002

चणोठीया अमदावाद

09.08.2003 गुजरात

विरमगाम

1955 10.06.2002

अघर

(अशोकनगर )

1494 01.05.2002

बास्का

भन्कोडा

रामपुरा

कांझ

सदातपुरा

देकावाडा

गमनपुरा

नदिसाला

रुडातल

डाभसर

अघर 7.

(अशोकनगर)

1956 10.06.2002

बास्का

देत्रोज

भन्कोडा

देत्रोज

डाभसर

देत्रोज

अघर (अशोकनगर )

880 13.03.2003

बास्का

देत्रोज

1954 10.062002

10. 2052 21.07.2003

देत्रोज

रामपुरा

रांतेज

बेचराजी

11.

बेचराजी

1492 01.05.2002 रुपुरा

आसजोल बेचराजी

बेचराजी

वनपुरा

करनसागर बेचराजी

बेचराजी

जेतपुरा

रनेला

बेचराजी

कनोडा

बेचराजी

महेसाणा

12 .

रामपुरा

1493 01.05.2002 (कटोसन)

नडासा

महेसाणा

पालज

महेसाणा

अमदावाद

09.08.2003 गुजरात

देत्रोज अमदावाद

09.08.2003 गुजरात

09.08.2003

देत्रोज अमदावाद गुजरात

09.08.2003

देत्रोज अमदावाद गुजरात

09.08.2003

देत्रोज अमदावाद गुजरात

09.08.2003

देत्रोज अमदावाद गुजरात

09.08.2003

देत्रोज अमदावाद गुजरात 09.08.2003

देत्रोज अमदावाद

09.08.2003

गुजरात

देत्रोज अमदावाद

09.08.2003

गुजरात

09.08.2003

देत्रोज अमदावाद गुजरात

देत्रोज अमदावाद

09.08.2003

गुजरात

09.08.2003

अमदावाद गुजरात

09.08.2003

अमदावाद गुजरात

09.08.2003

अमदावाद गुजरात

अमदावाद

09.08.2003

गुजरात

अमदावाद

09.08.2003

गुजरात

अमदावाद

09.08.2003

गुजरात

महेसाणा

09.08.2003

गुजरात

09.08.2003

महेसाणा गुजरात

09.08.2003

महेसाणा

गुजरात

09.08.2003

महेसाणा गुजरात

09.08.2003

महेसाणा

गुजरात

09.08.2003

महेसाणा

गुजरात

09.08.2003

महेसाणा

गुजरात 09.08.2003

महेसाणा

गुजरात

महेसाणा

09.08.2003

गुजरात

09.08.2003

महेसाणा

गुजरात

09.08.2003

महेसाणा

गुजरात 11564

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ ASVINA 30 , 1927

13. 3409

बेचराजी

रामपुरा

24.10.2002

14.

बेचराजी

आसजोल

1603 28.05.2003

15.

बेचराजी

करनसागर

1604 28.05.2003

16.

बेचराजी

कनोडा

1953 10.06.2002

उंझां

डाभी

1491

17.

उंझां

सुनाक

01.05.2002

उंझां

तुन्डाव

उंझां

वरवाडा

उंझां

विसोल

चानसमा

सुनसर

1490

18.

चानसमा

घिनोज

01.052002

चानसमा

दानोदरा

चानसमा

मुलठानिया

चानसमा

पलासर

चानसमा

सेवाली

पाटण 961

मन्नुद

19.

प.टण

दाभडी

15.03.2002

पाटण

रुवावी

पाटण

कानी

कानेशरा

1596

सिध्धपुर 20.

खाली सिध्धपुर 10.05.2002

खोलवाडा सिध्धपुर

सिध्धपुर

गणेशपुरा

सिध्धपुर

गंगलासन सिध्धपुर 3681

सिध्धपुर 21 .

सिध्धपुर

22.11.2002

22.

सिध्धपुर

1605 28.05.2003

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

09.08.2003 गुजरात

महेसाणा

09.08.2003 महेसाणा गुजरात

09.08.2003 पाटण गुजरात

[फा. सं. आर-25011/13/2005- ओ.आर. - 1 ]

एस. के. चिटकारा, अवर सचिव

Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas

New Delhi , the 7th October, 2005

S.O. 3844.-Whereas , by the notifications of the Government of India in theMinistry of Petroleum & Natural Gas , S.O. Number and date as mentioned in the schedule below issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of section 6 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962(50 of 1962) , the Central Government acquired the right of user in the lands specified in the Schedule appended to those notification;

11565

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

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

And whereas, the Competent Authority has made a report to the Central Government that the pipeline for the purpose of transport of petroleum (products) from Viramgam in the State of Gujaratto Sidhpur in the State of Gujarat through the villages in the State of Gujarat mentioned in the Schedule has been laid in the said lands, so the operation may be terminated in respect of land description of which in brief is specified in the Schedule annexedto this notification;

Now, therefore, as required under explanation- 1 of rule 4 of the Petroleum Pipelines ( Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Rules, 1963, the Central Government hereby declares the dates mentioned in Column 7 of the said Schedule as the dates of termination of operation.

Schedule

Taluka Name of Village

SL. No.

S.O. No. and Date

4 2

1 1495

Viramgam HANSALPUR (SE)

01.05.2002

VIRAMGAM

Viramgam VALANA

Viramgam KOTNA

Viramgam NADIYANA

Viramgam KANYALA

Viramgam CHANOTHIYA

Viramgam 879

Viramgam VALANA

213.03.2003

2056

Viramgam KANYALA

3 21.07.2003

1952

Viramgam CHANOTHIYA

410.06.2002

1955

Viramgam CHANOTHIYA

5 10.06.2002

AGHAR

6 1494

Detroj (ASHOKNAGAR)

01.05.2002

BASKA

Detroj BHANKODA

Detroj RAMPURA

Detroj KANZ

Detroj SADATPURA

Detroj DEKAVADA

Detroj GAMANPURA

Detroj NADISHALA

Detroj RUDATAL

Detroj DABHSAR

Detroj AGHAR

1956

Detroj (ASHOKNAGAR)

7 10.06.2002

BASKA

Detroj BHANKODA

Detroj

DABHSAR

State

District

Date of Termination ofOperation

Ahmedabad Gujarat

09.08.2003

09.08.2003 Gujarat

Ahmedabad

09.08.2003 Ahmedabad Gujarat

Ahmedabad Gujarat

09.08.2003 Ahmedabad Gujarat

09.08.2003

09.08.2003 Ahmedabad Gujarat

Ahmedabad Gujarat

09.08.2003

00:08.2008 Gujarat

Ahmedabad

09.08.2008 Ahmedabad Gujarat

09.08.2008 Ahmedabad Gujarat 11566

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30 , 1927

880 AGHAR

Ahmedabad Gujarat

Detroj

09.08.2003 (ASHOKNAGAR)

8 13.03.2003

1954

Ahmedabad Gujarat

Detroj

09.08.2003 BASKA

910.06.2002

2052

Ahmedabad Gujarat

Detroj

09.08.2003 10

21.07.2003 RAMPURA

Mehsana

1492

Gujarat

Becharaji

09.08.2003 01.05.2002 RANTEJ

Mehsana

09.08.2003 RUPPURA

Gujarat

Becharaji

09.08.2003 ASHJOL

Mehsana

Becharaji

Gujarat

09.08.2003 VANPURA

Mehsana

Becharaji

Gujarat

09.08.2003

Mehsana

KARANSAGAR

Becharaji

Gujarat

09.08.2003

Mehsana

JETPURA

Becharaji

Gujarat

Mehsana

09.08.2003 RANELA

Becharaji

Gujarat

Mehsana

09.08.2003 KANODA

Gujarat

Mehsana

1493

Gujarat

09.08.2003 RAMPURA( KATOSAN )

1201.05.2002

09.08.2003

Mehsana

NADASA

Mehsana Gujarat

09.08.2003

Mehsana

PALAJ

Gujarat

Mehsana

3409

Gujarat

Becharaji

09.08.2003 24.10.2002 RUPPURA

Mehsana

1603

Becharaji

Gujarat

09.08.2003 28.05.2003 ASHJOL

1604

Becharaji

Mehsana Gujarat

09.08.2003 28.05.2003 KARANSAGAR

Mehsana

1953

Becharaji

Gujarat

09.08.2003 KANODA

1610.06.2002

Mehsana Gujarat

1491

Unjha

09.08.2003 DABHI

17 01.05.2002

09.08.2003

Mehsana

SUNAK

Gujarat

Unjha

09.08.2003

Mehsana

TUNDAV

Gujarat

Unjha

09.08.2003

Mehsana Gujarat

VARVADA

Unjha

09.08.2003

Mehsana

VISOL

Gujarat

Unjha

Patan

Chanasma

1490

Gujarat

09.08.2003 01.05.2002 SUNSAR

09.08.2003

Chanasma

Patan

DHINOJ

Gujarat

09.08.2003

Patan

Chanasma

DANODARDA

Gujarat

09.08.2003

Patan

Chanasma

Gujarat

MULTHANIYA

09.08.2003

Patan

PALASAR

Chanasma

Gujarat

09.08.2003

Patan

Chanasma

SELAVI

Gujarat

Patan

Gujarat

961

09.08.2003 15.03.2002 MANUND

09.08.2003

Patan

DABHDI

Gujarat

09.08.2003

Patan

Gujarat

RUVAVI

09.08.2003

Patan

KANI

Gujarat

Patan

1596

Gujarat

Sidhpur

09.08.2003 KANESARA

2010.05.2002

09.08.2003

Patan

KHALI

Gujarat

Sidhpur

09.08.2003

Patan

KHOLWADA

Gujarat

Sidhpur

09.08.2003

Patan

Gujarat

GANESHPURA

Sidhpur

09.08.2003

Patan

SIDHPUR

Gujarat

Sidhpur

09.08.2003

Patan

Gujarat

GANGLASAN

Sidhpur

Patan

Sidhpur

Gujarat

3681

09.08.2003 22.11.2002 SIDHPUR

Patan

1605

Sidhpur

Gujarat

09.08.2003 SIDHPUR

28.05.2003

[F. No. R- 25011/13/2005-0.R . - 1 ] S. K. CHITKARA , Under Secy.

11567 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 21 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3845.- 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. 1303 तारीख ४ अप्रैल , 2005 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 9 अप्रैल, 2005 , में प्रकाशित की गई थी , द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मुन्द्रा-दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन के माध्यम से गुजरात राज्य में मुन्द्रा से दिल्ली तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 13 जून , 2005 , को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं ;

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

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

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

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

अनुसूची

राज्य: राजस्थान

जिला: पाली

तहसील : सोजत

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

हेक्टेयर

खसरा सं.

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

570

हरियामाली

854

855

859

860 .

772

638

225

3016GI /05-10 .

11568

[PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 22, 2005 /ASVINA 30, 1927

जिला : पाली

तहसील : सोजत

राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

एयर वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टेयर

6 1

सारंगवास

30 2.

266(स.नदी)

281

282

293(स. रास्ता)

386

385

593

दूण्ालाम्बोडी

591

572

567(स.भूमि)

566

559

556

356 (स. रास्ता)

339(स.भूमि)

282

277

273

268

266

265

16(स.रास्ता)

केलवाद

37 4.

684(स.पाल)

685

81 5.

लाडपुरा

333(स.नदी)

199

209

222

58 गुहाबिंजा

200

154

583

595

607(स.आगोर)

64 रायराकलां-खुर्द

612(स .रास्ता)

500

464

32 11569 [ भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

307

7. रायराकला- खुर्द(जारो...)

261

258

255

1330 (स. रास्ता)

1333

[फा. सं. आर-31015/52/2004- ओ.आर-II ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

NewDelhi , the 21st October, 2005

S. O. 3845.-Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 1303 dated the 8th April , 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 9th April , 2005 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of petroleum products from Mundra in the State of Gujarat to Delhi through Mundra-Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 13th June, 2005;

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

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

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

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

11570

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

SCHEDULE

Tehsil : SOJAT

PALI

District :

Sr. No

Khasara No. Name of the Village

3 1

570 1. HARIYAMALI

854

855

859

860

772

638

225 2. SARANGWAS

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Hectare Are Sq.mtr.

05 15

09 89

266(G /L River)

281

282 0

293(G / L Cart Track)

386

385

593 3. DHUNDHALAMBODI

591

572

567(G /L)

566

559

556

356 (G / L Cart Track)

339(G/L)

282

277

273

268

266

265

16( G/L Cart Track)

11 4. KELWAD

05 98

684(G/L Pal)

685 5. LADPURA.

04 81

333 (G/L River)

199

209

0 11571 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

6 1

222

58 6. GUDA BINJA

200

154

583

595

607(G /L Agor)

64 7. RAYRAKALAN - KHURD

612(G / L Cart Track)

500

464

307

261

258

255

1330(G/L Cart Track)

1333

[No. R-31015/52/2004-O.R. -II ]

HARISH KUMAR , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 21 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3846. - 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. 1710 तारीख 6 मई, 2005 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 7 मई 2005 , में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मुन्द्रा-दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन के माध्यम से गुजरात राज्य में मुन्द्रा से दिल्ली तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 30 जून , 2005 , को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं ।

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

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

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए , इस मंत्रालय के सहमति पत्र सं. आर 31015/7/03 ओ.आर-IL. दिनांक 25/11/2004 द्वारा लगाई गई शर्तों के अध्यधीन सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । 11572

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

अनुसुची

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल

खसरा/ किला

गाँव का नाम

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या संख्या

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

1. बादली

3/2

5/1

7/1

7/2

104

136

15/2

2. मोहमदपुर माजरा

3. गोयला कलां

107 (रास्ता)

1/1

09 11573 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/ आश्विन 30, 1927

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

खसरा/ किला संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

वर्गमीटर

हदबस्त संख्या

हेक्टेयर एयर

1/2

3. गोयला कलां (जारी ... )

4. बुपनियां

15/2

220

23/1

4/1

18/1

10/1

10/2

25/2

121

127

25/1

128

7.4

152

8/2

159

22/1

182 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005 /ASVINA 30 , 1927

11574

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

एयर

हेक्टेयर

मुसतिल संख्या

खसरा/ किला संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

185

4. बुपनियां (जारी...)

4/1

5. डाबोदा खुर्द

4/2/3

8/1

8/2

12/1

13/1/1

20/2

107

6. महन्दीपुर

12/2

17/2

7. जाखोदा

5/2

6/1

826

8. आसोदा टोइरान 11575 [भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

राज्यः हरियाणा

जिलाः झज्जर

तहसीलः बहादुरगढ़

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

खसरा/ किला संख्या

वर्गमीटर

हदबस्त संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हेक्टेयर एयर

830

68 8. आसोदा टोडरान (जारी ...)

831

836

838

[फा. सं. आर-31015/48/2004-ओ.आर-1 ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 21st October , 2005

S. O. 3846.-Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 1710 dated the 6th May, 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 7th May, 2005 , the Central Govemment declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of petroleum products from Mundra in the State of Gujarat to Delhi through Mundra- Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made avaliable to the public on the 30th June , 2005;

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

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

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

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

3016GI/05-11 11576

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

SCHEDULE

State : HARYANA Tehsil : BAHADURGARH

District : JHAJJAR

Area

Name of Village

Khasara/ Killa No.

Mustil No.

Hadbast No.

Hectare Are

Square Metre

1.BADLI

3/2

5/1

7/1

7/2

104

136

15/2

2. MOHAMAD PUR MAJRA

3. GOYALA KALAN

107 ( Path)

1/1 11577 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

Tehsil : BAHADURGARH

District : JHAJJAR

State : HARYANA

Area Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

1/2

07 3. GOYALA KALAN (Cont... )

02 4. BHUPANΙΑ

15/2

220

23/1

4/1

18/1

10/1

10/2

25/2

121

127

25/1

128

152

159

8/2

22/1

182

00 11578

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

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

District : JHAJJAR

State: HARYANA

Area

Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara/ Killa.No. Hectare Are

Square Metre

185

93 4. BHUPANIA ( Cont... )

4/1

5. DABODA KHURD

4/2/3

8/1

8/2

12/1

13/1/1

20/2

107

6. MEHINDIPUR

12/2

17/2

7. JAKHODA

5/2

6/1

826

8. ASUDHA TODRAN 11579

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

State : HARYANA

District : JHAJJAR

Tehsil :BAHADURGARH

Area Nameof Village

Khasara / Killa No.

Are

Mustil No.

Hectare

Hadbast No.

Square Metre

830

831

8. ASUDHA TODRAN (Cont ... )

836

838

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

नई दिल्ली, 21 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3847.- 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. 1797 तारीख 12 मई, 2005 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 14 मई, 2005 , में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मुन्द्रा-दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन के माध्यम से गुजरात राज्य में मुन्द्रा से दिल्ली तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 25 जून , 2005 , को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं ;

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

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

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए , इस मंत्रालय के सहमति पत्र सं. आर 31015/7/03 ओ.आर- II. दिनांक 25/11/2004 द्वारा लगाई गई शर्तों के अध्यधीन सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । 11580

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ ASVINA 30, 1927

तहसीलः पाटोदी

जिलाः गुड़गाँव

गाँव का नाम

हदबस्त संख्या

273 1. घोलनावास

272 2. खलीलपुर

268 3. खेतियावास

4. बलेवा

271 5.गांगली

267

265 6. पहाड़ी

7. मौजाबाद

21 8. डाडावास

19 9. हकदारपुर

16 10. शेरपुर

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

अनुसुची

राज्यः हरियाणा

श्रेत्रफल

खसराकिला

वर्गमीटर

डेक्टेयर एयर

संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

17/2

03 21/1

12 1

25/1

18/1

19/2

9/2

2/1

8/2

10/1

11/2

6/1

24/1

8/1

16/2

80 10

21/2

17/2

21/2

13/2

23/1 11581 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

राज्यः हरियाणा

तहसीलः पाटौदी

जिलाः गुड़गाँव

श्रेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

खसरा/किला संख्या

मुसतिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

00 00

23/2

10. शेरपुर (जारी...)

10/1

11. राजपुरा

11/2

00 50

16/1

00 35

20/1

[फा. सं. आर-31015/49/2004-ओ.आर- II ]

हरीश कुमार. अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 21st October , 2005

S. O. 3847.-Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry ofPetroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 1797 dated the 12th May, 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 14th May, 2005 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of petroleum products from Mundra in the State of Gujarat to Delhi through Mundra-Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline byHindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited;

Andwhereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 25th June , 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 rightof user therein:

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

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

11582

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005 / ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii)]

SCHEDULE

Tehsil : PATODI

District: GURGAON

State : HARYANA

Area

Name of Village

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Khasara / Killa No.

Are

Hectare

Square Metre 1. GHILANAWAS

273

17/2

33 2. KHALILPUR

272

21/1

25/1

18/1

19/2

9/2

2/1

268

8/2

3. KHETIAWAS

271

4. BALEWA

10/1

11/2

267

5. GANGLI

265

6.PAHARI

43 7. MOZZABAD

6/1

54 8. DADAWAS

24/1

8/1

16/2

9. HAKDARPUR

21/2

17/2

68 10. SHERPUR

21/2

13/2

23/1

00 11583 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

State : HARYANA

District : GURGAON

Tehsil : PATODI

Area

Name of Village

Are

Hectare

Khasara / Killa No.

Hadbast No.

Mustil No.

Square Metre

23/2

10. SHERPUR ( Contd... )

10/1

11. RAJPURA

11/2

16/1

20/1

[No. R-31015/49/2004-O.R. -II ] HARISH KUMAR, Under Secy.

कोयला मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 10 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3848.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला धारक क्षेत्र (अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम 1957 (1957 का 20) (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है।) की धारा 4 की उपधारा (i) के अधीन जारी की गई , जो भारत के राजपत्र, भाग II , खंड 3, उपखंड़ ( ii ) , तारीख 20 नवम्बर 2004 में भारत सरकार के तत्कालीन कोयला और खान मंत्रालय, कोयला विभाग की अधिसूचना संख्यांक का. आ. सं. 2976, तारीख 16 नवम्बर, 2004 पृष्ठ 8320 से 8322 पर प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से उपावद्ध अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट परिक्षेत्र की भूमि में की गई थी द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट परिक्षेत्र की भूमि में की गई थी, जिसका क्षेत्रफल 176.10 हेक्टर (लगभग) या 435.16 एकड़ (लगभग) है, कोयले का पूर्वेक्षण करने के अपने आशय की सूचना दी थी ;

और केन्द्रीय सरकार को यह समाधान हो गया है कि इस अधिसूचना से उपावद्ध अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि के एक भाग में कोयला अभिप्राप्य है ;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 7 की उपधारा (i ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , इससे संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित 135.02 हेक्टर (लगभग) या 333.63 एकड़ (लगभग ) माप वाली भूमि और ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की सूचना देती हैः-

टिप्पण: 1 इस अधिसूचना के अंतर्गत आने वाले क्षेत्र के रेखांक सं. सी. 1 (ई) ।।।/ एफआर/733- 0505, तारीख 30 मई, 2005 का निरीक्षण कलक्टर, नागपुर (महाराष्ट्र) के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक, 1 , काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता 700 001 के कार्यालय में या वेस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड ( राजस्व विभाग) कोल ईस्टेट, सिविल लाईन्स, नागपुर 440 001 (महाराष्ट्र) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकेगा ।

3016G1 /05-12 11584

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005 /ASVINA 30, 1927

[ PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] टिप्पण: 2 उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 8 के उपबंधों की ओर ध्यान आकृष्ट किया जाता है. जिसमे निम्नलिखित उपबंध हैः-

अर्जन की बावत आपत्तियाँ:

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

स्पष्टीकरणः इस धारा के अर्थान्तर्गत यह आपत्ति नहीं मानी जाएगी, कि कोई व्यक्ति किसी भूमि में कोयला उत्पादन के लिए स्वयं खनन संक्रियाएं करना चाहता है और ऐसी संक्रियाएं केन्द्रीय सरकार या किसी अन्य व्यक्ति को नहीं करनी चाहिए । (2) उपधारा (1 ) के अधीन प्रत्येक आपत्ति सक्षम प्राधिकारी को लिखित रूप में की जाएगी और सक्षम प्राधिकारी आपात्तिकर्ता को स्वयं सुने जाने का या विधि व्यवसायी द्वारा सुनवाई का अवसर देगा और ऐसी सभी आपत्तियों को सुनने के पश्चात् और ऐसी अतिरिक्त जांच, यदि कोई हो, करने के पश्चात् जो वह आवश्यक समझता है, वह या तो धारा 7 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधीन अधिसूचित भूमि के या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के संबंध में एक रिपोर्ट या ऐसी भूमि के विभिन्न टुकड़ों या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के संबंध में आपत्तियों पर अपनी सिफारिशों और उसके द्वारा की गई कार्यवाही के अभिलेख सहित विभिन्न रिपोर्ट केन्द्रीय सरकार को उसके विनिश्चय के लिए देगा ।

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

टिप्पण: 3 केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला नियंत्रक, 1 , काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट, को उक्त अधिनियम के अधीन भारत सरकार के राजपत्र, भाग II , में तारीख 21 जून, 1983 में प्रकाशित अधिसूचना सं ० का० आ 0 1983 द्वारा सक्षम प्राधिकारी के रूप में नियुक्त किया है । 700 001 कोलकाता खंड़ 3, उपखंड़ (ii) 2519 तारीख 27 मई,

अनुसूची

बीना विस्तारण खंड़

नागपुर क्षेत्र, जिला नागपुर (महाराष्ट्र)

(रखांक सं.सी - 1 ( ई) III /एफआर/ 733-0505 तारीख 30 मई, 2005)

ग्राम का नाम

जिला

तहसील

टिप्पणी क्रम संख्या

पटवारी सर्किल संख्या

क्षेत्र हेक्टर में

भानेगांव

सावनेर

135.02

भाग

नागपुर

कुल क्षेत्रः- 135.02 हेक्टर (लगभग) या 333.63 एकड़ (लगभग) 11585 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

ग्राम भानेगांव में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लॉट संख्यांकः

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6/1 ए- 6/ 1 बी- 6/2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12/1-12/1 बी-12/1 सी-12/ 1 डी -12/2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 , 22, 23 , 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 , 32/132/2- 32/3 , 33/1- 33/2, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38/1 ए- 38/1 बी 38/2, 39, 40, 41 , 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 /1- 51/2, 52, 53 , 54/1-54/2 , 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61 , 76, 77/1- 77/2, 78, 79, 80/1- 80/2- 80/3 , 81 , 82/1-82/2 , 85/2, सडक (भाग) ।

सीमा वर्गनः

क - ख रेखा बिन्दु ' क ' से आरम्भ होती है और प्लॉट संख्या 1,2 , 3 , 4,5, 6/ 1 ए- 6/ 1 बी- 6/2 , 7, 8, 12/1 ए- 12/1 बी- 12/1 सी- 12/1 डी- 12/2 की बाह्य सीमा के साथ- साथ ग्राम भानेगांव से गुजरती है और बिन्दु ' ख ' पर मिलती है ।

खगः

रेखा प्लॉट संख्या 12/ 1 ए- 12/1 बी-12/1 सी- 12 / 1 डी -12/2 , 9, 10, 22, 20, 17, 18 की बाह्य सीमा के साथ- साथ ग्राम भानेगांव से होकर गुजरती है, नहर पार करती है और प्लॉट संख्या 32/1-32/2- 32/3 , 33/1-33 /2 , 34, 35, 82/1- 82/2 की बाह्य सीमा जो न्यु बीना ब्लॉक, नागपुर क्षेत्र का कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम, 1957 की धारा 9 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधीन का. आ. संख्या 1254 तारीख 14 मई 2004 द्वारा अधिसूचित क्षेत्र का बाह्य सीमा भी है, के साथ - साथ आगे बढ़ती हुई बिन्दु ' ग ' पर मिलती है ।

ग घः

रेखा प्लॉट संख्या 82/1 82/2, 81 , 80/1-80/2-80/3, 85/2, 76, 77/1-77/2 , 60, 61, 54/1-54/2, 53 , 52, 51 /1-51/ 2 की बाह्य सीमा के साथ- साथ ग्राम भानेगांव से होकर गुजरती हुए , और बिन्दु ' घ' पर मिलती है ।

घ -कः

रेखा प्लॉट संख्या 51 /1- 51/2 , की बाह्य सीमा के साथ- साथ गुजरती है, ग्राम भानेगांव से होकर सड़क पार करती है और फिर प्लॉट संख्या 49, 48, 1 की बाह्य सीमा के साथ- साथ आगे बढ़ती हुई आरंभिक बिन्दु 'क' पर मिलती है ।

[फा. सं. 43015/22/2002- पी. आर. आई. डब्ल्यू. ] एम. शहाबुद्दीन , अवर सचिव

Ministry of Coal

New Delhi , the 10th October, 2005

S. O. 3848.---Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the then Ministry of Coal and Mines (Department of Coal ) number S.O. 2976 dated the 16th November, 2004 issued under sub - section (1) of section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 ( 20 of 1957) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and published in Part II , section 3 , sub- section ( ii ) of the Gazette of India, dated the 20th November, 2004 at pages 8320 to 8322 , the Central Government gave notice of its intention to prospect for coal in 176.10 hectares ( approximately) or 435.16 acres (approximately ) of the land in the locality specified in the Schedule annexed to that notification:

And whereas the Central Government is satisfied that coal is obtainable in a part of the said land described in the Schedules appended to this notification ;

11586

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of section 7 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby gives notice of its intention to acquire the lands measuring 135.02 hectares ( approximately) or 333.63 acres (approximately) and All Rights in or over such lands as described in the Schedule appended hereto .

Note 1 The plan bearing No. C- 1 ( E ) III /FR/ 733-0505 dated the 30th May, 2005 of the area covered by this notification may be inspected in the office of the Collector, Nagpur (Maharashtra) or in the office of the Coal Controller , 1, Council House Street , Kolkata (Pin 700 001 ) or in the office of the Western Coalfields Limited (Revenue Department) , Coal Estate , Civil Lines , Nagpur - 440 001 (Maharashtra) .

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

Objections to acquisition :

"8. (1 )

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

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

(2)

Every objection under sub - section ( 1 ) shall be made to the competent authority in writing and the competent authority shall give the objector an opportunity of being heard either in person or by a legal practitioner and shall , after hearing all such objections and after making such further enquiry , if any, as he thinks necessary, either make a report in respect of the land which has been notified under sub- section ( 1) of Section 7 or of rights in or over such land, or make different reports in respect different parcels of such land or of rights in or over such land , to the Central Government , containing his recommendations on the objections , together with the record of proceedings held by him , for the decision of that Government. ( 3)

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

Note 3 :- The Coal Controller , 1 , Council House Street , Kolkata - 700 001 , has been appointed by the Central Government as the competent authority under the Arl, vide notification number S.O. 2519 dated the 27th May , 1983 , published in Part -- II , section 3 , sub-section ( ii ) of the Gazette of India , dated the 11th June , 1983 .

Schedule

Bina Extension Block Nagpur Area , District Nagpur, Maharashtra

May , 2005 ) .

dated the 30th

( Plan No. C - 1 ( E ) III/ FR / 733-0505

Remarks

District

Tahsil

Area in hectares

Name of village

Serial number

Patwari circle number

Part

135.02

Saoner

Nagpur

1 Bhanegaon

Total area : 135.02 hectares ( approximately )

or 333.63 acres (approximately ) 11587 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22. 2005/आश्विन 30 , 1927

[ भाग ।। - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Plot numbers to be acquired in village Bhanegaon :

1 , 2 , 3 , 4, 5 , 6 / 1A - 6 / 13-6 /2 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10, 12/ 1A - 12/ 113- 12/ 10-12/ 11)- 12/2 , 17, 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22, 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27, 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32/1-32/2-32/3 , 33/1-33 /2, 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38/1 A- 38/ 113- 38/2 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49, 50 , 51 /1-51 /2 , 52 , 53 , 54/1-54/2 , 55 , 56 , 57, 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 76 , 77/1-77 / 2 , 78 , 79 , 80 /1-80/2-80/3 , 81 , 82 /1-82/2 , 85/2 , Road ( part ) .

Boundary description :

A- B :

Line starts from point ' A ' and passes through village Bhanegaon along the outer boundary of plot numbers 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6/ 1A- 6 / 13-6/ 2 , 7 , 8 , 12/ 18-12/ 113- 12/ 1C- 12/ 1D- 12/2 and meets at point 'B ' .

B - C :

Line passes through village Bhanegaon along the outer boundary of plot numbers 12 / 1A- 12/ 1B - 12/1C - 12/ 1D - 12/2 , 9 , 10 , 22 , 20 , 17, 18 , crosses Cannel then proceeds along the outer boundary of plot numbers 32/1-32/2-32/3, 33/1- 33/2, 34 , 35 , 82/1-82/ 2 , which is also a outer boundary of area notified u/ s . 9 ( i ) of CBA ( A & D ) Act . 1957 vide S.O. No. 1254 dated 14/05/2004 of New Bina Block , Nagpur Area and meets at point ' C ' . ..3/- C- D:

Line passes through village Bhanegaon along the outer boundary of plot numbers 82/1-82/2 , 81 , 80/180/2-80/3 , 85/2 , 76 , 77/1-77/2 , 60 , 61 , 54/1- 54/2 , 53 , 52 , 51/1 51/2 and meets at point ' D ' .

D - A :

Line passes through village Bhanegaon along the outer boundary of plot numbers 51 / 1-51 / 2 , crosses road then proceeds along the outer boundary of plot numbers 49. 48, 1 and meets at starting point ' A' .

[No. 43015/22/2002-PRIW] M. SHAHABUDEEN , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 10 अक्तूबर, 2005

का. आ. 3849.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला धारक क्षेत्र (अर्जन एवं विकास) अधिनियम, 1957 (1957 का 20) (जिसे इसमे इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है) की धारा 7 की उप धारा (I ) के अधीन भारत सरकार के कोयला मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ.237 तारीख 22.1.04 जो भारत के राजपत्र, भाग ii, खण्ड 3, उप खण्ड ( ii ) तारीख 31.1.04 में प्रकाशित की गई थी, और मुल अधिसूचना का संसोधन का आ. संख्याक 793 तारीख 24.2.05 जो भारत के राजपत्र भाग ii , खण्ड - 3, उप खण्ड ( II) तारीख 5.3.05 को प्रकाशित की गई थी उक्त अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट परिक्षेत्र की भूमि में जिसका माप 1463.433 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) है, के अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की सूचना दी थी और पूर्वाक्त परिक्षेत्र में भूमि के अर्जन पर कोई आपत्ति नहीं की गई हैं । इससे संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित 1463.433 हेक्टर (लगभग ) माप वाली भूमि अर्जित की जानी चाहिए । और, केन्द्रीय सरकार को यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त भूमि मे कोयला अभिप्राप्त है,

अतः केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 9 की उपधारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है इससे संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित 1463.433 हेक्टर (लगभग ) माप वाली भूमि अर्जित की जाती है । 11588

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005 / ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ] इस अधिसूचना के अंतर्गत आने वाले क्षेत्र के रेखांक सं . ई.सी.एल. / सी.एच.इउ.वी/ मौजा/ 09 तारीख 28.5.05 का उप आयुक्त, जिला गोड्डा एवं पाकुड़ (झारखण्ड) के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक, 1 , काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता 700001 को कार्यास निदेशक तकनीकी (प्लानिंग ऐंड प्रोजेक्ट्स्) , ईस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लि. संकटोरिया, डाकघर दिसेरगढ़ , जिला बर्दमान (प. बगांल) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकता है ।

अनुसूची ब्लाक 1 एवं 2 , चुपरबीटा ब्लाक ( राजमहल कोलफील्डस् )

ब्लाक

थाना क्रम सं०

मौजा/ग्राम का नाम

थाना सं० 1

प्रथम

चोटा पुरो सं

सुन्दर पहाड़ी 2

गरीडीह सं

सुन्दर पाहाड़ी 3

पीपर जोरीया सं

सुन्दर पाहाड़ी 4 मीरचैतारी सं

सुन्दर पाहाड़ी 5

पोखरिया सं

सुन्दर पाहाड़ी 5

खेरासोल सं

सुन्दर पाहाड़ी 7 बरा धामनी सं

7 सुन्दर पाहाड़ी B

माको मादगी सं

सुन्दर पाहाड़ी दितीय

जोरधीया सं

लिटीपाड़ा

2 लिटीपाड़ा

चोटा मुरजोड़ा सं

3 लिटीपाड़ा

बड़ा मुरजोरा सं

सिमलोंग सं

4 लिटीपाड़ा

$ अमरबीटा सं

जिला

क्षेत्र हेक्टेयर टिप्पणियां

152.640

भाग गोड्डा

92.790

भाग गोड्डा

37.100

भाग गोड्डा

89.400

भाग गोड्डा

53.624

भाग गोड्डा

103.272

भाग गोड्डा

47.120

भाग गोड्डा

1.142

भाग गोड्डा

359.856

भाग पाकुड़

157,840

भाग पाकुड़

137.437

भाग पाकुड़

51.095

भाग पाकुड़

भाग

26.931

7 लिटीपाड़ा

6 बास बीता सं

पाकुड़

57.720

8 लिटीपाड़ा

मारगो सं

भाग पाकुड़

भाग

27.260

9 लिटीपाड़ा

8 चोटा चटकम सं

पाकुड़

16.640

10लिटीपाड़ा

भाग पाकुड़ 11589 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भाग

22.856

9 धोवपाहाड़ सं

गोड्डा

सुन्दर पाहाड़ी

भाग

28.710

गोड्डा

10 लाडा पाथर सं

सुन्दर पाहाड़ी

1463.433 हेक्टेयर

कुल

1463.433 हेक्टयर (लगभग)

ब्लाक संख्या 1

सुन्दरपहाड़ी, जिला - गोड्डा के अर्जन किए जाने वाले प्लाट मौजा - छोटापुरा थाना संख्या- 8 , थाना

23 , भाग) , 2(भाग) , 3 (भाग) , 4 (भाग) , 5, 6 (भाग) , 7 (भाग), 8, 9, 10, 11 (भाग ), 20 (भाग) , 21 , 22, 1 (

, 25, 26, 27 , 28 , 29, 30, 31 , 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 , 41 , 42, 43, 44, 45, 24

67, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 , 52, 53 , 54, 55, 56, 57, 58 , 59, 60, 61 , 62, 63, 64, 65 , 66,

89, 68, 69, 70, 71 , 72, 73 , 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79 , 80, 81 , 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88,

108, 90, 91 , 92, 93 , 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101 , 102, 103 , 104, 105, 106, 107,

125, 109, 110 , 111 , 112, 113, 114, 115 , 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121 , 122, 123 , 124,

142, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130 , 131 , 132, 133 , 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141 ,

(भाग) , 143, 144, 145 , 146 , 147, 148, 149, 150 , 151 , 152, 153 (भाग) , 154, 155, 156

217, 157 (भाग) , 158(भाग) , 208 (भाग) , 209 (भाग) , 210 (भाग ) , 211 , 213 (भाग) , 214, 215, 216,

233, 218, 219, 220, 221 (भाग) , 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231 , 232,

250, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241 , 242, 243 , 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249,

266 , 251 , 252, 253 , 254 , 255 , 256, 257, 258(भाग), 261 (भाग) , 262(भाग) , 263, 264, 265,

281 , 267 (भाग ) , 268 (भाग) , 269, 270, 271 , 272, 273, 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280,

298, 282, 283 , 284, 285 , 286, 287 , 288, 289 , 290 , 291 , 292, 293, 294 , 295, 296, 297,

315, 299, 300, 301 , 302, 303 , 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311 , 312, 313, 314,

332 , 316, 317 , 318, 319 , 320 , 321 , 322, 323 , 324, 325 , 326, 327 , 328 , 329, 330 , 331 ,

349, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 339, 340, 341 , 342, 343, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348,

366, 350, 351 , 352, 353 , 354, 355 , 356, 357, 358, 359, 360, 361 , 362, 363 , 364, 365 ,

383 , 367, 368, 369 , 370, 371 , 372, 373, 374, 375, 376, 377, 378, 379, 380 , 381 , 382,

400 , 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389, 390, 391 , 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399,

417, 401, 402, 403, 404, 405, 406, 407, 408, 409, 410, 411 , 412, 413 , 414, 415, 416,

433, 434, 418, 419, 420, 421 , 422, 423 , 424, 425, 426, 427, 428, 429, 430, 431 , 432,

450, 451 , 435, 436, 437, 438 , 439, 440, 441 , 442, 443 , 444, 445, 446 , 447, 448, 449,

467, 468, 452, 453, 454, 455 , 456, 457, 458 , 459, 460 , 461 , 462, 463 , 464, 465, 466 ,

484, 485, 469, 470, 471 , 472, 473, 474, 475 , 476, 477, 478, 479, 480, 481 , 482, 483,

486, 487, 488, 489, 490, 491 , 492, 493, 494, 495, 496, 497, 498, 499, 500, 501 , 502 , 503 , 504, 505 , 506, 507, 508 , 509, 510, 511 , 512, 513 , 514, 515 , 516 , 517, 518 , 519 ,

535, 536, 520 , 521 , 522, 523 , 524 , 525, 526 , 527, 528, 529, 530, 531 , 532, 533, 534,

552, 553, 537, 538, 539 , 540, 541 , 542 , 543 , 544, 545, 546, 547 , 548, 549, 550, 551 ,

569, 570, 554 , 555 , 556 , 557, 558, 559, 560, 561 , 562, 563, 564 , 565 , 566 , 567 , 568,

586, 587, 571 , 572, 573 , 574, 575 , 576, 577 , 578, 579, 580, 581 , 582, 583, 584, 585,

603, 604, 588, 589, 590 , 591 , 592, 593, 594 , 595, 596, 597, 598, 599, 600, 601 , 602 ,

, 606, 607, 608, 609 , 610 , 611 , 612 , 613 , 614, 615, 616, 617, 618 , 619, 620, 621 , 605 11590

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005 /ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] 623 , 625,

622, 624, 626, 627, 628 , 629, 630, 631 , 633 , 634,

632,

635, 636, 637, 638, 640, 641,

639,

642, 643, 644, 645, 646 , 647, 648, 649, 650, 651 , 652, 653, 654, 655, 657, 658,

656,

659 , 660, 661 , 662, 663 , 664 , 666 ,

665, 667, 668 , 669, 670 , 671 , 672, 674,

673, 675, 676, 678,

677,

680 ,

679, 681 , 682, 683, 684, 686,

685,

688,

687, 689, 691 ,

690,

693 ,

692, 694, 695, 696, 697, 698 , 699 , 700, 701 , 702, 703, 704, 705 , 706, 707, 708, 709, 710, 711 , 712, 713 , 714, 715, 716 , 717 , 718, 719 , 720, 721 , 723,

722, 724, 725, 726 , 727, 728 , 729, 730, 731 , 732, 733, 734, 735, 736, 737, 738 , 739, 740, 741, 742, 743, 744, 745, 746, 747, 748, 749, 750, 751 , 752, 753, 754, 755, 756, 757, 758, 759, 760 , 761 , 762, 763, 764, 765, 766 , 767, 768, 769, 770, 771 , 772, 773, 774, 775, 776 , 777, 778, 779, 780 , 781 , 782, 783 , 784, 785, 786, 787, 788, 789, 790, 791 , 794,

792, 793, 795, 796 , 797, 798, 799, 800 , 801 , 802, 803, 804, 805, 806, 807, 808 , 809, 810 , 811 , 812, 813, 814, 815, 817,

816, 818, 819, 820 , 821 , 822, 823, 824, 825, 826, 827, 828, 829, 830 , 831 , 832, 833, 834, 835, 836 , 837, 838, 839, 840 , 841 , 842, 843, 844, 845, 846, 847, 848, 849, 851 ,

850,

852, 853, 854,

856 ,

855,

857, 859,

858 ,

860 , 861 , 862,

864,

863,

865, 866, 867, 868, 669, 870, 871 , 872, 873 , 674, 875, 876, 877, 679 ,

876,

881 ,

880, 882, 663 , 884, 665, 686, 687, 668, 889 , 890 , 892,

891,

894,

893, 895, 896, 697,898 , 899 , 900, 901 , 902, 903 , 904, 905, 906 , 907, 908, 909, 911 ,

910, 912, 913, 914, 915, 916, 917, 918, 919, 920, 921 , 922, 923, 924, 926,

925, 927 , 928, 929 , 930, 931 , 932, 933, 934, 935, 936, 937, 936, 939, 940, 941 , 943,

942, 944, 945, 946, 947, 948 , 949 , 950, 951 , 952, 953 , 954, 955 , 956, 857 , 958 , 959 , 960, 961 , 962, 963, 965,

964, 966, 967, 968, 969, 970, 971 , 972, 973, 974 , 975, 977,

976, 978 , 979, 960, 961 , 982, 983 , 984, 985, 986, 987, 988 , 989, 990 , 991 , 992, 993, 994, 995, 998 , 997, 998 , 999, 1000 , 1001 , 1002, 1003, 1004, 1005, 1006 , 1007, 1009

1006,

1011 ,

1010,

1012 , 1013 , 1014, 1015, 1016, 1017, 1018, 1019 , 1020, 1022,

1021,

1024 ,

1023,

1025, 1026 , 1027 , 1028 , 1029, 1030 , 1031 , 1032, 1033, 1034, 1035, 1036, 1037, 1038 , 1039, 1040, 1041 ,

1043,

1042,

1044, 1045 , 1046, 1047, 1048, 1049 , 1050, 1051 , 1052, 1053, 1054, 1055, 1056, 1057, 1058 , 1059 , 1061 ,

1060,

1063,

1062,

1064, 1065, 1066 , 1067, 1068, 1069,

1071 ,

1070 ,

1072, 1074,

1073,

1075, 1076 , 1077, 1078, 1079 , 1080 , 1081 , 1082, 1083, 1084, 1085, 1086, 1087, 1088, 1089 , 1090, 1091 , 1092, 1093 , 1094, 1095, 1096 , 1097, 1098, 1099, 1100 , 1101 , 1102,

1104 ,

1103,

1105.

मौजा- गरीडीह, थाना संख्या 9, थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी, जिला गोड्‌डा में अर्जन किए जाने वाले प्लाट 3, 4,

1 (भाग) , 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10( भाग ) , 11 (भाग) ,

20,

15(भाग) , 17( भाग) , 18, 19, 21 , 22(भाग) , 23, 24, 25, 26, 27,

31 ,

28, 29, 30 , 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37,

41 ,

38, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 48,

45, 46, 47, 49, 50, 51 , 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61 , 62, 63, 64, 65, 66 , 70,

67, 68, 69, 71 , 72, 73 , 74 ,

77,

75, 76, 78,

61 ,

79, 80, 62, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 91 ,

69, 90, 92, 93 , 94,

98,

95, 96, 97, 99 , 101 ,

100 ,

103,

102, 104, 105, 106, 107, 109, 110,

108,

111 , 112, 113 , 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119 , 120 , 121 , 122, 123, 124 , 126, 127,

125,

126, 129, 130, 131 , 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 141 ,

140, 11591

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30,1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

150,

149,

148,

147,

146,

145,

144,

142, 143,

167,

166,

165,

164 ,

163 ,

162,

161 ,

160,

159,

184,

183,

182,

181 ,

180,

179,

178,

177,

176,

200, 201 ,

199,

198,

197,

196,

195,

194,

193,

216, 217, 218 ,

215,

214,

213,

212,

211 ,

210,

233, 234, 235, 236,

230 , 231 , 232,

229,

228,

227,

250, 251 ,

247, 248, 249,

246,

245,

244,

267, 268, 269,

266,

265,

264,

263,

262,

261,

284, 285 , 286,

282, 283 ,

281 ,

280,

279,

278,

301 , 302, 303,

300,

299,

298,

297 ,

296,

295 ,

318 , 319, 320 ,

317,

316,

315,

314,

313,

312,

337,

335, 336,

334,

333,

332,

331 ,

330,

329,

354,

353,

352,

351 ,

350 ,

349,

348 ,

347,

346,

371 ,

370,

369,

368,

367 ,

366,

365,

364,

363,

388,

387,

386,

385,

384,

382, 383 ,

381 ,

380,

404,

403,

402,

401 ,

400,

399 ,

398,

397 ,

422 ,

420, 421 ,

419,

417, 418,

416,

415,

414,

437, 438 ,

436,

435,

434 ,

432, 433 ,

431 ,

456,

454, 455,

453,

451 , 452,

450,

449,

448,

472,

469, 470, 471 ,

468 ,

466, 467,

465,

489,

488,

486, 487,

485,

483 , 484,

482,

505, 506, 500, 501 , 502, 503, 504 ,

499,

522, 523 ,

521 ,

517, 518, 519, 520,

516,

539, 540, 534, 535, 536, 537, 538,

533,

557 ,

556, 551 , 552, 553, 554, 555,

550,

573, 574 ,

572,

569, 570, 571 ,

567, 568,

590 , 591 ,

589,

585, 586, 587 , 588,

584,

607 , 608,

605, 606,

602, 604,

603,

601 ,

625,

623 , 624,

621 , 622,

620 ,

618, 619,

641 , 642,

640,

638, 639,

637 ,

635, 636,

658, 659,

657,

655, 656,

654,

652, 653,

675, 676,

674,

671 , 672, 673,

669, 670 ,

692, 693,

691 ,

689, 690 ,

688 ,

686, 687,

708,

707,

705 , 706,

704,

703,

702 (भाग) ,

721 ,

720(भाग) ,

719,

718,

717,

716(भाग) ,

738,

737,

736,

735,

734,

733,

732,

731,

755,

754 ,

753 ,

752,

751 ,

750,

749,

748,

771 (भाग) ,

770,

769,

768,

767 ,

766,

765,

784,

783,

782(भाग) ,

781 (भाग) ,

780(भाग),

798(भाग) ,

797,

796 (भांग),

795(भाग) ,

791 (भाग) ,

3016 G1/05-13

158,

157,

156,

155,

154,

153 ,

152,

151 ,

175,

174,

173,

172,

171 ,

170,

169,

168 ,

192,

191 ,

190,

189,

188,

187,

186,

185,

209,

208,

207,

206,

205,

204,

203 ,

202,

226,

225,

224,

223,

222,

221 ,

220,

219,

243,

242,

241 ,

240,

239,

238,

237,

260,

259,

258,

257,

256,

255,

254,

252, 253 ,

277,

276 ,

275,

274,

273,

272,

271 ,

270,

294,

293,

292,

291 ,

290,

289,

288,

287,

311 ,

310,

309,

308,

307,

306,

305,

304,

328,

327,

326,

325,

324,

323 ,

322,

321 ,

345,

344,

343,

342,

341 ,

340,

339,

338,

362,

361 ,

360,

359,

358,

357,

355, 356,

379,

378,

376 , 377 ,

375,

374,

373,

372,

395, 396,

393, 394,

392,

390, 391 ,

389,

413,

412,

410 , 411 ,

409,

408,

406, 407,

405,

430,

428, 429,

427,

425, 426,

423, 424,

447,

445, 446, 442, 443, 444,

440, 441 ,

439,

464,

463,

462,

461 ,

459, 460,

457, 458,

480, 481 ,

478, 479,

477,

476,

473, 474, 475,

496, 497, 498,

495,

493 , 494,

490 , 491 , 492,

511 , 512, 513, 514, 515, 510 ,

507, 508, 509,

532, 527 , 528, 529, 530, 531 , 526,

524, 525,

548, 549,

545, 546, 547,

541 , 542, 543, 544,

563, 564, 565, 566,

562,

558, 559, 560, 561 ,

583,

582, 578, 579, 580, 581 ,

577,

575, 576,

600,

599,

596, 597, 598,

594, 595,

592, 593,

616, 617,

615,

614,

611 , 612, 613,

610,

609,

633, 634,

32,

629 , 630, 631 ,

626 , 627, 628,

650, 651 ,

649,

647, 648,

643, 644, 645, 646,

668,

666, 667,

665,

664,

661 , 662, 663,

660,

685,

684,

683,

681 , 682,

679, 680,

677, 678,

701 (भाग) ,

700,

699,

698,

697,

696,

695,

694 ,

714(भाग) ,

713 (भाग),

712,

711 ,

710,

709,

730,

729,

728,

727,

726,

725,

724,

723,

722,

747,

746,

745,

744,

743,

742,

741 ,

740,

739,

764,

763,

762,

761 ,

760,

759 ,

758,

757,

756,

778 (भाग),

777 (भाग) ,

775 (भाग) ,

774,

773,

772,

790 (भाग) ,

789,

788,

787(भाग) ,

785(भाग),

805(भाग) .

800 (भाग) ,

799 (भाग) , 11592

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )] मौजा - पीपर जोरीया, थाना संख्या 10, थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी, जिला गोड्डा में अर्जन किए जाने वाले प्लाट

12(भाग) , 13 (भाग) , 26 (भाग) , 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 (भाग) , 32(भाग ), 34(भाग) , 36(भाग) , 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 (भाग) , 52(भाग ) , 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61 , 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71 , 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79 , 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91 , 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110 , 111 , 112, 113 , 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121 , 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131 , 132, 133 , 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141 , 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151 , 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161 , 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171 , 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181 , 182, 183 , 184, 185, 186, 187(भाग ) , 188(भाग) , 189, 190, 191 , 192, 193(भाग) , 194 (भाग) , 195( भाग ) , 207 , 221 (भाग) , 223(भाग) , 224 (भाग) , 234(भाग) , 235(भाग) , 236(भाग) , 237, 238, 239, 240, 241 , 242(भाग) , 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251 , 252, 253 , 254, 255, 256, 257, 258, 259, 260(भाग) , 261 , 262, 263, 264, 265, 266, 267, 268, 269, 270, 271 , 272, 273 , 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279 , 280 , 281 , 282, 283 , 284, 285, 286, 287, 288, 289 , 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301 , 302, 303 , 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311 , 312, 313, 314, 316, 316, 317, 318, 319, 320 , 321 , 322, 323 , 324, 325, 326 , 327, 328, 329, 330, 331 , 332, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 339, 340 , 341 , 342, 343, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 351 , 352, 353 , 354, 355, 356, 357, 358, 359, 360, 361 , 362, 363, 364, 365, 366, 367, 368, 369, 370, 371 , 372, 373 , 374, 375, 376.

मौजा मीरचैतारी , थाना संख्या 11 , थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी, जिला गोड्डा में अर्जन किए जाने वाले प्लाट

11 (भाग) , 12 (भाग) , 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 , 23,

22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 , 29, 30, 31 , 32(भाग ) , 52(भाग) , 53(भाग) ,

55,

54(भाग) , 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 , 61 , 63 ,

62, 64, 65(भाग) , 66(भाग) ,

70,

67, 68, 69, 71 (भाग) , 72(भाग) , 75, 76(भाग) , 77, 78, 79, 81 ,

80, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91 , 92, 93 , 94, 95,

99,

96, 97, 98, 100, 101 , 102 ,

111 ,

103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 119,

118,

127,

120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 128, 129, 130, 131 , 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137,138, 139, 140, 141 , 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148 ,

151 ,

149, 150,

153,

152, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161 , 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167 , 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181 , 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188 , 189, 190, 191, 192, 193 , 194, 195, 196 , 197, 198, 199 , 201 ,

200 , 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208 (भाग) , 209(भाग) , 211 (भाग) , 242(भाग) , 243(भाग) , 244(भाग) , 245, 246, 248,

247, 249, 250, 251 , 252, 253, 254(भाग) , 255 , 256, 257, 258 , 259, 260, 261 , 262, 11593 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

263, 264, 265, 266 , 267, 268, 269, 270, 271 , 272, 273, 274, 275 , 276, 277, 278, 279, 365, 366, 367 , 368, 369, 370, 371 , 372, 373 , 374, 375, 376, 377, 378, 379, 380 (भाग), 382(भाग) , 383 (भाग) , 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389, 390, 391 , 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 465, 466, 467, 468, 469, 470, 471 , 472, 473, 474, 475, 476, 477, 478, 479, 480, 481 , 482, 483, 484, 485, 486(भाग) , 487, 488, 489, 490, 491, 492, 493, 494, 495, 496, 497, 515, 518, 517, 518, 519, 520 , 521 , 522, 523, 524, 525, 526, 527, 528, 529, 530, 531 , 532(भाग) , 533, 534, 535, 536(भाग), 537 (भाग ), 538(भाग) , 539(भाग) , 540(भाग), 541 (भाग) , 280, 281 , 282, 283, 284, 285, 286 , 287, 288, 289, 290, 291 , 292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301 , 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311 , 312, 313, 314, 315, 316 , 317 , 318, 319, 320 , 321 , 322, 323, 324, 325, 326 , 327, 328, 329, 330, 331 , 332, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 339, 340, 341 , 342, 343, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 351 , 352, 353, 354 , 355, 356, 357, 358, 359, 360, 361 , 362, 363, 364, 397, 398, 399, 400, 401 , 402, 403, 404, 405, 406, 407, 408, 409, 410, 411 , 412, 413, 414, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421 , 422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 427, 428, 429, 430, 431, 432, 433, 434, 435, 436, 437, 438, 439, 440, 441 , 442, 443, 444, 445, 446, 447, 448, 449, 450, 451 , 452, 453, 454, 455, 456, 457, 458, 459, 460, 461 , 462, 463, 464, 498, 499, 500, 501 , 502, 503 , 504, 505, 506, 507, 508, 509, 510, 511 , 512, 513, 514, 542(भाग) , 543 (भाग) .

मौजा - पोखरिया , थाना संख्या 12, थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी, जिला गोड्‌डा में अर्जन किए जाने वाले प्लाट

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

11594

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] मौजा - खेरासोल, थाना संख्या 13 , थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी, जिला गोड्डा में अर्जन किए जाने वाले प्लाट

60(भाग) , 61 (भाग) , 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69 , 70, 71 , 72(भाग) , 73(भाग) , 83 (भाग) , 85(भाग) , 86, 87(भाग) 88, 89(भाग) , 93 (भाग) , 94( भाग) , 95, 96, 97, 98, 99(भाग) , 100, 101 , 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108 , 109 , 110, 111 , 112, 113, 114, 115 , 116, 117, 118, 119 , 120, 121 , 122, 123, 124, 125, 126 , 127, 128 , 129 , 130, 131 , 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137,138, 139 , 140, 141 , 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151 , 152, 153 , 154, 155, 156 , 157, 158, 159 , 160 , 161 , 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169 , 170 , 171, 172, 173 , 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180 , 181 , 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190 , 191 , 192, 193, 194, 195 , 196 , 197, 198, 199, 200 , 201 , 202, 203 , 204 ,

221 , 205, 206, 207, 208, 209 , 210, 211 , 212 , 213 , 214 , 215, 216, 217, 218 , 219, 220 , 222, 223 , 224, 225 , 226, 227, 228, 229 , 230, 231 , 232, 233, 234, 235 , 236 , 237, 238, 239, 240, 241 , 242, 243 , 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250 , 251 , 252, 253 , 254, 255, 256, 257, 258, 259 , 260, 261 , 262, 263, 264, 265, 266, 267, 268, 269 , 270, 271 , 272, 273, 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280, 281 , 282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 287, 288, 289 , 290, 291 , 292, 293, 294, 295 , 296, 297, 298, 299 , 300, 301 , 302, 303 , 304 , 305 , 306, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311 , 312, 313 , 314, 315, 316, 317, 318, 319 , 320 , 321 , 322, 323 ,

337, 324, 325, 326, 327, 328, 329, 330, 331 , 332(भाग) , 333 (भाग) , 334(भाग) , 335, 336, 338, 339, 340, 341 , 342, 343 , 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349 , 350 , 351 , 352, 353 , 354 ,

371 , 355, 356, 357, 358, 359, 360 , 361 , 362 , 363 , 364, 365, 366, 367, 368, 369 , 370 , 372, 373 , 374, 375 , 376, 377, 378 , 379 , 380, 381 , 382, 383, 384, 385, 386 , 387, 388, 389, 390, 391 , 392, 393, 394, 395, 396 , 397, 398 , 399, 400, 401 , 402, 403 , 404, 405, 406, 407, 408 , 409, 410, 411 , 412, 413, 414(भाग) , 415, 416, 417, 418 , 419, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424 , 425, 426, 427, 428, 429, 430 , 431 , 432, 433, 434, 435 , 436, 437, 438, 439, 440, 441 , 442, 443, 444, 445, 446, 447, 448, 449 , 450, 451 , 452, 453 , 454, 455, 456, 457, 458 , 459, 460, 461 , 462, 463, 464, 465, 466, 467, 468, 469, 470 , 471 , 472 , 473, 474, 475, 476, 477, 478, 479, 480, 481 , 482, 483, 484, 485, 486, 487, 488, 489, 490, 491, 492, 493 (भाग) , 494 (भाग) , 496 (भाग) , 498(भाग) , 499, 500 , 501 , 502, 503 , 504, 505, 506(भाग) , 507 (भाग) , 508 (भाग) , 509, 510, 511 , 512, 513, 514 , 515 , 516, 517 , 518,

533, 519, 520, 521 (भाग) , 522(भाग) , 523, 524, 525, 526, 527 , 528, 529 , 530, 531 , 532, 534, 535, 536 , 537, 538, 539, 540, 541, 542(भाग) , 543 (भाग) , 544 (भाग), 577(भाग) , 578, 579, 580(भाग) , 581, 582, 583 (भाग) , 584 (भाग) , 598(भाग) , 600(भाग) , 614(भाग) , 615(भाग) , 682(भाग) , 683 (भाग) , 684, 685, 686, 687, 688, 689, 690, 691 , 692, 693 , 694, 695, 696, 697, 698, 699, 700, 701 , 702, 703 , 704, 705, 706, 707, 708, 709 , 710 , 711 , 712 (भाग) , 713(भाग) , 714, 715 (भाग) , 732 (भाग) , 733, 734, 735, 736, 737 (भाग) , 738 (भाग) , 740(भाग) , 741, 742(भाग), 743(भाग) , 748(भाग) , 749 (भाग) , 795(भाग) , 796(भाग) , 797(भाग).

