This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

रजिस्ट्री सं० डी० एल० ( एन ) 04/ 0007/ 2003-05

REGD. NO . D. L. ( N) 04 /0007/2003-05 भारत का राजपत्र The Gazette of India

प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक

WEEKLY

सं० 51 No. 5)

नई दिल्ली, जनवरी 29- फरवरी4, 2006 , शनिवार /माघ 9- माघ 15 , 1927 NEW DELHI, JANUARY 29- FEBRUARY 4, 2006, SATURDAY/MAGHA 9-MAGHA 15, 1927 इस भाग में भिन्न पृष्ठ संख्या दी जाती है जिससे कि यह पृथक संकलन के रूप में रखा जा सके Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation

भाग II- खण्ड 3-उप-खण्ड ( ii) PART II-Section 3-Sub- section ( ii )

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

संचार और सूचना प्रौद्योगिकी मंत्रालय ( सूचना प्रौद्योगिकी विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 27 जनवरी , 2006 का. आ. 379.-केन्द्र सरकार एत‌द्वारा राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम, 1976 के नियम 10 के उप- नियम ( 4) के अनुसरण में, सूचना प्रौद्योगिकी विभाग के अंतर्गत आने वाली डीओईएसीसी नामक स्वायत्त संस्था के एम. एम. एम. इंजीनियरिंग कॉलेज कैम्पस , गोरखपुर, उत्तर प्रदेश स्थित कार्यालय , जिसके 80 प्रतिशत से अधिक कर्मचारियों ने हिन्दी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, को अधिसूचित करती है ।

[सं. 7(2)/2005/हि.अ. ] बी.बी. बहल, संयुक्त निदेशक MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (Department of Information Technology) New Delhi , the 27th January, 2006.

S.Q. 379. In pursuance of Sub -Rule (4 ) of the Rule 10 ofthe Official Language (Use for official purposes 194 G1/06

ofthe Union) Rules , 1976 , the Central Government hereby notifies the DOEACC centre . an autonomous society of the Department of Information Technology, located at M.M.M. Engineering College Campus . Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh , more than 80 % staff whereof have acquired the working knowledge ofHindi .

No. 7 (2)/20005-H.S . ] B. B. BAHL , Jt. Director (दूरसंचार विभाग ) (राजभाषाअनुभाग ) नईदिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 380.-केन्द्रीय सरकार , राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम 1976 ( यथा संशोधित 1987 ) के नियम 10(4) के अनुसरण में संचार और सूचना प्रौद्योगिकी मंत्रालय, दूरसंचार विभाग के प्रशासनिक नियंत्रणाधीन निम्नलिखित कार्यालय को , जिसमें 80 प्रतिशत से अधिक कर्मचारियों ने हिंदी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है , एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करती है ।

(925) 926

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15, 1927

महाप्रबंधक दूरसंचार, भारत संचार निगम लिमिटेड, नासिक दूरसंचारजिला , नासिक-422002

केन्द्रीय तार कार्यालय, एन. डी. पटेल रोड, नासिक-422001

[सं . ई .- 11016/1/ 2005 (रा.भा. ) ] हरीश चन्द्र जयाल, संयुक्त सचिव (Department of Telecommunications) (Official Language Section) New Delhi , the 25th January, 2006 .

S.O. 380.-In pursuance of Rule 10(4) of the Official Language(Use for official purposes of the Union) Rules , 1976, (asamended - 1987) , the Central Government hereby notifies the following Office under the administrative control ofMinistry of Communications and Information Technology, Department of Telecommunications whereof more than 80% of staff have acquired working knowledge ofHindi.

General Manager Telecom , BSNL , Nasik Telecom District , Nasik-422002 Central Telegraph Office, N.D. Patel Road, Nasik- 422001

[No. E. - 11016/1 /2005-(O.L . ) ] HARISH CHANDRA JAYAL, Jt . Secy.

विद्युत मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली , 20 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 381.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम, 1976 के नियम 10 के उप- नियम ( 4) के अनुसरण में पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , गुड़‌गांव के प्रशासनिक नियंत्रणाधीन निम्नलिखित कार्यालय को , जिनके 80 प्रतिशत कर्मचारीवृंद ने हिंदी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है , एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करती है :

1. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , दक्षेपाप्र -1 , 400 के.वी. हैदराबाद उप केंद्र , पोस्ट बॉक्स नं . 2, घटकेसर-501 301 (आं. प्र. ) 2. वैजाग एच.वी.डी.सी. स्टेशन एवं 400 के.वी. उप केंद्र, पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. ,

सैक्टर-10, उक्कु नगरम, विशाखापट्नम -530032 (आं. प्र.)

3. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. ,

स्थल कार्यालय , 19 न्यू तहसील पुरा ( कोका कोला चौक) जी.टी. रोड अमृतसर ( पंजाब )

4. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , कोराडीकार्यालय, एमएसईबी कालोनी, गेट नं. 2 , क्वार्टर नं. 2 , टाइप -4, सीपीआरआई कालोनी, नागपुर- छिंदवाड़ा रोड, कोराडी-441111 जिला: नागपुर (महाराष्ट्र)

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)] 5. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , बीना कार्यालय, पोस्टबॉक्स नं . 2, बी 1 , एमपीईबी काम्पलेक्स के पास, खिमलासा रोड, ग्राम: धनोरा, बीना-470113 जिला: सागर ( मध्य प्रदेश)

6. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , सागर कार्यालय , घर नं. सी-10, सोनार इनक्लव्ह , आनंद नगर, रोड नं. 2 , राजखेरी , मैक्रोनिया, सागर-470002 (मध्य प्रदेश)

7. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , ग्वालियर कार्यालय, जी 197, साइट नं. 2 , पटेल नगर, सिटी सेंटर , ग्वालियर-474011 (मध्य प्रदेश)

8. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , बैतूल कार्यालय, द्वारका नगर, बडोरा चौक , पुलिस चौकी के सामने, नागपुर रोड, बैतूल ( मध्य प्रदेश)

9. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , शहडोल कार्यालय , प्रथम मंजिल, 2/6, माइनिंग रोड, पांडव नगर, शहडोल-484001 (मध्य प्रदेश)

T 10. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , राजगढ़ कार्यालय, भंडारी सदन, राजेंद्र कालोनी , राजगढ़, जिला : धार, राजगढ़ -454116 (मध्य प्रदेश )

11. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , परताबपुर कार्यालय , मो. साकिब का मकान, बस स्टैंड के पास, परताबपुर, जिला: सरगुजा ( छत्तीसगढ़ )

12. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , सीधीकार्यालय, फ्लैट नं. 203/38 , शास्त्री नगर, सीधी ( मध्य प्रदेश) [भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

13. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , छिंदवाड़ाकार्यालय, दीनदयाल पुरम रोड, शिवं सुंदरम नगर के पास, छिंदवाड़ा-480001 ( मध्य प्रदेश ) 14. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , मंडला कार्यालय, शिव मंगलम भवन, स्वामीसीताराम वार्ड, मंडला-481661 ( मध्य प्रदेश)

15. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , भाटापारा कार्यालय, घर नं. 83 , हथनी पारा वार्ड, रेलवे स्टेशन रोड, डाकघर : भाटापारा -493118 जिला-रायपुर ( छत्तीसगढ़ )

16. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , अंबिकापुर कार्यालय, प्रथम मंजिल, प्लाट नं . 243/37, विद्यानगर, सैक्टर -3 , दत्ता कालोनी, पीजी कॉलेज के सामने अंबिकापुर-497 001 जिला-सरगुजा ( छत्तीसगढ़ )

17. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , कवर्धा कार्यालय , दूसरी मंजिल, घर नं. 28, प्रोफेसर कालोनी, फॉरेस्टडिपो के पास, कवर्धा-491995 ( छत्तीसगढ़ )

18. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडियां लि. , आसोज कार्यालय, 400 के.वी. जीईबी सब स्टेशन कॉम्पलेक्स, पो.: अमलियारा, हलोल रोड, वड़ोदरा -390022 जिला बड़ोदरा ( गुजरात )

19. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , सूरत कार्यालय, पिपलोड, सूरत ( गुजरात)

20. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , पुणे कार्यालय, फ्लैट नं. 902, " ए" बिल्डिंग, डी एस के चंद्रदीप सोसायटी, मुकुंद नगर, पुणे-411037

927

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

21. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , वडोदरा निरीक्षण कार्यालय, ई-107, प्रथम मंजिल, वृंदावन टाउनशिप, नागेश्वर महादेव टैंपल के सामने , हारनीरोड, वडोदरा -390006 ( गुजरात )

22. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , पणजी ( गोवा ) डीएमएस कार्यालय, प्रथम मंजिल, एफ-5, जैराम कॉम्पलेक्स, नेउगी नगर, पणजी-403001 ( गोवा)

23. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , मड़गांव (गोवा ) डीएमएस कार्यालय , प्लाट नं . 26, हाउसिंग बोर्ड , विद्यानगर, गोगोई, मड़गांव-403601 (गोवा )

24. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , अहमदाबाद डीएमएस कार्यालय, बी-3 , सनराइज शापिंग सेंटर , इंद्रप्रस्थ टावर के सामने , ड्राइव इन रोड, अहमदाबाद-380054 ( गुजर

25. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , जामनगर डीएमएस कार्यालय, फ्लैट नं. टी-1 , 102 त्रिवेणी आपार्टमेंट्स, पंचवटी, बेदी बंदर रोड, जामनगर -361002 ( गुजरात)

26. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , स्थल कार्यालय , 220/66 के.वी. उपकेंद्र , मनी माजरा-किशनगढ़ रोड, गांव किशनगढ़ , मनी माजरा, चंडीगढ़ -160002

27. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , बी-1 /30, सेक्टर- ए, अलीगंज, लखनऊ-226020 (उ.प्र. )

28. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , 220/132 के.वी. सब स्टेशन , सितारगंज ( उत्तरांचल )

29. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , बाईपास रोड, प्रगतिपुरम , ऋषिकेश-249201 ( उत्तरांचल ) 928

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

30. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , 481, आवास विकास कालोनी, कचेहरी रोड, मिर्जापुर-231001 ( उ.प्र. )

31. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , कार्यालय (निर्माण ) कांकरौली, साक्षी प्लाजा, सुंदर नगर, भीलवाड़ा रोड, कांकरौली, राजसमद ( राजस्थान ) , पिन-313324

32. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , आरएपीपी-सी ( निर्माण ) , उ.क्षे.- I , 2-न-4, दादाबाड़ी, कोटा-324 009 ( राजस्थान )

33. पावरग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लि. , 28, सिविल लाइंस , डा. बलदेव सिंह मार्ग, रुड़की, हरिद्वार ( उत्तरांचल)

[सं. 11017/5/2005-हिन्दी] हरीश चन्द्र, संयुक्त सचिव MINISTRY OF POWER

New Delhi , the 20th January, 2006

S.O. 381.-In pursuance Sub-Rule ( 4) of Rule 10 of the Official Language ( Use for Official Purposes of the Union) Rules, 1976 the Central Government hereby notifies the following offices under the administrative control of Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , Gurgaon, the staff whereof have acquired 80% working knowledge of Hindi:-

1. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , SRTS - 1,400 KV Hyderabad Sub -station, Post Box No. 2, Ghatkesar - 501301 (A.P. ) 2. Vizag HVDC Station & 400 KV Sub Station , Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , Sector- 10, Ukku Nagaram, Visakhapatnam-503 032 (A.P. )

3. Powergrid Corportion of India Ltd. , SiteOffice , 19 - New Tehsil Pura , (Near Coca- Cola Chowk) , G.T. Road, Amritsar (Punjab).

4. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , Koradi Office, MSEB Colony, Gate No.2 , Qtr . No. 2 , Type IV, CPRI Colony, Nagpur- ChindwaraRoad, Koradi -411111 Distt . Nagpur (M.S.) .

5. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , Bina Office , Post Box No. 2, B- 1 , Near MPEB Complex, Khimlasa Road, Village: Dhanora , Bina-470 113 , Distt . Sagar (M.P. )

[ PART II-SEC. 3( ii) | 6. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , Sagar Office , House No. C - 10 , Sonar Enclave, Anand Nagar, Road No. 2 , Rajkhori , Makaroniya . Sagar-470002 (Μ.Ρ. ) .

7. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , GwaliorOffice, G- 197 , Site No. 2 , Patel Nagar, City Centre .

8. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , BetulOffice, Dwarka Nagar, Badora Chowk , Opp . Police Chowkee , Nagpur Road, Betul(M.P. )

9. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , Shahdol Office , 1st Floor, 2/6 Mining Road, PandavNagar, Shahdol -484001 (Μ.Ρ. )

10. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , Rajgarh Office , Bhandari Saran, Rajendra Colony. Rajgarh , Distt . Dhar, Rajgarh -454 116 (Μ.Ρ.)

11. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd.. PartabpurOffice, House ofMd . Sakib , Near Bus Stand , Pratabpur, Distt . Sarguja ( Chhattisgarh ) .

12. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , Sidhi Office, FlatNo. 203/38 , Shastri Nagar, Sidhi (M.P. )

13. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , Chindwara Office , DinDayal Puram Road , Near Shivam Sundaram Nagar , Chindwara -480001 (Μ.Ρ. )

14. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , MandlaOffice, Shiv Manglam Bhavan , Swami Sitaram Ward, Mandla -481 661 (Μ.Ρ. )

15. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , BhataparaOffice, House NO. 83, Hathni Para Ward , Rly. Station Road, Post Bhatapara - 493 118 Distt. Raipur ( Chhattisgarh ) .

16. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , AmbikapurOffice, 1st FLoor, Plot No. 243/37, Vidhya Nagar, Sector -3 , Dutta Colony, Opp . PG College, Ambikapur -497001 Distt. Surguja (Chhattisgarh ).

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

17. PowergridCorporation of India Ltd. , Kawardha Office , 2nd Floor, House No. 28 , Professor Colony, Near-Forest Depot, Kawardha-491995 ( Chhattisgarh) .

18. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , AsojOffice, 400 K.V.GEB Sub- Station Complex, P.O. Amaliara, Halol Road, Vadodara-390 022 , Distt . Vadodara(Gujarat) .

19. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , SuratOffice, Piplod, Surat (Gujarat).

20. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , PuneOffice, Flat No. 902 , ' A' Building, DSK Chandradeep Society, Mukundnagar, Pune -411 037 (Maharahstra) .

21. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , Vadodara Inspection Office , E-107, First Floor, Vrindavan Township , Opp. Nageshwar Mahadev Temple, Harni Road, Vadodara-390006 (Gujarat ).

22. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , Panaji (Goa) DMS Office , 1st Floor, F-5 , Jairam Complex, Neugi Nagar, Panaji-403 001 (Goa) .

23. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , Madgaon (Goa) DMS Office , Plot No. 26, HousingBoard, Vidhya Nagar, Gogoi , Madgaon -403601 (Goa ) .

24. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , Ahmedabad DMS Office , B-3 , Sunrise Shopping Centre, Opp. Indraprastha Tower, Drive in Road, Ahmedabad-380 054 (Gujarat ) .

929

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

26. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd., SiteOffice 220/66 KV Sub- Station , ManiMajra, Kishangarh Road , Vill. Kishangarh, Manimajra, Chandigarh- 160002.

27. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , B -1 /30 , Sector -A, Aliganj , Lucknow- 226 020 (UP) .

28. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , 220/132KV Sub-Station, Sitarganj (Uttaranchal ) .

29. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , ByPass Road, Pragatipuram, Rishikesh - 249 201 ( Uttaranchal ) .

30. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , 481 , Avas Vikas Colony, Katchehari Road, Mirzapur - 231001 (U.P. ) .

31. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , Office(Construction) Kankroli , Sakshi Plaza , Sunder Nagar, Bhilwada Road, Kankroli , Rajsamad(Raj .) Pin-313 324.

32. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd.. RAPP( Construction) , NR- I , 2N4, Dadabari , Kota- 324009 (Rajasthan).

33. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , 28,Civil Lines, Dr. Baldev Singh Marg , Roorki , Haridwar (Uttaranchal ) .

[No. 11017 /5/2005-Hindi ]

HARISH CHANDRA , Jt . Secy.

कृषि मंत्रालय

( कृषि एवं सहकारिता विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 24 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 382.- केन्द्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम , 1976 के नियम 10 के उप - नियम (4 ) के अनुसरण में कृषि एवं सहकारिता विभाग , कृषि मंत्रालय के नियंत्रणाधीन स्वायत्त संगठन नारियल विकास बोर्ड, कोच्यि के निम्नलिखित कार्यालय को , जिसके 80 % कर्मचारीवृन्द ने हिन्दी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है , अधिसूचित करती है:-

राज्यकेन्द्र,

नारियल विकास बोर्ड,

वी.आई.पी. रोड,

जंगलीघाट, पोर्टब्लेयर,

दक्षिण अन्डमान-744 103

25. Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd. , Jamnagar DMS Office, Flat No. T- 1 , 102, Triveni Apartments , Panchwati , Bedi Bandar Road , Jamnagar- 361002 (Gujarat)

[सं. 3-2/2002-हिन्दी नीति ]

पी. के. जलाली, संयुक्त सचिवः 930

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE

(Department of Agriculture and Cooperation) New Delhi , the 24th January, 2006.

S.O. 382. In pursuance Sub -Rule ( 4) of Rule 10 of the Official Language ( Use for Official Purposes of the Union) Rules , 1976 , the Central Government hereby notifies the following office of the Coconut Development Board , Cochin , an autonomous organisation under the control of the Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture , 80 % Staff whereof have acquired theworking knowledge ofHindi:-

State Centre ,

Coconut Development Board , VIPRoad, Jungleeghat,.

PortBlair,

South Andaman-744103 .

[No. 3-2/2002-Hindi Neetil

P.K. JALALI , Jt. Secy.

वाणिज्य एवं उद्योग मंत्रालय (वाणिज्य विभाग )

(पूर्ति प्रभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 383.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम, 1976 के नियम 10 के उप- नियम (4) के अनुसरण में, वाणिज्य एवं उद्योग मंत्रालय, वाणिज्य विभाग ( पूर्ति प्रभाग ) के निम्नलिखित कार्यालयों में हिन्दी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान रखने वाले कर्मचारियों की संख्या 80% से अधिक हो जाने के फलस्वरूप इन कार्यालयों को एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करती है:-

1. उपनिदेशक ( गुणता आश्वासन ) का कार्यालय, पुराना आयकर कार्यालय परिसर, जी.पी.ओ. के सामने , इंदौर -452 001 ( मध्य प्रदेश)

2. उपनिदेशक ( गुणता आश्वासन ) का कार्यालय, 128- ए पाटलिपुत्र कॉलोनी, पटना-13

3. निदेशक ( गुणता आश्वासन ) का कार्यालय,

जवाहर सॉ मिल कंपाउंड, पहला तल , शाहपुर दरवाजा के बाहर,

शाहपुर, अहमदाबाद-380 004

4. निदेशक ( गुणता आश्वासन ) का कार्यालय,

" निजाम पैलेस " 234/4 , आचार्य जगदीश चंद्र बसु मार्ग , कोलकाता-700 020

[फा. सं. ई -11016/6/2004-हिन्दी]

एम.वि.पि.सि. शास्त्री, संयुक्त सचिव

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) | MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY

(Department of Commerce)

(SUPPLY DIVISION)

New Delhi , the 25th January, 2006

S.O. 383. In pursuance of Sub - rule ( 4) ofRule 10 ofOfficial Language ( Use for Official Purposes of the Union) Rules , 1976 , the Central Government hercby notify the following offices of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Department of Commerce (Supply Division) , where more than 80% of Staff have acquired working knowledge ofHindi :-

1. Office ofDeputy Director ( Quality Assurance ) . OldIncomeTax Office Compus , Opp .G.P.O. Indore - 452 001 ( MP)

2. Office of Deputy Director ( Quality Assurance ) , 128 - A, Patliputra Colony, Patna- 13

3. Office of the Director ( Quality Assurance ) , Jawahar Saw Mill Compound , Ist Floor, Outside Shahpur Gate , Shahpur, Ahmedabad- 380004.

4. Office of Deputy Director ( Quality Assurance ) "Nizam Palace" 234/4 , Acharya Jagdish Chandra Basu Road, Kolkata - 700 020.

[ F. No. E - 11016/6/2004-Hindi | M. V.P.C. SASTRY, Jt. Secy.

अन्तरिक्ष विभाग

बेंगलूर , 24 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 384.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम, 1976 के नियम 10 के उप-नियम (4) के अनुसरण में, एतद्द्वारा अन्तरिक्ष विभाग की राष्ट्रीय सुदूर संवेदन एजेन्सी, बालानगर, हैदराबाद को अधिसूचित करती है, जिसके 80 प्रतिशत से अधिक कर्मचारियों ने हिन्दी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है ।

[फा. सं. 8/1/6/ 2006 - VI ]

मो. इक्रामुल्ला, अवर सचिव DEPARTMENT OF SPACE Bangalore , the 24th January, 2006

S.O. 384. In pursuance of Sub- rule (4) of Rule 10 ofthe Official Language ( Use for Official Purposes of the Union) Rules, 1976, the Central Government hereby notifics National Remote Sensing Agency, Balanagar, Hyderabad under the Department of Space where more than 80 per cent staff have acquired the working knowledge ofHindi .

[No. 8/ 1 /6/2006-VI

Md . IKRAMULLA , Under Secy.

931

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/ माघ 15, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

उपभोक्ता कार्य एवं लोक वितरण मंत्रालय

( उपभोक्ता कार्य विभाग )

(भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो )

नईदिल्ली, 20 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 385.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो ( प्रमाणन ) विनियमन 1988 के विनियमन 5 के उप विनियमन ( 6 ) के आधार पर निम्नलिखित विवरण के लाइसेन्सों का, उनके सामने दी गई तारीखों से रद्दीकरण :

अनुसूची

लाइसेन्सी का नाम व पता क्रम . लाइसेन्स संख्या

सं.

1. 6101137

प्रमियर हाई-टेक,

इंडस्ट्रीज प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, यूनिट -2, एस.एफ. नं. 35/2 , पारी नगर, सुंगम बै पास रोड, पुलियकुलम विलेज, कोयम्बत्तूर -641 045

2. 6311653

ए.आर. इन्डस्ट्रीज, नं. 42- ए, पांचवा क्रॉस , तण्णीर पेन्दल , पीलमेडु, कोयम्बत्तूर -641004

3. 6351362

पेंग्विन मिनरल वाटर्स प्राइवेट लिमिटेड झोर नं. 28, लेनिन स्ट्रीट, सुरांपट्टी ईरोड-638 009

रद्द लाइसेन्स द्वारा आवृत्त संगल रद्दीकरण की तारीख भारतीयमान के साथ वस्तु/प्रक्रम

2004-10-26 अपकेन्द्रीय जेट पम्प भा.मा.:

12225 : 1997

2004-10-28 साफ ठंडे पानी के लिए अपकेन्द्रीय उपुनरुत्पादक पम्प भामा: 8472 : 1998

2005-08-29 पैकेज बन्द पेयजल भा.मा. 14543 : 2004

[सं. सीएमडी/13: 13 ] एस.एम. भाटिया, उप महानिदेशक ( मुहर )

MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs)

(BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS)

New Delhi , the 20th January, 2006

S.O. 385. In pursuance of sub - regulation ( 6 ) of regulation 5 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certification ) Regulations 1988 , the Bureau of Indian Standards , hereby notifies that the licence particulars of which are given below have been cancelled with effect from the date indicated against each .

SCHEDULE

Name and Address of the Licensee Sl. Licence No. No.

1. 6101137

Premier Hi - Tech Industries Private Limited, Unit- 2 SF No. 35/2 , Paari Nagar, Sungam Bye Pass Road , Puliakulam Village, Coimbatore-641045 .

2. 6311653

A.R. Industries , 42-A5 th Cross, Tanneer Pandal , Peelamedu , Coimbatore-641004 3. 6351362

Penguin Mineral Waters (P) Ltd. , Door No. 28 , Lenin Street , Surampatti , Erode (Dt . )-638009

Date of cancellation Article/Process with relevant Indian Standard covered by the licence cancelled

2004-10-26 Centrifugal Jet Pumps , IS 12225 : 1997

2004-10-28 Centrifugal regenerative pumps for clear , cold water, IS 8472: 2004

2005-08-29 Packaged drinking water IS 14543 : 2004

No. CMD - 13 : 13 S. M. BHATIA, Dy. DirectorGeneral (Marks) 932

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 24 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 386.- मारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं :-

अनुसूची

क्रम. स्थापित भारतीय मानक(कों ) की संख्या

स्थापित तिथि

संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

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

1. आई.एस. 15612 ( भाग 1 ) : 2005

30जनवरी 2006 वस्त्रादि- पदों और डैपों का ज्वलन व्यवहार भाग 1 वर्गीकरण योजना

30जनवरी, 2006 2. आई एस 15612 ( भाग 3 ) : 2005

वस्त्रादि- पदों और ट्रैपों का ज्वलन व्यवहार भाग 3 टंगे नमूनों की ज्वलनशीलता करने की पद्धति ( छोटी ज्वाला) ज्ञात

30जनवरी, 2006 3. आई एस 15612 ( भाग 3 ): 2005 वस्त्रादि- पदों और ट्रैपों का ज्वलन व्यवहार भाग 4 टंगे नमूनों की ज्वलनशीलता ज्ञात करने की पद्धति

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

[सं. टीएक्सडी/जी-25 ]

एम. एस. वर्मा , निदेशक एवं प्रमुख ( टीएक्सडी)

New Delhi , the 24th January, 2006

S.O. 386. In pursuance of clause ( b) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rulcs. 1987. the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:

SCHEDULE

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

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

4 1

30 January. 2006 IS 15612 (Part 1 ) : 2005 Textiles-Burning Behaviour ofcurtains and Drapes Part I Classification Scheme .

30 January , 2006 IS 15612 (Part 3) : 2005 Textiles- Burning Behaviour ofCurtains and Drapes Part 3 Method for Deter- mining the ignitability ofVertically Oriented Specimens(Small Flame) .

30 January, 2006 IS 15612 (Part 4) : 2005 Textiles- Burning Behaviour ofCurtains and Drapes Part 4 Method for Deter- mining the Flame Spread of Vertically Oriented Specimens

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

[No. TXD/G-25 ]

M.S. VERMA, Director & Head ( Textiles) 933 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4 , 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 24 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 387.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एत‌द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गये मानक ( को ) में संशोधन किया गया /किये गये हैं:-

अनुसूची

संशोधन की संख्या और तिथि

क्रम . संशोधित भारतीय मानक की संख्या और वर्ष

संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि संख्या

1 2

संशोधन संख्या 1 दिसम्बर 2005 30जनवरी 2006 1. आई.एस. 3750 : 1993

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

[सं. टीएक्सडी/जी-25 ]

एम. एस. वर्मा , निदेशक एवं प्रमुख ( टीएक्सडी)

New Delhi , the 24th January, 2006

S.O. 387. In pursuance of clause (b) of sub -rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that amendments to the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued:

SCHEDULE

No. & year of the amendment

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

Date from which the amendment shall have effect

2 1

30 January, 2006 I. IS 3750 : 1993

Amendment No. I December , 2005

Copyof this Amendment 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 .

[No. TXD/G-25 ]

M.S. VERMA , Director & Head (Textiles)

नई दिल्ली, 24 जनवरी, 2006

का. आ. 388.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो के भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो ( प्रमाणन ) विनियमन 1988 के विनियमन 5 के उपविनियमन ( 6 ) के तहत यह अधिसूचित किया जाता है कि निम्नलिखित ब्यौरों वाले लाइसेंन्स, उनके सामने दी गई तारीखों से, रद्द किए जाते हैं: -

अनुसूची

समय- बाधित तारीख लाइसेन्स वाले का नाम/पता

लाइसेंस नम्बर

क्र.सं.

समयबाधित लाइसेंस द्वारा आवृत्त वस्तु/ प्रक्रिया के साथ

संगत भारतीय मानक

(4)

(5)

(3)

(1) (2)

2005-10-31

साफ ठंडे पानी के लिए

0727351

1 .

दंडायुद्ध पाणि फाउंडरी प्राइवेट

नं. 131/4-13 , विलानकुरिच्यो, कोयम्बतूर-641035

भाग -1 , कृषि एवं ग्रामीण

जल आपूर्ति के लिए भा माः 6595 ( भाग-1 ) : क्षैतिजिक अपकेन्द्रीय पंप-

2002.

194 G1/06-2 934

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

(1)

(2)

(3) 0943054

गीताजंली निटिटंग मिल्स, के.पो.पो. गार्डम , कोंगू मेइन रोड, तिरुप्पूर -641 607 .

6456881

वी-गार्ड इंडस्ट्रीज प्राइवेट नं. एन.एच. 47 , पालक्काड मेइन रोड, के. जी. चावडि, कोयम्बतूर -641 015.

6462472

के. आर. इंडस्ट्रीज, नं. 359 - ए, नंन्जुंडापुरम, कोयम्बतूर-641036.

6463979

चित्रा इंजीनियरिंग वर्क्स नं. 515 - ए, अविनाशी रोड, पोलमेडूवेस्ट, कोयम्बतूर-641004.

6465377

श्री रवि इंडस्ट्रीज, नं. 73 , करमण्णा गाउंडर लेआउट , वी.के. रोड, पोलमेड़, कोयम्बतूर -641004.

1101415

दि कर्नाटका निटिंग कंपनी, नं. 268 , अविनाशी रोड, पोस्टबाक्स नं. - 252 , तिरुप्पूर-641 602.

1380546

स्टोआ गार्मेन्टस,

नं. 21/30, तट्टान तोट्टम , कामराज रोड, तिरुप्पूर -641 604.

1639561

प्रमियर हाइटेक इंडस्ट्रीज प्राइवेट लि. एस. एफ. नं. 35/2 , पारी नगर, सुंगम बाईपास रोड, पुलियकुलमविलेज, कोयम्बतूर-641 045.

10.

2082442

ऊँ मुरगन इंडस्ट्रीज, नं. 11 व 12, रामकृष्णपुरम, गणपति (पोस्ट) , कोयम्बतूर-641 006.

2199160

11.

दि एल.पी.एम. इंडस्ट्रीज, नं. 127 , नव इंडिया रोड, के.आर. पुरम, कोयम्बतूर -641006.

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

(5)

2005-04-28

वस्त्रादि- सादी ( सिंगल जर्सी ) बुनो (निट्टङ ) सूती बनियान भा माः 4964: 2003 .

2005-05-14

सौर सपाट पट्टिका संग्राहक भा माः 12933 ( भागः ) 2003.

2005-10-12

मोनोसेट पम्पस भामा : 9079 :1989

2005-08-05

साफ ठंडे पानी के लिए अपकेन्द्रीय पुनरुत्पादक पंप,

भामा: 8472 : 1998 .

2005-11-14

Σ साफ ठंडे पानी के लिए अपकेन्द्रीय पुनरुत्पादक, भामा: 8472 : 1998 .

2005-10-01

वस्त्रादि-सादी (सिंगल जर्सी) बुनी (निटेड) सूती बनियान भामा: 4964 : 2003.

2005-04-28

वस्त्रादि-सादी (सिंगल जर्सी) बुनी सूती बनियान

भामा: 4964 : 2003 .

2004-12-18

मोनोसेट पम्पस,

भा मा: 9079 : 1989

2005-01-12

मोनोसेट पम्पस भामा : 9079 : 1989

2005-02-16

अपकेन्द्रीय जेट पम्प,

भामा : 12225 : 1997 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

935

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

(3) (1)

(2)

12.

2205634

संतोष कुमार इंडस्ट्रीज, पोस्टबाक्स नं .-6406, शान्ति नगर, के. के. पुदूर पोस्ट, कोयम्बतूर-641038.

13.

6022141

डेक्कान इंडस्ट्रीज यूनिट-11 , नं. 43, बी भारती नगर, गणपति, कोयम्बतूर -641 006.

6023042

14.

नारायण इंडस्ट्रीज , नं. 5 -सी, वल्लुवर नगर, पोलमेडु, कोयम्बतूर -641 004.

15. 6024448

डेक्कान इंडस्ट्रीज यूनिट-11 , नं. 43 -बी, भारती नगर, गणपति, कोयम्बतूर-641 006.

16.

6084264

टर्बो इंडस्ट्रीज, नं. 67/1 , नेहरू नगर ईस्ट, अविनाशी रोड, सिविल एरोड्राम पोस्ट, कालपट्टी विलेज़ , कोयम्बतूर -641 014.

17.

6157669

सी आर आई पम्प्स प्राइवेट लिमिटेड. , नं . 122 - बी, अत्तिपालयम रोड, चिन्नवेडमपट्टी, गणपति, कोयम्बतूर-641 006.

6183266

18.

गंगा इंजीनियरिंग वर्क्स, नं. 60/2-सी, मारुति नगर, शोभा नगर, कोयम्बतूर -641006.

6207153

19.

श्री रेणुका इन्डस्ट्रीज, नं. 49 -ए, गिरयम्मन कोइल , स्ट्रीट नं. - 1 , पोलमेडू, कोयम्बतूर-641004.

6219362

20.

गंगा इन्जीनियरिंग वर्क्स, नं. 60/2-सी, मारूति नगर , शोभा नगर, कोयम्बतूर -641 006.

6224860

21.

गंगा इन्जीनियरिंग , वर्क्स, नं. 60/2- सी, मारूति नगर, शोभा नगर, कोयम्बतूर-641006.

(4)

(5)

2005-10-12

मोनोसेट पम्पस भामा : 9079 : 1989

2005-08-31

निमज्जनीय पम्पसेट्स भामा: 8034: 2002

2004-10-15

सिंगल पेज छोटी एसी व युनिवर्सल बिजलीके के मोटर भामा: 996 : 1979

2005-10-21

निमज्जनीय पम्पसेट के मोटर, भामा :9283 : 1995

2005-10-31

साफ ठंडे पानी के लिए अपकेन्द्रीय निमज्जनीय पम्प, भामा: 8472 : 1998

2005-11-21

त्रिपेज़ीय प्रेरण मोटरें भा मा: 325 : 1996

2005-10-21

निमज्जनीय पम्पसेट के मोटर, भामा: 9283 : 1995

2005-02-28

मोनोसेट पम्प, भामा: 9079 : 1989

2005-07-21

गहरे कुओं के निमज्जनीय भामा: 14220 : 1994-

2005-09-29

साफ ठंडे पानी के लिए अपकेन्द्रीय पुनरुत्पादक, पम्प, भामा: 8472 : 1998 936

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART 11- SEC . 3 ( ii )] (2)

(1)

(3)

(4)

(5) 623461

22.

2005-10-12 लाइट कंटेनर्स प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, एस.एफ. नं. 135/2 - बी, नं. 135/2-सी, 135/3-बी, इरगूर विलेज, रावुत्तर रोड, पल्लडम तालुक, कोयम्बतूर -641103 .

अल्पदाब द्रवणीय गैसों के लिए 5 लीटर से अधिक जलक्षमता वाले वेल्डितअल्प कार्बन इस्पात के सिलिन्डर भाग: 1 द्रवित पैट्रोलियम, गैस के लिए सिलिन्डर, भा माः 3196 : भाग -1 , 1992 .

6255871

23.

2005-02-15

मोनो सेट पम्पस, भामा : 9079 : 1989

डेल्टन इन्डस्ट्रीज , नं. 103 - ए, शिव शक्ति कालोनी, गणपति, कोयम्बतूर -641006.

24.

6265571

2005-07-04

बिजली के इंस्टेन्ट वाटर हीटर, भामा : 8978 : 1992

केस्केड इलेक्ट्रोथर्मिक्स प्रा.लि. नं. 3 , केस्केड लेआउट, लूना नगर, कोयम्बत्तूर -641 025.

25.

6296077

2004-11-30

अपकेन्द्रीय जेट पम्प, भामा : 12225 : 1997

आल्फाइंजीनियरिंग इंडस्ट्रीज, नं. 2 - ए, छठा क्रास वी.के. रोड, तण्णोर पेन्दल, पोलमेडू, कोयम्बतूर-641 004.

26.

6327466

2005-05-31

निमज्जनीय पंपसेट, भामा: 8034: 2002

वी. एस . जी. इंजीनियरिंग इंडस्ट्रीज़ , नं. 7, आवारमपालयम रोड, गणपति, कोयम्बतूर-641006.

27 .

6328367

2005-10-12

मोनोसेट पम्पस, भामा : 9079 : 1989

कृष्णा इंजीनियरिंग, नं. 389, मारियम्मन कोइल स्ट्रीट, पोलमेडू, पुदूर, कोयम्बतूर-641 004.

28.

6329672

2005-07-04

अपकेन्द्रीय जेट पम्प, भामा: 12225: 1997

कृष्णा इंजीनियरिंग , नं. 389 , मारियम्मन कोइल स्ट्रीट, पोलमेडू, पुदूर, कोयम्बतूर-641 004.

6351463

29.

2005-10-01

अपकेन्द्रीय जेट पम्प, भामा: 12225 : 1997

हाइटेक पम्पस , नं. 258 , डॉ. अम्बेडकर रोड, वेलाण्डिपालयम, कोयम्बतूर -641 025.

30. 6362367

2004-12-01

निमज्जनीय पम्पसेट, भामा: 8034 : 2002

भरणी पम्पस, नं. 36, कस्तूरी निलयम, आवारमपालयम , कोयम्बतूर-641006 .

937.

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

(3) (2)

(1)

6365575

31.

बरानी इंडस्ट्रीज , नं. /38, 39 रामाकृष्णापुरम, गणपति पोस्ट, कोयम्बत्तूर-641006.

32.

6375881

सुगुणा मेशीन वर्षस प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, नं. /31 , सिडको इंडस्ट्रीयल एस्टेट, कुरिच्चो, कोयम्बत्तूर-641021 .

6386179

33.

कोवै वाटर्स एंड कम्पनी, नं. /109, गांधी नगर, तिरुप्पूर रोड, ईरोड-638701.

6390574

34.

सेल्वो फूड प्राडक्टस, एस.एफ. नं . /1128/5 , तण्णीर पन्दल, पुदूर रोड, ओट्टकुतिरै , के. मेट्टुपालयम पोस्ट, गोबोचेटिटपालयम-638455.

35.

6398489

शार्प इंडस्ट्रीज, डोर नं. /7/61 , पार्ट, नार्थ-साउथ रोड, एस एफ नं. /740/ई, कोयम्बत्तूर -641014.

6432059

36 .

गरुवाडि इंजीनियरिंग वर्क्स , नं./101 -बी, इलंगो नगर, आवारमपालयम, गणपति, कोयम्बत्तूर -641006.

(4)

(5)

2005-02-15

अपकेन्द्रीय जेट पम्प, भामा: 12225 : 1997

2005-03-15

निमज्जनीय पम्पसेट,

भामा: 8034 : 2002

2005-06-06

पैकेजबंद पेयजल,

भा मा: 14543: 2004

2005-06-15

बिस्कुटस,

भामा: 11011 : 2002

2005-06-16

निमज्जनीय पम्पसेट,

भामा: 8034: 2002

2005-02-09

साफ ठंडे पानी के लिए पुनरुत्पादक, अपकेन्द्रीय पम्पस, भामा: 8472 : 1998

[सं. सी एम डी-1/ 13 :13 ] एस. एम. भाटिया, उप महानिदेशक ( मुहर)

New Delhi , the 24th January , 2006

S.O. 388.- In pursuance of sub - regulation (6 ) of regulation 5 of the Bureau of Indian Standards ( Certification) Regulations 1988 , the Bureau of Indian Standards , hereby notifies that the licence particulars of which are given below have been cancelled with effect from the date indicated against each.

SCHEDULE

Name and Address of the Licensee SI. Licence

No. No.

1 2

1. 0727351 Dhandayuthapani Foundry Pvt. Ltd. , 131/4-B , Vilankurichi Road, Coimbatore-641035

Date of Expiry Article/Process with relevant Indian Standard covered by the licence expired

2005-10-31 Horizontal Centrifugal Pumps for Clear, Cold Water-Part 1 : Agricultural and Rural Water Supply Purposes IS6595 (Part 1 ): 2002 938

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

2. 0943054 Geetanjali Knitting Mills K.P.P. Garden, Kongu Main Road, Tirupur-641607

3. 6456881 V-Guard Industries Pvt . Ltd. , N.H. 47 , Palakkad Main Road, K.G. Chavadi , Coimbatore -641 105

4. 6462472

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

2005-04-28 Textiles - Vests, Cotton, plain( singlejersey) knitted, IS4964: 2003

2005-05-14 Solar flat plate collector IS 12933 ( Part 1 ): 2003

2005-10-12 Monoset Pumps IS 9079: 1989

Kay Arr Industries 359 -A, Najundapuram , Coimbatore-641036

5. 6463979 Chithra Engineering Works 515 - A, Avinashi Road , Peelamedu West, Coimbatore-641004

6. 6465377 Sri Ravi Industries 73 , Karupanna Gowder LayOut, V.K. Road, Peelamedu, Coimbatore-641004

7. 1101415 The Carnataka Knitting Company 268 , Avinashi Road, P.B. No. 252 Tirupur-641602

8. 1380546 Stowa Garments 21/30 , Thattan Thottam , Kamraj Road, Tirupur-641604

9. 1639561

2005-08-05 Centrifugal regenerative pumps for clear, cold water IS 8472: 1998

2005-11-14 Centrifugal regenerative pumps for clear, cold water IS 8472: 1998

2005-10-01 Textiles -Vests, Cotton, plain( singlejersey) knitted IS 4964: 2003

2005-04-28 Textiles -Vests , Cotton, Plain( Single Jersey) Knitted IS4964: 2003

2004-12-18 Monoset Pumps IS 9079 : 1989

PremierHi -Tech . Industries Private Limited Unit-2 SF No. 35/2 Paari Nagar, Sungam Bye Pass Road, PuliakulamVillage , Coimbatore-641045

10. 2082442

2005-01-12 Monoset Pumps IS9079 : 1989

OmMurugan Industries 11 & 12 Ramakrishnapuram, Ganapathy (P.Ο. ), Coimbatore-641006

11. 2199160 The El . P. Em . Industries 127, Nava India Road, K.R. Puram, Coimbatore-641006

12. 2205634

2005-02-16 Centrifugaljet pump IS 12225 : 1997

2005-10-12 Monoset Pumps IS9079 : 1989

Santoshkumar Industries P.B. No. 6406 Shanti Nagar K.K. Pudur Post , Coimbatore-641006

13. 6022141 DeccanIndustries Unit II 43B, Bharathi Nagar , Near FCI Road , Ganapathy, Coimbatore-641006

2005-08-31 Submersible Pumpsets IS 8034 : 2002 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

939

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4 , 2006/माघ15 , 1927

14. 6023042 Narayan Industries 5-C, Valluvar Nagar , Kamaraj Road, Peelamedu, Coimbatore-641004-

15. 602448 DeccanIndustries Unit II 43B, Bharathi Nagar, Near FCI Road, Ganapathy, Coimbatore-641006

16. 6084264 Turbo Industries 67/1 Nehru Nagar East , Avinashi Road, Civil Aerodrome Post, Kalapatti Village, Coimbatore -641014

17. 6157669 CRI Pumbs Private Limited 122-B , Athipalayam Road, Chinnavedampatti , Ganapathy, Coimbatore-641006

18. 6183266 GangaEngineering Works 60/2-C, Maaruthi Nagar, Shoba Nagar, Coimbatore-641006

19. 6207153 Sri Renuka Industries 49-A, Giriamman Koil Street No. 1 , Peelamedu, Coimbatore-641004

20. 6219362 Ganga Engineering Works 60/2C, Maruthi Nagar , Shoba Nagar, Coimbatore-641006

21. 6224860 Ganga Engineering Works 60/2C, Marruthi Nagar, Shoba Nagar , Coimbatore-641006

22. 6235461 Lite Containers Pvt . Limited SF No. 135 /2B , 135/2C, 135/3B, Irugur Village , Ravathur Road, Palladam Taluk, Coimbatore-641 103

23. 6255871 Delton Industries 103 -A, Siva Sakti Colony, Ganapathy, Coimbatore-641006

24. 6265571 Cascade Electrothermics Private Limited, No. 3 , Cascade Layout , Luna Nagar, Coimbatore-641025

2004-10-15 Single -phase small ac and universal electric motors IS996 : 1979

2005-10-21 Motors for Submersible Pumpsets IS9283 : 1995

2005-10-31 Centrifugal regenerative pumps for clear, coldwater IS8472 : 1998

2005-11-21 Three Phase induction motors IS 325: 1996

2005-10-21 Motors for Submersible Pumpsets IS9283 : 1995

2005-02-28 Monoset Pumps IS 9079: 1989

2005-07-21 Openwell Submersible Pumpsets IS 14220 : 1994

2005-09-29 Centrifugal regenerative pumps for clear, cold water IS 8472 : 1998

2005-10-12 Welded Low Carbon Steel Cylinders Exceeding 5 Litre WaterCapacity for Low Pressure Liquefiable Gases -Part 1 : Cylinders for liquefied Petroleum Gases (LPG), IS3196:Part 1 : 1992

2005-02-15 Monoset Pumps IS 9079 : 1989

2005-07-04 Electric instantaneous water heaters IS8978 : 1992 940

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

25. 6296077 AlfaaEngineering Industry No. 2A , 6th cross , V.K. Road, Thaneer Pandal , Peelamedu Coimbatore-641004

26. 6327466 V. S. G. Engineering Industries 7, Avarampalayam Road, Ganapathy, Coimbatore-641006

27. 6328367 Krishna Engineering 389 , Mariamman Koil Steet, Peelamedu Pudur, Coimbatore-641 004

28. 6329672 Krishna Engineering 389 , Mariamman Koil Stee , Peelamedu Pudur, Coimbatore-641004

29. 6351463 Hiteck Pumps 258 , Dr. Ambedkar Road, Velandipalayam, Coimbatore-641025

30. 6362367 Bharani Pumps 36 -Kasturi Nilayayam, Avarampalayam, Coimbatore-641006

31. 6365575 Barani Industries 38, 39, Ramakrishnapuram , Ganapathy ( P.O. ) , Coimbatore-641006

32. 6375881 Suguna Machine Works Pvt . Limited, 31, Sidco Industrial Estate , Kurichi , Coimbatore-641021

33, 6386179 Kovai Waters & Co. 109, Gandhi Nagar , Tirupur Road, Erode-638701

34. 6390574

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

2004-11-30 Centrifugal jet pump IS 12225 : 1997

2005-05-31 Submersible Pumpsets

IS 8034: 2002

2005-10-12 Monoset Pumps IS9079: 1989

2005-07-04 Centrifugal jet pump

IS 12225 : 1997

2004-10-01 Centrifugal jet pump

IS 12225: 1997

2004-12-01 Submersible Pumpsets IS8034: 2002

2005-02-15 Centrifugal jet pump

IS 12225: 1997

2005-03-15 Submersible Pumpsets IS 8034: 2002

2005-06-06 Packaged DrinkingWater IS14543 : 2004

2005-06-15 Biscuits IS 1011 : 2002

Selvi Food Products SF No. 1128/5 ,

Thaneer Pandhal-Pudur Road, Othakuthirai , K. Mettupalayam (P.O. ) , Gobichettipalayam -638 455 35. 6398489 Sharp Industries Door No. 7/61 Part , Goldwins , North-South Road, SF No. 740/-E, PartOf Kalapatty Village , Coimbatore North Taluk , Coimbatore-641014

36. 6432059 Guruvadi Engineering Works 101 -B, Elango Nagar, Avarampalayam , Ganapathy, Coimbatore -641006

2005-06-16 Submersible Pumpsets IS8034: 2002

2005-02-09 Centrifugal regenerative pumps for clear , cold water IS8472 : 1998

[ No .: CMD- 1 /13 : 13] S.M. BHATIA , Dy. Director General (Marks) 941 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 24 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 389.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम 7 के उप नियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए मानक( कों ) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं :-

अनुसूची

संशोधन की संख्या और तिथि

संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि संशोधित भारतीय मानक(कों ) की संख्या

क्रम संख्या वर्ष औरशीर्षक

01 जनवरी 2006

31 जनवरी 2006 आई एस 3043 : 1987

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

[सं. ईटी 20/टी -6]

पी.के. मुखर्जी, वैज्ञानिक एफ एवं प्रमुख ( विद्युत तकनीकी )

New Delhi , the 24th January, 2006

S.O. 389. In pursuance of clause (b ) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards , hereby notifies that amendment to the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed has been issued :

SCHEDULE

Sl .No.

No. & year of the Amendment

No.& year of the Indian Standards

Date from which the Amendment shall have effect

4 1

31 January 2006

01 January 2006

IS 3043 : 1987 Code of Practice forearthing

Copy of this Amendment is available 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 .

[ No. ET 20/T-6 ]

P.K. MUKHERJEE , Sc . ' F ' & Head (Electro Technical)

नई दिल्ली, 24 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 390.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम 7 के उप नियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए मानक( कों) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं :-

अनुसूची

संशोधन की संख्या और तिथि

संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि क्रम संख्या

संशोधित भारतीय मानक( कों ) की संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

31जनवरी , 2006

01 जनवरी, 2006

आई एस 13032: 1991 1000 वो से अनाधिक वोल्टता के लिए एसी लघु- परिपथ-वियोजक

बोर्ड-विशिष्ट

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

[सं. ईटी 20/टी-6]

पी.के. मुखर्जी, वैज्ञानिक एफ एवं प्रमुख ( विद्युत तकनीकी ) 194 G1/06-3 942

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

[PART II - SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 24th January, 2006

S.O. 390. In pursuance of clause (b) of Rules ( 1 ) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards , hereby notified that amendment to the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in in the Schedule hereto annexed has been issued:

SCHEDULE

Sl.No.

No.& year of the amendment

Date from which the amendment shall have effect

No.& year of the Indian Standards

4 1.

01 January, 2006

31 January, 2006 IS 13032 : 1991 AC Miniature circuit- breaker boards for voltages not exceeding 1000 V ---Specification

Copy of this Amendment is available 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.

| No. ET01 / Γ - 35 |

P.K. MUKHERJEE . Sc . ' F & Head ( Electro Technical )

नई दिल्ली, 24 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 391 भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं: -

अनुसूची

स्थापित तिथि स्थापित भारतीय मानक( कों ) की संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

क्रम संख्या

(4)

(3)

(1)

(2)

आई एस 11630: 1986

31 दिसम्बर , 2005 1. आई एस 11630: 2005- दाब पात्रों और विशेष अनुप्रयोगों के लिए इस्पात प्लेटों की पराश्रव्य परीक्षण की पद्धति ( पहला पुनरीक्षण )

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

[सं. एम.टी.डी. 21 /टी -69 ]

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

New Delhi , the 24th January , 2006

S.O. 391. In pursuance of clause (b) of sub - Rules ( 1 ) of Rules ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Burcau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards. particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against cach:

SCHEDULE

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

Sl. No. 1

No. and ycar of Indian Standards , if any, superseded by the New Indian Standard

(4)

(3)

(1)

31 December , 2005

IS11630 : 1986

I. IS 11630 : 2005-Method for ultrasonic testing of steel plates for pressure vessels and special applications (First Revision)

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 .

[ No. MTD 21 /T -69 ]

S. K. GUPTA, Sc . ' F ' & Head (MTD) 943 [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत काराजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 392.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एत‌द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं:-

अनुसूची

स्थापित तिथि स्थापित भारतीय मानक(कों ) की संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

क्रम संख्या

(3)

(1)

(2)

(4)

नवम्बर, 2005 1. Yara vzz) (Part 1 ) : 2005 /आई एस ओ 15022-1 : 1999 प्रतिभूतियां संदेशों की योजना ( आंकड़ा कार्यक्षेत्र कोश ) भाग 1 आंकड़ा कार्यक्षेत्र और संदेश डिजाइन नियम एवं दिशानिर्देश

नवम्बर, 2005 2. आई एस 15587(Part 2): 2005/आई एस ओ 15022-2 : 1999 प्रतिभूतियां- संदेशों की योजना ( आंकड़ा कार्यक्षेत्र कोश ) : भाग 2 आंकड़ा कार्यक्षेत्र कोश और संदेश कैटलॉग का रख-रखाव

दिसम्बर, 2005 3. आई एस 15586: 2005/आई एस ओ 10962: 1999 प्रतिभूतियां-वित्तीय प्रपत्रों का वर्गीकरण (सीएफआई कोड)

आई एस 12: 1988

दिसम्बर, 2005 4. आई एस 12 : 2005 भारतीय मानकों के मसौदे तैयार करने और उनकी प्रस्तुति की मार्गदर्शिका (चौथा पुनरीक्षण)

इन भारतीय मानकों की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन, १, बहादुरशाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002, क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों, नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर, कोथम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[सं. एम एस डी/जी-8 ]

प्रवीण कुमार गंभीर, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख ( प्रबन्ध एवं तंत्र)

NewDelhi , the 25th January, 2006

S.O. 392. In pursuance of clause (b) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau c . indian Standards Rules, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:

SCHEDULE

Dateof Established SL No.

No. and year of the Indian Standards Established

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

(4) (1)

November, 2005 1. IS 15587 (Part I) : 2005/ISO 15022-1: 1999 'Securities-Scheme for message (Data Field Dictionary): Part I Data field and message design rules and guidelines ' .

November, 2005 2. IS 15587 (Part 2) : 2005/ISO 15022-2:1999 'Securities-Scheme for message (Data Field Dictionary): Part 2Maintenance of the Data field

and Dictionary and cataglogue of messages 3. IS 15586: 2005/ISO 10962: 1999 ' Securities-

December, 2005 Classification of Financial Instruments . (CFI Code)

IS12: 1988

December, 2005 4. IS 12 : 2005 Guide for drafting and presentation of Indian Standards (Fourth Revision)

Copies of above Standards are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhawan , 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110002 and its Regional Offices at Kolkata , Chandigarh, Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices at Ahmedabad, Bangalore , Bhopal , Bhubaneswar, Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune and Thiruvananthapuram.

[No.MSD/G-8]

P.K. GAMBHIR, Sc . ' F' & Head (MSD) 944

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) |

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2006

का.आ. 393.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों काअनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग 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 वेस्पास्केल्स इंडिया , इजहिल स्ट्रीट , अरुल वेलावन नगर, सूलाय , इरोदे -4 , तमिलनाडु द्वारा निर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " वी एस आई-जे पी" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित , तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टोप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " वेस्पा" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 /05/ 628 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

Vespa

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृति गेज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप - प्रकार का ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई ) का माान 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 मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद भी किया जाएगा । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती हैकि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से, जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल 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 ) अन्तराल सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई" मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 %, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 (94) /2005]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 945 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 393. 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 " VSI - JP " series of high accuracy (Accuracy class - II ) and with brand name " VESPA " (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufacturedby M/ s . Vespa Scales India, Ezhil Street, Arul Velavan Nagar, Soolai , Erode - 4, Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 05 /628 ;

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) indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternate current power supply ;

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

[F. No. WM-21 (94)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 946

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 394.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों काअनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग 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 वेस्पास्केल्स इंडिया, इजहिल स्ट्रीट , अरुल वेलावन नगर , सूलाय , इरोदे -4 , तमिलनाडु द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " वी एस आई -टी बी" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित , तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " वेस्पा " है ( जिसे मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/05/629 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

Vespa

謝

India

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृति गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार का ) 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 तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए 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 निर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100मि.ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 94) /2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 947

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 16th January 2005

S.O. 394. 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 " VSI - TB " series of medium accuracy ( Accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " VESPA " ( hereinafter referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/s . Vespa Scales India, Ezhil Street, Arul Velavan Nagar, Soolai , Erode - 4 , Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND /09/ 05/629;

Vespa Sales and

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 5g . It has a tarc device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode ( LED ) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply;

In addition to sealing the stamping 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 and with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 100 to 10000 for ' e' value of 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 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 ( 94 )/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 948

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 395. -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 वेस्पास्केल्स इंडिया, इजहिल स्ट्रीट, अरुल वेलावन नगर, सूलाय , इरोदे -4 , तमिलनाडु द्वारा निर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग -11 ) वाले " वी एस आई- पी पी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित , तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " वेस्पा " है (जिसे उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 05/630 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

Vespa

Bench Weigtung Series

Vespa Scales India

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृति गेज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 600 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 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 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 प्रमाण पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से, जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि.ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान ( एन ) अंतराल सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. से अधिक 1000 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 शून्यके समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 94 )/2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 949 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 395.-Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 ( 60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with digital indication of " VSI - PP" series of high accuracy (Accuracy Class - II ) and with brand name " VESPA " ( hereinafter referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/s. Vespa Scales India, Ezhil Street , Arul Velavan Nagar, Soolai , Erode -4, Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /05 /630;

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 2.5kg . The verification scale interval (e ) is 50g . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternate current power supply ;

In addition to sealing the stamping plate, sealing shall also be done to prevent 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 ofsimilar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity ranging above 50 kg to 1000kg and with number of 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 × 10 , or 5 × 10k , k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 ( 94)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 194 G1/06-4 950

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 4, 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 396.- 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 वेस्पास्केल्स इंडिया, इजहिल स्ट्रीट, अरुल वेलावन नगर , सूलाय , इरोदे -4, तमिलनाडु द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " वी एस आई- पी टी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित , तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " वेस्पा" है ( जिसे उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 /05/ 631 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण - पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

Vespa Heavy duty platform series

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृति गैज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित अस्वचालित 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 ।

स्टाम्पिग 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 से, जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा..याया इससेकुर अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान ( एन ) अंतराल सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. से अधिक 5000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2.× 10के या 5 × 10 * , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य केसमतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं . डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 94 )/2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 951 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 396. 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 " VSI - PT " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " VESPA" ( hereinafter referred to as the said Model ) , manufacturedby M/ s. Vespa Scales India , Ezhil Street , Arul Velavan Nagar, Soolai , Erode - 4 , Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /05/631;

Vespa Heavy duty platform series

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 1000 kg and minimum capacity of 4kg . The verification scale interval (e ) is 200g . It has a tare device with 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts, 50 Hertz alternate 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 maximum capacity above 50kg and upto 5000kg and with number of verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10k, or 5 × 10k; k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 94)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 952

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2006

का.आ. 397.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों काअनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग 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 वेस्पास्केल्स इंडिया , इजहिल स्ट्रीट, अरुल वेलावन नगर, सूलाय , इरोदे -4 , तमिलनाडु द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " वी एस आई- पी सी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित , तोलन उपकरण ( कनवरशन किट फार प्लेटफार्म ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " वेस्पा " है ( जिसे उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 / 05 / 632 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

Vespa

Coversen sapes

उक्त मॉडल एक तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकत्तम क्षमता 300 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई ) का मान 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट , 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है । स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद भी किया जाएगा । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोपणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से, जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 1 मि.ग्रा. से 50 मि.ग्रा. तक " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 1,00,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि. ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 1,00,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान ( एन ) अंतराल सहित 1000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई" मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 , के हैं , जो घनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं . डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 94 ) /2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 953 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 397.- 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 ( Conversion kit for Platform) with " VSI - PC" series of belonging to medium accuracy (Accuracy class- III) and with brand name " VESPA " ( hereinafter referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M /s . Vespa Scales India , Ezhil Street , Arul Velavan Nagar, Soolai , Erode -4 , Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/05/632;

The said model is a weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 300 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 diode (LED )display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz. alternate current power supply;

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

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 1000 kg and with number of verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 100 to 1,00,000 for ' e ' value of Img to 50mg and with number of verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 5000 10 100,000 for ' e ' value of Ig. or more and with ' e ' value 1 × 10k , 2× 10k, or 5x10k, k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 94)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 954

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 398.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों काअनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग 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 बेन्सन वेइंग सिस्टम , नं ० 27, डिप्टी कलैक्टर कलोनी , के के नगर, मदुरै, तमिलनाडु द्वारा निर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " बीजेपी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित , तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " इकोनॉमिक " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2005 / 1031 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृति गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार का) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 2 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाष 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 सीलबंद करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए उसे खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद की जाएगी ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 248 ) /2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 955 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 398.- 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 "BJP " series of high accuracy ( Accuracy class - 11 ) and with brand name " ECONOMIC" ( hereinafter referred to as the said Model ), manufactured by M/s . Benson Weighing Systems , No. 27, Dy. Collector's Colony, K.K.Nagar , Madurai , Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 05 / 1031 ;

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

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

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

[ F. No. WM- 21 (248 )/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 956

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2006

का.आ. 399.-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 बेन्सन वेइंग सिस्टम, नं ० 27, डिप्टी कलैक्टर, कालोनी के के नगर, मदुरै, तमिलनाडु द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " बीपीडब्ल्यू" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित , तोलन उपकरण ( टिकट मुद्रण सुविधा के बिना या उसके साथ सिक्के द्वारा संचालित इलैक्ट्रॉनिक व्यक्ति तोलन मशीन ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " इकानॉमिक " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 05/ 1032 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है । उक्त मॉडल विकृत गेज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरंण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 200 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 100 ग्रा. है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए 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 " माम के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान अंतराल (एन ) सहित और 100 कि. ग्रा. से अधिक और 200 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10% , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 248 ) /2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1 957

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/ माघ 15, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 399. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Models described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) (hereinafter referred to as 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 with digital indication (Electronic Coin Operated Person weighing machine with or without ticket printing facility) of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III) belonging to " BPW " series with brand name " ECONOMIC " (hereinafter referred to as the said Model ) , manufacturedby M/ s . Benson Weighing Systems , No. 27 , Dy. Collector's Colony, K.K.Nagar, Madurai , Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 2005/ 1032 ;

The said model ( see the figure given above ) is a strain gauge type load cell based weighing instrument with the maximum capacity of 200 kg and minimum capacity is 2kg . The verification scale interval (c) is 100g . The display is of Light Emitting Diode ( LED ) type . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity in the range of 100 kg to 200kg and 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 × 10 %, 2× 10k or 5 × 10k , k being a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

F. No. WM- 21 (248 )/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 194 GI/06-5 958

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

[ PART 11 -- SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 400.-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 बेन्सन वेइंग सिस्टम , नं. 27, डिप्टी कलैक्टर कालोनी, के के नगर, मदुरै, तामिलनाडु द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " बी डब्ल्यूबी सी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित , तोलन उपकरण ( वे ब्रिज के लिए कन्वर्शन किट - हाइब्रिड प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " इकोनॉमिक " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 05 / 1033 सममुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृत गैज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित अस्वचालित कम्पाउंड लीवर सिस्टम के सिद्धांत का ( वे. ब्रिज के लिए कन्वर्शन किट- हाईब्रिड प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 40,000 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 10 कि. 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।

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 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 अनुमोल 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 10,000 100 टन तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान ? केसमतुल्यहै । तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 5 टन से अधिक और 1010 *,के, 2 × 10के या 5 × 10 के , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 248 ) /2005 ] पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 959 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 400.-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 ( conversion kit for weighbridge-hybrid type) with digital indication belonging to medium accuracy (Accuracy class -III ) of " BWBC " series with brand name " ECONOMIC" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ), manufactured by M/s Benson Weighing Systems , No. 27, Dy. Collector's Colony, K.K. Nager, Madurai , Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/05/ 1033;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based working on the principle of compound lever system non-automatic weighing instrument ( conversion kit for weighbridge - hybrid type) with a maximum capacity of 4t) ,000kg and minimum capacity of 200kg . The verification scale interval ( e) is 10kg. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tase effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED ) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternate current power supply ;

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

Further, in exercise of the powers 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 ofsimilar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 5 tonne and upto 100 tonne with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5kg or more and with ' c ' value 1 × 10k. 2× 10kor 5 × 10k , k being a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM -21 (248 )/2005 )

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 960

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 401.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों काअनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग 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 कीर्ति ट्रेडर, गणपति टावर, कण्डीओ बाजार, जोधपुर, राजस्थान द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " के आर टी डब्ल्यू" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( वे ब्रिज प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " के - डीगी " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 05/ 1038 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित्प्त करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( वे ब्रिज प्रकार का ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 40 टन और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 5 कि. ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आद्येयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आद्येयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन का 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 उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्मित किया गया है विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 कि. ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान सहित 5 टन से अधिक और 100 टन तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 के, 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 के, के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 150 )/ 2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 961

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 401. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 ( 60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby publishes the certificate of approval of the model of, non- automatic weighing instrument (weighbridge type ) with digital indication belonging to medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) of " KRTW series with brand name " K- DIGI " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Kirti Traders , Ganpati Tower, Kandio Bazar, Jodhpur, Rajasthan and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/05/ 1038 ;

The said model is a non - automatic weighing instrument (weighbridge ) with a maximum capacity of 40 tonne and minimum capacity of 100kg . The verification scale interval (e) is 5kg . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternate current power supply . The load cell is of strain gauge type .

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

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 5 tonne and up to 100 tonne with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5kg or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10*, 2 × 10* or 5 × 10k , k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 150 )/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 962

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2006

का.आ. 402.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों काअनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग 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 ऐलिगैन्टस इंजीनियर, सी-82 , सेक्टर -10, नौएडा-201 301 , उतर प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित सी एफ -4 श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, स्वचालित फीलिंग मशीन (कप फिलर ) मॉडल का जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एलिगैन्ट इंजीनियर " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09 / 2005/999 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक स्वचालित फीलिंग मशीन ( कप फिलर ) है और इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 200 ग्राम से 10 कि.ग्रा. है । इसका उपयोग फ्री फलोइंग वस्तुओं जैसे सूजी , चाय, कॉफी पाउडर, चीनी, चावल, नमक, ग्रेन्यूल्स, डिटरजेंट , बीज, कृषि उत्पाद आदि को भरने के लिए किया जाता है । यह 7 से 40 पैकेट प्रति मिनट भरता 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 प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिसप्ले उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के 1 ग्राम से 10 कि. ग्रा. तक की रेंज की क्षमता वाले हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 176 ) /2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 963 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का सजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 402. 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 saidAct . the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the self indicating , autentatic filling machine ( Cup Filler ) of " CF -4 " series with brand name " Elegant Engineers , " ( hereinafter referred to as the said Model). manufactured by M/ s Elegants Engineers , C- 82 , Sector - 10 , Noida- 201 301 , Uttar Pradesh and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005/999;

The said Model ( see the figure given below) an automatic filling machine ( Cup Filler) and its maximum capacity is 200g to 10kg. It is used for filling the free flowing products like suzi , tea, coffee powder, sugar, rice , salt, granuales , detergents , seeds , agricultural products etc. It fills 7-40 packets per minute. The instruments operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply;

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

[F. No : WM-21 ( 176)/2005]:

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 964

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 4, 2006 /MAGHA 15, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 403.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों काअनुमोदन) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग 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 ऐलिगैन्ट्स इंजीनियर, सी-82 , सेक्टर -10 , नौएडा-201301 , उतर प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित ए एफ-4 श्रृंखला के स्वचालित फीलिंग मशीन (ऑगर फिलर ) के मॉडल का जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एलिगैन्ट इंजीनियर " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 / 2005/ 1000 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल (नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक स्वचालित फीलिंग मशीन ( ऑगर फिलर ) है और इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1 ग्राम से 200 ग्रा. है । इसका उपयोग फ्री फलोइंग वस्तुओं जैसे टूथ पाउडर, टेलकम पाउडर, मिल्क पाउडर, कॉफी पाउडर, आदि को भरने के लिए किया जाता है । यह 40-50 पैकेट प्रति मिनट भरता 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 प्रमाणपत्र 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 होंगे जो 1 ग्राम से 1 कि. ग्रा. तक की रेंज की क्षमता वाले हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 176 )/2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 965 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 403. 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 ( 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 Automatic filling machine (Auger Filler ) of " AF- 1 " series and with brand name " Elgant Engineers , " ( herein after referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Elegants Engineers , C- 82 , Sector - 10 , Noida -201301 , Uttar Pradesh and which is assigned the approval mark IND /09/ 2005 / 1000;

The said model ( See the figure given below) an Automatic filling machine ( Auger Filler) and its maximum capacity is 1g . to 200g . It is used for filling the free flowing products like tooth powder, talcom powder , milk powder , coffee powder etc. It fills 40-50 packets per minute . The instruments operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply;

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

[ F. No. WM - 21 ( 176 )/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 194 GI/06-6 966

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 404. - 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 ) बांट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों काअनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग 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 अनफार्मा इक्विपमेंट, # IX/417 बी, अपोलो टायर्स के पास , मेरमबरा डाकघर, जिला त्रिचुर, केरल-680699 द्वारा निर्मित अंकक सूचन सहित स्वतः सूचक, स्वचालित भरण मशीन ( पिस्टन फिलर प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " अनफार्मा " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09 / 05 /658 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल स्वचालित भरण मशीन ( पिस्टन फिलर ) है । इसकी क्षमता 2 ग्रा. से 2000 ग्रा. तक की या समतुल्य मात्रा की रेंज में है । यह वनस्पति तेल, घी, वनस्पति , मारग्रेन आदि जैसे चिपचिपाहट वाले द्रव्य उत्पादों को भरने के लिए प्रयोग किया जाता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ज 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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 164 ) /2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 967 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 404. 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 self indicating Automatic filling machine (Piston Filler ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " APE " series and with brand name " ANPHARMA " , ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s Anapharma Equipment , # IX/ 417- B, Near Apollo Tyres , Perambra P.O. Trissur District , Kerala - 680689 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/05/ 658;

The said model is an Automatic filling machine (Piston Filler) and its maximum capacity range is 2g to 2000g or its equivalent in volume . It is used for filling viscous liquid products like vegetable oil , ghee, vanaspathi , margarine etc. The instruments operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply. Maximum filling capacity is 20 fills/minute .

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 ( 164 )/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 968

PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) | THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2006

का.आ. 405.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों काअनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग 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 ट्राइडेंट इंक, # बी-१ , तीसरा मुरथ रोड, जी ई एफ ब्लाक इंडस्ट्रीयल टाउन, राजाजी नगर, बंगलौर-560044 कर्नाटक द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता (यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " टी आई- वी सी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, स्वतः सूचक स्वचालित , अस्वचालित, इलैक्ट्रोनिक तोलन उपकरण (प्लेटफार्म के लिए कन्वर्जन किट ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " सत्यम " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 05/471 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है । उक्तमॉडल एक विकृति गेज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म मशीन के लिए कन्वर्जन किट प्रकार का ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 300 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आद्येयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आद्येयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

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 उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, यह घोषणा करती हैकि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे 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. उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान ( एन ) अंतराल सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से अधिक और 1000 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 110 , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 के , के हैं, जो घनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्यके समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 49 )/2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1 969 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 405. 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 non - automatic weighing instrument ( Conversion kit for Platform machine) with digital indication of " TI -PC " series of medium accuracy (accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " SATHYAM " ( hereinafter referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/s. Trident Inc, # B - 9, 3rd Main Road, G.E.F. Block Industrial Town , Rajaji Nagar, Bangalore - 560044, Karnataka which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/05 /471 ;

The said Model is a strain gauge type load cell based non -automatic weighing instrument (Conversion kit for Platform machine ) with a maximum capacity of 300kg . 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 ( LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply;

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

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50kg . and upto 1000kg. with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g. or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10kor 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 (49 )/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 970

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 406.- 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 ट्राइडेंट इंक, # बी-१ , तीसरा मुरथ रोड, जी ई एफ ब्लाक इंडस्ट्रीयल टाउन , राजाजी नगर, बंगलौर-560044, कर्नाटक द्वारा निर्मित उच्च यथार्थता (यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " टी आई- वी टी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, स्वतः सूचक स्वचालित , अस्वचालित, इलैक्ट्रोनिक तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " सत्यम " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 05/470 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृति गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 600 कि.ग्रा . और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2.5 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 50 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आद्येयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आद्येयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

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 से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल निर्माण किया गया है विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि. ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मानं के लिए 5,000 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान ( एन ) अंतराल सहित 50 कि.ग्रा . से अधिक और 1,000 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 ह्यया शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 (49 )/2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1 971

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 406. 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 non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with digital indication of " TI - PT " series of high accuracy ( accuracy class - II ) and with brand name " SATHYAM" (herein referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/ s. Trident Inc , # B- 9 , 3rd Main Road, G.E.F. Block Industrial Town , Rajaji Nagar , Bangalore - 560 044, Karnataka which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/05/ 470;

The said Model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument ( Platform type ) with a maximum capacity of 600kg . and minimum capacity of 2.5kg . The verification scale interval ( e) is 50g. 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 alternate current power supply.

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

Further , in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50kg. and up to 1,000 kg. with verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 5,000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10 , 2 × 10kor 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 (49)/2005]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 972

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्टमें वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों काअनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग 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 ट्राइडेंट इंक, # बी-9 , तीसरा मुरथ रोड, जी ई एफ ब्लाक इंडस्ट्रीयल टाउन, राजाजी नगर, बंगलौर -560044 कर्नाटक द्वारा निर्मित मध्य यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " टी आई- सी ओ " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, स्वतः सूचक स्वचालित, अस्वचालित, इलैक्ट्रोनिक तोलन उपकरण (सिक्काप्रचालित व्यक्ति तोलन मशीन ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का माम " सत्यम " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 05/472 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

Sathyam

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( व्यक्ति तोलन मशीन ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 150 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आद्येयतुलन युक्तिहै जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आद्येयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत्त प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन 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 हैकिउक्त 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 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिकं के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान ( एन ) अंतराल सहित 50 कि.ग्रा . से अधिक और 200 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 शून्यके समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 49 ) /2005 ] पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 973 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 407. 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 ( Coin operated person weighing machine ) with digital indication of " TI - CO " series of medium accuracy (accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " SATHYAM " ( hereinafter referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/ s Trident Inc , # B- 9 , 3rd Main Road, G.E.F. Block Industrial Town , Rajaji Nagar , Banglore- 560 044, Karnataka and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09 /05 /472;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Person weighing machine ) with a maximum capacity of 150kg 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. It has coin operated ticket print out facility. The Light Emitting Diode (LED ) display indicate the weighing result. The instruments operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternate current power supply;

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

Further , in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50kg and up to 200kg with verification scale interval ( n ) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10kor 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 ( 49 )/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 194 GI/06-7 974

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 408.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों काअनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग 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 एवरेस्टस्केल्स मैन्यूफेक्चरिंग कम्पनी, 7-6-511 , किशनगंज, निजामाबाद -503001 द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " ई एस एम डब्ल्यू बी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित , तोलन उपकरण ( तोल सेतु प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एवरेस्ट " है ( जिसे उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 05/ 609 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण -पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( तोल सेतु प्रकार का ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 40,000 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 10 कि. ग्रा . है। इसमें एक आद्येयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आद्येयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

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 हैकि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल 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 अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 5 टन से अधिक और 100 टन तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 , के हैं, जो घनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्यके समतुल्य है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 (283 )/2002 ] पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 975 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4 , 2006/माघ 15, 1927

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 408. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;.

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7 ) and ( 8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non - automatic weighing instrument (weighbridge type) with digital indication belonging to medium accuracy (accuracy class - 111 ) of " ESMWB " series with brand name " EVEREST " (herein referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/s. Everest Scales Manufacturing Co. , 7-6-511 , Kishan Gunj , Nizamabad -503 001 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/05/609;

The said Model is a non - automatic weighing instrument ( weighbridge ) with a maximum capacity of40,000 kg and minimum capacity of 200 kg . The verification scale interval (e ) is 10kg . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternate current power supply . The load cell is of strain gauge type .

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

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 5 tonne and up to 100 tonne with verification scale interval ( n ) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for, ' e ' value of 5kg or more and with ' c' value of 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 or 5 × 10k , k being a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which, the said approved Model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM -21 ( 283 )/ 2002 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 976

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2006

का.आ. 409.-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 एवरेस्ट स्केल्स मैन्यूफेक्चरिंग कम्पमी , 7-6-511 , किशनगंज, निजामाबाद -503001 द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " ई एस एम डब्ल्यूसी के " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित , तोलन उपकरण ( तोल सेतु के लिए कंवर्जन किट प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एवरेस्ट " है ( जिसे उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 /05 / 610 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

EVERE

;

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( तोल सेतु के लिए कंवर्जन किट ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 40,000 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 10 कि. ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आद्येयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आद्येयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

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 से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 कि. ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 5. टन से अधिक और 100 टन तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 * या 5 × 10 के , के हैं, जो घनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य केसमतुल्य हैं।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 (283 ) /2002 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 977 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

NewDelhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 409. 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 (conversion kit for weighbridge) with digital indication belonging to medium accuracy (accuracy class - III ) of " ESMWCK " series with brand name " EVEREST " ( herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Everest Scales Manufacturing Co. , 7-6-511 , Kishan Gunj , Nizamabad- 503 001 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/05/610 ;

The said model is a Straun gauge type load based non - automatic weighing instrument (conversion kit for weighbridge ) with a maximum capacity of 40,000 kg and minimum capacity of 200 kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 10kg. 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.

In addition to sealing the stamping plate sealing shall also be done to prevent the opening of the machinc 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 5 tonne and up to 100 tonne with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5kg or more and with ' e ' value of 1× 10k, 2 × 10kor 5 × 10k , k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM - 21 (283 )/2002 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 978

[PART 11-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 410.-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 एटको वेइंग सोल्यूशन कम्पनी लिमिटेड, 3 /ए, लालवानी इंडस्ट्रियल एस्टेट , 14 , जी डी अम्बेडकर रोड, वडाला, मुंबई -400 031 द्वारा विनिर्मित उंच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " ओ जे " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित , तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टोप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " ओक्टा " है ( जिसे उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 05/ 1078 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक इलैक्ट्रो मैगनेटिक फोर्स कम्पेन्सेशन सिद्धांत पर आधारित अस्वचालित (टेबल टोप प्रकार ) कातोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 300 ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 मि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 10 मि. ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रतयावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

OCTA 000

00000000

OJ SCALE

(Class 11)

स्टांपिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबन्द भी किया जाएगा । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती हैकिउक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत, 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 1मि. ग्रा. से 50 मि.ग्रा. तक " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 5000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि. ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के" ई " मान 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 के, 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 (02 )/2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 979 भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4 , 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 410. 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 (Table top type ) with digital indication of " OJ " series of high accuracy ( Accuracy class - II ) and with brnad name " OCTA " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Atco Weighing Solution Co. Ltd. , 3/A, Lalwani Industrial Estate , 14, G. D. Ambedkar Road, Wadala, Mumbai -400 031 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/05/1078;

The said model ( see the figure give below) is an Electro -Magnetic Force Compensation Principle based non- automatic weighing instrument (Table top type ) with a maximum capacity of 300g and minimum capacity of 200mg . The verification scale interval (e ) is 10mg. It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED ) indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50Hertz alternative current power supply;

00000000

OJ SCALE (Claas 11)

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

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

[F. No. WM- 21 (02 )/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 980

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 411.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों काअनुमोदन ) 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 परफेक्ट इंटरनेशनल प्रा० लि० , सी-113, ग्रेटर कैलाश पार्ट -1, नई दिल्ली -110048 द्वारा विनिर्मित यथार्थता वर्ग- II और " के "श्रृंखला के स्टील फीता मापक के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " किंग " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त माडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई इन डी/09/ 2005 / 1114 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक स्टील प्रकार का मापक है । 1 मि ०मी ० ग्रेजुशन के साथ इसकी लंबाई 5 मी ० है । मापंक की चौड़ाई 18.75 मि ०मी ० है और मोटाई 0.26 मि०मी ०है । मापक का रंग सफेद है जिसमे प्रत्येक सेंटीमीटर ग्रेजुएशन का रंग काला है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती हैकिउक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से , जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित अधिकरण.5 मी० तक की लंबाई के साथ उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के मापक उपकरण भी होंगे।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 362 ) /2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1 981 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 411. 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 steel tape measure of accuracy class - II and of series - ' K ' with brand name " KING " (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Perfect International Pvt. Ltd. , C- 113 ,Greater Kailash Part- I , New Delhi - 110048 and which is assigened the approval mark IND/09/05/ 1114 ;

The said model is a Steel Tape Measure of Length 5m with Imm graduation . The tape has a width of 18.75 mm and thickness of 0.26mm . The color of the tape measure is white where as the color of every centimeter graduation isblack .