11595 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

मौजा - बरा धामनी, थाना संख्या 7, थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी, जिला- गोड्डा में अर्जन किए जाने वाले प्लाट

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

मौजा - माको मादगी, थाना संख्या 16, थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी, जिला गोड्डा में अर्जन किए जाने वाले प्लाट

16(भाग) एवं 19(भाग) ..

व्लाक संख्या - 2

मौजा - जोरधीया, थाना संख्या 1 , थाना लिटीपाड़ा, जिला पाकुड़ में अर्जन किए जाने वाले प्लाट

12, 13, 1 (भाग) , 2(भाग ) , 3 (भाग) , 4 (भाग ), 5 (भाग ) , 6(भाग) , 7 (भाग) , 8, 9, 10(भाग ) , 11 (भाग ) ,

34(भाग), 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 , 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 , 32, 33,

47 (भाग) , 35(भाग) , 36(भाग) , 37(भाग) , 38 (भाग ) , 39, 40, 41 , 42, 43, 44, 45, 46(भाग) ,

71 , 52(भाग) , 53 (भाग) , 57 (भाग) , 58(भाग) , 59, 60, 61 , 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73 , 74, 75, 76, 77, 78 , 79, 80, 81 , 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91 , 92, 93 , 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100 , 101 , 102, 103 , 104, 105, 106, 107 , 108, 109, 110, 111 ,

128 , 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118 , 119, 120, 121 , 122, 123, 124) , 125, 126, 127,

145, 129, 130 , 131 , 132, 133 , 134 , 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141 , 142, 143, 144,

162, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151 , 152 , 153 , 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161 , 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171 , 172, 173 , 174, 175 , 176, 177 , 178, 179,

196 , 180 , 181 , 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191 , 192, 193, 194, 195, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201 , 202, 203 , 204, 205 , 206 , 207 , 208 , 209, 210 , 211 , 212 , 213 ,

230, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221 , 222, 223 , 224, 225, 226 , 227, 228, 229, 231, 232, 233 , 234, 235, 236 , 237 , 238, 239, 240, 241 , 242, 243, 244, 245, 246 , 247,

264 , 248 , 249, 250 , 251 , 252, 253 , 254 , 255, 256, 257, 258 , 259, 260, 261 , 262, 263, 11596

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II -SEC . 3 (ii ) ] 265, 266, 267 , 268 , 269 , 270 , 271 , 272, 273, 274, 275, 276 , 277 , 278 , 279, 280 , 281 , 282, 283 , 284 , 285 , 286 , 287 , 288 , 289 , 290 , 291 , 292 , 293 , 294, 295 296, 297 , 298 , 299, 300 , 301 , 302, 303 , 304 , 305, 306, 307 , 308, 309, 310 , 311 , 312, 313, 314, 315 , 316, 317, 318 , 319, 320, 321 , 322 , 323 , 324 , 325, 326, 327, 328, 329, 330, 331 , 332 , 333, 334, 335 , 336, 337, 338, 339, 340, 341 , 342, 343 , 344 , 345, 346 , 347, 348, 349, 350, 351 , 352 , 353 , 354 , 355, 356, 357, 358 , 359, 360, 361 , 362, 363, 364, 365, 366 , 367, 368, 369 , 370 , 371 , 372, 373 , 374, 375 , 376 , 377, 378, 379 , 380, 381 , 382, 383 , 384, 385, 386 , 387, 388 , 389, 390, 391 , 392, 393, 394, 395 , 396 , 397, 398, 399, 400 , 401, 402, 403 , 404, 405, 406 , 407 , 408, 409, 410, 411 , 412, 413 , 414, 415 , 416, 417, 418, 419 , 420 , 421 , 422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 427, 428, 429 , 430, 431 , 432, 433 , 434, 435, 436, 437 , 438 , 439 , 440, 441 , 442, 443 , 444, 445, 446, 447, 448 , 449, 450 , 451 , 452, 453, 454 , 455, 456, 457, 458, 459, 460 , 461 , 462, 463 , 464, 465, 466, 467, 468 , 469, 470, 471 , 472, 473 , 474, 475, 476, 477(भाग) , 481 (भाग) , 482(भाग) , 483, 484, 485(भाग) , 486 (भाग) , 487(भाग) , 489(भाग) , 490, 491, 492, 493(भाग) , 515(भाग) , 516, 517, 518, 519 , 520 , 521 , 522 , 523 , 524, 525, 526 , 527, 528, 529, 530 , 531 , 532, 533 , 534 , 535, 536, 537 , 538, 539, 540 , 541 , 542, 543, 544 , 545 , 546, 547, 548, 549, 550 , 551 , 552, 553 , 554 , 555 , 556, 557 , 558 , 559, 560 , 561 , 562, 563 , 564, 565, 566, 567, 568 , 569, 570 , 571 , 572 , 573 , 574, 575, 576 , 577 , 578 , 579, 580 , 581 , 582 , 583, 584, 585, 586, 587, 588 , 589, 590 , 591 , 592, 593 , 594, 595, 596, 597, 598, 599 , 600, 601 , 602 , 603 , 604, 605 , 606, 607 , 608 , 609, 610, 611 , 612 , 613 , 614 , 615 , 616, 617, 618, 619 , 620, 621 , 622 , 623 , 624, 625, 626, 627, 628, 629, 630, 631 , 632 , 633 , 634, 635, 636 , 637, 638 , 639 , 640, 641 , 642, 643, 644, 645, 646, 647 , 648, 649, 650, 651 , 652, 653 , 654, 655, 656 , 657, 658 , 659, 660, 661 , 662, 663 , 664 , 665, 666, 667, 668, 669 , 670 .

671, 672, 673 , 674, 675, 676, 677, 678, 679, 680, 681 , 682, 683 , 684, 685 , 686 , 687, 688, 689, 690 , 691 , 692, 693, 694, 695, 696, 697, 698, 699 , 700, 701 , 702, 703 , 704, 705, 706, 707 , 708, 709, 710, 711 , 712, 713 , 714, 715 , 716 , 717 , 718, 719 , 720 , 721 , 722, 723, 724, 725, 726, 727, 728, 729, 730 , 731 , 732, 733 , 734, 735 , 736 , 737, 738 , 739, 740, 741 , 742, 743, 744, 745, 746, 747, 748, 749, 750, 751 , 752, 753, 754, 755 , 756, 757, 758 , 759, 760, 761 , 762 , 763 , 764 , 765, 766, 767, 768, 769, 770, 771 , 772 , 773, 774, 775 , 776 , 777 , 778, 779, 780 , 781 , 782, 783 , 784, 785 , 786 , 787, 788, 789, 790, 791 , 792, 793, 794, 795, 796, 797, 798(भाग) , 803, 804, 805, 806, 808, 810 , 813(भाग) , 814, 815, 816, 818, 819, 820, 821 .

मौजा - चोटा मुरजोड़ा, थाना संख्या 2, थाना लिटीपाड़ा, जिला पाकुड़ में अर्जन किए जाने वाले प्लाट

19 (भाग) , 20 (भाग) , 1 (भाग) , 11 (भाग ) , 12(भाग ) , 13 (भाग ) , 14(भाग) , 16(भाग) , 17 (भाग ) , 18(भाग ) ,

51 (भाग) , 59(भाग), 60(भाग) , 61 (भाग) ,

46(भाग) , 47 (भाग) ,

69, 70, 71 , 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78 , 79, 80,

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

108, 109 , 110, 111 , 112, 113, 114, 107,

62 (भाग), 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 81 , 82, 83 , 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90 , 102(भाग) , 103, 104, 105, 106,

115, 116 , 117, 118, 119, 120(भाग) , 124(भाग) , 11597 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/ आश्विन 30, 1927

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

11598

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005 /ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ] मौजा - बड़ा मुरजोड़ा, थाना संख्या 3 , थाना लिटीपाड़ा, जिला पाकुड़ में अर्जन किए जाने प्लाट 2(भाग) , 3, 4, 5, 6, 7(भाग) , 8(भाग) , 9, 10, 11 , 12, 13(भाग) , 14(भाग) , 15, 16, 17, 18(भाग) , 21 (भाग ) , 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29(भाग) , 30, 31 ( भाग) , 35(भाग ) , 36(भाग) , 37(भाग), 56(भाग) , $7 (भाग) , 58(भाग) , 59, 60, 61 , 62, 63 , 64, 65, 66(भाग) , 68( भाग) , 69(भाग) , 70 , 71 , 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81 , 82, 83 , 84(भाग) , 92(भाग) , 93(भाग) , 94(भाग) , * 95(भाग) , 96, 97, 98(भाग) , 99(भाग) , 100 ( भाग) , 101 , 102, 103 , 104, 105, 106 , 107 , 108, 109, 110, 111 , 112, 113 , 114 , 115 , 116, 117, 118, 119, 120 , 121 , 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129 , 130, 131 , 132, 133 , 134, 135, 136, 137, 138 , 139 , 140, 141 , 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148 , 149, 150, 151 , 152, 153 , 154, 155, 156 , 157 , 158, 159 , 160, 161 , 162, 163 , 164 , 165, 166, 167, 168 , 169, 170 , 171 , 172 , 173 , 174, 175 , 176 , 177, 178, 179 , 180, 181 , 182, 183 , 184 , 185, 186, 187, 188 , 189, 190 , 191 , 192, 193 , 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199 , 200 , 201 , 202, 203, 204 , 205, 206, 207, 208, 209 , 210 , 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216 , 217, 218 , 219 , 220, 221 , 222, 223, 224, 225 , 226, 227 , 228, 229 , 230, 231 , 232, 233 , 234, 235, 236 , 237 , 238, 239, 240, 241 , 242, 243 , 244 , 245, 246, 247, 248, 249 , 250, 251 , 252, 253 , 254, 255, 256 , 257, 258 , 259, 260 , 261 , 262, 263, 264, 265, 266, 267 , 268, 269, 270(भाग) , 271 (भाग) , 272, 273, 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280, 281 , 282 , 283, 284, 285, 286, 287 , 288, 292(भाग) , 293 (भाग) , 294(भाग) , 300(भाग) , 313(भाग) , 316 (भाग ) , 317(भाग) , 318, 319, 320 , 321 (भाग) , 326(भाग) , 327(भाग) , 328 (भाग) , 329, 330, 331 , 332 , 333, 334, 335, 336 , 337, 338, 339, 340, 341 , 342, 343, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 351 , 352, 353 , 354 , 355(भाग) , 356(भाग) , 359(भाग) , 360, 361 , 362, 363 , 364, 365, 366, 367, 368, 369, 370 , 371 , 372, 373 , 374, 375, 376, 377 , 378, 379, 380, 381 , 382, 383, 384, 385 , 386, 387 , 388 , 389 , 390 , 391 , 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 400, 401 (भाग) , 410 ( भाग) , 411 (भाग) , 412, 413, 414, 415, 416, 417 , 418 , 419, 420, 422(भाग) , 423 (भाग) , 424(भाग) , 425(भाग) , 432(भाग ) ,

458, 449(भाग), 450(भाग) , 451 , 452, 453(भाग) , 454 (भाग) , 455 (भाग) , 456(भाग) , 457, 459(भाग) , 460(भाग) , 464 (भाग) , 465 , 466, 467, 468 , 469, 470, 471 , 472, 473, 474, 475, 476, 477, 478 , 479, 480, 481 , 482, 483, 484, 485, 486, 487, 488 , 489, 490, 491 , 492, 493, 494, 495, 496, 497, 498, 499, 500, 501 , 502, 503, 504, 505, 506 , 507 , 508 , 509, 510 , 511 , 512, 513, 514, 515, 516 , 517, 518, 519, 520 , 521 , 522 , 523, 524, 525 , 526 , 527, 528, 529 , 530, 531 , 532, 533 , 534, 535, 536, 537, 538, 539 , 540 , 541 , 542, 543, 544, 545, 546, 547, 548 , 549, 550 , 551 , 552, 553 , 554, 555, 556, 557 , 558, 559 , 560 , 561, 562, 563 , 564, 565, 566 , 567(भाग) , 568 (भाग) , 569, 570, 571 , 572, 573 , 574, 575, 576, 577, 578, 579 , 580, 581 , 582, 583 , 584, 585, 586, 587, 588, 589, 590, 591 , 592, 593, 594 , 595, 596, 597, 598 , 599, 600, 601 , 602, 603 , 604, 605, 606, 607, 608 , 609 , 610, 611 , 612 , 613 , 614, 615 , 616 , 617, 618, 619 , 620, 621 , 622, 623 , 624 , 625, 626, 627, 628, 629 , 630 , 631 , 632 , 633 , 634, 635, 636, 637 , 638 , 639, 640 , 641 , 642, 643, 644, 645, 646, 647, 648, 649 , 650 , 651 , 652, 653 , 654, 655 , 656 , 657, 658, 659, 660, 661, 662 663 , 664, 665, 666 , 667 , 668, 669 , 670, 671 , 672, 673 , 674, 675 , 676 677, 678, 679 , 680, 681 , 682, 683 , 684, 685, 686 , 687, 688, 689 , 690, 691 , 692, 693 , 694, 695, 696, 697, 698, 699, 700, 701 , 702, 703, 704, 705, 706 , 707, 708, 709 , 710, 711, 712, 713 , 714, 715, 716, 717, 718 , 719 , 720, 721 , 722 , 723 , 724, 725, 726 , 11599 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

727 , 728 , 729 , 730 , 731 , 732, 733, 734, 735, 736, 737, 738, 739, 740, 741 , 742, 743, 744, 745, 746 , 747, 748, 749, 750, 751 , 752, 753, 754, 755, 756, 757, 758, 759, 760, 761, 762, 763, 764, 765, 766, 767, 768, 769, 770(भाग) , 771 , 772, 773(भाग) , 774(भाग) , 778(भाग) , 786(भाग) , 787(भाग), 790 (भाग) , 791, 792, 793, 794, 795, 796, 797, 798, 799, 800, 801 , 802, 803, 804, 805, 806, 807, 808, 809, 810, 811 , 812, 813, 814, 815, 816, 817, 818, 819, 820, 821 , 822 (भाग) , 823 (भाग) , 824 (भाग) , 825(भाग) , 826, 827 (भाग) , 828(भाग) , 829, 830, 831 (भाग) , 907(भाग ) , 915(भाग) , 916(भाग ) , 917(भाग) , 918, 919, 920 , 921, 922(भाग) .

मौजा - सिमलोंग, थाना संख्या 4, थाना लिटीपाड़ा, जिला पाकुड़ में अर्जन किए जाने वाले प्लाट 8(भाग) , 9 (भाग ) , 10(भाग) , 11 , 12 (भाग) , 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 , 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 , 32, 33, 34 (भाग) , 35 (भाग ), 36, 37 (भाग) , 39 (भाग) , 40(भाग) , 44(भाग) , 45 (भाग ), 46, 47, 48(भाग) , 49, 50, 51 , 52, 53 , 54, 55, 56, 57, 58(भाग ), 59(भाग) , 60(भाग) , 61 , 62, 63 , 64, 65, 66, 67, 68(भाग), 69(भाग) , 71 ( भाग) , 72(भाग) , 73, 74(भाग) , 75, 76, 77, 78(भाग) , 79(भाग) , 80 (भाग) , 82(भाग ) , 92(भाग) , 93(भाग) , 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100(भाग) , 126(भाग) , 127(भाग ), 128(भाग), 129(भाग) , 130 ( भाग) , 131 (भाग) , 132(भाग) , 174(भाग) , 200(भाग) , 201 (भाग ) , 209(भाग) , 210, 211 , 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217 , 218 , 219 (भाग ) , 220 (भाग) , 221 (भाग) , 226 (भाग), 227 (भाग) , 233 (भाग ), 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241 , 242, 243 , 244, 245, 246, 247 (भाग) , 248 (भाग) , 249(भाग ) , 250, 251 , 252, 253(भाग) , 255 (भाग) , 256 (भाग) , 258, 259, 260, 261 , 262, 263 (भाग), 264(भाग) , 265 (भाग) , 266(भाग) , 276 (भाग) , 277, 278 (भाग) , 279(भाग) , 281 , 282, 283, 284, 285 , 286(भाग) , 287(भाग) , 288, 289, 290, 291 , 292, 293, 294, 295 (भाग) , 303 (भाग) , 304, 305, 306, 307 (भाग) , 308 (भाग) , 309 (भाग) , 310, 311 , 312, 313, 314, 315, 316, 317 (भाग ), 318, 319, 320, 321 (भाग) , 322(भाग) , 325 (भाग) , 331 (भाग) , 332, 333 (भाग) , 334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 339, 340, 341 , 342, 343 , 344 , 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 351 , 352, 353, 354, 355, 356, 357(भाग) , 364, 365, 366, 367, 368, 369, 370, 371 , 372, 373, 374, 375, 376, 377 , 378, 379, 380, 381 , 382, 383 , 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389, 390, 391 , 392, 393 , 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 400 (भाग) , 401 , 402, 403, 404, 405, 406, 407, 408, 409, 410, 411 , 412, 413 , 414, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421 , 422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 427 , 428, 429, 430, 431 , 432, 433, 434, 435, 436(भाग) , 437 (भाग) , 438(भाग) , 439(भाग) , 440, 441, 442, 443, 444(भाग ) , 449(भाग) , 450, 451 , 452 (भाग ) , 462 (भाग) , 463(भाग ), 464 (भाग) , 465, 466, 467, 468, 469, 470 , 471 , 472, 473, 474 (भाग).

मौजा - अमरबीटा, थाना संख्या 7, थाना लिटीपाड़ा, जिला पाकुड़ में अर्जन किए जाने वाले प्लाट 1 (भाग) , 112(भाग ) , 113(भाग).

मौजा - वांस मीता, थाना संख्या 8, थाना लिटीपाड़ा, जिला पाकुड़ में अर्जन किए जाने वाले प्लाट 1 (भाग ) , 2, 3, 4 (भाग) , 5(भाग ) , 7 (भाग) , 8(भाग) , 9(भाग) , 68 (भाग ) , 69(भाग) , 70, 71 , 72, 73,74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81 , 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91 , 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 3016GI/05-14 11600

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005 /ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] 97, 98, 99, 100 , 101 , 102, 103 , 104 , 105, 106 , 107, 108, 109 , 110, 111 , 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121 , 122, 123, 124, 125, 126 , 127, 128, 129, 130, 131 , 132, 133, 134(भाग) , 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141 , 142, 143 , 144, 145, 146, 147, 148 , 149, 150, 151 , 152, 153, 154, 155 , 156 , 157, 158, 159, 160 , 161 , 162, 163 , 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171 , 172, 173, 174, 175, 176 , 177 , 178, 179, 180, 181 , 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187(भाग) , 188, 189, 190, 191 , 192, 193, 194, 195, 196 (भाग) , 197(भाग) , 198(भाग) , 206, 207, 208, 209.

मौजा - मारगो, थाना संख्या 9, थाना लिटीपाड़ा , जिला पाकुड़ में अर्जन किए जाने वाले प्लाट 1 , 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7(भाग ), 9(भाग) , 15(भाग), 16(भाग) , 17, 18(भाग) , 101 (भाग) , 102 (भाग) , 103, 104, 105, 106 , 107, 108, 109, 110 , 111 .

मौजा- चोटा चटकम, थाना संख्या 10, थाना लिटीपाड़ा, जिला पाकुड़ में अर्जन किए जाने वाले प्लाट

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

मौजा- धोवपाहाड़, थाना संख्या 26, थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी, जिला गोड्डा में अर्जन किए जाने वाले प्लाट

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

मौजा लाडा पाथर, थाना संख्या 27, थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी, जिला गोड्डा में अर्जन किए जाने वाले प्लाट

3(भाग) , 4, 56, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 , 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 , 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 , 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 , 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 , 52, 53, 54 , 55, 56, 57, 58 , 59, 60, 61 , 62, 63 , 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71 , 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81 , 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91 , 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101 , 102, 103, 104 , 105, 106 , 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116 , 117, 118 , 119 , 120 , 121 , 122, 123 , 124 , 125 , 126 , 127, 128, 129, 130, 131 , 132(भाग) , 133(भाग) , 134(भाग) , 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141 , 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148(भाग) , 150(भाग), 151 (भाग) , 156(भाग) , 161 , 162, 163, 11601 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/ आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

164, 165(भाग) , 166 (भाग) , 246 (भाग) , 247(भाग) , 248(भाग) , 249, 250, 251 , 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257 (भाग ), 258 (भाग) , 259(भाग) , 260(भाग), 261 (भाग), 286, 287, 288, 289, 290, 291 , 292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 299, 300, 310 (भाग),

सीमा विवरण

ब्लाक- 1 ( क1 क18)

क 1 - क2 रेखा मौजा चोटापुरो संख्या 8 के थाना सुन्दरपहाड़ी, जिला गोड्डा(झारखण्ड) प्लाट संख्या 221 क1 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर प्लाट संख्या 210, 209, 259, 261 , 262, 267, 268, 153 से होकर गुजरती हुई बिन्दु क2 पर मिलती है ।

क2- क3 रेखा मौजा चोटापुरो संख्या 8 क2 हिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर और प्लाट संख्या 158, 157, 156 और प्लाट सं.1 एवं 2 से होकर गुजरती हुई चाटोपुरो के प्लाट संख्या 01 में विन्दु कउ पर मिलती है । क3 - क4 रेखा मौजा चोटापुरो संख्या 8 के प्लाट संख्या 01 कउ बिंदु से शुरु होकर और प्लाट सं 03, 04, 07, 06, 07,11 से होकर गुजरती हुई मौजा चोटा पुरो संख्या 8 के प्लट से 11 में बिंदु क4 पर मिलती है । क4- क 5 रेखा मौजा चोटापुरो संख्या 8 के प्लाट संख्या 11 क4 बिंदु से आरंभ होकर और प्लाट संख्या 20 से होकर गुजरती हुई और साझा सीमा मौजा चोटापुरो सं 8 एवं गरिडीह सं 9 की साझा सीमा को पार करती हुई और भौजा मीर डिह के प्लाट सं 22 , 21 , 17, 15, 10, 11 एवं 1 से होकर गुजरती हुई और पीपर जोरिया संख्या 10 एवं गरिडीह संख्या 9 की साझा सीमा में प्रवेश करती हुई और प्लाट संख्या 24, 26, 31 , 32, 34, 36, 13 , 51 , 52, 193, 194, 195, 198, 188, 187, 235, 236, 242 से होकर गुजरती हुई मौजा पीपर जोरिया संख्या 10 पर प्लाट संख्या 242 क4 बिंदु में मिलती है। क5 - क6 रेखा प्लाट सं 242 मौजा पीपर जोरिया संख्या 10 में क5 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर और प्लाट संख्या 243, 223, 260, 221 से होकर गुजरती हुई और मौजा पीपर जोरिया संख्या 10 एवं मीरचैतारी संख्या 11 के साझा सीमा में प्रवेश करती हुई, प्लाट संख्या 11 , 12, 11 , 32, 75, 76, 72, 71 , 67, 66, 64, 53, 52, 209, 208, 211, 243, 242 से होकर गुजरती हुई मीर चैतारी के प्लाट संख्या 254 मे बिंदु क6 पर मिलती है ।

क6 - क7 रेखा मौजा मीर चैतारी संख्या 11 क6 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर मौजा पोखरिया संख्या 12 और मौर चैतारी संख्या 11 की साझा सीमा को पार करती हुई प्लाट संख्या 243, 242, 241 , 234, 232, 231 , 229, 59, 58 , 57, 55, 51 , 50, 49, 91 , 93, से गुजरती हुई का विन्दु प्लाट संख्या 94 में मौजा पोखरिया संख्या 12 में मिलती है ।

क7 - कठ रेखा मौजा पोखरिया संख्या 12 के क7 बिंदु से आरंभ होकर से शुरू होकर प्लाट संख्या 94, 95 से गुजरती हुई और मौजा खयरासोल संख्या 13 एवं पोखरिया संख्या 12 की साझा सीमा रेखा में प्रवेश करती हुई, प्लाट संख्या 85, 69, 90, 92, 93, 94, 83, 74, 73, 72, 60, 62, 64, 336, 542, 544, 577, 588, 584, 597 से होकर गुजरती हुई मौजा खयरासोल संख्या 13 के प्लाट संख्या 531 में क8 बिन्दु पर मिलती है । 11602

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] क8-क9 रेखा मौजा खयरासोल सं . 13 , प्लाट संख्या 531 से आरंभ होकर और प्लाट संख्या 698 , 600,614,522,521,615,508,507,506,630,498,496,494,493,683,682,715,713, 712, 732, 738, 740,749,748 से होकर गुजरती हुई प्लाट सं.748 में बिंदु क9 पर मिलती है ।

क9 क

10 रेखा मौजा खयरासोल संख्या 13 के प्लाट संख्या 748 के क9 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर और प्लाट संख्या 742, 737, 743, 755 से होकर गुजरती हुई और गुमानी नदी के पश्चिमी किनारे को पार करती हुई मौजा खयरासोल के प्लाट संख्या 795 में बिंदु क 10 पर मिलती है ।

क10 - क 11 रेखा मौजा खयरासोल संख्या 13 गुमानी नदी प्लाट संख्या 795 क 10 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर और प्लाट संख्या 795, 796 से होकर गुजरती हुई और पुनः गुमानी नदी के पश्चिम किनारे को पार कर प्लाट संख्या 414 में प्रवेश करती हुई और 334, 333, 332 से होकर गुजरती हुई और पुनः प्लाट संख्या 124, गुमानी नदी से गुजरती हुई क 11 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

क11 - क12 रेखा गुमानी नदी एवं मौजा खयरा सोल संख्या 13 के प्लाट संख्या 124 से होकर क 11 बिंदु से होकर गुमानी नदी के पूर्वी किनारे एवं मौजा चोटा मुर जोरा संख्या 2 से होकर गुजरती है और प्लाट संख्या 46, 47, 20, 19, 18, 17 , 16, 14, 13, 12, 11 से होकर गुजरती हुई और गुमानी नदी के पूर्वी किनारे और मौजा छोटा गुरजोरा की साझा सीमा को पार करती हुई और गुमानी नदी से होकर गुजरती हुई प्लट संख्या 388 में क 12 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

क12 - क 13 रेखा क12 विन्दु से प्रारंभ होकर और प्लट संख्या 301 , 302, 303 , 329, 328, 334, 335, 336, 341, 351 , 354 से होकर गुजरती हुई मौजा पोखरि. या संख्या 12 एवं मिरचैतारी संख्या 11 में प्रवेश करती हुई प्लट संख्या 485, 486, 543 , 542, 541 , 540, 549, 538, 537 , 536 से होकर गुजरती हुई और गुमानी नदी के पश्चिम किनारे को पार करती हुइ प्लाट संख्या 582 में क13 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

क13- क14 रेखा गुमानी नदी मौजा मीरचैतारी संख्या 11 क 13 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर गुमानी नदी के प्लाट संख्या 582 को पार कर गुमानी नदी के पश्चिम किनारे से प्लाट संख्या 382 , 383, 381 से गुजरती हुई मौजा मीर चैतारी संख्या 11 एवं पीपर जोरिया संख्या 10 के साझा सीमा पर बिंदु क 14 पर मिलती है ।

क14 - क15 रेखा क 14 विन्दु से प्रारंभ होकर मौजा गरीडी संख्या 9 में प्रवेश करती हुई और प्लाट संख्या 667, 668, 805 से होकर गुजरती हुई और प्लाट सं. 668 को पार करती हुई और प्लाट संख्या 701 , 714, 713, 716 , 720 , 721 , 668, 814 , 798, 796 , 795, 791 , 790, 787, 785, 782, 787 , 780, 778, 777, 775, 789, 771 से होकर गुजरती हुई और मौजा गरीडी संख्या 9 एवं बड़ा धामनी संख्या 7 की साझा सीमा से होकर गुजरती हुई प्लाट संख्या 89, 91 , 95, 96, 97, 98, 85 से गुजरती हुई मौजा बड़ा धामनी संख्या 7 में क 15 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

क15- क 16 रेखा प्लाट संख्या 84 मौजा बड़ा धामनी संख्या 7, क 15 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर और प्लाट संख्या 230, 223, 232, 233 के उत्तरी सीमा से होकर गुजरती हुई और प्लाट संख्या 318 , 239, 314, 313, 312, 311 , 310, 307 , 305, 304, 303, 301 , 299, 297, 385, 386, 388, 389, 390 , 395, 397, 398, 375, 445, 504 से गुजरती हुई मौजा बड़ा धामनी संख्या 7 के क 16 बिन्दु पर मिलती है । 11603 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

क16 - क 17 रेखा मौजा बड़ा धामनी 07 प्लाट संख्या 504 के क 16 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर और प्लाट संख्या 504 से गुजरती हुई क 17 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

क17- क18 रेखा मौजा बड़ा धामनी संख्या 07 क17 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर प्लाट संख्या 504, 570, 477, 471 , 478 , से होकर गुजरती हुई और मौजा माको माधगी संख्या 16 की साझा सीमा मे प्रवेर , करती हुई प्लाट संख्या 19, 18 , 16, से होकर गुजरती हुई और मौजा चोटा पुरो संख्या 8 एवं माको माधगी संख्या 16 में साझा सीमा से होकर गुजरती हुई मौजा चोटा पुरो संख्या 8 के प्लाट संख्या 1056, में क18 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

क18 - क 1 रेखा मौजा चोटा पुरो संख्या ४ के प्लाट संख्या 1056 क18 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर इसी मौजा के प्लाट संख्या 215, 213 , 212, से होकर गुजरती हुई मौजा चोटा पुरो संख्या 8 थाना सुंदर पहाडी, जिला गोडडा में प्लाट संख्या 221 पर मिलती है ।

सीमा वर्णन

ब्लाक - 2 ( ख 1 - ख27)

ख 1 - ख 2 रेखा मौजा बड़ा धामनी संख्या 7 थाना सुन्दर पहाड़ी , जिला गोड्डा के प्लाट संख्या 100 के ख 1 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर प्लाट संख्या 100, 101 , 102, 103 से होकर गुजरती हुई और गुमानी नदी के पूर्वी किनारे को पार करती हुई और प्लाट संख्या 1175 से होकर गुजरती हुई और प्लाट संख्या 1161, 1162, 1165 के दक्षिणी किनारे सीमा को पार करती हुई और गुमानी नदी मौजा - जोरडीहा संख्या 1 में प्रवेश करती हुई प्लाट संख्या 813 , 499 से गुजरती हुई मौजा जोरडीहा संख्या 1 थाना - लिट्टीपाड़ा जिला पाकुड़ पर प्लाट संख्या 489 के बिंदु ख 2 में मिलती हैं ।

ख2 ख 3 रेखा मौजा जोरडीहा संख्या 1 प्लाट संख्या 489 के क 2 बिंदु से शुरू होकर और प्लाट संख्या 486, 485, 482, 481 , 480, 477 के दक्षिणी पश्चिमी किनारे से गुजरती हुई मौजा जोरडीहा सं. 1 के प्लाट संख्या 515 के ख 3 बिंदु पर मिलती है ।

ख३ ख4 रेखा प्लाट संख्या 515 , मौजा जोरडीहा संख्या 1 ख3 बिंदु से शुरू होकर और प्लाट संख्या 704, 508 , 798 से गुजरती हुई जोरडीहा संख्या 1 एवं छोटा चटकम संख्या 10 की साझा सीमा रेखा को पार करती हुई प्लाट संख्या 353, 354 के पश्चिमी किनारे से गुजरती हुई प्लाट संख्या 342, 403, 402, 488, 407 से गुजरती हुई मौजा छोटा चटकम संख्या 10 एवं मारगो संख्या 9की साझा सीमा रेखा से होकर गुजरती है और प्लाट संख्या 8 , 9, 15, 18, से गुजरती हुई मौजा मारगो संख्या 9 में ख4 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ख4 - ख 5 रेखा मौजा मारगो संख्या 9 में ख 4 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर प्लाट संख्या 102, 101 , 01 से गुजरती हुई मौजा मारगो संख्या 9 एवं बांशबीटा संख्या 8 और साझा सीमा रेखा पार करती हुई प्लाट संख्या 187, से गुजरती हुई मौजा बांसमीटा सं. 8 में ख 5 बिंदु पर मिलती है ।

ख 5 - ख 6 रेखा मौजा बांशबीटा संख्या 8 में ख 5 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर और प्लाट संख्या 198, 197 , 196, 68, 69 , से होकर गुजरती हुई एवं प्लाट संख्या 25 के उत्तरी पूर्वी किनारे से गुजरती हुई और प्लाट संख्या 9, 8 , 4 , 5, 1 से गुजरती हुई और मौजा बांशबीटा संख्या 8 एवं जोरडीहा संख्या 1 और साझा सीमा रेखा को पार करती हुई और जोरदीहा संख्या 1 के प्लाट संख्या 822 से गुजरती हुई ख6 बिन्दु पर मिलती है । 11604

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II -SEC . 3 (ii ) ] ख6 - ख7 रेखा मौजा जोरडीहा संख्या 01 में ख 6 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर मौजा अमरबीटा संख्या 7 एवं जोरडीहा संख्या 1 की साझा सीमा को पार करती हुई और मौजा अमरबीटा के प्लाट संख्या 1 से गुजरती हुई ख7 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ख7 ख 8 रेखा मौजा अमरबीटा संख्या 7 में ख 7 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर प्लाट संख्या 1 और प्लाट संख्या 111 की पश्चिमी सीमा से होकर गुजरती हुई प्लाट संख्या 112 , 113, और 1 से गुजरती हुई मौजा अमरबीटा संख्या 7 में ख 8 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ख४ ख9 रेखा मौजा अमरबीटा संख्या 7 में ख 8 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर मौजा बड़ा मुरजोरा संख्या 3 एवं अमरबीटा संख्या 7 में साझा सीमा रेखा में प्रवेश करते हुई, प्लाट संख्या 922 , 920, 917, 918, 831 828, 827, 825 , 823, 822 , 790, 787, 786 , 778 , 770 , 773 , 774, 432, 468, 567, 464 460, 459 से होकर गुजरती हुई प्लाट संख्या 448 में बिंदु ख 9 पर मिलती है ।

ख9 - ख 10 रेखा मौजा बड़ा मुरजोरा संख्या 3 प्लाट सं . 448 के ख9 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर संख्या 455, 453 , 450, 424, 410, 411 , 401 , 359, 355 , 356 से होकर गुजरती हुई मौजा बड़ा मुरजोरा संख्या 3 एवं सिमलोंग संख्या 4 की साझा सीमा रेखा को पार करती हुई प्लाट संख्या 37 , 38, 40, 35 , 34, 45, 48, 69, 68, 67, 72 से गुजरती हुई बिन्दु ख 10 को पार करती है ।

ख10- ख 11 रेखा मौजा सिमलोंग संख्या 4 के प्लाट संख्या 101 में ख 10 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर, प्लाट संख्या 100, 101 , 256, 257, 255 , 253, 249, 247, 248, 257, 126 , 127, 128 , 132, 133, 174 और 432 से होकर गुजरती हुई मौजा समलौंग सं. 4 के प्लाट संख्या 558 में बिंदु ख 11 पर मिलती है ।

ख 11 - ख 12 रेखा मौजा सिमलोंग संख्या 4 के प्लाट सं . 558 में ख 11 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर प्लाट संख्या 559 में ख 12बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ख12- ख13 रेखा मौजा सिमलोंग के प्लाट संख्या 4 में ख2 बिंदु में प्रारंभ होकर प्लाट संख्या 559, 342, 174, 132, 130, 129, 257, 248, 247 से गुजरती हुई ख 13 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ख13- ख 14 रेखा सिमलोंग संख्या 4 के प्लाट संख्या 247 के ख 13 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर, प्लाट संख्या 247, 238, 227, 226, 220, 221 , 219, 200, 201 , 295, 296, 297 , 309, 307 से होकर गुजरती हुई ख 14 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ख 14 - ख 15 रेखा प्लाट संख्या 307 के मौजा सिमलोंग संख्या 4 के ख 14 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर प्लाट संख्या 308 , 303, 333 , 486, 483 , 491 , 492, 481 , 436, 437, 438 , 440 , 444, 449 , 452 , 464, 463, 468, 472, 543, 400, 615, से होकर गुजरती हुई और लादा नदी को पार करती हुई मौजा सिमलोंग संख्या 4 एवं लादापाथार संख्या 27 की सम्मिलित सीमा रेखा पर बिंदु ख 15 मे बिन्दु ख 15 पर मिलती है ।

ख 15 ख16 रेखा साझा सीमा पर ख 15 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर और मौजा लादा पाथार संख्या 27 के प्लाट संख्या 167,166, 165 , 156, 151 , 150, 148 , 134, 133 , 247 , 256, 257, 258 से होकर गुजरती हुई प्लाट संख्या 261 में ख 16 बिन्दु पर मिलती है । 11605 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

ख16 - ख 17 रेखा मौजा लादा पाथार संख्या 27 के प्लाट सं. 261 में ख 16 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर और प्लाट संख्या 261 , 260, 310, 300 से होकर गुजरती हुई लादा पाथार संख्या 27 और धोपहाड़ संख्या 26 में साझा सीमा रेखा से होकर गुरजती हुई और प्लाट संख्या 262, 67, 69, 74, 75 से होकर गुजरती हुई प्लाट संख्या 100 में ख 17 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ख17- ख 18 रेखा मौजा धोपहाड़ संख्या 26 के प्लाट संख्या 100 ख 17 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर और प्लाट संख्या 100, 96, 94, 79, 85 से होकर गुजरती हुई ख 18 विन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ख18- ख 19 रेखा ख 18 बिंदु मौजा धोपहाड़ संख्या 26 एवं गुमानी नदी के दक्षिणी किनारे साझा सीमा रेखा से प्रारंभ होकर और गुमानी नदी तथा मौजा धोपड संख्या 26 के प्लाट संख्या 48, 47,46, 37, 36, 38, 35, 34, 33, 30, 206 से होकर गुजरती हुई और लादा पाथर संख्या 27 की साझा सीमा रेखा को पार करती हुई, गुमानी नदी को पार करती हुई प्लाट संख्या 3 में बिंदु ख 19 पर मिलती है ।

ख19 - ख 20 रेखा मौजा लादा पाथार संख्या 27 के प्लाट संख्या 3 के ख 19 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर और लादा पाथार संख्या 27 एवं सिमलोंग संख्या 4 के साझा सीमा रेखा से होकर गुजरती हुई प्लाट संख्या 363, 357, 356, 331 , 321 , 322, 317, 280, 278, 276, 286, 287, 265, 264, 263 , 92, 93, 78, 79, 80 से गुजरती हुई मौजा सिंमलौंग में प्लाट संख्या 60 के पश्चिमी किनारे पर ख20 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ख 20 - ख 21 रेखा ख 20 विन्दु से प्रारंभ होकर प्लाट संख्या 60 , 58, 8,9 , 12 से गुजरती हुई और मौजा सिमलोंग संख्या 4 एवं बड़ा मुरजोरा संख्या 3 के साझा सीमा रेखा मै प्रवेश करते हुई, प्लाट संख्या 326, 328 , 321 , 317 , 316 से गुजरती हुई ख 21 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ख 21 - ख 22 रेखा मौजा बड़ा मुरजोरा संख्या 3 के प्लाट संख्या 317 में ख 21 बिंदु से शुरू होकर और प्लाट संख्या 313, 270 , 271 , 300 , 294, 293, 292, 289 से होकर गुजरती हुई गुमानी नदी में ख 22 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ख22 - ख 23 रेखा गुमानी नदी में बिन्दु ख 22 से शुरू होकर और मौजा वड़ा मुर जोरा संख्या 3 एवं खयरासोल संख्या 13 की साझा सीमा रेखा को पार करती हुई और मौजा बड़ा मुरजोरा संख्या 3 के प्लाट संख्या 284, 223 , 101 , 100 , 99, 98, 94, 93, 92, 84, 69, 68, 66, 56 से होकर गुजरती हुई ख 23 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ख23- ख 24 रेखा मौजा वड़ा मुर जोरा संख्या 3 प्लाट संख्या 67 में ख 23 बिंदु से शुरू होकर और प्लाट संख्या ' 58, 29, 42, 37, 38, 35, 31 , 32, 21 , 19, 14, 13, 8, 5, 2 से होकर गुजरती हुई एवं मौजा बड़ा मुरजोरा संख्या 3 एवं छोटा मुरजोरा संख्या 2 की साझा सीमा में प्रवेश करती हुई और छोटा मुरजोरा संख्या 2 के प्लाट संख्या 188, 187, 186, 185, 184, 183 , 182 , 181 , 180 , 179, 178, 177, 173 से होकर गुजरती हुई और मौजा छोटा मुरजोरा सं. 2 और गुमानी नदी की सम्मिलित सीमा रेखा से होकर गुजरती हुई और गुमानी नदी से होकर गुजरती हुई और पुनः मौजा छोटा मुरजोरा नं.. 2 और गुमानी नदी की सम्मिलित सीमा रेखा को पार करती हुई मौजा छोटा मुरजोरा सं. 2 के प्लाट संख्या 125 में ख 24 बिन्दु पर मिलती है । 11606

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] ख24 - ख 25 रेखा मौजा छोटा मुरजोरा संख्या 2 के प्लाट संख्या 125 में ख 24 बिंदु से प्रारंभ होकर और प्लाट संख्या 126, 125, 120, 123 , 102, 101 , 100, 123, 61 , 60, 58, 59, 51 से होकर गुजरती हुई मौजा छोटा मुरजोरा संख्या 2 के प्लाट संख्या 792 में ख 25 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ख25 - ख 26 रेखा मौजा छोटा मुरजोरा संख्या 2 के प्लाट सं. 792 में ख 25 बिंदु से शुरू होकर और प्लाट संख्या 792 से होकर गुजरती हुई और मौजा छोटा मुरजोर संख्या 2 एवं जोरडीहा संख्या 1 की साझा सीमा पार करती हुई और प्लाट संख्या 731 , 154, 270, 131 से होकर गुजरती हुई प्लाट संख्या 270 में ख 26 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ख26- ख27 रेखा मौजा जोरडीहा संख्या 1 के प्लाट सं . 270 में ख 26 बिंदु से शुरू होकर, प्लाट संख्या 270, 126, 124, 7, 8, 10, 11 , 5 से होकर गुजरती हुई प्लाट संख्या 4 के पूर्वी कोने पर ख 27 बिन्दु पर मिलती है ।

ख27 - ख 1 रेखा मौजा जोरडीहा संख्या 1 के प्लाट संख्या 4 में ख 27 बिंदु से शुरू होकर, मौजा जोरडीहा सं . 1 के प्लाट संख्या 3 , 5, 2, 13, 15, 17, 19, 20, 21 , 24 से होकर गुजरती हुई मौजा जोरडीहा संख्या 1 एवं गरीडीह संख्या 9 की साझा सीमा रेखा में प्रवेश करती हुई और गुमानी नदी से गुजरती हुई मोजा बड़ा धामनी संख्या 7 एवं गरीडीह संख्या 9 की साझा सीमा को पार करते हुई मौजा धामनी संख्या 7 थाना सुन्दर पहाड़ी , जिला गोड्डा के प्लाट सं . 100 में ख 1 बिंदु पर मिलती है ।.

[फा. सं. 43015/10/2002- पी. आर. आई. डब्ल्यू. ] एम. शहाबुद्दीन, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 10th October, 2005

S. O. 3849. Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal, number S.O. 237 dated the 22nd January, 2004 issued under sub - section ( 1 ) of section 7 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act , 1957 ( 20 of 1957), (hereinafter referred to as the said Act ) published in the Gazette of India , Part II , section 3 , sub- section (ii ) dated 31st January , 2004 and amendment to the Principal notification vide S.O. number 793 dated 24th February , 2005 published in the Part II , section 3 , sub - section ( ii ) of the Gazette of India dated 5th March, 2005 , the Central Government gave notice of its intention to acquire the lands measuring 1463.433 hectares ( approximately ) of lands in the locality specified in the Schedule appended to that notification

And whereas no objection was made to the acquisition of the land in the locality aforesaid; And whereas the Central Government after consulting the Government of Jharkhand is satisfied that the land measuring 1463.433 hectares (approximately ) of lands described in the Schedule appended hereto should be acquired .

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of section 9 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that the land measuring 1463.433 hectares (approximately) described in the Schedule appended hereto are hereby acquired.

The plan bearing number : ECL/ CHUB / MOUZA/ 09 dated 28.5.2005 of the area covered by this notification may be inspected in the Office of the Deputy Commissioner , District Godda, (Jharkhand) and Pakur (Jharkhand) , or in the Office of the Coal Controller Collector , Shahdol (Madhya Pradesh) or in the Office of the Coal Controller , 1 , Council House Street, Kolkata 700001. or in the office of the Director , Technical ( Planning & Project ) , Eastern Coalfields Limited, Sanctoria, Post Office- Disergarh , Distt. Burdwan ( West Bengal ) Pin 713333 .

11607

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 19.27

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Block

Thana No. Sl . No

Mouza village

Ist

Chota Puro No

2 Garidih No.

9 3

PiperjoriaNo.

SCHEDULE

Block - First & Second

Chuperbhita Block (Rajmahal Coalfields)

Police station District

Area hectares Remarks

152.660 Part

Godda

Sundar- Pahari

Part

92.790

Godda

Sundar- Pahari

Godda

37,100 Part

Sundar-

Pahari

Mirchaitari No.

Pokharia No.

Kherasole No.

Bara Dhamni No.

Mako-Madgi

2nd

Jordiha No.

89.400 Part

Sundar- Godda Pahari

Godda

Part

53.624

Sundar Pahari

Godda 103.272 Part

Sundar- Pahari

Godda

47.120 Part

Sundar- Pahari

1.142 Part

Godda

Sundar Pahari

Past

359.856

Littipara

2 Pakur

Part

157.840

Littipara

Chota Murjora No

3 Pakur

137.437 Part

Littipara

Bara Murjora No.

SimlongNo.

Pakur

51.095 Part

Littipara

Amar Bita No.

Pakur

Part

26.931

Pakur

Littipara

BasbitaNo.

57.720 Part

Littipara

MargoNo.

Pakur

27.260 Part

Littipara

10 Pakur

Part

16.640

Littipara

Chota Chatkam No.

DhoupharNo.

Lada Pathar

Pakur

Godda

22.856 Part

Sundar- Pahari

Godda

28.710 Part

Sundar- Pahari

Grand Total

3016GI/05-15

1463.433

1463.433 hectares (approximately) 11608

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA30, 1927

[PART II -SEC. 3 (ii) ]

BLOCK NO . 1

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

1 (P), 2(P) , 3 (P) , 4(P) , 5 , 6(P) , 7(P) , 8 , 9 , 10, 11 (P) , 20(P), 21 , 22 , 23 , 24, 25 , 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 , 32, 33 , 527, 528 , 529, 530, 531 , 532 533 , 534, 535, 536, 537 , 538 , 539, 540, 541 , 542, 543 , 544, 545, 546, 547 , 548, 592, 593, 594, 595, 596, 597, 598 , 599, 600, 601 , 602, 603 , 604, 605 , 606, 607, 608, 609, 610, 611 , 612, 613 , 614, 615, 616, 617 , 618 , 619, 620, 621 , 622 , 623 , 624, 625, 626, 627, 628 , 629, 630, 631 , 632, 633 , 634 , 635 , 658, 659 , 660, 661 , 662, 663 , 664, 665 , 666, 667, 668 , 669, 670, 671 , 672, 673 , 674, 675, 676, 677, 678 , 679 , 680, 681 , 682 , 683, 684, 685, 686, 687, 688 , 689, 690, 691 , 692, 693 , 694, 695 , 696, 697, 698 , 699, 700 , 701 , 702, 703 , 704, 705 , 706, 707, 708 , 709 , 710 , 711 , 712, 713 , 714 , 715 , 716, 717 , 718 , 719 , 720, 721 , 722 , 723, 724 , 725 , 726, 727 , 728 , 729 , 730 , 731 , 732 , 733 , 734, 735 , 736, 737, 738 , 739 , 740, 741 , 742, 743 , 766, 767, 768, 769 , 770, 771 , 772, 773 , 774 , 775, 776 , 777 , 778 , 779, 780, 781 , 782, 783 , 784, 785 , 786 , 787, 788 , 789, 790, 791 , 792, 793 , 794, 795, 796, 797, 798, 799, 800, 801 , 802, 803 , 804, 805, 806 , 807, 808 , 831, 832, 833, 834, 835 , 836, 837, 838 , 839, 840, 841 , 842, 843 , 844, 845 , 846, 847 , 848 , 849, 850 , 851 , 34, 35, 36, 37 , 38 , 39, 40, 41 , 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47 , 48 , 49, 50, 51 , 52, 53 , 54, 55 , 56, 57, 58 , 59, 60, 61 , 62 , 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68 , 69, 70, 71 , 72, 73 , 74, 75 , 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81 , 82, 83 , 84, 85, 86, 87 , 88, 89 , 90, 91 , 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101 , 102, 103 , 104, 105, 106, 107 , 108, 109, 110, 111 , 112, 113 , 114, 115, 116, 117 , 118 , 119, 120 , 121 , 122 , 123 , 124 , 125 , 126 , 127, 128 , 129 , 130, 131 , 132, 133 , 134, 135 , 136, 137,138, 139, 140, 141 , 142, 143 , 144, 145, 146, 147, 148 , 149, 150 , 151 , 152, 153 (P) , 154 , 155, 156 (P) , 157 (P) , 158 (P ) , 208 (P) , 209(P) , 210 (P) , 211 , 213 (P) , 214, 215 , 216 , 217, 218 , 219, 220, 221 (P) , 222, 223 , 224, 225, 226 , 227, 228 , 229, 230 , 231 , 232, 233 , 234, 235, 236 , 237, 238 , 239, 240, 241 , 242, 243 , 244, 245, 246, 247, 248 , 249, 250 , 251 , 252, 253 , 254 , 255 , 256, 257 , 258 (P) , 261 (P) , 262 (P) , 263 , 264 , 265 , 266 , 267 (P), 268 (P ) , 269, 270, 271 , 272 , 273 , 274, 275 , 276, 277, 278 , 279, 280, 281 , 282, 283 , 284, 285 , 286, 287, 288 , 289 , 290, 291 , 292 , 293 , 294 , 295 , 296, 297, 298 , 299 , 300, 301 , 302 , 303 , 304, 305, 306, 307, 308 , 309, 310, 311 , 312, 313 , 314 , 315, 316, 317, 318 , 319, 320, 321 , 322, 323 , 324 , 325 , 326, 327, 328 , 329, 330, 331, 332, 333 , 334, 335 , 336, 337, 338 , 339, 340, 341 , 342, 343, 344, 345 , 346, 347, 348 , 349, 350 , 351.352, 353, 354, 355, 356, 357, 358, 359, 360, 361 , 362, 363, 364, 365, 366, 367, 368 , 369, 370, 371 , 372, 373 , 374, 375, 376, 377 , 378 , 379, 380 , 381 , 382, 383 , 384, 385 , 386, 387, 388 , 389 , 390, 391 , 392, 393 , 394, 395 , 396 , 397, 398, 399 , 400, 401, 402, 403 , 404, 405 , 406, 407 , 408 , 409, 410, 411 , 412, 413 , 414, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419, 420 , 421 , 422, 423 , 424, 425, 426 , 427 , 428 , 429, 430, 431 , 432, 433 , 434, 435, 436, 437, 438 , 439,440, 441 , 442, 443, 444, 445, 446, 447, 448, 449, 450, 451 , 452, 453 , 454, 455, 456, 457, 458 , 459 , 460, 461, 462, 463 , 464, 465 , 466, 467, 468, 469, 470, 471 , 472, 473 , 474, 475, 476, 477, 478 , 479, 480 , 481 , 482 , 483, 484, 485 , 486, 487, 488, 489, 490, 491 , 492 , 493 , 494, 495, 496, 497, 498 , 499, 500, 501 , 502 , 503 , 504, 505, 506, 507 , 508 , 509, 510, 511 , 512, 513 , 514 , 515 , 516, 517, 518, 519, 520 , 521 , 522, 523 , 524 , 525, 526, 549, 550 , 551 , 552, 553 , 554, 555 , 556, 557, 558 , 559, 560 , 561 , 562, 563 , 564 , 565 , 566 , 567 , 568 , 569 , 570, 571 , 572, 573 , 574, 575, 576, 577, 578, 579, 580, 581 , 582, 583 , 584, 585, 586, 587, 588 , 589 , 590 , 591 , 636, 637, 638 , 639, 640, 641 , 642, 643 , 644, 645, 646, 647, 648, 649, 650, 651 , 652, 653 , 654, 655 , 656, 657, 744, 745, 746, 747, 748, 749 , 750, 751 , 752 , 753 , 754, 755 , 756, 757 , 758 , 759 , 760 , 761 , 762, 763 , 764, 765, 809, 810, 811 812, 813 , 814 , 815 , 816, 817, 818 , 819 , 820 , 821 , 822 , 823 , 824 , 825 , 826, 827, 828 , 829 , 830 , 852, 853 , 854, 855, 856, 857, 858 , 859 , 860, 861 , 862, 863 , 864 , 865 , 866, 867, 868 , 869 , 870, 871 , 872, 873 , 874, 875 , 876, 877, 878 , 879 , 880, 881 , 882, 883, 884, 885, 886, 887,

888, 889 , 890, 891 , 892, 893 , 894, 895, 896, 897, 898 , 899, 900, 901, 902 , 903 , 904, 905 , 906 , 907, 908 , 909 , 910, 911 , 912, 913 , 914, 915, 916, 917, 918, 919 , 920, 921 , 922, 923 , 924, 925 , 926, 927 , 928 , 929 , 930 , 931, 932, 933 934, 935, 936, 937, 938 , 939 , 940, 941, 942 , 943 , 944, 945, 946 , 947 , 948 , 949, 950 , 951 , 952 , 953, 954, 955, 956, 857, 958 , 959, 960, 961 , 962 , 963 , 964 , 965 , 966 , 967 , 968 , 969, 970 , 971, 972, 973 , 974, 975, 976, 977, 978 , 979, 980 , 981, 982 , 983 , 984 , 985, 986, 987, 988 , 989 , 990 , 991 , 992 , 993 , 994, 995 , 996 , 997, 998 , 999, 1000, 1001 , 1002, 1003, 1004, 1005, 1006, 1007 , 1008 , 1009, 1010 , 1011 , 1012, 1013 , 1014, 1015, 1016, 1017, 1018 , 1019, 1020 , 1021 , 1022, 1023, 1024, 1025, 1026, 1027, 1028, 1029 , 1030 , 1031 , 11609 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

1032, 1033, 1034, 1035, 1036, 1037, 1038, 1039, 1040, 1041, 1042, 1043, 1044, 1045, 1046, 1047, 1048, 1049, 1050, 1051 , 1052, 1053, 1054, 1055, 1056, 1057, 1058, 1059, 1060, 1061 , 1062, 1063, 1064, 1065, 1066, 1067, 1068, 1069 , 1070, 1071 , 1072, 1073, 1074, 1075, 1076, 1077, 1078, 1079, 1080, 1081 , 1082, 1083, 1084, 1085, 1086, 1087, 1088, 1089 , 1090 , 1091, 1092, 1093, 1094, 1095, 1096, 1097, 1098, 1099, 1100, 1101 , 1102, 1103, 1104, 1105.

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

552, 553, 554, 555, 556, 557, 558 , 559, 560 , 561, 562, 563, 564, 565,

653, 654 , 655, 656, 657 , 658 , 659 , 660 , 661 , 662 , 663, 664 , 665 , 666 , 667 , 668 , 669 , 670 , 671 , 672, 673, 674, 675, 676, 677 , 678 , 679 , 680, 681 , 682 , 683 , 684, 685, 686 , 687 , 688 , 689 , 690, 691 , 692 , 693 , 694 , 695 , 696 , 697, 698 , 699 , 700 , 701 (P ), 702 (P ), 703, 704, 705, 706, 707, 708 , 709 , 710 , 711 , 712 , 713 (P) , 714(P ), 758, 759, 760, 761 , 762, 763 , 764 , 765 , 766, 767, 768, 769, 770, 771 (P ), 772 , 773, 774 , 775(P) , 777 (P) , 1(P), 3 , 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 , 9, 10(P) , 11 (P) , 15 (P) , 17(P), 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 (P) , 23 , 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 , 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 , 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68 , 69, 70, 71 , 72 , 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91 , 92, 93, 94, 95, 96 , 97 , 98 , 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111 , 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137,138, 139, 140, 141 , 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167 , 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183 , 184, 185, 186, 187, 188 , 189 , 190, 191, 192 , 193 , 194 , 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204 , 205, 206 , 207 , 208 , 209 , 210 , 211 , 212, 213 , 214 , 215, 216 , 217, 218 , 219, 220 , 221 , 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227 , 228 , 229, 230 , 231 , 232, 233 , 234, 235, 236 , 237, 238 , 239, 240, 241 , 242, 243 , 244, 245, 246, 247 , 248 , 249, 250 , 251 , 252 , 253, 254, 255, 256, 257 , 258, 259, 260 , 261 , 262 , 263, 264, 265, 266, 267, 268, 269, 270 , 271 , 272 , 273 , 274, 275 , 276, 277, 278, 279, 280, 281 , 282 , 283, 284, 285, 286 , 287, 288, 289, 290, 291 , 292, 293 , 294, 295 , 296, 297 , 298, 299, 300, 301 , 302, 303, 304, 305 , 306, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311, 312, 313, 314, 315 , 316, 317 , 318, 319 , 320, 321 , 322, 323, 324 , 325, 326 , 327, 328 , 329, 330 , 331, 332, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 339, 340 , 341 , 342, 343 , 344, 345, 346, 347, 348 , 349, 350 , 351, 352 , 353, 354, 355, 356, 357 , 358, 359, 360, 361, 362, 363, 364, 365, 366 , 367, 368, 369, 370, 371 , 372, 373, 374, 375, 376, 377, 378, 379, 380, 381 , 382, 383 , 384, 385 , 386, 387 , 388, 389 , 390 , 391 , 392, 393, 394 , 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 400, 401 , 402 , 403 , 404 , 405 , 406 , 407 , 408 , 409, 410, 411 , 412, 413 , 414, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419,420, 421, 422, 423 , 424, 425, 426, 427 , 428 , 429 , 430, 431 , 432, 433 , 434, 435, 436, 437, 438, 439, 440, 441, 442,443, 444, 445, 446, 447, 448, 449, 450, 451 , 452 , 453 , 454, 455, 456, 457, 458, 459, 460,461,462,463, 464, 465, 466, 467 , 468, 469, 470, 471 , 472, 473, 474, 475, 476 , 477, 478, 479, 480, 481 , 482, 483, 484, 485, 486, 487, 488 , 489, 490, 491 , 492 , 493, 494 , 495, 496, 497 , 498 , 499, 500, 51 , 502, 503, 504, 505, 506, 507, 508 , 509, 510 , 511 , 512, 513 , 514, 515, 516 , 517 , 518 , 519, 520 , 521, 522 , 523, 524, 525, 526, 527, 528, 529, 530, 531, 532, 533, 534, 535, 536, 537, 538, 539, 540, 541, 542 , 543, 544, 545, 546, 547, 548 , 549, 550, 551 , 566, 567, 568 , 569 , 570, 571 , 572, 573, 574, 575, 576, 577, 578, 579, 580, 581 , 582, 583, 584, 585,586, 587, 588 , 589, 590, 591 , 592, 593, 594, 595 , 596 , 597, 598 , 599, 600, 601 , 602 , 603 , 604, 605, 606, 607, 608, 609, 610, 611, 612, 613, 614, 615, 616 , 617 , 618 , 619 , 620 , 621 , 622, 623, 624, 625, 626, 627, 628, 629, 630, 631 , 632, 633, 634 , 635, 636, 637, 638 , 639 , 640 , 641 , 642 , 643, 644, 645, 646, 647, 648, 649, 650, 651 , 652, 716(P) , 717, 718, 719, 720 (P) , 721 , 722 , 723 , 724, 725 , 726, 727 , 728, 729 , 730, 731, 732, 733, 734, 735, 736, 737, 738, 739, 740, 741 , 742, 743, 744, 745, 746, 747 , 748, 749, 750, 751 , 752, 753, 754, 755, 756 , 757 , 778 (P), 780(P) , 781 (P) , 782 (P) , 783, 784 , 785 (P) , 787(P) , 788, 789, 790(P) , 791 (P) , 795(P ), 796 (P) , 797 , 798 (P ) , 799 (P ) , 800 (P) , 805 (P) .

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

12 (P) , 13 (P) , 26 (P ), 27 , 28, 29, 30 , 31 (P) , 32 (P), 34 (P) , 36 (P), 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 , 42 , 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 11610

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] THE GAZETIE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ ASVINA 30 , 1927

49, 50, 51 (P), 52(P), 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64, 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69, 70, 71 , 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78 , 79 , 80 , 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90 , 91 , 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101 , 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107 , 108, 109, 110, 111 , 112, 113 , 114, 115, 116, 117, 118 , 119, 120, 121 , 122, 123, 124 , 125 , 126, 127, 128 , 129, 130, 131, 132, 133 , 134, 135, 136, 137,138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147 , 148, 149, 150, 151 , 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161 , 162, 163, 164, 165 , 166, 167, 168 , 169, 170, 171, 172 , 173 , 174, 175, 176, 177, 178 , 179, 180, 181, 182, 183 , 184, 185, 186, 187(P), 188 (P) , 189 , 190, 191 , 192, 193 (P), 194(P) , 195 (P), 207, 221 (P), 223 (P) , 224(P), 234 (P) , 235 (P), 236(P) , 237 , 238 , 239, 240, 241 , 242 (P) , 243 , 244, 245 , 246, 247 , 248 , 249, 250 , 251 , 252, 253 , 254, 255 , 256, 257, 258 , 259 , 260 (P) , 261 , 262 263 , 264 , 265 , 266, 267, 268 , 269 , 270 , 271 , 272, 273, 274 , 275, 276, 277, 278 , 279, 280 , 281, 282 , 283 , 284, 285 , 286, 287 , 288 , 289, 290, 291 , 292 , 293, 294, 295, 296, 297 , 298 , 299, 300, 301 , 302 , 303, 304 , 305 , 306, 307, 308, 309 , 310, 311 , 312 , 313, 314, 315 , 316, 317, 318 , 319, 320, 321 , 322, 323 , 324, 325, 326, 327 , 328, 329 , 330, 331 , 332, 333, 334, 335 , 336, 337, 338, 339, 340 , 341 , 342, 343 , 344 , 345 , 346 , 347, 348 , 349, 350 , 351 , 352, 353 , 354, 355, 356, 357, 358, 359 , 360, 361 , 362 , 363 , 364, 365 , 366 , 367 , 368 , 369, 370, 371 , 372 , 373, 374, 375, 376.

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

11 (P), 12(P) , 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 , 19, 20, 21 , 22, 23, 24, 25 , 26, 27, 28, 29 , 30 , 31, 32 (P) , 52( P) , 53(P ) , 54(P), 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 , 61 , 62, 63 , 64 , 65 (P) , 66(P) , 67, 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 (P), 72 ( P) , 75, 76 (P ) , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80, 81 , 82, 83 , 84 , 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 95, 96, 97 , 98, 99 , 100, 101 , 102, 103, 104, 105 , 106, 107, 108, 109 , 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121 , 122 , 123 , 124, 125 , 126 , 127 , 128, 129, 130 , 131, 132, 133 , 134, 135, 136 , 137,138 , 139, 140, 141 , 142, 143 , 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160 , 161, 162, 163 , 164 , 165, 166, 167, 168, 169 , 170 , 171, 172, 173, 174, 175 , 176, 177, 178 , 179, 180, 181 , 182, 183, 184, 185, 186 , 187 , 188 , 189, 190 , 191 , 192, 193, 194, 195, 196 , 197, 198, 199, 200 , 201 , 202 , 203, 204, 205 , 206, 207 , 208 (P) , 209 ( P) , 211 ( P), 242 (P) , 243 (P), 244 (P) , 245 , 246, 247, 248, 249, 250 , 251 , 252 , 253 , 254 (P), 255, 256, 257 , 258, 259 , 260, 261 , 262 , 263, 264, 265 , 266 , 267 , 268 , 269 , 270 , 271 , 272, 273 , 274 , 275, 276, 277, 278 , 279, 280, 281 , 282 , 283 , 284 , 285 , 286, 287 , 288 , 289 , 290, 291 , 292 , 293 , 294, 295, 296 , 297 , 298, 299, 300 , 301 , 302 , 303, 304 , 305 , 306 , 307, 308 , 309 , 310 , 311 , 312, 313 , 314, 315 , 316, 317 , 318 , 319, 320, 321 , 322 , 323 , 324, 325 , 326 , 327 , 328 , 329 , 330 , 331 , 332 , 333, 334, 335 , 336 , 337, 338 , 339 , 340 , 341 , 342, 343 , 344, 345 , 346, 347, 348, 349, 350 , 351, 352, 353 , 354, 355, 356, 357, 358 , 359 , 360 , 361 , 362, 363 , 364, 365 , 366, 367, 368, 369, 370 , 371 , 372 , 373, 374 , 375 , 376, 377, 378, 379 , 380 (P ) , 382 ( P ), 383 ( P), 384, 385 , 386, 387, 388 , 389, 390, 391 , 392, 393 , 394, 395, 396, 397, 398 , 399, 400 , 401, 402 , 403 , 404, 405, 406, 407, 408, 409, 410 , 411 , 412, 413 , 414, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 425 , 426, 427, 428 , 429, 430 , 431 , 432, 433, 434, 435, 436, 437, 438 , 439, 440 , 441 , 442 , 443 , 444, 445, 446, 447 , 448 , 449 , 450, 451 , 452, 453, 454, 455, 456, 457 , 458, 459 , 460 , 461 , 462, 463 , 464, 465, 466, 467, 468, 469, 470 , 471 , 472, 473 , 474, 475, 476 , 477 , 478, 479, 480, 481 , 482, 483 , 484 , 485 , 486 (P) , 487 , 488 , 489 , 490 , 491 , 492, 493 , 494 , 495 , 496, 497, 498, 499, 500, 501, 502, 503 , 504, 505 , 506, 507, 508 , 509 , 510 , 511 , 512, 513 , 514, 515, 516 , 517, 518 , 519, 520 , 521 , 522, 523, 524, 525 , 526, 527 , 528, 529, 530 , 531, 532 (P ) , 533 , 534, 535, 536 ( P) , 537 ( P) , 538 (P) , 539( P) , 540 ( P), 541 (P) , 542 (P) , 543 (P) .

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

49 (P), 50 (P), 51 (P) , 56 , 57 (P) , 58( P) , 59 (P), 60, 61 , 62, 63 , 64 , 65, 66, 67, 68, 69 , 70 , 71 , 72, 73 , 74 , 75, 76 , 77, 78, 79, 80, 81 , 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91 (P ), 92, 93 (P) , 94 ( P) , 95 ( P), 96, 97 , 98, 99 , 100, 101 , 102, 103, 104, 105 , 106, 107, 108 , 109, 110, 111 , 112, 113, 114, 115 , 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122 , 123 , 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137,138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145 , 146, 147 , 148, 149, 150, 151 , 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158 , 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168 , 169 , 170, 171 , 172, 173, 174, 175 , 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185 , 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191 , 192, 193 , 194, 195 , 196, 197 , 198, 199, 200 , 201 , 202 , 203, 204 ( P) , 205, 206, 207 , 208 , 209, 11611 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii)]

भास्त का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005 / आश्विन 30 , 1927

210 , 211 , 212 , 213 , 214 , 215 , 216 , 217 , 218 , 219 , 220 , 221 , 222 , 223 , 224, 225, 226, 227 , 228 , 229(P) , 230 , 231 (P) , 232 (P ), 234(P) , 241 (P) , 242 (P), 243 , 244 , 245 , 246, 247, 248 , 249, 250, 251 , 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 258 , 259, 260 , 261 , 262 , 263, 264 , 265, 266 , 267, 268 , 269 , 270, 271 , 272 , 273, 274 , 275, 276, 277 , 278, 279, 280 , 281, 282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 287 , 288 , 289 , 290 , 291, 292 , 293 , 294 , 295, 296, 297, 298 , 299, 300 , 301 (P), 302 (P) , 303 (P), 304 (P), 305, 306, 307 , 308, 309, 310, 311 , 312, 313, 314, 315 , 316, 317, 318, 319, 320, 321 , 322, 323 , 324 , 325, 326, 327 , 328(P), 329 (P), 334(P) , 335 (P), 336(P) , 337 , 338, 339 , 340 , 341 (P) , 351 (P), 352 , 353, 354(P), 388 (P) .

Plots to be acquired in Mouza Kherasole Thana No.13 , P.S. Sundarpahari Dist. Godda

60 (P) , 61 (P), 64 , 65 , 66, 67, 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 (P) , 73 (P) , 83 (P), 85 (P ) , 86, 87(P) , 88 , 89(P) , 93 (P) , 94 (P ) , 95 , 96 , 97 , 98 , 99(P), 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113 , 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121 , 122, 123 , 124, 125, 126, 127, 128 , 129, 130, 131 , 132, 133, 134 , 135, 136, 137,138 , 139, 140, 141 , 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158 , 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171 , 172 , 173 , 174, 175, 176, 177 , 178, 179 , 180 , 181 , 182 , 183 , 184, 185, 186, 187, 188 , 189, 190, 191 , 192, 193 , 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201 , 202, 203 , 204 , 205 , 206 , 207, 208 , 209, 210, 211 , 212 , 213 , 214, 215, 216, 217 , 218 , 219, 220 , 221 , 222, 223 , 224 , 225 , 226 , 227 , 228 , 229, 230, 231 , 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240 , 241 , 242, 243 , 244 , 245, 246, 247, 248 , 249, 250 , 251 , 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 258, 259 , 260, 261 , 262 , 263 , 264, 265 , 266, 267, 268 , 269 , 270 , 271 , 272 , 273 , 274 , 275, 276 , 277, 278 , 279 , 280, 281 , 282, 283, 284 , 285 , 286 , 287 , 288 , 289 , 290, 291 , 292 , 293, 294 , 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300 , 301 , 302 , 303 , 304, 305, 306, 307, 308 , 309 , 310, 311 , 312 , 313, 314, 315, 316 , 317, 318, 319, 320, 321, 322, 323 , 324, 325, 326, 327, 328, 329, 330 , 331, 332(P) , 333(P) , 334(P) , 335, 336, 337, 338, 339 , 340, 341, 342, 343 , 344, 345, 346, 347, 348 , 349, 350 , 351, 352, 353 , 354, 355, 356 , 357, 358 , 359, 360, 361 , 362, 363, 364 , 365 , 366 , 367, 368 , 369 , 370, 371 , 372 , 373, 374, 375 , 376, 377 , 378 , 379, 380, 381, 382, 383, 384, 385 , 386 , 387 , 388 , 389, 390, 391 , 392 , 393 , 394, 395 , 396 , 397 , 398 , 399 , 400 , 401, 402 , 403, 404 , 405, 406, 407, 408, 409, 410, 411 , 412 , 413, 414(P) , 415, 416, 417 , 418, 419, 420, 421 , 422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 427, 428, 429, 430, 431 , 432, 433 , 434, 435 , 436, 437, 438 , 439 , 440 , 441 , 442 , 443, 444, 445, 446, 447, 448 , 449, 450, 451 , 452 , 453, 454, 455, 456 , 457 , 458 , 459 , 460 , 461 , 462 , 463 , 464 , 465, 466, 467, 468, 469, 470, 471 , 472 , 473 , 474, 475, 476, 477, 478 , 479, 480, 481 , 482 , 483 , 484 , 485 , 486 , 487, 488, 489, 490, 491 , 492, 493(P) , 494(P) , 496(P) , 498 (P) , 499, 500, 501, 502, 503, 504, 505, 506(P) , 507(P ), 508 (P ) , 509, 510, 511 , 512 , 513, 514, 515, 516, 517, 518, 519, 520, 521 (P ), 522 (P) , 523 , 524, 525, 526, 527 , 528, 529, 530, 531, 532 , 533 , 534, 535, 536, 537, 538, 539, 540 , 541 , 542(P ), 543 (P), 544 (P) , 577 (P) , 578 , 579 , 580(P) , 581 , 582, 583 (P ) , 584(P) , 598 (P), 600(P ) , 614 (P) , 615 (P) , 682 (P ) , 683 (P) , 684 , 685 , 686 , 687, 688 , 689 , 690 , 691 , 692 , 693 , 694, 695 , 696 , 697 , 698 , 699 , 700, 701 , 702, 703, 704, 705, 706 , 707, 708 , 709, 710, 711 , 712 (P), 713 (P), 714, 715(P) , 732(P) , 733, 734, 735 , 736 , 737(P ) , 738(P) , 740 ( P) , 741 , 742 (P), 743 (P) , 748(P ) , 749 (P), 795 (P), 796(P) , 797 (P) .

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

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

11612

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005 /ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] Plots to be acquired in Mouza Mako Madgi Thana No.16 , P.S. Sundarpahari Dist . Godda

16(P) & 19(P) .

BLOCK NO .

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

52 ( P ) , 53 (P ) , 57 (P) , 58 (P) , 59 , 60, 61 , 62, 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67, 68, 69, 70, 71 , 72 , 73 , 74, 75 , 76, 77, 78 , 79, 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84, 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 , 90, 91 , 92 , 93 , 94, 95 , 96, 97, 98 , 99 , 100, 101 , 102, 103, 104 , 105, 106, 107, 108 , 109, 110, 111 , 112, 113 , 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119 , 120, 121 , 122 , 123 , 124, 125 , 126 , 127, 128 , 151 , 152 , 153, 154, 155, 156, 157 , 158 , 159, 160, 161 , 162, 163 , 164, 165, 166, 167 , 168 , 169, 170 , 171 , 172, 173 , 174, 175 , 176, 177, 178 , 179, 180 , 181 , 182 , 183 , 184, 185, 186, 187, 188 , 189, 190, 191 , 192, 193 , 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201 , 202, 203, 204 , 205 , 206, 207 , 208 , 209, 210, 211 , 212 , 213 , 214, 215 , 216, 217 , 218 , 219 , 220 , 221 , 222 , 223 , 224 , 225 , 226, 227 , 228 , 229 , 230 , 231 , 232 , 233 , 234, 235 , 236, 237 , 238, 239 , 240, 241 242, 243 , 244, 245 , 246, 247 , 248 , 249 , 250, 251 , 252, 253 , 254 , 255 , 256, 257 , 258 , 259 , 260, 261 , 262, 263 264, 265 , 266 , 267, 268 , 269 , 270 , 271 , 272, 273 , 274, 275 , 276, 277, 278 , 279, 280, 281 , 282, 283 , 284 , 285 286, 287, 288, 289 , 290 , 291 , 292, 293 , 294, 295 , 296, 297, 298 , 299, 300, 301 , 302, 303 , 304, 305 , 306 , 307, 308, 309, 310, 311 , 312, 313 , 314 , 315 , 316, 317 , 318 , 319 , 320 , 321 , 322, 323, 324, 325 , 326, 327, 328 , 329 330 , 331 , 332, 333 , 334, 335 , 336, 337 , 338 , 339, 340, 341 , 342, 343 , 344, 345 , 346, 347, 348, 349 , 350 , 351 352 , 353 , 354 , 355 , 356, 357, 358 , 359, 360, 361 , 362, 363 , 364, 365, 366 , 367 , 368 , 369 , 370, 371 , 372, 373 , 374, 375 , 376 , 377, 378 , 379, 380 , 381 , 382, 383, 384 , 385 , 386, 387, 388 , 389, 390 , 391 , 392 , 393 , 394 395 , 396, 397, 398 , 399, 400, 401 , 402 , 403 , 404, 405, 406, 407, 408, 409 , 410, 411 , 412 , 413, 414, 415, 416 417, 418, 419, 420 , 421 , 422, 423 , 424, 425, 426, 427, 428 , 429, 430 , 431 , 432, 433 , 434 , 435, 436, 437, 438 439, 440, 441 , 442 , 443, 444, 445 , 446, 447, 448 , 449, 450, 451, 452, 453 , 454, 455 , 456, 481 (P) , 482(P) , 483 , 484, 485 ( P) , 486 (P) , 487 (P) , 489 (P) , 490 , 491 , 492, 493 (P ), 515 (P) , 516, 517 , 518 , 519 , 520 , 521 , 522 , 523 , 524, 525, 526, 527, 528 , 529 , 530, 531 , 532 , 533 , 534, 535, 536,537,538,539,540 , 541 , 542, 543 , 544, 545 , 546, 547, 548 , 549, 550, 551 , 552, 553 , 554, 555, 556 , 557 , 558 , 559 , 560, 561 , 562 , 563, 564, 565 , 566 , 567, 568 , 569 , 570 , 571 , 572 , 573 , 574, 575 , 576, 577, 578 , 579 , 580, 581 , 582 , 583 , 584, 585 , 586 , 587 , 588 589 , 590, 591 , 592 , 593 , 594, 595, 596, 597, 598 , 599 , 600 , 601 , 602, 603 , 604, 605 , 606, 607, 608, 609, 610 611 , 612, 613 , 614, 615, 616, 617 , 618 , 619, 620, 621 , 622, 623 , 624, 625, 626, 627 , 628 , 645,646, 647, 648 649, 650 , 651 , 652, 653 , 654 , 655, 656, 657 , 658, 659, 660 , 661 , 662, 663 , 664, 665 , 666 , 667, 668, 669 , 670 671 , 672, 673 , 674, 675 , 676, 677 , 678 , 679 , 680, 681 , 682, 683 , 684 , 685 , 686,687 , 688 , 689 , 690, 691 , 692 693, 694, 695, 696 , 697, 698 , 699, 700, 701 , 702 , 703 , 704 , 705 , 706, 707, 708 , 709 , 710, 711 , 712, 713 , 714 715 , 716, 717, 718 , 719, 720 , 721 , 722, 723 , 724, 725 , 726, 727 , 728 , 729, 730, 731 , 732 , 733, 734, 735, 736, 737 , 738, 739 , 740, 741 , 742, 743, 744, 745 , 746, 747, 748 , 749 , 750, 751 , 752 , 753 , 754, 755 , 756, 757,758, 759 , 760, 761 , 762 , 763 , 764 , 765 , 766, 767 , 768 , 769 , 770 , 771 , 772, 773, 774, 775 , 776 , 777 , 778 , 779 , 780 , 781 , 782, 783 , 784, 785 , 786, 787 , 788 , 789 , 790 , 791 , 792 , 793 , 794 , 795 , 796, 797, 1 (P) , 2 (P) , 3 (P ) , 4 ( P ) , 5 ( P) , 6 ( P ) , 7 (P) , 8 , 9 , 10(P ) , 11 (P) , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15, 16, 17, 18 , 19, 20, 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26, 27, 28 , 29 , 30, 31 , 32 , 33 , 34( P ) , 35 ( P ) , 36 (P) , 37(P ), 38 (P) , 39, 40, 41 , 42, 43 , 44, 45, 46(P) , 47 ( P) , 129, 130, 131 , 132, 133 , 134 , 135 , 136, 137 , 138 , 139, 140, 141, 142, 143 , 144 , 145, 146, 147, 148 , 149, 150, 457, 458, 459, 460, 461 , 462, 463 , 464, 465, 466, 467, 468 , 469, 470 , 471 , 472, 473 , 474, 475 , 476, 477 (P) , 629, 630 , 631 , 632, 633 , 634, 635 , 636, 637 , 638 , 639 , 640, 641 , 642 , 643 , 644, 798 (P) , 803. 804, 805 , 806, 808 , 810 , 813 (P) , 814 , 815 , 816, 818 , 819 , 820 , 821 .

Plots to be acquired in Mouza Chota Murjora Thana No.2 , P.S. Littipara Dist . Pakur

1(P) , 11 (P) , 12(P), 13 ( P) , 14(P), 16(P) , 17(P) , 18 (P) , 19 (P) , 20(P ) , 46(P) , 47 ( P) , 51 (P) , 59(P ) , 60(P) , 61 (P), 62 (P), 63 , 64 , 65 , 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71 , 72 , 73 , 74, 75 , 76, 77, 78 , 79 , 80, 81 , 82, 83 , 84, 85 , 86, 87, 88 , 89 , 11613 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

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

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

2(P ) , 3 , 4, 5 , 6, 7 (P) , 8 (P ) , 9 , 10, 11 , 12, 13 (P) , 14(P) , 15, 16 , 17 , 18 (P), 21 (P), 22 , 23 , 24, 25, 2006 , 28 , 29(P), 30, 31 (P) , 35 (P) , 36 ( P ) , 37 (P ) , 56 (P) , 57 (P) , 58 (P) , 59, 60, 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 ( P ) , 68 (P), 69(P) , 70 , 71 , 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78 , 79 , 80, 81 , 82, 83 , 84( P) , 92 ( P ), 93 ( P) , 94( P) , 95 ( P) , 96 , 97, 98(P) , 99( P) , 100(P) , 101 , 102 , 103 , 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109 , 110, 111 , 112, 113 , 114 , 115, 116, 117 , 118 , 119 , 120, 121 , 122, 123 , 124, 125, 126 , 127 , 128 , 129, 130, 131 , 132 , 133 , 134, 135 , 136, 137,138 , 139, 140, 141 , 142 , 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148 , 149, 150, 151 , 152, 153 , 154 , 155 , 156, 157, 158 , 159, 160, 161 , 162, 163 , 164 , 165 , 166 , 167, 168 , 169, 170 , 171 , 172 , 173 , 174, 175 , 176, 177 , 178 , 179 , 180, 181 , 182 , 183, 184, 185 , 186, 187, 188 , 189, 190, 191 , 192 , 193 , 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201 , 202, 203 , 204 , 205 , 206 , 207 , 208 , 209, 210 , 211 , 212 , 213 , 214, 215 , 216, 217, 218 , 219, 220 , 221 , 222 , 223 , 224, 225, 226, 227, 228 , 229, 230 , 231, 232, 233 , 234, 235 , 236, 237, 238 , 239 , 240, 241 , 242, 243 , 244, 245, 246, 247, 248 , 249, 250, 251 , 252 , 253 , 254, 255 , 256, 257, 258 , 259, 260, 261 , 262, 263, 264, 265, 266, 267, 268, 269, 270( P) , 271 ( P) , 272 , 273, 274 , 275, 276 , 277 , 278, 279 , 280, 281 , 282, 283 , 284 , 285, 286, 287, 288 , 292 (P), 293 (P) , 294(P) , 300(P) , 313 (P) , 316(P) , 317 (P) , 318 , 319, 320, 321 ( P) , 326 (P) , 327(P) , 328 (P) , 329 , 330, 331 , 332, 333 , 334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 339, 340, 341 , 342, 343, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 351 , 352, 353 , 354, 355 (P) , 356(P) , 359 (P) , 360, 361 , 362 , 363 , 364, 365 , 366, 367, 368 , 369 , 370, 371 , 372 , 373, 374, 375, 376, 377 , 11614

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 378, 379, 380, 381 , 382, 383 , 384, 385 , 386, 387 , 388 , 389, 390, 391 , 392 , 393 , 394, 395, 396 , 397, 398 , 399 , 400, 401 (P) , 410 (P) , 411 (P), 412, 413, 414, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419, 420 , 422 (P ), 423 (P ), 424(P) , 425 (P ) , 432(P), 449 (P), 450(P) , 451 , 452, 453 (P) , 454 (P) , 455 (P) , 456(P) , 457 , 458 , 459(P) , 460 (P) , 464(P), 465 , 466,467, 468, 469, 470, 471, 472, 473 , 474, 475, 476, 477, 478, 479, 480, 481 , 482, 483 , 484 , 485 , 486, 487 , 488, 489, 490, 491 , 492, 493, 494, 495, 496, 497, 498 , 499, 500 , 501 , 502, 503 , 504, 505 , 506, 507, 508 , 509 , 510, 511 , 512 , $ 13 , 514, 515, 516 , 517, 518 , 519 , 520 , 521 , 522 , 523 , 524 , 525 , 526, 527, 528 , 529, 530, 531 , 532, 533 , 534, 535, 536, 537, 538, 539, 540, 541 , 542 , 543 , 544, 545, 546, 547 , 548 , 549 , 550, 551 , 552, 553, 554, 555, 556, 557, 558 , 559, 560, 561 , 562, 563 , 564, 565 , 566 , 567 (P) , 568(P) , 569 , 570, 571 , 572, 573 , 574, 575, 576, 577, 578 , 579 , 580, 581 , 582, 583 , 584, 585 , 586, 587 , 588 , 589 , 590 , 591 , 592, 593 , 594, 595, 596, 597, 598 , 999, 600, 601 , 602, 603, 604, 605, 606, 607, 608, 609, 610, 611 , 612, 613, 614, 615 , 616, 617 , 618, 619, 620 , 621 , 622, 623 , 624, 625, 626, 627, 628, 629, 630, 631 , 632, 633 , 634, 635 , 636, 637, 638 , 639, 640,641 ,642, 443, 644, 645, 646, 647, 648, 649, 650, 651 , 652, 653, 654, 655, 656, 657, 658 , 659, 660, 661 , 662, 663 , 664, 665 , 666, 667, 668, 669, 670, 671 , 672, 673 , 674, 675, 676 , 677, 678 , 679, 680, 681 , 682 , 683 , 684, 685, 686, 687 , 688 , 689, 690, 691 , 692, 693 , 694, 695, 696, 697 , 698 , 699, 700 , 701 , 702, 703, 704, 705, 706, 707, 708, 709, 710, 711 , 712 , 713 , 714, 715 , 716, 717 , 718 , 719, 720 , 721 , 722, 723, 724, 725 , 726, 727, 728, 729, 730, 731 , 732, 733 , 734, 735, 736, 737, 738 , 739, 740, 741, 742, 743, 744, 745, 746, 747, 748, 749, 750 , 751 , 752, 753, 754, 755, 756, 757 , 758 , 759 , 760, 761 , 762, 763 , 764, 765, 766, 767 , 768, 769 , 770(P) , 771 , 772, 773 (P) , 774(P), 778 (P ) , 786(P) , 787 (P), 790(P), 791 , 792, 793 , 794, 795, 796, 797, 798 , 799, 800, 801 , 802, 803 , 804, 805 , 806, 807, 808, 809 , 810, 811 , 812, 813 , 814, 815, 86, 817, 818, 819 , 820, 821 , 822 (F) , 823 (P) , 824(P) , 825 ( P ) , 826 , 827(P) , 828 (P) , 829 , 830 , 831 (P) , 907( P) , 915 (P) , 916 (P) , 917 (P) , 918, 919 , 920, 921 , 922(P ).

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

8 (P) , 9 (P) , 10(F ), 11 , 12(P), 13 , 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 , 22, 23 , 24, 25, 26, 27 , 28 , 29, 30, 31 , 32, 33 , 34(P), 35 (P) , 36, 37 (P), 39(P) , 40(P) , 44 (P) , 45 (P) , 46 , 47, 48(P), 49, 50, 51 , 52, 53 , 54, 55 , 56 , 57, 58 (P), 59(P), 60(P) , 61, 62, 63 , 64, 65, 66, 67 , 68 (P) , 69 (P), 71 (P) , 72 (P) , 73 , 74(P) , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78(P) , 79(P ) , 80 (P) , 82(P) , 92 (P) , 93 (P) , 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99 , 100(P) , 126 (P) , 127 (P), 128 (P ) , 129 (P) , 130(P), 131 (P) , 132 (P) , 174(P), 200 (P) , 201 (P) , 209 (P) , 210 , 211 , 212 , 213 , 214 , 215 , 216, 217, 218 , 219(P) , 220 (P) , 221 (P) , 226 (P) , 227(P), 233 (P) , 234, 235, 236, 237, 238 , 239 , 240 , 241 , 242, 243 , 244, 245, 246 , 247(P), 248 (P) , 249 (P) , 250, 251 , 252, 253 (P), 255 (P), 256(P ), 258 , 259 , 260 , 261 , 262, 263 (P) , 264 (P) , 265 ( P) , 266 (P ) , 276(P) , 277 , 278 (P) , 279 (P) , 281 , 282, 283 , 284, 285 , 286(P) , 287 (P) , 288 , 289, 290 , 291 , 292 , 293 , 294, 295 (P), 303 (P) , 305 , 306, 307(P ) , 308 (P ) , 309 (P ) , 310 , 311 , 312, 313 , 314, 315, 316, 317(P), 318, 319, 320, 321 (P), 25 (P) , 331 (P) , 332 , 333 (P) , 334 , 335 , 336, 337, 338 , 339, 340 , 341 , 342, 343 , 344, 345 , 346, 347, 3,350, 351 , 352, 353 , 354, 355 , 356, 357(P) , 364, 365 , 366 , 367, 368 , 369 , 370, 371 , 372 , 373 , .374, 3736, 377, 378, 379, 380, 381 , 382, 383 , 384, 385 , 386, 387, 388, 389 , 390, 391 , 392, 393 , 394, 395 , 396, 397, 398 , 399, 400 (P) , 401 , 402, 403 , 404, 405, 406 , 407, 408, 409, 410, 411 , 412, 413 , 414, 415 , 416, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 423 , 424, 425, 426, 427, 428 , 429, 430, 431 , 432 , 433 , 434 , 435 , 436(P) , 437 (P), 438(P), 439(P) , 440, 441 , 442, 443, 444 (P), 449 (P) , 450 , 451 , 452(P), 462 (P) , 463 (P) , 464(P) , 465 , 466, 467, 468,469, 470, 471 , 472, 473 , 474(P) .

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

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

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

1 (P) , 2, 3 , 4 (P) , $ (P) , 7 (P ) , 8 (P) , 9 (P ) , 68 (P) , 69 (P) , 70, 71 , 72, 73 , 74, 75 , 76 , 77, 78 , 79, 80, 81 , 82, 83 , 84, 85, 86, 87, 88 , 89 , 90, 91, 92, 93 , 94, 95 , 96, 97, 98, 99, 100 , 101 , 102, 103 , 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118 , 119, 120, 121 , 122, 123 , 124, 125 , 126 , 127, 128 , 129 , 130, 131 , 11615 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

132, 133, 134(P), 135 , 136, 137 , 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143 , 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151 , 152, 153 , 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161 , 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171 , 172, 173 , 174, 175, 176, 177, 178 , 179, 180, 181 , 182, 183 , 184, 185, 186, 187(P), 188 , 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195 , 196(P), 197 (P), 198(P), 206, 207, 208, 209.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3(P), 4, 5 , 6, 7, 8 , 9, 10, 11 , 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 , 22, 23, 24, 25 , 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 , 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43 , 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 , 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71 , 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81 , 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98 , 99, 100, 101 , 102, 103 , 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111 , 112, 113 , 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121 , 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127 , 128, 129, 130, 131 , 132(P), 133(P), 134(P), 135, 136, 137,138, 139, 140, 141 , 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148 (P) , 150(P) , 151 (P), 156(P), 161 , 162, 163, 164, 165(P), 166(P) , 246(P) , 247(P), 248(P), 249, 250, 251 , 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257(P) , 258 (P) , 259(P) , 260(P) , 261 (P) , 286 , 287, 288 , 289, 290, 291 , 292, 293 , 294, 295, 296, 297, 299, 300, 310(P)..

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

A1 -A2: Line starting from point Al in mouza Chota Puro No. 8 of P.S. Sundar Pahari.- Dist. Godda, Jharkhand Plot No. 221 and passing through the Plot No. 210, 209,258, 261,262,267,268 & 153 meeting at point A2 in the Eastern Boundary of Plot No. 158 in Mouza Chota Puro No. 8.

A2-A3: Line starting from point A2 in Mouza Chota Puro No. 8 and passing through Plot No.158, 157,156 and Plot No.1 & 2 and meeting at point A3 in Plot No.1 of Chota Puro No. 8.

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

A4-A5 : - Line starting from point A4 in plot no. 11 of Mouza Chota puro no . 8 and passing through plot no.20 and crossing the common Boundary line of Mouza Chota Puro no. 8 and Garidih No. 9 and passing through Plot no . 22, 21 , 17, 15, 10, 11 and 1 of Mouza Garidih no. 9 and entering in the common boundary line of mouza Piparjoria no . 10 and Garidih no. 9 and passing through plot 3016-G1/05-16 11616

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ji ) ) no.24,26,31,32,34,36,13,51,52,193,194,195,198,188 , in plot no.242 of Mouza Piparjoria no. 10. 187,235,236,242 , and meeting at point AS A5 -A6: Line starting from point A5 in Mouza Piparjoria no. 10 plot no . 242 and passing through plot and Marchaitari no.243,223,260,221 and entering in the common boundary line of Mouza Piparjoria no.10 no.11 and -passing through plot no.11,12,11,32,75,76,72,71,67,66,64,53,52,209,208,211,243,242 and meeting at point A6 in plot no . 254 ofMouza Marchaitari no . 11 .

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

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

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

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

A10-A11: - Line starting from point A10 in Gumani River plot no.795 of Mouza Kherasol no. 13 and passing through plot no. 795,796 and crossing the Westem Bank of Gumani River and entering in plot no . 414 and passing through plot no.334, 333 , 332 and again crossing the Gumani river and passing through plot no . 124, Gumani river and meeting at pointA11 .

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

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

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

A14-A15: - Line starting from point A14 entering in Mouza Garidih No. 9 passing through plot no . 667 , 668 , 805 crossing the plot no. 668 and passing through plot no.701 , 714, 713 , 716, 720, 721 , 668 , 814, [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

11617

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

798, 798, 795 , 791 , 790, 787, 785, 782, 787, 780, 778 , 777 , 775, 789 , 771 and passing through the common boudary of Mouza Garidih no . 9 and Bara Dhamni no . 7 and passing through plot no . 89, 91 , 95 , 96 , 97 , 98 , 85 and meeting at point A15 Mouza Bara Dhamni no . 7 .

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

A16-A17: - Line stating from point A16 plot no . 504 of Bara Dhamani no . 7 and passing through plot no 504 and meeting at pointA 17.

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

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

Boundary Description : Block -2 (B1 - B27)

B1 -B2 : - Line starting from point B1 mouza Bara Dhamni No - 7, P.S. Sunderpahari , Dist . Godda, Plot No 100 passing through plot no 100, 101 , 102 , 103 and crossing the Eastern Bank of Gumani River and passing through Plot No 1175 and crossing the Southern Boundary of plot no 1161 , 1162, 1165 and crossing the Southern Bank of Gurmani River and entering in Mouza Jordiha No - 1 , Passing through plot no 813 , 499 and meeting at point B2 in plot no 489 of Mouza Jordiha no- 1 , P.S.- Littipara, dist. Pakur .

B2-B3 : - Line starting from point B2 in plot no 489 Mouza Jordiha No- 1 and passing through plot no 486, 485, 482, 481 , southern western line of 480, 477 and meeting at point B3 in plot no.515 of Mouza Jordiha no- 1.

B3 - B4 : - Line starting from point B3 plot no 515 Mouza Jordiha No - 1 and passing through plot no-704, 508, 798 and crossing the common Boundry line of Mouza Jordiha no - 1 and Chota Chatkam no- 10 and passing through Western Boundry of plot no 353 , 354 and passing through plot no 342, 403 , 402, 488,402 and passing through common boundary of Mouza Chota Chatkam no - 10 and Morgo no - 9 and passing through plot no.- 8, 9, 15 , 18 and meeting at point B4 in Mouza Margo no-9.

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

B5 -B6 : - Line starting from point B5 Mouza Bansbitha no- 8 passing through plot no - 198, 197, 196, 68, 69,1 , passing through North East corner of plot no 25 and passing through plot no. 9, 8, 4, 5, 1 and crossing the common boundary line of Mouza Bansbitha no- 8 and Jordiha no- 1 and passing through plot no 822 of Jordiha no- 1 and meeting at point B6.

11618

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )] B6-B7:- Line starting from point B6 in Mouza Jordiha N0-1 crossing the common boundary line of Mouza AmarBitha No-7 and Jordiha No- 1 and passing through plot no 1 of Amarbitha no -7 and meeting at of Mouza point$7.

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

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

B9-B10: - Line starting from point B9 in plot no -448 of Bara Murjora no- 3 , passing through plot no 455, 453 , 450, 424, 422, 410, 411 , 401 , 359, 355, 356 and crossing the common boundary line of Mouza Simlong no-4 and Bara Murjora no-3 , Passing through plot no 37, 38, 40, 35, 34, 45, 48 , 69, 68 , 67,72 and meeting at pointB10.

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

B11-B12: -Line starting from B11 in plot no 558 of Mouza Simlong no-4 and meeting at point B12 in plot no559.

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

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

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

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

B16-B17: -Line starting from point B16 plot no 261 of Mouza Lada Pathar no - 27 and passing through plot no-261 , 260, 310, 300 and passing throgh common boundary line of Mouza Lada Pathar no- 27 and Dhouphar no -26 and passing through plot no- 262,67, 69, 74, 75 and meeting at point B17 in plot no100.

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

B18-B19: -Line starting from point B18 the common boundary point of Mouza Dhouphar no-26 and Southern Bank ofGumani River and passing through Gumani river and plot no 48, 47 , 46, 37 , 36, 11619

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

38, 35 , 34, 33 , 30, 206 of Mouza Dhouphar no -26 and crossing the common boundary line of Mouza Ladapathar no - 27 and Dhouphar no - 26 and passing through Gumani River and meeting at point B19 on the Southern Bank of Gumani River plot no.3 of Ladapathar no.27.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[No.43015/10/2002-PRIW] M. SHAHABUDEEN , Under Secy.

11620

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II SEC. 3 (ii)

AWARD

श्रम एवं रोजगार मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 21 सितम्बर, 2005

TheGovernment of India in the Ministry of Labour in exercise ofpowers conferved by clause (d) of sub -section ion 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-29011/41/96 IR(M) ] , dated 4-09-97:-

1947 का. आ. 3850.औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनिष का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैं ओरस इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, भुवनेश्वर के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 131/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 21-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-29011/41/1996- आई आर ( विविध ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT

New Delhi, the 21st September, 2005

" Whether the refusal of the management of M/s.Ores Indian, Purunapani Limestone and Dolomite Quarry, P. O.Purunapani , Dist . Sundargarh to pay interim relif@Rs. 6 per day per head to the workmen engaged by them at Purunapani with effect from 8-7-1993 and flat refusal to pay house rent and transport allowance to its workmen are proper and justified? If not, to what relief are the workmen entitled?"

S.O. 3850. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. 131/2001 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , Bhubaneswar, in the industrial dispute between the management of RMD, SAIL. PO : Purunapani, Distt . Sundargarh and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 21-9-2005

[No. L -29011/ 41/ 1996 -IR (M)]

C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

2. The 1st Party- Management being a contactor had deployeddifferent contract laboures in the Dolomite Quarry of SAIL at Purunapani in the District of Sundargarh. In view oftheir continuous engagement the 2nd Party -Union demandedpayment of interim relief at the rate of Rs.6/-per day to each of the workman engaged in the quarry with effect from 8-7-2003 besides providing house rent allowance and transport allowance to these workers . On the denial of the Management to pay such benefits an Industrial Disputes was raised cluminating the same in the present reference.

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT, BHUBANESWAR

Present:

Shri N.K.R. Mohapatra, Presiding Officer , C.G.1.T. -cum -Labour Court, Bhubaneswar .

TR. INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE NO . 131/2001

Date ofPassing Award-7th September , 2005

Between:

TheManagement of M/ s . Ores India, Contractor, PLDQ, Purunapani , RMD, SAIL , P.O. Purunapani . Dist. Sundargarh .

... 1st Party-Management

(And)

3. On being noticed when the Management did not appear an exparte award was passed on 3-1-2002 by the tribunal . This order was challenged by the 1st Part- Management before the Hon'ble High Court in W.P. (C) No. 5458/2003 and the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa while disposing of the sake in their order dated 17-8-2004 remand back the matter to the Tribunal for fresh and expenditious disposal after providing sufficient opportunity to the Management to participate in the proceeding .The Hon'ble Court also fixed a target to dispose of the case by 15-9- 2004.While the matter stood thus both the parties filed a petition on 22-8-2005 to close the case in terms of the settlement arrived at between them on 10-8-2005 . While the same was pending for consideration they again filed an affidavit on 6-9-2005 in the form an agreement with a request to make the same a part of their earlier settlement and pass necessary orders .

TheirWorkman representred through the Secretary, United Mines Mazdoor Union,

P.O. Purunapani , Dist. Sundargarh.

...2nd Party - Union

Appearances:

Shri NandaGopal Mukherjee

...For the 1st Party-

Management

Shri Nandalal Chakraborty ...For the 2nd Party-Union

4. From the settlement dated 10-8-2005 it appears that the parties have agreed to wind up their entire dispute by paying Rs . 1,500 each to 357 numbers of workers who are in B -Register toewards their demand in the present reference and the claim made in Misc . Case No. 13/2003 . In addition to the above it has also been agreed that in respect of 110 numbers of casual and temporary workers the Management will pay Rs . 500/- each towards their demand in the present reference and the claim made in Misc . Case No. 13/2003 and 11621

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii )]

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalf of the workman

:Mr.Arjun Singh, Ld.Advocate

Onbehallfof the Management :Mr. D.K. Verma, Ld.Advocate

State : Jharkhand Industry : Coal

Dated, the 16th August, 2005 the above settlement will be operative with effect fromthe date of the acceptance of the same by the Tribunal . In the affidavit, which has been filed to form part of the above settlement the union is found to have foregone its demand forhouse rent, transport allowance and other claims .While recording such settlement both the parties most specifically the espousing Union submitted that in view of the above settlement there subsists no dispute at all and as such wanted the Tribunal to pass no dispute award.

AWARD

5. In view of the above the reference is answerwd in negation there being no dispute subsisting.

N. K. R. MOHAPATRA Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 21 सितम्बर, 2005

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 the Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No.L- 29011 /64/2000/IR (M) dated the 27th March, 2001.

SCHEDULE

का. आ. 3851.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भावान्थपुर लाईम स्टोन माईन्सके प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, धनबाद संख्या-2 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 107/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 15-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

"Whether the action of the management of Bhawanathpur Lime Stone Mine , Bhawanthpur Garhwa in superannuating/retiring Smt. Kamoda Devi w.e.f. 27/10/99 considering her date of birth as 10/10/ 37 and not considering the date of birth as 10/10/ 1945 as claimed by the workman is justified ? Ifnot, to what relief the workman is entitled ?" .

[सं. एल-29011/64/2000- आई आर ( विविध ) ] सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

2. The case of the concerened female worker according to written statement submitted by the sponsoring union on her behalf in brief is as follows:

New Delhi , the 21st September, 2005

S.O. 3851 .-- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 107/2001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court No. 1 , Dhanbad No.2 , in the industrial dispute between the management of Bhawanathpur Lime Stone Mine and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 15/09/2005.

[No. L-29011/64/2000 -IR (M) ]

The sponsoring union submitted that the concerned female worker was a permanent Crech Aya at Bhawanathpur Lime Stone Mines under the management , they submitted that at the time of appointment her date of birth was recorded as 10-10-45 and the same also was communicated to her. They disclosed that on the basis of her date of birth recorded in the statutory Register as 10-10-45 the same was recorded in her medical record and also in the identity card issued to her by the management. As her date of birth was righty recorded there was no reason on her part to raise any dispute over the same .

C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNA- (NO.2) DHANBAD

PRESENT:

They alleged that all of a sudden management superannuated her w.e.f. 27-10-99 illegally and arbitrarily onthe basis of manipulated date of birth in the statutory record. Accordingly, they raised an Industrial Dispute before ALC ( C) Patna for coriciliation which ultimately resulted reference to this Tribnunal for adjudication.

SHRI B.BISWAS , Presiding Officer .

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section10(1) (d) of the 1.d. Act . , 1947

The sponsoring union accordingly submitted prayer to pass award directing the management to reinstate the concerned female worker to her service considering her date of birth as 10-10-45 setting aside the order of superannuation passed against her w.e.f. 27-10-99.

REFERENCE NO . 107 OF 2005

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 PARTIES Employers in relation to the management of Bhawanthpur Lime Stone Mine , Bhawanthpur and their workmen.

11622

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ))

her specific allegation that management illegally and arbitrarily superannuated her from her service at an early date ignoring the date of birth recorded in the Form - B Register.

This witness during her cross examination admitted that she was engaged as Khalasi by the management and her name was recored in the Muster Roll before she got her appointment as Crech Aya. She further admitted that she was sent to Medical Board for her medical examination before she got her appointment in the said post as Aya in the year 1975. She further admitted that at the time of her medical examination her age was also ascertained as 30years.

female worker. They submitted that the concerned female worker initially started working as a Khalasi on Nominal MasterRoll basis from 9-8-74 . There after on 10-10-75 she got her appointment as Crech Aya. They disclosed that incourse of regularisation ofher service as Crech Aya she was referred to the medical afficer of the company for assessment of her age as she was illiterate and having no record in respect of her date ofbrith . The Medical Officer ofthe company after examining her declared her age as 37 years as on 10-10-75 and that being the position her date of birthwas considered as 10-10-38 . They further submitted that due to mistake her age was mentioned as 30 year as on 10-10-45 instead of 10-10-38 . They submitted that during the course of surprise checking and verification of personnel file ofthe employees by the Vigilance Department duringOctober 1999 the mistake in respect ofdate or birth ofthe concerned female worker was detected and the error wasrectified accordingly. They disclosed that as per correct date ofbirth i.e. , 10-10-38 she was liable to superannuate on 10-10-96 but she got her superannuation on 27-10-99.

Disclosing the facts stated above management submitted that neither they committed any illegality nor took any arbitrary decision in superannuating her on 27-10-99.Accordingly, they submitted prayer to pass award rejecting the claim of the concerned female worker .

4. POINTS TO HE DECIDED

"Whether the action of the management of Bhawanathapur Lime Stone Mine , Bhawanathpur Garhwa in superannuating/retiring Smt . Kamoda Devi w.e.f. 27-10-99 considering her date of birth as 10-10-1937 and not considering the date ofbirth as 10-10-1945 as claimed by the workman is justified ? If not to what relief the workman is entitled ?"

5. FINDINGWITH REASONS

M.W. 1 during his evidence disclosed that the concerned female worker initially got her appointment as Khalasi at Bhawanathpur Lime Stone Mines and Dolamite Mines on 9-8-74 and thereafter she was regularised as Crech Aya with effect from 10-10-75 . This witness further submitted that as she was an illiterate lady and failed to produce any cogent paper in support of her date of birth . She was sent to Medical Officer of their management at Bokaro General Hospital for assessment of her age as per clause 5(ii) of the Certified Standing Orders applicable to the workers of Bhawanathpur Lime Stone & Dolamite Mines. After her Medical examination the said Medical Officer sent his report assessing her age as 37 years as on 10-10-75 . The Certified Standing Order as well as Medical reprot submittedby the Medical Officer assessing the age ofthe concerned female worker during her evidence were marked as Exht.M.1 . & M.2 respectively. He further disclosed that as per the said Medical report the age of the concerned female worker was recorded in the Form-B Register as well as in his service book . This witness further submitted that for the mistake of the personnel Deptt . She worked extra three years after her actual date of superannuation as because of the fact that as per medical report her date of superannuation would be 10-10-96.

Ittranspinres from the recored that the sponsoring unionwith a viewto substantiate their claim examined the concerned workman as W. W.1 . Management also in support of their claim examined two witnesses as M. W. 1 andM. W. 2 .

Thiswitness during cross examination admitted that nonotice ofsuperannuation was given to her on the ground that she remained in service beyond the date of superannuation. He further admitted that date of birth recorded in the service record is binding upon both sides. However, he disclosed that after detection of mistake , age recorded in the Form-B Register was corrected without giving any notice to her.

W.W.I. , i.e. the concerned female worker during her evidence disclosed that in the year 1975 she joined at Bhawanathpur Lime Stone Mines as Crech Aya and at that time management recorded her age as 30 years and for which she was liable to be superannuated in the year 2005. She alleged that not only the management refrained from issuing any superannuation notice to her before her actual date of superannuation but also superannuated her before the date of her actual superannuation . This witness in support ofher claim relied on identity card and family health card issuedby the management ( marked as Exht . W- 1 and W-2) . She further disclosed that her date of birth in those documents recorded were as per her date of birth recorded inthe Form-B Register at the time ofher appointment. It is

M. W.2 during his evidence disclosed that in the same year, i.e. , in the year 1974 after getting her appointmint as Nominal Muster Roll worker a note sheet was initiated in her favour for her regularisation (Marked as Exht.M -3). The list of workers wherein the name of the concerned female worker appearing in S1 . No. 59 during his evidence was marked as Exht . M-4 . This witness disclosed that as perthe said list her date of birth was recorded as 10-9-38 . Particulars of the concerned female worker recorded in S1 . No.59 of the list also was marked as Exht.M-4/ 1 during 11623 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

evidence of this witness. This witness disclosed that she was interviewed on 23-4-75 . and at that time she submitted her fullparticulars in prescribed form which was markedas Exht.M-5 . He disclosed that she in the said form inwriting disclosed her age as 22 years as on 23-4-75 . This witness further submitted that as per rule if an illeterate worker fails to produce any documentary evidence in support of her date of birth he/she is sent Medical Officer for medical examination in connection with assement of her age . As the concerned female worker failed to produce any such document she was sent to Medical Officer for assessment ofher age and after medical examination of her age was assessed as 37 years as on 10-10-75. After regularisation management issued identity card to her through Asstt. Commandant, C.I.S.F. wherein her age was recorded as 37 years . The photo copy of the Identity Card was markedas Exht.M-6.

that she was sent to Medical Officer to ascertain correctness ofthe age declared by her. W.W.1 during her evidence admitted that the said Medical Officer at the time of her medical examination assessed her age . She disclosed that her age was assessed as 30 years by the said Medical Officer. The medical report dated 10-10-75 which the said MedicalOfficer after her examination submitted during evidence of M. W.1 was marked as Exht . M- 2 . From this report it transpires clearly that the concemed female worker atthe time ofher medical examination disclosed her age an 32years . The Medical Officer opined that as per appearance she was 37 years old. Therefore , it is seen that when in the prescribed form at the time of interview she disclosed her age as 22 years as on 23-4-75 during her medical examination on 10-10-75 she disclosed her age as 32 years. Variationof 10years of age of a lady is not at all believable and for which there is sufficient reason to hold that she wasnotat all aware ofher own age and for which she made contradictory statement at different places . Accordingly in obedience to the provision of clause 5 (ii) of the Certified Standing Order management rightly sent her to Medical Officerofthe Company for assessment of her age. As per report ofthe Medical Officer her age as on 10-10-75 was assessed as 37 years. As per clause 5 (ii ) of the Certified Standing Order the age assessed by the Medical Officer shall be final and binding upon the workman. Therefos , 37 years ofage as on 10-10-75 assessed by the Medical Officer. is absolutely binding upon the concerned female worker as per the clause in question.

Therefore, considering the evidence of both sides and also considering materials on record there is no dispute to hold that concerned female worker initially was employedby the management as Khalasi on 9-8-74 and her name was inrolled in Nominal Muster Roll worker . It is also admitted position that she was regularised as Crech Aya bythe management in the year 1975. It transpires that before herregularisation as Crech Aya she was interviewed on 23-4-75 and at the time of interview she submitted all her particulars in the prescribed form wherein she disclosed her age 22 years . The said form during evidence of M.W. 2 was marked as Exht . M-5 . It further transpires that management also prepared a list of workers whom they intended to regularise (Exht . M-4 / 1 ) . As per the said list date ofbirth of the concerned feamale worker was recorded as 10-9-38 . Therefore considering the list (Exht. M -4 /1 ) and theprescribed form duly filled in and submitted by her it transpires that there is clear variation of age disclosedby her. Considering the materials on record there is no dispute to hold that the concerned female worker was an illeterate lady. She during her evidence have failed to produce any document to show that ơn 23-4-75 , i.e. on the date ofher interview she was 22 years .

It is not the case of the sponsoring union that age of the concerried female worker was not correctly assessed bytheMedical Officer. Neither concerned worker nor the sponsoring union in course of hearing uttered a single word against the report of the Medical Officer about her age assessed by him. As per clause 5(ii ) when that assement of age is final and binding upon the workman until and unless any contrary is proved the sponsoring union as well as the female worker are estopped from raising any dispute. Actually they did not also raise any dispute challengingthe report of the Medical Officer. Therefore, it isclear that as on 10-10-75 the concerned workman was 37years ofage.