[ F. No. WM-21 ( 362 )/ 2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 194 G1/06-8 982

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2006

का.आ. 412.- 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 कैमरी इलेक्ट्रानिक ( जाओकिंग ) लिमिटेड , 4 कैंग ली, रोड एस, जाओकिंग , गुआगडांग , चीन द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " के सी ई " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( इलेक्ट्रानिक किचन वेइंग स्केल प्रकार ) के मॉडल का जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " फ्रीलांस " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) जिसे भारत में मैसर्स मल्टी क्रिएशन प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, 12, प्रिंटिंग प्रेस एरिया ( पंजाब केसरी के पीछे ) वजीरपुर, दिल्ली-110035 को विपणन किया गया है और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2005/1107 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त माडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 5 कि.ग्रा . है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 40 ग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 2 ग्राम है । प्रदर्श लिक्विड क्रिस्टल डिस्पले ( एल.सी.डी. ) प्रकार का है।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबन्द भी किया जाएगा । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त माडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत, 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 100 मि.ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक ' ई ' मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के ' ई ' मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और ' ई ' मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 322 ) / 2005 ]

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

983 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/ माघ 15, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 412. 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 with digital indication (Electronic kitchen weighing scale type ) of " KCE " series of medium accuracy ( Accuracy class III ) and with brand name " FREELANCE " ( herein after referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Camry Electronic ( Zhaoqing ) Ltd. , 4 , kang le , Road S. , Zhaoqing , Guangdong , China and marketed in India by M/s Multi Creations Pvt . Ltd. , 12 , Printing Press Area (Behind Punjab Kesari ) , Wazirpur, Delhi- 110035 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 2005/ 1107 ;

The said model (see the figure given above ) is a strain gauge type load cell based weighing instrument with the maximum capacity of 5kg and minimum capacity is 40g . The verification scale interval (c) is 2g . The display is of Liquid Crystal Display (LCD ) type .

Inaddition 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 , acc. racy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50kg and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg to 2g and with the verification scale interval in the range of 500 to 10000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k , or 5 × 10k, k being a positive or negative whole number or equał 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 ( 322 )/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director , of Legal Metrology 984

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( il )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 4, 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 413.- 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 कैमरी इलेक्ट्रानिक ( जाओकिंग ) लिमिटेड 4 कैंग ली , रोड एस , जाओकिंग, गुआगंडांग, चीन द्वारा विनिर्मित साधारण यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग IV ) वाले " बी आर एम " श्रृंखला के एनालॉग सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( मैकेनिकल व्यक्ति तोल मशीन ) के मॉडल का जिसके ब्रांड कानाम " फ्रीलांस " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) जिसे भारत में मैसर्स मल्टी क्रिएशन प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, 12 , प्रिंटिंग प्रेस एरिया ( पंजाब केसरी के पीछे ) वजीरपुर , दिल्ली-110035 को विपणन किया गया है और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी /09/2005/1108 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त माडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक तोलन उपकरण है जो स्प्रिंग के सिद्धांत पर कार्य करता है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 120 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 10 कि. ग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 1 कि. ग्राम है ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबन्द भी किया जाएगा । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त माडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत, 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 100 से 1000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 100 कि.ग्रा. से अधिक और 200 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और ' ई ' मान 1 × 10 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 322 ) /2005 ] पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 985 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 413. 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 with analogue indication (Mechanical person weighing machine) of " BRM" series of ordinary accuracy (Accuracy class IV) and with brand name " FREELANCE " ( herein after referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Camry Electronic (Zhaoqing ) Ltd. , 4, kang le, Road S. , Zhaoqing , Guangdong, China and marketed in India by M/ s. Multi Creations Pvt. Ltd. , 12 , Printing Press Area ( Behind Punjab Kesari ) , Wazirpur , Delhi - 110 035 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/ 2005/ 1108 ;

The said model ( see the figure given below) is a non - automatic weighing instrument working on the principle of spring with a maximum capacity of 120kg and minimum capacity is 10kg . The verification scale interval (e) is 1kg .

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 in the range of 100kg to 200kg and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 1000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e' value 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k , or 5 × 10k , k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the approved said model has been manufactured.

[ F. No. WM -21 (322)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 986

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 414.-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 कैमरी इलेक्ट्रॉनिक ( जाओकिंग ) लिमिटेड , 4 कैंग ली, रोड एस, जाओकिंग, गुआगडॉग, चीन द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " बी आर ई " श्रृंखला के एनालॉग सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( इलैक्ट्रानिक व्यक्ति तोल मशीन ) के मॉडल का जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " फ्रीलांस " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) जिसे भारत में मैसर्स मल्टी क्रीएशन प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, 12 , प्रिटिंग प्रेस एरिया ( पंजाब केसरी के पीछे ) , वजीरपुर, दिल्ली -110035 को विपणन किया गया है और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/2005/1109 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( ऊपर दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 150 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (ई ) 100 ग्राम है । प्रदर्श लिक्विड क्रिस्टल डिस्पले ( एल सी डी ) प्रकार का है । स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबन्द भी किया जाएगा । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत, 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 100 मि.ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक ' ई ' मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (एन ) सहित 100 कि.ग्रा. से अधिक और 200 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और ' ई ' मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 322 )/2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1

ト 987

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 414.- 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 model of non - automatic weighing instrument with digital indication (Electronic Person Weighing Machine) of " BRE " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class III) with brand name " FREELANCE " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s. Camry Electronic (Zhaoqing ) Ltd. , 4 , kang le, Road S. , Zhaoqing , Guangdong , China and marketed in India by M/s . Multi Creations Pvt . Ltd. , 12 , Printing Presss Area (Behind Punjab Kesari ) , Wazirpur, Delhi - 110 035 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 05/ 1109 .

The said model (see the figure given above ) is a strain gauge type load cell based weighing instrument with the maximum capacity of 150 kg and minimum capacity is 2 kg . The verification scale interval (e ) 100g . The display is of Liquid Crystal Display ( LCD ) type .

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 in the range of 100 kg to 200 kg with verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg to 2 g and with the verification scale interval in the range of 500 to 10000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value 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 ( 322)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 988

[ PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/ MAGHA 15 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 415.- 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 कैमरी इलेक्ट्रानिक ( जाओकिंग ) लिमिटेड, 4 कैंग ली , रोड एस, जाओंकिग , गुआगडॉग, चीन द्वारा विनिर्मित साधारण यथार्थता (यथार्थता वर्ग IV ) वाले " के सी एम " श्रृंखला के एनालॉग सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( मैकेनिकल किचन वेइंग मशीन 5 डॉयल प्रकार ) के मॉडल का जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " फ्रीलांस " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) जिसे भारत में मैसर्स मल्टी क्रीएशन प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, 12 , प्रिटिंग प्रेस एरिया ( पंजाब केसरी के पीछे ) वजीरपुर, दिल्ली-110 035 को विपणन किया गया है और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2005/ 1110 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक स्प्रिंग तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 4 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 20 ग्राम है । डॉयल द्वारा तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबन्द भी किया जाएगा । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 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 सिद्धांत, 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 ग्राम या उससे अधिक के ' ई ' मान के लिए 100 से 1000 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 के या 5 × 10 के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 322 ) /2005 ] पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 989 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 415. 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 with analogue indication (Mechanical Kitchen Weighing Machine-Dial type ) of " KCM" series ofordinary accuracy (Accuracy class IV) with brand name " FREELANCE " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ), manufactured by M/ s . Camry Electronic (Zhaoqing ) Ltd. , 4, kang le , Road S. , Zhaoqing , Guangdong , China and marketed in India by M/ s . Multi Creations Pvt . Ltd. , 12 , Printing Press Area (Behind Punjab Kesari) , Wazirpur, Delhi - 110 035 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 / 05/ 1110;

The said model ( see the figure given below) is a spring based weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of4 kg. and minimum capacity of 200g . The verification scale interval (e ) 20g . The result of measurement is indicated by a dial .

Inaddition 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 up to 50 kg . and with number of verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 100 to 1000 for ' e ' value of 5g . or more and with ' e ' value 1 × 10k , 2 × 10 *, or 5 × 10* , k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which , the approved said model has been manufactured.

[ F. No. WM -21 ( 322)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 194 G1 /06-9 990

[PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 416.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्षित 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 श्री मीनाक्षी इण्डस्ट्रीज, सेंटहिल इलाम , 8/231 , राजीव गांधी स्ट्रीट, मीनाक्षी नगर, न्यूरामानन्द रोड़ , मदुरै -625009 द्वारा निर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग II ) वाले " एस एम आई जे पी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित, तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटोप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " अनन्त " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09/ 05/637 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( एक विकृति गैज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टोप प्रकार का ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) का मान 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 ।

ΑΝΑΝΤΗ Jewellery Series

;

SREP HELPAAKSENTAPESTRIES

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबन्द भी किया जाएगा । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल 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 5000 तक के 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 ( 97 ) /2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 991 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4 , 2006/ माय 15, 1927

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 416. 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 ofWeights 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 " SMI - JP" series of high accuracy (Accuracy class II ) and with brand name " ANANTH " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ), manufactured by M/s. Sree Meenakshi Industries, Senthil Illam , 8/231 , Rajiv Gandhi Street, Meenakshi Nagar , New Ramanand Road, Madurai -625 009 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/05 /637;

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

ΑΝΑΝΤΗ Jewellery Series

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

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

[ F. No. WM-21 ( 97)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 992

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

नईदिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 417.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों काअनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग 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 श्रीमीनाक्षी इण्डस्ट्रीज, सेंटहिल इलाम , 8/231 , राजीव गांधी स्ट्रीट, मीनाक्षी नगर, न्यू रामानन्द रोड़, मदुरै-625009 द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " एस एम आई टी बी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटोप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " अनन्त " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/09/05/638 संमनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृति गैज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टोप प्रकार का ) है । इसकी अधीकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( 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 तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

ΑΝΑΝΤΗ TableTop Series

ANANTH

SRET MELNAARSHI INDUSTRIES

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 97 )/2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 993 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 417. 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 " SMI - TB" series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class III ) and with brand name " ANANTH " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Sree Meenakshi Industries , Senthil Illam , 8/231 , Rajiv Gandhi Street , Meenakshi Nagar, New Ramanan Road, Madurai - 625 009 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/05 /638 ;

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 5g . It has a tare device with 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply;

ANANTH Jable Top Series

ANANTH

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. with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg. to 2g. or with verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g. or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10k , or 5 × 10k , k being a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured .

[ F. No. WM-21 ( 97 )/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 994

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 418.-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 श्री मीनाक्षी इण्डस्ट्रीज, सेंटहिल इलाम , 8/231 , राजीव गांधी स्ट्रीट, मीनाक्षी नगर, न्यू रामानन्द रोड, मदुरै -625009 द्वारा निर्मित उच्च यथार्थता (यथार्थता वर्ग II ) वाले " एस एम आई- पी पी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " अनन्त " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/ 09/05/639 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृति गैज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 600 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2.5 कि. ग्रा . है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) का मान 50 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 ।

Bench Weighing Series

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबन्द भी किया जाएगा । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत, 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 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मान ( एन ) अंतराल सहित 50 कि.ग्रा . से अधिक और 1000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 के हैं , जो घनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्यके समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 97 ) /2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 995 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 418. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority , is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and ( 8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform type ) with digital indication of " SMI - PP " series of high accuracy ( Accuracy Class II ) and with brand name " ANANTH " (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Sree Meenakshi Industries , Senthil Illam , 8/231 , Rajiv Gandhi Street, Meenakshi Nagar, New Ramnad Road, Madurai -625 009 and which isassigned the approval mark IND/ 09/ 05/ 639 ;

The said model ( see the figure given below) is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform type ) with a maximum capacity of 600 kg and minimum capacity of 2.5kg . The verification scale interval (e ) is 50g . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alrernate current power supply;

ΑΝΑΝΤΗ Bench Weighing Series

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 ranging above 50kg to 1000kg and with number of 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 , k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design accuracy and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[ F. No. WM-21 (97)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 996

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 419.- 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 श्री मीनाक्षी इण्डस्ट्रीज , सेंटहिल इलाम , 8/231 , राजीव गांधी स्ट्रीट, मीनाक्षी नगर , न्यूरामानन्द रोड़, मदुरै -625009 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता (यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एस एम आई- पी टी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित , तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " अनन्त " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2005 /640 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृति गेज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) 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 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 उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्तमॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. से या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान ( एन ) 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 हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 (97 ) /2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 997 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 419. 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 , (Plat form type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " SMI - PT" series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " ANANTH" ( hereinafter referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/ s Sree Meenaakshi Industries , Senthil Illam , 8/231 , Rajiv Gandhi Street , Meenakshi Nagar , New Ramnad Road , Madurai -625 009 and which is assigned the approval mark IND /09/2005/640 ;

The said Model ( see the figure given below) is 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 200g . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED ) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing shall also be done to prevent 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 same series with 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 × 10k, 2 × 10k, or 5× 10%, k being 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 ( 97)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 194G1 /06-10 998

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 420.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि ठक्त 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 श्री मीनाक्षी इण्डस्ट्रीज, सेंटहिल इलाम, 8/231 , राजीव गांधी स्ट्रीट, मीनाक्षी नगर, न्यू रामानन्द रोड़ , मदुरै-625009 द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता (यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एस एम आई- पी सी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित, तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म के लिए कनवर्शन किट प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " अनन्त " है ( जिसे इसमें इसकें पश्चात उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/ 2005/ 641 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण - पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

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

Conversen Series

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन 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 उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि. ग्रा. से.2 ग्रा. तक " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 1,00,000 तक के रंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 1,00,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान ( एन ) अंतराल सहित 1000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 97 ) /2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 999 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 420.-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 (Conversion kit for Platform) with " SMI - PT " series belonging to medium accuracy (Accuracy class- III) and with brand name " ANANTH" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model) , manufactured by M/ s Sree Meenaakshi Industries , Senthil Illam , 8/231 , Rajiv Gandhi Street , Meenakshi Nagar, New Ramnad Road , Madurai - 625 009 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/2005/641 ;

Thesaid Model ( see the figure given below) is a weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 300 kg and minimum capacity of 2 kg . 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 ( LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

ΑΝΑΝΤΗ Conversen Series

SREE NIE MAAKSIRINDUSTRES

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 instrument of of similar make and performce of same series with with maximum capacity up to 1000kg and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 1,00,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg . to 2g and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 5000 to 1,00,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10 *, 2× 10 % , or 5x10 % , 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 (97 )/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 1000

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )] THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2006

का.आ. 421.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों काअनुमोदन ) 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 बी. पी. एल. वे वर्ल्ड , 7वां तला, राजेन्द्र कम्प्लेक्स, एन. एस. बोरस रोड, थाने -400601 द्वारा उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " बी पी एल" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित, तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टीप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " बीपीएल वे वर्ल्ड" है (जिसे इसके इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/05 /566 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

B.P.L.

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृति गेज प्रकार का लोड सैल आधारित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टोष प्रकार का ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. औरन्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई ) का मान 2 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आद्येयत्तुलन 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 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 प्रमाण पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 1 मि. ग्रा. से 50 मि. ग्रा. तक" ई " मान के लिए 100 से 5,000 तक के 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 के, 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 *, के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 25 )/2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान, 1001 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 421. 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 " BPL " series of high accuracy (Accuracy class - II ) andwith brand name " BPL WEIGH WORLD" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ), manufactured by M/s . B.P.L. Weigh -World, 7th Gala, Rajendra Complex, N.S. Bose Road, Thane -400 601 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/05/566;

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 100g. The verification scale interval (e) is 2g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode ( LED ) indicates the weighing result . The instrument operate on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply ;

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

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

[F. No. WM -21 (25)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 1002

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2006

का.आ. 422.- 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 बी. पी. एल. वे वर्ल्ड, 7 वां तला, राजेन्द कम्प्लेक्स, एन. एस. बोस रोड, थाने -400601 द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " बी पी डब्ल्यू" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित, तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टोप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " बी. पी. एल. वे वर्ल्ड " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09 /05/ 567 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

B.P.L.

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृति गेज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टोप प्रकार का ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. औरन्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मांपमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आद्येयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आद्येयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद भी किया जाएगा । औरकेन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडलके अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल कानिर्माण 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 500 से 10,000 तक के 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 हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 के, 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 के , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं . डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 25 )/2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1003 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/ माघ 15, 1927

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 422. 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 "BPW" series of medium accuracy ( Accuracy class - III ) and with brand name "BPL WEIGH WORLD " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . B.P.L. Weigh- World, 7th Gala, Rajendra Complex, N.S. Bose Road , Thane -400 601 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/05/567;

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 100g. The verification scale interval (e) is 5g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED ) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

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

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 100 mg to 2g or with verification scale interval (n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k , k being 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 ( 25)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 1004

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

> का.आ. 423.- 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 बी पी एल वे वर्ल्ड, 7 वां तला , राजेन्द्र कम्प्लेक्स, एन एस बोरा रोड, थाने-400601 द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " बी पी डब्ल्यू" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " बी पी एल वे वर्ल्ड " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चातें उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/05 / 568 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृति गेज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार का 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 आद्येयतुलन 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 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 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 के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा . से अधिक और 5000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 %, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 (25 ) /2005 ]

नी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1005 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006

S.O. 423. 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, (Plateform type) weighing instrument with digital indication of " BPW" series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " BPL WEIGH WORLD " ( herein after referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . B.P.L. Weigh- World, 7th Gala, Rajendra Complex, N.S. Bose Road, Thane -400 601 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/05/568 ;

The said model 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 200g. It has a tare device with 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED ) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

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 same series with maximum capacity up to 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 × 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 (25)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 194G1/0611 1006

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 17 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 424.-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 साहिब नोवेल्टिज , 5022/9 , भूतल, राम रहीम मार्केट, रुई मन्डी, सदर बाजार, दिल्ली -110006 द्वारा विनिर्मित यथार्थता वर्ग- II और " एस एन -150 " श्रृंखला के स्टील फीता मापक के माडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " साहिब " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2005 /6095 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

Sahib SM- 150

उक्त मॉडल एक स्टील प्रकार का मापक है । 1 मि. मी. ग्रेजुएशन के साथ इसकी लंबाई 5 मी. है । मापक की चौड़ाई 16 मि. मी . है और मोटाई 0.19 मि. मी. है । मापक का रंग पीला है जिसमें प्रत्येक सेंटीमीटर ग्रेजुएशन का रंग काला है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण - पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित अधिकतम 5 मी. तक की लंबाई के साथ उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के मापक उपकरण भी होंगे ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 357 ) / 2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1007 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 17th January, 2006

S.O. 424.-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 steel tape measure of accuracy class - II and of series - ' SN - 150 ' with brand name " SAHIB " (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s Sahib Novelties , 5022/9 , Ground Floor, Ram Rahim Market , Rui Mandi , Sadar Bazar, Delhi - 110006 and which is assigned the approval mark IND / 09 /2005/ 51095 ;

Sahib SN-150

The said model is a Steel Tape Measure of length 5m with Imm graduation . The tape has a width of 16 mm and thickness of 0.19mm . The colour of the tape measure is yellow where as the colour of every centimeter grade, ion isblack .

[F. No. WM -21 (357 )/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Mology 1008

[PART II - SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 18 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 425.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा जारी अनुमोदित प्रमाणपत्र के साथ उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए स्मार्ट टेक्नोलोजी सिस्टम्स, सं. 13 , 5वां क्रास, एम ई एस रोड, शारदांबा नगर, झालाहल्ली , बंगलौर-560013 द्वारा विनिर्मित " एस टी एस -30 "श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित ऑटो/टैक्सी मीटर के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " स्मार्ट " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/05/ 589 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

-FOR HIRE-

उक्तमॉडल 5 अंकीय दूरी और समय मापन युक्ति सहित लगा हुआ अंकन सूचन निर्देशन सहित ऑटो/टैक्सी मीटर है । यह यात्रा के किसी भी क्षण यात्री द्वारा संदेय प्रभार को निरंतर जोड़ता रहता है और उपदर्शित करता रहता है । यात्रा के दौरान कतिपय विनिर्दिष्ट चाल के ऊपर और विनिर्दिष्ट चाल के नीचे चली गई दूरी के किराए को देय करने का फंक्शन है । मीटर के पाठ प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) द्वारा उपदर्शित करता है उपकरण का " के " फैक्टर 2800 पल्स/कि. मी. है ।

स्टांपिग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबन्द भी किया जाएगा ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 69 )/2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1009 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4 , 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

New Delhi , the 18th January, 2006

S.O. 425. 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 an Auto/Taxi Meter with digital indication of ' STS - 30 ' series with brand name " SMART " ( herein referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Smart Technology Systems , No. 13 , 5th Cross , MES Road, Sharadamba Nagar, Jalahalli , Bangalore -560013 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/05/589;

FOR HIRE-

The said Model is an Auto/Taxi Meter with 5 digit digital indication incorporated with a distance and time measuring device. It totalizes continuously and indicates at any moment of the journey, the charges payable by the passenger . The fare to pay is a function of the distance travelled above a certain specified speed and the time elapsed below a specified speed during the journey. The reading of the meter is indicated by Light Emitting Diode ( LED) . The 'K' factor of the instrument is 2800 pulses per kilometer .

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

[F. No. WM- 21 (69)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 1010

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 426.-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 डेक्कन पैकेजिंग सिसटम्स एंड नीड्स , 402 , शशांक रेसीडेंसी , स्ट्रीट नं. 11 , टरंका, हैदराबाद -500017 द्वारा निर्मित " सेटपैक -900 वी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित स्वतः सूचक स्वचालित इलैक्ट्रानिक तोलन मशीन ( पिस्टन फिलर प्रकार ) के माडल का जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " सेटपैक " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/2005/ 902 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल का स्वचालित फिलिंग मशीन ( पिस्टन फिलर ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 2 ग्रा. से 1,000 ग्रा. अथवा उसके समतुल्य आयतन की रेंज में है । यह नियत घनात्मक विस्थापन के तहत पिस्टन फिलिंग प्रणली के सिद्धांत पर कार्य करता है । यह वनस्पति तेल, घी, वनस्पति, मारग्रेन जैसे चिपचिपे उत्पादों को भरने में प्रयुक्त होता है । यह 60 भरन प्रति मिनट ( अधिकतम ) की दर से भरता है जो पैक के'आकार और द्रव के चिपचिपे पर निर्भरत है ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट के मुदांकन 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 उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के मापक उपकरण भी होंगे जो 2 ग्रा. से 1,000 ग्रा. अथवा उसके समतुल्य आयतन की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 289 )/ 2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1011 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपन्न : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

New Delhi , the 18th January, 2006

S.O. 426. 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 (Piston Filler) of " SETPAC - 900V" series with brand name " SETPAC" ( herein referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/ s .The Deccan Packaging Systems and Needs , 402, Shashank Residency, Street No. 11 , Tarnka, Hyderabad-500017 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/05/902;

The said Model is an automatic filling machine (Piston Filler ) with a capacity in the range of 2g. to 1000.g or equivalent volume in ml . It works on the principle of piston filling mechanism under constant positive displacement . It is used for filling of viscous liquid products like vegetable oils , ghee , vanaspati , margarine etc. It fills 60 fills per minute ( max. ) depending upon the size of the pack and viscosity of the liquids .

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

[F. No. WM -21 ( 289)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 1012

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 427.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों काअनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग 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 डेक्कन पैकेजिंग सिस्टम्स एंड नीड्स, 402 , शशांक रेसीडेंसी, स्ट्रीट नं. 11 , टरंका, हैदराबाद-500017 द्वारा निर्मित सेटपैक-2250 जी श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित स्वतः सूचक स्वचालित, ग्रेविभेटरिक फिलिंग इलेक्ट्रानिक तोलन मशीन समय आधारित पाउच फिलिंग मशीन के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " सेटपैक " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/ 2005/901 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल स्वचालित ग्रेविमेटरिक फिलिंग मशीन समय - आधारित पाउच फिलिंग मशीन है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 2 ग्राम से 1000 ग्राम अथवा उनके समतुल्य आयतन मि.ली. में है । यह गुरुत्वाकर्षण प्रवाह के सिद्धान्त पर कार्य करता है और धागे , सफेदी, नील , दूध, घी, मिनरल जल जैसे मुक्त प्रवाही चिपचिपा रहित द्रवों को भरने में प्रयुक्त होता 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 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 उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 2 ग्राम से 1000 ग्राम अथवा उसके समतुल्य की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं ।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 289 ) /2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1013 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

New Delhi , the 18th January, 2006

S.O. 427. 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 , Automatic Gravimetric Filling Machine ( Time based-Pouch Filling Machine) of " SETPAC - 2250G " series with brand name " SETPAC" ( herein referred to as the said Model ) , manufacturedby M/ s . The Deccan Packaing Systems and Needs , 402, Shashank Residency, Street No. 11 , Tarnka, Hyderabad -500 017 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/05/901;

The said model is an automatic gravimetric filling machine (Time based Pouch Filling Machine ) with a capacity in the range of 2g to 1000g or equivalent volume in ml . It works on the principle of gravity flow and used for filling ofall free flowing non - viscous liquids like fabric , whitener, blue, milk, butter milk , arrack, mineral water etc. It fills 30 to 50 fills per minute ( max. ) depending upon the size of the pack and quantity of liquid to be filled.

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

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 289)/ 2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 194 GI/06-12 1014

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

नईदिल्ली, 18 जनवरी, 2006

का.आ. 428.-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 मेटासुन टेलीकाम प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, प्लाट सं. 168 , 169 और 170 महेश नगर, कपरा , ई सी आई एल डाकघर, हैदराबाद -500 062 , आंध्र प्रदेश द्वारा निर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " एम एस जे " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित , तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार ) -के माडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " मेटासन " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/05/622 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृति गेज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार का ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 2 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 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 उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती हैकि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे 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 5,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि.ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5,000 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 x 10 , 2 x 10 * या 5 × 10 , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 92 ) /2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1015 भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 18th January, 2006

S.O. 428.-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 " MS - J" series of high accuracy (Accuracy class - II ) and with brand name " METASUN" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s Metasun Telecom Pvt . Ltd. , Plot No. 168 , 169 & 170 , Mahesh Nagar, Kapra, ECIL Post , Hyderabad- 500 062 , A.P. and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 / 05/622 ;

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

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

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

[F. No. WM-21 (92 )/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 1016

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 18 जनवरी, 2006

का.आ. 429.-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 मेटासुन टेलीकाम प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, प्लाट सं. 168 , 169 और 170 , महेश नगर, कपरा , ई सी आई एल डाकघर, हैदराबाद -500062 आंध्र प्रदेश द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एम एस टी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित , तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " मेटासन " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2005/623 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृति गेज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार का ) तोलन उपकरण 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 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 प्रमाण - पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि. ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई" मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान के लिए. 1 × 10 के, 2 × 10 * या 5 × 10 के , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 92 )/2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1017

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 18th January, 2006

S.O. 429. 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 " MS- T. " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " METASUN " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Metasun Telecom Pvt . Ltd. , Plot No. 168 and 169 and 170 , Mahesh Nagar , Kapra , ECIL Post , Hyderabad- 500062 , A.P. and which is assigned the approval mark IND /09/ 2005/623 ;

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 5g . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing results . 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 up to 50 kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg . to 2g . or with verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g. or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k , k being is the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 ( 92 )/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 1018

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 430.- 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 मेटासुन टेलीकाम प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, प्लाट सं. 168 , 169 और 170 , महेश नगर, कपरा , ई सी आई एल डाकघर, हैदराबाद -500062 आंध्र प्रदेश द्वारा निर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " एम एस पी पी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित, तोलन उपकरण (प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " मेटासन " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/ 05 / 624 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृति गेज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार का ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 600 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2.5 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 50 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 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 प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि. ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान ( एन ) अंतराल सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से अधिक और 1000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 के , 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 के , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 92) /2005 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1019

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 18th January, 2006

S.O. 430. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform type ) with digital indication of " MS -PP " series of high accuracy (Accuracy class - II ) and with brand name " METASUN " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s . Metasun Telecom Pvt. Ltd. , Plot No. 168 , 169 and 170 , Mahesh Nagar , Kapra , ECIL Post , Hyderabad- 500062 , A.P. and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /05/624;

The said model ( see the figure given below ) is a strain gauge type load cell based non- automatic weighing instrument (Platform type ) with a maximum capacity of 600 kg . and minimum capacity of 2.5 kg. The verification scale. interval (e ) is 50g . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

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

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make and performance of same series with maximum capacity ranging above 50 kg . to 1000 kg and with number of 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 , k being is the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design , accuracy and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM- 21 (92)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 1020

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

नईदिल्ली, 18 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 431.-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 मेटासन टेलिकाम प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, प्लाट सं. 168 , 169 और 170 , महेश नगर, कपरा, ई. सी. आई. एल. पोस्ट, हैदराबाद -500062 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एम एस पी टी" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित , स्वतः सूचक तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेट फार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " मेटासन " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2005/625 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृति गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 कि. ग्रा . औरन्यूनतम क्षमता 4 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 200 ग्राम है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलमात्मक 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 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 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 अंतराल ( एन ) 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 ( 92 ) /2005 ] पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1021 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

New Delhi , the 18th January, 2006

S.O. 431. 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 " MS -PT. " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy Class - III ) and with brand name "METASUN " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/ s .Metasun Telecom Pvt . Ltd. , Plot No. 168 , 169 & 170 , Mahesh Nagar , Kapra, ECIL Post , Hyderabad- 500062 , Α.Ρ. and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09 / 05/625;

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 200g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED ) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternat 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 same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg and upto 5000. kg and with number of 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, 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 (92)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Metrology 194GI/06-13 1022

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

नई दिल्ली , 18 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 432.- 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 आई पी ए डिवाइसेस प्राइवेट लिमिटेड # 469 चतुर्थ फेस , पीन्या इण्डस्ट्रीयल एस्टेट एरिया, बंगलौर -560058 द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " पी बी सी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित , तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेट फार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " सी यू टी ई " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/05/633 सममुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण - पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गैज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( प्लेट फार्म प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 4 कि. ग्रा . है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 200 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 के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलंने 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 हैकिउक्तमॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा . से अधिक और 5000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 के, 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 * , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्यके समतुल्य हैं ।

[ फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 66 ) /2005 ] पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1023 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4 , 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 18th January, 2006

S.O. 432. 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 " PBC" series of medium accuracy (Accuracy Class - III ) and with brand name " CUTE " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s. IPA Devices Pvt . Ltd. , # 464, IVth Phase , Peenya Industrial Area , Bangalore - 560058 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/05/633;

The said model 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 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 alternate 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 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 I × 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 ( 66) /2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 1024

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 433.- 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 जराना इंस्ट्रूमेंट कम्पनी, प्लाट नं. जी-17 , एम आई डी सी, इण्डस्ट्रीयल एरिया, अमरावती -444604 द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एच बी-1000 के " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित, तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " व्हे एस टी आर " है ( जिसे उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/05/ 1106 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण - पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

WEIGH ST

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गैज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित 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 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 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 घोपणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा . से 5000 कि.ग्रा . तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 217 )/ 2005 ] पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1025 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

New Delhi , the 18th January, 2006

S.O. 433. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 ( 60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7 ) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of self indicating , non- automatic (Platform type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " HB - 1000K " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class- III ) and with brand name " WEIGH ST * R " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s Zarna Instruments Company, Plot No G - 17 , M.I.D.C. Industrial Area, Amravati -444 605 , M.S. and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/05/ 1106 ;

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 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 (LED ) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

WEIGH STER

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 same series with maximum capacity above 50kg and upto 5000kg and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g . or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k, or.5× 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 said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 ( 217)/2005 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 1026

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 18 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 434.-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 माष 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 प्रीत एंटर प्राइजेज , 184 , स्मृति विहार सोसायटी, बी/एच स्मृति मंदिर, पी.डी. पांडया कालेज रोड, ( पोड़ासा ) वल्वा, अहमदाबाद द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एम ए एस " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित , तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " मास्टर " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09 / 05/ 585 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गैज प्रकार का लोड सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार का) इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 15 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 40 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 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 और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 266 ) /2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1027

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[भाग II-खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 18th January, 2006

S.O. 434. 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 " MAS " series of medium accuracy ( Accuracy class- III ) and with brand name " MASTER " ( herein after referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s Preet Enterprise , 184, Smurti Vihar Society, B/H Smurti Mandir, P.D. Pandya College , Road , (Ghodasar ) , Vatva, Ahmedabad and which is assigned the approval mark IND / 09 /05/585;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with a maximum capacity of 15 kg . and minimum capacity of 40g . 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 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

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

Further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 12) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg to 2g or with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10k , or 5 × 10k , k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the sarne 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 (266)/2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 1028

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 जनवरी, 2006

का.आ. 435.-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 एनकार्डियोराइट इलेक्ट्रानिक प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, ए-7 , इंडस्ट्रीयल एस्टेट, तालकटोरा रोड, लखनऊ -226011 द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " ई एच एस " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित, तोलन उपकरण ( लटकने वाला स्केल प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " राइट " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2004/ 564 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक प्रतिबल तुलादण्ड प्रकार का भार सैल आधारित 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 परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

008

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन 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 उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्मित किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 5000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[ फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 189 )/2001 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1029 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4 , 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 18th January, 2006

S.O. 435. 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 (Hanging Scale ) weighing instrument with digital indication of "EHS " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " RITE " ( herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s Encardio - Rite Electronics Private Limited , A - 7 , Industrial Estate, Talkatora Road, Lucknow - 226011 and which is assigned the approval mark IND /09/2004/564;

The said model (see the figure given below) is a shear beam type load cell based weighing instrument with amaximum capacity of 1000 kg and minimum capacity of 4kg . The verification scale interval (e) is 200g . It has a tare device with 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternate current power supply .

008

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 up to 50,00kg and with number of verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2× 10k, or 5 × 10%, k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufacturedby 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 ( 189)/2001 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 194 GI /06-14 1030

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 18 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 436.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों काअनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग 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 एनकार्डियोराइट इलैक्ट्रानिक प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, ए -7, इंडस्ट्रीयल एस्टेट, तालकटोरा रोड, लखनऊ-226011 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " ई सी के " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित , तोलन उपकरण ( वेब्रिज प्रकार के लिए क्नर्वशन किट ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " राइट " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2004/565 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण - पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

Rite

008

उक्तमॉडल ( दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक प्रतिबल तुलादण्ड प्रकार का भार सैल आधारित ( वेब्रिज के लिए संपरिवर्तन किट ) अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 टन 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 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 मुद्राकिंत 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 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 अनुमोदितमॉडल विनिर्मित किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 1 कि.ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 5 टन से अधिक और 100 टन तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2× 10 या 5 × 10 * , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 189 )/2001 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1031

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 18th January, 2006

S.O. 436. 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 ( Conversion kit for weigh bridge type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " ECK " series of medium accuracy ( Accuracy class -III ) and with brand name "RITE " (hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/ s Encardio - Rite Electronics Private Limited , A- 7 , Industrial Estate , Talkatora Road, Lucknow- 226011 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /2004/ 565;

The said model ( see the figure given below) is a shear beam type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (conversion kit for weigh bridge) with a maximum capacity of 30 tonne and minimum capacity of 100 kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 5kg . It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternate current power supply.

008

Inaddition 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 5 tonne and up to 100 tonne and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 1 kg . or more and with ' e' value 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k , 5 × 10k, k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which , the approved said model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 ( 189 )/2001 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 1032

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 जनवरी, 2006

का.आ. 437.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत्त 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 एनकार्डियोराइट इलैक्ट्रानिक प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, ए-7 , इंडस्ट्रीयल एस्टेट, तालकटोरा रोड, लखनऊ -226011 द्वारा निर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " ई टी डब्ल्यू" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित , तोलन उपकरण ( इलैक्ट्रानिक टैंक तोलन स्केल प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " राइट " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2004/566 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक प्रतिबल तुलादण्ड प्रकार का भार सैल आधारित ( इलैक्ट्रानिक टैंक तोलन स्केल ) अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 120 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श, परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

Rite

008

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्राकिंत 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 किउक्त 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 मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से अधिक और 300 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2× 10 या 5 × 10 *, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 189 )/2001 ] पी . ए. कृष्णामूर्ति , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

1033

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

New Delhi , the 18th January, 2006

S.O. 437. 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 (Electronic tank Weighing Scale) weighing instrument with digital indication of " ETW " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III) and with brand name " RITE " ( herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/sEncardio-Rite Electronics Private Limited, A - 7, Industrial Estate , Talkatora Road, Lucknow - 226011 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2004/566 ;

The said model (see the figure given below ) is a shear beam type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Electronic tank Weighing Scale ) with a maximum capacity of 120 kg . and minimum capacity of 2 kg. The verification scale interval ( e) is 100g. It has a tare device with 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED ) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Ritc

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 capacity above 50kg 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 ' e' value 1 × 10k, 2× 10k, 5 × 10k , k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same material with which , the approved said model has been manufactured .

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 189)/2001 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 1034

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 जनवरी, 2006

का.आ. 438.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा जारी अनुमोदित प्रमाणपत्र के साथ उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स मीडिको लिमिटेड, प्लाट सं . 39/44 , स्कीम-6, रोड-2 , सीओन ( ई ) मुंबई -400022 महाराष्ट्र द्वारा विनिर्मित " एम एस एम III एस " श्रृंखला के सादृश सूचन सहित वितरण पंप के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " मीडिको " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 /05/ 592 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल अविपर्यस्त योग करने वाला धनात्मक विस्थापन मीटर सहित वितरक पंप है । इसकी प्रवाह क्षमता 35 लीटर/ मिनट है । यह धन या आयतन के लिए प्रीसेट युति है । प्रदर्श सादृश प्रकार का है । इसका अधिकतम उपदर्शित आयतन 99.99 लीटर और लघुतम प्रदर्श 10 मि ली है । स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद भी किया जाएगा ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 295 )/2003 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1035 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 18th January, 2006

S.O. 438. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7 ) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of Dispensing Pump with analog indication of " MMM 111S " series with brand name " MIDCO " ( herein after referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s Midco Limited, Plot No. 39/44 , Scheme-6 , Road - 2 , Sion (E ) Mumbai -400022 , Maharastra and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/ 05 / 592 ;

The said model is a mechanical dispensing pump with positive displacement meter along mechanical non- reversible totalizer. The maximum flow rate is 35 litre per minute . It has preset device for money ...... volume. The display is of analog type . The maximum volume indicated is in 99.99 litre and the smallest display is 10ml .

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

[F. No. W 21 (295 )/ 2003 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 1036

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 27 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 439.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइल ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962(1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 812( अ ) तारीख 10-6-2005 द्वारा, उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में गेल ( इण्डिया ) लिमिटेड द्वारा महाराष्ट्र राज्यमें दहेज- हजीरा - उरान एवं स्पर पाइपलाईनों के माध्यम से प्राकृतिक गैसके परिवहन के लिए पाइपलाईन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;

और उक्त राजपत्रित अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ जनता को तारीख 07-07-2005 तक उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी;

और पाइपलाईन बिछाने के संबंध में जनता से प्राप्त आक्षेपों पर सक्षम प्राधिकारी द्वारा विचार कर लिया गया है और उन्हें अननुज्ञात कर दिया गया है ;

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

और सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने, उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् और यह समाधान हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाईनें बिछाने के लिए अपेक्षित हैं, उस में 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 किइस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में पाइपलाईनें 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, निर्देश देती है कि पाइपलाईनें बिछाने के लिए भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार, इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को , केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने की बजाए, पाइपलाईनें बिछाने का प्रस्ताव करने वाली गेल ( इण्डिया ) लिमिटेड में निहीत होगा और तदुपरि, भूमि में ऐसे उपयोग का अधिकार, इस प्रकार अधिरोपित निबंधनों और शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुए, सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, गेल (इण्डिया ) लिमिटेड में निहित होगा ।

अनुसूची

तहसील गाँव

जिला

सर्वे नं.