It is the contention of the management that as she was illiterate lady as per clause 5(ii) ofthe Certified Standing Order applicable to their employees was sent to Medical Officer of their Company's hospital for assessment ofher age. The Certified Standing Order during evidence ofM.W. 1was marked as Exht. M- 1 . As per clause 5 (ii ) "Aworkman who is unable to produce documentary evidence of his age shall state his age and make a written declaration that the age as stated by him is correct . He shall be sent to the Company'sMedical Officer for examination whose opinion as to the workman's age shall be final and binding on the workman. "

The contention of the sponsoring union is that not only in the Form-B Register maintained by the management but also in the identity card and Medical record issuedby them date of birth of the concerned female worker was recorded as 30 years as on 10-10-45. Accordingly, her due date of superannuation was 2005. They alleged that management not only corrected the date of birth recorded inthe Form -B Register without giving any notice to the concerned female worker but also superannuated her in the year 1999 without giving any notice of superannuation long before due date . It is admitted fact that management correctedthe date of birth recorded in the Form-B Register. Their contention is that as per Medical report age of the Itis admitted position that the concerned femal workers at the time of her interview for consideration ofher regularisation made a declaration in prescribed form about her age as 22 years . After that declaration it is admitted fact

3016GI /05-17 11624

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA30, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] concerned workman as assessed as 37 years as on 10-10-75 corresponding to 10-10-38 . They further disclosed that during checkingbyVigillence Cell oftheir Company in the year 1999 it was detected that wrongly age of the concerned femaleworkerwas recorded as 10-10-45 instead of 10-10-38 as per Medical report in the Form -B Register . They also admitted that inthe computerised Identity Card as well as in the medical card same wrong date ofbirth was recorded. In support of their claim they relied on old Identity Card issued to the concerned workman wherein her age was recorded as 37 years. The copy of the said Identity Card was marked as Exht. M-6 during evidence of M.W. 2. Considering the two Identity Cards marked as Exht. W- 1 andExht. M-6 there is no dispute to hold that two different age was recorded in two seperate documents. Whatever , may be the facts that all these documents were issued by the management to the concerned female worker . It is not the allegation of the management that she interpolatedher date ofbirth in those documents . Therefore, for the mistake ofthe management the said female worker should not be blamed.

It is the claim of the sponsoring union relying on the evidence of W. W. I that at the time of medical examination age of the concerned female worker was assessed by the MedicalOfficer as 30 years and the same was recorded in the Form-B Register as well as in other documents viz . Identity Card and Medical Card . Accordingly , burden of proof is on the sponsoring union to establish that her age wasassessed as 30 years by the Medical Officer at the time ofhermedical examination . In course ofhearing they have failed to produce any such medical report in support of their claim. Obviously, there is reason to believe that relying ondate ofbirth recorded in the Form-B Register, Identity Card andMedical Card such claim has been made . As per clause 5 (ii ) of the Certified Standing order age assessedby the Medical Officer should be considered as final and binding upon the worker. It is mandatory . Therefore, it is expected that age in the Form- B Register and other documents ought to have been recorded relying on the age assessed by the Medical Officer as per clause 5 ( ii ) . It is seen that management recorded date of birth of the concemed workman in those documents as 10-10-45. Their contentionis that by mistake such wrong date was recorded. Itwas not possible for an illiterare worker to know that her worng date ofbirth was recorded not only in the Statutory Register but also in other documents. Accordingly, it was her belief that her date or superannuation was 10-10-05. The sponsoring union alleged that management committed illegality in changing her date of birth in the Statutory Register without giving any notice to her and in support of this claim they relied on the decision reported in 2005( i ) J.L.S.R.P. 323 and 2002 LAB.1.C. 1157 In the said decision Their Lord Ship observed that ofbirth can not be altered to the detriment of petitioner without giving any notice and also without giving him an opportunity to hear and in such case any correction of made is liable of be set aside and the

workman should be superannuated on the basis of date ofbirth recordedin the Service Book. There is no question at all to go beyond the observarion of the Hon'ble Court . Here in the instant case the picture appears to be different a clause 5 ( i ) & 5 (ii ) of the Certified Standing order of management cleary pointed out how the date of birth of any workman should be assessed and to be recorded in the Statutory papers . Here in the instant case the concerned female worker as was an illiterate lady she failed to produce a single scrap of paper showing her age or date of birth and for which management decided to send her before Medical Board for assessment of her age. However before sending her to Medical offecer as per clause 5( ii ) they obtained a statement of her in requisite form where she declared her age 22 years. Before Medical officer she disclosed her age as 32 years.On the contrary Medical Officer assessed her age 37 years as on 10-10-75. Clause 5 ( ii) speaks clearly that age to be assessed by the MedicalOfficer should be final and binding on the workman. The age of the concerned female worker was assessed by the Medical Officer for its recording in the Statutory register including Service record. Therefore, untill and unless any contrary is proved age assessed by the Medical Officer should be recorded in the statutory document i.e. , age to be recorded therein should be dependent on the assessment of age recorded by the MedicalOfficer . The sponsoring union did not challenge assessment of age made by the Medical Officer . There is no allegation that subsequent to that Medical Test she was again sent to Medical Officer for assessment of her age and her age was assessed as 30 years . Therefore, if clause 5( ii ) is binding on the workman age assessed by the Medical Officer . is also binding on her . Certified Standing order is applicable to all workers of the management in the matter of their service and regularisations. Therefore , if the report of the Medical Officer. (Exht. M-2) is taken into consideration there is no dispute to hold that age of the concerned female worker was recorded wrongly in the statutory papers and that mistake remained undetected for a long years till the same cameto the knowledge of the vigilance deptt. in the year 1999. It is seen that thereafter management before correcting that date ofbirth neither insued any notice nor gavethe concerned female worker any opportunity to hear. This act of the management should be considered arbitrary. However, for that reason the firnding of the Medical Officer cannotbe ignored at all in the matter of assessment ofher age as per clause 5 ( ii ) of the Certified Standing order. There is no dispute at all that the concerned female worker was seriously prejudiced for the acts of the management. It is clear that discrepancy cropped up seriously for wrong recording of her date of birth in the statutory records and when such gross discrepancy is very much evident about her age recorded in the report of the Medical Officer and the statutory records 1 consider , that for the interest of natural justice as well as to wipe out all confusion 11625 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

Inthematter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1)(d) ofthe LD. Act, 1947.

REFERENCE NO. 115 OF 2004

management should arrange for fresh medical examination ofthe concerned female worker by the Apex Medical Board as per strict guideline of the Medical jurisprudence andthe decision of the said Apex Medical Board in this regard should be binding upon both sides.

PARTIES

In the result the following award is rendered:

: Employers in relation to the management ofM/s. Mandhyan Mineral Corpn . and theirworkman .

APPEARANCES :

: None Onbehalf ofthe workman

Onbehalfofthe employers : Mr. S. N. Sinha, Advocate.

That the actionof the ma'nagement ofBhawanathapur Lime Stone Mine , Bhawanathpur Garhwa in superannuating/ retiring Smt . Kamoda Devi w.e.f. 27-10-99 considering her date of birth as 10-10-37 and not considering the date of birth as 10-10-1945 was not justified.

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Stone Mine .

dated, Dhanbadthe 9th September , 2005.

AWARD

Age of the concerned female worker named above should be reassessed by the management through ApexMedical Board in strict compliance toMedical jurisprudence and the decision of the said board should be binding on both sides .

Management is directed to arrange for the said MedicalBoard within the three months from thedate ofpublication of this award in the Gazette of India.

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10(1)(d) ofthe I. D. Act. , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-29012/48/2004-( IR (M) dated 12-10-2004.

B. BISWAS, PresidingOfficer

SCHEDULE

नई दिल्ली, 21 सितम्बर, 2005

"Whether the action of the management of M/s . Mandayan Minerals , Pakur in terminating the services of Shri Gora Rajbansi without complying Section 25-F of the I. D. Act . , 1947 is legal and or justified? Ifnot, to what relief the above workman is entitled?"

का. आ. 3852.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मै ० मध्यान मिनरल्स के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद संख्या-2 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 115/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 21-9- 2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल -29012/48/2004- आई आर ( विविध ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 21st September, 2005

S.O. 3852. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 115/ 2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court, Dhanbad No. 2 in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s . Mandhyan Minerals Corpn. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 21-9-2005

[No. L-29012/48/2004-IR(M)] C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT:

2. In this case neither the concerned workman nor the sponsoring union appeared before this Tribunal . No Written Statement also filed on their behalf. Management side, however, made appearance through their authorised representative and filed Written Statement. It reveals from the record that Regd. notices and show-cause notice were issued to the workman/ sponsoring union consecutively. In terms of Rule 1068) ofthe I. D. Central Rules , 1957 it is mandatory on the part of the concerned workman/sponsoring union to file Written Statement , complete with relevant documents, list of reliance and witnesses before the Tribunal within 15 days from the date of receipt of the order of reference from the Ministry. The concerned workman/ sponsoring union not only violated the above rules but also even did not consider necessary to respond to the notices issued by this Tribunal . Gesture ofthe concernedworksaan/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 Tribunal also finds no ground to adjourn the case suo moto for days to gether . Hence , the case is closed and a ' No dispute ' Award is passed in this reference presuming non- existence of any industrial dispute between the parties.

ShriB. Biswas, PresidingOfficer.

B. BISWAS , PresidingOfficer 11626

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

नई दिल्ली , 21 सितम्बर, 2005

का. आ. 3853.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का'14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एयरपोर्ट आथोरिटी आफ इण्डिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में श्रम न्यायालय कोझीकोड के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 6/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 15-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-11011/5/2003- आई आर ( विविध ) ] सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 21st September , 2005 S.O. 3853. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 6/2003 ) of the Labour Court , Kozhikode as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management ofAirport Authority of India, Calicut Airport and their workmen, receivedby the Central Government on 15-9-2005

[No. L- 11011 / 5/2003 - IR (M) ]

C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

IN THE LABOUR COURT, KOZHIKODE, KERALA STATE

Dated this the 22nd do of August, 2005 PRESENT:

Shri K. BALASUBRAMANIAN, B.Corn . , LL.B. PresidingOfficer,

LD. (C) No. 6/03

BETWEEN :

TheAirport Director , AirportAuthority of India, CalicutAirport, Calicut-673647.

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]

AWARD

Ex-serviceman deployed as Security staff in the KaripurAirport raised an Industrial Dispute alleging that their services were illegally terminated by the management . The dispute was eventually referred to this Court by the Ministry of Labour, Government of India as per Order No. L - 11011 /5/2003- IR (M) dated 19-6-2003 to adjudicate the following issues :-

(1) Whether the service of the security staff of the Ex- servicemen Security Organisation to be regularised or not ?

(2) Should the security staff terminated on superannuation to be paid compensation or not?

(3) Whether the security staff are eligible for wage arrears consequent to non - revision in their wages due to the stay order of the Hon'ble High Court? If not what are the other relief the Ex- servicemen Security Organisation is entitled? '

2. Initially the Ex- servicemen Security Staff Organisation alone was in the party - arry . The Calicut Airport Security Staff Union was impleaded as second union on their motion during the pendency of reference.

....Management

AND

The Chairman

Calicut. Ex-servicemen Security Organisation, Karipur, Calicut Airport,

...Union 2.The Secretary, CalicutAirport Security Staff Union- Karipur, Calicut Airport, Calicut

REPRESENTATIONS

3. It is the case of the second Union that the ex- service personnels involved in the dispute were working assecurity staff in the Karipur Airport as introduced and recommended by the ex- servicemen security organisation. They were under the direct control and supervision of management-Airport Authority and salary was also disbursed by the authority . There was no stipulation about the age of superannuation in the terms of appointment . While so , Government of India issued a notification that all civil operational airports are to be manned by CISF personnels . The said notification has only prospective effect and has no applicationto the security personnels involved in the dispute . But under the guise of implementing the said notification phase- wise , the management terminated the service of some of the security staffwho had crossed the age of 5.5. The termination according to the union is unjust, irrational and invalid.

...ForManagement

Sri P.M. haris , Advocate, Calicut

Sri T. Raveendran&

Sri K. N. Jayakumar,

Advocates, Calicut

... ForUnions

4. According to the management the workers involved in the dispute were never employed by it . There was no relationship of master and servant . The management had entered into a contract with the Chairman, Ex-service Security Organisation to provide security staff for the Calicut Airport for a period of one year ( 1996-97) and accordingly the workers were deployed as supplied by the organisation . While so , the worker filed a writ petition before the Hon'ble High Court claiming regularisation and on the strength of a stay order obtained therein continued in employment for a few years . Subsequently the writ petition was dismissed. There is no [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

question of absorption/ regularisation of contract employees by the management. In the meanwhile the Government of India issued a notification that all the civil operational airports are to be manned by CISF. Accordingly the management informed the security staff organisation that the order will be implemented phase wise and the security staff who had crossed 55 years of age may be removed from service. The Chairman of the organisation was not amenable to the proposal as he wanted to discontinue the very arrangement. Thus contract with the organisation was terminated . In view of the above facts there could be no industrial dispute regarding the same . Payments if any are to be made by the contractor only . Moreover in view of the direction dated 16-11-1999 issued by the Ministry of Labourwatch and ward do not come within the jobs specified by the Ministry and are not entitled to receive basic pay and D.A. of the lowest category and hence they are not entitled to wage arrears . They are also not entitled for revision during the time their employment was stayed by the Hon'ble High Court.

5. A rejoinder is seen filled by the Security Organisation practically reiterating the contentions of Union No. 2. The evidence consists of the oral evidence ofWW1 and documentary evidence , Exts . W1 to Won the side of the union . No. Oral evidence was adducedby the management whereas Exts . M1 to M4 were marked on their side.

6. The points for determination are :--

(1) Whether there exists any employer employee relationship between the security staff of the ex-service security organization with the management?

(2) Whether the service of the security staff of ex-service security personnels is liable to be regularise or not?

(3) Whether the security staff terminated on superannuation are liable to be paid any compensation?

(4) Whether they are eligible for wage arrears , consequent to non- revision in their wages during the operation of stay order of the Hon'ble High Court ? If not, other reliefs liable tobe granted?

7. Points . When the reference came up for evidence , the union relinquished their claim for reinstatement/regularisations . They did not also adduce any evidence in that line. The union representative who was examined as WWI has testified in terms of their claims respective claims. The fact that the workers whose cause was exposed by the security organisation were working as security staff in the Karipur Airport for some period on contractual arrangement with the

11627 management has supplied by the organisation was not disputed. The contract period was initially for one year, i.e. 1996-97 as could be seen from evidence and has admitted by WW1 . The arrangement was being extended on adhoc basis could be seen from Exts . W5 . While so the workers approached the Hon'ble High Court by filling a writ petition claiming regularisation in service and on the strength of a status quo order continued their employment . The above facts are born out from Ext . W7 copy of the order . Subsequently the writ petition was dismissed in the light of the judgement rendered in 2001 ( 5 ) SCALE 626 as born out from Ext .M4 copy of the judgment. The writ petition was dismissed without making any reservations about their service during the pendency of status quo order. In the meanwhile as could be seen from Ext . M3 , the Government of India decided to deploy CISF personnels for aviation security duties at the Civil Airports in India in a phased manner and as part of implementing the decision , the management as per Ext . W6 requested the Chairman , ex - service security organisation to terminate the service of the workers who had completed 55 years of age as on 30-4-2002 . The security organisation was not amenable to this suggestion and asperExt . Mi dated 26-4-2002 intimated the management of their decision to discontinue the contract with respect to all workers supplied by them from 1-5-2002. This was accepted by the management so evidenced byExt .M2 .

8. Ext . W2 to W4 Government orders would show that wages of security guards and similar categories of workman were periodically renewed. According to the management the watch and ward do not come within the job specified by the Ministry and so the workers are not entitled to receive basic pay and BDA of the lowest category. Any how, eligibility for wage arrears or payment of compensation by the management may not arise in this case for paucity of evidence to establish the master and servant relationship and for want of reservations in the judgement in writ petition . The principal employer who supplied the workers is also not in the party array. So the claim are only to be declined .

9. The learned counsel for the workers contended that the contractual arrangements between the workers and the airport is only a camouflage to defeat the rights of theworkers.

10. I have already found that there are absolutely no materials to evidence the employer employee relationship with the management much and less any supporting evidence. So the argument may not hold good.

11. In the result an award is passed holding that the security staff of the ex-servicemen security organisation are not liable to be regularised in service nor entitled for any compensation or wage arrears .

11628

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

41/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 21-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed byher, corrected, revised and passed by me on the 22nd day ofAugust, 2005.

[सं. एल-30011/111 /2003 - आई आर ( विविध ) ] K. BALASUBRAMANIAN, PresidingOfficer

सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव APPENDIX:

Witnesses examined from the side of the Unions :-

New Delhi , the 21st September, 2005.

WW1 : Balakrishanan.

Witnesses examined from the side of the Management:-

NIL.

Documentsmarked from the side of the Unions :-

S.O. 3854. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 41/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court, New Delhi No. II as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Indian Oil Corpn . Ltd. Indian Oil Corporation, IOCL Bottling Plants , andtheir workmen, received by the Central Government on 21-9-2005

Ext. W1: Complaint sent by the Chairman Ex - servicemen Security organisation, Karipur to the Assistant Labour Commissioner (E) , Ernakulam dt.21.5.2002 .

[No. L -30011 /111 /2003 -IR (M) ] Ext. W2 .. Copy of the Govt. Order dt. 19.9.1997 regarding thewages ofEx -Servicemen SecurityGuard.

C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy. ANNEXURE

-do-

Ext. W3 .. Original of Govt. Order dt.24.3.1999

Ext.W4 .. dt.7.11.2000 -do- -do-

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT- II, RAJINDRA BHAWAN, GROUND FLOOR, RAJENDRA PLACE NEW DELHI Ext.W5 .. Copy of the Appointment Extention order ofthe Airport Authority Security guards dt.2.9.1997.

L.D. No. 41/2004

Ext. W6 .. Order ofthe Airport Authority AssistantManager dt.18.4.2002 .

R. N. RAI , Presaiding Officer

Inthe matter of:-

Ext.W7 .. Copy of the order of the Hon'ble High court of Kerala in OP. No. 10753/97 E dt.23.6.19997.

TheGeneral Secretary,

Ext.W8 .. Letter of the Airport Director, Calicut Airport dt.3.9.1997 .

Bhartiya Shramjivi Sangh, Ch. No. 240, Lawyers Chambers , TisHazari , Delhi - 110054.

Documents marked form the side of the management:-

VERSUS

Ext.M1 Copy of letter sent by the Chairman, Ex- Servicemen security organisation, Karipur to theAirport Director dt. 26.4.2002.

1. TheManagement of IndianOil Corporation Limited, (IOCL), Bottling Plant, Tikri Kalan, New Delhi .

Ext. M2 .. Copy of letter sent by the Asst. Manager , Airport Authority to the Chairman, Ex -Servicemen Security organisation dt . 29-5-2002.

Ext.M3 .. Copy of the letter sent by the Dy . Commissioner of Security (CA) , Burean of Civil Aviation Security ,NewDelhi to the Director General of Policedt. 2.1.2002.

2. TheGeneral Manager, IndianOil Corporation Limited, (IOCL), Yusuf Sarai , NewDelhi . AWARD

Ext.M4 .. Copy of the Judgement in O.P. 10753/97 of the Hon'bleHigh Court of Kerala dt.3.10.2001.

TheMinistry ofLabour by its letter No. L-30011/ 111/ 2003-IR(M) Central Government Dt. 20-2-2004 has referred the following point for adjudication .

नईदिल्ली , 21 सितम्बर, 2005

The point runs as hereunder :--

का. आ. 3854.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार इंडियन आयॅल कारर्पोरेशम के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नई दिल्ली-संख्या- II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या

"Whether the demand of the Bharitya Shramjivi Sangh for absorption/regularization of the services of contract labours (as per list enclosed) employed through contracters in the establishment of Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Delhi Bottling Plant, 11629

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

regular employees of the management of the corporation.

New Delhi, isjust fair and legal? Ifyes , to what relief these workmen are entitled and from which date ?"

That the differece between salary and other perks/ allowances ofthe claimants/ workmen and that of a regular employees of the management corporation working at corresponding positions is very big and in view of the same the claimants/ workmen are being exploited by the officers ofthe management corporation and, therefore, they also deserve to be prosecuted for resorting unfair Labour Practice u/ s 25 U & T read the Section 1 ( ra) and Scheduled 5 of the Industrial Disputes Act as the management intentionally and deliberately favouring a group of working and ignoring the claimants/workmen so the management is liable to be punished for this exploitation/unfair labour practice on their part.

The General Secretary , Bhartiya Shramjivi Sangh (Regd.) onbehalf of the workmen/claimants has filed claim statement. In the claim statement it has been stated that the workmen/claimants as mentioned in Annexure-A to this statement of claim along with details/particulars of their employment with the management had raised dispute with the management and thereafter with the conciliation officer , who did the conciliation proceedings as per the provisions of law in the matter, as the workmen had requested that they be treated as regular employees ofthe management as they have been working therefrom 1993 and even prior to that and doing the job as that of regular employees without any break in their services and, so in view of Section 25 -B of the I.D. Act, they be treated as regular employees of the management for all intents and purposes .

Thatthe Government of India has issued one Circular/ Notification dated 21-10-97 whereby the Government of India, Ministry of Labour , has prohibited the management to deploy the contractual labourers/temporary labours knowing it well that they are working at 8 places where the deployment of claimants/ workmen has been prohibited. Hence, the management is liable to be prosecuted for restoringto Unfair Labour Practice as mentioned above.

That the abovesaid workmen/ claimants are working with the management since 1993 and till date they have worked with the management continuously without any break in services and some of them even prior to that , as already stated above, however, inspite of the provisions under Section 25 -B of the I.D. Act , they have not been treated as regular employees and, so are not being paid Pay and Allowances as that of a regular employee of the Corporation, hence , this claim.

That the management has institued one Writ Petition in the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi vide . C.W.P. No. 5775/1998 and C.M. No. 7012/1999 . The workman have also become party in the said writ petition vide their application filed through their Union, i . e. Petroleum Workers Union, and the said application has been allowed to file amended memo ofparties within a week C.W. No. 5775/1998 and rule has been issued in the matter and now petition will be beard along with C.W.P. No. 426/99 and the Order passed on 18-11-1998 has been made absolute till disposal of the writpetition whereby the prosecution of the officers has been stayed, but the Notification of Union of India dated 21-10-1997 is still in operation.

That the claimants/ workmen are working with the management corporation as they have been employed by the management of the corporation w.e.f. 1993 and they are doing their jobs which is of the permanent nature and not a temporary one and the management has been prohibited as per Vasudevan Committee Report wherein it has been observed that on the places connected with filling of cylinders in the Plant of the Corporation, no employee having no experience to work in the Plant be deployed there.

That the application filed by the management C.M. No. 1103/1998 for the clarification of the Interim Order passed on 18-11-1998 has been disposed off and C.M. No. 8084/2000 the court has observed it is not possible to stay the operation of the impugned Notification in any case , there is a stay of the prosecution on the basis of the impugned Notification and no further order has been passed in the application of the management by the Hon'ble Court/High Court of Delhi at NewDelhi.

That some other workmen had filed one application in theHigh Court ofDelhi bearing No. 11384/2002 and non- appearance on behalf of the said workmen on18-7-2002 resulted in dismissal of the said application. That since the notification of Government of India, dated 21-10-1997 is in operation and the claimants/workmen are working on the places/points of work in Delhi Plant of the management since 1993 and even prior to that and so they be treated as regular employees of the management for all intents and purposes .

That as per Vasudevan Committee Report certain measure has been prescribed that no contract labour can be appointed/deployed by the management inside the Plant except for the purpose of loading and unloading of cylinders for private vehicle outside the Plant, i.e. about 15 meters away from the plant itself. Therefore , in all respects thejob which is being executed by the claimants/ workmen is of permanent nature and is of the Corporation itself, so in all respects the claimants be treated as regular employees of management and they be paid Pay and Allowances at par with other regular employees of the management corporation . The management illegally and unjustifibly is not paying the Pay and Allowances as that ofregular employees of the Corporation, to the claimants/ workmen for their vested interests . Therefore, the claimants/ workmen are entitled to get themselves be designated or treated as regular employees of the manegement corporation and they be paid Pay and Allowances and all other consequential benefits at par with the corresponding

That sometime back on the complaint of some workmen, the concerned authorities from the office ofthe 11630

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ ASVINA 30, 1927

Regional Labour Commissioner had visted the site at Tikri Kalan, New Delhi of the management and found the workers doing the job on eight places mentioned in the notification dated 21-10-1997 of the Government of India who were working/doing the same job which the other regular employees of the management were doing; whereas the management was paying regular scale of pay and allowances to some of the workmen shown as regular employees of the management, but the claimants / workmen hereinwere being paid very low salary/ minimum wages as prescribed by the NCT government and they were not being paid the other emoluments and proper pay scale and further to the information of the claimants/ workmen on the basis of such investigation and on the basis ofthe complaint of the claimants/workmen, now the committee appointed under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 hasgiven its report by which it is proved beyond doubt .

That the claimants shown as contractual labours, in fact, have not been appointed by any of the contractors appointed from time to time by the management and in fact, they have been appointed by the management itself, but infortunately, the claimants/workmen are not being paid the pay and allowances as that of regular employees by the management on false pretext that their employment in the management corporation is on contractual basis which isonly a fraud and no truth lies in that contentions of the management . In fact, the claimants/ workmen are working with themanagement corporation since 1993 and even since prior to 1993 , hence , for all intents and purposes they be treated as regular employees of the management corporation as perthe provisions of Section 25 -B of the ID Act and they be paid the pay and allowances as that of regular employees of the management , with all arrears and consequential benefits .

The management has filed written statement In the written statement it has been stated that there never existed any employer-employee relationship between the claimants and the management of Indian Oil Corporation . Hence no dispute as defined u/s 2(k ) ofthe ID Act, 1947 would arise for reference before this Hon'ble Court. The management submits that the claimants were employed by M/s . Jain Brothers , M/s . Chirag and Co. and M/s . MarfEngineering whowere contractor for the management corporation . The duration of the contract with M/ s . Jain Brothers was from 1-1-2002 and is still continuing , M/s . Chirag and Co. had performed the contract from 1-1-2002 and is still continuing and M/s . Marf Engineering are the contractors from 10-10-1997 to 9-10-1999 . Hence there being no privity of the contractbetween the claimants and the management , thepresent claim statement is líable to be dismissed on this short ground alone . The claimants may be directed to produce their appointment letter or any other correspondence of the management which would go on to prove the employer -employee relationship between the parties.

The management submits that engagement of the contractorby the management is as per the provisions of

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] the Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970 , and the management has its own recruitment policy and guidelines which are statutory in nature and cannot be overlooked/sidelined and the reference may kindly be rejected on this ground also . The demands made for regularization may also be rejected.

That the claimant Union has no locus standi qua the answering management . The management has its own Union and the Bhartiya Shramjivi Sangh has no locus qua the management . The union has not been able to show its membership to the Hon'ble Court . That the management had engaged the contractor as per the provisions of the Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970. The said Act being a self contained code provides remedies to the concerned workmen and the reference of the dispute under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act is thus misconceived and liable to be rejected. The said Act provides for effacious and adequate remedies to the claimants, ifany.

That the claim is bad for non joinder of necessary and proper parties . The claimants have not made the contractor namely Jain Brothers , Chirag & Co: and Marf Engineering as parties to present reference hence the claim is liable to be rejected on the grounds of non joinder of necessary and proper parties . The respondents further submit that as per the information received from the contractors , the claimant at serial no . 27 namely Shri Sanjya Kumar Rana , S/o . Mohinder Singh Rana is no longer working with the Contractor M/s . Jain Brothers since January, 2002.

Itiswrong and denied that the claimants are working with the management since 1993 as alleged . The claimants be put to strict proof of the averments made in the Para . The claimants cannot be treated to be the regular employees of the answering management . It has already been submitted that the claimants are not employees of the management and as such their working from 1993 onwards is denied. The report of the Vasudevan Committee being matter of record is not disputed. The main job of the Corporation ofLPG Tikri Kalan is filling and distribution of the LPG Cylinders . The claimants are not performing any job connected with such LPG Cylinders . It is wrong and denied that the work being performed by the claimants is either regular or perennial in nature.

The report ofthe Vasudevan Committee being matter ofrecord is notdisputed . However, it is wrong and denied that the work being performed by the claimants is perennial / permanent in nature . The claimants cannot be treated to be the regular employees of the Corporation . The claimants are not the employees of the answering Corporation and hence they cannot be equated with the regular employees ofthe respondent corporation. There has been no violation ofSection 25U & T of the ID Act as alleged. There has been no exploitation by the answering management . The corporationhad given a contract for certain petty jobs to the contractors which are neither regular nor perennial in 11631 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( H) ]

nature. The respondent management cannot be burdened for the wages etc. of the claimants.

Itisadmitted case of the management that contractors are changed every year . The contract is given for a year after inviting tenders . My attention was drawn to Basudevan Committee Report . The committee has suggested to the Ministry of labour . The report is as hereunder:

However, it is submitted that the said notification is subject matter of a writ petition being CWP No. 5775/98 filedby the Corporation. The Hon'ble High Court has been pleased to pass interim order prohibiting the prosecution ofany officials of the corporation for the violation of the said notification. It is submitted that the corporation has moved an application being CM No. 3462 of 2003 for quashing the notification itselfin the light ofthejudgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Steel Authority of India 2001 II LLJ 1087.

"The committee feels strongly about the change of contract labour in the LPG Bottling Plants as it wouldbe impossible to ensure that such manpower is adequately trained, disciplined enough for the various operations in the LPG Bottling Plant including inspection of Cylinders (empty and filled) evacuation repair work. The contract of manpower must be barined.

The contract manpower usage may however be permitted for loading and unloading of Cylinders from Lorries under effective supervision. In this case also it must be ensured that the loading and unloading locations at 15 meters away from the filling site . This committeewas constituted in 1983 and it submitted its report. It has banned contract labour in the bottling Plant. It has permitted contract labour only for loading and unloading purposes . Histechnical training is required for the work in LPG Bottling Plant".

The claimants cannot be treated to be the regular employees of the Corporation . The notification dated 21-10-1997 is subject of the writ petition before the Hon'ble High Court . The claimants cannot steal a march over others ; the Corporation has its own recruitment policy and guidelines . The claimnats have made vague allegations about the visit of representatives from the Labour Commissioner's office , without giving any particulars like date, timeetc. Such vague averments cannot be commented upon without there being any specific averments . The allegations that the said representatives found the claimants working is wrong and denied. The Officers from the Labour Authorities regularly visit the Plant of the Corporation and ensure that the welfare of the employees is looked after . The claimants be directed to given better particulars to enable the management to reply to the averments. The Corporation reserves its right to place the correct and true records as and when the desired particulars are submitted by the claimants . The averments made with regard to the working of the claimants since 1993 is wrong and denied .

The workmen applicant has filed rejoinder . In their rejoinder they have reiterated the averments of their claim statement . They have stated that they have been working since 1993 and even prior to that. The job is of regular type but it is taken in the fake name of the contractors . The workmen are deprived of their due wages . Most of the paras of the written statement have been denied by the workmen. The management has also denied most of the paras of the claim statement.

Evidence of both the parties has been taken.

Heard arguments from both the sides and perused the papers on the record.

It was submitted from the side of the workmen that the management is compelled to retain the workmen as a fresh workmen cannot do the job in Bottling Plant. The management adopted unfair labour practice . It changed name of the contractors but retained the same employees and need not bother to train its own employees. It is also admitted case of the management that more than 100 workmen are working in the Bottling Plant. The work in the BottlingPlant is oftechnical nature i. e . why the committee bannedthe contract labour in the LPG Bottlimunt .As there are various operations which require adequately trained and disciplined workmen. The management has admitted that initially contract was given for 2-3 years but later on contract is given yearly. Some papers regarding contract has been filed but no paper regarding payment of wages, control and supervision over the workmen, terms and conditions of the contractors have been given. If there is really valid and real contract the term of the agreement are reduced in writing . There is no agreement which stipulates the terms and conditions of the workmen ofthe contractor. The management has not filed any list as to which workmen was engaged by which contractor . If there is contractprocess right from 1988 or prior to that as is evident from the Basudevan Committee Report, in that case it is but natural that the management would be maintaining the list of the workmen supplied by every contractor. The management is failed to prove that payment to the workman is made through the contractor. Ifthere is contract and the contractor supplies the manpower in that case entire emoluments of the workmen are to be paid to the contractorby Cheques . No such Cheques have been filed with the record. There is no evidence that contractor had control over the workmen working in the Bottling Plant, supervision and control making on payments and It was submitted from the side of the workmen that all the workmen have been working since 1993. Some ofthe workmen have been working prior to that. The duties discharge by the workmen is of regular type. The contractors have been changed but the workmen have been continuedby the management. The management directed the contractor to retain the workmen as the work is of technical type . Fresher cannot perform the job so the workers have been retained all along . The names of the contractors have been changed on the papers .

3016G1/05-18 11632

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] integration or some of the criteria which are essential for establishing the contract . In the instant case there is no evidence that entire payment have been made to the contractor. There is no stipulation as to how much money the contractor will get for supplying the workmen . There is no stipulation as to what facilities and benefits will be provided to the contractors men by the management . There isabsolutely no paper regarding terms and conditions of the contract. In the circumstances it is proven fact that contractwas only the name giver. The workmen have been working for long time. They have work experience i.e.why they are continued year after year. Basudevan Committee has recommended the banning of the contract labour in the LPG Bottling Plant i.e. the reason that Ministry of Labour has issued notification in 1997 pursuant to recommendations of the Basudevan Committee. Notification dated 21-1-1997 abolishing the contract system in the management has been issued by the Ministry of Labour. The same has been challenged before the Hon'ble High Court ofDelhi .

Itwas further submitted from the side ofthe workmen that the work of the management is of perennial nature. The management has admitted categorically that 27 workmen have been working since 1993. Every year contractor is changed but the workmen remian the same. The management is getting its work performed through contractor's men right from 1993 so it is established fact thatwork performed by the workmen is ofperennial nature and is of sufficient duration . It is also admitted that a committee was constituted to inquire into the matter whether the contract should be abolished in the establishment under reference . The committee has given its report after hearing the management as well as the representatives of the union . It has been observed by the committee that "the work of sufficient duration is available inLPG Plant Complex for putting the seal on the LPG Cylinders , preparation of soaps solutions , pasting . Cylinders through soap solution method, sorting out of defective Cylinders . The data submitted by the management from 1988 onwards shows the decline in use ofmanpower engaged through the contractor which reflects less manpower requirement which can be meaningful engagement if contract labour is required. The committee isof the considered opinion that the employment ofcontract labour in theseprocesses , operation and other works /jobs be abolihsed and prohibited. In view of the provision of Section 10 ofthe Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970 and Rules made there under the Ministry of Labour, Government of India issued notification on 21-10-1997under Section 10 of Contract Labour (Regulation &Abolition) Act, 1970 and contract labour was abolished. WritNo. 5775/98 is pending for quashing the notification dated 21-10-1997.

Itwas submitted from the side of the workmen that writ for quashing notification dated 21-10-1997 is pending before the Honble High Court . This Tribunal is the appropriate forum to decide whether the workmen are the emplovees of the management/respondent . This matter is not pending before the Hon'ble High Court in writ petition. Itwas not brought to my knowledge even by the management that any other writ petition is pending before theHon'ble Delhi High Court regarding the same matter.

It was submitted from the side of the workmen that Stephen Ekka, Manager (ER) , IOCL has admitted several points . It has been admitted that they are working since 1993 as per record. The witness of the management has admitted that the workmen of Annexure - A have been working continuously from 1993 up date so there is no dispute regarding continuity of employment of 27 petitioners since 1993. The management witness has also admitted that these workmen have been engaged by different contractors since 1993 up date . The management has also admitted that Basudevan Committee was appointed to inquire into the matter due to fire in 1983 at Shakur Basti . The management witness has also admitted that there are three filling sheds and one staff is working in two shifts . It has been also admitted that the workmen are more that 100 in numbers . The management witness has also admitted that filling is a part of the process and daily routine work . The management witness has failed to name the representatives of the management before whom payment is made

It was submitted from the side of the management that since the Hon'ble Delhi High Court is seized of the matter under reference , the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to decide this case. The matter under reference before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court is regarding quashing of the abolition of contract labour. It was submitted from the side oftheworkmen that the reference is not regarding quashing ofthe notification or demand for abolition of the contract labour. The demand is for examining the actual reality behind the facade. After piercing the veil it is to be examined whether there exits actual contract labour system or it was onlymake belief. It has been held by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in LLR 1991 Page 573 that it is within jurisdiction ofthe Tribunal to examine the reality behind the facade of paper arrangement of contract labour system. The Tribunal hasto examine relationship between the management and contractworkmen. It is to be examined whether there exists master and servant relation or not. It has been held in 1999 Lab I C825 that the Tribunal can give findings that contract between the Company and its contractors is sham and bogus. The finding will not obviously abolish the contract labour system so the matter referred to here is regarding the factual finding whether the contract is sham and bogus. There is no reference regarding abolition of the contract labour . In the instant case the workmen worked [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30 , 1927

for continuously for 365 days and the Hon'ble GujaratHigh Court found the work to be of perennial nature . In the present case also almost 27 workmen have been working since 1993. The contractors have changed every year as perthe admission ofthe management witness . 27 workmen have been performing work since 1993. The workmen worked in the establishment of the manageinent . The management has control and supervision over the contractor's men, the workmen remaining the same . The contract is changed every year so certainly this is a facade of the papers and contract is camouflage and sham and bogus. The entire establishment is owned and maintained by the management where the contractor's men are employed. The contract is not genuine one .

It was submitted from the side of the workmen that 'the CLRA 37 of 1970 is a act to further social welfare and general interest of the community. The contract labour is to be abolished whenever the contract is found sham and not genuine. In the instant case the contractor is only name giver. The workmen are under the control and supervision ofthe management. There is no proof that money ispaidto thecontractor and the contractor pays to its workmen. The management makes payment of wages to the workmen directly.

Ithas been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in AIR 1986 SCI -workman ARI Ltd. Versus ARI Ltd. Bhaw Nagar that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to examine the reality behind the facade of paper arrangement of contract labour system so according to the judgement of the Apex Court the Tribunal can examine the genuineness or otherwise of the contract labour. I find no force in the argument of the managerment .

Itwas further submitted that the management is an instrumentality of the Central Government. They are charged with the duties ofdischarging their functions in a fair and just manner. They are expected to act justly and fairly and not arbitraarily or capricatiously . The management has not been acting fairly impartially and reasonably. It is their duty to act fairly. Despite the report of the Basudevan Committee they went on engaging contract labour in the LPG Plants but no need was paid by the management and they went on engaging the same workers in the fake name of different contractors . Contractors have been changed but the worken have been remained the same . It is almost the admitted case of the management. The management witness could not say whether the workmen have remained and the contractors have changed .

11633 betreated as the employees of the principal employer who shall be directed to regularize the services of the contract labour in the concerned establishment. In the instant case itisproven fact that the contractors are mere name givers andjob lenders . The workmen work under the control and supervision ofthe management.

They are within the establishment of the management. Payment ismade to the workman by the management. The management has not even deposited the ESIC and EPF of the alleged contract workers . The workmen worked in the LPG Plant under the directions and control of the management.

It was submitted by the Learned Counsel for the workmen that the management has mis-appropriated even the ESIC andEPF. In order to mis- appropriate this amount the name of the contractors is changed every year. It is established beyond the ray of doubt that the workmen are not the contractor's men but they are direct employees of the management. Their services are integrated to the management.

Ithas beenheld in AIR 1953 SC 404 that if a master employs a servant and authorised him to employ a number ofpersons to do a particular job and to gurantee their fidelity and efficiency for cash consideration, the employees thus appointed by the servant will be eqaully with the employer servant of the masters . In the instant casethere is no servant to empoly a number of persons. The name ofthe contractor is fake one . The management obtainedthe licences for them for a handful of money but everything is done by the management. The workmenhave been retained in the service of the management since 1993. 27workmen have been working continuously since 1993 and they have become an asset to the management. The management cannot dispense with their services as they have obtained technical efficency and training . The work in the LPG Plant requires trained personnel The management is helpless in continuing the workmen since 1993. It has been held in 1997 AIR SCW Page 430 that the industrial adjudicator should decide whether there is valid contract or it a is mere rules/camouflage and if it is found thatthe contract or is only a name lender the management should be directed to regularize the workmen. In JT 2003 (1) SC 465-the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that industrial adjudication is appropriate remedy for the alleged contract workers. In (2000) ISCC 126-the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that there are multiple pragmatic approach/ factors which should be considered in deciding employer and employee relationship .According to the criteria there should be control and integration. The management has doubtless control over the alleged contractor's men as they work in the establishment of the management . They are integrated to the service of the management . NO EIC or EPFhas been deposited by the contractor . There are no terms and conditions of the contract so there is master and servant relationship. The creation of contract labour is only sham and camouflage and the employer cannot be relieved ofhis liabilities . According to this judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court at least 19 workmen are the 11634

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30 , 1927

employees of the management . There is employer and employee relationship . Issue number is decided accordingly.

In JT 1999 ( 2 ) SC 435 -the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that if the work is of perennial nature or of sufficient duration , contract workers shall be onsidered tobe the direct employees of the management and they are entitled to be absorbed permanently as employees of the management The work in the instant case , no doubt, of perennial nature as the workmen have been continuously working since 1993. It is for sufficient duration . So the alleged contractor's men will become the servant of the management . The management has some vested interest ile. why the management is continuing the workmen since 1993 and in order to veil this reality the management is giving the name of several contractors every year. The management is doing violent injustice to the workmen . They have been deprived of the facilities and emoluments of regular employees since 1993. The interınediary has been introduced in order to deprive the workmen of their rights . The work is not of scasonal nature. It involves continuity in work so long as the LPG Plant functions as the engagement of the workmen is on necessity as they are trained in view of their long experience. Such workmen should not be deprived of their legitimate right. The Ministry of Labour has abolished contract labour system in the management but still the management is continuing the same process . It prima facedly proves that the management has some vested interest and it is exploiting the workinen and is engaged in unwholesome labour practice . There cannot be a more serious and glaring violation of the beneficial legislation of the Contract labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970. The workmen are making continued efforts to achieve the purpose of the LPG Plant but they are deprived of their legitimalc and due rights . The management is no doubt indulging in unfair labour practice. It ignored the recommendations of Basudevan Committee and of a recent committee which has recommended the abolition ofcontract labour from the LPG Plants but the management insisted for continuing the contract work condemnably . It has been admitted by the management that almost 100 workmen are working.

It was submitted from the side of the management that the workmen are the contractor's inen and this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to regularize the workmen . Only the Central Government can abolish the contract labour and direct for regularization of the contractor's men . There is no merit in the argument of the management. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a Catena of cases has decided that it the duty of industrial adjudicator to examine and give findings whether contract labour a sham and a mere camouflage to evade the responsibility of thic management . It is admitted case that 27 workmen have been working continuously since 1993. Sd these 27 workmen arc entitled to be regularized within one month from publication of the award. The law cited by the management is not applicable in the presesnt facts and circumstances of the case .

[PART II SEC. 3 (ii)] The reference is replied thus:-

The Demand of the Bhartiya Shramjivi Sangh for absorption / regularization of the services of contract labourers ( 27) as per list enclosed employed through contractors in the establishment of Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Delhi Bottling Plant, New Delhi is just, fair and legal . All the 27 applicants deserve to be absorbed within one month from the date of publication of the award. The management should regularize the services of all these 27 workmen within one month from the date of publication of theaward.

The award is given accordingly .

Date: 20-9-2005.

R. N. RAI , Presaiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 21 सितम्बर, 2005

का. आ. 3855. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय जीवन बीमा निगम के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद संख्या-2 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 07/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 15-9-2005 * को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-17025/2/2005- आई आर ( विविध) ] सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 21st September, 2005 S.O. 3855. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 07/99) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court, Dhanbad No. 2 as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Life Insurance Corporation and their workmen, which was received by the Central Govemment on 15-9-2005

[No. L - 17025/2/2005- IR (M ) ] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT LABOUR COURTAT DHANBAD

PRESENT : Shri B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer In the matter of an application under Section 33 -C(2 ) of the I.D. Act . , 1947

APPLICATION NO . LC. 7 OF 1999 PARTIES:

The General Secretary , Patna Division Insurance Workers Organisation , B/163 PipuisCo -operative Colony , Kankar Bagh, Patna- 800020.

.Applicant

VERSUS 11635 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

TheExecutive Director, Internal

प्रसंग: भारत सरकार , श्रम मंत्रालय , नई दिल्ली के आदेशांक एल-29011 /20/ 2003 आई आर ( एम ) दिनांक 196-03

AuditDeptt . , L.I. C ofIndia, Central Office,"Yogakshema"

Opp. Party

JeevanBima Marg , Mumbai - 400021 .

निर्देश अन्तर्गत धारा 10( 1 ) ( पं) औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 APPEARANCES:

मध्य

None

OnBehalf of the applicant:

None

श्रीमती रामप्यारी पुत्री श्री गौरीलाल द्वारा जनरल सैक्रेट्री, राष्ट्रीय मजदूर संघ, रामगंज मण्डी, जिला कोटा। Onbehald of the O. P.

......प्रार्थिनी श्रमिक :

State: Jharkhand

Industry: Insurance

एवं

Dated, Dhanbad, the 18th August , 2005

ORDER

प्रबन्धक, एसोसियेटेड स्टोन इण्डस्ट्रीज ( कोटा ) लि. रामगंज मण्डी, जिला कोटा

अप्रार्थी नियोजक This is an application under Section 33C( 2) of I.D. Act. , 1947 filedby the applicant claiming certain dues on computation against the O. P. management named above.

उपस्थित

: श्री सतीश पचौरी

प्रार्थिनी श्रमिक की ओर से प्रतिनिधि

: श्री रमेश राठौर

अप्रार्थी नियोकक की ओर से प्रतिनिधि

अधिनिर्णय दिनांक: 30-8-2005

अधिनिर्णय

In this application neither the application nor his representative appeared before this Labour Court . None also appeared on behalf of the O. P. management . This case is pending for hearing since 1999. As the parties failed to appear for taking necessary steps , the application is dismissed for default.

B. BISWAS, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 21 सितम्बर, 2005

भारत सरकार, श्रम मंत्रालय, नई दिल्ली द्वारा अपने उक्त आदेश अधिसूचना दिनांक 19-6-03 के जरिये निम्न निर्देश/विवाद आद्यौगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( जिसे तदुपरान्त " अधिनियम " से सम्बोधित किया जायेगा ) की धारा 10 ( 1 ) ( घ) के अन्तर्गत इस न्यायाधिकरण को अधिनिर्णयार्थ सम्प्रेषित किया गया है:

का. आ. 3856.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैं ० एसोसियेटिड स्टोन इंडस्ट्रीज के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में श्रम न्यायालय कोटा के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 23/03 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 15-09-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल -29011 /20/2003- आई आर ( विविध) ]

"Whether the action of the management of M/s . Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd. , Ramganjmandi in terminating the services ofthe workman Smt . Ram Pyari D/o . Shri Gauri Lal w.e.f. 3-9-2002 is legal & justified ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ?" सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 21st September, 2005

2. निर्देश/विवाद , न्यायाधिकरण में प्राप्त होने पर पंजीबद्ध उपरान्त पक्षकारों को नोटिस विधिवत रूप में जारी किये गये जिस पर दोनों पक्षों की ओर से अपनी-अपनी उपस्थिति दी गयी । S.O. 3856. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 23/03) of the Industrial Tribunal KOTA in the Industrial Dispute between the management of M/s Associated Stone Industries, Kota and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 15-09-2005.

[No. L- 29011/20/2003 -IR (M) ]

3. दौरान विचारण दिनांक 26-5-05 को पक्षकारों की ओर से संयुक्त रूप से एक राजीनामा प्रस्तुत कर यह निवेदन किया गया कि चूंकिप्रार्थिनी श्रमिक श्रीमती रामप्यारी ने अपने सेवामुक्ति के विवाद में अप्रार्थी नियोजक से पिछले वेतन व नौकरी के अधिकार को छोड़ने के एवज में कुल 30,000 रु. की राशि मुआवजा स्वरूप जरिये चैक नं. 433309दिनांकित 25-5-05 प्राप्त कर ली है और अपना विवाद समाप्त करकोई विवाद आगे नहीं चलाना चाहती है, अतः प्रस्तुतशुदा राजीनामे के आधार पर अधिनिर्णय अन्तिम रूप से पारित कर दिया जाये । C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

अनुबंध

न्यायाधीश , औद्योगिक न्यायाधिकरण (केन्द्रीय ) /कोटा/राजस्थान

पीठासीन अधिकारी- श्री के. के. गुप्ता, आर. एच.जे.एस.

न्यायाधिकरण द्वारा प्रस्तुतशुदा राजीनामे का अवलोकन किया गया । चूंकि प्रार्थिनी श्रमिक ने हस्तगत निर्देश/प्रकरण में फुल एण्ड फाईनल सेटिलमेन्ट बतौर कुल 30,000 रु. की राशि अप्रार्थी नियोजक से प्राप्त कर ली है और तदुपरान्त उसके व अप्रार्थी नियोजक के मध्य किसी प्रकार का कोई विवाद शेष नहीं रहा है । अतः प्रस्तुतशुदा राजीनामे के आधार पर सम्प्रेषित निर्देश/ विवाद को इसी प्रकार अधिनिर्मीत कर उत्तरति किया जाता है ।

निर्देश प्रकरण क्रमांक: ओ. न्या. केन्द्रीय/23/03

के. के. गुप्ता, न्यायाधीश दिनांक स्थापित: 19-7-03 11636

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II SEC. 3 ( ii)] नई दिल्ली, 21 सितम्बर, 2005

contractors in the LPG Plant, Tirki Kalan are entitled for reinstatement/regularization in the establishment ofI.O.C.L. on the basis that they were working against perennial jobs some of which were later prohibited byGovernment for employment of contract labour vide notification No. 734 (E) dated 21-10-1997 If yes, to what other relief they are entitled?" का. आ. 3857.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार इण्डियन ऑयल कार्पो. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण श्रम न्यायालय , नई दिल्ली संख्या- II के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 82/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को21-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं एल. 30011/41/2000- आई.आर (विविध ) ]

सी, गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव

The Petroleum Workers Union on behalf of the workmenhas filed statement of claim. In the statement of claim it has been stated that the above said reference has been made by the appropriate government after receiving failure report of Shri Khushal Singh, ALCO, Delhi 6-4-2000.

NewDelhi , the 21st September, 2005

S.O. 3857. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 82/2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court , New Delhi No. II as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 21-9-2005.

[No. L- 30011/41/2000- IR (Misc.) ]

C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

That the concerned workmen had raised a dispute with the management as well when their demand was not concededbefore the Conciliation Officer ( Central) as per list annexed with this statement of claim vide their dispute dated 19-8-1999 wherein workmen had claimed that the management of I.O.C.L. had appointed the workmen through their contractors i.e. through its Sr. Plant Manager, LPG Plant, Tikri Kalan, New Delhi , had employed 54 workmen under Contract Labour System through M/s . Friends Cargo Movers & Traders , Delhi , long back and due to termination of the contract of the contractor by the management of Indian Oil Corporation Limited w.e.f. 9-6-1993 , the services of the workers were terminated and management had refused to reinstate the workers and has categorically instructed the newly appointed contractor not to again employ the terminated workers .

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

L.D. NO. 82/2000

IN THE MATTER OF:-

The workmen as represented by Petroleum Workers Union , 4/7 , Asaf Ali Road, NewDelhi ,

After a long persuasion with the management of IndianOil Corporation Limited Shri L.K. Mathur , the then Dy.General Manager instructed the contractor to take some ofthe workers in service . Out of 54 workmen, only 19 workers were taken in the employment by the new contractor and 35 workers were left out and in their places , new workmen were appointedby the management . The 19 workmen who were taken on duty on the instance of the management , are still working as shown in annexure ' A' . The workmen are out ofjobs w.e.f. 19-6-1993 are shown in Annexure 'B ' .

Versus

The Management of

M/ s. Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Yusuf Sarai , NewDelhi.

AWARD

That the grievances of the workmen are (a) that since the work of the management is of perennial nature and the same is being got done and executed by the respondent management through the contractor and his workmen . The similar jobs are also being done and executed by the permanent and regular employees. The workmen employed by the contractor have been discriminated for the purpose of pay and allowance and also for various other welfare facilities . The difference in pay and allowances and other social benefits are mentioned as under :-

1. The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L- 30011 / 41/2000/IR(Misc. ) Central Government dt . 31-7-2000 has referred the following point for adjudication .

The point runs as hereunder:-

"Whether 54 contract workers whose services were

terminated on 9-6-1993 on completion of contract and out ofwhich 19 workmen are still working through

The workmen working with Corporation on regular basis are getting pay scale of Rs . 2234-40-2554-50- 2904-60-3505 in the year 1995 whereas in the month of January, 1999 they were being paid Rs . 5719/- per month under different heads i.e. basic pay, 11637 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

the contracter then appointed by the management whereas the management had given specific direction to their contractor not to employ the previous staff members and so they were rendered jobless and thrown on the road and not only this even at the time of termination of their services that outgoing contractor did not pay legal dues to 35 workers so terminated even their provident fund and ESI contributions deducted from their salary was not deposited with the respective authorities . The entire legal dues payable to the said employees were eaten by the out going contractor and officers of the management because the contract system has been introduced by the officers of the management for their own interest and not for the benefit of the Corporation. Therefore , in view of even own admission of the management of the Corporation they being the principal employer were bound to pay all legal dues at the time of termination of services of 35 workers mentioned in the list 'B ' and because their termination were illegal and unjustified and now the job of all such category of the Corporation has been declared as of permanent nature/ perennial in nature vide notification dated 21-10-1997, therefore , all the said employees are entitled to the relief of their reinstatement with full back wages and continuity of services and are required to be regularized with the management and be paid pay and allowances with arrears along with other consequential benefit as per other regular employees of the Corporation .

That in the statement of claim before the conciliation officer the workmen had requested/prayed that the termination/dismissed workers may be reinstated as shown in the list ' B ' with full back wages and continuity of services and likewise all other workmen who are working with the contractor/ management of the Corporation and thereafter due to the intervention of some good officers ofthe Corporation i.e. 19 workers taken on duty who are at present working with the management be treated as regular employees of Indian Oil Corporation Limited and they be paid and allowances and other consequential benefits treating them as regular employees of the Corporation for all intents and purposes .

It was also specifically mentioned in the statement ofclaim before the Conciliation Officer (Central) that the following persons/contractors have exploited the claimant workmen at the instance of the officers of the Corporation or in collusion with them.

NameofFirm

Nameof

Period of Contract

Proprietor

variable DA and fixed DA, CCA, HRA @30% special allowance@ 10% of basic , other allowance like tea, washing allowance , transportation charges , children education allowance ete. and in addition to that the regular employees of the Corporation are getting earned leave for 32 days, casual leave for 12 days in a year, sick leave for 10 days in a year , LTC for self and family member, bonus every year, productivity linking bonus every year, medical assistance through nominated hospital , special leave for serious sickness and accident on duty benefit , provident fund contribution @ 12% of basic pay, DA, Gratuity with compensation benefit , canteen facilityetc. whereas the workmen doing the similar job for 8 hours daily are getting only Rs . 2419/- inclusive ofESI & PF contribution and they are not provied even protective measure whereas the regular employees are getting all protective measure and this way the contractor workers i.e. the workers who are working under. contract and doing the similar job which the other regular employees are doing with the respondent management are being badly exploited . There are various rulings of the various High Courts of the country as well as of the Apex Court i.e. Hon'ble Supreme Court of India that "Equal Pay for Equal Work" . But unfortunately though the work being executed by the workmen as per list annexed to the statement of claim A & B they are not being treated as regular employees of the management i.e. Indian Oil Corporation Limited. The 19 workers are continuously working with the management and their job which is being job in perennial in nature and the same employment of the contract labour with respect to them has been prohibited as per notification dated 21-10-1997 of Government of India , therefore , they are required . to be treated as regular employees of the Corporation and be paid pay and allowances that of the regular employees with arrears and they be also treated for all intents and purposes i.e. for the consequential benefits as regular employees in view of Section 25B of the Industrial Disputes Act . Moreover , there is a ruling of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India that a work which exists for one year , the said work is of regular nature and the employees appointed to do the said work even after, he works for the lesser period be treated as regular employees of the establishment . Hence in view of the same, the management has no case at all and the claimant workmen are entitled to the relief.

9-6-88to

Sh. B.P. Bhawani M/s . Friends Cargo &

9-6-93

Traders (P) Ltd.

10-6-93 to

M/ s. Job Orient

Sh. V.N. Bhalla

10-6-99

-do-

Sh. J.S. Bhambra M/s . Glamour (India) That 35 workmen as per list annexed ' B ' to this statement of claim were terminated under the guise of termination of contract of the contractor in 1993 i.e. w.e.f. 9-6-1993 and the concerned workmen were removed from their job taking the plea that they were the employees of 11638

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

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

Sh. P.K.

M/s. Pee Kay Contractor 10-6-95 to

10-6-97

Sh. Gladbin

10-6-97 to

MarfEngg.

of the answering respondents and no contract workman is employed in such nature of jobs . The distribution of LPG is through distributors appointed by the answering management. The jobs being performed by the contractors are neither perennial in nature nor of the establishment .

Cont.

ThatM/ s .Friends Cargo Traders (P) Limited had deducted the contributions on account of provident Fund from the wages of the workers for some period and had not deposited with the Provident Fund Commissioner's Office along with its matching contributions and the Principal Employer is M/s . Indian Oil Corporation Limited has not taken any steps in this direction inspite of repeated requests and complaints .

That the answering management has its own recruitment policy and guidelines and the same can not be over looked/by passed by considering the case of the claimants herein . The claimants cannot be allowed to steel a march by, by - passing the recruitment rules as well as the guidelines of the answering management . It is the settled law of the land that no back door entry into public sector employment can be permitted . Hence the claim is liable to be dismissed on this ground also .

It is pointed out that the notification dated 21st October, 1997 is a subject matter of writ petition No. 5775 of1998 pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi . The notification has been challenged on the grounds of being ultra vires as mentioned in the petition and the same is admitted for consideration of the Hon'ble Court.

The management has filed written statement . In the written statement it has been stated that the concerned workmen named in Annexure -A and B were never in the employment of answering management and as such the claim itself is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone. There never existed any employer-employee relationship betweenthe claimants and the management and therefore no " Industrial Dispute" can arise between the parties and the reference may kindly be rejected.

That the claimants themselves in their claim petition have stated that they were employed as contract workmen ofM/s . Friends Cargo Movers India and without such a contractor being made a party to the present dispute the claim is liable to be dismissed on the ground of non- joinder and mis joinder of necessary and proper parties .

Itis correct that the contract which was awarded to M/s. Friends Cargo Movers and Traders was awarded for a period of two years and the said contractor was terminated thereafter. It is wrong and emphatically denied that the answering respondents had instructed the new contractor not to engage the concerned workmen. It is respectfully submitted that the said averments can be best answered by the contractor and the averments as made in this paragraph are denied for want of knowledge . The allegation being made against a party who is not present may not be adjudicated by the Hon'ble Court.

That the Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970 is a self sufficient code , providing the machinery for regularization of the contract labour and its abolition in certain cases . The reference thus made under the provisions of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 is thus withoutjurisdiction and ultra vires of the powers of the appropriate Government and may kindly be rejected .

It is wrong and denied that the Deputy General Manager of the answering respondent Shri L.K. Mathur had instructed the contractor to take the services of the claimants . The averments made in this paragraph are wrong and vehemently denied. It is also wrong and denied for want ofknowledge whether any persons were engaged by the contractor . The answering management denies for want of knowledge whether any person was engaged by the new contractor or not. The answering management however, has been able to ascertain that out of 19 workmen named in Annexure -A, have been engaged by M/ s . New Marif Engineering Private Limited and 5 have been engaged by M/ s . Pawan Constructions Private India .

It iswrong and emphatically denied that the workers named in Annexure -A or in Annexure -B were performing any work which was of regular on perennial in nature . It is again reiterated that the main job of the answering respondents at Tikri Kalan Bottling Plant is of filling of LPG Cylinders and its distribution .

That the claimants have been guilty of" suppression veri suggestion falsi " . The claimants have stated that theyare performing work of permanent and perennial in nature. This averment of the petitioners is wrong and vehemently denied. It is . respectfully submitted that the claimants were never employed by the management but might have been engaged by contractor . The contract given by the answering respondents to the contractor was for the up keep ofbuilding , up keep of rest room and canteen and floor sheds . Besides above the contract also stipulates that the contractor shall ensure proper grass cutting, de silting of drains and cleaning of soak pits and septic tank of the answering management . The claimants have falsely alleged that they are performingjobs of regular and perennial nature . It is submitted that the mainjob of the answering respondents at the Tikri Kalan Bottling Plant is for filling of LPG Cylinders and its distribution. The LPG filling process is done by the regular employees

None ofthe workers named in the Annexure - A or B were engaged in any work which were regular or perennial in nature. In fact all the workmen named in Annexure -A andBare contract workmen and there existed no employer- 11639 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

of India and the Union of India is appropriate authority todefend the said writ petition . However, it is correct that the claimants had made an application for impleadment in the sald writ petition which stands allowed . The claimants have also filed a writ petition being writ petition No. 1889/ 2001 , which has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Delhi HighCourt on 10-04-2001 .

employee relationship between the claimants and the answering management. The pay scales of the workmen employed by the answering respondents was 2234-40- 2554-50-2904-60-3505 in the year 1995. However, the regular workmen of the answering respondents were not being paid HRA and Special Allowance as has been claimed in this paragraph . 11 is respectfully submitted that the Principle of " Equal pay for Equal Work " would not be applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case . As the work being performed by the contractors was neither regular nor perennial in nature , there has been no violation of Section 25B of the ID Act, 1947 as alleged . The Recruitment Policy of the management corporation has to be followed for getting employment in the corporation. The claimants do not satisfy the recruitment norms laid down by the corporation .

It is wrong and denied that the answering corporation has exploited the workers as named in Annexure- A and B. It is respectfully submitted that no relief of reinstatement can be granted in favour of the claimants as they never were in the employment of the answering management. It is , therefore , respectfully prayed that the claim filed by the claimants may kindly be dismissed with cost as the claimants have not made the contractor a party to the present dispute the proceedings do not survive. As per their own showing their rservices have been terminated in the year 1993 but the reference has been raised in the year 2000 , thus causing grave prejudice to the management . It is stated that records relating to such period would not be available with the corporation particularly so when the claimants were not even the employees of the Corporation.

That the contents of Para 7 as stated are wrong and denied for want of knowledge . It is wrong that the 35 persons named in the Annexure No. B were not engaged by the contractor. The allegations made against the out going contractor can be best answered by the said contractor . The management neither appointed nor terminated any of them . In fact at present the management corporation is unable to admit/deny whether any of the 35 persons mentioned in Annexure-B have worked with the Corporation through a contractor . The delay in raising the reference itself shows that such persons never thought themselves to be the employees of the Corporation.

The Union on behalf of workman applicant has filed rejoinder . In the rejoinder the union has reiterated the averments of his claim statement and has denied most of the paras of the written statement. The management has also denied most of the paras of the claim statement.

Ithas been stated from the side of the Union that the management's contention is that the aggrieved workmen are the workmen of their contractors namely M/s. FCM/ Glamour India/ Job Orient/P.K. Constt./Marf Engineers.

It is submitted that the conciliation proceedings had failed as there existed no relationship of employer and employee between the claimants and the management of M/s . Indian Oil Corporation . It is wrong and denied that the answering corporation has exploited the workers in colusion with the contractor . The allegations are absolutely baseless and vague and deserves no consideration from the Hon'ble Court. The claimants may not be allowed to raise belated/stale disputes.

Ithas been stated that all the workmen shown in Annexure A & B annexed in statement of claim were employed by FCM (Contractor ) during the period oftheir initial contract for three years with the Principal Employer i.e. Indian Oil Corporation Limited from 09-06-1988 to 09-06-1991 . The period of contract was mutually extended by both the parties for two years and remained in force upto 9th June, 1993 and finally the contract was terminated.

It is submitted that the PF Authorities had approached the answering Corporation regarding non payment of certain dues and the answering corporation had replied to the concerned authorities stating that there was no amount which was pending with the corporation of the contractor M/ s . Friends Cargo Movers and Traders except a sum of Rs . 10,000 (Ten Thousand Only ) which was deposited with the PF Department. The management had complied with the directions of the PF department and has acted in accordance with law.

Instead of the Contractor M/ s . FCM, when their contract was terminated by the Principal Employer, the management of IOCL had illegally appointed two contractors namely M/s . Glamour India and M/s . Job Orient without entering into any contract agreements. Both the contractors were advised to bring their own workmen to work for the IOCL in its premises at Tikri Kalan. The workers employed by the earlier contractor M/s. FCM were thrown out of jobs and were not kept by the new contractors on the specific instructions by the Principal Employer.

It is stated that the management of IOCL through Shri L.K. Mathur , the then DGM (LPG) had advised and Itisstated that it is correct that a writ petiton No. 5775 of 1998 is pending disposal before the Hon'ble High Court, Delhi . However, it is wrong and emphatically denied that the answering corporation with the guilty mind did not make the union as a party to the said writ petition. It is respectfully submitted that the said writ petition has been filed challenging the notification issued by the union

3016G1/05-19 11640

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

instructed the newly appointed contractors to take the workers back in the service who had been working earlier and were employed by the previous contractor M/ s . FCM . It is submitted that 19 workers , as per annexure A were taken in the employment by both the contractors. It is further submitted that 9 workers were employed by Shri Bhambra of M/ s . Glamour India and 10 workers were taken by Shri Bhall of M/s . Job Orient . Later when the contractor namely M/ s . Job Orient had cheated the Principal Employer and had run away without any intimation to the concerned authorities and without making the payment of wages to the workers , the Principal Employer was persuaded and all the workers working through the absconding contractor were shifted to work under another contractor Shri Bhambra of M/ s . Glamour India. The wages of the contract labour were also paid by another contractor who was asked to take the responsibilities of habilities and profits of the absconding contractor .

It is reiterated that as Principal Employer , management of IOCL had played a vital role in removing the contractor's werkers and again shifting their services to another contractor. The deductions on account of PF accmulations with the PF authorities were well within the knowledge ofthe Principal Employer and its Managers. The contractors were being shielded/protected against the violation and non implementation of the statutory labour laws.

It is, therefore, humbly stated that the management of IOCL cannet escape its responsibility as a Princial employer in the present dispute . The dispute does exist between the Principal Employer and the workmen engaged in the premises of Indian Oil Corporation Limited who have/had been working for the public Sector Company through its Agents/ Contractors .However, if management ofIOCL as Principal Employer feels that the concerned contractors should be made the parties to the present dispute, it maybe directed to trace involved contractors and being them down to appear before the Labour Authority.

The difference in pay and allowances and other social benefits between the two sets of workers , who are doing the identical jobs in the same premises is self explanatory. The comparison shown in the statement of claim is reiterated. It is reiterated and confirmed that the contract labour has been continuously engaged without any break for last so many years to do the regular and perennial jobs such as:

(a) Jebs of Peous in the office .

(b) Jobs of dispatching the mail/dak .

(d) Sealing/Capping -Decapping of the Cylinders.

(e) Loading and unloading of Cylinders .

[PART II SEC . 3 (ii)] (f) Preparation of Soap Solution/Cleaning of Trays /Applying of Soap Solution to the Conveyer Belts for smooth movements .

(g) Removal of empty/filled LPG Cylinders from one place to another .

About 100 workers are daily deployed to perform regular and perennial jobs. It is absolutely incorrect to say that the workers are not deployed on any permanent and perennial jobs. It is admitted that no list of 19 workers was ever given to the management of IOCL for their regularization . It is again submitted that 19 workers out of 54 were employed by the newly appointed contractors i.e M/s . Glamour India and M/s. Job Orient on the intervention and specific instructions of the representative of the Principal Employer, Shri A.K. Mathur, the then Dy . General Manager(LPG).

It is reiterated that there existed/exist master servant relationship between the Principal Employer and the workmen who are engaged to perform the duties for Indian OilCorporation Limited in its premises . They are further governed by the administrative rules of the management ofIOCL . The Passes/Identity Cards issued to the workers show that they are engaged to work for Indian Oil Corporation Limited at its LPG Plant . The Identity Cards issued to the workers are further redesigned by the management of IOCL to escape its reponsibility to have any connection with the contractor's workmen. The sample of the Entry Pass/Identity Card is annexed to give clearpicture that how the Principal Employer is trying to escape its moral/ethical/legal responsibilities towards the labour. The address of the contractor ( O ) has not been deliberately mentioned in any of the records accessible to the workmen to aboid to accept any responsibility towards the workmen both by the Principal Employer and the Contractor .

Evidence of both the parties has been taken .

From the side of the workmen , the President of Petroleum Workers ' Union and the Secretary of Petroleum Workers' Union have been examined. The workmen have also filed affidavit but their cross was not permitted by the predecessor, the Presiding Officer as W- 1 and WW - 2 to represent the general case of all the workmen being President and Secretary of the Petroleum Workers ' Union. Claim statement has also been filed by the Union . The management has also examined one witness .

Argument of both the parties was heard.

Itwas submitted from the side of the workmen that initially 54 workers were engaged as contractor workers from 1988 but on 09-06-1993 on completion of contract 35 workmen were dis - engaged but 19 workmen are still working through contractors in the LPG Plant , Tikri Kalan . All the 54 workmen should be regularized/ reinstated as theirjob is of perennial nature . It is admitted to both the parties that the Government of India has abolished [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30 , 1927

contract labour w.e.f. 21-10-1997 and the order of the Government dated 21-10-1997 has been challenged before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court .

Itwas submitted from the side of the workmen that despite dependency of the writ the matter under reference canbe adjudicated upon as contract is sham one and it is not genuine. The Contract is a comouflage and ifthe veil islifted the contract workers will be found to be regular employees of the respondents /management . On 26-08-2002 an issue has been framed whether there existed employer -einployee relationship between the parties. This issue will be replied after considering the nature, duties and duration of the work and permissibility of contract labour for such nature of work . A writ petition was filed in the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi for direction to treat 19 workers as regular employees ofthe management but the samewas rejected by the Hon'ble High Court as a reference wasmade by Central Government regarding 54 employees including 19 workers who have the writ CPW No. 5775/ 98. TheHon'ble High Court ofDelhi ordered for maintaing status -quo till 3 1st March , 2001 so the writ petition which is pending before the Hon'ble High Court is for quashing the notification dated 21-10-1997 . The Hon'ble Delhi High Court rejected the writ petition of the worknten on the ground that the reference is pending before the appropriate foruin . In this case the points of decision is whether contract workers deserves to be reinstated or regularized.

It was submitted from the side of the workmen thatwrit regarding writ for quashing notification dated 21-10-1997 is pending before the Hon'ble High Court. This Tribunal is the appropriate forum to decide whether the workmen are the employees of the management/ respondent . This matter is not pending before the Hon'ble High Court in writ petition. It was not brought to my knowledge even by the management that any other petition is pending before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court regarding the same matter.

Itwas submitted from the side of the workmen that Stephen Ekka, Manager (ER) , IOCL has admitted several points. It has been also admitted that they are working since 1988 as per record . The witness of the management hasadmitted that the workmen of Annexure -A have been working continuously from 1988 up date so there is no dispute regarding continuity of employment of 19 petitioners since 1988. The management witness has also admitted that these workmen have been engaged by different contractors since 1988 up date . The management has also admitted that Basudevan Committee was appointed to inquire into the matter due to fire in 1983 at Shakur Basti . The management witness has also admitted that there are three filling sheds and one staff is working in two shifts . It has been also admitted that the workmen are more than 100 in numbers. The management witness

11641 has also admitted that filling is a part of the process and daily routine work. The management witness has failedto name the representatives of the management before whom payment is made.

It was further submitted from the side of the workmen that the work of the management is ofperennial nature . The management has admitted categorically that 19 workmen have been working since 1988. Every year contractor is changed but the workmen remain the same . The management is getting its work performed through contractor's men right from 1988 so it is established fact thatwork performed by the workmen is of perennial nature and is of sufficient duration . It is also admitted that a committee was constituted to inquiry into the matier whether the contract should be abolished in the establishment under reference. The committee has given its report after hearing the management as well as the representatives of the union. It has been observed by the committee that "the work of sufficient duration is available in LPG Plant Complex for putting the seal on the LPG Cylinders, preparation of soaps solutions , pasting of Cylinders through soap solution method, sorting out of defective Cylinders . The data submitted by the managementfrom 1988 onwards shows the decline in use of manpower engaged through the contractor which reflects less manpower requirement which can be meaningful engagement if contract labour is required. The committee is of the considered opinion that the employment of contract labour in these processes , operation and other works/jobs be abolished and prohibited. In view of the provision of Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act , 1970 and Rules made there under the Ministry of Labour , Government of India issued notification on 21-10-1997 under Section 10 of Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970 and contract labour was abolished. Writ No. 5775/98 is pending for quashing the notification dated 21-10-1997 .

Itwas subinitted from the side of the management thatsince the Hon'ble Delhi High Court is seized of the matter under reference , the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to decide this case . The matter under reference before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court is regarding quashing of the abolition of contract labour. It was submitted from the side of the workinen that the reference is not regarding quashing of the notification or demand for abolition of the contract labour . The demand is for examining the actual reality behind the facade. After piercing the veil it is to be examined whether there exists actual contract labour system or it was only make belief. It has been held by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in LLR 1991 Page 573 that it is withinjurisdiction of the Tribunal to examine the reality behind the facade of paper arrangement of contract labour system. The Tribunal has to examine relationship 11642

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

between the management and contract workmen. It is to be examined whether there exists master and servant relation or not. It has been held in 1999 Lab 1C 825 that the Tribunal can give findings that contract between the Company and it contractors is sham and bogus . The finding will not obviously abolish the contract labour system so the matter referred to here is regarding the factual finding whether contract is sham and bogus. There is no reference regarding abolition of the contract labour. In the instant case the workmen worked for continuously for 365 days and the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court found the work to be of perennial nature . In the present case also almost 19 workmen have been working since 1988. The contractors have changed every year as per the admission of the management witness . 19 workmen have been performing work since 1988 . The remaining 35 workmen worked from 1988 to 1993 for almost five years . These 35 workmen after having worked for five years were not engaged by the next contractor but all the contractors have engaged the 19 workmen right from 1988. The workmen worked in the establishment of the management . The management has control and supervision over the contractor's men , the workmen remaining the same . The contract is changed every year so certainly this is a facade of the papers and contract is camouflage and sham and bogus. The entire establishment is owned and maintained by the management where the contractor's men are employed. The contract is not genuine one .

Itwas submitted from the side of the workmen that the CLRA 37 of 1970 is a act to further social welfare and general interest of the community . The contract labour is to be abolished whenever the contract is found sham and not genuine . In the instant case the contractor is only name giver. The workmen are under the control and supervision of the managerment. There is no proof that money is paid to the contractor and the contractor pays to its workmen. The management makes payment of wages to the workmen directly.

It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in AIR 1986 SC I-workman ARI Ltd. Versus ARI Ltd. Bhaw Nagar that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to examine the reality behind the facade ofpaper arrangement of contract labour system so according to the judgement of the Apex Court the Tribunal can examine the genuineness or otherwise of the contract labour . I find no force in the argument of the management .

It was further submitted that the management is an instrumentality of the Central Govemment . They are charged with the duties ofdischarging their functions in a fair and just manner . They are expected to act justly and fairly and not arbitrarily or capricatiously. The management has not been acting fairly impartially and reasonably . It is theirduty to act fairly. Despite the report of the Basudevan Committee they went on engaging contract labour in the

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii)] LPG Plants but no heed was paid by the management and they went on engaging the same workers in the fake name of different contractors Contractors have been changed but the workmen have been remained the same . It is almost the admitted case of the management . The management witness couldnot say whether the workmen have remained andthe contractors have changed .

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in AIR 2001 SC 3527 has held that the industrial adjudicator will have to consider the question whether the contract has been interposed either on the ground of having undertaken to produce any given result for the establishment or supply of contract labour for work of the establishment under the genuine contractorwhether it is a mere ruse/camouflage to evade compliance of various beneficial legislations so as to deprive the workers of the benefits there under. If the contract is not genuine the alleged contract labour should betreated as the employees of the principal employer who shallbe directed to regularize the services of the contract labour in the concerned establishment . In the instant case itisproven fact that the contractors are mere name givers andjob lenders . The workman work under the control and supervision of the management.

They are within the establishment of the management . Payment is made to the workman by the management . The management has not even deposited the ESIC and EPF of the alleged contract workers . The Workmen worked in the LPG Plant under the directions and control of the management.

It was submitted by the Learned Counsel for the workman that the management has mis - appropriated even theESIC andEPF . In order to mis -appropriate this amount the name of the contractors is changed every year . It is established beyond the ray of doubt that the workmen are not the contractor's men but they are direct employees of the management . Their services are integrated to the management.

Ithas been held inAIR 1953 SC 404 that if a master employs a servant and authorized him to employ a number of persons to do a particular job and to guarantee their fidelity and efficiency for cash consideration, the employees thus appointed by the servant will be equally with the employer servant of the masters. In the instant case there is no servant to employ a number of persons . The name ofthe contractor is fake one . The management obtained the licence for them for a handful of money but everything is done by the management . The workmen have been retained in the service of the management since 1988 . At least 19of theworkmen have been working continuously since 1988 and they have become an asset to the management . The management cannot dispense with their service as they have obtained technical efficiency and training. The work in the LPG Plant requires trained personnel . The management is helpless in continuing the workmen since 1988. It has been hald in 1997 AIR SCW Page 430 that the industrial adjudicator should decide 11643 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

Basudevan Committee and of a recent committee which has recommended the abolition of contract labour from the LPG Plants but the management insisted for continuing the contract work condmnably . It has been admitted by the management that almost 100 workmen are working.

whether there is valid contract or it is a mere rules/ camouflage and if it is found that the contract or is only a name lender the management should be directed to regularize the workmen. In JT 2003 (1 ) SC-465-the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that industrial adjudication is appropriate remedy for the alleged contract workers . In (2000) I SCC 126-the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that there are multiple pragmatic approach/factors which should be considered in deciding employer and employee relationship . According to the criteria there should be control and integration . The management has doubless control over the alleged contractor's men as they work in the establishment of the management . They are integrated to the service ofthe management . No EIC or EPF has been deposited by the contractor . There are no terms and conditions of the contract so there is master and servant relationship . The creation of contract labour is only sham and camouflage and the employer cannot be relieved ofhis liabilities . According to this judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court at least 19 workmen are the employees of the management . There is employer and employee relationship . Issue number is decided accordingly.

Itwas submitted from the side of the management that the workmen are the contractor's men and this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to regularize the workmen . Only the Central Government can abolish the contract labour and direct for regularization of the contractor's men. There is no merit in the argument of the management . The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a Catena of cases has decided that it the dutyof industrial adjudicator to examine and give findings whether contract labour a sham and a mere camouflage to evade the responsibility of the management . It is admitted case that 19 workmen have been working continuously since 1988. So these 19 workmen are entitled to be regularized within one month from publication of the award. The remaining 35 workmen have worked only for five years from 1988 to 1999. The law cited by the management is not applicable in the present facts and circumstances of the case.The management will consider their case while making fresh recruitment and the 35 workmen should be given weightage and priority.

The reference is replied thus :-

The 19 workers who are still working through contractor in the LPG Plant, Tikri Kalan are entitled for regularization in the establishment of the Indian Oil Corporation Limited on the basis that they were working against perennial jobs. Some of which were later prohibited byGovernment for employment of the contract labour by notification No. 734 (e) dated 21-10-1997. The management should absorb the workmen within one month of the publication award and they will be treated as regular employees for all intents and purposes as the other regular employees of the management. The management will consider the case of other 35 workmen while making recuirtment of such type of workers .

The award is given accordingly. Date: 19-09-2005.

R.N. RAI, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 23 सितम्बर, 2005

का. आ. 3858.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार इण्डियन 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 77/1999 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-09- 2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल.- 12011/6/1999- आई.आर. ( बी- II ) ] सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव In JT 1999 (2) SC435-the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that ifthe work is ofperennial nature or of sufficient duration, contract workers shall be considered to be the direct employees of the managment and they are entitled to be absorbed permanently as employees of the management. The work in the instant case , no doubt , of perennial nature as the workment have been continuously working since 1988. It is for sufficient duration . So the alleged contractor's men will become the servant of the management . The management has some vested interest i.e. why the management is continuing the workmen since 1988 and in order to veil this reality the management is giving the name of several contractors every year. The management is doing violent injustice to the workmen. They have been deprived of the facilities and emoluments of regular employees since 1988. The intermediary has been introduced in order to deprive the workmen of their rights. The work is not of seasonal nature . It involves continuity in work so long as the LPG Plant functions as the engagement of the workmen is on necessity as they are trained in view of their long experience . Such workmen should not be deprived of their legitimate right . The Ministry of Labour has abolished contract labour system in the management but still the management is continuing the same process . It prima facedly proves that the management has some vested interest and it is exploiting the workmen and is engaged in unwholesome labour practice. There cannot be a more serious and glaring violation ofthe beneficial legislation of the Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970. The workmen are making continued efforts to achieve the purpose of the LPG Plant but they are deprived of their legitimate and due rights. The management is no doubt indulging in unfair labour practice . It ignored the recommendations of 11644

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] New Delhi , the 23rd September , 2005

S.O. 3858. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 77/ 1999) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court, Bangalore as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Indian Bank and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 23-09-2005 .

[No. L- 12011 /06/ 1999 - IR (B -II )]

C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT BANGALORE

DATED: 15th September, 2005

PRESENT : Shri A. R. SIDDIQUI

PresidingOfficer

C.R. NO . 77/1999

1991 respectively. They carried and discharged permanent nature of work as against permanent vacancies of sub- staff pending regularization of their services . They discharged their duties honestly and sincerely , drawing of daily wages of Rs . 30 ; that they have continuously worked till their services were illegally terminated in the month of August 1997; that the 1 party Union took up their cause with the management seeking regularization oftheir services and during the course of the conciliation the management rejected the claim ofthe 1 party workman to regularize their services . It regularized the services of other employees placed on par with the workman and adopted a different statistic against the workman and terminated their services without complying section 25 (f) ofthe 1.D. Act and therefore action of the Management amounts to unfair labour practice and is illegal invalid and viod ab - initio ; that they have been put to great hardship and mental agony having no other means of livelihood and therefore they requested this tribunal to pass award in their favour setting aside termination orders passed against them and reinstating them in service with full back wages , continue of service and other consequential benefits .

IParty

IIParty

The General Secretary, Indian Bank Employes Union , C/o Indian Bank , 10, K.G. Road, Bangalore-9

TheDy . General Manager (Admn . ), Indian Bank, Central Office , Personnel Department , PB No. 1384, Rajaji Salai, Chennai -600001 .

Appearances:

IParty

: Shri K.V. Sathyanaryana President

IIParty

: Shri Ramesh Upadhayaya Advocate

AWARD

The Central Government by exercising the powers conferred by Clause (d) of Sub - section 1 and Sub -section 2A of the Section 100 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 has referred this dispute vide Order No. L - 12011 /6/99 - IR(B- 11)dated04-/ 11-06-1999 for adjudication on the following schedule:

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Indian Bank in terminating the services of Sh . Jaganath Maruthi Pawar and Sh . Y. Yerriswamy is legal and justified? Ifnot, what relief the workmen are entitled? "

2. The case of the 1 party workmen , as made out in the Claim Statement . briefly, stated is that they ( Jaganath Pawarand Y. Yerriswamy ) were appointed as Temporary Sub-staff at Nippani and Bellary branches w.e.f. 1989 to

3. The case of the management in its Counter Statement is that the reference itself is not maintainable , firstly, for the reason that during the course of conciliation the dispute raised by the 1 party Union was with regard to the regularization of the services of the 1 party workmen without alleging illegal termination and therefore , the points of reference as they stand with regard to the alleged termination are against the case made out by the Union before the Conciliation Officer. The Management , while denying the contention of the workman that they worked asTemporary Sub- staff took up the plea that services of the workmen were being engaged purely on temporary basis as a Casual Labourer intermittently at the branches ofthe Bank. They were engaged on daily wages against the leave vacancies ofpermanent Sub - staff being paid daily wages of Rs . 30.00. At para 8 of the Counter Statement, the Management, gave out the details with regard to the procedure of appointment and regularization of services of temporary sub - staff. It contended that the temporary staff brought on panel satisfying Age and Educational Qualification will be considered for interview along with other candidates sponsored through the Employment Exchange and in case the candidate gets through the interview he will be appointed as a Permanent Sub - staff, that too , against an existing vacancy and since the I party workman were not among those temporary sub - staff on the panel and they simply worked as a Casual Labourers , question of considering them for permanent post did not arise. Therefore, the contention taken by the workmen with regard to the termination of their services is not tenable they being casual labourers being engaged by the Bank intermittently against the leave vacancies and in the result 11645 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/ आश्विन 30, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

there was no legal or illegal retrenchment in not following the provisions of the I. D. Act .

of the I. D. Act . He further contented that the testimony of WW I on the aforesaid point has been very much supported by the Pass Book entries of the year 1996 and as against this the statement of MW 1 has a hearsay evidence not based on any document evidence much less Muster Roll said to have been maintained by the Bank as admittedby MW 1 .

9. With regard to the maintainability of the reference the advocate submitted that during the conciliation not only point of regularization of services of the workmen was raised but it was made clear that they have been terminated from services in the meanwhile . Therefore, reference point is quite in order.

4. During the couse of trial , the management examinedMW1 working as a Manager (Personnel ) claimed toknow the facts ofthe case . His statement in Examination in chief relevant for the purpose is that in case ofvacancies arising for the sub- staff they are guided by the instructions issued by the Central Government and they will be seeking candidates for appointment through Employment Exchange and that the I party workmen have not been appointed going through the above said process . He stated that they have been appointed as casual Labourers utilising their services against the services of the Permanent employee going on leave being paid daily wages of Rs . 30.00 and their claim as a Temporary sub - staff is not correct.

10. After going through the records first of all , Ido not find any force in the arguments advanced for the Management that the present reference is not maintainable . If the Management was of the view that reference is not reflecting the real dispute involved during the course of conciliation and that it was bad in lawtheproper course available to the management was to challenge the same before the proper forum and not before this authority.

5. The I party Sh. Y. Yerriswamy on his part filed an effidavit by way of his Examination - in -chief, almost , reiterating the various averments made in their claim statement and therefore need not be reiterated. In his further Examination - in -chief he got marked four documents at Ex W- 1 to W -4 and made a statement that he had worked for aperiod of more than 240 days continuously apart from working with the management since 1991 .

6. I would like to come the aforesaid documents and the cross -examination of MW 1 and WW - 1 at appropriate time.

11. Secondly, aperusal of Conciliation report failure filedbefore this tribunal by the I party marked at Ex . W-4 and the letter of the I party Union to the conciliation office at Ex. W-3 would make it clear that not only the point of regularization services of the I party workmen were the issues involved but also the question of disengagement of the services of the I party workmen . Therefore, in my opinion there was nothing wrong on the part of the Government of India framing the present reference raising the point of alleged termination made by the Management .

7. Learned Counsel for the Management , vehemently, argued that the reference with regard to the alleged termination of the services of the I party workmen itself is not itself maintainable as the conciliation proceedings which resulted into the present reference were with regard to the regularization of their services and not for their alleged termination. His next contention was that there is no sufficient evidence produced by the workman to prove that they have worked for 240 days and more continuously that too immediately prior to the alleged date of their termination and that the testimony of WW 1 on this point cannot take to be legal and sufficient evidence. With regard to the Xerox copies of the Pass Book entries at Ex. W 2 produced by the I party workman, his argument was that they cannot be relied upon as a conclusive proof without any corroborative evidence .

12. As far as the contention of the Management that the I partyworkmen were not appointed as Temporary sub -staff and that their services were being utilised as a Casual Labourer intermittently, is concerned, there cannot be any controversy going by the very statement of I party in the Claim Statement that they were being paid dailywages ofRs . 30.00 being engaged as a Casual worker. Their claim that they were appointed as a Temporary sub- staff against the permanent vacancy is not tenable as admittedly, they were being paid daily wages ofRs. 30.00 and their engagement was not continuous .

13. Now, therefore , the only question to be looked into would be:

"Whether the I party workman namely Shri Y. Yerriswamyworked continuously for a period of 240 days and more immediately proceeding the date he was refused work so as to attract the provisions of Section 25 (b) and Section 25(f) of the I. D. Act read with Section 2(00) there off?" 4 8. Whereas , Learned counsel for the I party argued that the I partyworkman Shri Y. Yerriswamy. (He gave up the claim of the workman Jagannath Pawar by filling a Memo on the ground that he is no more) argued that he worked with the Management during the year 1991 to 1997 , intermittently not for a period of 240 days or more except in the year 1996 as entries in the pass book disclosed and therefore he shall be presumed to have worked continuously for a period of 240 days and more during the year 1996-97 and therefore , the action of the management in terminating the services amounts to retrenchment , there being no compliance of Section 25 (f) 11646

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ ASVINA 30, 1927

14. In his claim statement as well as in his affidavit not give rise to any adverse inference against the Management . Moreover, now it is well established principles of law that the burden to prove that the workman worked for 240 days and more immediately prior to his alleged termination is squarely cast upon workman himself and non production of any records much less Muster Roll will notbe coming to the help of the workman to discharge his burden [2002 LLR 339 and 2004 ( 107) FJR 267 SC cases referred].

15. Therefore , since the I party in this case has not fulfilled the condition of service of statutory period of one year as defined under Section 25 (B) of the ID Act, the action of the Management in refusing work to him will not attract the provisions of Section 25(F) of the ID Act read with Section 2(00) thereof. However, keeping in view the fact that the I party Shri Y Yerriswamy has been in the service of the Management though intermittently, right from the year 1991 till the year 1996 and admittedly his case was taken up by the I party union before the Management through conciliation and so also keeping in view the fact admitted by the Management through the branch manager in his letter dated 12-6-1996 brought on record before this tribunal at Ex W- 1 , it appears to me that ends ofjustice will be met if management provides him an employment on compassionate grounds on the same terms as he was engged prior to his terminaton . For my this observation , I take support of the passage in the said letter, as under :

"Regarding employment of Sri Yerriswamy there is no record with us for taking him on duty. However itis afact that the branch was hiring him whenever the regular staff went on leave and also some time to clear the pending work which left incomplete due to overload of work . He was employed more regularly since the opening of extension counter and promotion of our sub staff. The practice is still continuing.

Sri Yerriswamy belongs to SC category and has all the qualifications required for appointment of sub staff. He also fulfills the other norms . He was sponsored by Employment Exchange . Over the period he has worked hard and has learned all the duties of sub staff. As such he may be given appointment ."

16. Therefore , in the light of the above , though the reference fails for the reasons quoted above , the management is asked to consider the case of the I party workman Shri Y Yerriswamy on compassionate grounds as noted above. Hence , the following award .

ORDER

Reference stands dismissed in the light of my observation made aobve . No order to Costs .

though the I party stated that right from the year 1991 to 1997 he worked continuously and worked for 240 days and more in each calendar year but in his further Examination - in - chief, he came out with a version that he worked for a period of 240 days in the year 1996 apart from working with the management since the year 1991 . As noted above , we are now concerned as to whether he fulfilled the service condition of year i.e. , he worked for 240days and more during the 12 months calendar period immediately preceding the alleged date of termination so as to attract the above said provisions of the ID Act . If we go through the aforesaid S B account entries marked on behalf of the workman himself, it can be seen that during the relevant period i.e. , from August 1996 to August 1997 during which month he was refused work, his total working days hardly come to about 110 days . Theaforesaid entries are only up to the month of January 1997, that means to say that from February 1997 till August 1997 services of the I party were not at all utilized by the Management . That being the case , if we take into consideration his working days from August 1996 to January 1997, they come to about 110 days . In the result it becomes very crystal clear that he has not fulfilled the condition laid down under Section 25 (B) of the ID Act for having worked 240 days or more during a particular calendar year immediately preceding his alleged termination . Even for the sake of arguments if we take into account actual working days of the 1 party during the year 1996 itself i.e. , from January 1996 to December 1996, the period comes to hardly 188 days , therefore , he neither worked for a period of 240 days or more during the year 1996 nor worked for the above said period continuously during the year 1996-97 i.e. , during 12 calendar months immediately preceding the aforesaid alleged of termination . The very entries in the above said pass book make it clear that the I party never worked under the Management subsequent to January 1996 and therefore, on this count itself his contention that he was denied working during the month of August 1997 must fall to the ground. The arguments for the I party that though MW 1 admitted of having maintained Muster Roll for payment of wages to the I party which is held back and therefore adverse inference to be drawn against it is not deserving any merit. If we peruse the statement of MW 1 in his cross -examination , it can be gathered that the Management had the records of payments of wages tothe I party for the above said period while referring to the entries made in S. B. account of the I party. There was no suggestion on the part of the I party that he worked beyond the period of January 1996 till the month of August 1997 and that for that period he was paid wages and this payment entries were not made in his SB Account and that for that payment there was no records produced by the Management . Therefore , non production of Muster Roll for the period in which 1 party was not engaged will

A. R. SIDDIQUI , Presiding Officer 11647 [ भाग II-खण्ड 3(ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 26 सितम्बर, 2005

Disputes Act , 1947 to this court for adjudication . The dispute referred is: -

"Whether the punishment of reduction of basic pay by one stage, imposed on Shri K.Hashim for alleged misconduct by the Federal Bank Limited is justified? If not , what relief is the workman entitled to".

का. आ. 3859.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार फेडरेल बैंक लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , एर्नाकुलम के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आईडी-6 ऑफ 2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-09-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल.-12012/228/2004- आई.आर. ( बी-1 ) ] अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी

2. On notice , both sides entered appearance . The workman represented by General Secretary, Federal Bank Staff Union , Aluva filed a claim statement contending as follows: -

New Delhi , the 26th September, 2005

S.O. 3859. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( ID. No. 6 of 2005 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court , Ernakulam now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Federal Bank Ltd. , and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 23-09-2005 .

[No. L - 12012/228/2004 - IR (B - I) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM

Present : Shri P.L. Norbert , B.A, LL.B. , PresidingOfficer

(Tuesday the 13th day of September, 2005 /22nd Bhadrapadam 192.7)

L.D. 6 of 2005

The workman , Shri K.Hashim, while employed as Bankman (subordinate cadre ) at Badagara branch of Federal Bank , the management issued a memo on 31-7-2002 calling for explanation of the workman for certain misconduct and negligence , As part of disciplinary action , an enquiry was conducted. The Enquiry Officer found the workman guilty of misconduct and disciplinary authority imposed a punishment of reduction of basic pay by one stage . Finding of the Enquiry Officer is vitiated by bias and violation of principles of natural justice . The workman was denied a reasonable opportunity for defence. The punishment imposed is illegal and disproportionate . The evidence on record is insufficient to substantiate the charges levelled against the workman . The allegation raised against the workman amounts to minor misconduct only and as per the bipartite settlement the punishment ordered cannot be mulcted on the workman. Reduction of basic pay by one stage is a major punishment meant for major misconduct. The punishment is imposed without considering the past record of the workman and his familybackground. Therefore , the workman prays to set aside the finding of the Enquiry Officer and declare the punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority illegal and unjust.

: K. Hashim

Workman

Represented by the General Secretary Federal Bank Staff Union Bank Junction Aluva-683101

ByAdvocate Shri Ashok B. Shenoy.

Management

: The Chairman Federal Bank Limited HeadOffice Federal Towers Aluva-683 101

By Advocate ,

Shri P.

Shankaranarayanan

AWARD

3. The Management filed written statement contending that the Industrial Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain a dispute regarding punishment only except under Section 11 ( A) of Industial Disputes Act, i.e.when there is dismissal or discharge . The workman , Shri K. Hashim was entrusted with two treasury tokens regarding government cheques on 29-6-2002 at about 11.45 a.m. for presenting them in State Bank of Travancore , Bedagara Branch and getting the amount credited to the account of Federal Bank . The two tokens related to two cheques for an amount of Rs . 4,03,374 due to a customer of Federal Bank by name, Shri Lukose V. J. (a government contractor ) . The workman was late to the bank and hence could not encash the cheques and returned to the Federal Bank only by 1.30 p.m. When the Manager questioned the workman for the delay in returning to Federal Bank and for not executing the work entrusted to him, the workman turned furious , murmured something and went out of cabin closing the door with a bang . The Management had This is a reference made by Central Government under Section 10 ( 1 ) (d) and ( 2A) of Industrial

3016 G1 /05-20 11648

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

reason to believe that the workman had attended to his personal needs before going to SBT for surrendering the token and that is why he was late to reach SBT. Hence, disciplinary action was initiated against the workman.

Hewas given charge sheet and the Enquiry Officer wasappointed for conducting an enquriy. Coinplying with the principles of natural justice and the procedure for enquiry, the charges were enquired into by the Enquiry Officer. On aproper appreciation of the evidence on record and hearing the represenatives of both sides , a finding was entered to the effect that the workman was guilty of misconduct of gross negligence . Notice was given to the workmanproposing imposition ofpunishment . Thereafter, punishment of reduction of basic pay by one stage was ordered by the Disciplinary Authority . The workman filed anappeal to the Appelate Authority, the Assistant General Manager (P&HRD) . However , the finding of the Enquiry Officer and the punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority were upheld . The Enquiry Officer, Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority had properly considered the submissions made by the workman before passing the impugned orders . The enquiry was conducted ina fair manner complying with the principles of natural justice. The workman had failed to discharge his duties properly and diligently which resulted in a complaint by the customer of the bank. Since there is a tigla competition in the banking field the staff of the bank have to provide prompt serviceto the customer and behave well. Bank can not tolerate inefficient serviceto the customer . Therefore, the Management prays to confirm the finding and the punishment.

4. The points for consideration are:--

(1) Whether the Enquiry Officer has complied with principles of natural justice?

(2) Is the workman guilty of ( misconduct of) negligence and misbehaviour?

(3) Is the punishment proper ?

(4) Reliefs and costs .

5. No oral evidence was adduced by both parties . TheManagement produced domestic enquiry files and they are marked as Exts . M1 & M1 ( a).

6.My learned predecessor had passed an award in respect of the same dispute on 30-6-2005 . The award was published in the Official Gazette of India on 13-7-2005 . Howe.cr before the award became final and enforccable as per Section 17 ( A) of Industrial Disputes Act, the schedule of reference was amended and the altered second reference was received by this court on 8-7-2005 . Hence , notice was given to both sides and they were heard regarding the amended schedule of reference . The Management has no objection in adjudicating the matter once again on the basis of the second reference . It was occasioned due to the contention of the management , that the first reference challenging only the punishment portion of the disciplinary proceedings , was not maintainable

[PART II-SEC . 3(ii)] before this court except under Section 11 (A) of Industrial Disputes Act. The first schedule of reference reads as follows:-

"Whether the punishment of reduction of basic pay by one stage in the scale of pay, imposed to Shri K.Hashim for committing an act of misconduct of gross negligence , by Federal Bank Limited is Proportionate or not? If not , what is the appropriate punishment for the said misconduct or what are the relief entitled to the above workman ? "

The altered schedule of reference is as follows :-

"Whether the punishment of reduction of basic payby one stage , imposed on Shri K.Hashim , for alleged misconduct by the Federal Bank Limited is justified? Ifnot, what relief is the workman entitled to?"

7. In view of the amended schedule of reference challenging both the finding and punishment , the contention of management that the reference is not maintainable can no more stand. They also do not press this aspect in the light of the amended reference.

Point No. 1 :

8. Suffice it to refere to the proceedings of enquiry at pages 1,2 & 64 to 66 of Ext.MI to answer this point . It is specifically stated by the Enquiry Officer that the workman had received charge- sheet and show cause notice from the management , that he was given opportunity to file explanation, that he was represented by another staff of thedepartment inthe enquiry, that he was given opportunity to adduce evidence and that sufficient time was given to him to make submission at the end of enquiry. From the enquiry file, I am not able to find any violation of principles of natural justice or adoption of any unfair method in the enquiry. The workman was not able to point out any instance ofbias by the Enquiry Officer during enquiry. He has also not shown that the Enquiry Officer had any axe to grind against the workman. Other than the bare and mere allegation in the claim statement that the enquiry was not fairand principles of natural justice were not complied, no effort was made to substantiate the allegation . Therefore , I find that the enquiry was fair , that the procedure for enquiry was followed by the Enquiry Officer and that the principles ofnaturaljustice were fully complied with in the enquiry. The point is answered accordingly.

Point No. 2:

9. Accordingto the Management , the workman was sentto State Bank ofTravancore , Badakara Branch on 29-6-2002 at 11.45 a.m. for surrendering two tokens issued from Treasury ( while two govt . cheques were deposited) and crediting an amount of Rs . 4,03,374 in the Account of Federal Bank . Badakara Branch. However , the workman reached the SBT late and , therefore , could not get the token encashed and returned to Federal Bank only by 1.30 p.m. When questioned by the Manager about the reason for non -encashment of the tokens and delay in 11649 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

returning, the workman got wild and fanned out of the cabin closing the door with a bang and muttering something . The workman has denied the incident alleged bythe management. According to him, from 10.00 a.m. to 12.30p.m. on 29-6-2002 he was deputed to SBT for remitting some cash , thento post office and thereafter to the Treasury. The tokens mentioned by the management were handed over to him at 12.30 p.m. When he reached SBT he was told that the business hours for government transactions were over and it was not possible to accept the tokens . He was neither slow to reach SBT nor negligent in surrendering tokens . He had also not misbehaved to the Manager.

10. On the side of the Management three persons were examined before Enquiry Officer, all Managers of Federal Bank (MWs Ito 3) . Though all of them say that the business hours regarding government transactions in SBT is 12:30 p.m . ,DE2 ofext.MI leaves no room for doubt. It is a letter issued by SBT, Badakara Branch on 25-2-2003 to the effect that on saturdays bank transactions regarding government departments is between 10 a.m. and 12.00noon.

thetimeofdeparture of workman to SBT in ME14 & DE 1 of Ext . M1 . ME14 is T.A. application of another bank staff, Shri K.P. Raju . It is an admitted case that workman , Shri Hashim and Shri K.P. Raju together were sent to SBT for remitting cash in the morning before the disputed transaction. The time of departure as per ME14 is 10.10 a.m. DEl is copy of relevant folio of ' Cash In Transit Register ' . It shows that on 29-6-2002 , Shri K.P. Raju had left for SBT for remitting cash at 10.50a.m. That transaction was over before 11.00 a.m. Whether the departure of the workman for remitting cash in SBT was 10.10 a.m. or 10.50 a.m. makes no difference as far as the dispute in this case is concerned. Yet, I will say that on a close perusal of DE1 , it appears that thetime 10.10 a.m was altered into 10.50 by sometampering. In the ' minutes' (time) portion , originally " 10" was written with the tale of " I " curving towards "0". That is the manner In which the hour " 10 " is also written. The " 1 " of minutes " 10 " is changed into " 5" , However. the change in time is inconsequential so far this case is concerned. The evidence reveals that the workman . Hashim had left for SBT for surrendering tokens at 11.45 a.m. The tokenswere given to him sometime around 11.30 a.m. The Management has no complaint that there was any deliberate delay on the part of Hashim in proceeding to SBT from Federal Bank after the tokens were handed over to him . Admittedly, the time taken to reach State Bank of Travancore from Federal Bankby walk is 15 minutes at the most . He went by walk and not by vehicle . As per DE2 , 29-6-2002 being a Saturday, business hours for transactions ofgovernment departments is only up to 12.00 noon. Had the workman taken his normal time he would have reached SBT only by 12 noon. But, had he been earnest and zealous he couldhave reached the bank and surrendered the tokens at least five minutes before time . Shri Hashim is a bankman (subordinate cadre) who almost every day visits SBT and other banks for bank transactions. He must have been aware ofthe business hours on Saturdays . Had he been entrusted tokens at 12.30p.m. as claimed by him , definitely he would have flatly refused to take them knowing fully well that he could not have surrendered the tokens in SBT . The very fact that he accepted the tokens and proceeded to SBT itself is indicative of the fact that there was sufficient time to present the tokens . But, he proceeded leisurely and took hisown sweet time to reach SBT. The result was that the tokens could not be encashed putting the customer of Federal Bank in difficulty. The customer had to overdraw his account to the extent of Rs . 10,000 on 29-6-2002 . The workerwas back to Federal Bank only by 1.30p.m. Normally , he should have returned by 12.15-p.m. or latest by. 12.30 p.m. There is no explanation as to why he was so late to return to Federal Bank. The apprehension of the Management that the workman would not have reached SBT even at 12.00 noon is not without basis . As banks have several transactions between them almost every day and the staff of banks know each other , usually even if a cheque is presented five minutes late and ifthere is urgency , banks do oblige . In this case, either Shri Hashim would not have shown any urgency to get the tokens surrendered or 11. MW2 is Shri Babu Sebastian, Manager ( Admn . ) , Federal Bank Badakara Branch . He is not the person who either instructed the workman to go to SBT for surrendering the tokens or the person who handed over the tokens. Hence, his testimony before the Enquiry Offcer does not assume importance . MWI is Shri Jawahar Mathews , Manager, Federal Bank, Badakara Branch. He had instructed the workman to go to SBT and surrender tokens on 29-6-2002 .According to him, the workman Hashim went to SBT from Federal Bank at 11.45 a.m. and returned by 1.30 . p.m. MW3 is Shri Bijoy John , Assistant Manager Federal Bank, Badakara Branch . He is the custodian of tokens . The tokens which were received from Treasury sometime in April , 2002 were kept with him due to Treasury ban till 29-6-2002 . According to the witness , the tokens were handed over to the worker at 11-30 a.m. The worker left for SBT at 11.45 a . m. and returned by 1.15 p.m. Thus, both MWI and MW3 agree that the bankman went to SBT at11.45 a.m. The case of workman that tokens were given to him at 12.30 p.m. and he proceeded to SBT only thereafter does not appear to be true. Both MWI and MW3 say that Shri Hashim was first sent to SBT for remitting some cash atabout 10.15 a.m. on 29-6-2002 . He came back by 10.45 a.m. Then , he was sent to post office . He came back by 11.30 a.m. MWs 1 to 3 affirm that he was not sent to Treasury on that day by any of the officers of Federal Bank. They have also denied that the workman was asked to attend the counter -duty in Federal Bank on 29-6-2002 in the morning . No defence evidence was adduced except marking two documents ( DE1 and DE2 in Ext. MI ). Nothing was brought out in the cross - examination of MWs 1 to 3 to challenge their version süccessfully regarding this aspect. But, when MW2 was examined, much was asked about the time at which the workman was sent to SBT for remitting some cash. It was pointed out by the workman during cross- examination of MW2 that there is a discrepancy regarding 11650

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

APPENDIX

Witness for the Workman

: Nil

Witness for the Management

Exhibits for Workman

: Nil

Exhibits for the Management

M1-Statement of witnesses ( MW 1 to 3 ) and exts . (El to E5 , ME1 to ME14 & DE 1 & 2 )

M1 (a) -Miscellaneous papers of Enquiry.

नई दिल्ली, 26 सितम्बर, 2005

he would have been very late to reach . SBT . The possibility is for being late than reaching there at 12.00 noon. The workman had enough opportunity to adduce evidence either by examining any of the bank people in SBT or showing the records regarding Treasury transactions which he claims was the last transaction he didbefore going to SBT for surrendering tokens . But, he made no attempt to adduce such evidence on his part . The inference is that there is some fault on his part and that fault is the delay in reaching SBT and executing the work entrusted to him . He was also negligent in returning to Federal Bank on time.

का. आ. 3860.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार विहित एण्ड एक्सेल प्लान्ट के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, बंगलौर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आईडी-80/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-09-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल.- 41012/45/99- आई.आर. ( बी-1 ) ] अजय कुमार , डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 26th September, 2005 12. The Management has a case that the workman misbehaved to the Manager when the latter questioned theworkman for failure to complete the bank transactions and for the delay in returning to Federal Bank . The incident of turning wild and expression of anger took place inside the cabin of MW 1. Naturally others would not have noticed as there was no loud exchange of words . There is no possibility for MW2 and MW3 to watch the conduct of Shri Hashim while in the cabin of MW1 . Nobody else was examined to prove the misbehaviour of Hashim towards MW1 . In the absence of sufficient evidence , it to find that the workman is guilty of misbehaviour . However , I have already observed that he is guilty of ( misconduct of) negligence . Pointis answered accordingly.

Point No. 3

S.O. 3860.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( ID . No. 80/99) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Bangalore now as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Wheel & Axle Plant and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 23-09-2005.

[No. L-41012/45/99- IR(B -I) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

13. The punishment imposed on the workman is reduction ofbasic pay by one stage . My predecessor, while passing an award regarding the same matter on 30-6-2005, had found that deparring of one increment for six months without cumulative effect is sufficient and proportionate to the guilt. There is no reason to strike a different note considering the entire circumstarices of this case and especially in view of the fact that there is no misbehaviour but only negligence on the part of workman . Held accordingly.

Reliefs and costs (See award portion)

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, BANGALORE

Dated: 13th September, 2005

Present: Shri A.R. SIDDIQUI , PresidingOfficer

C.R. No. 80/99

IParty

IIParty

Shri N. Ramachandra Reddy,

S/o . Narayana Reddy, Bettachalasur (PO) , JalaHobli ,

Inthe result, an award is passed finding that there is negligence on the part of workman, Shri K. Hashim in the token transaction. Taking into consideration that there is no misbehaviour on the part of workman and in the absence ofanypast record of disciplinary action, I find that reduction ofbasicpay by one stage for six months without cumulative effect, is sufficient and proper punishment . All benefits due to workman withheld during the disciplinary proceedings will be given back to him, other than the aforesaid punishment. The parties will suffer their costs. Theaward will take effect one month after its publication in the official Gazette

The General Manager, Wheel & Axle Plant, Yelahanka, Bangalore-64

Nr. ShaniMahatma Temple ,

Bangalore-57

AWARD

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and passed by me on this the 13th day of September, 2005.

P.L. NORBERT, Presiding Officer

I. The Central Government by exercising the powers conferredby clause (d) ofsub-section 2A of the Section 10 11651 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has referred this dispute vide order No. L -41012/45/99 /IR (B -I) dated the 17th June, 1999 for adjudication on the following schedule:

SCHEDULE

not press his application, 1A No. 2 claiming Interim Relief and on merits he submitted that since the charges of misconduct have remained to be proved by the Second Party against the first party, award may be passed setting aside the termination order passed against him . Learned Counsel for the Second Party who was present before this tribunal, had no arguments to advance and therefore , the matter is posted this day for award.

"Whether the termination of Shri Ramachandra Reddy bythemanagement ofWheel & Axle Plant isjustified? Ifnot, to what relief the workman is entitled to ?"

2.The first party in his Claim Statement challenged the enquiry proceedings conducted against him by the SecondParty on the ground that he was not given sufficient and reasonable opportunity to defend himself and that they suffered from the violation of Principles of Natural Justice . He also challenged the enquiry findings holding him guilty of the charges of misconduct of absenteeism alleging that they were not based upon sufficient and legal evidence . He challenged the order terminating his services as illegal and in valid based on the findings of the enquiry officer and that punishment of termination was quite excessive and harsh keeping in view the gravity of the misconduct alleged against him .

6.The case of the first party as made out, in the Claim Statement, on merits briefly , stated is that he joined the services ofthe Second Party as a casual employee ondaily wage basis w.e.f. 25-1-79 and was discharging his dutiesto the satisfaction of the higher authorities and his services cameto be confirmed as Skilled Artisan w.e.f. 1-1-84. He was promoted as Skilled Artisan Grade- III w.e.f. 1-1-89. Then he was promoted as Skilled Grade- I M.M.V. vide order dated 29-12-1995 in the pay scale of Rs . 1320-2040. However, he was illegally removed from service vide order dated 4/6th February 1998 , on the allegations that he remained unauthorisedly absent from duty from 1-6-97 to 3-6-97, 6-6-97 (Α/N) , 13-6-97 (F/N) , 14-6-97, 16-6-97 (F.N. ) and on 20-6-97 and onwards , continuously . Accordingly he was served with the charge sheet dated 25-7-97 and his explanation since was not found satisfactory, the Disciplinary Authority appointed the enquiry officer to go into the charges and ultimately on the basis of the findings ofthe enquiry officer holding him guilty of the aforesaid charges of misconduct , he was removed from service by the impugned punishment order terminating his services .

3. The management in their counter statement refuted the various allegations made by the first party on the aforesaid points and maintained to say that enquiry proceedings were held in accordance with law following the principles of natural justice and that enquiry findings were based on sufficient and legal evidence and that termination order passed against the first party was quite valid and legal and the punishment was quite proportionate to the gravity of the misconduct committed by him .

7. The case of the Second Party as noted above, was to the effect that when the charges of misconduct stood proved against the first party by way of enquiry report submitted by the enquiry officer , the Disciplinary Authority terminated his services by way of impugned punishment order which was quite legal and correct and punishment was quite proportionate keeping in view the gravity of the charges and misconduct committed by him.

4. Keeping in view the respective contentions ofthe parties with regard to the validity and fairness or otherwise ofthe enquiry proceedings , this court framed a Preliminary Issue on the point and by its order dated 18-10-04 recorded a finding to the effect that enquiry held against the first party by the Second Party was not fair and proper and the matter came to be posted for hearing ofthe learned counsels onmerits.

8.Now as seen above, the enquiry conducted against the first party by the Second Party is held to be not fair and properand the application filed by the management to prove the charges of misconduct leveled against the first party came to be dismissed by this tribunal , therefore , there remained nothing on record to substantiate the charges of misconduct leveled against the first party . In the result findings of the enquiry holding the first party workman guilty of the charges and the resultant impugned punishment order passed against the first party have to be declared as illegal and invalid and accordingly are set aside.

9. Now coming to the relief of reinstatement, back wages and other consequential benefits , learned counsel for the first party submitted that since the order terminating the services of the first party is illegal , the natural consequences to follow would be his reinstatement in service with all back wages and other attendant benefits. As far as the relief of reinstatement is concerned, it has to begranted for the simple reason that impugned punishment 5. Learned counsel for the Second Party filed an application at IA No. 1 under Section 11 of the ID Act requesting this tribunal to permit the Second Party to lead fresh evidence to prove the charges of misconduct levelled against the first party as the enquiry proceedings held against the first party are held to be not fair and proper. The first party resisted the above said application contending that the right to lead evidence on merits of charges , in case , the enquiry was set aside , since has not been reserved by the management while filing its counter statement, application cannot be allowed. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties , this tribunal by its order dated 25-7-05 dismissed the above said application . Once again the case came to be posted to hear the counsels representing the parties giving the date 17-8-2005, on which date learned counsel for the second party remained absent and the case came to be posted on 5-9-2005 on which date the learned counsel for the first party submitted that he did 11652

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

order has been held to be illegal and is liable to be set aside.

10. Comingto the relief of the back wages , in order to deny the reliefof back wages , it was incumbent on the part of the management to establish before this tribunal that the first party has been gainfully employed during the periodhe was out of the service of the management. Neither any such standwas taken by the management in its Counter Statement nor any evidence has been produced before this tribunal to substantiate the fact that the first party has been gainfully employed. Unfortunately, the first party has also not stepped into the witness box to suggest that he has not been gainfully employed during the period hewas awayfrom the service of the management . Therefore, having regard to the latches both on the part of the management as well as on the part of the first party on the gainful employment ofthe first party, it appears to me that ends of justice will be met if the first party is to be reinstated in service with 50 % of the back wages from the date of his termination till the date of his reinstatement with all consequential benefits including continuity of service . Hence the following award is passed.