आर.ओ. यू. अर्जित करने के लिए क्षेत्रफल ( हेक्टेयर में)

(1) (2)

(5)

(3) (4)

विहाल

00-20-13 चोर्यासी

सुरत

00-33-00

नहर

00-08-70

00-28-85

10/पी-1 00-01-75

योग

00-92-43

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ] (1) (2) (3)

(4) (5) चोर्यासी वंकला

00-02-19 सुरत

बैलगाड़ी रास्ता

109

00-44-97

108

00-12-30

00-67-80

153

106

00-09-36

01-36-62

योग

[फा. सं. एल-14014/20/04-जी.पी. ]

एस.बी. मण्डल, अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS New Delhi , the 27th January, 2006 S.O. 439. Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 812 (E) dated 10-06-2005 issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of Users in Land) Act , 1962 (50 of 1962 ) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act ) , 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 transport of natural gas through Dahej -Hazira - Uran and its spur pipelines in the State ofGujarat by the GAIL ( India) Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 07-07-2005;

And whereas the objections received from the public to the laying of the pipeline have been considered and disallowed by the Competent Authority ;

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

And whereas the Central Government has, after considering the said report , decided to acquire the Right of User in the lands specified in the Schedule ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 6 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that the Right of User in the land specified in the Schedule is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;

And further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section (4 ) of Section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby directs that the Right of User in the said land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Central Government , vest , on this date of the publication of the declaration in the GAIL ( India ) Limited, free from all encumbrances .

1037

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

SCHEDULE

Tehsil

Distt.

Village Survey

No.

Area to be Acquired for R.O.U. (inHectares) 2

00-20-13 Surat Choryasi Vihal

00-33-00

00-08-70

Canal

00-28-85

10/P- 1 00-01-75.

Total 00-92-43

00-02-19

Vankala Cart

Track

109 00-44-97

108 00-12-30

00-67-80

153

106 00-09-36

01-36-62

Total

[F. No. L - 14014/20/04-G.P. ] S.B. MANDAL , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 27 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 440.-केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि महाराष्ट्र राज्य में दहेज़- हजीरा - उरान एवं स्पर पाइपलाईनों द्वारा प्राकृतिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए गेल ( इण्डिया ) लिमिटेड द्वारा , एक पाइपलाईन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

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

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

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर, भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाईन बिछाए जाने के संबंध में, श्री के. एन. कशिवले, सक्षम प्राधिकारी , गेल ( इण्डिया ) लिमिटेड, गेल आशियाना भवन, सेक्टर 8 बी, 3 डी2 , सी.बी.डी. , बेलापुर, नवी मुम्बई -400 614 (महाराष्ट्र ) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

194 GI/06-15

अनुसूची

जिला तहसील गाँव सर्वे नं.

आर.ओ. यू. अर्जित करने के लिए क्षेत्रफल ( हेक्टेयर में)

(1) (2) (3) (4)

(5)

96/4

रायगड पनवेल नेरे

वाकडी 139/13 00-03-00

153/0

[फा. सं. एल -14014/20/04- जी.पी. ( भाग -1 ) ] एस.बी. मण्डल, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 27th January , 2006 S.O. 440. Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of natural gas through Dahej- Hazira - Uran and its spur pipelines in the State of Maharashtra , a pipeline should be laid by the GAIL (India) Limited;

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

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

Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of the notification issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the said Act , as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public , object in writing to the laying of the Pipeline under the land to Shri K.N. Kashivale , Competent Authority, GAIL ( India ) Limited , GAIL Ashiyana Building, Sector 8B , 3D2 , C.B.D. Belapur, Navi Mumbai- 400 614 (Maharashtra).

SCHEDULE

Distt. Taluka Village Survey No.

Area to be Acquired for R.O.U. (inHectares) 2

5 1

96/4

Raigad Panvel Nera

Vakadi

Panyel

Raigad

139/13 153/0

[F. No. L - 14014/20 /04 -G.P. (Part -1 ) ] S. B. MANDA Under Secy.

1038

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 27 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 441.-केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत हो है कि महाराष्ट्र राज्य में दहेज़-हजीरा उरान एवं स्पर पाइपलाईना द्वारा प्राकृतिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए गेल ( इण्डिया ) लिमिटेड द्वारा , एक पाइपलाईन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

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

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

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है , उस तारीख से जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर, भूमिके नीचे पाइपलाईन बिछाए जाने के संबंध में, श्री के. एन. कशिवले, सक्षम प्राधिकारी , गेल ( इण्डिया ) लिमिटेड, गेल आशियाना भवन, सेक्टर 8 बी , 3 डी2 , सी.बी.डी. , बेलापुर, नवी मुम्बई -400 614 (महाराष्ट्र) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

अनुसूची

जिला

सर्वे

तहसील गाँव

नं.

आर.ओ. यू. अर्जित करने के लिए क्षेत्रफल ( हेक्टेयर में)

(4)

(1)

(5) (2) (3)

22/2पै

वाडी

00-03-50 ठाणे अंबरनाथ

साखरोली

00-26-00

26पै

ठाणे अंबरनाथ

92पै

कुशीवली

ठाणे अंबरनाथ

चिखलोली 13/1पै

00-33-00 ठाणे अंबरनाथ

144पै

00-13-00

123पै

01-17-00

रायते

ठाणे

120

कल्याण

00-62-00 ठाणे

कल्याण रुंदे

66//22/ 23/25पै

ठाणे

चिंचवली 11/8/2पै

कल्याण

00-55-50

नडगांव तर्फे 168पै

ठाणे कल्याण

पितांबरे

कल्याण

00-17-00 ठाणे

जांभुल मोहाली 39/ 1पै 39/2पै

माँजलीं

53पै

00-65-00 ठाणे कल्या'ग

51पै

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) ] (1) (2)

(5)

(4)

(3)

140पै

ठाणे भिवंडी

00-10-48

लाप बुद्रुक

114/1

00-02-29

41पै

00-24-71

100/3

00-87-00 भिवंडी आन्हे

ठाणे

2/ए

भिवंडी

127/1

ठाणे

किरबली- दुरबली

179

00-67-00 ठाणे भिवंडी दिघासी

00-05-60 भिवंडी जांभिवली

61/1

ठाणे

ठाणे वाडा

00-05-50

199

चिंचघर

बिलोशी

225/सी

ठाणे वाडा

00-08-20 वाडा

ठाणे

कमलखांड डब्लू4

खानिवली

133

00-14-00 ठाणे वाडा

ठाणे वाडा

बिलावली

00-22-00

246/बी

00-01-50

2.39/सी

ठाणे वाडा विजयगड

14/12

14/11

355

00-32-00 ठाणे वाडा मुसारणे

357

00-03-40

188

ठाणे वाडा भोपीवली

वाडा

ठाणे

180बुधावली

130/सी

नदी

206पै

ठाणे

कुर्झ

विक्रमगड

197/पै 00-36-00

196पै

218

219

224

00-11-00

242

01-05-00

299

297

00-23-00

298

00-23-00

295

00-21-00

294

300

00-59-00

00-32-00

301

00-56-00

307

310

311

312

00-12-00

00-46-00

475

498

511

नदी

00-24-00

00-64-20

203 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

1039

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

ठाणे विक्रमगड आपटी बुद्रुक 32 704

ठाणे

00-64-00

24 डब्लू

विक्रमगड मुरबाड

182

ठाणे

आंबोली

डहाणू

319

ठाणे

बाघाडी

00-15-00 डहाणू

ठाणे

ओसरविरा

00-18-00 डहाणू

ठाणे

देऊर

122

00-25-00 डहाणू

ठाणे

111पै

00-28-00 तलासरी अणवीर

ठाणे

00-25-00

122

तलासरी

सुत्रकार

ठाणे तलासरी बोरमाल

00-18-00 [फा. सं. एल-14014/20/04-जी.पी. ( भाग-1)]

एस. बी. मण्डल, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 27th January, 2006 S.O. 441. Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of natural gas through Dahej- Hazira -Uran and its spur pipelines in the State of Maharashtra, a pipeline should be laid by the GAIL (India) Limited;

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

Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of the notification issued under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public , object in writing to the laying of the Pipeline under the land to Shri K. N. Kashivale , Competent Authority, GAIL (India) Limited , GAIL Ashiyana Building, Sector 8B , 3D2 , C.B.D. Belapur , Navi Mumbai - 400 614 (Maharashtra) .

SCHEDULE

Taluka

Distt .

Village

Area to be

Survey No. Acquired for R.O.U.

(inHectares)

5 I

2 3

00-03-50

22/2P

Ambernath Wadi

Thane

00-26-00

26P

Ambernath Sakharoli

Thane

92P

Ambernath Kushivali

Thane

00-33-00

13/ 1P

Ambernath Chikhaloli

Thane

144P

00-13-00 Thane Ambernath Chikhaloli

123P

01-17-00

120

Thane Kaylyan Rayate

00-62-00

Rundhe

Thane Kaylyan

66/A/22/ 23/25P

00-05-00 Thane Kaylyan Chinchawali 11 /8/2P

168P

00-55-50 Thane Kaylyan Nadgam Turfe Pitambari

39/ 1P

00-17-00 Thane Kaylyan

39/2P

Jambul Moholi

00-65-00 Thane Kaylyan Manjarli 53P 51P

00-10-48

Lap Budruk

Thane Bhiwandi

00-02-29

00-24-71

140P 114/1 41P

100/3

2/A

Anhe

00-87-00 Thane Bhiwandi

Bhiwandi

Thane

127/1

Kirawali Durawali

00-67-00 Bhiwandi Dighashi 179

Thane

00-05-60

61/1

Bhiwandi Jambhivali

Thane

00-05-50 Wada

Thane

199

Chinchghar

00-08-20

225C

Biloshi

Thane Wada

Kalamkhand W-4

Thane Wada

Wada

00-14-00 Thane

Khanivali 133

Wada

Thane

246/B

00-22-00

Bilavali

239/C

00-01-50 Thane Wada Vijaygad 14/12 14/11

355

00-32-00 Thane Wada Musarne

00-03-40

357

Thane Wada Bhopivali 188

Thane Wada Budhavali 180

130

River

Thane Vikramgad Kurze

00-36-00

206P 197P

196P

218

219

224

00-11-00

242

01-05-00

299

297

00-23-00

298

295

294

00-21-00

00-59-00

300

00-32-00

301

00-56-00

307

310 1040

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15, 1927

(4)

(3)

(5)

(1) (2)

00-06-00

311

जिला Thane Vikramgad Kurze

00-12-00

312

00-46-00

475

498

511

(1)

00-24-00

River

ठाणे

00-64-20

203

Apti-

Thane Vikramgad

704

Budruk

24W

00-64-00 Murbad

Thane Vikramgad

182

Thane Dahanu Amboli

319

00-15-00 Thane Dahanu Vaghadi

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii ) ] अनुसूची

तहसील गाँव सर्वे नं.

आर. ओ. यू. अर्जित करने के लिए क्षेत्रफल ( हेक्टेयर में)

(4)

(5) (2) (3)

कल्याण

00-20-30

167

गोडसई

00-12-02

00-33-72

103

00-53-22

104

00-08-08

00-42-05

106

107

00-01-17

54/A

00-04-00 ठाणे

00-18-00

Thane Dahanu Osarvira

00-25-00 Devur

122

Thane Dahanu

00-28-00 Anvir

Thane Talasari

122

Sutrakar

00-25-00 Thane Talasari

00-18-00 Bormal

Thane Talasari

[F. No. L- 14014/20/04-G.P. ( Part -1) ] S.B. MANDAL , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली , 27 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 442 केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि महाराष्ट्र राज्य में दहेज- हजीरा- उरान एवं स्पर पाइपलाईनों द्वारा प्राकृतिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए गेल ( इण्डिया ) लिमिटेड द्वारा , एक पाइपलाईन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

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

ठाणे

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

ठाणे कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है , इक्कीस दिन के भीतर, भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाईन बिछाए जाने के संबंध में, श्री के. एन. कशिवले, सक्षम प्राधिकारी, गेल ( इण्डिया ) लिमिटेड, गेल आशियाना भवन, सेक्टर 8 बी, 3 डी2 , सी.बी.डी. , बेलापुर , नवी मुम्बई -400614 (महाराष्ट्र) को लिखित रूप में आपेक्ष भेज सकेगा ।

कल्याण मानिवली

00-04-28

00-16-29

00-05-14

00-00-84

00-28-04

00-06-33

00-10-42

00-19-15

00-08-93

00-44-62

02-17-93

00-00-95

00-03-17

00-15-35

00-09-74

00-26-27

00-54-88

117

00-19-36

119

00-33-40

116

00-03-06

00-18-18

113

00-55-83

111

00-22-97

109

उंबारनी

00-23-77 कल्याण

00-33-97

00-66-99 मोहीली

कल्याण

00-01-65

00-03-15

19/डी

00-99-17

19/ए

00-00-57 गोलेगांव

00-00-59 कल्याण

00-52-81

00-01-01

00-10-70

00-34-05

00-21-32 1041

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

(5)

(1) (2)

(3) (4)

be laid and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification ;

00-15-14

गोलेगांव

ठाणे कल्याण

00-29-66

00-24-10

00-19-13

00-36-71

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

00-29-58

ठाणे कल्याण मोहने

00-10-06

00-21-23

28/1

00-00-14

01-67-84

NRC Area

70 00-15-31

00-15-19

00-03-29

00-39-61

00-54-54

Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of the notification issued under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the said Act , as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public , object in writing to the laying of the Pipeline under the land to Shri K.N. Kashivale , Competent Authority, GAIL (India) Limited, GAIL Ashiyana Building , Sector 8B, 3D2 , C.B.D. , Belapur, Navi Mumbai - 400614 ( Maharashtra).

00-00-43

SCHEDULE

00-41-08

Distt. Taluka Village

Survey Area to be 71

00-09-93

No.

00-12-60

Acquired for R.O.U.

(inHectares) 45

00-57-56

ठाणे कल्याण वडवली

00-63-24

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(1)

00-24-94

Ghotsai

167

00-20-30

Thane Kaylyan

00-00-24

00-12-02 33

00-08-74

00-33-72 32

00-48-92

103

00-53-22 50

00-43-15

104

00-08-08

00-23-63

00-42-05

Ghotsail

Thane Kaylyan

00-76-91

ठाणे

कल्याण साहाड

107

00-01-17 53

00-21-49

54/A

00-04-28

00-89-74

Manivali

Thane Kaylyan

00-17-01

00-16-29 56

00-31-98

00-05-14 [फा. सं. एल-14014/20/04-जी.पी. ( भाग -1 ) ]

00-00-84 एस. बी. मण्डल, अवर सचिव

00-28-04

00-06-33

New Delhi , the 27th January, 2006

00-10-42

00-19-15

00-08-93

00-44-62

02-17-93 S.O. 442. Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of natural gas through Dahej- Hazira -Uran and its spur pipelines in the State of Maharashtra , a pipeline should be laid by the GAIL (India) Limited;

00-00-95

00-03-17

00-15-35

00-09-74 And, whereas it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the Right of User in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to 1042

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

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

00-26-27

00-00-24 Thane Kaylyan Manivali

Thane Kaylyan Vadavali

00-08-74

00-54-88

117

00-48-92

00-19-36

00-43-15

00-33-40

119

00-23-63 116

00-03-06

Shahad

00-76-91 113

00-18-18

00-21-49

00-55-83

111

00-89-74

00-22-97

109

00-23-77

00-17-01 Umbarni

00-31-98

00-33-97

00-66-99

Mohili

[ F. No. L - 14014/20/04 -G.P. (Part - 1 ) ] 18

00-01-65

S. B. MANDAL, Under Secy. 19/D

00-03-15

00-99-17

19/A

नई दिल्ली, 27 जनवरी , 2006

00-00-57

00-00-59

Galegaon 28

00-52-81

00-01-01

00-10-70

00-34-05

00-21-32

00-15-14

00-29-66

00-24-10

का.आ. 443. केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 552 ( अ ) तारीख 12 , अप्रैल, 2005 द्वारा , उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में गेल ( इण्डिया ) लिमिटेड द्वारा गुजरात राज्य में दहेज - हजीरा उरान एवं स्पर पाइपलाइनों के माध्यम से प्राकृतिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोपणा कीथी;

00-19-13

00-36-71

और उक्त राजपत्रित अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ जनता को तारीख 04मई, 2005 से 05 मई, 2005 तक उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी;

00-29-58

Mohane

00-10-06

00-21-23

और पाइपलाइन बिछाने के संबंध में जनता से प्राप्त आक्षेपों पर सक्षम प्राधिकारी द्वारा विचार कर लिया गया है और उन्हें अननुज्ञात कर दिया गया है;

00-00-14

28/1

01-67-84

NRC Area

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

00-15-31

00-15-19

00-03-29

00-39-61

औरकेन्द्रीय सरकार ने, उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् और यह समाधान हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइनें बिछाने के लिए अपेक्षित है , उस में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चय किया है;

00-54-54

00-00-43

00-41-08

00-09-93

00-12-60

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 पाइपलाइनें बिछाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाता है;

00-57-56

Vadavali

00-63-24

00-24-94

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, निर्देश देती है कि पाइपलाइनें बिछाने के लिए भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार, इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन 1043 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

And whereas the objections received from the public to the laying of the pipeline have been considered and disallowed by the Competent Authority;

की तारीख को, केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने की बजाए, पाइपलाइनें बिछाने का प्रस्ताव करने वाली गेल ( इण्डिया ) लिमिटेड में निहित होगा और तदुपरि, भूमि में ऐसे उपयोग का अधिकार, इस प्रकार अधिरोपित निबंधनों और शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुए, सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड में निहित होगा ।

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

अनुसूची

जिला

गाँव

तहसील

सर्वे

नं.

And whereas the Central Government after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipelines , has decided to acquire the Right of User therein .

आर.ओ. यू. अर्जित करने के लिए क्षेत्रफल ( हेक्टेयर में)

53/1

चोर्यासी खाजोड़

सुरत

53/2

ब्लॉक नं.

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

0-15-18

कुल

आभवा

385/ 1अ

385/ 1 ब 0-10-95

388

0-08-77

418

0-01-20

416

0-26-24

And further, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub -section ( 4) of Section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby directs that the Right of User in the land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Central Government , vest , on the date of the publication of the declaration in the GAIL ( India ) Limited, proposing to lay the pipelines and thereupon the right of such user in the land shall , Subject to the terms and conditions so imposed , vest in the GAIL (India) , free from all encumbrances .

SCHEDULE

424

0-34-65

Distt. Tehsil

450

0-05-48

Village Survey No.

0-87-29

कुल

Area to be Acquired for R.O.U. (inHectare) [फा. सं. एल-14014/20/04- जी.पी. ]

Surat Choryasi Khajod 53/1

एस.बी. मण्डल, अवर सचिव

53/2

Block No.

New Delhi , the 27th January, 2006

72-1

0-15-18

Total

Abhva 385 / 1A 385/ 1B

0-10-95

388

0-08-77

418

0-01-20

0-26-24

416

0-34-65

424

450

0-05-48

Total

0-87-29 S.O. 443. Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 552( E) dated the 12th April , 2005 issued under Sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines ( Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act , 1962 ( 50 of 1962) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipelines for transportation of natural gas through Dahej -Hazira- Uran and its Spur pipelines in the State of Gujarat by the GAIL ( India) Limited;

[F. No. L - 1014/20/04 -G.P. ] S. B. MANDAL , Under Secy.

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public from 4th May, 2005 to 5th May, 2005 ;

1044

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 27 जनवरी, 2006

का.आ. 444. केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि गुजरात राज्य में दहेज़ - हजीरा उरान एवं स्पर पाइपलाईनों द्वारा प्राकृतिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए गेल ( इण्डिया ) लिमिटेड द्वारा, एक पाइपलाईन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

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

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है , इक्कीस दिन के भीतर, भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाईन बिछाए जाने के संबंध में , श्री जे. पी. दीवान , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , गेल ( इण्डिया ) लिमिटेड, मनीषा सर्किल, ओल्ड पादरा रोड, वड़ोदरा- 390015 ( गुजराज ) को लिखित रूप में आपेक्ष भेज सकेगा ।

अनुसूची

जिला तहसील गाँव सर्वे नं.

आर.ओ. यू. अर्जित करने के लिए क्षेत्रफल ( हेक्टेयर में)

5 2

भाटपोर 459

00-13-20 चोर्यासी

सुरत

00-00-73

464

455

00-05-81

00-19-49

451

452

00-17-21

00-01-80

442

441

00-08-14

00-00-15

बैलगाड़ी

रास्ता

00-24-81

440

437

00-10-20

00-06-18

438

00-61-69

435

01-61-69

योग

[फा. सं. एल-14014/20/04- जी.पी. ]

एस. बी. मण्डल, अवर सचिव

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) | New Delhi , the 27th January, 2006 S.O. 444.- Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of natural gas through Dahej- Hazira -Uran and its spur pipelines in the State of Gujarat . a pipeline should be laid by the GAIL ( India ) Limited;

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

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

Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of the notification issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the said Act , as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public, object in writing to the laying of the Pipeline under the land to Shri J.P. Diwan , Competent Authority, GAIL ( India) Limited , Manisha Circle , Old Padra Road, Vadodara - 390015 ( Gujarat) .

SCHEDULE

Distt. Tahsil Village Survey No.

Area to be acquired for R.O.U. (inHectares) 2

459

00-13-20

Surat Choryasi Bhatpor

464

00-00-73

455

00-05-81

451

00-19-49

452

00-17-21

00-01-80

442

441

00-08-14

Cart

00-00-15

Track

00-24-81

440

437

00-10-20

438

00-06-18

00-61-69

435

Total

01-61-69

[F. No. L- 14014/20/04 - G.P. ]

S. B. MANDAL, Under Secy.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

1045

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006 /माघ 15 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 31 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 445.- 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. 2504 तारीख 05 जुलाई, 2005 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 16 जुलाई , 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 मुकुन्द्रा 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 31 अगस्त, 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 निहितं होगा ।

194 GI / 06-16 1046

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

अनुसूची

जिला: पाली तहसील : देसूरी

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

3 1

1. मोरखा

607

578

575

557

560

506

502

469

470 2. मादा

[PART II -SEC. 3 (ii ) ]

राज्य : राजस्थान क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

6 0

53 0

76 0

91 0

74 0

96 0

19 0

49 0

84 0

9(स. नदी)

45 3. सिन्दरली

903 0

40 0

06 0

797 (स.भूमि)

785

725

724

721

176 4. गुडा मांगलिया

218

221

265

259

255

249

243

303

359 5. छोडा

31 0

69 0

23 0

28 0

48 0

85 0

56 0

46 0

78(स.खराच)

79 0

116 (स..रास्ता)

6. गुडा पाटीया

159(स .रास्ता)

167 (स. नदी)

7. आना

131(स . नदी)

130(स.भूमि)

129(स .रास्ता)

330 0

96 [ भाग II - खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

जिला : पाली तहसील : देसूरी

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

1047

राज्य : राजस्थान क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर

खसरा संः

327 7. आना (जारी...)

348

351

379

383

385

545

एयर वर्ग मीटर 4

51 0

50 0

92 0

524(स.नाला)

500

464

581 0

78 0

604(स.रास्ता)

609

719

721

724 8. सारंगवास

20 0

74 0

00 0

80 0

10 (स.भूमि)

9. शोभावास

52 0

22 0

88 0

15 0

19 0

2(स.नाला)

1621 10. नारलाई

48 0

1640 (स.वाली)

1553

1473

1475

1497 0

16 0

22 0

1360 (पी.डब्लू.डी. सड़क)

257

258

286

131 11. चकसुजापुरा

27 0

24 0

14 0

47 0

127(स. रास्ता)

126 0

04 0

164(स.रास्ता)

249/276 (स.भूमि)

249

242 0

57 0

243(स.मगरी)

00 1048

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

जिला : पाली

राज्य : राजस्थान तहसील : देसूरी

क्षेत्रफल

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

वर्ग मीटर

खसरा सं .

हेक्टेयर एयर

12. ढेलड़ी

196

194

193

192

205(स.भूमि)

201

213

214/293 (स.भूमि)

146(स.भूमि)

235 (स.भूमि)

69(स.रास्ता)

32 13. अटाटिया

257

250

254

111

144

141

140

149/396

135

121

122(स.वाली)

14. केसूली

397 (स .नदी)

380

405/617

416(स.पाल)

415

410 (स.भूमि)

463

465(स.भूमि)

520 (स. भूमि)

364

362

345(स.भूमि)

186

187

170(स.वाला)

162/594(स.भूमि)

346(स.भूमि)

[ भाग II - खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

1049

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

जिला: पाली

देसूरी

तिहसील :

क्रम

सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं .

151 14. केसूली (जारी ... )

147

146 15. डायलाना कलां

राज्य : राजस्थान क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

88 0

37 0

08 0

76 0

115(स. रास्ता)

162

161

140

142 16. केरली

06 0

84 0

105(स. नदी)

105/322 (स.भूमि)

104(स.भूमि)

17. टोकरला

162(स.भूमि)

144

130

109

108

307

320 18. कोलर

62 0

32 0

82 0

76 0

66(स.नाला)

74 0

72 0

63(स. रास्ता)

12 19. खीवाड़ा

38 0

63 0

87 0

14 0

22 0

1352(स.वाला)

1342 0

1335/4

65 0

1330 (स.भूमि)

1323

1321

1262

1236

1144

1147

1151 0

40 0

70 02

61 0

89 0

69 0

61 00

1021(स.रास्ता)

17 1050

[PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006 /MAGHA 15, 1927

जिला : पाली

राज्य: राजस्थान देसूरी

| तहसील :

क्षेत्रफल क्रम सं.

वर्ग मीटर गाँव का नाम

हेक्टेयर

खसरा सं.

एयर

1004

80 19. श्रीवाड़ा (जारी ...)

966

846

852(स.रास्ता)

756(स.रास्ता)

771

793(स. आबादी)

08 20. माताजीकागुड़ा

1 4

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

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 31st January , 2006

S. O. 445.- Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry ofPetroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 2504 dated the 05th July , 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 16th July, 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 fron . 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 31 August, 2005;

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

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

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

And further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 4) of section 6 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Central Government , vest on the date of publication 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.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

1051

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

SCHEDULE

State : RAJASTHAN

District : PALI

Tehsil : DESURI

Khasara No. Sr. No

Name of the Village

3 1

607 1. MORKHA

578

575

557

560

506

502

469

470 2. MADA

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr.

6 0

91 0

74 0

19 0

15 0

84 0

9 (G /L River)

903 3. SINDARLI

40 0

46 0

797 (G/L)

785

725

724

721

176 4. GUDA MANGALIYA

218

221

265

259

255

249

243

303

359 5. CHHODA

31 0

30 0

60 0

23 0

30 0

28 0

56 0

78 (G / L Kharach)

79 6. GUDA PATIYA

08 0

22 0

116 ( G / L Cart Track)

48 0

159 (G / L Cart Track)

167 (G/ L River)

7. ΑΝΑ

131 ( G / L River )

02 0

130(G/L)

18 0

129 (G / L Cart Track)

330

0 1052

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

Tehsil : DESURI

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

District : PALI

Khasara No. Sr. No

Name of the Village

3 1

327 7. ANA ( Contd ... )

348

351

379

383

385

545

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr

6 4

51 0

37 0

50 0

92 0

62 0

90 0

524( G/L Nala)

500

464

581

78 0

87 "

64 0

604 (G / L Cart Track)

609

719

721

724 8. SARANGWAS

74 0

10 ( G/L)

21 9. SHOBHAWAS

32 0

22 0

88 0

15 0

2(G/ L Nala)

1621 10. NARLAI

1640 ( G / L Nala)

1553

1473

1475

1497 0

16 0

34 0

22 0

1360 ( P.W.D. Road)

257

258

286

131 11. CHAKSUJAPURA

27 0

14 0

47 0

127 ( G/ L Cart Track)

126

164 ( G/ L Cart Track)

20 0

249/276( G/L)

249

242

57 0

03 0

243 (G/ L Magri )

1 1053

भारत का राजपत्र फरवरी 4 , 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

State : RAJASTHAN

District : PALI

Tehsil : DESURI

Khasara Nó .

Sr. No

Name of the Village

196 12.DHELRI

194

193

192

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr. 4

27 0

58 0

91 0

205 (G/L)

201

213 0

40 0

93 0

214/293 ( G/L)

146(G/L)

235 (G/L)

69 (G/ L Cart Track)

257 13. ΑΤΑΤΙYA

250

254

111

144

141

140 0

20 0

82 0

49 0

58 0

95 0

52 0

46 0

149/396

135

121 0

10 0

37 0

75 0

122(G /L Nala)

14. KESOOLI

397 ( G/L River)

380

16 0

405/617

56 0

416(G/L Pal)

415

41 0

410(G/L)

463

16 0

33 0

465(G/L)

520(G/L)

364

362

34 0

345(G/L)

186

187 0

37 0

170(G/L Nala)

30 0

162/594(G /L)

346(G/L)

194 G1 / 06-17 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

1054

PALI

District :

Tehsil : DESURI

Khasara No. Name of the Village

Sr No

151 KESOOLI ( Contd ... )

14.

147

146

70 15 DAILANA KALAN

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

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr.

> 0

115 ( G / L Cart Track)

162

161

140

142 16. KERLI

105 ( G /L River )

105/322(G/ L)

104 (G/L)

17. TOKARLA

162(G/L)

144

130

109

108

307

320 18. KOLAR

66 (G / L Nala )

63 ( G / L Cart Track)

12 19. KHINWARA

1352(G / L Nala )

1342

1335/4 02

1330( G / L)

1323

1321

1262

1236

1144

1147

1151

1021 ( G /L Cart Track )

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

1055 Tehsil : DESURI

District : PALI

State : RAJASTHAN

Area Sr. No

Are

Khasara No.

Hectare

Name of the Village

Sq.mtr .

1004

80 19. KHINWARA (Contd ... )

966

846

852( G /L Cart Track)

756 ( G / L Cart Track)

771

793 ( G / L Abadi )

20. MATAJI KA GUDA

1 4

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

नई दिल्ली, 31 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 446. - केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोक हित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि गुजरात राज्य में विरमगाम से हरियाणा राज्य में पानीपत तक राजस्थान राज्य में चाकसू से होती हुई अपरिष्कृत तेल के परिवहन के लिए इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा सलाया- मथुरा पाइपलाइन प्रणाली के विरमगाम - चाकसू, चाकसू- पानीपत ओर चाकसू- मथुरा सेक्शनों के संवर्द्धन के कार्यान्वयन हेतु एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ;

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

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

कोई भी व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है , इक्कीस दिन के भीतर उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने या भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाने के संबंध में श्री योगेश कुमार श्रीवास्तव, सक्षम प्राधिकारी , (राजस्थान) , इण्डियन ऑयल कॉरपोरेशन लिमिटेड (पाइपलाइन्स प्रभाग ), 33 , मुक्तानन्द नगर, गोपालपुरा बाईपास , जयपुर 302 018 (राजस्थान) को लिखित रुप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । 1056

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

अनुसूची

जिला : पाली

राज्य: राजस्थान

तहसील : देसूरी

गांव का नाम

खसरा संख्या

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

393

बड़ौद

[फा. सं . आर-25011/29/2001-ओ.आर. - 1 ]

एस. के. चिटकारा, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 31st January , 2006

S. O. 446. Whereas , it appears to the central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of crude Oil from Viramgam in the State of Gujarat to Panipat in the State of Haryana via Chaksu in the State of Rajasthan , A pipeline may be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited for implementing the " Augmentation of Viramgam -Chaksu , Chaksu - Panipat and Chaksu -Mathura sections of Salaya- Mathura Pipeline System" .

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

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

Any person interested in the land described in the said schedule may , within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of this notification issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the said Act , as published in the Gazette of India, are made available to the general public , object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein or laying of the pipeline under the land , to Shri Yogesh Kumar Shrivastava, Competent Authority ( Rajasthan ) , Indian Oil Corporation Limited (Pipelines division) , 33 , Muktanand Nagar , Gopalpura Bye - pass . Jaipur 302018 , (Rajasthan).

1 1057

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4 , 2006/माघ 15, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii ) ]

SCHEDULE

State : RAJASTHAN

District: PALI

Tehsil : DESURI

Area

Khasara No.

Name of the Village

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr.

5 1

66 BAROD

393

[ F. No. R- 25011/29/2001 - O.R. - I ] S. K. CHITKARA , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 31 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 447. - 'केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोक हित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि गुजरात राज्य में विरमगाम से हरियाणा राज्य में पानीपत तक राजस्थान राज्य में चाकसू से होती हुई अपरिष्कृत तेल के परिवहन के लिए इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा सलाया-- मथुरा पाइपलाइन प्रणाली के विरमगाम - चाकसू, चाकसू- पानीपत ओर चाकसू- मथुरा सेक्शनों के संवर्द्धन के कार्यान्वयन हेतु एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ;

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

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

कोई भी व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है , इक्कीस दिन के भीतर उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने या भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाने के संबंध में श्री योगेश कुमार श्रीवास्तव , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , (राजस्थान) , इण्डियन ऑयल कॉरपोरेशन लिमिटेड (पाइपलाइन्स प्रभाग) , 33 , मुक्तानन्द नगर, गोपालपुरा बाईपास, जयपुर 302 018 (राजस्थान) को लिखित रुप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । 1058

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

अनुसूची

जिला : सिरोही

राज्य : राजस्थान

तहसील : आबूरोड़

क्षेत्रफल

गांव का नाम

खसरा सख्या

वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

98 आम्बा

257

[फा. सं. आर-25011/47/2001- ओ.आर. - 1 ]

एस. के. चिटकारा , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 31st January , 2006

S. O. 447.- Whereas , it appears to the central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of crude Oil from Viramgam in the State of Gujarat to Panipat in the State of Haryana via Chaksu in the State of Rajasthan , A pipeline may be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited for implementing the " Augmentation of Viramgam - Chaksu , Chaksu -Panipat and Chaksu -Mathura sections of Salaya- Mathura Pipeline System " .

Any person interested in the land described in the said schedule may , within twenty one days from the date on which the copics of this notification issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the said Act , as published in the Gazette of India , are made available to the general public , object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein or laying of the pipeline under the land , to Shri Yogesh Kumar Shrivastava . Competent Authority ( Rajasthan ) . Indian Oil Corporation Limited (Pipelines division ) , 33 , Muktanand Nagar, Gopalpura Bye - pass . Jaipur - 302018 , (Rajasthan) .

1059

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

[ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

SCHEDULE

State : RAJASTHAN Tehsil : ABU ROAD

District : SIROHI

Area

Khasara No.

Name of the Village

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr.

5 1

257

98 AMBA

[ F. No. R -25011 /47/2001-0.R . - 1 ] S. K. CHITKARA, Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली, 31 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 448.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोक हित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि गुजरात राज्य में विरमगाम से हरियाणा राज्य में पानीपत तक राजस्थान राज्य में चाकसू से होती हुई अपरिष्कृत तेल के परिवहन के लिए इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा सलाया- मथुरा पाइपलाइन प्रणाली के विरमगाम चाकसू, चाकसू- पानीपत ओर चाकसू- मथुरा सेक्शनों के संवर्द्धन के कार्यान्वयन हेतु एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ;

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

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

कोई भी व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियों साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है , इक्कीस दिन के भीतर उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने या भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाने के संबंध में श्री योगेश कुमार श्रीवास्तव, सक्षम प्राधिकारी , (राजस्थान) , इण्डियन ऑयल कॉरपोरेशन लिमिटेड (पाइपलाइन्स प्रभाग ) , 33 , मुक्तानन्द नगर, गोपालपुरा बाईपास, जयपुर 302 018 (राजस्थान) को लिखित रुप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927 [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 1060

अनुसूची

राज्य : राजस्थान

जिला : सिरोही

तहसील : पिण्डवाड़ा

क्षेत्रफल

खसरा सख्या

गांव का नाम

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

हेक्टेयर

वाटेरा

53/3 मिन

186

अजारी

189

214

215

217

219

2743

पिण्डवाड़ा

2753

2754

2756

2764

2765

2769

[फा. सं. आर-25011/47/2001- ओ.आर. - 1 ]

एस. के. चिटकारा , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 31st January, 2006

S. O. 448 .-- Whereas , it appears to the central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of crude Oil from Viramgam in the State of Gujarat to Panipat in the State of Haryana via Chaksu in the State of Rajasthan . A pipeline may be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited for implementing the " Augmentation of Viramgam -Chaksu , Chaksu - Panipat and Chaksu --Mathura sections of Salaya - Mathura Pipeline System" .

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

1061 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

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

Any person interested in the land described in the said schedule may , within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of this notification issued under sub- section( 1 ) of Section 3 of the said Act , as published in the Gazette of India , are made available to the general public , object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein or laying of the pipeline under the land , to Shri Yogesh Kumar Shrivastava, Competent Authority ( Rajasthan ) , Indian Oil Corporation Limited (Pipelines division ), 33 , Muktanand Nagar, Gopalpura Bye - pass , Jaipur - 302018 , (Rajasthan) .

SCHEDULE

Tehsil : PINDWARA

District : SIROHI

State : RAJASTHAN

Area

Khasara No.

Name of the Village

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr. 1

5 VATERA

53/3 Min

97 AJARI

186

189

214

215

217

219

36 PINDWARA

2743

2753

2754

2756

2764

2765

2769

[F. No. R-2501 1/47/2001 - O.R. -I ]

S. K. CHITKARA , Under Secy.

194 GI /06-18 1062

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 31 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 449. - केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम. 1962 (1962 का 50 ) (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया हैं) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 3572 तारीख 03 अक्तूबर , 2005 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 08 अक्तूबर, 2005 में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मध्यप्रदेश राज्य में मांगल्या (इंदौर ) संस्थापन से हरियाणा राज्य में पियाला तथा दिल्ली राष्ट्रीय राजधानी क्षेत्र में बिजवासन तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए मुंबई मांगल्या पाइपलाइन विस्तार परियोजना के माध्यम से भारत पेट्रोलियम कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक विस्तार पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 11 नवम्बर , 2005 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं;

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

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

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने की बजाए , सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, भारत पेट्रोलियम कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । 1063 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

अनुसूची

तहसील: बल्लभगढ़

जिला: फरीदाबाद

राज्य: हरियाणा क०

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

क्षेत्रफल हेक्टेयर में

26/16/2

हरफला

0.0515

0.0685

0.0305

0.0230

25/20

0.0070

12/18

0.0480

पियाला

0.0050

0.1440

0.0960

19/ 1

0.1520

20/5

0.0610

0.0940

0.1470

8/1

0.0100

0.0835

13/1

0.1115

13/2

0.0230

0.0635

0.1520

21/16

0.0710

0.0315

0.1520

0.0785

0.0075

107 (रास्ता)

54/17

मोहला

0.0420

0.0180

0.0090

55/15

0.0025

0.0095

0.0195

0.0155

0.0475

56/ 6

0.0050

0.0435

0.0550

0.0520

57/8

0.0070

0.0625

0.0650

48/22

सीकरी

0.0025

0.0835 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15. 1927

1064

49/1 4.

सीकरी (जारी ... )

50/6

14/1

14/2

15/2

59/23

60/16

22/1

61/4

5/1

5/2

8/1

8/2

19/22 5.

ड़ीग

31/18

40/3

53/ 3

61/4

73/20

74/5

80/11

32/21 6. सागरपुर

33/18 [PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

0.0785

0.1515

0.0580

0.0810

0.1400

0.0025

0.0200

0.0660

0.0410

0.0190

0.1130

0.0630

0.1035

0.0220

0.0500

0.0390

0.0055

0.0800

0.0160

0.0175

0.0590

0.0530

0.0125

0.0050

0.1030

0.0140

0.0045

0.0427

0.0670

0.0540

0.0110

0.0130

0.0230

0.0285

0.0840

0.0200

0.0250

0.0030

0.0040

0.0190

0,0270

0.0155

0.0650

0.0040

0.0795

0.0045

0.0110

0.0090

0.0065

0.0760 1065

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

0.0205

सागरपुर (जारी...)

0.0160

0.0640

34/15

0.0080

37/2

0.0040

0.0925

0.0140

0.0330

0.0115

42/1

0.0055

0.0270

0.0320

0.0160

0.0070

0.0050

18/13

पहलादपुर

0.0240

0.0110

21/14

0.0100

0.0440

0.0250

0.0145

31/15

0.0310

0.0275

34/11

0.0520

41/9

0.0300

0.0100

12/1

0.0140

12/3

12/4

0.0025

0.0125

0.0560

43/4

0.0025

0.0420

0.0060

0.0520

0.0060

48/1

0.0415

0.0090

48/10

0.0270

0.0040

19/1

19/2

0.0170

0.0070

0.0235

51/3

0.0150

179(रास्ता)

0.0055

180 (रास्ता)

[फा. सं. आर-31015/2/2005- ओ. आर-11 ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव 1066

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

New Delhi , the 31st January , 2006

S. O. 449. Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 3572, dated the 03rd October , 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 08th October, 2005 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land, specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying an extension pipeline for transportation of petroleum products through Mumbai - Manglya Pipeline Extension Project from Manglya ( Indore) terminal in the State of Madhya Pradesh to Piyala in the State of Haryana and Bijwasan in the NCT of Delhi by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited;

And whereas the copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 11th November , 2005;

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

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

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

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

SCHEDULE

TEHSIL: BALLABHGARH

DISTRICT : FARIDABAD

S.NO.

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

STATE: HARYANA AREA IN HECTARE 1

HARFALA

26/16/2

0.0515

0.0685

0.0305

0.0230

25/20

0.0070

PIYALA

12/18

0.0480

0.0050

0.1440

0.0960

19/1

0.1520

20/5

0.0610

0.0940

0.1470

8/1

0.0100

0.0835

13/1

0.1115

13/2

0.0230 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

1067

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/ माघ 15, 1927

3 1

19 PIYALA ( Contd ... )

21/16

107(Rasta) 3.

54/17 MOHLA

55/15

56/6

57/ 8

10 4.

SEEKRI

48/22

49/1

50/6

14/1

14/2

15/2

59/23

60/16

22/1

61/4

5/1

5/2

7 4

0.0635

0.1520

0.0710

0.0315

0.1520

0.0785

0.0075

0.0420

0.0180

0.0090

0.0025

0.0095

0.0195

0.0155

0.0475

0.0050

0.0435

0.0550

0.0520

0.0070

0.0625

0.0650

0.0025

0.0835

0.0785

0.1515

0.0580

0.0810

0.1400

0.0025

0.0200

0.0660

0.0410

0.0190

0.1130

0.0630

0.1035

0.0220

0.0500

0.0390

0.0055

0.0800

0.0160

0.0175

0.0590

0.0530

0.0125

0.0050

0.1030

0.0140 1068

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

8/1 4.

SEEKRI ( Contd ... )

8/2

19/ 22 DEEG

31/18

40/ 3

53/ 3

61/ 4

73/20

74/5

80/11

32/21 SAGARPUR

33/18

34/15

37/ 2

42/1

24 7.

18/13 PAHLADPUR

21/14

31/15

34/ 11

41/ 9

12/1

12/3

12/4

43/4

48/1

19/1

19/2

51/ 3

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

0.0045

0.0427

0.0670

0.0540

0.0110

0.0130

0.0230

0.0285

0.0840

0.0200

0.0250

0.0030

0.0040

0.0190

0.0270

0.0155

0.0650

0.0040

0.0795

0.0045

0.0110

0.0090

0.0065

0.0760

0.0205

0.0160

0.0640

0.0080

0.0040

0.0925

0.0140

0.0330

0.0115

0.0055

0.0270

0.0320

0.0160

0.0070

0.0050

0.0240

0.0110

0.0100

0.0440

0.0250

0.0145

0.03 10

0.0275

0.0520

0.0300

0.0100

0.0140

0.0025

0.0125

0.0560

0.0025

0.0420

0.0060

0.0520

0.0060

0.0415

0.0090

0.0270

0.0040

0.0170

0.0070

0.0235

0.0150

179 (Rasta)

0.0055

180 (Rasta)

[F.N.R -31015/ 2 /2005 -OR - II ]

Harish Kumar Under Secretary [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

1069 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4 , 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 1 फरवरी, 2006

का. आ. 450.- 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 संख्यां का.आ. 2936 तारीख 18 अगस्त, 2005, जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 20 अगस्त, 2005 में प्रकाशित की गई थी. द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मध्यप्रदेश राज्य में मांगल्या (इंदौर ) संस्थापन से हरियाणा राज्य में पियाला तथा दिल्ली राष्ट्रीय राजधानी क्षेत्र में बिजवासन तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए मुंबई-मांगल्या पाइपलाइन विस्तार परियोजना के माध्यम से भारत पेट्रोलियम कॉपोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक विस्तार पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ जनता को तारीख 10 अक्टूबर, 2005 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं ;

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

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

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

अनुसूची

राज्य: राजस्थान

जिला: भरतपुर

तहसील: भरतपुर

क्र०

सर्वे नंबर

ग्राम का नाम

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में 2

नगला बन्ध

676

0.0626

677

0.1378

679

0.0504

680/2444

0.0187

680

0.1355

684

0.0139

681

0.0360

682

0.1553

749

0.0851

750

0.1904

751

0.0800

748

0.1008

747

0.0880

695

0.0953

1276

2 नगला विलौठी

0.0427

[फा०स०आर०-31015/ 82/2004- ओ आर -II ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 1st Febuary , 2006

S. O. 450.- Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O.2936, dated the 18th August, 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 20th August, 2005 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land, specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying an extension pipeline for transportation of petroleum products through Mumbai - Manglya Pipeline Extension Project from Manglya (Indore ) terminal in the State of Madhya Pradesh, to Piyala in the State of Haryana and Bijwasan in the NCT of Delhi by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited;

And whereas the copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 10th October , 2005;

194 GI/ 06-19 1070

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] And whereas the competent authority has , under sub - section ( 1 ) of section 6 of the said Act, submitted report to the Central Government;

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

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that the right of user in the 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 Govermercat hereby directs that the right of user in the said land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Ceniral Government , vest on the date of the publication of this declaration , in Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, free from all encumbrances .

SCHEDULE

DISTRICT : BHARATPUR

STATE : RAJASTHAN TEHSIL : BHARATPUR

S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO.

AREA IN HECTARE 2

1 NAGLA BANDH

676

0.0626

677

0.1378

679

0.0504

680/2444

0.0187

680

0.1355

684

0.0139

681

0.0360

682

0.1553

749

0.0851

750

0.1904

751

0.0800

748

0.1008

747

0.0880

695

0.0953

2 NAGIA MILON

1276

0.0427

[F.N.R- 31015/ 82 /2004- OR- II ]

HARISH KUMAR , UNDER SECRETARY 1071 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 1 फरवरी , 2006

का. आ. 451.- 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. 2937 तारीख 18 अगस्त, 2005, जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 20 अगस्त, 2005 में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मध्यप्रदेश राज्य में मांगल्या (इंदौर) संस्थापन से हरियाणा राज्य में पियाला तथा दिल्ली राष्ट्रीय राजधानी क्षेत्र में बिजवासन तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए मुंबई- मांगल्या पाइपलाइन विस्तार परियोजना के माध्यम से भारत पेट्रोलियम कॉपोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक विस्तार पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ;

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

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

अनुसूची

राज्य: राजस्थान

तहसील: भरतपुर

जिला: भरतपुर

क्र०

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

बगधारी

432

0.0170

350

0.0144

कस्बा भरतपुर

चक नं. 2

349

0.1368

348

0.0576

347

0.0504

344

0.0864

338

0.0576

334

0.0100

333

0.1080

0.0100

332/3399

346

0.0020

3 जधीना 1

1924

0.0105

979

0.1208

976

0.0608

993

0.0036

2464

0.1080

2463

0.0015

2462

0.1296

2457

0.0020

2460

0.0144

2461

0.0360

2473

0.0020

2475

0.0576

2476

0.1152

969

0.0216

970

0.0040

980

0.0936

981

0.0648

977

0.0072

986

0.0072

4 विलौठी

248

0.0147

224

0.0504

622

0.0076 1072

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

854 विलौठी (जारी...)

975

973/1753

756

754

753

784

788

787

140 6 अठेरा

134

128

263

261

236

225

227

203

260

234

232

228

129

309 7 बमनपुरा

316

369

421

386

619

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

0.0532

0.0240

0.0624

0.0332

0.0264

0.0883

0.0174

0.0127

0.0710

0.0062

0.0345

0.0040

0.0072

0.0546

0.0576

0.0288

0.0522

0.0396

0.0576

0.0406

0.0576

0.0691

0.0072

0.0216

0.0144

0.0360

0.0030

0.0100

0.0088

0.0382

0.0238

0.0230

0.0189

[फा०स ०आर०-31015/82 /2004- ओ आर -II ]

हरीश कुमार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 1st Febuary , 2006

S. O. 451. Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O.2937 , dated the 18th August, 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 20th August, 2005 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land, specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying an extension pipeline for transportation of petroleum products through Mumbai - Manglya Pipeline Extension Project from Manglya ( Indore) terminal in the State of Madhya Pradesh , to Piyala in the State of Haryana and Bijwasan in the NCT of Delhi by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited ;

And whereas the copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 10th October, 2005;

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

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

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

1073

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

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

SCHEDULE

STATE : RAJASTHAN

DISTRICT : BHARATPUR

TEHSIL : BHARATPUR

SURVEY NO .

AREA IN HECTARE NAME OF VILLAGE

S.No.

0.0170

432

1 BAGDHARI

350

0.0144

2 KASBA BHARATPUR

0.1368

349

CHAK NO . 2

348

0.0576

0.0504

347

344

0.0864

338

0.0576

334

0.0100

333

0.1080

0.0100

332/3399

346

0.0020

0.0105

1924

3 JAGHINA 1

979

0.1208

976

0.0608

0.0036

993

2464

0.1080

2463

0.0015

2462

0.1296

2457

0.0020

2460

0.0144

0.0360

2461

2473

0.0020

2475

0.0576

2476

0.1152

969

0.0216

970

0.0040

980

0.0936

0.0648

981

977

0.0072

986

0.0072

248

0.0147

4 VILOTHI

224

0.0504

0.0076

622

854

0.0532

0.0240

975

0.0624

973/1753 1074

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/ MAGHA 15, 1927

0.0332

5 PAR

0.0264

0.0883

0.0174

756

0.0127

754

0.0710

753

0.0062

784

0.0345

788

0.0040

787

0.0072

0.0546

140

ATHERA

134

0.0576

128

0.0288

263

0.0522

261

0.0396

236

0.0576

225

0.0406

227

0.0576

203

0.0691

260

0.0072

234

0.0216

232

0.0144

0.0360

228

0.0030

129

309

0.0100

7 BAMANPURA

316

0.0088

369

0.0382

421

0.0238

386

0.0230

0.0189

619

[No. R-31015/82/ 2004-O.R. - II ]

HARISH KUMAR , Under Secy.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

1075

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 1 फरवरी , 2006

का. आ. 452.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि राजस्थान राज्य में ब्यावर से चित्तौड़गढ तक पैट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए इण्डियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा " सिद्धपुर - सांगानेर पाइपलाइन से चित्तौडगढ़ तक ब्रान्च लाईन " के कार्यान्वयन हेतु एक शाखा पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ।

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

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

कोई भी व्यक्ति , जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है , उस तारीख से जिसको भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने या भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाने के संबंध में श्री योगेश कुमार श्रीवास्तव , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , ( राजस्थान) , इण्डियन ऑयल कॉरपोरेशन लिमिटेड (पाइपलाइन्स प्रभाग ) , 33 , मुक्तानन्द नगर , गोपालपुरा बाईपास , जयपुर (राजस्थान) को लिखित रुप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । 302 018

अनुसूची

तहसील : मांडल

राज्य: राजस्थान

जिलाः भीलवाड़ा

क्षेत्रफल

गांव का नाम

खसरा सख्या

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

2806/1320

20 भादू

[फा. सं . आर-25011/31/2004-ओ,आर. - 1 ]

एस. के. चिटकारा , अवर सचिव 1076

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

New Delhi , the 1st Febuary , 2006

S. O. 452. Whereas , it appears to the Central Government, that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of petroleum products in Rajasthan State from Beawar to Chitthurgarh a " Branch Pipeline to Chittaurgarh from Sidhpur Sanganer Pipeline", should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Lirnited .

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

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

Any person interested in the land described in the said schedule may , within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of this notification issued under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the said Act , as published in the Gazette of India , are made available to the general public , object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein or laying of the pipeline under the land, to Shri Yogesh Kumar Shrivastava , Competent Authority ( Rajasthan ) , Indian Oil Corporation Limited ( Pipelines division ) , 33 , Muktanand Nagar , Gopalpura Bye- pass , Jaipur - 302 018 , ( Rajasthan ) .

SCHEDULE

State : RAJASTHAN

District : BHILWARA

Tehsil : MANDAL

Area

Khasara No.

Name of the Village

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr .

2806/1320

BHADU

IF . No. R -25011/31/2004-O.R. -I ] S.K CHITKARA , Under Secy.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

श्रम मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 6 जनवरी, 2006

का.आ. 453.-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 कानपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 47/98 को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं .एल-40012/89/96- आई आर (डीयू] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी MINISTRY OF LABOUR New Delhi , the 6th January, 2006 S.O. 453. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 47/98) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court , Kanpur now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Deptt . of Telecom and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1- 2006.

[No. L -400 12/89/ 96 - IR (DU) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

Industrial Dispute No. 47 of 1998

In the matter of dispute between: SriLaxmi Kant S/o Sri Mata Prasad Pandey r / o 17 -E/6 Dabauli , Ratan Lal Nagar, Kanpur-208001

And

The Divisional Engineer (Project ) Microwave 1 , A, Sarvodaya Nagar ,

Kanpur.

AWARD

1. Central Government , Ministry of Labour, vide notification No. L-40012/89/96-IR(DU) dated 10-3-98 has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :--

"Whether the action of the management of Divisional Engineer Telecom Project (Microwave) , Kanpur, in terminating the services of Sri Laxmi Kant S /o Sri Mata Prasad Pandey w.e.f. 1-7-91 is legal & justified ? If not to what relief the workman is entitled " ?

2. The case in short on behalf of the workman is that he was appointed under the opposite party against a permanent post of Jeep Driver on 1-1-89 . He was paid his wages at the rate ofRs . 1800/- per month and that the work and conduct of the workman was quite satisfactory.

194 GI/06-20

1077

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4 , 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

Hehas completed 240 days of continuous service . It has further been alleged by the workman that the opposite party terminated the services of the workman w.e.f. 28-1-91 and that at the time of illegal termination of his services he was not provided with the benefits as per rules nor any notice or retrenchment compensation as provided under the provisions of Industrial Dispute Act , 1947, was extended to him by the management ofTelecom Deptt . It is also alleged by the applicant that the termination of the services is against the provisions of principles of natural justice as well as also attracts the provisions of Unfair Labour Practice . Several Juniors to the workman were retained in the services of the oppoiste party whereas his services were dispensed with by the opposite party, in a absolutely illegal manner. On the basis of the above allegations it has been prayed by the workman that the action of the management terminating his services w.e.f. 21-1-91 be declared illegal and unjustified and the workman be reinstated in the services of the management with full back wages and all consequential benefits.

3. The claim of the workman has been vehementaly refuted by the management opposite party on variety of grounds . The management has alleged that the present reference has been made without application of mind in asmuch as on industrial dispute is apprehended or exist between the parties , hence this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the present reference and the reference is liable to be rejected being untenable , misconcieved and misleading . It has also been alleged that the management of Telecom Department is not an industry as defined under the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, hence the reference order is bad in law.

4. On merit of the case it has been alleged by the opposite party that the workman's date of termination in schedule of reference order is wrong as the services of the applicant have never been terminated w.e.f. 20-1-91 .. The workman has deliberately concealed the material facts from the notice of this Hon'ble Tribunal hence no cause of action arose on 20-1-91 as such the present reference order is bad in law and the present reference is beyond the competence of this Hon'ble Tribunal. It is further alleged that the project of Telecom Department is purely temporary hence the experienced officers , engineers , technicians , office staff are taken from the other wing of Department of Telecom on deputation and no fresh person has been engaged to perform the work ofproject department of Telecom at Kanpur. It has also been alleged that the project had some casual work therefore some daily rated Labour were employed in the project for doing casual job for some period . Workman Laxmi Kant could have been employed casually for doing some casual work in the project on daily rate basis . After completion casual job his services were not required .

5.Workman has filed his rejoinder but nothing new has been reiterated therein except facts mentioned by him in his statement of claim.

1078

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

6. After pleadings were exchanged between the parties, the management filed an affidavit of Sri R K Trivedi , Asstt . of Divisional Engineer Telecom Project (Microwave) , Sarvodaya Nagar, Kanpur , wherein it has been deposed by the deponent that as a matter of fact Sri Laxmi Kant son of Raj Kumar Pandey was employed as casual labour from time to time during the period between 21-11-90 to 30-6-91 and as his services were not required w.e.f. 1-7-91 after completion of project work , services stood terminated automatically. Said Sri Laxmi Kant Pandey son of Raj Kumar Pandey was daily rated employee engaged for the shifting the material from one site to another and his engagement was as per requirement of the work . It has further been alleged that the services of Laxmi Kant Pandey son of Raj Kumar Pandey stood automatically terminated upon completion ofproject work due to efflux of time. Since there exist no relationship of matter and servant between Laxmi Kant Pandey son of Mata Prasad Pandey, hence there exist no industrial dispute between Laxmi Kant Pandey present workman and management of Telecom . Management has categorically denied the fact that it ever emoloyed Sri Laxmi Kant son of Mata Prasad Pandey in their employment whereas management has adimtted the fact that some Laxmi Kant son of Raj Kumar Pandey was employed by them as casual labour .

7. Both contesting parties apart from filing of documentary evidence has also examined Sri Laxmi Kant son of Mata Prasad alias Raj Kumar as w.w.1 and management examined Sri M. S. Beg SDE Telecom Kanpur asM. W.1 .

8. I have heard the representatives for contesting parties at length and have also gone through the record ofthe case carefully.

9. The question germane invlved in the present case is whether Laxmi Kant S/o Mata Prasad Pandey had ever worked with the management as claimed by him and as to whether his services were dispensed with in violations of the provisions of the I.D. Act . The management in their affidavit has categorically denied the fact that Laxmi Kant present workman son of Sri Mata Prasad Pandey had never been in the employment of the management whereas on investigation it was revealed that some Laxmi Kant son of Raj Kumar Pandey had worked under them on casual basis as per exigency of work and that he was paid on the basis of daily rate and also that his services came to an end automatically by efflux of time on completion of work . The above facts as were found disclosed in the affidavit filed by the management have not been controverted by the alleged workman either in his rejoinder or in his evidence deposed on oath before this tribunal . Therefore the above evidence of the management remains uncontroverted . Even he workman has not stated any thing about the fact that it was the who was engaged as casual labour by the management and his parentage has wrongly been recorded in the records of the management . Management witness in his deposition on oath before the tribunal has admitted the fact that the concerned workman had never worked in the department as Jeep Driver nor he was ever

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) ] appointed as such . During course of cross examination this witness has denied the suggestion of the work man that he ever worked as Jeep Driver in the department w.e.f. 1-1-89 to 1-7-91 . Workman in his evidence has reiterated the facts as has been alleged by him in his statement of claim but he had no where deposed in his evidence that he is the workman who had worked with the management with parentage of Raj Kumar Pandey. Therefore on the basis of above evidence , the tribunal is inclined to hold that Laxmi Kant son of Mata Prasad Pandey, present workman had never worked as Jeep Driver with the opposit party and thus there exist no relationship of master and servant between the contesting parties of the case .

10. Management witness alongwith his affedavit has also filed a copy of letter dated 1-7-98 addressed to the D.E. (T.P) Kanpur and issued by Sub Divisional Engineer Telecom Project - 1 , A, Kanpur wherein it has been written that Laxmi Kant son of Raj Kumar Pandey has worked as casual labour on daily wage basis and paid against the estimate No. 8356D ( a)/ 140 OEC for the period 21-11-90 to 30-6-91 . This document has been marked as Annexure A to the management's affidavit . By letter dated 30-6-98 annexure 'D' to the affidavit , Sub Divisional Engineer Telecom project had informed the Divisional Engineer that Sri Laxmi Kant sonof Mata Prasad Pandey R/o 17E /6 Dabauli Ratan Lal Nagar Kanpur had never worked under his supervision and this fact is being verified from the official record . It is worthwhile to note that a copy of the affidavit filed by the management supporting there with documents was received by the workman Laxmi Kant . Thus the hard fact remains that the workman has never denied the fact disclosed in the management affidavit and has also not denied the documents annexed there with on the ground that the documents annexed with the affidavit of the management do not pertains to him . Therefore the tribunal on the basis of unrebutted evidence lead by management is inclined to believe the case as set up by the management opposite party and the case as set up by the workman is not acceptable and it is held that the workman Laxmi Kant son ofMata Prasad Pandey was never in the employment of the management and if it is so question of termination of his services by the opposite party does not arise at all for want ofestablished relationship of master and servant between the contesting parties .

11. For the reasons discussed above, it is held that the action of the management in terminating the services of Laxmi Kant son of Mata Prasad Pandey w.e.f. 1-7-91cannot be held to be unjustified and illegal . Result isthat the workman is held not entitled for any relief as claimed by him pursuant to the reference order made to this tribunal .

SURESH CHANDRA , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 6 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 454.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स टिस्को के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक 1079 [ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

अधिकरण, भुवनेश्वर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 133/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं . एल-29012/63/97- आई आर ( विविध ) ]

बी. एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 6th January, 2006

2. Admittedly the workman was give! appointment as a Mazdoor and thereafter as a Helper i termittently during the period from 15-7-1991 to March 1994. (The last appointment letter [Ext. - 1 / 7] being for 50 days from 10-2-1994). As he was refused further employment from 14-4-1994 he made some representations and ultimately raised an Industrial disputes through this Union , North OrissaWorkers Union, Rourkela giving rise to the present reference . It is claimed by the workman that he was engaged against perennial nature of work but the Management in order to avoid the rigour of law had given him temporary appointment intermittently with superficial break and ultimately refused employment from 1st April , 1994 without any notice or notice pay or retrenchment compensation when asked for regularzation.

S.O. 454. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 133/ 2001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court , Bhubaneswar as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s . TISCO and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on6-1-2006.

[No. L- 29012/63 / 97 - IR(M) ] B.M. DAVID , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT, BHUBANESWAR

PRESENT:

Shri N.K.R. Mohapatra , Presiding Officer, C.G.I.T. -cum-Labour Court, Bhubaneswar.

TR. INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE No. 133/2001 Date of Passing Award 8th December, 2005

BETWEEN:

3. The Management while admitting the inter- mittent engagement of the workman has taken the stand that the appointment of the workman was purely on temporary basis for a fixed tenure and therefore after expiry of each term of appointment he was automatically disengaged without notice as per the terms and conditions of his appointment orders . It is further contended that the workman was simply engaged to look after the plantation activities , which were seasonal in nature and therefore he was disengaged after his last contractual term was over on 31-3-1994 . In other words itis claimed by the Management that the workman had never worked continuously for 240 days or more in any 12 calendar months during 1991 to 1994 and therefore there was no obligation on his part to pay retrenchment benefitbefore refusing employment from 1st April , 1994 onwards.

5. On the basis of above pleadings of both the parties the following issues were framed.

TheManagement of the Senior Divisional Manager, Sukinda Chromite Mines , TISCO Ltd. , P.O. Kalarangitta, Dist. Jaipur.

ISSUES

1stParty-Management

(And)

Their Workmen , represented through the General Secretary, North Orissa Workers Union, Rourkela - 12 .

2nd Party-Union

1. Whether the action of the Management of Sukinda Chromite Mines of TISCO Iron striking off the name/ retrenching Shri Padmanav Mohanta, S/ o . Bharat Mohanta, Personal No. 195810 with effect from 1-4-1994 is justified ?

APPEARANCES :

None

2. If not , what relief the workman is entitled to?

Forthe 1st Party- Management

Additional Issue

Shri Padmanav Mohanta

ForHimself, the 2nd

3. Whether the reference is maintainable ?

Party-Union.

AWARD

6. During trial the workman got himself examined and cross examined in part by the Management . Later when the Management did not turn up despite repeated chances to further cross -examine the workman the case ofboth party was closed and the Management was set exparte.

ISSUE NOS . I & I

The Goverment of India in the Ministry of Labour, in exercise of powers conferred by Clause (d ) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub- section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) have referred the following dispute for adjudication vide their Order No. L -29012/63/ 97 - IR ( Misc .) , dated 17-09-1997 .

"Whether the action of the Management of Sukinda Chromite Mines of TISCO in striking off the name/retrenching Shri Padmanav Mohanta , S /o. Bharat Mohanta, Personnel No. 195810, with effect from 1-4-1994 is justified ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to ?"

7. From the various appointment letters ( Ext . - 1 to Ext. - 1 /7) issued to the workman it appears that in the year 1991 he was initially appointed as a Mazdoor for 85 days from 15-7-1991 and thereafter as such for 45 days from 1-11-1991 and then for 85 days from 11-7-1992 and again for 30 days from 6-6-1992 and then for 85 days 1080

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

from 7-10-1992 and again for 43 days from 4-3-1993 . Thereafter for 85 days from 11-10-1993 he was engaged as a Helper and again as such for a period of 50 days from 10-2-1994 expiring on 31-3-1994. These appointment letters indicate that the workman was given a personal number 195810 and almost every time he was given appointment under the same number indicating thereby that the work performed by the workman was perennial in nature . This also explains that the gap maintained between two appointment letters was superficial . Besides though the Management claims that he was engaged for aspecified period against a specific project to look after the plantation activities , there is no mention of such fact in any of his appointment letters . His time to time engagement with superficial breaks indicates that the work against which he was engaged was perennial in nature . Further the evidence of the workman shows that after his termination the Management has given appointments to seven other persons suggesting that the workman was refused employment (amounting to retrenchment ) when the job was still available for him . In the above premises , the Management cannot escape from the comment of not being fair and clean in his approach . This observation has gained support from another document (bonus payment slip of 1993-1994 ) , which is available on record . Though the Management claim that during last 12 calendar month the workman was not engaged for 240 days , the above document shows that during the termination year of 1993-94 he had worked for 308 days for which he has been paid bonus .

8. Thus in the above premises I hold that the Management was not justified in refusing employment tothe workman without retrenchment benefits as required under Section 25 - F of the I.D. Act .

9. As in the meantime more than a decade has elapsed since the termination of the workman , I feel that aone time monetary compensation in lieu of reinstatement and back wages would meet the ends of justice . Accordingly, the Management is directed to pay a consolidated compensation of Rs . 1.5 lakhs to the workman within two months from the publication of the award and on his failure to do so the workman would be entitled to recover the same together with 6% interest from such date of publication of the award.

ISSUE No. III

10. There being no substantial challenge as to the maintainability of the case this issue is answered affirmatively.

11. Accordingly the reference is answered ex parte against the Management and in favour of the workman .

Dictated and Corrected by me .

N.K.R. MOHAPATRA, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 6 जनवरी , 2005

का.आ. 455. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार कालय ऑयरन माईन्सके प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] औद्योगिक अधिकरण , भुवनेश्वर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 9/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 06-01-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-26012/49/96 आई आर ( विविध ) ] बी. एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 6th January, 2006

S.O. 455.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 09/ 2005) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Bhubaneswar as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of Kalıa Iron Mines and their workman , which was received by the Central Government 6-1-2006. on

[No. L-26012/49/96- IR (M)] B.M. DAVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE CENTRAL COVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, BHUBANESWAR

PRESENT:

Shri N.K.R. Mohapatra , Presiding Officer , C.G.I.T. -cum-Labour Court, Bhubaneswar.

Industrial dispute case No. 9/2005 Date of Passing Award- 16th Noember , 2005 BETWEEN:

1st Party Management The Management of the Kalta Iron Mines , RMD , SAIL, P.O. Kalta , Dist . Sundargarh. (And)

Their Workmen , represented through General Secretary, North Orissa Workers , Union , P.O. Barbil , Dist . Keonjhar.

2nd Party Workman .

APPEARANCES :

Shri Saujat Das , Advocate ..... For the 1st Party- Management

For the

Shri A. Mohapatra , Advoacte

2nd Party Workman .

AWARD

The Goverment of India in the Ministry of Labour, in exercise of powers conferred by Clause (d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2 ( A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) have referred the following dispute for adjudication vide their Order No. L-26012/49/96 - IR (Misc . ) , dated 31-3-1997.

"Whether the termination of service of Shri Pramoda Nanda Patra by the Management of Kalta Iron Mines , RMD, SAIL, w.e.f. 28-4-1995 islegal and justified ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled ? " भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माथ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

2. The case of the workman as presented by the Union in its claim statement is as follows :-

That the workman joined the establishment of the Isı Party -Management as a peace rated worker (P.R. W. ) on 20-3-1980 . Sometimes in 1983 he proceeded on leave to his native village and suffered there from Brain Malaria for which he could not return to his duties . Because of the acuteness of the disease he remained under constant treatment and after being fully cured came to join in his duties about 12 years later on 28-4-1995 . It is alleged by the workman that on his reporting for duty he was refused and not allowed to join . He was asked to wait till receipt of a fresh order from the Head Office . As no such order was passed he raised an Industrial Disputes through his Union culminating the same in the present refrence .

1081

ISSUES

1. Whether the termination of service of Shri PramodaNanda Patra by the Management of Kalta IronMines , RMD , SAIL , w.e.f. 28-4-1995 is legal andjustified?

2. If not, to what relief the workman is entitled ?

5. Initially the workman examined on his behalf three witnesses including himself. After the case was remanded back by the Hon'ble Court the workman got himself further re - examined and produced few more documents . From the side of the Management a single witness has alone been examined and through him the departmental proceeding started against the workman has been proved.

ISSUE NO . 1 & 2

3. By denying the story of the workman the Management contents that the workman had joined as a peace rated worker on 28-4-1980 but not on 20-3-1980 as claimed by him . According to it the workman unauthorizedly remained absent from duty from 11-7-1983 for which he has issued with a registered notice on 29-9-1983 asking him to join forthwith. In reply thereto theworkman in his letter dated 9-11-1983 wanted 12 days time to join but on his failure to do so another registered noticewas sent to him on 4-1-1984 recalling him to duties. As the workman remained silent over that letter a departmental proceeding was started and the charge- sheet was sent to him in his village address on 8-8-1984 asking him to show cause within 8 days and having received no reply an enquiry committee was constituted and the workman was again issued with a notice on 5-7-1985 by registered post to attend the enquiry. As he did not attend the enquiry without any cause he was set ex-parteand finally after closure of enquiry removed from service as per Order 30( 2 ) (b ) of the certified Standing Orders of theManagement vide order dated 24 /27-2-1987 and a copy there of was sent to him in his village address but to no consequences . Refuting the other allegations of the workman it is further contended by the Management that after service of the termination letter the workman had never approached the Management to join in his duties and his plea that he was never allowed to join on 28-4-1995 (about 12 years later ) and that he was asked to wait for the order of the head office are false and got up stories created for raising the disputes and to get through the job about 12 years after his termination.

4. On the basis of above pleadings of the parties the Tribunal framed necessary issues an award earlier on 17-5-2000 holding that the termination of the workman from service vide Management's order dated 24/27-2-1987 was justified, the same having been done pursuant to the result of a departmental proceeding duly conducted . An O.J.C. No. 12342/2000 being filed against the said award by the workman the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa in their order dated 18-2-2005 came to hold that the award passed by the Tribunal on 17-5-2000 wasbeyond the terms of reference and as such remanded the case for fresh disposal in terms of the reference. Thus the case is for fresh disposal .

6. These issues taken up together as they are interlinked.

Admittedly the workman remained absent from his duty continuously from 11-7-1983 onwards . According to him as usual on a Saturday he left for his village but could return to duty thereafter he suffered from brain Malaria . After being cured fully when approached to join inhisduties after 12 years he was refused employment . As regards taking of leave he stated at first during examination on 20-7-1998 that he had sent a single leave application through his brother in law Jeeban Patra but during-his re-examination which took place about 7 years later he again stated to have had sent two applications one through his wife and the second through his brother- in-law, Jeeban Patra . Seeking leave for six months only in extension of his earlier application he also could not tell for how many days he had applied for leave in his first application. In view of the above , specially in the absence of any cogent evidence it is difficult to appreciate the caseofthe workman that he had remained on leave during these 12 years.

7. In its counter the Management has contended thatwhen the workman remained absent unauthorizedly he was sent one letter by registered post on 29-9-1983 asking him to join forthwith and in reply thereto the workman had sent one letter dated 9-11-1983 seeking 12 days time and thereafter no communication was received from him . This averment of the Management has gained support from the initial evidence of the workman given on 20-7-1998 and therefore , except to the above extent the rest of the evidence of the workman given 7 years after his first examination can not be believed . Even if it is believed for a moment that the workman had applied for leave twice once through his wife to be given to the Management through W.W. 2 and another through his brother - in - law Jeeban Patra , the evidence of Workman shows that the said 2nd application was given four months after the first application for a period of six months only and no application was made thereafter which itself speak that by not applying for leave for the entire absence period he had virtually abandoned the job at his will .

8. Under clause 29 of the standing order the Management leaveing the station without permission as notified by the Management amounts to official 1082

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II - SEC. 3 (ii) ]

II . The principles of natural justice are required to be complied with having regard to the fact situation obtaining therein. It can not be put in a straitjacket formula . It can not be applied in a vacuum without reference to the relevant facts and circumstances of the case [ See State of Punjab Vs. Jagir Singh 2004 ( 8 ) SC 129 : 2004- III - LLJ - 1148 ) and Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation & Anr.-- Vs.-S . G. Kotturappa & Anr . AIR 2005 SC 1933 : 2005- II - LLJ- 161 .

misconduct . So also habitual late attendance and willful absence from duty without leave application on sufficient cause amounts to official misconduct . It be stated here that where a person remains absent continuously for years together without any leave application or sufficient case being shown he is to be considered to have abandoned the job voluntarily and in such a case the Management would be justified to terminate his service inaccordance with its standing orders and the workman would have no further right to claim his reinstatement under only pretext .

From the documents produced by the Management itappears that repeatedly the workman was noticed both to join in his duty as also to participate in the enquiry started against him and these notices were sent in his pesent village address which itself amount to sufficient compliance of the principles of natural justice . By continuously remaining absent for about 12 years the workman can not take the plea that he has no knowledge of his termination and claim his former post with the grievance that he was not allowed to join when reported upon.

10. Ext . - 2 , the so - called joining report dated 28-4-1995 shows that with that application the workman had approached the Management with a request to take him back to service . This has of course been denied by the Management . However , even if it is taken for granted that on that day the workman had approached the Management to join in his duties and that he was not allowed by the Management to do so , then even the action of the Management can not be held to be illegal , independent of the result of the domestic enquiry, for then the workman had already abandoned his service by continuously remaining absent without leave for about 12 years .

11. Thus in view of the various discussions made in the foregoing Paras , I hold that the Management was justified in refusing employment ( amounting to termination ) to the workman on 28-4-1995 .

9. The Management while producing the departmental proceeding file has proved through his witness (M. W. 1) that due to the workman's absente from the duty he was issued with notice after notice tojoin in duty and on the latter's failure to do so a proceeding was started. As in the said proceeding the workman did not appear despite repeated notices being sent he was sent ex-parte and accordingly terminated on the basis of the result of such enquiry. The evidence of the M. W. I further shows that though the order of termination was set to the workman by registered post it did not bring any change in the situation. As against the above it is pleaded by the workman that , he was never intimated about the proceeding nor the order of termination was ever sent to him . He simply came to know about the same whenhe came to join in his duties on 28-4-1995 . But his so called joining report marked as Ext. - 2 dated 28-4-1991 itself indicates that on that day he had approached the Management to join in his former post knowing fully well that the same was no more available to him . Therefore, his stand that he was not intimated of the proceeding or about his termination can not be believed . Besides in a caseofpresent nature where the workman absent himself for years together without sufficient cause it is not more necessary for the Management to keep the disciplinary proceeding pending until the appearance of the workman. It is equally not open to the workman to say later that the proceeding started against him was not fairly conducted and the principles of natural justice not observed . In a case of the present nature as reported in 2005- II -LLJ- 1034 (Vivekananda Sethi-Versus - Chairman , J & K Bank Ltd., and others) the apex Court have held at Paгa 20 :-

12. Accordingly the reference is answered against the Union/Workman and in favour of the Management . Dictated & Corrected by me. N.K.R. MAHAPTRA , PresidingOfficer नई दिल्ली, 6 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 456. 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 चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 382/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं .एल-40012/238/ 2003- आई आर ( डीयू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा , डैस्क अधिकारी " It may be true that in a case of this nature , the principles of natural justice were required to be complied with but the same would not mean that a full- fledged departmental proceeding was required to be initiated . A limited enquiry as to whether the employee concerned had sufficient explanation for not reporting to duties after the period of leave had expired or failure on his part on being asked so to do , in our considered view amounts to sufficient compliance of the requirements of the principles of natural justice . "

New Delhi , the 6th January, 2006 Similarly at Para 22 it has been observed that: -

S.O. 456.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.382/ 2004 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court , Chennai now as shown in the "The principle of natural justice, it is trite , is no unruly horse . When facts are admitted, an enquiry would be an empty formality. Even the principle of estopel will apply [See Dr. Gurjeewan Garewal ( Ms. ) Vs. Dr. Dumitra Dash (Ms.) and Others 12004 (5) SCC 263 : 2004- III -LLJ- 1083 [ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/ माघ 15, 1927

Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Deptt . of Telecom and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-2006 .

[No. L-40012/238/2003 - IR (DU) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM -LABOUR COURT, CHENNAI

Monday, the 29th September , 2005

PRESENT :

K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer Industrial Dispute No. 382/2004

(In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of sub -section ( 1 ) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , between the Management of BSNL and their workmen)

BETWEEN:

SriP.S. Kumar

: I Party/Petitioner

AND

: II Party/Management

The Telecom District Engineer, BSNL ,

Dharmapuri.

APPEARANCE :

For the Petitioner

: Ms. S. Jothivani , Advocate

For the Management : M/ s . P. Arulmudi & P. Srinivasan , Advocates

AWARD

The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide order No. L -400 12/ 238/2003 - IR(DU) dated 22-06-2004 has referred this industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication . The Schedule mentioned in that order is- "Whether the demand of the workman Sri P. Sukumar from the management of BSNL for reinstatement in the service is just and fair? If so , to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date?"

2. After the receipt of the reference , it was taken on file as I.D. No. 382/2004 and notices were issued to both the parties and both the parties entered appearance through their advocates and filed their Claim Statement and Counter Statement respectively.

3. The allegations of the Petitioner in the Claim Statement are briefly as follows :-

certificate to the Petitioner on 2-7-73 certifying that he belongs to ST community. While so , during the year 1983 the Respondent/Management advised the Petitioner to submit another community certificate and the Petitioner also produced another community certificate in the prescribed form issued by the Block Development Officer , Kaveripattinam the competent authority for issuance of community certificate at that time. But all of a sudden , a memorandum of charges dated 11-11-87 under Rule 14 of CCS ( CCA) Rules , 1964 was issued to the Petitioner alleging that the Petitioner exhibited lack of integrity in that he got himself appointed as a telephone operator in the year 1981 in Salem Telecom Engineer Division against Scheduled Tribe quota falsely declaring himself as belonging to Malayalee under ST quota and thereby contravening Rule 3 ( 1 ) ( i) & 3 ( 1 ) ( iii ) of CCS (Conduct) Rules , 1964. Even though the Petitioner has submitted his explanation , it was not accepted and a departmental enquiry was ordered to be conducted against him. But , in the departmental enquiry, the Enquiry Officer without application of his mind and in violation of principles of natural justice and without giving him any opportunity to defend his case and with a biased mind , he has given the finding that the charges framed against the Petitioner were proved. In the enquiry, even though the Petitioner requested the Enquiry Officer for examination ofDeputy Tehsildar, who has issued some of the documents which was based reliance during the enquiry, but the request of the Petitioner was rejected by the Enquiry Officer as not relevant to the charges . Till date , the community certificate issued to the Petitioner was not cancelled and it is still valid and therefore , the findings given by the Enquiry Officer is perverse and it is not valid. The Disciplinary Authority based on the Enquiry Officer's report has imposed the punishment of removal from service and passed an order dated 25-5-99 . Even the appeal preferred by the Petitioner against the order of Disciplinary Authority was rejected. The order passed by the Disciplinary Authority which was confirmed on appeal has been passed in an illegal , arbitrary exercise of power with closed mind without affording any sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the Petitioner . Therefore , the entire enquiry is vitiated and the punishment imposed will become non - est in the eye of law. Further, the enquiry hasnot conducted in a proper manner as laid down under law and inconsonance with the principles of natural justice and therefore , the said enquiry is illegal , arbitrary and in violation of principles of natural justice . Hence , thePetitioner prays that an award may be passed holding that the order of removal of Petitioner from service by the Divisional Engineer is illegal and void, ab initio and to set aside the same and also to direct the Respondent/Management to reinstate the Petitioner in service with all concomitant service and monetary benefits.