AWARD

The management is directed to reinstate the first party in service to the post he was holding at the time of termination with 50 % of the back wages from the date of terminationtill the date ofreinstatement with continuity of service and all other consequential benefits . No order to cost.

(Dictated to PA transcribed by her corrected and signedby me on 13th September , 2005).

A. R. SIDDIQUI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 26 सितम्बर, 2005

का. आ. 3861.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार कोंकण रेलवे कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण / श्रम न्यायालय बंगलौर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई डी 21/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-09-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल.-41012/30/2002- आई.आर. ( बी-1 ) ] अजय कुमार , डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi, the 26th September , 2005 S.O. 3861. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( ID. No. 21 / 2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court , Bangalore now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Konkan

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] Railway Corporation Ltd. and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 23-09-2005 .

[No. L -41012/30/2002- IR (B -I) ]

AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, BANGALORE

Dated, the 5th September , 2005

Present : Shri A.R. SIDDIQUI Presiding Officer

C.R. No. 21/2002

IParty

II Party

Sri Ganapathi S. Bhat, C/o. Sri Suray Ishwar Bhat, Driver, S & T, KRCL , Chitrigi, Ganpathi Temple Road, KUMTA - 581 343.

The Regional Railway Manager , Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd. Regional Ofice, Near Railway Station , Shriwad, KARWAR- 581306

Appearances

IParty

Shri PT Hebbar President

IIParty

Mrs. Shwetha Anand Advocate

AWARD

1. The Central Government by exercising the powers conferredby Clause (d) of sub -section ( 1 ) and Sub - section 2A of the Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has referred this dispute vide Order No. L -41012/30/2002/ IR(B- I) dated the 26-4-2002 for adjudication on the following schedule:

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Konkan Railway Corporation Limited in dismissing the workman Sri Ganapathi S. Bhat, ex. driver from service for the alleged acts of intoxication and for taking out the vehicle without the permission is justified? If not, what relief the said workman is entitled? " 2. A Charge Sheet dated 21-05-1999 was issued to the I party by the Management with the allegations as shownbelow:

"Sub-para a : While working with S.E. (S&T) Karwar, on20-05-1999 he has taken the vehicle without any permission from the site, at Noshikoti Gate at C.H. 571 and driven the vehicle in drunken condition causing damage to the vehicle of Rs . 10,000 and caused inconvenience to the Railway Working .

Sub -parab : Shri Ganapathi S. Bhat, driver while performinghis official duties, has violated the service 11653 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

conduct rule by taking the vehicle without permission and also has violated the road traffic rules by driving the vehicle in intoxicated condition. "

6. Now, therefore, in the light ofthe above said, order, the I party in his Memo has requested this tribunal to close the proceedings making it further clear that the above said order has been implemented by the Management and he has already been reinstated in service. Therefore , in the light of the above , following award is passed:

ORDER

Reference on hand is disposed of in the light ofthe above said memo filed by the I party. It shall form part ofthe award. No order to costs.

A.R. SIDDIQUI , Presiding Officer 3. In the claim statement I party challenged the DomesticEnquiry proceedings conducted against him as well as findings of the enquiry on the ground that they suffered from violation of principles ofnatural justice and were illegal and arbitrary. Consequent, upon the I Party requested this tribunal to set aside the Enquiry Report dated 29-09-1999 as illegal, arbitrary and in the result to set aside the order dated 31-10-1999 removing him from services oftheManagement seeking relief and restatement and all other consequential benefits.

नई दिल्ली, 26 सितम्बर, 2005

का. आ. 3862.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण सं. 1 , धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 7 ऑफ 1999 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को23-09-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[ सं. एल. - 12012/117/1998- आई.आर . ( बी-1 ) ] अजय कुमार , डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 26th September, 2005 4. The management resisted the claim on the ground that a fair and reasonable opportunity was given to the I party and principles ofnatural justice were adhered to in conducting the Domestic Enquiry against the I party. It further took up the contention that enquiry report holdig the workman guilty of the charges has been based upon sufficient and legal evidence supported by valid and cogent reasoning's and that the order passed by the management removing him from service was quite proper and legal and punishment was also proportionate and commensurate keeping in view the gravity of the misconducted committed byhim.

S.O. 3862.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 7 of 1999) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. I , Dhanbad now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the the employers in relation tothemanagement ofState Bank of India and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 23-09-2005 .

[No. L- 12012/ 117/98 -IR (B- I) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

5. During the course of trial , a preliminary issue on Domestic Enquiry was framed and parties were called upon to lead evidence on the point . When the matter came to the stage of hearing of arguments , on 28-06- 2005, learned counsel for the management submitted that the I party has already been reinstated into service and settlement will be reported in the meantime . In the meanwhile , learned counsel for the I party on 25-02-2005 filed a memo along with the Xerox copy of the order dated 31-10-2004 passed by the Chief Personnel Officer on the appeal preferred by the I party against the above said punishment order . The order passed by the Appellate Authority relevant for the purpose at para 3 runs is as under :

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. I, DHANBAD

Inthematter of a reference U/s 10(1)(d) (2A) of L.D. Act Reference No. 7 of 1999

"After considering both the Minor Charge sheet dated 22-06-1999 and Major Charge sheet dated 21-05-1999 and the relevant records and facts ofthe case, the Appellate Authority has decided to set aside the Major penalty proceedings and to change the Minor penalties as under :

Parties : Employers in relation to the manage- ment of State Bank of India . AND

(a) The complete pecuniary loss caused due to damage top the vehicle shall be recovered from your salary.

TheirWorkmen

Present : Shri Sarju Prasad, Presiding Officer

Appearances:

: None

Forthe Employers

: None

For the Workman

(b) The orders of removal from service is set aside and a penalty of withholding of increments for two years under Rule 8(6 ) is imposed for indiscipline and violation of service conduct rules which was also one of the charges . This will not have the effect ofpostponing of future increments ."

State: Jharkhand

Industry: Coal 11654

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] Dated, the 7th September, 2005

AWARD

Present : Shri A.R. Siddiqui Presiding Officer

C.R. No. 49/00

IParty

IIParty

Shri Sekhar I Benakatti , The General Manager,

Gonnagar Post,

Telecom,

By order No. L- 12012/ 117/98/IR(B - I) dated 12-1-1999 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 :

Ramadurga Taluk,

D/o Telecom Gurwarpath,

Belgaum-06

Tilakwadi , Belgaum-06

AWARD

"Whether the action of the State Bank of India Management Ranchi ignoring the seniority of Sri Lallan Singh while making promotion from Sr. Clerk to Head Clerk as also Making discrimination in posting is right and justified ? If not, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to?"

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-40012/ 122/2000/IR(DU) dated 30th June 2000 for adjudication on the following schedule :

SCHEDULE

2. This reference case is of the year 1999. Despite notice sent to the parties , neither the written statement has been filed on behalf of the workman nor anyone has appeared in this case , even today, to take any step. Therefore, it seems that neither the concerned workman nor the sponsoring union is interested to contest the case .

"Whether the action of the management of Department of Telecom, in terminating the services of Shri Sekhar I , Benakatti is justified ? If not, towhat relief the workman is entitled?"

3. Under such circumstances , I render a ' No Dispute ' Award in this reference case .

SARJU PRASAD , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 27 सितम्बर , 2005

का. आ. 3863. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार दूर संचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , बंगलौर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 49/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-09-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल.-40012/122/2000- आई.आर. (डी.यू. ) ]

कुलदीप राय वर्मा , डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 27th September , 2005

S.O. 3863. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 49/2000 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Labour Court , Bangalore now as shown in Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management ofDeptt . of Telecom and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 27- 09-2005,

[No. L-40012/ 122/2000 - IR (DU ) }

KULDIP RAI VERMA , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

2. The case of the first party workman as made in out in the Claim Statement, in brief, is that he was appointed as a Casual Mazdoor on daily wage basis by the management w.e.f. 25-1-1996. He was being paid daily wage of Rs . 28/- and he was discharging duties sincerely and diligently under the control of Incharge Tele- communication Centre , Saundatti which office used to send letter to the Sub- Divisional Engineer , Saundatti being the drawing authority giving out the details of the number ofthe days worked by the first party in a particular month and he was getting his wages by putting his signature on a form called ACG17. He worked continuously from 25-1-1996 to 19-4-1999 . as on the date he was refused work by the management w.e.f. 20-4-1999 His daily wages were paid at the rate of Rs . 49 per day; that the management without any reason and without issuing any memo or notice refused work to the first party on 20-4-1999 and his request to provide him work made several times subsequent thereto was not considered by the management . The first party, further, contended that during the above said period he has worked continuously for more than 240 days in each calender year therefore , the action of the management in refusing work to him amounts to retrenchment within the meaning of Section 2( 00) of the ID Act and since the management has failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of Section 25F of the ID Act, its action amounts to illegal retrenchment tantamounting to illegal termination of the services and therefore, he is entitled to be reinstated in service with full back wages , continuity of service and other consequential benefits.

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT , BANGALORE

Dated, the 14th September, 2005

3. The case of the management in its Counter Statement is of total denial . It denied that the first party was appointed by the management as a Casual Mazdoor on 25-1-96 and he worked continuously with the 11655 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

management from 25-1-1996 to 19-4-1999 and that he worked continuously for a period of 240 days and more in any of the calender year during the aforesaid period . Therefore, the management contended that since the first party did not work continuously for a period of 240 days and more in any of the calender year , the action of the management in refusing work to him does not amount to retrenchment and the management was not obliged to comply with the provisions of Section 25F of the ID Act and therefore, the reference is liable to be rejected .

days in any of the calendar year is liable to be rejected for the simple reason that he did not know the facts of the case personally and that at no point of time first party worked under him and he was also unable to say that the first partyworkedunder the management during the period from 1996 to 1999 and that he worked for 240 days and more in any of the calendar year . He argued the fact that the first party worked for 240 days and more during the period of 12 calendar months immediately prior to termination of his services has been established by him in the aforesaid payment receipts and whereas , not a scrap ofpaper/Muster Roll was produced by the management despite the requests made by the first party and therefore, it is to beheld that the first part has fulfilled the conditions ofone year service as defined under Section 25B of the ID Act and since his services have been brought to an endwithout the compliance of Section 25F of the ID Act, he is entitled to the relief of reinstatement and other consequent benefits . After having gone through the records I find substance in the arguments advanced by the firstparty.

4. During the course of trial, the management examined one witness as MW1 , who was working at Sub- Divisional Office , Telecom, Belgaum and got marked one documentat Ex- M1 namely a circular . His statement in examination chief relevant for the purpose is that the first party was working as a Casual Labourer on temporary basis for a short period and he was not appointed on regular basis being issued any regular appointment order. He denied that the first party worked continuouslyfrom 25-1-96 to 19-4-1999 and he stated that as per the above said Circular at Ex . Ml issued by the management had office, they have stopped engaging casual labourers and they have not maintained any Muster Roll. I would like to refer to his statement in cross examination as and when found relevant and necessary.

5.The first party on his part filed an affidavit evidence almost reiterating the various averments made in his claim statement and got marked Xerox copies of wage payment receipts (forty in numbers ) hanging between the period from January 1996 to May 1999 marked at Ex. W1 series. His statement in cross examination is also to be referred at appropriate time.

6. Learned counsel for the management in his written argument once again reiterated the contentions taken in the Counter Statement but not denying the fact that the first party was being engaged by the management as a Daily Mazdoor against the leave vacancy in exigency of the services . It was also contended that the first partydid not work for 240 days or more continuously in any of the calender year . In support of his argument learned counsel relied upon decisions reported in AIR 2005 SCW 301 and AIR 2005 SCW 1370 .

8. The statement offirst party made in his examination chiefby way of affidavit evidence that he worked during theperiod from 1996 till 1999 and also worked continuously foraperiod more than 240 days in each calendar year has not been very much shaken in his cross examination for the management except to suggest that he did not work with the management as stated by him . In fact a suggestion is also made to the first party stating that he was not at all engaged by the management even as a casual worker and that he was being engaged on daily wage basis whenever work was available . The oral evidence led on behalf of the management by way of statement of MW1 is again not sufficient and adequate to meet the case of the first party. On the other hand MW 1 in his examination chief admitted that the first party being engaged as a casual labourer under contingency for shorter period and there was no appointment order in his favour. In his cross examination MWI admitted that he did not work at Saundatti, Telecommunication Centre during the year 1996 and therefore, he is not aware whether the first party worked there during the said year. He has shown his ignorance if first party worked with the management i.e. with Tele Communication Centre , Saundatti during the period from 25-1-96 to 19-4-99 and that he worked for a period of 240 days and more continuously in each calendar year during the said period. Therefore the above said statement of MW1 in his cross examination will not weaken the case of the first party , helping the case of the management to say that he was not working with the management during the aforesaid period and he worked for 240 days and more in each calendar year. Moreover, in this case the moot question to be decided would be Whether the first party worked continuously for a period of 240 days and more during the period of 12 calendar months immediately preceding the date he was refused work by the management.

7. Whereas , the learned counsel for the first party argued that the fact that the first party was in the services of the management during the period from 1996 to 1999 has not been denied and the evidence of the management witness on this point is quite inadequate and insufficient to speak on the said point . He submitted that the statement of first party in his examination chief that he worked for 240 days and more in each of the Calendar year first of all has not been challenged and controverted inhis statement in cross examination for the management and secondly it has been very much corroborated in the aforesaid payment receipts marked before this tribunal at EX. WI series. He submitted that the statement of MW1 denying the fact that the first party did not work for 240

3016G1/05-21 11656

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

question must be in the Affirmative . Since the firstparty worked for 240 days and more in 12 calendar months immediately preceding the date on which he was refused work, he has fulfilled the condition of having worked for a period of one year as definded under Section 25B of the ID Act . His services therefore , could have been terminated by way of retrenchment as provided under Section 2 (00) of the ID Act by complying with the mandatory provision of Section 25F of the ID Act . Since , admittedly the management did, not comply with the provision of Section 25F of the ID Act its action tantamount to retrenchment as defined under Section 2(00) of the ID Act and since there was no compliance of Section 25F of the ID Act the action of the management tantamounts to illegal temination and therefore, it is liable to be set aside as illegal and void abinitio . In the result the natural corollary would be the reinstatement of the workman into the service of the management .

10. The next question now to be decided wouldbe 'whether the first party is entitled to other reliefs such as back wages , continuity of service and other consequential benefits' . In order to deny the back wages claimed by the first party the management was duty bound to place on record some evidence to suggest that he has been gainfully employed during the period he was out of the service of the management . There was no attempt made onthe part of the management to lead evidence on this point nor the statement of MWI speaks to the said fact . Although the first party in his Claim statement made no such claim but in his affidavit evidence he came out with the everment that ever since the refusal of employment by the management he has not been gainfully employed. Therefore keeping in view the nature of the dispute the nature of the work the first party was carrying out as a Casual Labourer and the fact undisputed that as on the date he was refused work , he was being paid daily wage of Rs . 49, it appears to me that ends ofjustice will be met ifthe first party is awarded with 50 % of the backwages from the date of termination till the date of reinstatement without continuity of service and other consequential benefits . Accordingly the reference is answered and following award is passed .

AWARD

The management is directed to reinstate the first party workman in its service providing him the work on casual basis hewas carrying out at the time of termination with50% back wages from the date of termination till the date of reinstatement without continuity of service and other consequential benefits. The management is at liberty to terminate the service of the first party in accordance withlaw.

(Dictated to PA transcribed by her corrected and signedby me on 14th September , 2005) .

9. As seen above as far as the management is concerned, the evidence pressed into service in the statement of MW1 is of no help in disproving the contention of the first party on the said point . There is again no document such as attendance register or muster roll as such produced by the management in meeting the case of the first party . As noted above the statement of first party that he worked continuously for 240 days and more during the year 1996 to 1999 and in each calendar year he worked for 240 days and more has not been shaken in his cross examination for the management . However, the documents at Ex. W1 series produced on behalf of the first party , will not support his contention that in each calendar year from 1996 to 1999 he worked for a period of 240 days and more but those payment receipts filedby the first party would come to his help in substantiating the fact that he worked for 240 days and more during the period of 12 calendar months immediately preceding the date he was refused work by the management. A perusal of the payment of receipts would reveal that during the month ofApril the first party worked for a period of 26 days , in the month of May 27 days , June 28 days , July 30 days , August 27 days , September 28days , October 27 days , November 27 days , December 30 days January 23 days and in the month of April he worked for 15days and therefore, the total period of working days comes to 288 days from the month of April, 1988 till the month of April, 1999 during which month he was refused work by the management. These are the Xerox copies of the payment receipts bearing the signature of the Manager , Telecommunication Centre, Saundatti and therefore , there are no reasons not to act upon those receipts showing the , working days of the first party in the aforesaid 12 months relevant for the purpose.A casual suggestion to first party was made on behalf of the management by saying that these are the documents fabricated by him. This suggestion has to be discarded on his face itself as almost all the payment receipts are under the letter head of department of Telecommunication, Manager , Telecom, Saundatti and bearing the signatures of the Manager , Telecom Centre Saundatti with his official designation and seal . Therefore, when we take into consideration the aforesaid payments of receipts showing the payment of daily wages as well as the days worked by the first party, it becomes crystal clear that during the period of 12 calendar months from April, 1998 toApril , 1999 which is the period immediately preceding the date of termination of the services of the first party, he worked for a period of about 288 days . In other words he worked for 240 days and more in the abovesaid period thereby fulfilling the requirements of Section 25B of the ID Act. In the result the next question to be considered wouldbe Whether the action of the management in refusing work to the first party amounts to retrenchment as defined under Section 2 ( 00 ) of the ID Act and it tantamounts to illegal retrenchment and illegal termination there being no compliance of Section

25F of the ID Act . The plain answer to the above said

A. R. SIDDIQUI , Presiding Officer 11657 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 27 सितम्बर, 2005

terminating the services of Shri V. AnnappayaHolla w.e.f. 10-6-88 ? If not , what relief the workman concerned is entitled to ?"

का.आ. 3864- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार रीजनल प्रोविडेन्ट फंड कमिश्नर के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , बैंगलौर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 31/91 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42012/157/90- आई आर ( 'डीयू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 27th September , 2005

S.O. 3864.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 31/91) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Bangalore now as shown in the annexure , in the industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to themanagement of Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 27-9-2005.

2. The case of the first party, as made out, in the Claim Statement, briefly, stated is that he was appointed as aManager of Bhavishya Nidhi Departmental Canteen attached to the office of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner,Balmatta, Mangalore (hereinafter called the Second Party) and his work was mainly clerical in nature being paid total emoluments ofRs. 1200 as monthly salary. Hisservices were abruptly terminatedby the Second Party by order dated 12-5-1998 without assigning any reason andwithout complying the provisions of ID Act, The first partyhas put in more than 240 days of service and therefore, hewas entitledto the protection of provisions of IDAct and in the result his termination amounts to illegal retrenchment in the absence ofcompliance ofthe provisions of the ID Act . that even otherwise the first party has renderedunblemished service and there was no justification forthe Second Party to terminate his services therefore, theact ofthe Second Party amounts to unfair labour practice tainted with malafides . Therefore , he is entitled to be reinstated in service with back wages and other consequential benefits.

[No. L-42012/ 157/90- IR (DU)]

KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM-LABOURCOURT, BANGALORE

Dated: 9th September,2005

PRESENT:

Shri A.R. SIDDIQUI , Presiding Officer

C.R. No. 31/91

II PARTY

I PARTY

TheRegional Provident Fund Commissioner,

V. Annappayya Holla (Since deceased,

Balmatta, Mangalore

represented by his L Rs. ) , Smt. Narayani, Master Anautha, Master Prathviraj Residing at C/o P. N. Suresh , Palaneer House Meenakalya Post, Panambur

AWARD

3. The management by its Counter Statement however, contended that the first party is not a ' workman' and therefore, this court has no jurisdiction to decide the case,as provisions of the ID Act are not applicable to the facts ofthe case. While admitting the fact that the first partywas appointed as a Temporary Manager, on probation to the above said canteen attached to the office of the Second Party as per order dated 13-7-1987 , it denied the allegation that his work was mainly clerical in nature . It contendedthat the appointment of the first party was in managerial cadre and his duty was to manage the affairs of the Canteen and to control his subordinates . It contended that the services of the first party have been terminatedas per the agreement after the notice dated 12-5-88 and therefore, provisions of ID Act are not attracted . The management further denied the allegation that the first party has put in more than 240 days of service and his services were unblemished and that the Second Party had no justification in terminating his services. It contended that hewas appointed purely on temporary basis on probattion in managerial cadre as per the terms agreed by him as mentioned in Clause 6 and 8 of the Memorandum dated 13-7-1987 . At para 8 , it contended that the Second Party felt that the Canteen could not afford the services of the full time manager because of the financial constraints and the managing committee of the Canteen in its meeting held on6-5-88 decided to dispense with the services of the first party. Therefore, his termination was as per Clause 8 ofthe saidmemorandum after giving one month's notice and in the result the reference is liable to be rejected.

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-42012/ 157/90 - IR (DU) dated 3rd June, 1991 for adjudication on the following schedule:

SCHEDULE

4. Keeping in view the contention taken by the Second Party that the first party is ' not a workman ' as definedunder the ID Act and that he is not entitled to the reliefs sought for, this tribunal framed the following two additional issues :-

"Whether the management of Regional Provident Fund Commissioner , Mangalore is justified in 11658

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005 /ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] "(i) Whether the first party is a workman under the ID Act?

(ii) Whether the first party is entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for?"

written arguments vehemently contended that the first party undisputedly was appointed as a Manager and was discharging the duties of the Manager exercising his managerial powers in looking after the affairs ofthe Canteen and supervising 3 workers working in the canteen . Therefore, he is not a ' workman' .

5. During the course of trial , the management examined thethen Assistant Commissioner, Provident Fund, Mangalore as MW1 and got marked documents at Ex. M1 toM4. Ex. Mi is the memorandum/ order of appointment of the first party, Ex. M2 is the duty joining report by the first party, Ex. M3 is the notice of termination and Ex. M4 is the order terminating the services of the first party. His statement in examination chief relevant for the purpose is that the appointment of the first party as a Manager was to supervise the subordinates and to manage the affairs of the Canteen ona temporary basis and the management committee took the decision not to have a manager for the Canteen since it was running under loss and therefore , now the management committee itself is looking after the affairs of the said Canteen. Lastly he stated that the services of the first partyhave been terminated as per Ex . M1 and that the first party did not work for more than 240 days in the Canteen and that he is not a workman . I would like to come to his statement in cross examination, a little later .

6. The first party examined himself as WW1 and got marked 5 documents as Ex. W1 to W5 . Ex . Wl is the notice to show the duty hours of the Canteen staff including the first party as a Manager. Ex. W2 & W3 are the notices issued by the Second Party for the interview held for the post of the said manager. Ex. W4 & W5 are the office memorandum of the Govt . of India , Ministry of Finance Department of Economic Affairs (Budget Division) dated 24-1-92 and 29-1-92 by which it is made clear that the employees of the Non Statutory departmental canteens are to be treated as Central Government servants entitled to all benefits which are available to Central Government servants . In his examination chief while referring to the aforesaid documents filed by him , the first party stated that he was selected for the above said post during the interview held by the Second Party. On 13-7-87 he received a regular appointment order at Ex. Ml and joined duty on 16-7-1987 . He stated that though he was designated as Manager but had no managerial powers. His nature ofwork was to issue canteen coupons to the workers and then to intimate the concerned department for reduction from their salaries.He used to get the necessary goods for the canteen with the approval of canteen Secretary which post was held by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner and it is he who used to approve the shop from where he ( the first party) should get the goods. He was also writing daily cash book of the Canteen and was being paid a grooss amount of Rs . 1200 per month . I would like to refer his statement in cross examination as and when found relevant and necessary.

7. Now, therefore , in the light of the above , the first question to be decided as per the above said additional issue No. 1 is ' whether the first party comes under the definition of ' workman ' as defined under the provisions of IDAct or not. Learned counsel for the management in his

8. Whereas , the learned counsel for the first party argued that the mere designation as a Manager will not fulfill the requirements suggesting that the first party had managerial powers particularly, keeping in view the nature ofthe work he was carrying out in the canteen and in view of the fact that statement of first party with regard to the nature ofhis work has not been controverted or challenged by the Second Party in his cross examination. I find substance in his arguments . From the above said statement ofthe first party in his examination chief referred to supra which has not been very much shaken in his statement in cross examination, one cannot appreciate the contention taken by the Second Party that first party had managerial powers having control and supervision over the canteen workers and therefore , was not a ' workman ' . There was no suggestion to the first party in his cross examination denying his above said statement giving out the details of nature of his work. Moreover , the evidence let in by the management on this point is very much inadequate and insufficient to draw a conclusion that the first party had exercised the powers of the manager in any manner. Merely because some 3 workers are working in the canteen carrying out the business of the canteen serving the customers , it cannotbe said that their work was directly under the control and supervision of the Manager who himself was one of the employees working under the Second Party. From the statement of the first party it can very well be gathered that he was himselfworking under the control and supervision of the canteen Secretary which job was held by the Assistant, Provident Fund Commissioner. MW1 in his cross examination was not in a position to say as to whether the only functions performed by the first party were issuing the coupons to the staff members for tea and other items and preparing the list of items to be purchased and getting it approved from the Secretary and then purchasing the same from the shop specified by the managing committee and that payment was being made for those items of purchase directly by the Secretary to the shop concerned. He has also shown his ignorance whether the first party had done managerial or supervisory functions. He admitted that the first party had no disciplinary powers , to open any bank account etc. Therefore , as noted above , the evidence produced by the management on the point is very weak and insufficient to substantiate the contention taken by it that first party was not a ' workman ' since he worked as a manager of the canteen . From the very nature of the work, the first party was supposed to carry out as Manager of Canteen, one can never appreciate the contention of the management that he held any managerial powers . Undisputedly, he had no powers to sanction any leave or to take any disciplinary action against the workers working in the canteen and therefore it cannot be said that those workers were under his control and supervision. The job of the first party appears to be very simple in nature. He was working under the supervision and control of the 11659 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/ आश्विन 30, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

Secretary of the canteen, namely the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner. Therefore , there is no hesitation to come to the conclusion that the first party comes under the definition of the ' workman' as defined under the provisions of Section 2(s) of the ID Act.

the termination order at Ex. M4 cannot be said to be in accordance withthe terms of the above said appointment order much less as per Clause 8 of the said appointment orderas contended by the Management. Moreover, now it well settled principle of law that the services of the probationer cannot be dispensed with without affording the opportunity of hearing to the workman concerned, Their Lordship of Supreme Court in the case reported in 19981 LLJ 139 (Uptorn India Ltd Vs. Shammi Bhan & Another) laid down the principle that ' despite there being certified standing orders providing for authomatic termination of service ofa permanent employee, termination woudbebad if there was no opportunity of hearing given to the employee concerned' . In the fact of the above said principle of law, the management cannot take benefit of Clause 8 ofthe above said appointment order and terminate the services of the first party without giving him any opportunity ofhearing particularly, when his services were not found unsatisfactory as provided under Clause 2 of the said appointment order.

10. Their Lordship of Supreme Court in decision reported in 2000(II )LLJ 1410 (Executive Engineer, CPWD) , Indore Vs Madhukar Purshottam Kolharkar and Another) held the view that retrenchment as defined in Section 2(00) covers every case of termination of service except those which have been embodied in the definition and the discharge from employment or termination ofservice of a probationer would also amount to retrenchiment, therefore , requirement of section 25F are mandatory. In the instant case, since the first party has rendered the services of240 days andmore in a calendar year preceding his termination, the order terminating his services without compliance of Section 25F therefore , amounts to retrenchment as defined under Section 2(00) of the ID Act . The management undisputedly has not fulfilled the requirements of Section 25F and therefore, the termination order since is made in violation of above said provisions must be held to be illegal and void abinitio liable to be set aside by this tribunal.

9. Now coming to the quesiton as to ' Whether the first party is entitled to the reliefs claimed' Undisputedly, the first party joined the services of the Second Party on 16-7-87 as per the order ofEx. M1 dated 13-7-87 and hewas in the service of the Second party till his services were terminated as per the termination order dated 3-6-88 marked before this tribunal at Ex. M4. He was given the termination notice at Ex. M3 dated 12-5-88 intimating him that his services shall stand terminated w.e.f. the date of expiry of the period of one month from the date of service of notice and then as per Ex. M4 his services were terminated. Therefore, he being in the services of the Second Party right from 16-7-87 up till 3-6-88 it cannot be said or denied that the first party had not put in service of more than 240 days under the Second Party as on the date his services came tobe terminated by the above said termination order at Ex . M4 . Therefore , the contention taken by the management that the first party did not render services of more than 240 days to attract the provisions of ID Act is baseless and against the factual position. As the first party has completed services of statutory period of 240 days in a calendar year immediately prior to his termination, he fulfills the conditions of one year service as defined under Section 25B of the ID Act. In the result the question now to be considered would ' whether his services could have been dispensed with by way of termination without complying the provisions of Section 25F read with Section 2(00) of the ID Act' . It is the contention of the management that provisions of ID Act do not apply to the present case as his services have been brought to an end in the light of Clause 8 of his Appointment Order at Ex . M1 , wherein it is made clear that his services can be dispensed with without assigning any reason by giving one month's notice . I am not inclined to accept the aforesaid contention for the management . Firstly, for the reason that the appointment ofthe first party as can be read out from Clause 7 of above said appointment order was in the nature of permanent appointment, he being liable to be transferred throughout the Karnataka State so also with a liability to serve in any part of Indian Union, where the departmental canteen of employees of Provident Fund are in existence . Therefore , first of all it cannot of believed that the appointment ofthe first party was temporary in nature . Secondly as per Clause 2 of the said appointment Order, his probationary period was 2 years subject to the extension by the authority concerned with a rider that if his services were not found satisfactory during the course of probation he can be dismissed without any notice and without assigning any reason. It is not in dispute that temination order in question came into effect during the course of probation period itself. It is also not in dispute that his services were not terminated on the ground that they were not found satisfactory during the course of probation . The termination order at Ex. M4 is just to say that services of the first party are no longer

11. Now comingto the reliefs sought for the first party for reinstatement, backwages and other consequential benefits. It is to be noted that during the course of pendency of the proceedings , the first party is reported to dead as on 15-8-98 and consequent thereto his LRs have been brought on record . Therefore, question of his reinstatement is ruled out . Now comes the question o f backwages . In order to deny the benefit of back wages it was for the management to produce evidence before this tribunal to suggest that the first party had been in gainful employment when was out of its service at any time before he expired. No such evidence is produced and the witness for the management also has not spoken to a single word on this aspect of the case . Unfortunately, the first party in his statement before this tribunal as well as in his claim statement also as never taken a contention that was without employment after his services were terminated by the management. Therefore , keeping in view the lapses on this point both on the part of the Second party as well as onthe part of the first party, so also taking into consideration that the first party (since deceased) was drawing a total emoluments of his salary of Rs . 1200/- per month as on the required, therefore , they are being terminated. Therefore, 11660

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii)]

AND

1. The Chief General Manager Telecom, UP Circle Hazratganj Lucknow.

2. The Telecom District Manager Telecom Deptt. BSNL Bahraich.

date, his services were terminated, it appears to me that ends ofjustice will be met if the LRs of the deceased are paid a lump sum amount of Rs. 1 lakh as compensation towards the backwages of the deceased first party workman towards his entire claim against the management . Accordingly the reference is answered and followingAward ispassed:-

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide their order No. L-40012/34/2004 - IR(DU) dated: 16-8-2004 has referred following dispute for adjudication to the Presiding Officer , Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court , Lucknow for adjudication.

The Second Party management is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1 lakh as compensation amount towards the back wages of the deceased workman to his LRs towards his full and final satisfaction of the claim. The amount shall be paid within a period of 3 months from the date of publicationof this award. In case offailure, it shall carry interest at the rate ofRs. 12% per annum till the date of its realization. No order to cost.

"Whether the action of the management ofBharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Behraich in terminating the services of Sh. Pramod S/o Sh . Gaffur, daily wager w.e.f. 31-7-2001 is legal and justified ? Ifnot, to what relief the workman is entitled to ?"

(Dictated to PA transcribed by her corrected and signed by me on 9th September , 2005)

A.R. SIDDIQUI , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 27 सितम्बर, 2005

का. आ. 3865-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भारत संचार निगम लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण लखनऊ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 89/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-40012/34/2004 आई आर ( डी.यू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा,डेस्कअधिकारी

New Delhi , the 27th September, 2005

S.O. 3865. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 89/2004) of the Central Governmentnment Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Lucknow now as shown in the annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on27-9-2005 .

[No. L-40012/34/2004 - IR (DU) ]

KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM-LABOUR COURT, LUCKNOW

Theworker'scase in brief is that hejoined his services as a daily wages casual labourer ( Class IV post ) January, 1997 in serious exigency of departmental work. Since then he isworking on the said post as a hard working labourer and has worked for more than 240 days of service in the preceding years . It is also alleged that in the Telecom Department , time to time daily wages casual labourers have been engaged to meet the exigency of the work in absence of regular appointment . At the time of termination of the services of the worker neither enquiry was conducted nor any charge sheet was issued and no notice and retrenchment compensation was paid to the worker . Thus , the employers have violated the provisions of Section 2N ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1974. It is also alleged that atthe time to termination of services of the worker, persons junior to the worker have been retained and allowed to continue in service. Thus , the respondents have violated provision of Section 25G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. It is further alleged that the opposite party have engaged new persons and no opportunity of employment has been given to the worker, thus , the opposite party have violated the provision of Section 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The worker has therefore, prayed that opposite party may be directed to consider the case of the worker and take him back in service with payment ofwages for entire period of service and further direct the opposite partyto provide temporary status to the worker with further consequence to consider him for regularisation in the regular establishment with all the consequential benefits. The worker has further prayed to direct the opposite party to provide bonus to the worker, who has completed several years of service according to the policy of the Central Government. espondens

Present: Shrikant Shukla , Presiding Offcer I. D. Case No. 89/2004

Ref. No. L-40012/34/2004 - IR (DU) dated: 16-8-2004 BETWEEN

Sh . Pramod S/o Sh . Gaffur

Eamamganj Road, Balmiki Tola Nanpara, Bahraich.

The opposite party has disputed the claim of the worker, alleging therein that reference is not maintainable as bad in law. It is submitted that worker was neither appointed by the opposite parties to any class IV post nor hewas engaged as a daily wages casual labourer. It is also submitted that if the worker was appointed by the opposite parties to a post , a formal appointment letter would have been issued to the worker as at that point of time Bharat 11661

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

any Class IV post nor he was engaged as daily wager/ Casual labour. In the Circumstances there is no question ofany termination order. It has been submitted by Sh. Ram Charan that SDE Mihinpurwa in order to give some undue benefit to his kith and kin, has prepared some bogus documents showing engagement ofworker and other persons as having worked as daily wage/casual labourer whereas he was not competent to engage any daily wage/ casual labourer as there was a complete ban. I, therefore, come to the conclusion that the worker has failed to establish that he was engaged/appointed by the opposite partyand the worker was terminated w.e.f. 31-7-2001 . So there is no question of adjudicating the termination the services of Shri Pramod. The issue is accordingly answered and I come to the conclusion that worker is not entitled to any relief.

The representative of the opposite party has not made out any case that reference order is bad in law.

Lucknow. SHRIKANT SHUKLA , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 27 सितम्बर, 2005 Sanchar Nigam Ltd. had not come into existence and it was aDepartment of Ministry of Telecommunication . So far as the engagement of workmen on daily wages is concerned, it is submitted that there was a complete ban on the engagement of fresh casual labourer/ daily wagers in the department w.e.f. 12-6-1988 . Since the worker was never engaged/appointed by the competent authority as a dailoy wager, the annexure No. 2 to the claim statement allegedly written by the then SDE is absolutely false . It appears that the then SDE without having any authority to engage any casual labourer has issued this letter in order to give illegal benefits to the applicant and other persons. Casual labourers were earlier engaged by the department on muster roll but after putting a ban on the engagement of the casual labourer/daily wagers by means of an order w.e.f. 22-6-88 which was later on circulated vide letter dated 12-2-99 no fresh labourer is being engaged on muster roll. Since the worker has never worked with the opposite party and as such his case is not similar to those casual labourers who are duly appointed on daily wages and on account of their continuous engagement they were given the benefits ofgrant of temporary status scheme, the applicant is not entitled to be given temporary status under the grant of temporary status scheme. Lastly, it has been alleged that asthe worker was never engaged /appointed on daily wages. As such, there was no question of his disengagement by oral order and at the same time there was no necessity of conducting a departmental enquiry or given any show, cause notice to the worker who is a stranger to the opposite parties and the present claim of the worker for his engagement on a post is false and frivolous.

का. आ.3866.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीस सरकार भारत संचार निगम लिमिटेड 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 87/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -40012/32/2004 - आई आर (डी. यू. ) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा , डैस्कअधिकारी New Delhi , the 27th September, 2005 The worker has field the rejoinder after the date was fixed for evidence, therefore , the rejoinder was taken on record at the cost of Rs . 110/-but no cost was paid by the worker. The even did not turn up in the case not produced himself as witness nor produced any other witness for examination or cross -examination , therefore, there was no option left but to proceed ex - parte against the worker and the oppoiste party was given opportunity to lead , its evidence.

The opposite party has filed affidavit of Divisional Engineer (Headquarter ), Shri Ram Charan.

Theworker's representative did not tum up to cross- examine him.

S.0.3866 . In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref . No. 87/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Labour Court, Lucknow now as shown in the annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management ofBharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on27-9-2005.

[No. L-40012/32/2004 -IR (DU) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer Onthedate fixed for arguments , non -appreared on behalfof the worker and therefore, heard arguments of the opposite party's representative alone.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT, LUCNOW The dispute referred to was to adjudicate whether the action of the management of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Behraich in terminating the services of Sh. Pramod S/o Sh . Gaffur, daily wager w.e.f. 31-7-2001 is legal and justified? The worker has alleged in statement of claim in para 1 that his services were terminated by TDM on 8-10-2001 , therefore , I come to the conclusion that even worker does not alleged that the was terminated on 31-7-200.

PRESENT SHRIKANT SHUKLA PRESIDING OFFCER I. D. Case No. 87/2004

Ref. No. L-40012/32/2004 - IR (DU) dated: 16-8-2004 Divisional Engineer , Shri Ram Charan has denied that the worker was appointed by the oppoiste party to 11662

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] BETWEEN:

engaged , as such there could not be disengagement by oral order. Claimant's claim is false and frivolous .

Sh. Vishram Dass Gupta S/ o Sh . Siya Ram

R/o Khuria Safique Chilwara Bahraich.

AND

1. The Chief General Manager Telecom , UP Circle Hazratganj Lucknow.

2. The Telecom District Manager Telecom Deptt . BSNL Bahraich.

AWARD

The claimant never appeared in the proceedings . On 4-4-2005 the worker was directed to file the evidence of his witnesses in the form of affidavit and produce the witnesses for corss -examination and accordingly 12-7-2005 was fixed for evidence , but as usual the worker did not turn up. It was therefore believed that the worker is not interested in producing any evidence and the next date fixed was 19-7-2005 . When worker remained absent on 19-7-2005, the case was ordered to proceed ex parte against theworker and the next date was fixed on 4-8-2005 . Worker did not move any application showing sufficient cause in absenting from the case and praying for setting aside order dated 12-7-2005 and 19-7-2005 .

TheGovernment of India , Ministry of Labour vide their Order No. L-40012/32/2004- IR(DU) dated : 16-8-2004 has referred following dispute for adjudication to the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court , Lucknow for adjudication .

Opposite partywas directed to file three affidavit in support of its case. Opposite party has accordingly filed affidavit of Sh . Ram Charan, Divisional Engineer.

Heard the arguments of opposite party as none appeared for the worker.

"Whether the action of the management of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Bahraich in terminating the services of Sh.Vishram Das Gupta S/ o Sh . Siya Ram, DailyWager w.e.f. 31-7-2001 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled ? "

Claimant, Vishram Das Gupta has field the statement ofclaim . The brief facts ofthe claim are that :

Worker on the one hand failed to prove as to on what date he was appointed as casual labour/daily wager . Hehas also failed to prove as to who was the officer of the opposite party who appointed him. He has also not stated in claim as to what was his wages and the interval when he received them;

I. He has joined his services as dilay wages casual labour (Class IV post ) April , 1995. Since then he has been working on the said post and has worked for more than 240 days in the preceding years.

2. The Telecom District Manager , Distt . Bahraich terminated the services w.e.f. 31-7-2001 .

Opposite party has argued that the false and fictitious claim has been filed on the documents which are not genuine . Divisional Engineer has proved that the claimant was neither appointed nor engaged claimant on any post Opposite party has also proved that there was complete ban on deployment of fresh casual labour/daily wager in the circumstances claimant could never be engaged after1988.

3. The termination was on the basis of extraneous consideration without any valid reasons. The action was arbitrary, malafide , discriminatory without affording opporunity of hearing.

4. No notice and retrenchment compensation was paid.

5. At the time of termination, personsjunior to the claimant have been retained .

In the circumstances I am of the considered opinion that the worker has failed to prove that he was in the employment of opposite party and as such, here could be no question of his termination . Issue is accordingly answered against he claimant and he is not entitled to any relief.

6. Opposite party has engaged new hands and no opportunity of employment was given to the claimant.

Lucknow. 15-9-2005

SHRIKANT SHUKLA, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 27 सितम्बर, 2005

7. The employer has voilated the provisions of Section 25 N, 25 G & 25 H of the Industrial Disputes Act,. 1947 .

Further the worker has claimed the temporary status, regularisation, back wages , bonus etc.

का. आ. 3867.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भारत संचार निगम लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय लखनऊ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 93/2004) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -40012/40/2004-आई आर ( डी. यू. ) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्कअधिकारी The opposite party has absolutely denied the claim of the worker, alleging that claimant's claim is misconceived anddevoid of merit It is alleged that there was a compete banonthe engagement of fresh casual labour/daily wagers indepartment w.e.f. 12-6-88 Claimant was never engaged/ appointed by the competent authority as a daily wager. Before 12-6-88 . casual labours were engaged by the department on muster roll , but due to ban imposed no fresh labour is being engaged . As the claimant was never 11663 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 27th September, 2005

ofthe worker and take him back in service with payment ofwages for entire period of service and further direct the oppoisite party to provide temporary status to the worker with further consequences to consider him for regularisation in the regular establishment with all consequential benefits.

S.O. 3867. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 93/2004 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Labour Court , Lucknow now as shown in the annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management ofBharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 27-9-05.

2. Further direct the opposite party to provide bonus to the worker, who has completed several years of service according to the policy of the Central Government.

[No. L-40012/40/2004- IR (DU) ]

KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM - LABOUR COURT, LUCKNOW

PRESENT : SHRIKANT SHUKLA PRESIDING OFFCER

I. D. Case No. 93/2004

Ref. No. L-40012/40/2004 - IR (DU) dated: 16-8-2004

BETWEEN:

Sh . Santosh Kumar S /o Sh. Chhote Lal Rani Rahua Hata Bahraich

AND

1. The Chief General Manager Telecom, UP Circle Hazratganj , Lucknow.

2. The Telecom District Manager Telecom Deptt. BSNL Bahraich.

The opposite party has field the writtern statement denying the claim of the worker, Santosh Kumar. It is submitted that the casual labours were earlier engaged by thedepartment on muster roll but the ban was imposed for such engagements by means of an order w.e.f. 22-6-88 which was later on circulated vide letter dated 12-2-99 as such no fresh labours are being engaged. It is further submitted that Sh. Santosh Kumar was neither appointed by opposite party to any Class IV post nor he was engaged as daily wages casual labour in 1998, thus there was no question of having completed 240 days in service. Since the disputant never worked with the opposite party, there arise no question of termination as alleged. Referringto the document Annexure- 2 filed by the disputant, it is alleged that the document is absolutely fasle and it appears that SDE without having any authority to engage any casual labour has issued the said letter in order to give illegal benefits to the disputant. The opposite party has therefore , submitted that the disputant's claim is misconceived and devoid of merit and is liable to be rejected .

AWARD

The workers never turned up on the date fixed for evidence/cross -examination . The case was ordered to proceed ex-party against the worker on 19-7-2005.

Theopposite party has field the affidavit of Sh . Ram Charan, Divisional Engineer.

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide their Order No. L -400 12/40/2004 - IR (DU) dated 16-8-2004 has referred following dispute for adjudication to the Presiding Officer , Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum -Labour Court, Lucknow for adjudication.

Heard learned representative of the opposite party and perused the evidence on the record.

"Whether the action of the management of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Behraich in terminating the services of Sh . Santosh Kumar S /o Sh. Chotte Lal , Daily Wager w.e.f. 31-7-2001 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled ?"

The disputant has not disclosed as to who appointed him on class IVpost as a casual labour. Disputant has also not disclosed as to what was the amount of his salary and who paid him. No appointment letter has either been filed.

The workers case in brief is that he joined his service as dialy wage casual labour ( Class IV post ) in August, 1998 in serious exigencies of departmental work and has worked for more than 240 days ofservice in the preceding year. The Telecom District Manager, BSNL Distt . Bahraich, terminated the service of the workman on 31-7-2001 without notice, compensation on the basis of extraneous considerations voilating the provisions of Section 25 N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. It is alleged that persons junior to the workman have been retained and even fresh hands were engaged, thus the opposite party has violated the provisions of Section 25 G& H ofthe Act, 1947. Thus the action of the opposite party is iillegal , worker has there prayed for following relief

The opposite party has proved that there was ban onthe engagement of fresh casual labours w.e.f. 12-6-88 and has also proved that the disputant was not appointed on the post of class IV or was engaged as casual labour. Sh. Santosh Kumar was to prove that he was the workman employed by the opposite party and that he was illegally terminated, but he has not come forward to stand to the test of cross-examination . I therefore , come to the conclusion that the disputant was not in the employment ofthe opposite party and therefore , there was no question oftermination Issue is therefore answered against the workman and that Sh. Santosh Kumar is not entitled to anyrelief.

Lucknow. 19-9-2005

SHRIKANT SHUKLA, Presiding Officer 1. To direct the opposite party to consider the case

3016G1 /05-22 11664

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii )] नईदिल्ली, 27 सितम्बर, 2005

का. आ. 3868.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एम. टी. एन.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय नं . II , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 56/95 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं एल -40012/61/1994- आई आर ( डी.यू. ) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 27th September , 2005

Shri Ram Rattanjoined into the employment of the MTNL as a Driver (DRM) w.e.f. 28-9-1982 having been sponsored by the Employment Exchange . He was being treated as a daily rated/casual/muster roll worker and was being paid wages as fixed and revised from time to time under the Minimum Wages Act by the Delhi Administration , Delhi while his counterpart who are doing the identicala work and the work ofthe same value are being paid their salaries in the proper pay scale and allowances. Such employees are also enjoying other benefits like Casual /Earned Leave, Gazetted/Festival/Restricted Holidays and Medical Leave etc.whichwere completely denied to the workman aforesaid. He has unblemished and uninterrupted record of service to his credit up to the time of commencement of inquiry proceedings.

That since 28-9-1982 the workman aforesaid has been rendering the services to the entire satisfaction of his superiors. That on 10-2-1984 a certificate about satisfactory and honest services being rendered by the workman was also issued under the signatures of Junior Engineer (EPABX) and those of Assistant Engineer (EPABX) .

S.O. 3868-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 56/95) 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 MTNL and their workman , which was receivedby the Central Government on 27-9-2005

[No. L -40012/61 / 1994 - IR (DU)]

KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

That since the inception of employment of the workman and even prior to that the normal practice adopted by the department with regard to parking of the vehicles was that whenever any particular vehicle was not in use would be parked in the compound of Kidwai Bhawan Building, New Delhi.

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-

LABOUR COURT- II, NEW DELHI

R. N. RAI , PresidingOfficer

I.D. No. 56/1995

In the matter of

Shri Ram Rattan,

That at the relevant time the services ofthe workman was also placed at the disposal of the Assistant Engineer (EPABX) working in Kidwai Bhawan, New Delhi and the vehicle on which the services ofthe workman was availed of alsoused to be parked in the said compound whenever it was not in use under the directions of the officer concerned.

LorryDriver, C/o. Shri Girdhari Lal, Purani Dhotiwala Chockpur Mathai , Azad Market , Delhi - 110006 .

That along with the vehicle , a Log Book is also maintained in which relevant entries are made from time to time in respect of the vehicle No. Standard 20 DEP; 5070 the Log Book was regularly maintained and the entries therein used to be made in due course .

Versus

TheGeneral Manager,

MTNL, Khurshid Lal Bhawan, NewDelhi .

AWARD

That as would be apparent from the evidence adduced by the department before the Inquiry Officer , record of the entries and exit of various vehicles was also maintained by the security staff posted at the gates of Kidwai BhawanBuilding , New Delhi but such record was not being maintained by them regularly and in due course.

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L-40012/61 / IR (DU) Central Government Di. 5-5-1995 has referred the following point for adjudication.

The point runs as hereunder: --

That vehicle No. DEP 5070 was earlier placed under the charge ofanother driver Shri Amar Singh ( DWI ) and he had to leave that vehicle on his transfer n December, 1987. In the month ofDecember, 1987 and January, 1988 the said vehicle was not in proper working order and required substantial repairs including replacement ofbattery. That in the month of January, 1988 the said vehicle was in a defective condition .

"Whether the action of the management of MTNL , New Delhi ju terminating the servies of Shri Ram Rattan islegal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to? "

The workman applicant has filed claim statement. In the claim statemeht it has been stated that the workman

That on the utter surprise of the workman , the workman received a communication No. Disc./EPABX/II/ 87 /KDM /RR- II dated January, 14, 1988 issued by the 11665 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

oftheworkman been terminated with immediate effect. That the termination/ dismissal ofthe workman aforesaid from the services is wholly illegal, bad, unjust and malafide for the following amongst other reasons:-

1. That the report of the Inquiry Officer is perverse, not based on the facts.

2. That the order of dismissal/ termination from services dated October 19,1988 has been passedby the management without application ofmind. Moreover, The order of termination is anon -speaking order.

3. That the workman aforesaid was not given any opportunity of being heard before passing the impugned order although it was specially prayed that the workman be given personal hearing.Despite the request of the workman aforesaid he was not given any opportunity of beingheard.

Assistant Engineer, EPABX, MTNL, Kidwai Bhawan, New Delhi wherein it was stated to the effect that he was informed that Standard 20 vehicle No. DEP 5070 was taken outby the workman on January 1, 1988 at 15.30 hours and thatthereafter it was not parked back in Kidwai Bhawan, New Delhi up to January 11 , 1988 because no such record was available with the Assistant Engineer. It was also claimed in the said communication to the effect that January 9, 1988 at night the said vehicle was not seen parked in Kidwai Bhawan, New Delhi and that on January 10, 1988 at night about 20.30 hours on Delhi Mathura Road Shri A.K. Tirkha, DDG (Vigilance ) noticed the movement ofthe vehicle on that road. Through this communication the workman was called upon to show cause as to why the same be not treated as a mistake/ lapse of the workman as a serious lapse and the workman was also threatened to show cause astowhy after expiry ofone week of the service ofthe said notice, the services of the workman be not terminated at anytithe.

4. That the workman aforesaid was not allowed tohave a defence assistant of his own choice .

5. That the penalty ofdismissal/termination was the result ofbiased mind and pre-determined attitude ofthe management .

6. That the Learned Inquiry Officer has misdirected himself as well as the inquiry proceedings which has resulted into grave miscarriage ofjustice as well as failure ofjustice.

7. That the learned Inquiry Officer as well as the Punishing Authority have altogether ignored from their consideration the well settled principles of law that mere suspicion howsoever strong it maybe, cannot take the place ofproof and serve as a substitute of proof ofany fact.

That on receipt of the said communication dated January 14 , 1988 the workman submitted his written explanation on January 28 , 1988. It was specifically explained in the said show cause reply to the effect that the said vehicle required replacement of brakes and estimate for other repairs was also to be taken from the mechanic and for that purpose the said vehicle had been taken out under the oral orders/directions of Shri Hari Singh , JTO , EPABX at 15.30 hours on January 9,1988 and after getting the brakes repaired and after obtaining the necessary estimate for repairs from the concerned mechanic , the said vehicle was parked back at Kidwai Bhawan , New Delhi on January 9, 1988 itself at 18.30 hours . Thereafter on the morning of January 11,1988 when the workman came on duty at Kidwai Bhawan , he found the vehicle to be duty parked at its properplaceand the workman found the meter reading ofthe vehicle to be correct in accordance with the Log Book which was also explained.

8. That the Inquiry Officer and the Disciplinary Authority have misdirected themselves and they have made an altogether erroneous and illegal approach to the matter in controversy which has resulted into undue punishment to the humble workman whereby this poor workman has been worngfully and illegally deprivedofthe course of his livelihood and he has beenvirtually placed on wrong side to see the starvation of family and children for no fault on his part .

That on January 10 , 1988 the workman has weekly offand he remained at Delhi at his residence . It was further explained by the workman that he had no knowledge if and where and how the said vehicle had gone after 18.30 hours on Junuary 9, 1988. It was also explained in the said show cause reply to the effect that the keys of other vehicles could also be used on this vehicle because the keys ofthis types of vehicles were virtually identical and comman and they would easily apply to the locks of the other vehicles.

9. That no charge sheet was served upon the workman and the copies of the statements recorded in preliminary inquiry were not supplied to the workman which were to be supplied along with the charge sheet , nor any list of witness was supplied to the workman which was also be supplied along with the charge sheet which vitiates the inqiry proceedings completely.

Thatthereafter Shri P. D. Malhotra was appointed as Inquiry Officer and Shri S.D. Naik was appoined as PresentingOfficer on behalf of the department and inquiry was conducted by the said Inquiry Officer. That in the preliminary inquiry also the workman had pleaded not guilty and he claimed to be tried because he was innocent.

10. That the report ofthe Inquiry Officer and the decision ofthe Disciplinary Authority is based only on mere conjectures an surmises.

That the Inquiry Officer submitted his inquiry report through his letter No.Disc.I/Inq. /RR/48/87-88 dated July 27,1988 to theAssistant Engineer, EPABX, Kidwai Bhawan, New Delhi and vide order dated August 1, 1988 the services

11. That the Disciplinary Authority has failed to apply its mind to the report of the Inquiry 11666

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii )] Officer and the orders of penalty have been passed in a stereo type manner.

12. That the Appellate Authority has also failed to apply its mind to the case and rejected the appeal and as stereo type manner .

Shri Ram Rattan had taken out the vehicle from Kidwai Bhawan Premises at 15.30 hours on 09-01-1998 . Since the 9th January, 1988 was Saturday and workman purposely with mala fide intention and ulterior motive just touse the vehicle on Sunday i.e. weekly off did not park the vehicle back on 09-01-1988-in the Kidwai Bhawan. The workman used/misused the vehicle unauthorisedly on 10- 01-1988 . The said vehicle was spotted near Kosikalan on Delhi -Agra National Highway by DDG.

13. That the workman has filed the case before the Administrative Tribunal which has been returned tohim for want ofjurisdiction and to file the same before a proper forum.

Onthe aforesaid facts a memo was issued to the workman and an inquiry was instituted . The inquiry found the charges proved and accordingly held him guilty. The disciplinary authority after giving the hearing to the workman passed the order terminating the services of Shri RamRattan.

That the workman aforesaid is unemployed since he has been thrown out of job. That a demand notice was served upon the General Manager of the MTNL by registered A/D post vide communication dated December 10, 1992 duly received in his office but no reply was received and it was presumed that the demand has been rejected. Thereafter the dispute was raised by filing a statement of Claim before the Conciliation Officer (C) . The Conciliation proceedings were initiated but resulted in failure because of the adamant and non -cooperative attitude ofthe management . Hence this reference .

It issubmitted that in January, 1988 the vehicle was in working order and same was in the custody of the workman/Ram Rattan who used to drive the same . Replacement of battery as alleged, if at all , is not a major repair. It is submitted that the said vehicle was being found driven at Kosikalan and statement made in para under reply are false to the knowledge of the workman and the same are not admitted.

The management has filed written statement . In the written statement the management has denied that the workman had unblemished and uninterrupted record of serviceto his credit till time of commencement of the inquiry proceedings and the workman is put to strict poofthereof. Itissubmitted that the workman was employed on casual basis and was being paid wages in accordance with law.

It is submitted that the said memo was issued on the basis of the report filed by Shri A.K. Trikha , the then DDG (Vig. ) DOT who had noticed the movement of the vehicle at Delhi - Agra National Highway at Kosikalan on 10-01-1988 at 20.30 hours . It is denied that the said vehicle was taken out by the workman on January 1 , 1988 at 15.30 hours but in fact on January 9 , 1988 at 15.30 hours . The answering management craves a reference to the said memo for its true purport , meaning and effect thereof.

It is denied that the workman has been rendering service to the entire satisfaction of his superior since September 28 , 1982. No copy of the alleged certificate referred to in para under reply has been given hence the management is unabte to give any reply to the same. The answering management craves leave of this Hon'ble Tribunal to give a detailed reply as and when the alleged certificate is given to the answering management .

Itissubmitted that as and when the vehicle used to erxist and enter from Kidwai Bhawan compound the said factwas recorded by the driver in the record book maintained by the security staff at the gate .

Itissubmitted that the statement made in para 12 are false and concocted to the knowledge of the workman. All these facts have been duly proved by the management before the inquiry officer hence the same cannot be relied upon . The answering management craves a reference to the inquiry proceedings and subsequent punishment etc. imposed thereto in reply to the statements made in the statement of claim ofthe workman.