4. As against this , the Respondent/Management in its Counter Statement contended that the Petitioner has suppressed most of the facts. At the first instance , the Petitioner approached the Central Administrative Tribunal , Madras by filing O.A. No. 233/87 seeking direction to the DET, Dharmapuri to treat him as The Petitioner was appointed as telephone operator by the Telecom District Engineer , Krishnagiri in the year 1980 under Scheduled Tribe quota. The Petitioner belongs toHindu Malayalee Community which is included in the list as a Scheduled Tribe . The Deputy Tehsildar , Headquarters office at Krishnagiri , Salem Dist . who is competent to issue community certificate for the ST candidates at the relevant point of time had issued a [PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

1084

domestic enquiry. The Petitioner has given due opportunity to defend himself. The enquiry was spanned over ten years . The Petitioner has tried dilatory tactics at various stages to delay the process of enquiry. Even in WritPetition the High Court has observed that 'writ petition seems to be an afterthought and the Petitioner wants to stall the disciplinary proceedings which were properly initiated against him . Even the Disciplinary Authority has followed the due procedure before awarding the punishment of removal from service. The request of the Petitioner to post him as OC candidate if he is not belonging to ST community cannot be agreed to as he was selected against ST vacancy. Further the adjusting the official against OC vacancy would mean granting him a job to which he is not entitled in normal course violating constitutional provisions of equal opportunity for employment. Hence , he is was rightly removed from service. Therefore , for all these reasons mentioned above , the Respondent prays to reject the claim of the Petitioner with costs .

5. Under these circumstances , the points for my consideration are-

(i) " Whether the demand for Petitioner for reinstatement in service of the Respondent/ Management is just and fair ? "

(ii ) To what relief the Petitioner is entitled? "

Point No. 1 :-

6. The case of the Petitioner in this case is that he was selected and appointed as telephone operator in Scheduled Tribe quota on the strength of the community certificate issued by the Block Development Officer , Kaveripattinam during the year 1980. Since his selection was a regular one which is evident from Ex . Ml which cannot be questioned subsequently by the Respondent/ Management that he was selected provisionally for that post. Further, even in Ex. Ml against some of the names it was mentioned that he has been provisionally selected, therefore, it is evident that the Block Development Officer who was the competent authority to issue community certificate for ST candidates at the relevant point oftime was accepted as such by the telecom department and he was selected and appointed for the post of telephone operator. Hence , it cannot be questioned by the Respondent/Management now without cancelling the said community certficate in proper way. If really, the Petitioner was selected provisionally against his name , it must have been mentioned that he was provisionally selected subject to his furnishing of prescribed certificate within a reasonable time . but , on the other hand, against his name, no mention was made and it represents that he was selected for the post and therefore , it is clear that the community certificate produced by the Petitioner issued by the Block Development officer is not an invalid one andthe Block Development Officer is empowered to issue such certificate at the relevant point of time. According to the orders of the Respondent/ Management at para 13.3 of the brochure on reservation and concessions for SC/ ST, if the certificate produced by the candidate is doubtful one , it should be sent for verification to the District Magistrate . This instruction belonging to ST community. The Tribunal has dismissed the said O.A. No. 18-9-87 holding that Deputy Tehsildar was not the competent authority to issue community certificate and it further observed in the order that applicant has misrepresented himself as a Malayali Tribal but in fact he was only a Malayalam speaking Keralite. Thereafter, the Petitioner filed a W.P. No. 11178/93 before the High Court ofMadras and the High Court dismissed the said W.P. The Petitioner has not preferred any Writ Appeal against the order of Single Bench and since he has exercised the option to go before the Central Administrative Tribunal , it is not open to the Petitioner to raise this dispute , as the same is bared by Section 11 ofCPC . Therefore , the industrial dispute raised by the Petitioner is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. That apart the Petitioner was appointed to the post of telephone operator against the reserved ST vacancy and his appointment was purely provisional pending issue of eligibility certificate in candidate's favour and the appointment was liable to be cancelled in the event of such certificate being refused. Subsequently, it came to light that he has made a false declaration in the application form and attestation form that he belongs to ST community. He was awarded with punishment of removal under CCS ( CCA ) Rules , 1965 after due enquiry. Only after verification done by the competent Revenue authority of State Govt . it was found that the Petitioner does not belong to Malayalee Hill tribal of Dharmapuri and therefore , he was not eligible to be treated as ST candidate . The Block Development Officer is not the competent authority to issue community certificate for ST candidates. Though the Petitioner alleged that enquiry conducted against him is not in accordance with rules , the enquiry was conducted in accordance with CCS (CCA) Rules , 1965. Though the petitioner has filed a petition for perusal of 17 documents , 15 documents were disallowed by the Enquiry Officer as they are not relevant to the charges framed against him . The Enquiry Officer has duly applied his mind while rejecting the request and there was no violation of natural justice . The Petitioner already moved through W.P. No. 11178/93 to quash the report of revenue authorities of verification of community certificate and the High Court has rightly dismissed the said W.P. The Enquiry Officer has given full opportunity to the Petitioner to defend himself and all the original documents list in Annexure III were submitted before the Enquiry Officer and admitted as authenticated documents by the Petitioner was brought on record. Further , the Petitioner was aware of Tehsildar's proceedings as he had challenged the same before the High Court . With regard to the report of the Revenue authorities , it is a valid document and once the document is taken by the Petitioner as authentic and not fake , to challenged the contents of Tehsildar's report on caste verification cannot be done during the course of departmental disciplinary proceedings . The appropriate recourse would have beento challenge the Thasildar's investigation in the appropriate Court and not before the 1085 .

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

the present case and what was held in that decision is only that community certificate issued by the empowered public authority under seal continues to be valid till it is cancelled . But , in this case , the Petitioner has produced a community certificate given by Headquarters Deputy Tehsildar's who is not the empowered authority and therefore , the certificate issued by him has no validity in the eye of law. Further, the Tribunal has gone into various documents produced in that case it has also gone through the SSCL certificate issued to the Petitioner and the community certificate produced by him and the Tribunal in its findings has given that the Petitioner is not entitled to claim ST status and the Petitioner has not preferred any appeal against that order and hence it has become final . Further , the Petitioner again filed a Writ Petition No. 11178/93 before High Court seeking Writ of Mandamus challenging the enquiry report dated 31-12-83 of Tehsildar , Krishnagiri with regard to community status of the Petitioner was also dismissed by theHigh Court . Even against this order, the Petitioner has not prefered any Writ Appeal and it has become final . Under such circumstances , there cannot be any dispute with regard to status of the community of the Petitioner and he has suppressed all these facts and has raised this dispute only to get sympathy of this Tribunal and he is guilty of suppression of material facts and he has also wanted to take advantage of suppressing the vital facts . He has approached this forum with unclean hands and therefore , he is not entitled to get any relief.

was also reiterated in G.I. Deptt . of Personnel & Training O.M. No. 42012/8/87 EST ( SCT) dated 14-10-87 . In this case, the Petitioner was recruited in the year 1981 and his cast status was verified immediately and he was selected for that post. It is not the contention of the Respondent/Management that no verification was made immediately he has been selected . Only in the year 1984 , after a long lapse of time , the Divisional Engineer, Dharmapuri addressed the District Collector in this regard . Even assuming that he has written a letter to District Collector, the Respondent has not produced any reply which was sent by the District Collector to the Respondent/Management . Only a copy of the report marked to department has been taken into account and it is not known whether the Collector had agreed to the finding of Tehsildar's report. Further , even in that Thasildar's report it has not been stated that Commissioner of Panchayat Union was not competent authority to issue caste certificate for ST candidates. Further, from the report , it is not clear whether he has enquired the Petitioner and whether he has given any opportunity to prove the Petitioner with regard to his claim. Therefore , the enquiry report without examining the Petitioner is not valid in law. Further , though the Enquiry Officer has relied on the report given by Tehsildar with regard to this , he has not been examined before the enquiry and no opportunity was given to the Petitioner for cross examination with regard to this document . Under such circumstances, the findings given by the Enquiry Officer relying on the report given by the Thasildar is vitiated. Under such circumstances , the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority and Appellate Authority are not valid and therefore , the Petitioner is entitled to the claim made by him .

7. But , as against this , the learned counsel for the Respondent argued that in this case, the order of removal was made on 25-5-99 and the Petitioner has raised this industrial dispute only on 1-7-2003 before the Regional Labour Commissioner ( Central ) and he has not stated any explanation for the delay of three years in raising this dispute . Further, the Petitioner has suppressed most ofthe material facts and details about his earlier grounds of litigation in respect of the same subject matter only to get sympathy of this Tribunal . The Petitioner had filed W.P. No. 12058/83 before the High Court of Madras to treat him as belonging to ST community on the basis of community certificate issued by Commissioner of Panchayat Union and that given by Headquarters Deputy Tehsildar. It was transferred to Central Administrative Tribunal, after its consideration and it was renumbered as T.A. No. 233/87 . In that case , the Central Administrative Tribunal went into the question of communal status of the Petitioner and it has given a specific finding that the Headquarters Deputy Tehsildar had no authority to issue a community certificate and the Petitionerdo not belong to Scheduled Tribe and he is only a Malayalam speaking Keralite and this finding was given by the Tribunal based on relevant records produced before it . It further held that the decisions of the High Court of Madras in S.P. SAKTHI DEVI VS. COLLECTOR OF SALEM which was cited by the Petitioner herein is not applicable to

8. Though the Petitioner alleged that he has not been given any fair opportunity to defend himself before the domestic enquiry, the Respondent has clearly established before this Tribunal that all fair opportunities were given to the Petitioner before the domestic enquiry and he has fully participated in the domestic enquiry. Though the Petitioner relied on the rejection of request to examine the Tehsildar of Krishnagiri , the Enquiry Officer has clearly found that his request is not valid. Further, even before the Central Administrative Tribunal , that Tribunal has given a finding that report of Tehsildar Krishnagiri is perfectly valid and the charges framed against the Petitioner was proved based on the other available independent witnesses . Even the enquiry was pending for more than ten years . The Petitioner has not taken any steps to produce a valid community certificate issued by competent authority and only after a long number of years , the Enquiry Officer has come to the conclusion that charge framed against the Petitioner has been proved against him . Though the Petitioner contended that Block Development Officer and Headquarters Deputy Tehsildar's are competent authoritiesto issue community certificate with regard to ST community, he has not produced any validdocument to show that these authorities were empowered to give community certificate to the ST candidates . On the other hand, the Respondent has established through the brochure of the Govt . that community certificate for the candidates belonging to ST is to be given by Tehsildar ofthe Revenue Department . Under such circumstances , since the Petitioner has not established that he belongs to ST community, since he has not produced a community 194 GI /06-21 1086

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

Witnesses Examined :-

For the I Party/Petitioner : WWI Sri P.Sukumar .

For the 11 Party/Management : MWI Sri C. Theerthagiri.

Documents marked :-

For the First party/ Petitioner

Ex. No. Date

Description

11-11-87

Xerox copy of the memorandum of charges

11-09-90

Xerox copy of the petition preferred by Petitioner Against Enquiry Officer

28-06-92 Xerox copy of the reply given by the Respondent

12-02-98 Xerox copy of the defence brief submitted by Petitioner

27-03-98

11-02-99

Xerox copy of the enquriy report Xerox copy of the representation given by Petitioner

25-05-99 Xerox copy of the order of removal given to Petitioner

22-06-99

Xerox copy of the appeal preferred by Petitioner

03-12-99

Xerox copy of the appeal preferred by Petitioner

25-02-00

W10

Xerox copy of the order of Appellate Authority

W11

21-03-01 Xerox copy of the revision petition filed by Petitioner

W12 01-08-03 Xerox copy of the 2A petition filed by Petitioner

08-10-03

W13

Xerox copy of the reply filed by Respondent

W14 01-11-03 Xerox copy of the rejoinder filed by Petitioner .

For the II Party/Management : -

certificate from the competent authority, he cannot contend that selection made by the Respondent/ Management is not valid and not a provisional selection. Even under Ex. M.2 which is the copy of appointment order, it is clearly stated that the appointment is purely provisional pending the issue of eligibility certificate in the candidate's favour and shall stand cancelled in the event of such certificate being refused. Under such circumstances , it cannot be said that the Petitioner has been selected and appointed as a telephone operator by producing a valid community certificate given by the competent authority. It is further contended on behalf of the Respondent/ Management that since the charges levelled against the Petitioner are serious and grave in nature , the Disciplinary Authority has imposed the punishment of removal from service . Further any length of service put in the Petitioner will not wipe the seriousness ofthe misconduct . Since the very appointment itself was procured by playing fraud on the management by the Petitioner knowingly that he belongs to forward community, he usurped the reservation quota exclusively meant for candidates belongingto Scheduled Caste . Therefore , it cannot be said that the punished imposed by the Respondent is harsh and there is no scope for this Tribunal even to consider the question of adequacy of the penalty. Under these circumstances, the Respondent praysto dismiss the claim of the Petitioner .

Ex . No. Date

Description

15-12-80

Xerox copy of the selection list for the cadre of Telephone Operators

06-06-81 Xerox copy of the appointment order issued to Petitioner

01-12-80 Xerox copy of the community certificate issued by BDO

27-06-83 Xerox copy of the letter from Respondent lo Petitioner

6-7-83

Xerox copy of the letter from DE to DRO , Dharmapuri

07-07-83

Xerox copy of the letter from Petitioner to D.E.

26-08-83

Xerox copy of the letter from DE to SDO , Krishnagiri

31-12-83 Xerox copy of the letter from Tehsildhar , Krishnagiri to Sub Collector , Hosur

18-09-87

9. 1 find much force in the contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent because though the enquiry was pending for more than ten years , the Petitioner has not produced any community certificate from the competent authority. It is clear from the records produced by the Respondent that the Respondent/Management has given ample opportunity to the Petitioner to produce the proper community certificate from the competent authority, but the Petitioner has not produced any community certificate from the competent authority and his Writ Petitioner and also application before the Central Administrative Tribunal were dismissed after consideration of all these points . Under such circumstances , I find this point against the Petitioner .

Xerox copy of the order passed by CAT, Madras

05-07-88

M10

Point No. 2 :

Xerox copy of the Enquiry proceedings

11-11-88

MII

Xerox copy of the Enquiry Proceedings

M12 01-03-89 Xerox copy of the Enquiry Proceedings

M13 17-03-89

The next point to be decided in this case is to what relief the Petitioner is entitled?

Xerox copy of the letter from defence assistant to Petitioner

08-02-90

M14

Xerox copy of the Letter from Enquiry Officer to Petitioner

21-03-90

MIS

10. In view of my foregoing findings that the Petitioner'sdemand is not just and fair, I find the Petitioner is not entitled to any relief. No. Costs .

M16 11-09-90

Xerox copy of the Enquiry Proceedings Xerox copy of the Enquiry Proceedings

M17 28-06-92

11. Thus , the reference is answered accordingly.

Xerox copy of the letter from TDM, Salem to Petitioner

M18 18-06-93 Xerox copy of the Enquiry Proceedings

M19 19-09-97 Xerox copy of the Enquiry Proceedings

27-03-98

M20

Xerox copy of the Enquiry report (Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 29th September , 2005 )

M21 25-05-99 Xerox copy of the order of Disciplinary Authority

K. JAYARAMAN , Presiding Officer

M22 13-12-02 Xerox copy of the order passed by CGM, BSNL , Tamil Nadu .

1087 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4 , 2006/ माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

=== नई दिल्ली , 6 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 457.- 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 नं.- I, चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 101 / 2000) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल- 40012/434/99- आई आर ( डीयू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi the 6th January, 2006

the management Shri G. C. Babber submitted that workman and his representative both are not interested in prosecuting their case and they are not taking interest perhaps workman is gainfully employed some where and not coming himself or sending his authorised representative . As workman is not interested in prosecuting his case reference may be returned for non- prosecution . In view of the above submission of Shri G.C. Babbar counsel for the management and my perusal ofthe previous order sheets. I have found that workman or his AR is not appearing and not interested to persue their case , as there is no information or application filed inthis court for adjournments. Hence , it appears that workman or his authorised representative is not interested in prosecuting his case , the reference is returned to the Central Government for want of prosecution . Central Government be informed. File be consigned to record.

Chandigarh RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer

Dated 15-12-2005

नई दिल्ली, 6 जनवरी , 2006

S.O. 457. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 101/ 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court No.I , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Deptt . of Telecom and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-2006 .

[No. L- 400 12/434/99 -IR(DU) KULDIP RAI VERMA , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT NO.1 CHANDIGARH.

का. आ. 458. 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 नं. - 1, चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 103/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

Case No. ID 101/2000

[सं. एल-40012/436/99- आई आर ( डीयू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा , डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi the , 6th January, 2006

Applicant

Shri Chander Pal S/o Sh. Ram Kandiara C/o Sh. N.K. Jeet, President , Telecom Labour Union , Mohalla Hari Nagar, Lal Singh Basti Road, Bhatinda (Punjab). 151001 .

Versus

The General Manager,

...Respondent

Telecom, Ferozepur (Punjab ) -152001

APPEARANCES :

None

For the Workman

S.O. 458. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 103/ 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court No.I , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Deptt . of Telecom and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-2006 .

: Sh . G.C. Babbar.

For the Management

AWARD

[No. L-40012/436/ 99 - IR ( DU ) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA . Desk Officer Passed on 15-12-2005

ANNEXURE

Central Govt . Vide No. L - 40012 /434/99 /IR (DU) dated 18-2-2000 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT No.1 , CHANDIGARH.

Case No. ID 103/2000

"Whether the action of the management of General Manager Telecom, Ferozepur in terminating the services of Sh . Chander Pal S/o Sh . Ram Kandiara is legal andjustified ? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ?"

..Applicant

Shri Bittu S/ o Sh . Sher Singh C/o Sh . N. K. Jeet, President , Telecom Labour Union, Mohalla Hari Nagar, Lal Singh Basti Road, Bhatinda (Punjab ) . 151 001 .

2. Case was called serveral times . Awaited . None appeared on behalf of the workman. Learned counsel for 1088

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

Versus

.... Respondent TheGeneral Manager, Telecom, Bhatinda (Punjab) -151001

APPEARANCES :

None

For the Workman

Sh . G. C. Babbar.

For theManagement :

AWARD

Passed on 15-12-2005

Central Government vide No. L-40012/436/ 99 /IR (DU) dated 17-2-2000 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of General Manager Telecom, Ferozepur in terminating the services of Sh . Bittu S/o Sh. Sher Singh is legal and justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date?"

2. Case was called serveral times. Awaitea . None appeared on behalf of the workman. Learned counsel for the management Snri G. C. Babber submitted that workman and his representative both are not interested in proscuting their case and they are not taking interest perhaps workman is gainfully employed some where and not coming himself or sending his authorised representative . As workman is not interested in prosecuting his case reference may be returned for non- prosecution. In view of the above submission of Shri G.C. Babbar counsel for the management and my perusal of the previous order sheets . I have found that workman or his AR is not appearing and not interested to persue their case, as there is no information or application filed in this court for adjournments . Hence , it appears that workman or his authorised representative is not interested in prosecuting his case, the reference is returned to the Central Government for want of prosecution . Central Government be informed. File be consigned to record.

Chandigarh RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer Dated 15-12-2005

नई दिल्ली , 6 जनवरी , 2006 का. आ. 459.- 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 नं.- I, चण्डीढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 105 / 2000) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-40012/440/99- आई आर ( डीयू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 6th January, 2006 S.O. 459. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 105/

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)] 2000 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court No.I , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Deptt. of Telecom and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-2006 .

[No. L - 40012/440/99 - IR (DU) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer . ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT No.1 , CHANDIGARH.

Case No. ID 105/2000

..........Applicant Shri Harpal Singh S/ o Sh . Chand Singh C/o Sh . N. K. Jeet, President, Telecom Labour Union , Mohalla Hari Nagar, Lal Singh Basti Road, Bhatinda (Punjab) . 151001 .

Versus

TheGeneral Manager,

Telecom.Bhatinda (Punjab) -151001

Respondent APPEARANCES :

For the Workman

For theManagement

None : Sh . G.C. Babbar. AWARD

Passed on 15-12-2005

Central Government vide No. L -40012/440/99 - IR(DU) dated 16-2-2000 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of General Manager Telecom , Ferozepur in terminating the services of Sh . Harpal Singh S/o Sh. Chand Singh is legal andjustified ? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date? "

2. Case was called serveral times . Awaited. None appeared on behalf of the workman . Learned counsel for themanagement Shri G. C. Babbar submitted that workman and his representative both are not interested in prosecuting their case and they are not taking interest perhaps workman is gainfully employed some where and not coming himself or sending his authorised representative . As workman is not interested in prosecuting his case reference may be returned for non - prosecution . In view of the above submission of Shri G.C. Babbar counsel for the management and my perusal of the previous order sheets . I have found that workman or his AR is not appearing and not interested to persue their case , as there is no information or application filed in this court for adjournments . Hence , it appears that workman or his authorised representative is not interested in prosecuting his case , the reference is returned to the Central Government for want of prosecution . Central Government be informed. File be consigned to record .

Chandigarh Dated: 15-12-2005 RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

1089 भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 6 जनवरी, 2006

का.आ. 460. 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 नं.- I, चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 107/ 2000 )को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

representative . As workman is not interested in prosecuting his case reference may be returned for non -prosecution. In view of the above submission of Shri G.C. Babbar counsel for the management and my persual of the previous order sheet , I have found that workman or his AR is not appearing and not interested to persue their case, as there is no information or application filed in this court for adjournments . Hence , it appears that workman or his authorised representative is not interested in prosecuting his case , the reference is returned to the Central Government for want of prosecution . Central Government be informed. File be consigned to record.

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer [सं. एल- 40012/442/ 99- आई आर ( डीयू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 6th January, 2006

Chandigarh Dated 15-12-2005

नई दिल्ली, 6 जनवरी , 2006

S.O. 460. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 107/ 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court No.I , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Deptt . of Telecom and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-06 .

[No- L- 40012/442/99 -IR(DU)

KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

का.आ. 461.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार दूरसंचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं. - 1 चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 199/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -40012/105/2002- आई आर ( डीयू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT- I CHANDIGARH.

Case No. ID 107/2000

New Delhi the, 6th January, 2006.

ShriVipan Kumar S/o Sh. Kamaljit C/ o Sh . N.K.Jeet, President , Telecom Labour Union, Mohalla Hari Nagar, Lal Singh Basti Road, Bhatinda(Punjab). 151001 .

Applicant

Versus

.....Respondent

S.O. 461. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 199/2002 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court No.I , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers inrelation to the management ofDeptt . of Telecom and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-06 .

TheGeneral Manager, Telecom, Bhatinda (Punjab )-151001 APPEARANCES :

For the Workman : None

For theManagement : Sh . G. C. Babbar.

[No. L- 40012/105 /2002 - IR(DU) KULDIP RAI VERMA , Desk Officer AWARD

ANNEXURE

Passed on 15-12-2005

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT-I CHANDIGARH

CentralGovt. vide No. L-40012/442/99/IR (D.U.) dated 17-2-2000 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal foradjudication:

Case No. ID 199/2002

"Whether the action of the management of General Manager Telecom, Ferozepur in terminating the services of Sh. Vipan Kumar S/o Sh . Kamal Jeet is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ?"

Shri Subhash Kumar, C/o Sh . N. K. Jeet , 27349 , Lal Basti Road, Bhatinda (Punjab)

.Applicant

Versus

The General Manager, Telecom, E-10BBuilding, BehindHPO,

Respondent

Bhatinda (Punjab) .....

1090

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman : None

Sh . G. C. Babbar.

For the Management :

AWARD

(Passed on 15-12-2005 )

Central Govt . vide No. L-40012 / 105 /2002 /IR (DU ) dated 7-10-2002 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of General Manager Telecom , Ferozepur in terminating the services of Sh. Subhash Kumar S/o Sh. Pritam Singh workman w.e.f. 30-4-2001 is just and legal ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date?"

2. Case was called serveral times . Awaited . None appeared on behalf of the workman . Learned counsel for the management Shri G. C. Babbar submitted that workman and his representative both are not interested in prosecuting their case and they are not taking interest perhaps workman is gainfully employed some where and not coming himself or sending his authorised representative . As workman is not interested in prosecuting his case reference may be returned for non -prosecution. In view of the above submission of Shri G. C. Babbar , counsel for the management and my persual of the previous order sheets , I have found that workman or his AR is not appearing and not interested to persue their casc, as there is no information or application filed in this court for adjournments . Hence , it appears that workman or his authorised representative is not interested in prosecuting his case , the reference is returned to the Central Government for want of prosecution. Central Government be informed. File be consigned to record.

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer Chandigarh Dated 15-12-2005

नई दिल्ली, 6 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 462.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार दूरसंचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं. - 1 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 77/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल- 40012/393/99- आई आर ( डीयू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 6th January, 2006 S.O. 462. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 77/2000 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court No.I , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] in relation to the management of Deptt. of Telecom , and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-06.

[No. L- 40012/393/ 99 - IR (DU ]

KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM - LABOUR COURT - 1 CHANDIGARH.

Case No. ID 77/2000

Shri Raj Singh

S/o Sh . Tek Singh ,

Applicant C/ o Sh . N. K. Jeet, President , Telecom Labour Union, Mohalla Hari Nagar , Lal Singh Basti Road, Bhatinda (Punjab ) , 151001

Versus

The General Manager, Telecom,

APPEARANCES :

Jalandhar (Punjab) : Respondent For the Workman

None

Sh . G. C. Babbar.

For theManagement :

AWARD

Passed on 15-12-2005

Central Govt . vide No. L-40012/393 /99-1R ( D.U ) dated 1-2-2001 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal foradjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of General Manager Telecom , Jalandhar in terminating the services of Sh . Raj Singh S /o Sh . Tek Singh is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ? "

2. Case was called serveral times. Awaited . None appeared on behalf of the workman. Learned counsel for the management Shri G. C. Babbar submitted that workman and his representative both are not interested in prosecuting their case and they are not taking interest perhaps workman is gainfully employed some where and not coming himself or sending his authorised representative . As workman is not interested in pin prosecuting his case reference may be returned for non - prosecution . In view of the above submission of Shri G. C. Babbar counsel for the management and my persual of the previous order sheets , I have found that workman or his AR is not appearing and not interested to persue their casc , as there is no information or application filed in this court for adjournments . Hence, it appears that workman or his authorised representative is not interested in prosecuting his case , the reference is returned to the Central Government for want of prosecution. Central Government be informed. File be consigned to record.

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer Chandigarh Dated 15-12-2005 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

1091

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 6 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 463.-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 नं.- I चण्डीढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 203/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल- 40012/110/ 2002- आई आर (डीयू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा , डैस्कअधिकारी New Delhi , the 6th January, 2006 S.O. 463. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government here by publishes the award ( Ref. No. 203/2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court No.I , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Deptt . of Telecom and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-06 .

[No- L- 40012/ 110/2002 - IR(DU)

KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT- 1 , CHANDIGARH

Case No. ID 203/2002

Shri Sukhpal Singh,

Applicant C/o Sh . N. K. Jeet , 27349 , Lal Basti Road, Bhatinda (Punjab )

Versus .

The General Manager,

Telecom, E--10B Building,

Respondent BehindHPO, Bhatinda ( Punjab )

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman

: None

Sh . G.C. Babbar .

For the Management :

AWARD

Passed on 15-12-2005

Central Govt . vide No. L-40012/ 110/ 2002 - IR ( DU) dated 7-10-2002 has referred the following disputeto this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of General Manager Telecom, Ferozepur in termination the services of Sh . Sukhpal Singh S/o Sh . Kaur Singh workman w.e.f. 31-3-2001 isjust and legal ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ?"

2. Case was called serveral times . Awaited . None appeared on behalf of the workman . Learned counsel for the management Shri G. C. Babbar submitted that workman and his representative both are not interested in prosecuting their case and they are not taking interest perhaps workman is gainfully employed some where and not coming himself or sending his authorised representative . As workman is not interested in prosecuting his case reference may be returned for non -prosecution. In view of the above submission of Shri G. C. Babbar counsel for the management and my perusal of the previous order sheets . I have found that workman or his AR is not appearing and not interested to persue their case , as there is no information or application filed in this court for adjournments. Hence , it appears that workman or his authorised representative is not interested in prosecuting his case, the reference is returned to the Central Govern- ment for want of prosecution. Central Government be informed. File be consigned to record.

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer Chandigarh Dated 15-12-2005

नई दिल्ली, 6 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 464.-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 नं. - 1 चण्डीढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 37/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल- 40012/217/ 2002- आई आर ( डीयू) ]

कुलदीप राय वर्मा , डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 6th January, 2006 S.O. 464. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government here by publishes the award (Ref. No. 37/2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court No.I , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Deptt . of Telecom and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-06.

[No- L- 40012/217/2002 - IR( DU) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT-1 , CHANDIGARH Case No. ID 37/2003

Applicant Shri Pardeep Kaur C/o Sh . N. K. Jeet , 27349, Lal Basti Road, Bhatinda (Punjab ) 1092

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

Versus

The General Manager,

..Respondent Telecom, BSNL , Deptt. ofTelecom. , Amritsar (Punjab )

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman : Nonc

Sh . G. C. Babbar .

For the Management :

AWARD

Passed on 15-12-2005

Central Govt . vide No. L- 40012 /217/ 2002 /IR ( DU) dated 24-2-2003 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of General Manager Telecom, ( BSNL ) Amritsar in termination the services of Sh. Pardeep Kaur W/ o Sh . Karamjit Singh Clerk w.e.f. 18-7-99 is just and legal ? If not to whatrelief the workman is entitled to and from which date ?"

2. Case was called serveral times . Awaited . Nonc appeared on behalf of the workman . Learned counsel for the management Shri G. C. Babbar submitted that workman and his representative both are not interested in prosecuting their case and they are not taking interest perhaps workman is gainfully employed some where and not coming himself or sending his authorised representative. As work man is not interested in prosecuting his case reference may be returned for non -prosecution . Inview of the above submission of Shri G. C. Babbar counsel for the management and my perusal of the previous order sheets . I have found that workman or his AR is not appearing and not interested to persue their case , as there is no information or application filed in this court for adjournments . Hence , it appears that workman or his authorised representative is not interested in prosecuting his case , the reference is returned to the Central Government for want of prosecution. Central Government be informed. File be consigned to record .

Chandigarh

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer Dated 15-12-2005

नई दिल्ली, 6 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 465.- 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 नं. - 1, चण्डीढ़, के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 35/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-40012/216/ 2002- आई आर ( डीयू) ]

कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] New Delhi , the 6th January, 2006 S.O. 465. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government here by publishes the Award (Ref. No. 35/2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court No.I , Chandigarh , now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Deptt . of Telecom and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-2006 .

[ No. L- 40012/ 216/2002 - IR ( DU) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT - 1 , CHANDIGARH

CASE NO . ID 35/2003

Shri Vijay Kumar , C/o Sh . N. K. Jeet , 27349 , Lal Basti Road, Bhatinda (Punjab )

....Applicant

Versus

The General Manager ,

Telecom, BSNL , Deptt. of Telecom. ,

....Respondent Amritsar ( Punjab)

APPEARANCES :

: None

Sh . G. C. Babbar.

For the Workman For the Management

AWARD Passed on 15-12-2005

Central Govt . vide No. L - 40012 / 216/ 2002 / IR ( DU ) dated 24-2-2003 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of General Manager Telecom , (BSNL) Amritsar in termination the services of Sh . Vijay Kumar S/ o Sh . Kamal Kumar RegularMazdoor w.e. f. 28-2-99 is just and legal ? If not to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which datc ? "

2. Case was called several times . Awaited. None appeared on behalf of the workman . Learned counsel for the management Shri G. C. Babbar submitted that workman and his representative both are not interested in prosecuting their case and they are not taking interest perhaps workman is gainfully employed some where and not coming himself or sending his authorised representative . As workman is not interested in prosecuting his case reference may be returned for non -prosecution . In view of the above submission of Shri G. C. Babbar counsel for the management and my perusal of the previous order sheets . I have found that workman or his AR is not appearing and not interested to persue their case , as there 1093

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4 , 2006/माघ 15, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

is no information or application filed in this court for adjournments . Hence , it appears that workman or his authorised representative is not interested in prosecuting his case, the reference is returned to the Central Government for want of prosecution. Central Government be informed. File be consigned to record.

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer Chandigarh

Dated 15-12-2005.

नई दिल्ली, 6 जनवरी , 2006 का. आ. 466. 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 नं.- I, चण्डीढ, के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 33/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[ सं. एल-40012/203/2002- आई आर ( डीयू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 6th January, 2006 S.O. 466.In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 33/2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court No.I , Chandigarh, now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Deptt . of Telecom and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-2006 .

[No. L - 40012/203/ 2002- IR (DU) KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT- 1 CHANDIGARH

CASE NO. ID 33/2003

Shri Sanjeev Kumar Dadwal ,

C/o Sh . N. K. Jeet ,

27349 , Lal Basti Road,

Applicant

Bhatinda (Punjab )

Versus

The General Manager ,

.....Respondent Telecom, BSNL , Deptt . ofTelecom. , Amritsar (Punjab)

APPEARANCES :

None

For the workman

: Sh. G.C. Babbar .

For the management

194 G1 /06-22

AWARD

Passed on 15-12-2005

Central Govt . vide No. L -40012 /203 /2002/IR (D.U) dated 24-2-2003 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of General Manager Telecom , (BSNL) Amritsar in terminating the services of Sh . Sanjeev Kumar S/o Sh . Harnam Singh Regular Mazdoor w.e.f. 28-2-99 is just and legal ? If not to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ? "

2. Case was called several times . Awaited . Nonc appeared on behalf of the workman. Learned counsel for the management Shri G. C. Babbar submitted that workman and his representative both are not interested in prosecuting their case and they are not taking interest perhaps workman is gainfully employed some where and not coming himself or sending his authorised representative . As workman is not interested in prosecuting his case reference may be returned for non - prosecution. In view of the above submission of Shri G. C. Babbar counsel for the management and my perusal of the previous order sheets . I have found that workman or his AR is not appearing and not interested to persue their case , as there is no information or application filed in this court for adjournments . Hence , it appears that workman or his authorised representative is not interested in prosecuting his case , the reference is returned to the Central Government for want of prosecution . Central Government be informed. File be consigned to record .

Chandigarh RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer Dated 15-12-2005

नई दिल्ली, 6 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 467. औधोगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार दूर संचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्व नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं.- I, चण्डीढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 201/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल- 40012/106/2002- आई आर ( डीयू) ]

कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 6th January, 2006 S.O. 467. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 201/2002 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court No.I , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Deptt. of Telecom and their workman , which was receivedby the Central Government on 6-1-06 .

[No- L - 40012/ 106/2002 - IR(DU) KULDIP RAI VEDA Desk Officer 1094

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT - 1 CHANDIGARH

Case No. ID 201/2002

Shri Sanjay Singh ,

Applicant C/o Sh . N. K. Jeet , 27349, Lal Basti Road , Bhatinda (Punjab )

Versus

The General Manager,

Telecom,

E-10B Building, Behind HPO, Bhatinda , (Punjab)

.....Respondent APPEARANCES :

Forthe workman

None

Sh . G.C. Babbar

Forthe management :

AWARD

Passed on 15-12-2005

Central Govt . vide No. L - 40012/ 106/ 2002/IR (D.U) dated 7-10-2002 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of General Manager Telecom , Ferozepur in terminating the services of Sh . Sanjay Singh S/ o Sh . Deep Narain Singh , workman w.e.f. 28-2-99 is just and legal ? If not to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ? "

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii) ] नई दिल्ली , 6 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 468.-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 नं. -1 चण्डीढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 31/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल- 40012/ 204/2002 - आई आर ( डीयू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 6th January, 2006 S.O. 468.1n pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 31/2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court No.I , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Deptt . of Telecom and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-2006 .

[No- L - 40012/ 204 / 2002-1R( DU) KULDIP RAI VERMA , Desk Officer ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT- 1 CHANDIGARH

CASE NO. ID 31/2003

Shri Raman Kumar , C/o Sh. N. K. Jeet , 27349 , Lal Basti Road,

Applicant

Bhatinda (Punjab)

Versus

The General Manager,

Telecom, BSNL, Deptt . ofTelecom. ,

Respondent

Amritsar (Punjab)

2. Case was called several times . Awaited . None appeared on behalf of the workman . Learned counsel for the management Shri G. C. Babber submitted that workman and his representative both are not interested in prosecuting their case and they are not taking interest perhaps workman is gainfully employed some where and not coming himself or sending his authorised representative . As workman is not interested in prosecuting his case reference may be returned for non -prosecution . In view of the above submission of Shri G. C. Babbar counsel for the management and my perusal of the previous order sheets . I have found that workman or his AR is not appearing and not interested to persue their case , as there is no information or application filed in this court for adjournments . Hence , it appears that workman or his authorised representative is not interested in prosecuting his case , the reference is returned to the Central Government for want of prosecution. Central Government be informed . File be consigned to record.

Chandigarh

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer Dated 15-12-2005

APPEARANCES :

For the workman

: None

Sh . G. C. Babbar

For the management :

AWARD Passed on 15-12-2005

Central Govt . vide No. L -40012/ 204/2002/ IR (D.U) dated 24-2-2003 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of General ManagerTelecom, (BSNL) Amritsar in terminating [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

1095

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

the services of Sh . Raman Kumar S/o Sh . Surinder Kumar Regular Mazdoor w.e.f. 28-2-99 is just and legal ? If notto what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ? "

2. Case was called serveral times . Awaited. None appeared on behalf of the workman . Learned counsel for the management Shri G. C. Babbar submitted that workman and his representative both are not interested in prosecuting their case and they are not taking interest perhaps work man is gainfully employed some where and not coming himself or sending his authorised representative . As workman is not interested in proseecuting his case reference may be returned for non- prosecution . In view of the above submission of Shri G. C. Babbar counsel for the management and my persual of the previous order sheet , I have found that workman or his AR is not appearing and not interested to persue their case, as there is no information or application filed in this court for adjournments . Hence , it appears that workman or his authorised representative is not interested in prosecuting his case , the reference is returned to the Central Goveernment for want of prosecution . Central Government be informed . File be consigned to record.

Chandigarh

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer Dated 15-12-2005

नई दिल्ली, 6 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 469.-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 नं.- I, चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 281/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-40012/ 143/2001- आई आर ( डीयू) ]

कुलदीप राय वर्मा , डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi the , 6th January, 2006 S.O. 469. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 281/2001 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court No.I , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Deptt. of Telecom and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-2006.

[No- L- 40012/143 /2001 - IR( DU)

KULDIP RAI VERMA , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT - 1 CHANDIGARH

CASE NO . ID 281/2001

Shri Deepak Kumar

C/oMadan Mohan , H. No. 1212 , Sector 22-B ,

Chandigarh -160001.

Applicant

Versus

The General Manager, Telecom,

.....Respondent Amritsar (Punjab)-143001 .

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman

None

Sh . G.C. Babbar.

Forthe Management :

AWARD

Passed on 15-12-2005

CentralGovt . vide No. 1.-40012 / 143/ 2001 -IR ( D.U) dated 6-8-2001 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management of Telecom, Amritsar in termination the services of Sh. Deepak Kumar S/o Sh . Gurdial Singh is just and legal ? Ifnot , to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ? "

2. Case was called serveral times . Awaited . None appeared on behalf of the workman . Learned counsel for the management Shri G. C. Babbar submitted that workman and his representative both are not interested in prosecuting their case and they are not taking interest perhaps workman is gainfully employed some where and not coming himself or sending his authorised representative. As workman is not interested in prosecuting his case reference may be returned for non - prosecution . In view of the above submission of Shri G. C. Babbar counsel for the management and my perusal of the previous order sheet , I have found that workman or his AR is not appearing and not interested to persue their case , as there is no information or application filed in this court for: adjournments . Hence , it appears that workman or his authorised representative is not interested in prosecuting his case, the reference is returned to the Central Govern- ment for want of prosecution . Central Government be informed. File be consigned to record .