That parking of vehicle in the said compound is a matter of record. It is submitted that once the vehicle leaves the premises an entry was made. Similarly as soon as the same is brought into the premises an entry was made and the vehicle parked. It is submitted that it was the duty of thedriver driving the vehicle to ensure that vehicle is parked atthe Kidwai Bhawan and appropriate entry is made in the record.

Itis stated that the maintenance of log book is also a matter of record . However , it is submitted that the said log book is also being maintained by the concerned driver who is always in possession of the said book and no other person . However, it is incorrect to contend that the entries made therein were used to be made in due course . Itisalso correct that log book in respect of the Standard-- 20 Vehicle No. DEP 5070 was being maintained. Since the said vehicle was being driven by Shri Ram Rattan at the relevant period, the same was being maintained by him.

It is specifically denied that the termination/dismissal of the workman from the services is wholly illegal , bad, unjust and malafide for the reasons set out in para under reply. Each and every reason set out in the sub-paras in para under reply is specifically denied as if the same are specifically set forth and traverse in seriatim. The management craves a reference to the said inquiry report for its true purport , meaning and effect thereof. It is denied that the inquiry officer of disciplinary authrity mis-conducted themselves as alleged in para under reply. It is submitted that the answering management has rightfully terminated the services of the workman on the basis ofthe inquiry report . The answering management is not responsible for any mis -happening which may have happened on account of the workman's termination . It is specificallydenied that the report of the inquiry officer and the decision of the disciplinary authority is based on surmises and conjectures and that the appellate authority has failed to apply its mind . The answering management 11667

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

craves a reference to the said inquiry report for its true purport, meaning and effect thereof.

The workman applicant has filed rejoinder. In his rejoinder he has almost 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.

Heard arguments from both the sides and perused the papers on the record.

Itisadmitted fact that the workman Shri Ram Rattan joined into the emloyment of MTNL as a Driver w.e.f. 28-09-1982 . He rendered services for about six year. The workman was terminated w.e.f. 1-08-1988 with immediate effect . An inquiry was held against the workman applicant and he was found guilty of misconduct and his services were terminated by the disciplinary authority . It also transpires from perusal of the inquiry proceeding that principles of natural justice have been followed . The workman applicant has been given ample opportunity to cross examine the witnesses of the management . The workman has examined the witnesses in his defence as such principle of natural Justice have been followed in conduct of the inquiry proceedings .

It was submitted from the side of the workman applicant that the Inquiry Officer has given a perverse finding. His finding are not based on any substantial evidence . It is based on conjecture and surmises . Sufficiency or otherwise of evidence on which the Inquiry Officer has based his findings has been questioned.

It was submitted from the side of the workman applicant that Exhibit S - 3 is a register containing 10 sheets. The movement of the vehicles at the main gate , Kidwai Bhawan is entered in Exhibit S-3 . It transpires from perusal ofthese sheets that there is entry at serial No.7 , sheet No. 1 made by Shri Amar Singh , Driver of DEP- 4352 .Out going time is 9.55 hrs . but the incoming time is blank . There are signatures of Shri Amar Singh, Driver. On this sheet there are 11 blank entries on 09-01-1988 and 2 blank entries on 10-01-1988 and 27 blank entries on 11-01-1988 on which the incoming time is not made by the Gateman/Driver. The InquiryOfficer has also mentioned this fact on page 44 of his inquiryproceeding. It transpires from the sheets of S-3 that there are several blank paces and the Gateman/Driver has not recorded incoming time , so it cannot be said that the register which was maintained at the gate regarding incoming and outgoing ofvehicles was properly maintained and all the entries are recorded in that register. This is a document produced by the management in the proceeding of the inquiry and these shortcomings have been noted evenby the Inquiry Officer. In case a register contains the record of the outgoing and incoming vehicles, it must be complete. It appears that the register was not maintained strictly and the incoming and outgoing of the vehicle was not properly recorded.

examined as the management witness and he has stated that a register was maintained at the gate for recording outgoing and incoming of the vehicles . It was kept as spare wheels of the vehicles were stolen . This witness has also stated that vahicles were checked during night also and entries were made in a register kept for that purpose . It isa primary duty ofthe Gateman to check the coming and going ofthe vehicles and record the same in the register but from perusal of the S -3 it transpires that incoming of several vehicles has not been recorded . In case the vehicles are checked during night and Venicle No. DEP 5070 was not parked, the Gateman should have reported this fact and should have recorded in the register kept for that purpose but no such register was produced during the inquiry proceedings. The management witness Shri Ram Milan has stated that Junior Engineer has permitted Shri Ram Rattan to take the vehicle and get the brakes checked and then to bring the vehicle back and park it in Kidwai Bhawan. Consequently Shri Ram Rattan took the vehicle to check the brakes. The Junior Engineer has admitted during his cross examation that asked the Driver to take the vehicle to Mechanic Shop and after getting the brakes checked beingback the vehicle. So the permission of JE was obtained for taking the vehicle to the Mechanic Shop to repair the vehicle on 09-01-1988 . The vechiele was taken out admittedly at 15.30 hrs . for checking the brakes on 09-01- 1988. On 10-01-1988 the vehicle was seen at New Delhi- MathuraRoad at 8.30 PM by DO (Vig. ) . The vehicle was again found on 11-01-1988 at the parking place . From perusal ofthe statment ofthe Gateman, Shri Trilok Singh, Shri Ram Milan, Security man, Shri Amar Singh, it transpires that entry was made while the vehicle was taken out and no entry was made when the vehicle is taken in. Shri Amar Singh, Management witness has stated so and it is also a proved fact that a register was maintained at the Gate and incoming and outgoing of the vehicle was recorded in that register. It is also aproved fact that entry in the register was foundblank. The register was no properly maintained and the register was not properly checked. The Gateman has deposed that the vehicles are checked even during night and the same is entered in a register kept for that purpose. The case of the management is that the vehicle was taken out by Shri Ram Rattan at 15.30 hrs and it was seen at 10-01-1988 at 8.30 pm. by DO (Vig .) and it was again found in the parking place in the morning on 11-01-1988 . An inquiryhas been conducted and inquiry Officer has given the findings that from the deposition ofthe witness it came to light that incoming enrty of the vehicle was not done by theGateman. It was the duty ofthe Gatemen which they do not strictlyperform. The CSE may taken the benefit ofthis . This finding ofthe Inquiry Officer is based on assumption . Itis the fault of the Gateman who did not enter in the register ofcoming vehicles . Ifthe Gatemen are negligent in making entry of the coming vehicles the workman should riotbe punished for the same negligence . The vehicle was found in the parking place on 09-01-1988 and 11-01-1988 . Therewas entry of taking out of the vehicle on 09-01-1988 and 11-01-1988. The vehicle on 11-10-1988 cannot be taken out in case it has not been parked in Kidwai Bhawan . It becomes quite obvious from the statement of the witness that the vehicle was taken out at 1025 hrs . on 11-01-1988 . It It was submitted from the side of the workman applicant that the Gateman Shri Trilok Singh has been 11668

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)]

the vehicle was very much parked in Kidwai Bhawan that may be after 8.30 hrs on 10-01-1988 but it was taken inside by the Driver. If it was not in the parking place during night of the 10th January, 1988 it cannot be taken out on 11-01-1988 in the morning. The Inquiry Officer has not considered this aspect of the evidence of the inquiry proceedings.

goes a long way to prove the fact that the vehicle was parked in Kidwai Bhawan on 10-01-1988 . It is also obvious that the vehicle was taken out on 09-01-1988 for checking up the brakes and the brakes could not have been checked by the mechanic and the vehicle might have remained in the Garage of the Mechanic. The substantial question is whether permission was taken for taking the vehicle out or not. The Junior Engineer concerned has deposed that he permitted theDriver Shri Ram Rattan the workman to take the vehicle to a Mechanic Shop to get the brakes checked so the vehicle was taken out with the permission of the JE . The case of the management is that the workman took the vehicle without permission of the JE. The JE himself has deposed that he permitted the workman to take the vehicle so the vehicle was taken to the Mechanic Shop with the categorical permission of the JE so the workman has not committed any misconduct . It may be the vehicle was not repaired up to 8.30 hrs on 10-01-1988 and it was detected by the DO (Vig. )while the Driver was taking it to the parking place . The management has to establish the fact that the workman has done something without prior permission of the JE. It is not the case of the managerment that the workman took away the vehicle with the purpose of theft . it is not the case of the management that the workman was arrested with the vehicle. The vehicle in question is a Lorry and it cannot be believed that the Driver misused the Lorry. It is not a passenger vehicle . The Inquiry Officer should have considered these points while giving findings regarding the guilt of the workman applicant. The Inquiry Officer has admitted that the incoming vehicles were not entered in the register due to the fault of the Gateman . In case the fault relates to Gateman the workman should not be penalized for the same .

Itwas submitted from the side of the management that LogBook is with the Driver. The entry in the Gate register is made by the Gateman and they check the vehicles during night. The vehicle was found not missing during night and itwas taken out with the permission of the JE so in the facts and circumstances of the case the workman applicant has not taken out the vehicle without permission of the JE. Ifthe vehicle is taken out for repairs with the permission of the JE itwill bebrought back after complete repair. The vehicle was parked after 8.30 hrs . on 10-01-1988 as súch the Driver has taken the vehicle with the permission of the JE and he has parked the vehicle inside the parking place and there is no report that the vehicle was missing at any of the night . Strict Rules ofEvidence Act is not applicable in domestic inquiries but the evidence that has come during the inquiry should be considered and the Inquiry Officer should not hold the charge sheeted employee guilty on the basis of assumption and preponderance of probability. He should also consider the other aspect of the evidence and after consideration of totalityofevidence he should reach the conclusion regarding theguilt or otherwise of the charge sheeted employee.In the instant case the Inquiry Office has not taken into account the statement of the Gateman, Shri Trilok Singh, Security Man, Rám Milan and the Driver Shri Amar Singh and the Junior Engineer who permitted the workman to take the vehicle out . The evidence of these four witnesses is material for correct conclusion of the inquiry. No attempt has been by the Inquiry Officer to the substantial evidence of the witnesses referred to above .Hence the findings ofthe Inquiry Officer arebased on assumption , conjecture and surmises in utterdisregard of the evidence of the material witness .

Ifthere are several witnesses and there is material contradiction in their evidence then the entire is to be analized and then conclusion should follow. There is no consideration of the material evidence referred to above by the Inquiry Officer. This is not the case of a sole testimony. It can be gathered that according to the reliable witness the vehicle might be inside parking place as incoming entry was not made by the Gateman in the relevant register. The findings of the Inquiry Officer is not based on reliable evidence so it is liable to be set aside and it is set aside . The workman is a Driver and it has come in evidence that he has been driving vehicle so he was gainfully employed .He was not a regular employee but he has worked for seven years and so inquiry has been held against him prior to termination of his services . He is to be reinstated without back wages and with continuity of service .

The reference is replied thus :-

Itwas submitted from the side of the management that it is settled law that sufficiency of evidence is not to be examined in domestic inquiry. Even hearsay evidence is permissible in the departmental inquiry. The Sophisticated and Technical Rules of the evidence are not to be given preeminence and a employee can be held guilt on the evidence of a sole witness . When there is contradictory evidence the Inquiry Officer has to assess and appraise the entire evidence that has cropped up . He should not confine himself to the evidence which is against the workman applicant and give his findings in utter disregard ofthe evidence supporting the case of the charge sheeted employee. Ifthere is admixture and interlinking of false and true evidence, then there must be a sifting true evidence is tobe sifted out and disengaged from the admixture oftruth and falsehood. In the instant case several witnesses have been cross examined and some have deposed in favour of the management and some have given evidence regarding the day to day, hour to hour duties . The Gateman is a prime witness and reliance can be placed on his evidence . He has stated that vehicles were checked during night . Ifthe vehicle was not parked in the night of the 9 & 10th January, 1988 this matter should have been reported to and entered into the register but no register has been produced during the inquiry to show that this vehicle was entered as missing vehicle . The management witness has admitted that the entry of the outgoing vehicles was recorded but the entry of incoming vehicles was not recorded. It indicates that

The action of the management of MTNL, New Delhi in terminating the services of Shri Ram Rattan is neither legal norjustified . The workman applicant is entitled tobe भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

reinstated within one month from the publication of the award without any back wages but with continuity of service.

The Award is given accordingly.

Date:26-09-2005.

R.N.RAI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 27 सितम्बर, 2005

का.आ. 3869. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भारत संचार निगम लिमिटेड, के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों केबीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, लखनऊ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 92/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल -40012/39/2004- आई आर ( डीयू) ]

कुलदीप राय वर्मा , डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 27th September , 2005 S.O. 3869. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 92/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court , Lucknow now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Govemment on 27-9-2005.

[No. L -40012/39/2004-IR(DU)] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT, LUCKNOW

PRESENT :

SHRIKANT SHUKLA, PRESIDING OFFICER

I. D. Case No. 92/2004

Ref. No. L-40012/39/2004 - IR(DU) dated : 16-8-2004

BETWEEN

Sh . Pappu Prasad S/o Jhura Radan Tola, Near Police Station Nanpara , Bahraich. AND

1. The Chief General Manager Telecom , UP Circle Hazratganj , Lucknow.

2. The Telecom District Manager Telecom Deptt . BSNL Bahraich.

11669

AWARD

TheGovernment of India , Ministry of Labour vide their Order No. L-40012/39/2004- IR(DU) dated: 16-8-2004 has referred following dispute for adjudication to the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal, cum-Labour Court, Lucknow for adjudication.

"Whether the action of the management of BSNL , Bahraich in terminating the services of Sh . Pappu S/o Sh. Jhura Prasad, Daily Wager w.e.f. 31-7-2001 is legal and justified ? If not, towhat relief the workman is entitled ? "

Theworker's case in briefis that he joined his services asdaily wager/casual labour (Class IV post ) April 1998 in serious exigency ofdepartmental work. Since then he has been working on the said post . The Telecom District Manager, Telecom Deptt. , Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Distt. Bahraich terminated the services of the worker Pappu Prasad on the basis of extraneous consideration without any valid reasons absolutely in illegal, arbitrary, mala fide and discriminatory manner. At that time of termination of service, the worker was not served any notice and was to paid retrenchment compensation . It is also alleged that at the time of termination junior to the worker have been retained at the same time opposite party has engaged new hands and no opportunity of employment was given to the worker. Thus , the employer has violated the provisions of Section 25 N , 25 G & 25 H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The worker has prayed for the following relief:

1. Opposite parties be directed to consider the case of worker and take him back in service with the payment ofwages for entire period of service and further direction be issued that worker be provided temporary status and to consider him for regularisation.

2. Opposite party be directed to pay bonus to the worker who has completed several years ofservice.

Opposite party has filed the written statement disputing the claim the workman. Opposite party has alleged that so far as the engagement of workman on daily wage is concerned, there was complete ban on the engagement of fresh casual labour/daily wager in the department w.e.f. 12-6-88 . It has been submitted that the worker was neither appointed or was engaged by the opposite party to any Class IV post nor he was engaged as a daily wager casual labour in 1998. It is further submitted! thatcasual labour were earlier engaged by the department onmuster roll but after putting a ban on engagement/daily wagers w.e.f. 22-6-88 no fresh labour is being engaged on muster roll. Those who were working on muster roll and were governed under grant of temporary and regularisation scheme have been granted the benefits. The present worker did not fall within the categery because he was never engaged by the department. As such , there was no question ofdisengagement by order and at the same time there was no necessity of conducting a departmental enquiry or any show cause notice to the worker who is a stranger to the opposite party and the present claim is false and frivolous .

11670

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

It isalleged the claim statement is misconceived and devoid ofmerit and reference is to be a negative and Sh. Pappu Prasad is not entitled to any relief.

The worker never appeared in the case to prove the allegation of clain statement and ever withstood the test of cross-examination in course of proceeding .The court ordered the case to proceed ex - parte against the worker on 19-7-2005. Worker never came forward with the prayer that the order dated 19-7-2005 be set aside . He never showed sufficient ground for not complying with the order of the court.

The opposite party was directed to file affidavit in support of his case and the opposite party did file the affidavit of the Divisional Engineer (Headquarter ) Sh.Ram Charan. On 17-8-2005 worker's representative was present wasoffered opportunity to cross -examine Sh . Ram Charan buthedid not avail the opportunity. Today also the worker did not turn up, and hence, heard the argument of the opposite party only.

Worker has neither alleged nor proved as to who appointed him as casusl labour /daily wager .

No reference is made with claim whether any appointment order was issued to him . Not a single word finds place in the statement of claim as to what was the amount of his salary and on what interval he was paid and who paid him the said amount . No specific date of his joining the services of opposite party is mentioned in the statement of claim

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii) ] अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, नं.1, नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 185/97 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं एल-12012/541/89- आई आर ( बी. II ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 27th September , 2005 S.O.3870.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 185/97) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum -Labour Court , No. I, New Delhi as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relatiopn to the management of Punjab National Bank and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 26-9-2005 .

[No. L- 12012/541/89 -IR(B - II) ] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy. ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, NEW DLEHI PRESIDING OFFICER : Shri S. S. BAL L. D. No. 185/97

IN THE MATTER OF DISPUTE BETWEEN :

Workman Shri Ramesh Chander Joshi , R/ o Pahari Darwaja, Joshiyan, Dhampur(Bijnor)-244001 Versus

The Regional Manager , Punjab National Bank, Civil Lines, Muradabad-244001

Management APPEARANCES

Divisional Engineer on the other hand has stated that Sh. Pappu Prasad was neither appointed nor engaged asdailywager/casual labour. It is further submitted by him that no order has been passed for appointment/ engagement of Sh . Pappu Prasad by competent authority of the department. It is further stated that there was complete ban on the engagement of fresh casual labours on the department w.e.f. 12-6-88. It is futher submitted that the documents annexed with the statemant of claim in support of claimant's engagement are not genuine . Divisional Engineer has specifically stated that the claimant has never worked in the department therefore he cannot be taken to be an employee of the opposite party. The witness of the opposite party has termed the claimant as stranger. There is no question to disbelieve the Divisional Engineer's statement on the affidavit .

I therefore , come to the conclusion that the claimant Pappu Prasad has failed to prove that he was in the employment of the opposite party and was terminated. Therefore , the issue referred is answered against Sh. Pappu Prasad and he is not entitled to any relief.

Lucknow 15-9-2005.

SHRIKANT SHUKLA, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 27 सितम्बर, 2005

का. आ. 3870.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार पंजाब नेशनल बैंक के प्रबंधातंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच,

Workman in person with Sh . B.K. Prasad , Advocate

Shri R. Veeranjaneyulu , Officer for the Management

AWARD

The Central Government in the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L - 12012/ 541 / 89 - IR ( B - II ) dated 10-10-1997 has referred the following industrial dispute to thisTribunal for adjudication

"Whether the action of the Management of Punjab National Bank in retiring Shri Ramesh Chander Joshi w.e.f. 31-1-89 is legal and justified . If not, to what relief the said workman is entitled to?"

2. Brief facts of this case are that the workman Shri Ramesh Chander Joshi , Hundi Presentor of P.N.B. Dhampur branch , district Bijnore has stated in his claim 11671 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

3. In exceptional cases such non-matriculate employees, who cannot produce any ofthe aforesaid proofs, the date of birth maybe admitted on the basis ofthe declaration of age given by the employee at the time of his appointment and in case the employee is unable to state his exact date ofbirth but can state the year or the year and mouth ofbirth, Ist July or the 16th of month respectively may be treated as the date of his birth. The employee nmay also be required to submit a certificate ofage from the Civil Surgeon of the place or area in which he resides."

statement that he has been forcibly retired on 31-1-89 whereas he should have been retired on 21st of May, 91 . His actual date of birth was got determined by the Branch Manager under the orders of Regional Manager from C.M.O. Bijnore who also determined his age as 50 years on 21-5-81 and the branch Manager took this age opined by C.M.O. as correct vide letter dated 14-10-81 written to Regional Manager Dehradun. In the ordinary register maintained in the bank the date of birth , date of appointment , permanent and present address and date of retirement of the members of entire staff have been mentioned. His date of birth in that register has been mentioned as 31-5-1931 . He should have been retired on 21-5-91 but has been forcibly retired on 31-1-89 . History sheet froms were also got filled from the entire staff. In the said form his entire details have been filled up even his photo has been pasted and the same bears his signature . The branch manager has confirmed the details mentioned in all the forms and thereafter recommended the same, which included his history sheet form aiso. Even after his retirement his date of birth has been confirmed and recommended as 21-5-31 in pension papers by the branch manager after ascertaing from the record. The registrar officer ofbirth and death Bijnore confirmed his age as 50 years on 21-5-81 as determined by CМО which ( age) was assumed as correct by: SDM Bijnore who also issued age certificate to him and he can produce the same. He has further stated that his certificate from school has beenwrongly obtained by the authorities with ulterior motives . It is also stated that an agreement was entered into between the bank and unions of employees . There was a compromise between the banks and the union of employees that the age of the peons of the employees mentioned in school leaving certificate as 5-1-29 . It is further stated that he was subsequently designated as Hundi presentor w.e.f. 31-5-67 in the year 1980. Не represented for grant of promotion/special allowance and for considering the same then Regional officer , Lucknow advised B.O. Dhampur to submit the history sheet of all employees in Subordinate Cadre alongwith educational certificates and or proof of age and while forwarding the desired information vide letter dated 18-8-80 the B.O. Dhampur stated that no educational certificate was available in respect ofthe workman. It is father stated that the bank rules regarding admission of date of birth of employees have been circulated vide staff department circular No.86 of 1954 Annexure- II which interalia reads as under:

Theaforesaid rules expressly state that age of the employees will be admitted on the basis of certificate from theMunicipal Record or Police Station or School Leaving Certificateand in the absence ofproduction ofsaid proofs, the employee would be required to submit certificate of age from Civil Surgeon , only in exceptional cases . It is further statedthat he (workman ) made a wrong information that he had no school leaving certificate and he requested the management to ask for certificate from the ChiefMedical Officer and vide letter dated 22-2-88 he informed that the said certificate was not available with him and had the same been available he would have produced the same in the year 1980 and there would have been no occasion to obtain certificate from Chief Medical Officer. The workman failed to submit any certificate . Hence he was advised by the bank to obtain certificate of C.M.O. to enable to the bank to determine his date of birth for purposes of service records as an exceptional case . Workman appeared before C.M.O. Bijnore who opined vide letter dated 21-5-81 that hisage according to his statement is 40 years and by general appearance is about 50 years . It is further stated that the workman insured himself with LIC as such the matter taken up by LIC who informed that date of birth of applicant/ workman in their record was 5-1-29 on the basis of certificate (school leaving certificate ) annexure V submitted by the applicant. However workman concealed this fact from bank deliberately with a view to take advantage of determination of lower age in terms of opinion of CMO that on the basis of school leaving certificate Annexure V and his own declaration as per his confidential report dated 1-7-50 annexure V the date of birth of applicant workman was admitted as 5-1-29 in bank records in terms ofbanks rules quoted herein and accordingly his date of retirement was determined as 31-1-89 on attaining age of superannuation Thus the action of the bank is justified and legal .

" 1. That where an employee has not passed the matriculation examination , his age shall be admitted onthe basis ofcertificate from the Municipal record orPolice Station ofthe place where such an employee is born, or School Leaving Certificate of a recognised school.

5. On meritsit is stated that the applicant workman joined in service, 18-5-48 and not 8-5-48 as stated by him . It is not denied that the applicant submitted confidential report in 1951 as mentioned. In fact the same was submitted on1-7-50 stating his age as 21 years which is evident from annexure V. Other paras are wrong and denied. It is futher stated that the applicant did not furnish his date ofbirth at 2. In the absence of production of said proof the employees would be required to submit certificate of age.

3016G1 /05-23 11672

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 22, 2005/ ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )]

the workman and according to the management his (workman's) date of birth is 5-1-29 and not 21-5-31 as claimed by the workman. From the evidence placed on record it emerges as follows:

1. That the workman joined the service as peon of the respondent management at Dhampur Bijnore on 18-5-48.

the time ofjoining deliberately and he supressed the fact ofhis school leaving certificate and he did not produce his school leaving certificate. Therefore, he was referred to C.M.O. for obtaining his opinion of determination of his age. It is also stated that the age of retirement ofemployee is60 years and on attaining age of superannuation i.e. no other reason is required to be stated. It is further stated thatthe appplicant attained the age of superannuation on 31-1-89 as is evident from the school leaving certificate & inconfidential report . Contents ofother paras are denied. It is denied that the date ofbirth of the applicant is 21-5-81 . The workman himself declared his qualification as Vth pass inHindi in the staff confidential report dated 1-7-50 in which hehas also declared his age as 21 years which corroborates the fact mentioned in the school leaving certificate with regard to the age and qualification his plea that he is illiterate and he has never studied in any school is fabricated and after thought . Other facts are also denied. In view of the above submissions the claim is sought to be dismissed and the reference is sought to be answered against workman claimant and in favour of the respondent .

6.Writtenstatement was followed by rejoinder where the facts mentioned in the statement of claims were reiterated to be correct and controverted pleas in the written statement we denied as incorrect . Thereafter the evidence was adduced by both the parties.

7. Management adduced evidence by way of affidavit of Vipin Kumar who was examined and cross- examined as MW1 and management evidence was closed. Thereafter the workman filed his affidavit in his evidence and he was examined and cross-examined as WWI and he closed his evidence.

8. Thereafter the A/R of the workman Sh. B.K. Prasad and Shri R. Veeranjaneuly A/R for the management addressed arguments at length . I gave my anxious thought to their respective contention and perused the record meticulously.

2. He did not produce his matriculation certificate to prove his age at the time of his joining nor produced any medical certificate or police verification about his age at the time ofjoining.The workman admitted the photo copy of his school leaving certificate accepted the same i.e. admitted it tobe correct and also admitted the photo copy ofconfidential report both these documents were admitted by him at the time of admission denial on 13-1-98. Admitted documents need no proof and in one of the admitted documents i.e. school leavingcertificate Prasthan Praman Patra' his date ofbirth has been mentioned as 5-1-1929 his name has been mentioned as Ramesh S/ o Sh . Bhasu Ram. In the confidential report on work and conduct dated 1-7-50 his date of birth has been mentioned as 21 years that means as per this documant i.e. staff confidential report for work and conduct his age was 21 years as on 1-7-50 and hence his date of birth accordingly comes to or falls on 1-7-29 and his date ofbirth as per school register being 5-1-29 also falls in the year 1929 (29) , Both these above said date of birth i.e. the one furnished by the workman at the time of joining the service and the one which mentioned inhis school leaving certificate are not admitted/ accepted by the workman but he realised upon 21-5-31 as his date of birth which was inferred/ arrived at the basis of opinion C.M.O. Bijnore who opined his age 50 years on 21-5-81suggesting/ infruing his date ofbirth as 21-5-31 . But thisdate ofbirth was inferred from the opinion of C.M.O. Bijnore on the basis of his appearance when he appeared beforehim for medical examination and cannot be given preference to the age mentioned Inthe school leaving cerificate . His date of birth as mentioned in the school leaving certificate is 5-1-29 . Thus the date of birth of the workman is proved as 5-1-29 .

10. In view of the above discussion I am of the opinion that the date ofbirth of the workman is 5-1-29 and not 21-5-31 as claimed by him and the action of the management in retiring him as on 31-1-89 on his superannuation after completing the age of 60 years thus legal and justified . The reference is thus answered and award passed accordingly.

9. The controversy in this case is with regard to the age of the claimant . The workman claims that he was 50 years as on 21-5-81 i.e. to say his date of birth was 31-5-31 whereas the management does not admit it to be correct and contends that his date of birth is 5-1-29 as the workman himselfdisclosed and declared that according to school leaving certificate his date of birth is 1-5-29 and this date has been disclosed by him in his insurance policy also and hehimselfhad mentioned this date before C.M.O. as opined by CMO Bijnore. Thus according to him his date of birth is 21-5-31 but the managemant disputes this and claim that his actual date ofbirth is 21-5-29 according to school leaving certificatewhich the management procured how or the other, and he also mentioned this age in his insurance policy which fact was disclosed to the management by the insurance company and management further claims that workman also declared his age as 21 year as on 1-7-50 in the staff confidential report on the work and conduct of Dated: 25-08-2005

S. S. BAL, Presiding Officer [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 27 सितम्बर, 2005

का.आ. 3871.- 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 विषाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, नं 2 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 70/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-9- 2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -12012/23/2000- आईआर ( बी- II ) ]

11673 The workman has unblemished and uninterrupted recor of service to his credit . That the erstwhile New Bank was merged with Punjab National Bank vide Govt. of India's Notification dated 4-09-1993 . That after the merger of the saidNewBank of India with PNB the Punjab National Bank management vide their letter dated 5-11-1993 transfered the workman aforesaid from Head Office (Personal Division), Hotel Marina Building, New Delhi to Central UP Zonewith instructions to report to Zonal Manager, Agra.

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 27th September, 2005 S.O. 3871. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 70/2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court, No. 2, New Delhi as shown in the Annexure in Industrial Dispute between the management ofPunjab National Bank and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 26-09-2005 .

[No. L - 12012/23/2000- IR (B- II) ] C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

ANNEXTURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT II, NEW DELHI PresidingOfficer : R. N. RAI

I.D. No. 70/2000

IN THE MATTER OF:

Shri S. G.Gupta, C/o . Delhi Labour Union, Aggarwal Bhawan, TisHazari , Delhi- 110054

Versus

TheManager, Punjab National Bank, Head Office: Bikaji Cama Place , NewDelhi

AWARD

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L- 12012/23/ 2000- IR (B-II) Central Government Dt . 29-06-2000 has referredthe following point for adjudication .

The point runs as hereunder:

The workman applicant has filed statement of claim through the Union. In the statement of claim it has been stated that the workman Shri Shree Gopal Gupta was appointed as a Clerk/Typist in the erstwhile New Bank of India as per appointment letter dated 27-01-1982by which he was taken on probation for six months and after the expiry of probation period, he was confirmed in service.

That the workman Shri Shree Gopal Gupta protested against his illegal , malafide and unjustified transfer vide hisregd. Letter dated 16-11-1993 addressed to Manager, PNB, Head Office (Personal Division ), New Delhi wherein he requested the bank management to allow him to resume dutiesat Head Office , New Delhi as his transfer was not in consistence with circular dated 16-09-1993 . The bank has not responded the said letter in spite of repeated reminders to PNB.

That the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India vide its judgment dated 11-02-1997 in Civil Appeal No. 740 of 1997 arising out of SLP (C) No. 4323 of 1996 has directed the bank to cancel or modify transfer orders which were not consistent with the Bank's own transfer guidelines dated 16-09-1993 and the Bank would have to consider such representations, if made , and take appropriate decision or pass orders in accordance with the said guidelines .

That in the light of the abovesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court the workman aforesaid made a representation addressed to the Zonal Manager (Delhi ), PNB, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi on 18-02-1997 requesting the Bank to cancel /modify his transfer order dated 5-11-1993 as his transfer was not done in accordance with the PNB'sown transfer guidelines dated 16-09-1993 and allow him to resurse ais duties at Head Office , New Delhi . A copy of the said representation was also sent to the Chairman andManaging Director , PNB, Head Office , Bikaji CamaPlace, New Delhi .

That on 24-02-1997 , the aforesaid workman received a letter dated 14-02-1997 from PNB (personal division) Head Office, New Delhi wherein he was advised to report for duties atZonal Office, Agra on or before 24-02-1997 . The workman in response to the said letter, requested the AGM (Personnel) , Head Office (Personnel Division) , New Delhi to reconsider his representation dated 18-02-1997 in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated 11-02-1997 vide his representation dated 24-02-1997, the workman did not receive any reply to the said representation from the management in spite of various reminders from the workman .

That the workman in response to letter dated 20-08-1997 received by him on 26-08-1997 from Zonal Office, Agra again requested vide his letter dated 1-09-1997 sent byRegd. A/D post and addressed to the Chairman and ManagingDirector, PNB, Head Office, New Delhi to cancel/ modify his transfer as he was not satisfied with the repiy of theBank. The workman aforesaid also requested the Bank to inform him where his name stands in the seniority list and for which Zone, in the light of the Bank's own transfer guidelines dated 16-09-1993 but he did not receive any 11674

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005 /ASVINA 30, 1927

reply from the Bank in this context. The copy of the letter dated01-09-1997 was also sent to the Zonal Office , Agra , by Regd. A/D . post but they also did not give any reply to theworkman.

That thereafter the Zonal Office , Agra vide letter dated 20-09-1997 , received by the workman aforesaid on 26-09-1997 , served a notice of voluntary cessation of employment against all the norms and ethics of law and instructd him to join his duties whithin 30days from the date of the said notice. The workman aforesaid vide his letter 01-10-1997 addressed to the Zonal Manager, Agra and GM ( personnel ) , PNB , Head Office , New Delhi again requested to dispose of his various applications/ representations in which he repeatedly requested the Bank to cancel modify his transfer order in the light of Bank's own transfer guidelines andjudgment dated 11-02-1997 of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. The workman also informed the bank that he never afforded to leave the service and was very much willing to serve the bank sincerely to the best of his ability. The bank turned a deaf ear to his various representations\ requests followed by various reminders .

That after receiving the notice dated 29-09-1997 the workman reported for duty to the Zonal Office , Agra without prejudice to his rights and contentions on 16-10-1997 i.c. will within the period of 30 days notice but the Bank Management at Zonal Office , Agra refused the workman to join duties . The Zonal Manager, Agra also refused to give in writing the reason for not allowing him to joinhis dutics. That even otherwise the action of the management of PNB in refusing duties to the workman at ZonalOffice, Agra was unlawful , malafide , illegal , violative of the principles of natural justice and by way of victimization .

That the workman aforesaid being left with no other alternative sent his joining report by post on the same day i.c. 16-10-1997 to the Chief Manager, PNB . Zonal Office , Agra with a copy thereof to the GM, ( Persontiel ) , PNB , HeadOffice (personnel Division ) , Bikaji Cama Place , New Delhi by Regd. A/D post from Hari Parvat Post Office, Agra. The said joining report was duly received in the offices of the management but no communication was received from the management .

Thatinstead of responding to the joining report dated 16-10-1997 of the report, the bank management vide letter dated (05-12-1997 informed the workman that he neither reported for duties nor gave any satisfactory explanation within stipulated time and therefore; he was deemed to have retired voluntarily from the service of the Bank upon expiry of the notice period and his name was struck off from the rolls of the bank w.e. f. 21-10-1997 .

That the workman made an appeal vide communication dated 24-01-1998 against the punishment ofvoluntary retirement/voluntary cessation of service to the GM (personnel ) 7 , Bhikaji Cama Place , New Delhi against the illegal , arbitrary, unil teral and unjustified orders of the ChiefManager , Agra Zone and demanded setting aside of the arbitrary and illegal decision and allowing him duties . It is submitted that the bank management has not decided

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] the appeal dated 24-01-1998 in spite of various reminders dated10-03-1998 , 22-04-1998 and02-07-1998.

That the voluntary retirement/voluntary cessation of employment imposed upon the workman by the management is wholly illegal , bad, unjust and malafide for the following amongst other reasons:-

1. That the voluntary retirement/voluntary cessation of employment imposed upon the workmanbythe management is a penalty, which could not be inflicted upon the workman without due process of law. It is submitted that no domestic inquiry was conducted against the workman and he was not afforded any opportunity of being heard before inflicting upon him the said penalty.

2. That the transfer of the workman to Zonal Office, Agra was malafide.

3. That the workman has been meted out with hostile discrimination as juniors to him are posted in Delhi and he was transferred to Zonal Office, Agra in complete violation of the guidelines of the Bank.

4. Thatthe representation of the workman dated 16-11-1993 addressed to Manager , PNB, Head Office(Personnel Division) , New Delhi against his illegal transfer was not considered without application of mind.

5. That the impugned transfer of the workman was not in consistance with circular dated 16-09-1993 .

6. That the management has not at all followed the judgment dated 11-2-1997 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court ofIndia. The Hon'ble Supreme Court ofIndia in the said judgment had dirceted the bank to cancel or modify transfer orders which were not consistent with the Bank's own transfer guidelines dated 16-9-1993 and the Bank was directed to consider representations ofthe transferred employees , if made and take appropriate decision or pass orders in accordance with the said guidelines . The management rejected representations of the workman arbitrarily.

7. That the request of the workman that he be informed about his position in the seniority list was turned down by the management arbitrarily and no seniority list was shown to him.

8. That the representation of the workman dated 1-10-1997 addressed to the Zonal Manager, Agra and GM , (Personnel ) , PNB, Head Office, New Delhi had requested the management to dispose of his various applications / representations in which he repeatedly requested the bank to cancel/ modify his transfer order in the light of Bank's own transfer guidelines and judgment dated 11-2-1997 of Hon'ble Supreme Court of भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

India. The workman had also informed that bank that he never afforded to leave the service and was very much willing to serve the bank sincerelyto the best of his ability. The bank turned a deaf ear to his various respresentations/ requests followed by the various reminders.

9. That even, otherwise , the management at Zonal Office, Agra refused the workman to join his duties and even his joining reported was not accepted, a copy of which was therefore , sent byRegd. A/D post . The Zonal Manager, Agra also refused to give in writing the reason for not allowing him to join the duties .

10. That even otherwise the action of the management of PNB in refusing duties to the workman at Zonal Office, Agra was unlawful , malafide , illegal , violative ofthe principles of natural justice and by way ofvictimization.

11. That the appeal dated 24-1-1998 ofthe workman has not been considered inspite of various reminders dated 10-3-1998 , 22-4-1998 and 2-7-1998 .

12. That the transfer of the workman amounts to unfair labour practice as provided in Section 2(ra) readwith item no. 7 ofthe 5th Schedule of the ID Act , punishment under Section 25 -U readwith Section 25 -T of the ID Act, 1947 .

13. That the workman aforesaid is unemployed since he has been illegally transferee to Zonal OfficeatAgra.

14. That the dispute was raised by filing a statement of claim before the conciliation officer . The conciliation officer initiated the conciliationproceedings and the management participated in the conciliation proceedings and filedtheir written statement. But the conciliation proceedings resulted in failure because ofthe adamant and non-cooperative attitude of the management . Hence this reference .

The management has filed written statement. In the written statement it has been stated that Shri Shree Gopal Gupta was deemed to have voluntarily retired from the services of the bank under the provisions of para 17 of the BPS by the competent authority and accordingly it is submitted that the present reference to the Hon'ble Tribunal does not merit and consideration .

That before giving para wise reply to the statement ofclaim filed by the opposite party, the bank would like to submit as under :-

1. That the erstwhile NBI was amalgamated with PNB on 4th September, 1993 by the Central Government in consultation with RBI in exercise of its powers under Section 9 of the banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings ) Act , 1980. The Central Government in consultation with RBI in exercise of above statutory powers , read with

11675 Clause 4 (50) of the Notification dated 4th September , 1993 notified another scheme dated 8thDecember , 1993 relating to placement and fixation ofinter-se-seniority of the employees of erstwhile NBI vis -a -vis the employees of PNB . Clause 3 of the Notification dated 8th December, 1993 inter alia provides as under:

" redeployment of Officers / Staff - the transferee bank may redeploy /transfer the Officers / Award Staff of transferor bank to any of the office / branches of the transferor bank to any bank, keeping in view of the suitability of the officers / employees , administrative and manpower requirements of the transferee bank, in accordance with the provisions contained in the PNB ( Officers ) ServiceRegulations, 1970 or existingAwards/ Bipartite Settlements . The officers may be transferred to any place in India and the posting/transfers of workmen employees will be made within the same linguistic area. " 2. That on 16th September , 1993 the bank framed guidelines for redeployment of surplus staff of erstwhile NBI in administrative exigencies . These guidelines were challenged by the Union of erstwhile NBI and certain individual employees before different High Courts and finally the guidelines dated 16th September , 1993 and consequent redeployment orderswere upheld by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide judgment and order dated 11th February, 1997.

3. It is most respectfully submitted that Hon'ble Supreme Court vide judgment and order dated 11th February, 1997, while upholding the guidelines and consequent redeployment order observed as under :

" Agrievance was also made on behalfofthe respondents that some of the orders of transfers are not consistent with the guidelines dated 16th September 1993. Ifthat is so it would be open to the respondents to draw the attention of the concerned authorities of PNB to such orders and seek their cancellation or midification . Obviously PNB will have to consider such application or representations , ifmade and take appropriate decision or pass orders in accordance with the said guidelines .

Except to the extent of the aforesaid observation we allow this appeal, set aside the judgment and order passed by the High Court ofAllahabad in Special Appeal No. 877 of 1993 and dismiss Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.39883 of1993. However , in view of the facts and circumstances of the case , we pass no order as to costs .

4. That in pursuance of the above observations , the bank had received about 280 representations from the employees of 11676

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005 /ASVINA30, 1927

erstwhile NBI wherein they had alleged that their redeployment orders are not in accordance with the guidelines dated 16th September, 1993. For consideration of the afore said 280 representation received from the employees of erstwhile NBI , having regardto the observations made by Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment and order dated 11th February, 1997 the bank had constituted a committee consisting of Zonal Manager, Delhi Dy.GM (P) (P) .The above committee of Sr. Executives of the bank had met on 8-3-1997, 21-3-1997, 4-4-1997, 15-4-1997 and 29-4-1997 and wherever modification/ cancellation of redeployment orders was required on the recommendations of the committee, the bank modified/ cancelled the redeployment orders issued on 5th November, 1993 and had simultaneiously issued fresh redeployment orders of the employees of erstwhile NBI who were junior and who should have been redeployed out of Delhi in terms of guidelines dated 16th September, 1993 .

5. That Shri Gupta had also made a representation, as referred to above , vide his representation dated 18th February , 1997 the same had also been placed before the committee for consideration along with other representations , received from the employees or erstwhile NBI and the committee after due consideration , recommended to GM ( P ) that the redeployment/transfer orders of Shri Gupta requires no modification and the representation made by him is without any merit and substance . The GM(P) concurred with the recommendation of the committee and rejected the same . The above decision of the bank was communicated to Shri Gupta vide letter dated 31st March , 1997 , sent at his last known available address under postal certificate .

6. Thatthe service conditions of the employees in the banking industry are governed by the provisions of Industry Level Award, BPS signed from time to time . Para 17 of the BPS relating to voluntary cessation of workmen employees reads as under . "

" The earlier provisions relating to the voluntary cessation of employment by the employee in the earlier settlements shall stand substituted by the following:

(a) When an employee absents himself from work for a period of 90 or more consecutive days , without submitting any application for leave orfor its extension or without any leave to his credit or beyond the period of leave sanctioned originally/subsequently or when there is a satisfactory evidence that he has taken up employment in India or when the management isreasonable satisfied that he has no intention

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii )] ofjoining dutes , the management may at any time thereafter give a notice to the employee at his last known address calling upon him to report for duty within 30 days of the date of Use novice, stating inter alia the grounds for comming to the conclusion that the employee has no intention of joining duties and furnishing necessary evidence , where available. Unless the employee reports for duty within 30 days of the notice or given an explanation for his absence within the said period of 30 days , satisfying the management that he has not taken up another employment or a vocation and that he has no intention of not joining duties , the employee will be deemed to have voluntarily retired from the bank's service on the expiry of the said notice. In the event of the employee submitting a satisfactory reply, he shall be permittedto report for duty thereafter within 30 days from the date of the expiry of the aforesaid notice without prejudice to the bank's right to make any action under the law or rules of service (b) If an employee again absents himself within a period of 30 days without submitting any application after reporting for duty in response to the notice given after 90 days or 150 days absence, as the case may be the second notice shall be given after 30 days of such absence giving him 30 days time to report . If he reports in response to the second notice , but absents himself a third time from duty within a period of 30 days without application, his name shall be struck off from the establishment after30 days of such absence under intimation to him by registered post deeming that he has vountarily vacated his appointment .

7. Itis pertinent to mention her that Shri Gupta was redeployed from Delhi to Zonal Office, Agra for his posting at the point of need on 5th November, 1993 and despite the fact that the guidelines dated 16th September, 1993 and subsequent transfer orders were upheld byHon'ble Supreme Court videjudgment and order dated 11th February, 1997 and also having regard to the fact that the representation made by Shri Gupta in pursuance of the observations made by Hon'ble Supreme Court also disposed by the Bank vide letter dated 31st March, 1997 Shri Gupta did not report for his duties at Zonal Office , Agra despite instructions given to him by them from time to time . Zonal Office, Agra issued notice to him for deemed voluntary retirement under Para 17 of the BSP quoted hereinabove vide letter dated 20th September , 1997. Since Shri Gupta did not report for his duties , Zonal Office , Agra vide letter dated 5th December , 1997 advised him 11677 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

Inview ofthis , it is submitted that the appeal preferred by Shri Gupta against his deemed to have voluntarily retired from the services of the bank was not maintainable under the provisions of the BPS and did not merit any consideration.

that since he did not report for his duties nor any satisfactory explanation was receivedby the Bank within the stipulated time, he is deemed to have retired voluntarily from the services of the bank upon expiry of the notice period w.e.f. 21st October , 1997 thus the action of Zonal Office, Agra is in terms of service conditions of Shri Gupta and accordingly, he is not entitled to challenge the same.

It is denied that the action of the bank is deerfing Shri Gupta voluntarily retired from the services of the bank under the provisions of para 17 of the BPS is illegal , bad, unjust or malafide for any of the reasons mentioned therein or otherwise . Further , each and every allegation/ submission made in Para under reference be deemed to have specifically denied unless admitted here - in- before.

The workman applicant has filed rejoinder. In his rejoinder he has reiterated the averments of claim statement and has denied most of the paras of the written statement. The management has also denied most of the paras of the claim statement.

It is submitted that the transfer of Shri Gupta vide letter dated 16-11-1993 was perfectly legal , bona fide , justified and was in accordance with the guidelines dated 16-09-1993 laid down by the bank. It is further submitted that the request, ifany, of Shri Gupta for allowing him to resume duties at Head Office, New Delhi was wholly misconceived and the same did not merit any consideration.

Evidence ofboth the parties has been taken .

Heardargument from both the side and perused the papers on the record.

It was submitted from the side of the applicant that he was transferred to Central UP Zone and he has reported to Zonal Manager, Agra on 5-11-1993 . The workman applicant made a representation that the Hon'ble High Court has quashed the circular dated 16-09-1993 in which the bank has issued transfer orders of employees of erstwhile New Bank of India. The Hon'ble High Court also quashed transfer orders . He requested for treating on duty to resume his duty.

It is submitted that Shri Gupta had submitted a representation dated 18-2-1997 which was consideredby the committee consisting of Zonal Manager , Delhi Dy. GM (P) and AGM (P) and after due consideration the competent authority rejected the representation of Shri Gupta fórmodification/Cancellation of his posting/transfer orderfor Central UP Zone. This was duly communicated to Shri Gupta vide letter dated 14-02-1997. It is further submitted that since the representation submitted by Shri Gupta was duly considered in accordance with the directions given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court his any subsequent representation for re -consideration waswholly misconceived . The submissions made hereinbefore are reiterated.

It was submitted by the management that the applicant after 17-11-1993 again sent representation for conceling his transfer order. The management on 31-03-1997 adviced him tojoin duty and in that letter it has been mentioned that his reference has been considered in the light of the order dated 11-2--1997 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and his application has been disposed of and he was advised to join immediately but the workman applicant did not join duty. He again sent an explanation to representation on 1-9-1997 to look into the matter. He again sent a letter on 24-9-1997 stating therein that some juniors to him have been working in Delhi whereas he has been transferred to Agra . The workman applicant again wrote letter on 01-10-1997 and requested therein to modify the order passed on 5-11-1993 . Thereafter themanagement sent him 30 days notice to join for duty or he will be treated absent from duty.

It is submitted that show cause notice dated 20-09-1997 was issued by the competent authoirty at Zonal Office, Agra under the provisions of the BPS. It is categorically denied that the said show cause notice was against any norms or ethics of law as alleged or otherwise. It is further submitted that the transfer of Shri Gupta to Central UP Zone was in accordance with the guidelines dated 16-9-1993 laid down by the bank and his representation was also duly considered and disposed off having regard to the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judment dated 11-02-1997 . Despite rejection of his representation and having been advised to report at ZonalOffice , Agra for further duties at the point of need, Shri Gupta did not report for his duties which was a clear indication that he was not willing and interested in thejob with the bank .

It is submitted that Shri Gupta never reported for his duties at Zonal Office, Agra and accordingly there was no occasion to refuse to allow him to join his duties . The allegations made by Shri Gupta are nothing but an after thought only. It is submitted that Shri Gupta was deemed tohave voluntarily retired from the services of the bank in accordance with the provisions of the para 17 of the BPS and was not inflicted any punishment by way of disciplinary action. It is further submitted that under the provision of the BPS an employee can prefer an appeal only against a disciplinary action order .

Itwas submitted from the side of the applicant that he went to Agra to join duty but he was not permitted to join duty. He reported to the Zonal Manager on 10-10-1997 but the Zonal Manager did not allow him on duty. In the meantime he was voluntarily retired and he made appeal against the order of the voluntary retirement on 24-1-1998. The workman applicant has annexed reservation tickets from Delhi to Agra and from Agra to Delhi to prove the fact that did report to the Zonal Manager, Agra but he refused him tojoin duty. It is pertinent that the Zonal Manager, Agra has been produced as management witness and he has said that the workman applicant did not report to duty. It is true that the workman 11678

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] went to Agra Zone when 30 days notice was served to him and expressed his willingness to join duty. As per the allegations the Zonal Manager did not permit him tojoin duty so before the expiry of 30 days notice the workman applicant went to join dutybut in the meantime the order of the voluntary retirement was passed treating him absent fromduty for more than 90 days .

on duty from 10-10-1997 and he is not entitled to get full back wages from 10-10-1997 but he will not be entitled to get any back wages or even increments from 5-11-1993 to 10-10-1997 as an employee cannot be permitted to take benefit of his in activity. No premium is permissible for non activity. If there was transfer order the workman applicant is to abide by that order and should have joined duty in Agra and thereafter made representations . It shall be presumed that he was reluctant to resume office in Agra so he cannot get any benefit for the period for which he remained absent .

The order of compulsorily retirement is not according to the Bipartite Settlement. He went tojoin duty prior to the expiry of 30 days notice so the order of the compulsory retirement is aboslutely illegal and arbitary. The workman applicant is entitled to be reinstated.

The reference is replied thus:-

The Zonal Manager, Punjab National Bank , Agra was not competent to strike off the name of Shri Shree GopalGupta, Clerk/Type from the role ofthe bank w.e.f. 21- 10-1997 although the workman did not join duty or did not work even a single day with Agra Zone . The action of the Management ofPunjab National Bank , New Delhi is not justified to take action of voluntary retirement/ Voluntary cessation to employment of workman. The workman applicant is entitled to be reinstated w.e.f. 10-10-1997 without any back wages and continuity of service from 5-11-1993 to 9-10-1997. However he will get full back wages from 10-10-1997 . The management is directed to implement the award within one month from its publication.

The Award is given accordingly.

Date21-9-2005

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 27 सितम्बर, 2005

का.आ. 3872.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार यू. को. 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 संख्या 235/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं . एल-12012/71/99- आईआर ( बी- II ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 27th September, 2005

S.O. 3872. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.2 35/99) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of UCO Bank and their workman , received by the Central Government on 26-9-2005.

Itissettled law that in case 30 days notice is issued and the employee is willing to join and in fact approaches the management forjoining duty he cannot be compulsorily retired. In the facts and circumstances of the case prior to theexpiry of30 days notice the workman applicant went to Agra and reported for duty but according to him the Zonal Manager, Agra did not permit him to resume his duties. He has annexed photocopies of the Railway Journey from Delhi to Agra and Agra to Delhi and he has sent registered letter in this respect . The orally adducedby the management is not a very probative value as the workman has given proof of his reporting for duty to the Zonal Manager, Agra. It indicates that he has no intention not tojoin duty or he has had the post of some other job. Itwas alleged by the Management that he was engaged in busniess i.e. why he kept silent after 5-11-1993 when transfer order was passed and communicatedto him . He sent his next representation after almost four years he remained silent and he did not made any representation or report to duty. The circumstances indicate that he was engaged in some sort of business and was not very much willing to report to duty. If the order for transfer is passed the employee has no other alternative but to resume duty on the transferred place in case the transfer is not modified or set aside. In the present case transfer order was passed on 5-11-1993 and the employee was asked to report to Zonal Manager, Agra but almost four years he kept mum. In case his representation was not considered he shall be deemed that same was rejected as the transfer order subsisted all along . It is the duty of an employee to resume work at different place and he should not made representation in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court . The Hon'ble Supreme Court has modified the order of the Hon'ble High Court andhas directed that at general rule that transfer policy should be followed but in case of exigency or necessity the management may transfer against the Rules as anoffice cannot be kept vacant to let the work suffer as per the fules. Since there were exigencies so the management transferred him to Agra Zone. The Management has sent reply to the workman that this representation was considered in the light of the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court but he did not take care to report to Agra Zone. It indicates that the workman applicant was adamant to not to report to Agra zone and he did not do any job from5-11-1993 to 10-10-1997 . OfCourse on 10-10-1997 he went to Agra to resume his duties . He took undue advantage of quashing of the rule of the Hob'ble High Court but the same was modified by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the circumstances out of his own will an adacity hedid not perform any duty from 05-11-1993 to 10-10-1997 sohe is not entitled to get any emolument or even continuity of serive for the aforesaid period . He did go to join the service toAgra on 10-10-1997 so he shall be deemed to be

[No. L- 12012/71 /99 - IR (B- II) ] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR

NO . CGIT/LC/R/235/99

Shri C. N. Singh , PresidingOfficer

Shri Prashant Choudhary,

.....Workman S/o. Shri Roopnarayanji Choudhary, R/o H. N. 99 , Chandni Chowk, Ratlam(MP).

Versus

The Assistant General Manager ,

UCO Bank, Regional Office, E-5, Area Colony, Bhopal (MP).

11679

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

....Management

AWARD

Passed on This 13th day of September, 2005 1. The Govrnment of India, Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. L- 12012/ 71 /99 /IR (B - II ) dated 18-6-99 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :-

"Wherther the action of the management of Asstt .

GeneralManager , UCO Bank in terminatingthe services of Prashant Choudhary w.e.f. 12-5-97 isjustified ? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to? "

2. The case of the workman Shri Prashant Choudhary in brief is as follows. That he was appointed on post of peon at Ratlam branch of UCO Bank on 4-3-94 . His work was satisfactory and good. He was paid salary on daily wages@Rs. 35/- .He remained employed as peon at Ratlam branch of UCO Branch till 12-5-97 . He had worked as peon for more than 240 days . His disengagement from service was terminated in violation of provisions of Séc 25 -F of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( hereinafter referred as Act) . He was not paid any compensation for his retrenchment . His retrenchment is therefore illegal and improper. The persons who were employed after him in the said branch of the bank were not retrenched and thus the act of the management of his retrenchment is in violation ofprovisions of Sec 25 -G of the Act . That the management had not taken consent from the Competent Authority before his retrenchment and thus his retrenchment was done illegally without following the provisions of Sec 25 - G & N ofthe Act . That the workman was not called upon to join the service again and thus the management did not follow the provisions of Sec 25 -H of the Act. It has been prayed in the statement of claim by the workman that the act of the management be declared illegal and improper, be set aside and the management be directed to reinstate him on the post of peon .

3. The management in order to contest the reference , filed their written statement. Their pleadings in brief are as follows . That Shri Prashant Choudhary was never engaged 3016G1/05-24

against any post or vacancy in subordinate cadre of Ratlam branch on 4-3-94 as per recruitment rules and procedure . His engagement was purely on daily wage basis according to the need and ex.gencies of Bank - work of contingent in nature, on payment of labour charges debiting the working expenses . It is denied that applicant Shri Prashant Choudhury rendered 240 days uninterrupted service at Ratlam Branch of UCO Bank. The concept of provisions contained in Sec . 25 -B and 25 -F of the Act cannot be extended to any daily wages Casual Labour whose engagement was only on the basis of a contract lasting for aday according to the need and exigencies of Bank and each day engagement is a fresh lasting for a day. Hisdis- engagement was due to end of the need and necessity of the Bank which was just, fair and bonafide . Such type of dis- engagement is absolutely outside the concept of retrenchment since he was not engaged by the Branch Manager dehors the rule for doing somejob of contingent nature. The provisions of Sec - 25 - G & N were never violated for such non - engagement or disengagement . His engagement was by local arrangements only and not appointed as per the recruitment rules and procedure of the Bank. He has not rendered any service of un - interrupted in nature against any post or vacancy in Ratlam Branch of UCO Bank from 4-3-94 to 12-5-97 as claimed . It is prayedby the management in their Written Statement that the reference be answered in favour of the managemeni aer treating the prayer clause of applicant Shri Prashant Kar Choudhary as unwarranted, anmerited and untenabl ..

4. Workman Shri Prashant Choudhary examined himself as WW- I in support of his case . The management in order to resist the reference examined Shri Vilas Bhale- MW - 1 Assistant Manager , UCO Bank, Ratlam Branch and Smt . Manjula Patodia MW - II Branch Manager, Sarwn Branch , UCO Bank.

5.Both the parties have filed certain documents in support of their respective contentions which appear to be Photostat copy of the originals . Those documents may be referred in the body of this award at appropriate places where the need be .

6. I have heard Shri D.K. Khare , Advocate learned counsel for the workman and Shri M.R. Chandra , Advocate learned counsel for the management . I have very carefully gone through the entire evidence on record .

FINDINGS

7. The learned counsel for the workman submitted that the workman remained in the continuous employment of the management as peon for more than 240 days and therefore it was mandatory on the part of management to comply with the provisions of Sec 25 - F of the Act before his retrenchment . Against the above , the learned counsel for the management submitted that there is no evidence on record to prove the fact that the workman continuously worked for 240 days in the employment of management and therefore there was no legal necessity of complying with provision of Sec 25 -F of the Act.