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer Chandigarh

Dated 15-12-2005 1096

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 6 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 470.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14.) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार दूर संचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण / श्रम न्यायालय नं. - 1, चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 283/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1- 06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[ सं. एल- 40012/ 145/ 2001- आई आर ( डी यू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 6th January, 2006

the management Shri G. C. Babbar submitted that workman and his representative both are not interested in prosecuting their case and they are not taking interest perhaps workman is gainfully employed some where and not coming himself or sending his authorised representative. As workman is not interested in prosecuting his case reference may be returned for non - prosecution. In view of the above submission of Shri G.C. Babbar counsel for the management and my perusal of the previous order sheet , I have found that workman or his AR is not appearing and not interested to persue their case , as there is no information or application filed in this court for adjournements Hence , it appears that workman or his authorised representative is not interested in prosecuting his case the reference is returned to the Central Government forwant of prosecution . Central Government be informed. Filebe consigned to record .

CHANDIGARH RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer

Dated 15-12-2005

नई दिल्ली, 6 जनवरी , 2006

S.O. 470. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 283/ 2001 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court No. I , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Department of Telecom and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-2006 .

[No- L- 40012/ 145 /2001 - IR( DU)

KULDIP RAI VERMA , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

का. आ. 471.- 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, नं. - 1 चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 277/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT NO.1 CHANDIGARH,

Case No. ID 283/2001

[सं . एल- 40012/131/2001 - आई आर ( डीयू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी Shri Sanjiv Kumar

New Delhi , the 6th January, 2006 C/ o Madan Mohan , H. No. 1212 , Sector 22 -B, Chandigarh - 160001 .

Applicant

Versus

.... Respondent

The General Manager, Telecom, Amritsar (Punjab)-143 001

APPEARANCES :

: None

Forthe Workman

S.O. 471. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref . No. 277 / 2001 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court No - I, Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Department of Telecom and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-06 .

Sh . G. C. Babbar .

For theManagement :

AWARD

[No- L- 40012/ 131 / 2001 - IR(DU) KULDIP RAI VERMA , Desk Officer Passed on 15-12-2005

ANNEXURE

Central Govt. vide No. L -40012 / 145 /2001 /IR (DU) dated 6-8-2001 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT NO.1 CHANDIGARH

Case No. ID 277/2001

"Whether the action of the management of Telecom. , Amritsar in terminating the services of Shri Sanjiv Kumar S/o Sh . Gurdial Singh is just and legal ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date?"

Applicant

Shri Parshotam Lal C/ o Madan Mohan , H. No. 1212 , Sector 22 -B , Chandigarh - 160001.

2. Case was called serveral times . Awaited, None appeared on behalf of the workman. Learned Counsel for

IN 1097 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

Versus

TheGeneral Manager, Telecom, Amritsar(Punjab)-143001

.....Respondent

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman

None

Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 205/ 2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court No.I , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers inrelation to the management of Department of Telecom and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-06.

Sh . G. C. Babbar .

FortheManagement :

[No- L- 40012/ 108/2002 - IR(DU) AWARD

KULDIP RAI VERMA , Desk Officer Passed on 15-12-2005

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL Central Govt. vide No. L-40012/ 131/2001 - IR (DU) dated 6-8-2001 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT 1 , CHANDIGARH

Case No. ID 205/2002

Shri Raj Singh

C/ o Sh . N. K. Jeet , President, Telecom Labour Union ,

"Whether the action of the management of Telecom. , Amritsar in terminating the services of Shri Parshotam Lal S/ o Sh . Gian Chand is just and legal ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date? "

MohallaHari Nagar,

Lal Singh Basti Road,

Applicant

Bhatinda (Punjab) -151001

Versus

.....Respondent

The General Manager , Telecom, Jalandhar (Punjab)

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman

: None

Sh. G. C. Babbar

Forthe Management :

AWARD

Passed on 15-12-2005

Central Govt . vide No. L-40012/ 108/2002 - IR (DU) dated 7-10-2002 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

2. Case was called serveral times . Awaited , None appeared on behalf of the workman . Learned counsel for the management Shri G. C. Babbar submitted that workman and his representative both are not interested in prosecuting their case and they are not taking interest perhaps workman is gainfully employed some where and not coming himself or sending his authorised representative. As workman is not interested in prosecuting his case reference may be returned for non -prosecution. Inview of the above submission of Shri G.C. Babbar counsel for the management and my perusal of the previous order sheet I. have found that workman or his AR is not appearing and not interested to persue their case , as there is no information or application filed in this court for adjournments . Hence , it appears that workman or his authorised representative is not interested in prosecuting his case , the reference is returned to the Central Government for want of prosecution. Central Government be informed. File be consigned to record.

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer

Chandigarh

Dated 15-12-2005

"Whether the action of the management of General Manager Telecom. Ferozepur in terminating the services of Shri Raj Singh S/o Sh . Gurdev Singh workman w.e.f. 30-4-01 is just and legal ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date?"

नई दिल्ली, 6 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 472.- 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 नं. - 1 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 205/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल- 40012/108/2002- आई आर ( डीयू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 6th January, 2006

2. Case was called several times . Awaited, None appeared on behalf of the workman . Learned counsel for the management Shri G. C. Babbar submitted that workman and his representative both are not interested in prosecuting their case and they are not taking interest perhaps workman is gainfully employed some where and not coming himself or sending his authorised representative . As workman is not interested in prosecuting hiscase reference may be returned for non -prosecution. Inview of the above submission of Shri G.C. Babbar counsel for the management and my persual of the previous order sheet I have found that workman or his AR is not appearing and not interested to persue their case , as there is no information or application filed in this court for adjournments . Hence , it appears that workman or his S.O. 472. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central 1098

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

authorised representative is not interested in prosecuting his case the reference is returned to the Central Government for want of prosecution . Central Government be informed . File be consigned to record .

Chandigarh

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer Dated 15-12-2005

नई दिल्ली, 6 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 473.- 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 नं.- I, चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 21/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल- 40012/392/ 2000- आई आर ( डीयू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 6th January, 2006

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

AWARD

Passed on 11-11-2005

Central Govt . Vide notification No. L - 4-0012/392/ 2000/IR (D.U ) dated 27-12-2000 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of Chief General Manager, Telecom, Punjab Circle , Sector 20 -A, Chandigarh and the Principal General Manager , Telecom , Chandigarh . District in ordering disengagement/termination of services of Shri Akbar Khan a workman engaged through contractor Sh . R. K. Mittal w.e.f. 27-2-1999 is just and legal ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled and from which date ?"

2. The case taken up in Lok Adalat . The authorised representative of the workman Shri O. P. Singh withdraw the present reference in Lok Adalat vide his statement recorded on 18-10-2005 to this effect . In view of the same , the present reference is returned as withdrawn in Lok Adalat Central Government be informed.

Chandigarh

S.O. 473. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 21/ 2001 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court No.I, Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Department of Telecom and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-2006 .

[No- L - 40012/392 / 2000 - IR ( DU) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM - LABOUR COURT NO . 1 , CHANDIGARH

Case No. L.D. 21/2001

Shri Akbar Khan , C/o Sh . R. K. Sharma , H. No. 372 , Sector 20 -A, Chandigarh - 160001

...Applicant

Versus

Punjab Circle , Sector 34 , Chandigarh- 160001 ( 1 ) The ChiefGeneral Manager, Telecom,

...Respondent (2) The Principal General Manager, Telecom Sector- 18 , Chandigarh.

APPEARANCES : For the Workman : Shri O. P. Singh

Sh . G. C. Babbar For the Management :

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer Dated 11-11-2005

नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 474.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा.को. को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्व नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , धनबाद I के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 92/ 1998) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल- 20012/699/ 97- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एस. एस . गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 9th January, 2006 S.O. 474. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government here by publishes the award ( Ref. No. 92/ 1998) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court, Dhanbad I , now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 9-1-2006 .

[No- L- 20012/699/97 - IR(C - 1 ) S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

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. Reference No.92 of 1998

Parties: Employers in relation to the management of CV Area ofBCCL .

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

1099

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

AND

TheirWorkman

PRESENT: Shri Sarju Prasad, Presiding Officer.

APPEARANCES :

None .

For the Employers

For the Workman:

None .

State: Jharkhand.

Industry: Coal.

Dated, the 21st December , 2005

AWARD

ByOrder No.L- 20012/ 699 /97 - IR( C-I) dated 10-9-98 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub - section ( 2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

"Whether the action of the management of CV Area of BCCL in dismissing Sri Seikh Manjoor, Tyndal, B/F No. 1497 of Laikdih Deep Colliery is legal & justified ? If not , to what relief is the workman entitled ?"

2. This is a reference case of the year 1998. Inspite of registered notice two dates have been passed but no step has been taken from the side of the workman . It seems that neither the concerned workman nor the sponsoring union is interested to contest the case .

3. In such circumstances , I render ' No Dispute ' Award in the present reference case.

SARJU PRASAD , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 475. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार भा.को.को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , धनबाद- II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 130/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[ सं. एल- 20012/56/2003- आई आर ( सी- I ) ] एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 9th January, 2006 S.O. 475-.In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 130/ 2003) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court , Dhanbad - II , now as shown in the Annexure inthe Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-2006 .

[No- L- 20012/ 56/2003 - IR (C - I) ]

S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Shri B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer.

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

REFERENCE NO . 130 OF 2003

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the management of West Washery Zone of M/ s. BCCL and their workmen.

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalf of the workmen : Onbehalfofthe Employers:

State: Jharkhand .

None. Mr.D.K.Verma, Advocate. Industry: Washery Dated, Dhanbad the 9th December, 2005.

AWARD

TheGovt . of India, Ministry of Labour , in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) (d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L - 20012/56/ 2003 - I.R. (C - I ), dated , the 10th November, 2003 .

SCHEDULE

KYA JHARKHAND KOYALA MAZDOOR UNION KI BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED KI PASCHIM WASHERY ZONE KEY PRABANDHTANTRA SEY MANG KI SLURRY EVAM KOYALEY KI LADAI KEY KARYA MAY LAGE 538 KARMAKARO ( SUCHI SANGLAGNA HAI) KO UKT PRABANDHTANTRA SEY NIYAMITA SEVA KA LAV DIYA JAYA UCHIT EVAM NAYASANGAT HAI ? YADI HA TO UKT KARMKAR KIS RAHAT KEY PATRA HAI TATHA KIS TARIKH SEY? "

2. In this case neither the concerned workmen nor theirrepresentative appeared before this Tribunal . Management, however , made appearance through their authorised representative . It reveals from the record that instant reference is pending since 2003 . It also further shows that registered notices and show cause notice were issued to the concerned workman/sponsoring union consecutively. In term ofRule 10 (B ) of the I.D. Central Rules , 1957 it is mandatory on the part of the concerned worknmen/ sponsoring union to file statement of claim, complete with relevant documents , list of reliance and witnesses before the Tribunal within fifteen days from the receipt of the order of reference. The concerned workmen/ sponsoring union not only violated the above rules but also did not consider necessary to respond to the notices issued by this Tribunal, Gesture of the workman/sponsoring union 1100

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ) THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/ MAGHA 15, 1927

Dated , Dhanbad the 9th December, 2005

AWARD

TheGovt. of India , Ministry of Labour, in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d ) of the I.D. Act , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-20012 / 2/ 572/2001 - I.R. (C - I) , dated the 21/30-5-2002 .

if is taken into consideration will expose clearly that they are not interested to proceed with the hearing of the case . Under the circumstances this Tribunal also find no ground to adjourn the case suo motu for causing appearance of the workman/ sponsoring union. 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.

SCHEDULE

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

"Whether the demand of the JMS from the management of BCCL , Kustore Area that Shri Md . Aktar Hussain may be regularised in the post of Welder Helper is just and fair If so , to what relief is the concerned workman entitled and from what date ?"

का. आ. 476. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा. को.को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, धनबाद- II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 46/2002) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल- 20012/572/2001 - आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव

New Delhi the , 9th January, 2006

S.O. 476. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 46/2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court , Dhanbad - II , now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-2006 .

[No- L - 20012/ 572 /2001 - IR ( C - 1) } S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

2. In this reference neither the concerned workman nor his representative appeared before this Tribunal . Management side, however, made appearance through their authorised representative. It transpires from the record that the instant reference is pending since 2002. It also further reveals that registered notices and show cause notice were issued to the concerned workman /sponsoring union consecutively. In terms of Rule 10 (B) of the I.D. Central Rules , 1957 it is mandatory on the part of the concerned workman/ sponsoring union to file written statement complete with relevant documents , list of reliance and witnesses before the Tribunal within fifteen days from the receipt ofthe order of refcrence . The concerned workman/ sponsoring union not only violated the above rules but also did not consider necessary to respond to the notices issued by this Tribunal . Gesture ofthe workman/ sponsoring union if is taken into consideration will expose clearly that they are not interested to proceed with the hearing of the case. Under the circumstances this Tribunal also finds no ground to adjourn the case suo motu for causing appearance of the workman/ sponsoring union . 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 .

B. BISWAS, Presiding Officer.

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

PRESENT:

नई दिल्ली , 9 जनवरी , 2006 Shri B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer

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

REFERENCE NO . 46 OF 2002

PARTIES :

का. आ. 477.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा .को. को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, धनबाद- II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 18/ 2002) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

Employers in relation to the management of Kustore Area of M/ s BCCL and their workman.

APPEARANCES :

[सं. एल- 20012/ 558/ 2001 - आई आर ( सी- I ) ] एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव

None .

New Delhi , the 9th January, 2006 Onbehalf of the workman : Onbehalf of the Employers

Mr. U. N. Lal , Advocate .

State : Jharkhand.

Industry: Coal.

S.O. 477. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No.

H 1101

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

18/2002 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court , Dhanbad II , now as shown in the Annexure inthe Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-2006.

[No. L - 20012/ 558/2001 - IR ( C-I) ]

S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT :

Shri B. BISWAS, Presiding Officer .

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

Reference No. 18 of 2002

PARTIES :

Employers in relation to the management of P.B. Area of M/ s BCCL and their workman .

APPEARANCES :

None.

Onbehalf of the workman :

Mr. S. N. Sinha, Onbehalf of the Employers :

Advocate .

State: Jharkhand .

Industry: Coal.

Dated , Dhanbad, the 9th December, 2005 .

AWARD

The Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour , in exercise ofthe powers conferred on them under Section 10( 1) (d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L - 20012/ 558/ 2001, dated the 28th February, 2002 .

SCHEDULE

"Whether the demand of the Union for regularisation of Smt . Fulmani Devi , P.R.W/ Loader as General Mazdoor Cat . I from the management of P.B. Project of M/ s . BCCL is justified. Ifso , to what relief is the concerned workman entitled and from what date ? " 2. In this reference neither the concerned workman nor his representative appeared before this Tribunal , No Written Statement was also filed on their behalf. Management , however, made appearance through their authorised representative . It transpires from the record that notices and show cause notice where issued to the concerned workman/ sponsoring union consecutively by registered post . It further reveals from the record that the instant reference is pending since10-9-2002 for disposal . In terms of Rule 10 (B) of the I.D. Central Rules , 1957 , it is mandatory on the part of the concerned workman/ sponsoring union to file a statement of claim complete with relevant documents , list of reliance and witnesses before the Tribunal within fifteen days from the receipt of 194 GI/06-23

the order of reference . The concerned workman/ sponsoring union not only violated the above rules but also did not consider necessary to respond to the notices issued by this Tribunal . Gesture of the workman/ sponsoring union if is taken into consideration will expose clearly that they are not interested to proceed with the hearing of the case . Under the circumstances , this Tribunal also finds no ground to adjourn the case suo moto for causing appearance of the workman/sponsoring union . 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 .

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 478.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 194- का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार भा. को. को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, धनबाद II , के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 154 / 98) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल- 20012/280/97- आई आर ( सी- I ) ] एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi the, 9th January, 2006 S.O. 478. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 154/ 98) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court , Dhanbad II , now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-2006.

[No. L- 20012/ 280/ 97 - IR ( C - I ) ] S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT:

Shri B. Biswas , Presiding Officer .

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

Reference No. 154 of 1998 .

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the management of Govindpur Area No. III of M/ s BCCL and their wrorkmen.

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalf of the workman :

Mr. N.G. Arun , Ld. Advocate None

Onbehalf of the Employers: State : Jharkhand .

Industry: Coal.

1102

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

Dated , Dhanbad , the 12th December , 2005 .

AWARD

The Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour, in exercise ofthe powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d) of the I.D. Act. , 1947 has referred the following dispute to thisTribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L - 20012/ 280/97 - IR ( C - I ) dated , the 15th May, 1998 .

SCHEDULE

" Whether the removal from service of Sh . Jagdish Manjhi , Shri Maghi Manjhi , Shri Dhani Manjhi , Shri Gora Manjhi , Shri Bila Manjhi and Shri Kandana Manjhi and did not allow to resume their duties by the management of Govindpur Area No. III of M/ s BCCL is genuine and justified?

If not, to what relief are these workmen entitled?

2. The case of the concerned workman according to written statement submitted by the sponsoring union on their behalf in brief is as follows:

The sponsoring union submitted that the concerned workmen were previously in employment as Miners at Akashkinaree Colliery under Govindpur Area No. III .

They disclosed that according to the statement of the management the concerned workman were transferred to Kooridih Colliery in the same area but during investigation by them they found that no such order of transfer was issued in their names . They submitted that the names of those workmen were struck down by the management from the roll of the workers and for which they raised an Industral Dispute before ALC ( C) Dhanbad for conciliation which was registered as conciliation Case No. 1/377/87 -E-4 dt. 11-12-87. However, the said conciliation proceeding was withdrawn on the assurance that the management would consider their case. However, as the management did not consider their case they again raised Industrial Dispute in the year 1989 but the same also was withdrawn on the assurance given by the management thatthe concerned workmen will be allowed to resume their duty. They alleged that as the management did not take any step again they raised Industrial Dispute and it was registered as Conciliation Case No. 1 / 182/95/E -4 dt . 16-2-96 but as the conciliation proceeding ended in failure instant reference case was initiated for adjudication .

The sponsoring union accordingly submitted prayer to pass award directing the management to allow the concerned workmen to resume their duties with all consequential benefits .

Ittranspires from the record that inspite of issuance ofrepeated notices by registered post as the management failed to appear and also failed to submit written statement on their part the instant reference case fixed for exparte hearing.

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

Points to be Decided

"Whether the removal from service of Sh . Jagdish Manjhi , Shri Maghi Manjhi , Shri Dhani Manjhi , Shri Gora Manjhi , Shri Birla Manjhi and Shri Kandana Manjhi and did not allow to resume their duties by the management of Govindpur Area No. III of M/ s BCCL is genuine and justified? If not, to what relief are these workmen entitled?

4.Findingwith reasons-

Ittranspires from the record that though the instant casewas fixed for exparte hearing inspite of giving repeated opportunities the sponsoring union has failed to adduce any evidence . Therefore , based on the written statement let itbe considered of their claim stands on cogent footing or not .

It is the specific claim of the sponsoring union that the concerned workmen were Miners at Akashkinare Collieryunder Govindpur Area No. III . Their contention is that they heard from the management that those workmen were transferred to Kooridih Colliery under same area but on investigation they came to know that no such transfer order was issued against them . Accordingly, they raised an Industrial Dispute in the year 1987 but the same was withdrawn by them as management assured to consider their claim . It is the specific claim of the sponsoring union that the names of the concerned workmen were struck down from the roll of the Company. They submitted that in the year 1989 they again raised Industrial Dispute as management failed to take any step but that industrial dispute was also withdrawn by them as management assured to allow the concerned workmen to resume their duties. They alleged that they again raised Industrial Dispute in the year 1996 as management did not take any step allowing the concerned workmen to resume their duties.

Considering the submission of the sponsoring union it transpires that during the period from 1986 to 1996 they raised Industrial Dispute on three consecutive occasions . From the facts disclosed in the written statement it transpires clearly that the concerned workmen were found absent from duty as Miners at Akashkinaree Colliery. It is their contention that from the management they heard that those workmen were transferred to Kooridih Colliery. They admitted that the said information was found to be wrong as no such order of transfer was issued against them. In this fact is taken into consideration it can safely be presumed that the concerned workmen altogether remained absent from duty. It is not the ease of the sponsoring union that the concerned workmen were not allowed to resume their duties and for which they lodged complaint to the union that they were disallowed by the management to resume their duties . It is the specific allegation of the sponsoring union that management struck down the names of the concerned workmen from [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

1103

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

the roll of the Company. Question of striking down name of any worker crops up when that workmen remains absent for a continuous period. As the management did not take any step in the instant case burden of proof rests on the sponsoring union to establish that the names of the concerned workers were struck off from the roll of the Company. It is seen that the sponsoring union have got ample opportunity to adduce evidence of the workmen to show that management illegally and arbitrarily did not allow them to resume their duties. Question of resumption of duty comes in if the workmen are found present physically. As the concerned workmen have not been dismissed from service there is no reason to apprehend that their names were struck off from the roll of the Company. Question which comes in actually whom the management will allow to resume their duties when they are not found present physically?

Therefore , burden of proof is on the sponsoring union to show physical presence of the concerned workmen who were disallowed by the management to resume their duties particularly when it is admitted fact that they were not transferred to Kooridih Colliery.

Factsdisclosed in the written statement can not be considered as substantive piece of evidence until and unless the same is substantiated by cogent evidence . It is seen that sponsoring union inspite of getting ample opportunity has failed to establish that management illegally and arbitrarily did not allow the concerned workmen to resume their duties.

As they have failed to subtantiate their claim the concerned workmen are not entitled to get any relief.

In the result the following award is rendered:

AWARD

Thatremoval from service of Sh . Jagdish Manjhi Sri Maghi Manjhi , Sri Dhani Majhi , Sri Gora Manjhi Sri Birla Manjhi and Sri Kandana Manjhi did not allow to resume their duties by the management of Govindpur Area III of M/ s BCCL is genuine and justified.

Consequently, the concerned workmen named above, are not entitled to get any relief.

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 479.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा. को.को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, धनबाद II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 85/ 1998 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/65/97- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi the, 9th January, 2006 S.O. 479. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No.85/ 1998) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court Dhanbad II , now as shown in the Annexure inthe Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman , which wasreceived by the Central Government on 6-1-06.

[No. L -20012/65/97 -IR (C-I)

S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT:

Shri B. Biswas , Presiding Officer.

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

REFERENCE NO . 85 OF 1998 .

PARTIES : Employers in relation to the management of BhulanBararee Colliery of M/s BCCL and their wrorkmen .

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalf of the workman :

Mr. B. N. Singh , Representative of theworkman.

Onbehalf of the employers:

State Jharkhand .

Mr. D. K. Verma , Ld. Advocate . Industry: Coal.

Dated , Dhanbad the 12th December , 2005 .

AWARD

The Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour, in exercise ofthe power conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) (d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-20012/65/ 97-Coal- I dated, the 24th March, 1998 .

SCHEDULE

" Whether the action of management of Bararee Colliery ofM/ s BCCL is unjustified in denial to regularise Shri Ram Lal Manjhi as underground Munshi is justified ? If not , to what relief the concerned workman is entitled ?" 1104

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

2. The case of the concerned workman according to written statement submitted by the sponsoring union on his behalf in brief is as follows:

The sponsoring union submitted that the concerned workmen is time rated Trammer of Bararee Colliery but being authorised by the management he started working as underground Munshi with effect from 1-8-89 . They submitted that as he discharged his duties continuously being an underground Munshi he submitted representation to the management for his regularisation in the post but his such prayer was turned down illegally and arbitrarily violating the principle of natural justice . Accordingly he raised an Industrial Dispute through the sponsoring union before ALC ( C ) for conciliation which ultimately resulted reference to this Tribunal for adjudication . The sponsoring union accordingly, submitted prayer to pass award directing the management to regularise the concerned workman as underground Munshi with effect from 1-8-89 with full back wages and other consequential reliefs.

3.Management on the contrary after filing written statement -cum - rejoinder have denied all the claims and allegations which the sponsoring union asserted in the written statement submitted on behalf of the concerned workman.

They submitted that the post of underground Munshi is governed by Seperate Cadre Scheme. The person having the qualifications of Matriculation are eligible for the said post . Whenever any vacancy arises the management can fill up the said post through DPC by giving equal opportunity to all eligible candidates after taking due approval from the Director (P).

They submitted that the concerned workman does not possess minimum qualification of matriculation. He is by designation a TR Trammer and working in that capacity.

They however, admitted that the concerned workman was authorised to work as underground Munshi for a very short period and did not put his attendance of 190 days in that capacity. Accordingly they submitted that prayer of the concerned workman for his regularisation as underground Munshi finds no basis and as such he is not entitled to get any relief in view of his prayer.

4. POINTS TO BE DECIDED

"Whether the action of management of Bararee Colliery of M/ s . BCCL is unjustified in denial to regularise Shri Ram Lal Manjhi as underground Munshi is justified ? If not , to what relief the concerned workman is entitled ? "

5. FINDING WITH REASONS-

It transpires from the record that the sponsoring union with a view to substantiate their claim examined the concerned workman as WWI management also in support of their claim examined one witness as MWI .

WWI . i.e. the concerned workman during his evidence disclosed that in the year 1979 he got his appointment as Stone Cutter at Bhulan Bararee Colliery.

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] Thereafter in the year 1983 he started working as Trammer asperdirection of the management. He further disclosed that in the year 1989 being directed by the management he started discharging his duties as Munshi in the underground and in that capacity he worked continuously upto 2000. In 2000 management transferred him to D.C. Plantat Jealgora Colliery as Trammer . Concerned workman duringhis evidence relied on some office orders marked as Exht. W- 1 series . In support of his qualification he also submitted his matriculation certificate which during his evidence was marked as Exht. W- 2. It is his contention thatmanagement illegally and arbitrarily not only refuted his claim but also denied to regularise him as Munshi .

During his cross- cxamination concerned workman has failed to show any paper that he was authorised to work as underground Munshi . He further admitted that since his appointment as Trammer management paid him wages against that post .

MWI who was Hindi Typist attached to Personnel Deptt. of Bararce Colliery during his evidence specifically disclosed that the concerned workman was never authorised by the management to work as Munshi in the underground. He disclosed that work of Munshi in the underground is a clerical job and comes under clerical cadre .He was never selected by the management to work as clerk though this witness admitted that in case of emergency work on some occassions he was deployed to work as Munshi in the underground as well as on the surface absolutely on temporary measure . He disclosed that as the concerned workman is a Matriculate it ipso facto did not create any right to place claim for his regularisation as clerk because of the fact that selection of clerk is made as per provision laid down in NCWA. This witness further disclosed that Time rated Trammer comes under seperate Cadre and their promotion are considered as per the norms laid down for the said cadre .

Therefore , considering the evidence of WWI and MWI and also considering the facts disclosed in the pleadings of both sides there is no dispute to hold that concerned workman by designation was a TR Trammer and posted at Bararce Collicry initially.

Itis the contention of the concerned workman that in the 1989 he started working as underground Munshi as perdirection of the management . He disclosed that from 1990 to 2000 he was deployed as Munshi by the management continuously and thereafter he was transferred to DG Plant Jealgora Colliery as Trammer . According to his submission continuously he worked as Munshi and inspite of his rendering continuous service and also having requisite qualification to work in the clerical cadre management ignored to regularise him in the clerical grade as Munshi . In support of his claim he relied on the documents which in course of his evidence were marked as Exht. W- I series , W- 2 & W-3 . The documents marked as Exht, W - I series shows clearly that time to time management used to deploy the concerned workman either as underground Munshi or as sand Munshi . It further transpires from the document marked as Exht . W- 5 that while working as Munshi management vide office order [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

dt. 27-8-98 issued charge -sheet to him for dereliction of his duty as Munshi which amounted to misconduct. Again from the office orders marked as Exht . W -1/1 and W- 1/3 dt.8-7-96 and 1-9-98 respectively it transpires that pending final decision of the chargesheet he was asked to resume his duties as Munshi . Therefore if these office orders marked as Exht . W- 1 series are taken into consideration , it will expose that prior to 1993 he was engaged by the management to work as Munshi and in that capacity continuously he worked upto 1999 .

MWI during his evidence disclosed that the concernedworkman was a time rated trammer and he was never authorised by any official of Bararee Colliery to work as Munshi in the underground . He disclosed that the post of Munshi comes under clerical cadre and the concerned workman was never selected by the managementto work as clerk as per provision ofNCWA: However he submitted that in case of emergency work on some occasions he was deployed to work as Munshi either in the underground or on the surface absolutely on temporary measure .

Therefore , the very evidence of MWI speaks clearly that the concerned workman rendered his service as Munshi on some occasions cither in the underground or on the surface absolutely on temporary measure . It is the specific contention of the management that for a time rated worker there is no scope to get him entry in the service of clerk as it is cadre post . As per NCWA there is selection process for selection of a clerk under Cadre Scheme . If this submission of the management is taken into consideration in that case the question which has been cropped up how they utilised the service of the concerned workman as Munshi cither in the underground for onthe surface particularly when he was a time rated trammer . No satisfactory explanation in that regard could be given by the management . On the contrary it shows clearly that violating the provision of NCWA management deployed the service of the concerned workman as Munshi though he was by designation a trammer and for his rendering higher responsibility management did not pay him diffcrence of wages . On the contrary atleast on two occasions they issued chargesheet to him for committing misconduct while he was engaged as Munshi on the surface . It is curious to note that when the management claimed that time rated trammer holds no entry to get his regularisation as clerk in the clerical cadre without coming through selection process did not hesitate to issue chargesheet to him with the allegation of committing misconduct while he was engaged as Munshi .

Not only in the written statement - cum - rejoinder submitted by the management but also MWI during his evidence disclosed that for a very short period the concerned workman was engaged to work as Munshi .

1105

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4 , 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

This fact which the management asserted finds no basis if the documents marked as Exht . W- I series are looked into. It is not the case of the management that all these documents which the concerned workman relied on are manufactured to substantiate his claim. Therefore , if these office orders are looked into it will expose very clearly that prior to 1993 he was engaged by the management to work asMunshi and in that capacity he worked till 1999. Accordingly, based on these documents there is no scope to say that absolutely for a temporary period he was engaged as Munshi in the underground as well as on the surface . Matriculation Certificate marked as Exht . W- 2 shows clearly that the concerned workman is a Matriculate . Therefore , based on the claim of the management there is no scope to say that the concerned workman does not have requisite qualifications to get his regularisation in the clerical cadre .

Considering the materials on record it has been exposed very clearly that management utilised the service ofthe concerned workman as Munshi in clerical Cadre for years together but when question of his regularisation cropped up they flatly denied his claim taking the plea that (i) he does not possess requisite qualification ( ii ) T.R.Trammer has got no entry in clerical post ( iii ) that excepting for a limited period he was never deployed to work as Munshi .

My discussion above will expose clearly that the plea taken by the management are not only without merit but also they have done so with malafide intention not to regularise the concerned workman in clerical grade inspite of explosing his service Contincously for years together as Munshi which comes under clerical cader .

It is not expected that a helpless workman is to be exploited by the management for their own interest . When itwas absolutely within their knowledge that there was no provision to allow a T.R. worker to work in clerical grade it was not at all a wise decision to deploy the service ofa T.R. worker in clerical grade and for which there is no reason to say that the workman concerned should be penalised particularly when it has been established that for years together he discharged his duties as Munshi either in the underground or on the surface .

Accordingly, after careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances I hold that management illegally and arbitrarily violating the principle of natural justice refused to regularise the concerned workman in the clerical grade as Munshi .

In the result the following award is rendered:

"That the action of management of Bararee Colliery of M/ s BCCL is unjustified in denial to regularise Shri Ram Lal Manjhi as underground Munshi .

Management is directed to regularise Shri Ram Lal Manjhi as Munshi in clerical Gr. III with effect from the date of passing this Award .

This Award management should implement within three months from the date of its publication in Gazettee of India . "

B. BISWAS, PresidingOfficer.

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii ) ] 1106

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 480.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सी सी एल के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 57/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल- 20012/292/ 2003- आई आर ( सी- I ) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 9th January, 2006

S.O. 480. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government here by publishes the award ( Ref. No. 57/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court Dhanbad II now as shown in the Annexure inthe Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of CCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-06 .

2. In this case neither the concerned workman nor his representative appeared before this Tribunal . Management , however, made appearance through their authorised representative. It transpires from the record that registered notices and show cause notice were issued to the workman/ sponsoring union . As per rule 10 (B ) of the I.D. Central Rules , 1957 it is mandatory on the part of the concerned workman/ sponsoring union to file Written Statement , complete with relevant documents , list of reliance and witnesses before the Tribunal within fifteen days from the receipt of the order of reference . The concerned workman/sponsoring union not only violated the above rules but also did not consider necessary to respond to the notices issued by this Tribunal. Gesture of the workman/ sponsoring union if is taken into consideration will expose clearly that they are not interested to proceed with the hearing of the case . Under the circumstances , this Tribunal also finds no ground to adjourn the case suo moto for causing appearance of the workman/sponsoring union . Hence , the case is closed and a ' No Dispute ' Award is passed in this reference presuming non - existence of any industrial dispute between the partics.

[No. L- 20012/292 /2003 - IR ( C- I ) ] S.S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer. नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

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

PRESENT :

Shri B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer . In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10( 1) (d) of the 1.D. Act . , 1947 .

का. आ. 481.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सी सी एल के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 149/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

REFERENCE NO . 57 OF 2004

PARTIES:

[सं . एल- 20012 /122/98-आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव

New Delhi the 9th January, 2006 Employers in relation to the management of Barka Sayal Kshetra ofM/ s . CCL and their workman.

APPEARANCES :

: None

Onbehalf of the Workman On behalf of the employers : Mr. D.K. Verma, Advocate .

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal .

S.O. 481. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government here by publishes the award (Ref. No. 149/ 99) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court Dhanbad II now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of CCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-06.

Dated, Dhanbad, the 12th December, 2005 . AWARD

No. L- 20012/ 122/98 - IR( C -1 ) ] S.S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO . 2) AT DHANBAD The Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise ofthe powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d ) of the I.D. Act . , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L - 20012/292/ 2003-1.R. (C - 1 ), dated, the 26th April , 2004.

PRESENT

SCHEDULE

Shri B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer.

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

REFERENCE NO . 149 OF 1999 "Kya coalfield Mazdoor Union ki C.C.L Barka Sayal kshetra key pravandhtantra sey mang ki karmkar Shri Gopal Nayak ko varsh 1998 sey Chaprasi key pad par niyamit kiya jaya uchit evam naya sangat hai ? Yadi hanto karmkar kis rahat key patra hai tatha kis tarikh sey?" [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

1107

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the management of Kargali Colliery ofM/ s . CCL and their workman .

APPEARANCES

Onbehalfof the Workman : Mr. B.B. Pandey, Advocate

Onbehalf of the employers : Mr. D.K. Verma, Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal .

Dated, Dhanbad, the 12th December, 2005 .

AWARD

The Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise ofthepowers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) (d) of the 1.D. Act . , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-20012 / 122/ 98 - I.R. (C - I ) , dated, the 19th February, 1999 .

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the Management of Kargali Colliery (OpenCast ) , CCL, P.O. Bermo , Dist. Bokaro in not regularising S/Sri Manas Sengupta, Deo Raj Kewat, Shamsul Haque and Dilip Kr . , Trainees Category I as Clerk Gr. III in terms of I.1. No. 29dt. 27-9-91 of JBCCI is justified ? If not , what relief the concerned workmen are entitled to ?"

2. In this case both the parties appeared and filed their respective Written Statement, documents etc. The . case then proceeded along its course . Subsequently at the stage of evidence, the authorised representative of the concerned workmen submitted his prayer to pass a ' No Dispute' Award in this case as the concerned workmen involved are not interested to proceed with the hearing of this case. No objection raised on behalf of the management . When the concerned workmen are not interested it is redundant to carry on hearing of this case further. Hence , the case is closed and a ' No Dispute' Award is passed in this reference presuming non -existing of any industrial dispute between the parties .

B.BISWAS, Presiding Officer.

नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 482.- औद्यागिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा.को.को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्व नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, धनबाद II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 84/ 2004) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं . एल- 20012/46/2004- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ]

एस.एस. गुप्ता , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 9th January, 2006 S.O. 482. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 84/ 2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court Dhanbad II now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-06 .

[No. L- 20012/46/2004 - IR (C- I) ] S.S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT

Shri B. Biswas , PresidingOfficer .

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

REFERENCE NO. 84 OF 2004

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the management of Justore Area of ¡M/s. BCCL and their workman .

APPEARANCES

None

Onbehalf of the Workman :

Onbehalf of the employers : Mr. U. N. Hal Advocate. State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal .

Dated Dhanbad, the 12th December , 2005

AWARD

TheGovt . of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise ofthe powers conferred on them under Section 10( 1 ) (d) of the I.D. Act . , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 20012/46/ 2004-1.R. (C- I) , dated, the 28th June, 2004.

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the Management ofHurriladih Colliery, Kustore Area of M/s . BCCL, P.O. Kustore , Dist . Dhanbad in dismissing Shri Khagan Roy, Miner Loader from the services of the Company vide order dt. 10-11-2003 is just , fair and legal , If not , to what relief is the said workman entitled ?"

2. In this reference neither the concerned workman nor his representative appeared before this Tribunal . No Written Statement was also filed on their behalf. Management, however made appearnace through their authorised representative . It transpires from the record that notices and show cause were issued to the concerned workman/sponsoring union consecutively by registered post. It further reveals from the record that the instant 1108

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 / MAGHA 15 , 1927

reference is pending since 18-10-2004 for disposal . In terms ofRule 10(B) of the I.D. Central Rules , 1957 it is mandatory on the part of the concerned workman/sponsoring union to file a statement of claim complete with relevant documents , list of reliance and witnesses before the Tribunal within fifteen days from the receipt ofthe order of reference . The concerned workman /union not only violated the above rules but also did not consider necessary to respond to the notices issued by this Tribunal. Gesture of the workman/ sponsoring union if is taken into consideration will expose clearly that they are not interested to proceed with the hearing on the case . Under the circumstances , this Tribunal also finds no ground to adjourn the case suo moto for causing appearance of the workman/ sponsoring union . 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.

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 483.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा .को. को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्व नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 184/ 2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं . एल- 20012/210/ 2001- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 9th January, 2006 S.O. 483. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 184/ 2001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court Dhanbad II now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 6-1-06 .

[No. L- 20012/210/2001 - IR ( C- I) ] S.S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT :

Shri B. Biswas , Presiding Officer.

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

REFERENCE NO . 184 OF 2001

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the management of Govindpur Area No. III of M/ s . BCCL and their workman .

PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) |

APPEARANCES

Onbehalf of the Workman : Mr. S.N.Goswami .

Ld . Advocate.

Mr. D.K. Verma, Onbehalf of the employers :

Ld. Advocate. State : Jharkhand

Industry Coal .

Dated , Dhanbad , the 12th December, 2005 .

AWARD

The Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour, in exercise ofthe powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d) of the I.D. Act . , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L - 20012/210 / I.R. (C - I ) , dated, the 11th July , 1999 .

SCHEDULE

"Whether the demand of Mazdoor Sanghathan Samittee from the management of Govindpur Area III ofM/ s BCCL for regularisation of Sri Bibhuti Singh , Pcon as Munshi Grade II is legal and justified? If so, what relief the workman concerned his entitled to ? " 2. The case of the concerned workman according to written statement submitted by the sponsoring Union ofhisbehalf in brief is as follows:

The sponsoring union submitted that the concerned workman Bibhuti Singh initially got his appointment as Peon at Kooridih Colliery under Govindpur Area No. III . They submitted that by office order No. ARIII / Koor/ 1134/90dt . 19/21-5-90 Dy. C.M.E./ Agent , Kooridih colliery authorised the concerned workman to perform the job ofMunshi at Kooridih Colliery Block IV OCP under Govindpur Area III. Since that period he started discharging his dutics as Munshi continuously and issued letter of confirmation to that effect by letter No. 2065 dt . 25-9-92.