11680

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005 /ASVINA 30 , 1927

8. As per evidence of workman Shri Prashant Choudhary WW-I in his affidavit, it has been stated on oath by him that he was employed by the management on 4-3-94 as peon and he continuously worked till 12-5-97 as such and thus he continuously worked with the management for more than 240 days . Shri Vilas Bhale MW- I and Smt . Manjula Patodia MW - II in their oral evidence contained in their affdavits have denied the said fact stated by the workman. Both of them stated on oath that there was no necessity for the Bank to continue the engagement ofthe workman as regular employee either for 240 days or more at a stretch. The above pleaded fact by the workman that he continuously worked with the management for more than 240 days has been specifically denied in the Written Statement of the management . The workmanin order to prove the above fact that the he worked with the management for more than 240 days continuously, filed his affidavit and Photostat copy of the attendance sheet showing the dates on which he attended the management's office. This attendance sheet has been deniedby the management . On being cross examined on his affidavit, Shri Prashant Choudhary WW - I deposed that hehad himselfprepared details of his attendance and filed the same. This paper is not authentic. It is prepared by the workman himself. Nothing is on record to show as to what isthebasis ofpreparation of this paper. The workman did not file the details of his attendance obtained from the management therefore the above paper regarding details of attendance of the workman is not admissible in evidence . As a result thereof, the said paper cannot be read in evidence.At this stage, the learned counsel for the workman submitted that the management should have filed the vouchers for making payment to the workman for proving the number of days for which the workman worked with the management The learned counsel for the workman attracted the attention of this tribunal towards the following deposition made by Shri Vilas Bhale MW - I during his cross examination: -

"The vouchers of the payment must have been in the branch for the number of days for which theworkman worked during the year 1994 to 1997 That it is correct to say that the vouchers of payment have not been filed in this case. " The learned counsel for the workman submitted that the interest of justice required that the management could have filed the said vouchers for showing the number of days for which the workman worked with the management. Against it, the learned counsel for the management submitted that the ownus ofproving the fact that the workman has infact completed 240days in the last preceding 12 month'speriod is on the workman and not on the management. In this respect, he placed reliance on 2003 - SC Cases (L& S) 13 in the case if Issen Deinki versus Rajeev Kumar and 2002- SC Cases (L& S) 367 in the case ofRange Forest Officer versus S.T. Hadimani . The

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii) ] following has been held in 2003 - SC Cases (L& S) 13 cited above-

-The requirement of statute of 240 days cannot be disputed and it is not for the employee concerned to prove that he has infact completed 240 days in the preceding 12 months period."

The following has been held in 2002 SC cases (L& S ) 367 in the law cited above-

" Itwas the case of the claimant that he had so worked but this claim was denied by the appellant . It was than for the claimant to lead evidence to show that he had infact worked for 240 days in the year preceding his termination . Filing an affidavit is only his own statement in his favour and cannot be regarded as sufficient for any court or tribunal to come to the conclusion that the workman had infact worked for 240 days in a year. No proof of receipt of salary or wages for 240 days or order or record of appointment or engagement for the period was produced by the workman. On this ground alone, the award is liable to be set aside . "

Following the law cited above, it is concluded that if itis averred in the statement of claim that the workman remained in continuous service of 240 days and the same is denied by the management , then under the circumstances, the burden of proving the fact that the workman remained in the continuous service of the management for 240 days lies on the employee himself. In the case at hand , this burden has not beendischarged by the workman. Simply his affidavit has been filed stating that he worked for more than 240 days with the management in the last preceding 12months period which fact has been denied by the management's witnesses Shri Vilas Bhale MW- 1 and Smt. Manjula Patodia MW - II in evidence . The workmanhas not filed receipt of salary or wages for 240 days or order or record of appointment or engagement for that period for proving the fact that he worked with the management for 240 days . Under the circumstances , the workman has failed to prove that he had infact worked for 240 days or more in the preceding 12 months period. And as a result of which there has been no violation of the provision of Sec- 25-F on his dis - engagement from service.

10. In view ofmy findings above, it is concluded that the action of the management of Assistant General Manager, UCO Bank in terminating the services of Shri Prashant Choudhary w.e.f. 12-5-97 is justified and the workman is not entitled to any relief. The reference is, therefore, decided accordingly in favour of the management aand against the workman. However the parties shall bear their own cost of this reference .

11. The copy of the award be sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour as per rules.

C. M. SINGH, Presiding Officer 11681 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 28 सितम्बर, 2005

का.आ. 3873.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार स्काईलाइन एन इपीसी 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- II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 76/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

Theworkman applicant has filed statement ofclaim Inthe statement of claim it has been stated that the claimant was working with the management with effect from 1-2-1994 asMarketing Analyst. The claimant was appointed vide letter dated 11-3-1994 and was confirmed vide letter dated 8-8-1994. It is further submitted that the claimant was promoted as Assistant Manager vide letter dated 28-7-1995 . The last drawn salary by the claimant was Rs . 11,050. It is further submitted that the work performedby the claimant was mainly clerical in nature and the claimant is a workman within the definition of Section 2( s) ofthe ID Act, 1947.

[सं. एल -11012/98/98- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एन. पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 28th September, 2005

It is further submitted that the management vide letter dated 8-8-1997 illegally terminated the services of the claimant without giving notice pay and retrenchment compensation . It is further submitted that the said termination was in violation of Section, 25 F and other provisions of ID Act . It is submitted that the management even failed to pay salary for the month of July and August when the claimant had actually worked. The salary forthe month of June was also paid only in the month of September.

S.C. 3873. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 76/99) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court , New Delhi -Il now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Skyline NEPC Ltd. and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 26-9-2005.

[No. L- 11012/98/98 -IR (C-I) ] N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

The respondent/ management has failed to pay any notice pay or retrenchment compensation to the claimant. It is therefore, submitted that the illegal retrenchment is in violation of the ID Act and amounts to illgal termination. The claimant is therefore entitled for reinstatement with fullbackwages.

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- ABOUR COURT - IL, NEW DELHI

It is further submitted that for any reason if the management is unable to reinstate the claimant and pay back wages , the management is liable to pay the following dues to the claimant :

PRESIDING OFFICER : R.N. RAI

Amounts L.D. NO. 76/1999

Particulars

Rs. 11,050.00

Earned wage for the month of July, 97

IN THE MATTEROF :-

Earned wage for 8 days in the month

Rs. 2,920.00

ofAug. , 97

Medical reimbursement

Smt. Rimmi Kalyan, R/o . L - 11 , Sarita Vihar, New Delhi- 110044

Rs.10,000,00

LTA

Rs.4,000,00 Versus

Rs. 11,050.00

Notice pay(Onemonth salary)

Rs. 22,100.00.

Retrenchment compensation @ 15 days pay every Completed year of services .

Total

Rs. 61,120.00 The Skyline NEPC Limited, G-39, 3rd Floor, Pawan House, Connought Place, NewDelhi - 110001 .

AWARD

Interest on the above @ 24 % from the date of illegal retrenchment till

Rs . 36,670.00

thedate of filing the claim.

Rs . 30,000.00 TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No : L - 11012/98/ 98- IR (C-I) Central Government Dt . 11-3-1999 has referred the following point for adjudication.

Compensation for harassment causing mental tension .

The point runs as hereunder :-

"Whether Smt . Rimmi Kalyan who was posted as Assistant Manager in Skyline NEPC Co. is an employee according to the provision and said rule or not? If she is an employee whether it is justified and legal to terminate her services w.e.f. 8-8-1997 ? If not to what relief she is entitled to . "

In the facts and circumstances stated above, it is most respectfully prayed that the management be directed to reinstate the claimant and award full back wages or direct the respondentto pay an amount of Rs . 1,27,790.00 as stated above along with interest @ 18% till the date of actual payment also award Rs . 10,000.00 towards cost of theclaim.

11682

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

Assistant Manager. She was not a workman. Her dutywas managerial .

The management has filed written statement In the written statement it has been stated that the claimant is not a ' workman ' as defined under section 2 (s ) of the ID Act , 1947 which specifically provides that one who is employed mainly in a managerial or administrative capacity is not a 'workman' .

From perusal ofthe record it transpires that it is the admission of the applicant that she was promoted to the post of Assistant Manager and her salary was Rs . 11050/-. Shedoes not come under the category of workman . The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to decide this case as the workman was posted in the managerial capacity. She did not turn up despite notice sent twice . She is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.

The reference is replied thus :-

The action ofthe management of Skyline NEPC Co. in terminating the services of Smt . Rimmi Kalyan w.e.f. 8-8-1997 is legal and just . She is not entitled to get any reliefas prayed for. The award is given accordingly.

That the claimant was appointed as 'Marketing Analyst' which is basically an administrative function involving the formation of marketing policies . In fact , her position as ' Marketing Analyst was a sort of probation , during which she was trainedto hold a mangerial position . Later on she was promoted as 'Assistant Manager ' (Marketing ) . In her capacity as 'Assistant Manager ' , besides framing of marketing policies she was also responsible for supervision of 'Marketing Executives ' . Her salary at time of her termination was Rs . 11,050/- which also shows that her nature of work was not clerical .

Date: 21-9-2005.

R.N. RAI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 28 सितम्बर, 2005

That the claimant was not a ' workman ' under the ID Act . Therefore, the claimant has no right to raise any industrial dispute and the present reference to this Hon'ble Court/Tribunal is illegal and void . Hence , this Hon'ble Court/Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the present. dispute and the claim ofthe claimant is liable to be dismissed.

का.आ. 3874.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार जैट एअरवेज के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय मुम्बई II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 48/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । Itisspecifically denied that the work performed by herwas clerical in nature and she is a workman within the definition of Section 2 (s) of the ID Act. In fact , she used to perform the work of the managerial nature.Even otherwise, it is unbelieavable that she was getting a salary of Rs. 11,050/- for performing clerical work.

[सं. एल-11012/32/2003- आई आर ( सी- I ) ] एन. पी. केशवन , डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 28th September, 2005 Itisdenied that the services of claimant were illegally terminated in violation of Section 25 (F) or any other provision of ID Act. In fact , the claimant was not a 'workman' and the provisions of ID Act are not applicable toher. It is stated that the claimant was not a workman and theprovisions of D Act are not applicable to her. Therefore there is no question of any illegal termination or retrenchment . Hence , it is specifically denied that the claimant is entitled for any einstatement .

S.O. 3874. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 48/ 2003) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court , Mumbai - II now as shown in the Annexure, in Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Jet Airways and their workman , which wasreceived by the Central Government on 22-9-2005.

The claims of the claimant are denied. It is also denied that the management is liable to pay any sum to the claimant . Itisfurther stated that the alleged conciliation proceedings and the present reference is also illegal and void.

[No. L - 11012/32/2003 -IR( C-I )] N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL No. 2, AT MUMBAI PRESENT:

B.I. Kazi : Presiding Officer REFERENCE No. CGIT - 2/ 48 OF 2003 Employers in Relation to the Mangement of M/s . Jet Airways AND

It transpires from perusal of the record that the applicant was not present after 6-5-2004 . Notice has been sent to her twice but still she did not turn up . The management was present on the date of arguinent . Argument was heard from the side of the management . The case of the workman applicant is that she was promoted as Assistant Manager by letter dated 28-7-1995 . Her last drawn salary was Rs. 11,050/- . The management illegally terminated her services without paying retrenchment compensation . She has demanded Rs. 61,120/-aswages due and notice pay and Rs . 30,000/- ascompensation and interest Rs . 36,670/- on the entire amount . The case of the management is that she was [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

11683

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

Their Workmen

(Shri Rajendra D. Waghmare)

APPEARANCES :

FortheEmployer

: Smt . P.A. Kulkarni . Advocate

Forthe Workman

: No appearance

Mumbai , Dated 29th August, 2005

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi , by its order No. L- 11012/32/ 2003 - IR (C - I ) dated 22-8-2003 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) ofsub -section ( 1 ) and sub -section 2( A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 have referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :-

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of M/s . Jet Airways (India) Pvt . Ltd. , to dismiss Shri Rajendra D. Waghmare, Loader-cum-Cleaner from service w.e.f. 26-6-2002 is justified? If not , what relief is the workman, entitled to ?"

2.Onreceipt of Order of Reference from Government notices were issued on 7-10-2003 to Management and Union (Exh. 2) . Both parties duly served (Exh. 3 & 4) . The matter was adjourned from time to time for filing of Statement of Claimby the Union . However, no Statement of Claim was filed. Exparte notice was therefore issued to the Union on 13-8-2004 (Exh. 6) . The same was duly served on the Union (Exh . 7) . On 31-8-2004 Workman appeared in person and applied for adjournment (Exh . 8) . Thereafter the matter was adjourned sino-die . On 21-2-2005 again notices were sent to theManagement, the Union and the Workman for filing Statement of Claim on 22-3-2005 and on the said date workman remained present, Union and Management remained absent. The matter was therefore adjourned at the request of workmen on 28-4-2005 . On 28-4-2005 union and workman remained absent and Advocate for the Management remained present. Exparte notice was again issued to the Union and Workman on 02-06-2005 (Exh. 13) which was duly served upon the Union and the Workman (Exh. 14 & 15) .However , both the parties remained absent. The matter was, therefore , once again adjourned finally for Statement ofClaim and posted on 26-7-2005. On 26-7-2005 also the Workman remained absent. Ms. Pooja Kulkarni , Advocate for Management appeared and filed application for disposing the matter for want of prosecution (Exh. 17) . Heard the advocates for the Management .

3. In my view Workman was given sufficient opportunity and a fair chance for filing statement ofclaim from time to time since 4-11-2003 . The Workman however failed to file the Statement of Claim, nor bothered to appear before the Tribunal and explain his difficulty in filing the statement of claim which shows that he is not interested in conducting the matter. I , therefore , find the prayer of the Management Advocate , for disposing the matter for want ofprosecution, just and fair and hence pass the following order:-

ORDER

Reference stands disposed of her want of prosecution.

B.I. KAZI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 28 सितम्बर, 2005

का.आ. 3875.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार इंडस्ट्रीयल फ्यूल कं. ( प्रा. ) लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों केबीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 3/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/104/99-आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एन. पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi, the 28th September, 2005 S.O. 3875. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 3/2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court, Dhanbad - I now as shown in the annexure, in industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Industrial Fuel Co. (P) Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on22-9-2005.

No. L-20012/104/99 - IR(C-I) ] N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . I, DHANBAD Inthe matter ofa reference U/s. 10( 1 )(d)(2A) of I.D. Act . Reference No. 3 of2000

PARTIES: Employers in relation to the management of Industrial Fuel Co. (Pvt . ) , Ltd. Bhuli AND TheirWorkmen

PRESENT:

Shri Sarju Prasad, Presiding Officer

APPEARANCES :

Forthe Employers

: Shri D.K. Verma Advocate

Forthe Workman

None

State : Jharkhand.

Industry: Coal Dated the 15th September, 2005 11684

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

AWARD

ByOrder No, L-20012/ 104/ 99 - IR(C-I) dated 18-8-1999 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 . Αα, 1941 referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:

"Whether the action of the management of M/s. Industrial Fuel Company ( Pvt . ) Ltd. , At & P.O. Bhuli , Dhanbad, in dismissing the services of Smt. Mandu Devi , w.e.f. 5-3-92 is proper and justified? If not, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled?"

2. This reference case was received in this Tribunal on3-1-2000.But since 16-4-2002 none is appearing on behalf ofthe workman to take any step. It has also been brought to the notice of this Tribunal that the Industrial Fuel Company (Pvt . ) Ltd. has been closed.

3. In such circumstances, I render a ' No Dispute' Award in the present reference case .

SARJU PRASAD , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 28 सितम्बर, 2005

का.आ. 3876.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 1 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सीसीएल के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 109/95 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-20012/325/95- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एन. पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 28th September, 2005 S.O. 3876. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 109/ 95) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court, Dhanbad- I 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 22-9-2005.

[No. L -20012 /325/95 - IR (C- I ) ] N. P. KESAVAN , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . I, DHANBAD Inthe matter of a reference U/S 10 ( 1 ) (D ) ( 2A) ofI.D.Act

Reference No. 109 of 1996

PARTIES: Employers in relation to the management of Kathara Washery of M/ s . CCL. AND

TheirWorkman

[PART II SEC . 3 ( ii) ] PRESENT : Shri Sarju Prasad, Presiding Officer APPEARANCES :

For theEmployers : Shri D. K. Verma , Advocate For the Workman : Shri D. Mukherjee, Advocate State : Jharkhand.

Industry: Coal.

Dated, the 15th September, 2005 AWARD

By Order No. L- 200212 /325 / 95 - IR (Coal- I ) dated 7-11-1996 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- sec . ( 1) and sub - sec . (2A) of Section 10 ofthe I.D. Act , 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication to thisTribunal:

"Whether the action of the management of Kathara Washery of M/s . CCL , P.O. Kathara, Distt . Bokaro in not accepting the date of birth of Sri Hardhan Chakraborty as 1-2-1934 and retiring him w.e.f. 9-1-1994 is justified? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled?"

2. Shri D. Mukherjee appearing on behalf of the workman submits that the concerned workman has died and the legal representatives are not traceable and as such he submits for passing of a ' No Dispute ' Award in this reference case .

3. In view of the submission being made by Shri Mukherjee on behalf of the workman , I render a ' No Dispute' Award in the present reference case .

SARJU PRASAD , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 28 सितम्बर, 2005

का.आ. 3877. 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- I के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 21/94) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/35/93- आई आर ( सी-1) ] एन. पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 28th September, 2005 S.O. 3877. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 21/94 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court, Dhanbad- I as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of BCCL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 22-9-2005.

[No. L -20012/35/93 - IR ( C-I ) ] N. P. KESAVAN , Desk Officer भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. L, DHANBAD In the matter ofa reference U/s. 10( 1 )(d)(2A) of

I.D. Act. 1947

Reference No. 21 of 1994

PARTIES : Employers in relation to the management of Moonidih Project of M/ s . B.C.C. Ltd.

AND

Their Workmen

PRESENT : Shri Sarju Prasad, Presiding Officer APPEARANCES :

11685

Shri R. N. Ganguly, Advocate

For the Employers :

For the Workmen : Shri B. N. Singh, Addl .General Secretary, National CoalWorkers Congress .

Coal .

Industry:

State : Jharkhand.

Dated, the 14th September, 2005

AWARD

ByOrder No. L- 20012/ 35 /93 - IR dated 17-2-94 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise ofthe powers conferred by clause (d) of sub -sec. (1 ) and sub - sec. (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947, referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

"Whether the action ofthe management ofMoonidih Project ofM/ s . BCCL, P.O. Moonidih , Dt . Dhanbad in retiring the workman , Shri Sahmali Mia w.e.f. 9-7-90 is justified with reference to the date ofbirth of the workman recorded in Govindpur Colliery as 7-1-36 at the time of his initial appointment ? Ifnot, to what relief is the workman concerned entitled?" 2. The case of the sponsoring union is that the concerned workman, Sahmali Mia, was initially appointed as miner/loader in Govindpur Colliery on 1-4-1957 and at that time he had declared his date of birth to be 7-1-1936 in Form' B ' Register of Govindpur Colliery. Subsequently he was transferred to Moonidih Project from where he was superannuated w.e. f. 9-7-1990 as an imaginery date ofbirth was recorded in Form 'B' Register of Moonidih Colliery although in Form ' B ' Register of Govindpur Colliery his date ofbirth has been mentioned as 7-1-1936, therefore he ought to have been superannuated w.e.f. 6-1-1996 . The concerned workman submitted a petition dated 8-2-92 to the management mentioning that he has been superannuated pre -maturely from 9-7-1990 which is illegal and he should be allowed to resume the duty but the management of Moonidih Project paid no heed to his petition dated 8-2-1992 .

3. The case of the management, on the other hand , is that the date ofbirth of the concerned workman in Form ' B ' Register which is a statutory register maintained under Sec.48 of the Mines Act and Rules framed thereunder, his date ofbirth has been mentioned as 9-7-1930 and in C.M.P.F. record and Identity Card Register also the same date of birth has been mentioned. Accordingly, the concerned workamn was issued an Identity Card in which the same date ofbirth i.e. 9-7-1930 was mentioned . The concerned workman was also served with a service excerpt sometime in the year 1987 as per decision of JBCCI . In that service excerpt also the same date of birth was mentioned . The concerned workman did not raise any objection regarding thedate ofbirth at that time, rather returned back a copy of service excerpt duly signed by him . According to the management the service excerpt was served to all the workman of M/s . BCCL with clear cut instruction that if any one has got any objection regarding any entry in the service record ofthe comparry he must bring it to the notice ofthe management failing which the entries in the service record shall be treated to be final and no workman shall be allowed to dispute any entry later on . The concerned workman accordingly, after the completion of 60 years of age was superannuated from 9-7-1990 and prior to that he was served with a notice of superannuation but at that time also he did not raise any objection . The further case of the management is that after superannuation the concerned workman obtained all his retiral benefits including the gratuity, provident fund etc. and after two years of retirement he had made a representation for correction of his date of birth and allowing him to resume duty which was not allowed in view of the fact that in all the records of the company the same date of birth of the concerned workman has been mentioned which is 9-7-1930 and at no point of time the concerned workman has raised any objection regarding incorrect mention of the date of birth , therefore, the claim ofthe concerned workman which has beenreferred to this Tribunal after long period ofretirement from service is liable to be discarded.

4. From the pleadings of the parties and also evidence of the parties following facts emerged to be fully establsihed:

(i) The date of birth of the concerned workman in From ' B' Register, Identity Card Register , Identity Card issued to the concerned workman C.M.P.F. record and service excerpt served to the concerned workman as also the notice of superannuation is 9-7-1930 . But the concerned workman did not raise any objection during his entire service period.

(ii) The concerned workman has rather accepted all the retiral benefits after his superannuation and for the first time made a representation on 8-2-1992 i.e. almost after one year and seven months after the date of retirement that his date ofbirth at Govindpur Colliery in Form' B ' Register has been mentioned as 7-1-1936 .

(iii) The concerned workman has not filed any document in proof of his date of birth.

(iv) The concerned workman has not even taken any stepto call for the CMPF record from the office of CMPF . The concerned workman was 11686

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005 / ASVINA 30, 1927

appointed on 1-4-1957 by the erstwhile owner ofGovindpur colliery and at that time the said collierywas under the private management .But FormB Register of that colliery has not been brought on record.

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. L, DHANBAD Inthe matter ofa reference U/ s . 10 ( 1 )( d) (2A) of I.D. Act, 1947

Reference No. 4 of 1997

PARTIES : Employers in relation to the management of Amlabad Colliery of M/s . B.C.C. Ltd. AND

TheirWorkmen

PRESENT:

Shri Sarju Prasad, Presiding Officer APPEARANCES :

Forthe Employers

: Shri H. Nath, Advocate .

For the Workmen

: None

State : Jharkhand

5. Thus , from the materials on record it is clear that the concerned workman has not disputed the recording of his date of birth at Moonidih Project, although he was very well knowing that his date of birth has been recorded as 9-7-1930 in the statutory register and other records of the company and he gladly accepted the superannuation and retiral benefits . Therefore , now after two years of retirement the management rightly did not entertain his representation specially when he has gladly accepted all his retiral benefits. It is well settled principals of law enunciated by the Apex Court of this country that any dispute regarding entry of date of birth must be raised by the conerned person at reasonable opportunity and if any dispute is raised at the fag end of retirement such dispute cannot be entertained . In this case the dispute has been raised long - long after superannuation that also after accepting all the retiral benefits. Therefore , I find that the action of the management in retiring the concerned workman w.e.f. 9-7-1990 is justified and the concerned workman is not entitled to any relief.

6. Inthe result, I render following Award:

That the action of the management ofMoonidih Project of M/s . B.C.C. Ltd. in retiring the workman , Sahmali Miaw.e.f. 9-7-1990 is justified and the concerned workman isnot entitled to any relief.

SARJU PRASAD, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 28 सितम्बर, 2005

का.आ. 3878. 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 संख्या 4/97 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/421/95- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ]

एन. पी. केशवन , डैस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi , the 28th September, 2005 S.O. 3878. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 4/97) 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 receivedby the Central Government on 22-9-2005.

[No. L- 20012/421 /95 - IR (C-I ) ] N. P. KESAVAN , Desk Officer

Industry: Coal Dated the 13th September , 2005

AWARD

ByOrder No. L-20012/421 /95 -IR(C- I) dated 18-12-1996 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub - sec . ( 1) and Sub - sec . (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunai :

"Whether the demand by the Union , for regularisation of S/Shri Dular Chand and 45 others ( as per list ) by the management ofAmlabad Colliery ofM/s . B. C.C.L. is legal and justified? If so , to what relief are these workmen entitled?"

2. To-day ( 13-9-2005) was the date fixed for adducing evidence by the management, but no witness is present for being examined though the case is pending for the said purpose since long .

3. From the terms of reference it appears that it was the demand of the sponsoring union for regularisation of 46 workmen but inspite of several opportunity they have failed to adduce any evidence to prove that relationship of employers and employees exists or existed between the management of M/s. B.C.C.Ltd . and the concerned persons .

4. Mr. C. Prasad, Advocate , who was authorised by the sponsoring union and the workmen , was informed on 24-4-2002 to adduce evidence but he expressed his inability to adduce any evidence .

5. The management has clearly denied relationship between the management of M/ s.B.C.C.Ltd . and the concerned persons , Shri Dular Chand and 45 others.

6. Since the sponsoring union/workmen have failed to prove that they have worked under the management for 190/240 days in underground /surface mine , I render a 'No Dispute ' Award in the present reference case.

SARJU PRASAD , Presiding Officer 11687

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नईदिल्ली, 28 सितम्बर, 2005

का.आ. 3879.- 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- I के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 2/99) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/518/97 - आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एन. पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 28th September, 2005 S.O. 3879. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 2/99) 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 22-9-2005.

[No. L-20012/518//97 -IR (C- I) ] 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) (2A) of I.D. Act, 1947

Reference No. 2 of 1999

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the management ofBararee Colliery ofM/ s . B.C.C. Ltd.

AND

TheirWorkmen

PRESENT:

Shri Sarju Prasad, Presiding Officer APPEARANCES :

None.

Forthe Employers

: None .

For the Workmen

Industry: Coal State: Jharkhand

Dated the 7th September , 2005 AWARD

ByOrder No. L-20012/518/97 - IR(C- I) dated 16-12-1998 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d ) of Sub - sec . (1 ) and Sub - sec . (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 ofBararee Colliery of M/s.BCCL in dismissing Sri Bechan , M/ Loader from the services of the Company w.e.f. 3016 G1/ 05-25

1-9-92 is justified ? If not to what relief the workmen is entitled?"

2. This reference case is of the year 1999. Despite notice sent to the parties neither any written statement has been filed on behalf of the workman nor anyone has appeared on behalf of the workman to take any step. It, therefore , appears that neither the concerned workman nor the sponsoring union is interested to contest the case.

2. Under such circumstances, I render a ' No Dispute ' Award inthe present reference case.

SARJU PRASAD , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 28 सितम्बर, 2005

का.आ. 3880.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का14 ) 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 संख्या 20/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-20012/242/98- आई आर ( सी- I ) ] एन. पी. केशवन , डैस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi, the 28th September, 2005 S.O. 3880.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 20/99) 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 22-9-2005.

[No. L-20012/242/98 - IR (C- I)] N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . I, DHANBAD Inthe matter of a reference U/s . 10( 1) (d) ( 2A) of I.D. Act, 1947

Reference No. 20 of 1999 .

PARTIES :

Employers in relation to the management ofBastacola CollieryofM/s. B.C.C. Ltd.

AND Their Workmen

PRESENT:

Shri Sarju Prasad, Presiding Officer APPEARANCES :

Forthe Employers : Shri R.N.Ganguly, Advocate .

For the Workman : Shri Ram Ratan Ram, JointGeneral Secretary, B.M.U.

Industry: Coal State: Jharkhand 11688

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

AND

Dated the 6th September, 2005

AWARD

Their Workmen

PRESENT:

Shri Sarju Prasad, Presiding Officer

APPEARANCES :

None

Forthe Employers

ByOrder No. L- 20012/242/ 98 -IR(C-I) dated 28-1-1999 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- sec. (1) and sub -sec . ( 2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

Forthe Workmen

None

State: Jharkhand

Industry: Coal

Dated, the 6th September, 2005 "Whether the demand ofthe union ofEmployment ofShri Suresh Bhuiya as dependent son of late Rudwa Bhuini , Ex -Wagon Loader of Bastacolla Colliery is justified? If so , to what relief the dependent son of the deceased workman is entitled to?"

AWARD

2. Shri Ram Ratan Ram appearing on behalf ofthe concerned person, Suresh Bhuiya, dependant son of late Rudwa Bhuini, Ex-Wagon Loader of Bastacolla Colliery, filesa petition stating therein that Suresh Bhuiya died in the month of June, 2004 and also has prayed to withdraw the case.

ByOrder No. L- 20012/ 644/97 -IR (C -I) dated 13-8-1998 the Central Government in the Ministry ofLabour 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 for adjudication to this Tribunal :

3. In view of the above circumstances , I render a 'NoDispute' award in the present reference case.

SARJU PRASAD, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 28 सितम्बर, 2005

"Whether the demand of the union for giving notional seniority and rectification in the date of promotion as Dumper Operator, Grade- I , in Group 'B' in respect of S/ Sri Lazman Mandal, Arti Das , Robert Konedy, Chottu Murmu, Ganesh Mahta and R. Ingasqu of Jarangdih Colliery (Kathara Area) , C.C.L. is Legal and justified ? Ifnot, to what reliefthe workman are entitled to ?"

: का.आ. 3881.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार भा. को. को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्रके 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 46/98 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/644/97- आईआर( सी -1 ) ] एन.पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी

2. This reference case was received in this Tribunal on 1-9-1998 . Despite registered notice sent to the parties none appears even to - day on behalf of the concerned workmen to file their written statement . It, therefore, appears that neither the sponsoring union nor the concerned workmen are interested to contest the case.

New Delhi , the 28th September, 2005

3. Under such circumstances , I render a ' No Dispute ' Award in the present case.

SARJU PRASAD, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 28 सितम्बर, 2005

S.O. 3881.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.46/98 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court, Dhanbad- I now as shown in the Annexure in Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of CCL and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 22-9-2005 .

[No.L -20012/644/97 - IR(C-I) ] N. P. KESAVAN , Desk Officer

का.आ. 3882.- 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 संख्या 64/95 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

[सं. एल-20012/423/93- आईआर ( सी -1 ) ] एन.पी. केशवन , डैस्क अधिकारी INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. I, DHANBAD

New Delhi , the 28th September, 2005 Inthe matter of a reference U/s . 10 ( 1 ) ( d) (2A ) of I.D. Act , 1947

Reference No.46 of 1998

PARTIES

Employers in relation to the manage- ment of C.C. Ltd.

S.O. 3882. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.64/95 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , Dhanbad- I now as shown in the Annexure 11689 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

industrial dispute through the sponsoring union, Janta Mazdoor Sangh, before Asstt . Labour Commissioner (Central) , Dhanbad.

in. Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 22-09-2005 .

[No. L-20012/423/93 - IR (C-I) ]

N.P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALNO . L, DHANBAD

In the matter of a reference U/ S . 10 (1 ) (d) (2A) of I.D. Act, 1947

Reference No. 64 of 1995

Parties: Employers in relation to the management of Hurlidih Colliery ofBhalgora Area ofM/S . BCCL AND

TheirWorkmen

Present:

Shri Sarju Prasad, Presiding Officer

APPEARANCES :

Their further case is that they were engaged by the management ofHurlidih colliery both in underground and surface of the mine on different time - rated jobs , such as , stone cutting, tyndals , installation of machines , stopping etc. under the direct control and supervision of the management . They were issued implements for doing day todaywork by the management and their attendance were also marked by the management and the cap lamps were issued to them whenever they have to go for work into underground mine . They were paid through the Pay Clerk ofthe management and their works were duly supervised bythe management's representative. They were also doing in prohibited category of work, like , tyndals, stone cutting etc. for over three years and such works are of permanent and perennial nature. Although they were working under the direct supervision of the management of M/s . BCCL but they were not being paid wages as per NCWA nor they were being paid other benefits, like , L.T.C. , Bonus etc. like regular employees . The claim ofthe concerned workmen is for regularisation as permanent employees in the time- rated job of the management of M/s . BCCL .

For the Employers : Shri D. K. Verma, Advocate

Forthe Workmen :Shri S. C. Gour, Advocate

Industry: Coal

State: Jharkhand

Dated, the Ist September, 2005

AWARD

By Order No. L- 20012/423/93 - IR ( Coal - I ) dated 16-6-1995 the Central Government in the Ministry ofLabour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub- sec . ( I ) and Sub -section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:

"Whether the demand of the Union for regularisation/ employment by the management of Bhalgora Area ofM/ s . BCCL of Sh . Ramashish Paswan and 81 other (as per list enclosed) members of a RegisteredCo- operative Society namely Kustore Shramik Sahayog Samitee Ltd. , is justified ? If not , to what relief are these concerned workman entitled to ?"

3. The case of the management is that the concerned workmen are the members of Kustore Shramik Sahayog Samitee at Hurlidih Colliery of Bhalgora Area of the Company and during the period of 1989 to 1992 they were given some contractual work for doing some temporary work, like, installation and stopping etc. and the payment were being made to the Co-operative Society through cheque. The concerned persons were never working under the supervision and control of the management and no relationship of employer and employee existed between the management of Hurlidih Colliery and the concerned persons.Accordingly to the management, the concerned persons have never worked on permanent and perennial nature of the job . The Co -operative Society was assigned some contractual job of very short duration and purely temporary in nature . The work was supervisied by the Secretary of the Co-operative Society and on completion ofthe work the Society was paid the billed amount through cheque. The concerned persons were never made payment of wages by the representative of the management . According to the management, there was no relationship ofemployer and employee between the management and the concerned persons , therefore the present reference is not maintainable.

4. The point for consideration in this case is whether the concerned persons were engaged by the management and the relationship of employer and employee existed between the management and the concerned persons , if so, whether they were doing the job of permanent nature and had they completed more than 190/240 days of work during a calendar year doing such job into underground 2. The case of the concerned workmen is that they are members of Kustore Shramik Sahayog Samitee Ltd. , a Registered Co -operative Society, who were engaged by the management of Hurlidih Colliery to work in different time- ratedjobs of the colliery in the month of April , 1989 andthey continued to work as such till the end of January, 1992. In January, 1992 they were stopped from work by the management , when they asked the management to regularrise them on permanent roll of the company and make payment of wages and other benefits as that of permanent employees performing similar work . But nothing tengible came out then they have raised the present

3016G1/05-26 11690

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] mine/ surface and whether the concerned workmen are entitled for regularisation as permanent employee of the management .

Findings

5. The concerned workmen in order to prove relationship of employees and employer have adduced both oral and documentary evidence . The management toohas adduced oral evidence but the managment has not filed any documentary evidence .

(Personnel) on 1-10-90 in which he has claimed that the members of the Co -operative Society are working under different collieries of Bhalgora Area continuously for two years into underground mine also as Tyndal/Miner Loader, therefore, they may be departmentalised as permanent employees of the company. They have also filed the copy of letter dated 1-10-90 referred to above in order to prove that they have made demand to the management to regularise their services as permanent employees of the companybefore raising the present industrial dispute . The concerned workmen have also filed certain requisition slips ofthe authorities of M/s . BCCL at Hurlidih colliery from which it appears that they have requisitioned sometime 12 heads of Co-operative Society, sometime 8 heads , sometime 10 heads , 15 heads or different number of Co -operative workers. Requisition for workmen are in bunch and in all 15 such requisition slips have been filed. From these requisition slips it is clear that the claim of the management that Co- operative Society was given certain contract work is not correct, rather the management was requisitioning number ofworkmen per day in different shifts for day to day work. Besides the aforesaid requisition slips they have also filed reply of the management before the Asstt . Labour Commissioner(Central ) which is dated 20-7-93 in which the management has claimed to have made payment of Rs. 51,000 or odd by means six cheques in between 3-11-89 to 14-3-90 . But they have not explained how the paymentwas made when they had requisitioned the number ofworkers of the Co -operative Society for doing some miscellaneous jobs on different dates . The management has not filed tender register, lender notice or the work order register from which it would have been clear as to how many jobs were offered to the Co -operative Society oncontract basis . The management has not even filed the Attendance Register which is mandatory register in Form 'C' for underground mine and in Form ' E' for the surface of the mine to be maintained under the Mines Act . The management's witness K.L. Singh (MW- 1 ) who is the Agent ofHurlidih colliery has admitted that these are the mandatory registers , but the management has not filed the register in Form ' C' and Form ' E' to say how many days the concerned persons have worked in a calendar year. The concernedworkmen have filed an application before this Tribunal making a prayer to pass an order directing the management to produce Form ' C' register, Form 'E ' register and Cap Lamp Issue Register from which the actual number ofdays work by each of the concerned person would have been proved, but the management did not produced those registers nor has offered any explanation for non -production ofthe aforesaid registers . Therefore presumption has to be drawnagainst the management and the plea ofthe concerned personwill have to be accepted that they have worked for more than 190/240 days into underground/surface of the mine in a calendar year . This presumption is further supported by Ext. W- 2 series from which it appears that barring a few almost all the concerned persons have 6. The first witness of the workmen is WW- 1 Ramashray Gahalaut , one of the concerned workmen and the Secretary ofKustore Shramik Sahayog Samitee . He has said that he alongwith other workmen were working at Hurlidih Colliery from 1989 to 1992. Thereafter they were stoppedfrom work. They were in total 82 workmen working there . They were working as tyndal and overhead miscellaneous work , and there work was supervised and controlledby the officers ofM/s . BCCL . The payment was made by the clerk of BCCL . According to him, their attendance was more than 200 days in a year . He has filed attendance - sheet duly signed by Satyo Lal , Attendance Clerk andRajanNonia, Attendance Clerk of BCCL in all six sheetswhich have been marked Exts . W-2 to W-2 / 5 . From these attendance-sheets it appears that attendance of almost all the concerned persons except one is more than 240days in a calendar year. The concerned persons have produced one ofthe Attendance Clerk, Rajan Nonia, who hasbeen examined as WW - 3 and he has admitted that the attendance -sheet was prepared by him and bears his signature . He has clearly stated that he was Attendance Clerk of the management of BCCL . Besides this the concerned workman have examined another concerned workman, Ramasish Paswan and he too has clearly stated that they were working as Tyndal into underground mine and also on surface of the mine and their work was being supervised by the Engineer of the management. Besides that they have filed the registration certificate of the Co- operative Society and subscription receipts in order to prove that all the concerned persons are the members of registered Co-operative Society which is also admitted by the management They have filed some noting - sheets of the management- company which have been marked Ext. 4 seriesfrom which it appears that note- sheet was initiatc . by the management company for payment of certain jobs done by the members of the Co - operative Society. These documents have not been challenged by the management and in all there are 13 such note-sheets. Ext. W- 5 is the bill for day to day work during the month of October, 1990. Ext. W-6 is a letter addressed to the Agent ofSimlabahal /Burragarh/Hurlidih Colliery by the Personnel Manager of Bhalgora Area mentioning therein that Ramashray Gahalaut , Secretary of Kustore Shramik Sahayog Samites has addressed a letter to the Director 11691 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 22, 2005/ आश्विन 30, 1927

completedmore than 240 days work.

and that all the concerned workmen except one Jalandra Chouhanwhose name appears in Sl. No. 33 of the annexure to the order of reference . Since they were working continuously for about three years they are entitled tobe regularised as permanent employees of the company in due course against the sanctioned post if the concerned persons are found medically fit.

11. Inthe result, I render following award-

The demand of the union for regularisation/ employment bytne management of Bhalgora Area ofM/s . B.C.C. Ltd. of Shri Ramashish Paswan and 81 others (as per list enclosed) , the members of a Registered Co- operative Society, namely Kustore Shramik Sahayog Samitee Ltd. is justified, except one Jalandra Chouhan whose name appears in Sl . No. 33 ofthe list enclosed in the orderofreference. They are entitled for reinstatement into service on payment ofwages as prescribed under N.C.W.A. for General Mazdoor /Tyndal and are also entitled for regularisation as permanent employment by the management in due course on permanent vacancy provided such members of the Co-operative Society are found medically fit . The inanagement is directed to reinstate the concerned workmen into service on payment ofwages as prescribed urider N.C. W. A. for General Mazdoor/Tyndal within30 days from the date of publication of the award, failing which they shall be entitled for wages as prescribed under N.C.W.A. for General Mazdoor/Tyndal.

SARJU PRASAD, PresidingOfficer

SI. Name

Father'sName

No.

1. Ramashis Paswan

Shri Suryadeo Paswan

2. RamashrayGahalaut

Sri Suryadeo Paswan 7. The management's only witness , K.L. Singh, who wasAgent of Hurlidih colliery has come to say that the concernedpersons were never in the roll ofHurlidih colliery and they were never engaged by him during the period when he was posted. He has however admitted that the Co-operative Society was alloted the work of contract for some period but the management has not produced the register of contract order nor has produced the tender register. They have not even produced any licence of contractor as required under the Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970 nor they have filed any paper to show that the Co-operative Society was registered with them under the Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act. It appears that initially few work orders were issued to the Co- operative Society, but subsequently instead giving any work order for doing certain job the management was directly requisitioning number ofpersons for doing somejob both in the surface of the mine as well as into the underground mine . These jobs include the job oftyndal andjob ofremoval ofdebries, shifting machinery and its installation in different places . Therefore, it is apparent that the plea of the management that the Co- operative Society was given some temporary contract work appears to be incorrect. The real fact on lifting the veil appears to be that initially the concerned persons were engaged as contract labourers under a labour Co-operative Society in which all the concerned persons were members of that Society and they all used to do work under the banner of Co-operative Society including the Secretary. Thereafter, the management directly started requisitioning the services of the workmen on day to day basis as the volume ofwork and requirement . The Attendance Clerk of the management has prepared an attendance chart from which it appears that except Jalandra Chouhan (Sl . No. 33 of the list annexed to the order of reference ) all have completed more than 240 days work during calendar year 1990 .

3. Ashok Kumar Ram

Lt. Kapil Deo Ram

Sri Ashok Prasad

4. Uday Kumar Ram

Sri Lal Saheb Pawan

5. Bijay Paswan(II )

Sri Bhagirathi Ram

6. Sampuranand Prasad

7. Kamta Ram

Sri Deoki Ram 8. The concerned persons except Sl . No. 33 had completed more than 240 days work in a calendar year, but without complying with the provision of Sec . 25 -F ofthe Industrial Disputes Act their services have been terminated by the management which is abinitio void.

Sri Deoki Ram

8. Raghunath Ram

Sri Mahadeo Ram

9. Ram SwarupRam

SriBhikhar Ram

10. RamRakha Ram

Sri Chulhan Pandey

11. Chandradip Pandey

Sri Laxman Ram

12. Ram Naresh Ram

13. Paresh Nath Ram

Sri Raghunandan Ram

SriBrahamadeo Tiwari

14. Sarwan Kr. Tiwari

Sri RamLaganRam

15. BnayRam

9. From the materials available on record , I find that except Jalandra Chouhan (Sl. No. 33 ofthe annexure ) all the concerned workmen have completed more than 240 days work in a calendar year and have been working under the direct supervision and control of the management on different jobs, like , tyndals; have been illegally stopped fromwork by the management. Therefore , they are entitled for reinstatement into service as temporary Tyndal Mazdoor/General Mazdoor.

Sri Sachehu Prasad

16. Ashok Kr . Sinha

ChulhanPandey

17. Pradip Pandey

Sri Kameshwar Paswan

18. Deo Janam Paswan

Sri Ram Prasad Ram

19. Ram Charitra Ram

10. From the materials available on record the relationship of employer and employees fully established between the management of M/ s . BCCL at Hurlidih Colliery 11692

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22, 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

4 2

Sri Mahendra Tiwari 1 20. Satish Kr . Tiwari

Sri Deoki Ram

21. Bishwanath Ram

Sri Parmeshwar Prasad 22. Manoj Prasad

1 23. Ramakant Tiwari

Sri Jagannath Tiwari

Sri Deo Pati Ram 24. Krishana Prasad

Sri Lt. Ganesh Ram 25. Sumar Kr. Bharaty

1 26. Budhi Narayan Tiwary Sri Jagannath Tiwary

Sri Prameshwar Prasad 27. Rajendra Prasad

Sri Chandra Deo Paswan 1 28. Rajesh Paswan

Sri Bachu Sukla

29. Chandradip Sukla

30. Dina Nath Paswan Sri Jagnarayan Paswan 1

Sri Phakir Mahato 31. Bhushan Mahato

Sri Mohan Chauhan 32. Nandu Chauhan

33. Jalendra Chauhan

Sri Nargovind Chauhan 1

Sri Kameshwar Paswan 1 34. Ramasish Paswan( 11 )

Sri Gurucharan Ram

1 35. Sikandar Ram

Sri Maghanath Gahalot 36. Seo Pujan Gahalot

Sri Sanichar Mahato 37. Kapil Mahato

Sri Rambrichha Paswan 1 38. Bijay Paswan( 1)

Sri Basudeo Das .

39. Dilkeshwar Das.

Sri Chandar Das 1 40. Ram Bilash Das .

Sri Mohan Pd . Srivastava 1 41. Pramod Kr. Srivastava

SriMurti Yadav 42. Mahandra Yadav

Sri Ram Das Yadav 43. Baijnath Yadav

Sri Sanichar Mahato 44. Raja Mahato

1 45. Ram Bali Ram

SriRaghunandan Ram

Sri Sanichar Mahato 46. Rajendra Mahato

Sri Jai Ram Singh 47. Ghanshyam Singh

Sri Sita Ram Prasad 48. Jitendra Kumar

1 49. Adhesh Ram

Sri Laxman Ram

50. Udai Ram

Sri Sita Ram Prasad 51. Narendera Prasad

Sri Sivchand Paswan 52. Rambilash Paswan

1 53. Arvind Pd. Yadav

Sri Ram Murti Yadav 54. Lalan Chauhan

Sri S. Rajan Noniya

1 55. Kailash Rawani

Sri Trivani Rawani

Lt. Panchanand Pd .

56. Abhay Kumar Sinha

Sri Rambilash Paswan 57. Lalan Paswan

Sri Bodh Paswan 58. Surjdeo Paswan

Sri Sachu Prasad 59. Janardhan Kr . Sinha

Sri Sachu Prasad 60. Arun Kr . Sinha (II)

Sri Ashok Kr . Sinha 61. Mukesh Kr . Sinha

Md. Khalil Ansari 62. Md. Sahabuddin Ansari ,

Lt. Mahadeo Ram 63. Ram Rup Ram

15 64. RamPd. Ram

Lt.KirpalRam

15 65. Sheo Kr. Paswan

Raghuvir Paswan

15 66. Baidhnath Ram

Mungeshwar Ram

15 67. Ram Bilash Ram

Lt. Mahadeo Ram

Ram Bhajan Ram 68. Ram Resh Ram

Sadhu Pd . Verma 69. Rama Nand Verma

Ganesh Pd. Verma 70. Pradip Kr. Verma

Motilal Kushwaha.

71. Ram Naresh Kushwaha

11 72. Ranesh Chaudhary

10 73. Umesh Chaudhary

11 74. Munilal Chaudhary

09 75. Ram Asis Chaudhary

24 76. Arjun Chaudhary

11 77. Ramprit Chaudhary

25 78. Sahabudin Mia

26 79. ShivKumar Ram

12 80. Lakhan Chaudhary

09 81. Raghu Nath Saw

25 82. Ram Asis Yadav

नई दिल्ली, 28 सितम्बर, 2005

कोप्राप्त हुआ था । का.आ. 3883.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार जेएसी एअर सर्विसेज प्रा० लि० के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों केबीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, नई दिल्ली- II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 53/2002) को प्रकाशित करती है , जी केन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-9-2005 [सं. एल-11012/19/2002- आई.आर. ( सी-1 ) ] एन.पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 28th September, 2005 S.O. 3883. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 53/2002 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court, New Delhi II now as shown in the Annexure in Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of JAC Air Services Pvt . Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 26-09-2005.

[No. L- 11012/ 19/2002- IR(C-I ) ] N.P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT- IL, NEWDELHI

I.D. No. 53/2002 Presiding Officer : R.N. RAI .

IN THE MATTER OF :---

Sh . Bhagwan, S/o . Shri Harkesh , Loader No. 279 , Pass No. E- 168 ,

P.O. Didoli , Ghaziabad (UP).

11693 [ भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22 , 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

VERSUS

New Delhi , the 29th September , 2005 The Managing Director, J.A.C. Air Services Pvt. Ltd. , International Cargo Terminal, Public Amenities Building , Ground Floor, I.G.I. Airport, NewDelhi .

AWARD

S.O. 3884. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 108/2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum -Labour Court , No. 2 , New Delhi as shown in the Annexure in Industrial Dispute between the management of CPWD, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 29-09-2005 .

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L- 11012/ 19 /2002 - IR (C-I) Central Government Dt . 25-07-2002 has referred the following point for adjudication .

[No. L-42012/270/2002- IR ( CM - II) ] N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer The point runs as hereunder :--

ANNEXURE

"Whether the action of the management ofM/ s . JAC Air Services Pvt . Ltd. in dismissing Shri Bhagwan, Loader from services with effect from 24-05-2000 is just, fair and legal ? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled."

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT -II, NEWDELHI

L.D. No. 108/2003

PresidingOfficer : R. N. RAI. IN THE MATTER OF :- Sh. Umesh Chand, C/o. The General Secretary, All India CPWD (MRM) Karamchari Sangathan, 4823, Balbir Nagar Extension, Gali No. 13 , Shahadara, Delhi - 110032.

The claimant has stated in his claim that he was working as a Loader with the defendant Company i.e. JAC Air Services Pvt. Ltd. since December, 1991. He was working ondaily wages of Rs . 91 /- A. complaint was made against him on 22-05-2000 regarding demanding of extra money from the passenger for speedy clearance of his baggage . An inquiry was held but the workman was not given proper opportunitytodefend himself. His services were terminated on 24-05-2000 . No written statement has been filed and no affidavit of the workman in support of his claim statement hasbeen filed.

VERSUS

TheDirector General (Works) , CPWD,

Ittranspires from perusal of the order sheet that the workman has not been turning up since 28-04-2004. He has not filed affidavit in support of his claim statement so his claim is not maintainable.

The reference is replied thus:-

Nirman Bhawan ( JDivn . CPWD, East Block, R.K. Puram) , New Delhi - 110011.

AWARD

The action of the management of M/s . JAC Air Services Pvt . Ltd. in dismissing Shri Bhagwan, Loader from services with effect from 24-05-2000 is just , fair and legal. The workman applicant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L-42012/270/2002 -IR (CM- II ) Central Government Dt. 23-07-2003 has referred the following point for adjudication.

The Award is given accordingly.

The point runs as hereunder :-

Date: 23-09-2005

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 29 सितम्बर, 2005

"Whether the action of the management of CPWD in not regularizing the services of Shri Umesh Chand, Sewerman w.e.f. 01-12-1996 is legal and justified ? If not,to what relief the workman is entitled. "

Ittranspires from perusal of the order sheet that 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 CPWD in not regularizing the services of Shri Umesh Chand, Sewerman w.e.f. 01-12-1996 is legal and justified.

का.आ. 3884.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सी.पी.डब्ल्यू. डी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं . 2 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 108/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

Nodispute award is given.

Date:23-09-2005

R.N. RAI , PresidingOfficer [सं. एल -42012/270/2002- आई.आर. ( सी एम- II ) ] एन. पी. केशवन , डैस्क अधिकारी 11694

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 22 , 2005/ASVINA 30, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 29 सितम्बर, 2005

का.आ. 3885.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सी.पी.डब्ल्यू. डी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं. 2 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 149/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-42012/308/2003-आई.आर. ( सी एम- II ) ] एन. पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 29th September, 2005 S.O. 3885 - In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 149/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court, No. 2 , New Delhi as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the management of CPWD, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 29-09-2005 .

[No. L-42012/308/2003 - IR (CM- II)]

N. P. KESAVAN , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT-II, NEWDELHI

Presiding Officer : R. N. RAL

LD . No. 149/2004

IN THEMATTER OF :-

The National President ,

All India CPWD ( MRM) Karamchari Sangathan , 4823, Balbir Nagar Extension , Gali No. 13, Shahdara , Delhi - 110032.

VERSUS

The Executive Engineer,

CPWD, Air Conditioning Division-2,

Vidyut Bhawan, NewDelhi - 110011 .

AWARD

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No.L -42012/308/2003 - IR (CM - II ) Central Government Dt.23-08-2004 has referred the following point for adjudication.

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] The point runs as hereunder :-

"Whether the contract between the management of CPWD and their contractor is sham and the demand ofAll India CPWD ( MRM) Karamchari Sangathan for absorption/regularization of Shri Surender Paswan , Khalasi in the establishment of CPWD is legal and justified ? Ifyes , to what relief they are entitled. "

} Ittranspires from perusal of the order sheet that notice to the workman was sent twice to file claim statement but the workman applicant has not turned up. The management was present on 20-9-2005 but the workman was not present. The workman applicant has not filed claim statement despite service of the notice.

No dispute award is given. Date:23-09-2005

R.N. RAI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 29 सितम्बर, 2005

का.आ. 3886. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सी.पी.डब्ल्यू. डी. के प्रबंधतंत्रके संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं. 2 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 107/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-9-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-42012/271/2002- आई.आर. ( सी एम- II ) ] एन.पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 29th September , 2005 S.O. 3886. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 107/2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court, No. 2, New Delhi as shown in the Annexure in Industrial Dispute between the management of CPWD , and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 29-09-2005.

[No. L -42012/271/2002 - IR (CM - II) ] N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT -IL, NEW DELHI

PresidingOfficer : R. N. RAL

I.D. No. 107/2003

IN THE MATTER OF:-

Sh .Mukesh Kumar,

C/o. The General Secretary,

All India CPWD (MRM) Karamchari Sangathan , 4823 , Balbir Nagar Extension, Gali No. 13 , Shahdara, Delhi - 110032 .

11695 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 22, 2005/आश्विन 30, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

VERSUS

11. पोट्टिरेड्डिपट्टि

12. तुम्मड़कुरिची

TheDirector General (Works),

CPWD,

13. कोडिचेट्टिपट्टि

14. रेड्डिपट्टि

NirmanBhawan ( JDivn . CPWD , East Block, R.K. Puram), NewDelhi - 110011 .

15. नामक्कल तालुक का एन् पुदुपट्टि और AWARD

16. नल्लूर

17. मणियनूर

18. नामक्कल जिला में परमातिनेलूर तालुक के देवनम्पालयम ।

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. No.L -42012/ 271 /2002 - IR (CM - II ) Central Government Dt.23-07-2003 has referred the following point for adjudication.

The point runs as hereunder :-

[संख्या एस-38013/60/ 2005- एस.एस.- 1 ] के. सी. जैन, निदेशक

New Delhi , the 6th October , 2005 "Whether the action of the management of CPWD in not regularizing the services of Shri Mukesh Kumar, Sewerman w.e.f. 11-09-2001 is legal andjustified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled."

Ittranspires from perusal of the order sheet that 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 CPWD in not regularizing the services of Shri Mukesh Kumar , Sewerman w.e.f. 11-09-2001 is legal and justified.

S.O. 3887.- In exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub-section (3 ) of Section 1 of the Employees ' State Insurance Act , 1948 (34 of 1948) the Central Government hereby appoints the 10th October, 2005 as the date on which the provisions of Chapter IV (except Sections 44 and 45 which have already been brought into force) and Chapter -V and VI [except sub-section (1 ) of Section 76 and Sections 77 , 78 , 79 and 81 which have already been brought into force] of the said Act shall come into force in the following areas in the State of Tamilnadu namely:-

No dispute award is given.

Centre Name Areas comprising the revenue Date: 23-09-2005

villages of Namakkal

R.N. RAI, PresidingOfficer

01. Namakkal Municipal Limits

02. Chellappampatti

नई दिल्ली, 6 अक्तूबर, 2005

03. Pappanaickenpatti

04. Minnampalli

05. Nallipalayam

06. Veesanam

07. Vettampadi

08. Vallipuram

09. Periyapatti

10. Thusur

का.आ. 3887.- कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम, 1948 (1948का 34 ) की धारा-1 की उपधारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार एत‌द्वारा 10 अक्तूबर , 2005 को उस तारीख के रूप में नियत करती है, जिसको उक्त अधिनियम के अध्याय -4 (44 व 45 धारा के सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रवृत्त हो चुकी है ) अध्याय -5 और 6 [ धारा-76 की उपधारा ( 1 ) और धारा -77,78 , 79 और 81 के सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रवृत्त की जा चुकी है । के उपबंध तमिलनाडु राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे, अर्थात्,

11. Pottireddipatti

नामक्कल जिला के राजस्व गाँव

12. Thummankuruchi

1. नामक्कल नगरपालिका सीमा आरंभ

13. Kondichettipatti

14. Reddipatti

2. चेल्लप्पम्पट्टी

15. N. Pudupatti

3. पापनायक्कनपट्टी

ofNamakkal Taluk and

4. मिन्नम पल्ली

16. Nallur

5. नल्लिपालयम

17. Maniyanur

6. वीसानम

18. Devanampalayam

7. वेट्टाम्पाडी

ofParmathivelur Taluk

in Namakkal District

8. वल्लिपूरम

[No. S -38013/60/2005-S.S. 1 ] 9. पेरियप्पट्टि

K.C. JAIN, Director 10. तूसूर

Printed by the Manager , Govt . of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri , New Delhi - 110064 and Publishedby the Controller of Publications, Delhi - 110054.