They disclosed that the concerned workman started rendering his job as Munshi in clerical cadre against permanent vacancy in the year 1990 and thereafter continuously rendering his job in that capacity and for discharging his duties in that capacity management though paidhim difference of wages of clerical Grade II and ofthe peon in category I did not consider to regularise him in clerical Grade. Accordingly , he submitted several representations to the management with prayer for his regularisation in clerical grade Il but to no effect and for which he was compelled to raise Industrial Dispute before ALC(C) for conciliation which ultimately resulted reference to this Tribunal for adjudication .

Concerned workman accordingly submitted his prayer to pass award directing the management to regularise him as Munshi in clerical Grade II since the date of his engagement as such .

3. Management on the contrary after filing written statement cum rejoinder have denied all the claims and allegations which the sponsoring union asserted in the written statement submitted on behalf of the concerned workman.

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

They submitted that the post of Munshi Grade . II is aclerical post and the promotion of any workman in clerical Grade is being made according to cadre scheme of clerk formulated by JBCCI . They disclosed that lowest Grade in a clerical cadre is clerk Grade III and a clerk of clerical Grade III is only entitled to be promoted in the post of clerk Grade II on recommendation of D.P.C.

They disclosed that the concerned workman was appointed as peon and is working as a peon. They never authorised him to work as Munshi in Grade II because of the fact that there is no provision for regularisation of a peon to that post. Apart from this fact they submitted that the concerned workman also does not possess requisite qualifications for getting his posting in clerical Grade Ii . Accordingly, management submitted that the claim ofthe concerned workman as finds no basis is liable to be rejected.

4. POINTS TO BE DECIDED

"Whether the demand of Mazdoor Sangathan Samittee from the management of Govindpur Area III of M/ s . BCCL for regularisation of Sri Bibhuti Singh , Peon as Mushi Grade II is legal and justified? Ifso, what reliefthe workmen concerned is entitled to?"

5. FINDINGS WITH REASONS

It transpires from the record that inspite of giving ample opportunity the sponsoring union has failed to take any step for adducing evidence with a view to substantiate the claim of the concerned workman . Accordingly the management also declined to adduce any evidence on their part.

In view of this situation there is no way out but to answer the reference based on the facts disclosed in the pleadings of both sides suo moto .

Considering the pleadings of both sides there is no dispute to hold that the concerned workman was employed by the management as peon at Kooridih Colliery under Govindpur Area No. III . It is the contention of the sponsoring union that by office order No. AR- III/Koor / 1134/90 dt . 19/21-5-90 the Dy. C.M.E./Agent of Kooridih Colliery authorised him to work as Munshi in clerical Grade II and since then he is working in that capacity and put his attendance for more than 240 days in each year . The sponsoring union further submitted that by letter No. 2065 dt. 25-9-92 Dy.C.M.E. , Block- IV confirmed his service as Munshi in clearical Grade II . It has been further submitted that for discharging higher responsibility management paid differences of wages of clerk Grade Il and of Peon in Category I to the concerned workman . They alleged that management though paid difference of wages to him refused to regularise him in the post of Munshi in clerical Grade II and for which he submitted several representations but to no effect and for which he raised an Industrial dispute with a view to get his relief.

Management on the contrary categorically denying the claim of the concerned workman submitted that the 194 Gl /06-24

1109

भारत का राजपत्र फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

post of Munshi in clerical Grade II is only filled up by promotion from clerical Grade III if the name of any workman is recommended by D.P.C. as per provision laid down in N.C. W.A. They submitted that initial appointment inthe post of clerk in clerical Grade III is only made by selection/ interview from the departmental candidates . They submitted that there is no scope for getting direct appointment from category 1 post to clerical Grade without facing selection/interview subject to fulfillment of requisite qualification . It has been submitted by them that the concerned workman is lacking of minimum educational qualification which is required for his selection even initially inclerical Grade III . The provision as laid down in N.C.W.A. relating to selection of clerk Grade III speaks clearly that the workman should be matriculated and he must work as permanent staff minimum for a period of three years and hismode of appointment is by way of selection/ interview Promotion in clerk Grade II only is given from clerk Grade III and the made of such promotion is only through D.P.C. It is the claim of the sponsoring union that Dy. C.M.E./ Agent, Kooridih Colliery by office order No. AR.III /Koor/ 1134/90/dt . 19/21-5-90 engagedby the concerned workman towork as Munshi in clerical Grade II . It is curious to note that inspite of claiming so the sponsoring union has failed to produce any such office order. As per N.C.W.A. there is no scope at all to engage a workman of category I directly to the post ofMunshi in clerk Grade II . Therefore, burden of proof absolutely rests on the sponsoring union to establish that Dy.C.M.E./Agent Kooridih Colliery is competent authority to engage any workman of category 1 to work in the post of Munshi clerical Grade II . Moreover, they can not avoid their responsibility to establish that the concerned workman is sufficiently qualified to work as Munshi in clerk Grade II . It has been specifically claimed by the sponsoring union that management for discharging. higher responsibility paid the concerned workman the difference ofwages of clerk Grade II and of the wages of category I. It is seen that inspite of getting sufficient opportunity the sponsoring union has failed to produce an iota of evidence based on which there is scope to draw conclusion that Dy. C.M.E./Agent, Kooridih Collierywas competent authority to engage any workman of Cat } It is seen that inspite of getting sufficient opportunity the sponsoring union has failed to produce an iota ofevidence based on which there is scope to draw conclusion thatDy.C.M.E./Agent, Kooridih Collierywas competent authority to engage any workman of Cat. I to the post ofMunshi in clerical Grade II . They have also failedto produce any such order as claimed to show about his engagement as Munshi in clerical Grade 11. The sponsoring union also has failed to produce matriculation certificate of the concerned workman to show that he possesses requisite qualification . They have also failed to produce a single wage sheet to show that management paiddifferences of wages to him . Practically excepting placing claim the sponsoring union has failed to producc a single scrap of paper to show that he worked in post of Munshi in clerical Grade II by order of the management for years together and put his attendance for more than 240 days in each year .

1110

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

It is to borne in mind that facts disclosed in the pleading cannot be considered as substantive piece of evidence until and unless the same is substantiated by cogent evidence . I find no hesitation to say that inspite of getting sufficient opportunity the sponsoring union has lamentably failed to substantiate the claim of the concerned workman. Accordingly, based on the facts disclosed in the written statement I find no scope at all to uphold the claim of the sponsoring union for regularisation of the concerned workman in the post of Munshi in clerical Grade II .

In result the following award is rendered:

"That the demand of Mazdoor Sangathan Samittee from the management of Govindpur Area III of M/s . BCCL for regularisation of Sri Bibhuti Singh, Peon as Munshi Grade II is not legal and justified.

Consequently the concerned workman named above is not entitled to get any relief. "

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 484.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा. को.रो.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 141/1997 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल- 20012/333/96- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 9th January, 2006 S.O. 484. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government here by publishes the award ( Ref. No. 141/997 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court Dhanbad II now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Department of BCCL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-2006 .

[No. L- 200 12/333 /96 - IR(C -I ) ]

S.S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

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

REFERENCE NO . 141 OF 1997

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the mana- gement ofSudamdih Shaft mine M/s. BCCL, and their workmen .

APPEARANCES

On behalf of the Workman : Mr. K.Singh , Ld . Advocate .

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)] Onbehalf of the employers : Mr. S.N. Sinha, Ld. Advocate State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal .

Dated, Dhanbad, the 13th December, 2005

AWARD

TheGovt. of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise ofthe 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-20012/333 /96-1.R. (C - 1 ) , dated, November, 1997.

SCHEDULE

"Whether the demand of the Union for the protection ofwages from the retrospective effect and regularisation in T.R. jobs of S/ Shri Ramashish Paswan and 37 others (as per list enclosed) is legal and justified? If so, to what relief are these workmen entitled ? "

2. The case of the concerned workmen according to written statement submitted by the sponsoring union on their behalf in brief is as follows:

The sponsoring union submitted that the concerned workmen were picce rated Miners/Loaders of wage group V - A of Sudamdih Shaft Mines . They submitted management without giving any notice under Section 9 - A of the I.D. Act to the concerned workmen changed their service condition and converted them to Time Rated workers frorn Piece Rated workers without giving any protection of their wages which they used to draw under group V -A resulting of which they have sustained financial loss . Accordingly they submitted prayer before the management for protection of their wages as T. R. workers but as the management refused to give any such pay protection they raised Industrial Dispute for conciliation which ultimately resulted reference to this Tribunal for adjudication .

3.Management on the contrary after filing written statement cum rejoinder have denied all the claims and allegations which the sponsoring union asserted in the written statement submitted on behalf of the concerned workmen.

They submitted that the concerned workmen as were piece rated workers they used to be paid wages on the basis of quantity of work performed by them as per the rates oftheir respective groups. They submitted that the concerned workmen on different occasions approached the management to provide them employment as time rated workers . According they considered the request of the concerned workmen made time to time and provided them time rated jobs on temporary basis according to skill possessed by them and they were paid the full back wages of the piece rated group on which they were working . They submitted that before conversions of the concerned workmen to T.R. jobs they were asked to give voluntary options to work in time rated category with the initial [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

basic start of the category in which they were to be regularised.

Accordingly, the concerned workmen submitted their options for their regularisation on time rated jobs in the respective categories with the initial basic fixed for such time rated workers . Thereafter, on the basis of their options they were regularised in time rated categories with the wages as per time rated scale as agreed upon by the workmen concerned according to the option form . They disclosed that the piece rated workers who did not submit their options were not regularised and they were sent back to their original jobs and their status as piece rated continued.

They submitted that the concerned workmen can- not raise any demand subsequently claiming protection oftheir wages particularly when they were converted as T. R. workers and placed in appropriate category in view of options giving by them . In view of the facts and circumstances management submitted that the concerned workmen are not entitled to get any relief in view of their prayer and for which their claim is liable to be rejected.

4. POINTS TO BE DECIDED

"Whether the demand of the Union for the protection of wages from the retrospective effect and regularisation in T.R. jobs of S/ Shri Ramashish Paswan and 37 others (as per list enclosed) is legal and justified? If so , to what relief are these workmen entitled?"

5. FINDING WITH REASONS

It transpires from the record that sponsoring union with a view to substantiate the claim of the concerned workmen examined one of the concerned workmen as W.W.I. Management on the contrary in support of their claim examined one witness as M, W. 1 .

W.W.1 . during his evidence disclosed that though initially he got his appointment under the management as Miner/Loader in the year 1985 , he was engaged as Sub- way crew as piece rated worker but in the year 1995 management regularised him in the said post as time rated worker suo motu and without taking any option from them . He submitted that as piece rated worker they were inGroup Vwages. He further submitted that as management was facing shortage of staff they converted their designations as time rated workers and transferred some of the concerned workmen to the post of sub - way crew and the rests to the posts ofTrammers and material suppliers .

This witness further disclosed that without giving any pay protection management converted them to T.R. from P.R. Actually in T. R. they were placed in the initial stage of basic pay like new entrants . Moreover before changing the status oftheir job as T.R. worker management did not gave any notice under Section 9 -A of the I.D. Act. It has been further alleged by him that out of 38 workers management gave pay protection to 19 workers and their list during his evidence was marked as Exht . W - I . Accordingly they submitted representation to the

1111

भारत का राजपत्र फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

management for giving their pay protection like those 19 workmen but their claim was not considered.

During cross examination this witness admittedthat they submitted options to the management for their placing asT.R. worker from piece rated workers.

M.W. 1 during his evidence disclosed that out of 38 workmen 19 workmen submitted in writing their consent for change of their status as piece rated workers to time rated workers and accordingly in view of option given by them they were placed in category II and in different other categories with initial basic wages w.e.f. 1-8-95. Out of the option forms filled up by 19 workmen 3 workmen viz Khublal Singh , Akbar Ansari and Sadadat Hussain have been superannuated from service and 2 workmen viz Srikant Roy and Mundrika Singh were transferred to C. V. Area . This witness admitted that management issued pay protection order in favour of rest 19 workmen who did not submit any written consent in view of Circular issued dt. 12/ 13-3-99 (Exht . M-2). It is the contention of the management that as the rest 19 workmen opted to work as T.R. worker in writing with undertaking not to claim pay protection they are not entitled to get such relief.

M.W. 1 during his cross examination admitted that by the Circular marked as Exht. W- 2 , 38 workmen werc converted in T.R. workers from P.R. workers with initial basic pay of their category in which to be regularised . It is seen that out of these 38 workers , 19 workers who did not opt for T.R. category from P.R. category were given the benefit ofpay protection in view of office order issued by the management dt. 12/ 13-3-99 though their wages were fixed with initial basic pay when they were converted to T.R. category along with rest 19 workers vide office order dt. 28-2-95/ 1-3-95 (Exht. W -2 ). It is seen that 19 workers were convertedto T.R. category in view of option given by them under their own signature /LTI and admitted to accept their fixation of pay with initial basic wages w.e.f. 1-3-96. Referring the option forms (Exht . M- 1 ) series duly executed by these 19 workmen management submitted that question ofissuing notice under Section 9-A did not arise as change ofservice condition was done absolutely in view ofoption executed by them . Management categorically denied the fact that taking the opportunity of the dueress they obtained those option forms from these 19 workmen. The option forms (Exht. M- 1 series) shows clearly that in presence of the witness each of the 19 workers either signed . or put their LTIs expressing their willingness to be placed in T.R. category accepting initial basic wages in that category. Accordingly, burden of proof rests on these workmen to establish that under dueress they compelled to execute the option forms . In course of hearing the sponsoring union hás failed to substantiate such allegation and for which there is no scope at all to uphold their contention . Considering the facts and circumstances there is sufficient scope to say that these 19 workmen were fully aware about change of their service conditions from P.R. category to T.R. category. Therefore , the allegation which they have brought against the management that without giving notice under Section 9 - A of the I.D. Act they have changed their service conditions finds no basis at all .

1112

[PART II - SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

Considering the evidence of both sides it has been exposed that out of 38 workmen management changed the category of 19 workmen on the basis of option given by them but it is evident that in respect of the rest 19 workmen their categoryto T.R. worker was converted without getting any option from them . It has been admitted by the management that by office order dt. 12/ 13-3-99 (Exht . M-2) pay protection was given to those 19 workers . It is seen that as the other 19 workers submitted their options they have been deprived of getting such benefit though at the initial stage names of all the 38 workers were included in the office order ( Exht . W- 2 ) as T.R. category with initial basic pay of that category to which they have been regularised . Management changed the situation by office order dt . 12/13-3-99 (Exht. M- 2 ) and by this office order they have created a clear division in between those 38 workers. It is very clearly evident that 19 workers who did not give option while were provided with the benefit of pay protection the rest 19 workers had been deprived of only for the reason that they have expressed their willingness to change their category. There is sufficient reason to believe that for adopting their discriminative policy a section of workers have been deprived of equal wages with that ofother workers inspite of rendering equal service in same category. Absolute burden is on the management to establish that the discriminitive policy which they adopted was not against the principle of equaity andjustice. In course of hearing the representative of the management have failed to justify the decision adopted by them. The equity and justice speaks that every person is entitled to get equal pay for equal job .

Instead of following this principle management adopted a clear discriminitive policy to creat a division amongst the workers . It is not at all expected that a portion ofthe workers should be deprived of getting pay protection for the reasons that they have executed options to change their category. Such discreminitive policy adopted by the management I should say is not only illegal but also arbitrary and violative to the principle of naturaljustice.

Accordingly, in view of my discussion above I hold that the 19 workers who have executed their options for change their category . P.R. category to T.R. category shall get pay protection based on the same footing of 19 others workers who have got their pay protection in view ofoffice order dt. 12/ 13-3-99 .

In the result following award is rendered:

"That the demand of the Union for the protection of wages from the retrospective effect and regularisation in T.R. , jobs of S/ Sri Ranashish Paswan and 37 others (as per list enclosud ) is legal and justified.

However, as management admitted that they have already issued order of pay protection to S/ Shri Dashrath Das and 18 others workers (list enclosed as Exht . W-3 ) management is directed to issue pay protection order in favour of Chhotan Das and 18 other workers who have executed their options to T.R. category on the same footing with 19 workers who have already got their pay protection , within three months from the date of publication of award inthe Gazette of India . "

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 485.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा० को ० को० लि० के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , धनबाद II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 110/1998 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल- 20012/174/ 98- आई आर ( सी -1 ) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 9th January, 2006 S.O. 485. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 110/99) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court, Dhanbad II now as shown in the Annexure inthe Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-06 .

[No. L- 20012/ 174/98- IR(C-I ) ] S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Shri B. Biswas, Presiding Officer

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

REFERENCE NO . 110 OF 1999

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the mana- gement ofC. V. Area ofM/ s BCCL and their workmen:

APPEARANCES :

Onthe behalf of Workman Mr. S. N. Sinha, Ld . Advocate

Onthe behalf of employers : Mr. B. M. Prasad, Ld. Advocate .

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal .

Dated, Dhanbad, the 14th December, 2005 AWARD

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour, in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d) of the I.D. Act , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 20012/ 174 /98 - IR (C - I ) , dated, the 27th January, 1999 .

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

1113

भारत का राजपत्र फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of C. V. Area ofBCCL in dismissing Sh . Rabi Manjhi , Ex -U.G. Loader ofBasantimata Colliery from the services of the Company on the only charge of his absence from duty from 16-4-1995 is justified ? Ifnot, to what relief ishe entitled ?"

2. The case of the concerned workman according to written statement submitted by the sponsoring union on his behalf in brief is as follows:

The sponsoring union submitted that the concerned workmanwas under ground Loader at Basantimata Colliery. They submitted that owing to illness of the concerned workman he could not report to his duty and the said fact was duly intimated to the management by him. After recovery from his ailment when he went to his place ofhis work with a view to resume his duty he was not allowed to join there and subsequently management by letter no . BM/ PO/97/854 dt . 8/ 12-4-97 dismissed him from service without any charge sheet or holding any departmental enquiry againsthim.

After the said order of dismissal he submitted several representations to the management with a prayer to reinstate him in service but to no effect and for which he compelled to raise Industrial Dispute for conciliation which ultimately resulted reference to this Tribunal for adjudication.

Accordingly, concerned workman submitted prayer to pass award directing the management to reinstate him in service from the date of his dismissal from service with full back wages and consequential relief setting aside the order of dismissal .

3.Management on the contrary after filing written statement cum rejoinder have denied all the claims and allegations which the sponsoring union asserted in the written statement submitted on behalf of the concerned workmen.

They submitted that the concerned workman was under-grouná loader at Basantimata Colliery. They disclosed that the concerned workman developed the habit of remaining unauthorised absence from duties without permission or information and without any justifiable cause. His habit of remaining himself absent from duty was so ugly that during the year 1992 he put his attendance for 92 days while during 1993 and 1994 he did not put his attendance for a single day. In the year 1994 he put his attendance for only 80 days and remained absent from duty w.e.f. 16-4-95 to 23-8-95 continuously without taking any permission or giving any information to the management. As unauthorised absence from 16-4-95 to 23-8-95 amounted to misconduct a charge sheet dt. 24-8-95 was issued to him and thereafter a departmental enquiry was initiated against him .

They submitted that in the said Departmental enquiry, the enquiry officer gave him full opportunity to defend his case. After completion of the said enquiry the enquiry officer submitted his report holding the concerned workman guilty to the charges brought against him. The Disciplinary Authority thereafter considering the report and also considering all material aspects dismissed the concerned workman from service .

Management submitted that they neither committed any illegality nor took any arbitrary decision violating the principle of natural justice in dismissing the concerned workmanfrom his service and accordingly submitted prayer to pass award rejecting his claim.

4. POINTS TO BE DECIDED

"Whether the action of the management of C. V. Area of BCCL in dismissing Sh. Rabi Manjhi , Ex -U.G. Loader ofBasantimata Colliery from the services of the Company on the only charge of his absence from duty from 16-4-1995 is justified ? If not , to what relief is he entitled ? "

5. FINDING WITH REASONS

Ittranspires from the record that before taking up hearing of this case on merit it was taken into consideration ifdomestic enquiry held against the concerned workman was fair, proper and in accordance with the principle of naturaljustice.

The said issue on preliminary point was disposed of vide order no . 19 dt. 5-9-05 in favour of the management holding that domestic enquiry conducted by the Enquiry Officer was fair, proper and in accordance with the principle ofnaturaljustice.

Now, the point for consideration is if the management have been able to substantiate the charge brought against the concerned workman , and if so , whether there is any scope to review the order of dismissal issued against him as per provision laid down in Section 11 -A of the I.D. Act , During hearing charge sheet issued to the concerned workman for committing misconduct under clause 26: 1: 15 ofthe Certified Standing order was marked as Exht. M-2 .

Clause 26: 1 : 15 speaks " Causing willful damage to work in progress or to the property of the employer " .

It is the specific allegation of the management that the concerned work men developed the habit of remaining unauthorised absence from his duties without permission or information and without justifiable cause . They submitted that in the year 1992 concerned workman put his attendance for 62 days while during 1993 and 1994 he did not put attendance for a single day. In the year 1995 he worked only for 80 days and started absenting from duties w.e.f. 16-4-95 upto 23-8-95 continuously without giving any intimationor taking prior permission from the management. As his period of unauthorised absence was for more than 10 days , a chargesheet on the allegation of committing misconduct under clause 26 : 1 : 15 was issued to him and thereafter, a domestic enquiry was initiated against him.

Onthecontrary the concerned workman in his written statement disclosed that as he was suffering from illness and beyond control of the circumstances he did not get 1114

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

scope to allow his duties though he intimated the matter to the management in due course. He further submitted that management dismissed him from service without issuance ofany charge sheet and also without giving him any notice ofenquiry dismissed him from service.

Considering the enquiry papers marked as Ext.M3 series it transpires clearly that the concerned workmen participated himself in the hearing of enquiry proceedings conducted by the Enquiry Officer and put his L.T.I. in day to day hearing of the proceedings . Thus it is clear that knowing fully well of the charge of misconduct he participated in the hearing of the enquiry proceedings . It is not the case of the concerned workman that no opportunity was given to him to defend his case at the time of hearing. Onthe contrary in course of hearing on preliminary point his representative accepted the fairness of the enquiry. Considering all these aspects it is clear that the allegation which he ventilated against the management that neither he received any charge sheet nor notice of enquiry was issued to him finds no basis.

Itishisspecific contention that owing to his serious illness and due to unavoidable circustances he could not get scope to attend his duty and this matter was duly intimated to the management . It is clear that the concerned workman all through not only remained present in course of hearing of the enquiry proceeding but also have his statement which was duly recorded by the Enquiry Officer. At the time of giving his statement he asserted that owing to his illness he could not attend to his duty and by registered post he gave due intimation to the management . Accordingly burden of proof is on him to establish that actually he was lying ill and that fact of his illness was duly intimated to the management by registered post.

Insupport of his claim before the Enquiry Officer he produced the postal receipt and medical certificate issued by the Doctor . Enquiry report submitted by the Enquiry Officer duringhearing was marked as Ex. M -5 . The Enquiry Officer in his report disclosed about submission of sick certificate by the concerned workman . From the sick certificate it revealed that he was suffering from " Nefritis" . The Enquiry Officer in his report opined that the concerned workman did not report to Colliery hospital for his treatment but did not use a single word if he disbelieved the said sick certificate or not . From the report of the Enquiry Officer it has been further exposed that the concerned workman gave his explanation why he did not attend colliery hospital for his treatment . He disclosed that as blood was coming out with urine he immediately went to the Chamber of Local Doctor for his treatment and when his condition improved he sent information to the management about his sickness . Explanation given by the concerned workman before EnquiryOfficer appears to be cogent . In case ofemergency, forthe protection of his life a workman has every libertyto select his Doctor for his treatment. Accordingly there is no scope to say that concerned workman for his immediate treatment attending the chamber of Local Doctor committed any mischief. From his statement I find that he was a patient of'Nefritis' and for which he could not get scope to attend his duty and secondly he intimated his sickness to the

[PART II--SEC . 3 ( ii) ] management by registered post . Postal receipt which he produced before the Enquiry Officer has supported his claim. There is no whisper on the part of the management if they received such intimation or not . It has also not been claimed by the management that the postal receipt which he produced was manufactured . It has not been denied by the management that the Medical Certificate which he relied on is also a manufactured document

Enquiry Officer in his report did not make any sort of finding that he disbelieved the sick certificate and postal receipt produced by the concerned workman .

He found the concerned workman guilty to the charge taking into consideration that he did not attend colliery hospital for his treatment though there was ample scope of getting specialised treatment there . During hearing management have failed to produce any such Circular that the workman shall not be allowed to get his treatment elsewhere excepting in the hospital of the colliery. I have already discussed above that a workman's right cannot be curtailed on selecting the place of his treatment . Question iswhether in the name of treatment the concerned workman submitted false sick certificate after enjoying unauthorised leave. The Enquiry Officer in his report did not expose any doubt about genuinity of the sick certificate produced by the concerned workman. Therefore , it is clear that he ignored the said sick certificate incoming to his decision that the concerned workman was guiltyto the charge brought against him . Such finding I should say is absolutely arbitrary and violative to the principle of natural justice.

It isspecific allegation of the management that the concerned workman during 1992 put his attendance for 62 dayswhile during 1993 and 1994 he did not put his atternidance for a single day. Though such specific allegation was brought against him management inspite of getting ample opportunity did not produce any paper before the Enquiry Officer to substantiate such claim. It is to be borne in mind that an allegation finds no weight until and unless the same is substantiated by cogent evidence.

As management have failed to establish the fact before EnquiryOfficer in course of hearing of the Enquiry proceeding . I find no scope to take cognizance of such allegation.

It is admitted fact that the concerned workman remained himself absent from duty with effect from 16-4-95 to 23-8-95 . Concerned workman producing his sick certificate clearly explained to Enquiry Officer under which circumstances he was unable to attend his duty. It is seen that management on the ground of committing misconduct under clause 26: 1 : 15 issued charge sheet to the concerned workman. Clause 26: 1 : 15 of the Certified Standing Order speaks:

"Causing wilful damage to work in progress or to the property of the employer. "

Allegation of remaining unauthorised absence by the concerned workman finds no prima facie bearing with the contents ofthis clause i. e. clause 26: 1 : 15 ofthe Certified 1115

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

Standing Order. Therefore burden of proof rests on the management to establish that unauthorised absence ofthe concerned workman caused wilful damage to work in progress or to the property of the employer. It is seen that in course of hearing of the enquiry proceeding on the side of the management three witneses were examined . These witness during their examination failed to produce any material evidence to establish that unauthorised absence ofthe concerned workman caused wilful damage to work in progress or to the property of the employer. It is peculiar to note that the Enquiry Officer after completion of the hearing of enquiry proccedings submitted his report holding the concerned workman guilty to the charge brought against him without making slightest observation that if absence of the concerned workman caused wilful damage to work in progress or to the property of the employer. Before coming to his finding he only observed that the concerned workman avoided to take his treatment being a patient of ' Nefrictis from colliery hospital though there was scope for getting specialised treatment.

Such observation in no circumstances proves the charge brought against the concerned workman under clause 26: 1: 15 of the Certified Standing Order.

Accordingly, after careful consideration of all facts and circumstances I hold that management have lamentably failed to establish the charge brought against the concerned workman. Accordingly, order of dismissal issued against the concerned workman by the management is declared illegal and the same is liable to be set aside .

In the result the following award is rendered:

AWARD

"That the action of the management of C. V. Arca of BCCL in dismissing Sri Rabi Manjhi , Ex - U.G . Loader of Basantimata Colliery from the services of the Company on the only charge of his absence from duty from 16-4-95 is notjustified.

Orderofdismissal issued by the management against the workman named above is declared illegal and hence it is set aside .

131/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1- 06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल- 20012/133/2000- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एस. एस. गुप्ता , अवर सचिव New Delhi the 9th January, 2006 S. O. 486. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 131 / 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court Dhanbad - Il now as shown in the Annexure inthe Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman , which wasreceived by the Central Government on 6-1-06 .

[No. L- 20012/ 133/2000 -IR (C- 1 ) S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT:

Shri B. Biswas , Presiding Officer.

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

REFERENCE NO . 131 OF 2000

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the management ofBarka Sayal M/s. BCCL and their workman.

APPEARANCES :

On the behalf of Workman : Mr. U.P. Sinha . Advocate

On the behalf of employers : Mr. B. M. Prasad, Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Management arce directed to reinstate the concerned work man to his service within three months from the date ofpublication of the award in the Gazette of India.

Concerned workman however will not get any back wagcs."

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer.

नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 486.-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 -11 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या

Industry : Coal .

Dated Dhanbad, the 15th December, 2005 .

AWARD

The Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise ofthe powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d) of the 1.D. Act . , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication Vide their Order No. L - 20012/ 133/2000-1.R. (C- I ), dated, the 27th September, 2000.

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the Management of Laikdih Deep Colliery of M/ s . BCCL in not regularising Sri Ibrahinı Ali as Magazine Clerk is justified ? If not, to what relief is the concerned workman entitled and from what date ? " [PART 11- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] 1116

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

2. Case of the concerned workman according to written statement submitted by the sponsoring union on hisbehalf in brief is as follows :

theMines during shift hours . He was authorised to work as Explosive carrier as per provisions of Coal Mines Regulations , 1957. By virtue of his carrying explosives as the concerned workman gained some experience on the jobs of issue of explosives to the explosive carrier and return of the explosives unused in the Mines the local management authorised him to perform the job of issue and receipt explosives to the explosive carriers during the leave and sick vacancies of explosive issue clcrk or the magazine clerk during a particular shift . Thus the aforesaid authorisation was purely for performing the job of issuc and return of explosives only during temporary vacancies and such job was not full time job of the Magazine clerk . TheMgazine clerk is required to perform various clerical jobsbesides the job of issue and return of explosives . The concerned workman only was entrusted to perform a part ofthejob ofMagazine clerk as and when required . Knowing fully well of this fact the sponsoring union has pressed for his permanent absorption on the job of Magazine clerk.

The sponsoring union submitted that the concerned work man Ibrahim Ali is an employee of Laikdih Deep Colliery. They submitted that being directed by the Agent of the said colliery said workman started working at Colliery Magazine with effect from 17-12-93 and he was entrusted on the job of Issue and Receipt of explosive--a Job which is performed by a Magazine Clerk . They submitted that in that capacity the concerned workman was allowed to work for more than 5 years and during this period he performed duties as such for more than 240 days in a year . They further submitted that after rendering his service as Magazine Clerk for a period of one year he claimed for his regularisation in that capacity but the Management did not consider his such prayer and for which they on behalf of the concerned workman took up the matter in arca level . Management of area level at time oftalk with them though assured to regularise the concerned workman as Magazine Clerk did not keep their words and for which they raised an industrial dispute on behalf of the concerned workman in the year 1998 for conciliation which ultimately resulted reference to this tribunal for adjudication . Accordingly the sponsoring union submitted prayer to pass award directing the management of Laikdih Deep Colliery under Chanch Victoria Area to regularise the services of the concerned workman as Magazine Clerk with effect from 17-12-1993 along with back wages and other consequential benefits .

They disclosed that before any Time rated category worker is put on clerical grade he must pass the selection test conducted by the Selection Committee duly constituted by the competent authority. Thereafter he is required to perform his duties for a certain period as probationer and after satisfactory performance of his duties as probationer he is made permanent by way of confirmation and is regularised on specific grade attached to such post . It has been submitted by the management that as soon as the higher management came to know that the concerned workman was allowed to perform his job of issue and return of explosives on termporary or casual basis by the Agent of the Colliery, in contravention of the cadre scheme and specific direction of the management . he was reverted back to his original post . They disclosed thatthe concerned workman is working as Pump Operator in the mine on time rated job from the year 1998 andhe is no longer working on the post of explosive carrier. Accordingly he does not have any relationship with the Magazine or working on the job of issue and return of explosives under authorisation of the Agent of the Collicry. Accordingly they submitted that claim of the concerned workman for his regularisation in the post of Magazine Clerk finds no basis and for which his prayer is liable to be rejected.

4. POINTS TO BE DECIDED

"Whether the action of the management of Laikdih Deep Colliery of M/ s . BCCL in not regularising Sri Ibrahim Ali as Magazine Clerk is justified? Ifnot, to what relief is the concerned workma entitled and from what date ?"

5. FINDING WITH REASONS

It transpires from the record that sponsoring union with a view to substantiate their claim examined the concerned workman as WW - 1. Management also in support oftheirclaim examined one witness as MW - 1 . WW- 1 during his evidence disclosed that intially he got his employment as General Mazdoor under Cat. 1 at Laikdih Deep Collicry under the management . One year after his service as General Mazdoor he was posted as Explosive carrier in the same 3. Management on the contrary after filing written statement cum rejoinder have denied all the claims and allegations which the sponsoring union asserted in the written statement submitted on behalf of the concerned workman . They submitted that after introduction ofcadre scheme duly formulated by JBCCI there is no scope of regularisation of any time rated or piece rated worker on any clerical post , as because , all workmen possessing requisite qualifications and experience are cligible for consideration of clerical post on the basis of decision made by Selection Committee constituted for selection of candidates in clerical cadre . They submitted further that the management also has issued a circular directing all the area management not to divert any picce rated or time rated worker into clerical job and if any person was allowed to work in that capacity by the local management after 1-7-92 such worker should be reverted to his original job taking into consideration that no one could claim regularisation by virtue of any authorisation obtained from local management. They disclosed that according to the provision of cadre scheme and also as per the circular of the management a workman belonging to Time rated or picce rated group cannot claim for his regularisation on clerical post by virtue of any authorisation granted to him by any officer of the local management permitting him to work on any clerical job . It has been asserted by the management that the concerned workman Ibrahim Ali was inthe post of Explosive carrier in time rated category and he was required to carry explosive from the magazine to

1-4 1 1-117 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

colliery. This witness disclosed that he is matriculate and workman was an explosive carrier in time rated Cat . II . NCWA also has clearly pointed out how a clerk in Clerical Grade is appointed. It is the specific claim of the management that in case of selection of any departmental candidate in the post of clerk due processes are followed for his selection . However, in case of exigency and also in case of leave and sick vacancy. Manager of the Colliery absolutely for a limited period may allow any departmental candidate to work in the post of clerk but i.e. on absolutely temporary measure . In this connection management relied on a circular issued by the H.Q. whereby it has been made anembargo for allowing any Piece rated/Time rated worker to perform any job in monthly rated category. The said circular according to the management was issued in the ycar 1992. It is seen that at the relevant time i.e. during 1993 thework in the Magazine department used to be carried on three shifts and Magazine clerks in cach shift were posted separately. MW - 1 during his evidence admitted that at the relevant time Birendra Pandey, Nitai Deogharia were Magazine clerks posted in B shift under the management in the explosive section . But as they were transferred the said two posts remained vacant . The contention of the sponsoring union is that the local management authorised the concerned workman to work as Magazine clerk in the said vacant post , in the year 1993 and in that capacity he was allowed to work till 1998 and thereafter he was transferred from Magazine section to the Mine as Pump Operator. It is the specific allegation of the sponsoring union that management illegally and arbitrarily refused to regularise the concerned workman in the post of clerk in the post of Clcrical Grade - III inspite of performing his duties asMagazine clerk for more than 240 days in each year during the period in question . They further submitted that for regularisation of the concerned workman in the post of Magazine clerk the concerned workman submitted representation to the management but to no effect . The matter in'issue was also taken up for discussion at arca level between the union and the Management and though management assured to consider the case of the concerned workman did nothing . In support of this claim the sponsoring union relied on the Minutes of the meeting marked as Ext. M- 5 and M - 5/ 1 .

as part of his duty he used to collect explosive from the magazine and also used to carry the same to appropriate place for use . This witness further disclosed that at that relevant time three clerks were posted in the magazine department and subsequently out ofthree clerks two clerks weretransferred from magazine department and the said two posts of clerk were not filled up and for which the same remained vacant. Thereafter he disclosed that Manager of the said colliery issued letters time to time to work as clerk in the magazine department. The letters issued by the Manager in favour of the concerned workman to carry on the works of Magazine clerk in course of evidence were marked as Ext. W- 1 to W- 3 and Ext. W- 4 to W -4/2 . This witness disclosed that from 1993 to 1998 he worked in the magazine department under written direction of the Manager continuously and as part of his duty he used to issue explosive as per requisition and used to make note of issuance of magazine in the register and also used to carry on all other works there . Accordingly as this witness rendered the services of the magazine clerk continuously for years together he submitted representation to the management for his regularisation as Magazine clerk. But Management did not consider his prayer and for which he raised an industrial dispute through the sponsoring union for his regularisation as Magazine clerk . He further disclosed that over his regularisation as Magazine clerk there was a joint meeting between the union and the management at arca level and the minutes of the meeting during his evidence was marked as Ext. W-5 and W -5/ 1 . On the contrary MW - 1 during his evidence admitting the fact that the concerned workman was and explosive carrier disclosed that by letter dated 17-12-1993 issued by the Manager. Laikdih Deep Colliery the concerned workman was deputed to work in the section for issuance and receipt ofthe explosives. This witness disclosed that part of duty ofMagazine clerk is to issue explosives and also to receive explosives and as per Mines Act . Manager is competentto authorise any worker either to issue explosives or to recieve explosives . He further adınitted that some authorisation letters time to time were issued in favour of the concerned workman by the Manager to discharge his duties for issue and receipt of explosives in the Magazine departinent . He further categorically denied the fact that the concerned workman from 1993 to 1994 worked in the Magazine department continuously as clerk . This witness further disclosed that the post of explosive carrier comes under Cat . II while the post of clerk comes in Clerical Grade - 111 . The explosive carrier is time rated while the post of clerk is monthly rated. Selection Committee is entrusted to select departmental candidate for the post of clerk after maintaining necessary process . He further disclosed that asper circular of the H.Q. if any local arrangement is made by virtue ofwhich a workman of piece rated or time rated is deputed to work in clerical grade he shall be reverted back to his original post . Accordingly this witness disclosed that the claim of the concerned workman is not justificd .

The office order marked as Ext . W- 1 dated 17-12-93 issued by the Manager. Laikdih Deep Colliery speaks that the concerned workman who was explosive carrier was entrusted in the job of issue and receipt of explosives for Laikdih Deep Colliery from Chanch Magazine considering the exigencies and gravity of work . The said order was valid from 17-12-93 to 16-2-94 or till posting of Magazine clerk at Laikdih Deep Colliery whichever is earlier . Prior to entrusting this job to the concerned worknian one Paresh Bouri was entrusted to carry on the said job but by issuing ofthis Office Order his authorisation to issuc and receipt of explosives was terminated. Thereafter on 21-2-1994 similar order was issued by the Agent/Manager in favour of the concerned workman and that order was vaild upto 210-4-1994 or till posting of Magazine clerk at Laikdih Deep Colliery whichever is carlier . This order during evidence of WW- 1 was marked as Ext . W - 2 . Therefore considering the Office Orders Ext . W - 1 and W - 2 that from 17-12-93 to Considering the evidence of WW - 1 and MW - 1 and also considering the facts disclosed in the pleadings of both sides there is no dispute to hold that the concerned

194 G1/06-25 1118

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II - SEC. 3 ( ii )] 20-4-94 the concerned workman was entrusted to discharge his duties in the job of receipt and issue of explosives for Laikdih Deep Colliery from Chanch Magazine . Thereafter byOffice order marked as Ext . W- 3 dt 12-9-94 the Agent , Laikdih Deep Colliery again entrusted the concerned workman in the job of receipt and issue for explosives for Laikdih Deep Colliery from Chanch Magazine and that order came into effect from 12-9-94 to 11-11-94 or till posting of Magazine clerk at Laikdih Deep Collicry whichever is carlier. The office letter dt . 14-11-1994 marked as Ext. W - 4 speaks that one Shri Dhananjoy Dubcy, General Mazdoor was authorised to work in Colliery Magazine for issue of explosives and to maintain record from 15-11-94 till the concerned workman resumes his normal duty as he went on leave . The Office Order marked as Ext . W- 4/ 1 dt . 7/28-12-1994 show that further authorisation was issued in favour of the concerned workman by the Agent, Laikdih Deep Colliery in the job of issue and receipt of explosives for Laikdih Deep Colliery from Chanch Magazine considering the exigencies and gravity of the job for a period from 28-12-94 to 6-2-95 . Again by Office Order dt . 26/1-7/8-1996 marked as Ext. W -4/2 the Agent of the same colliery authorised the concerned workman and four other workmen to issue and receive and handling the explosives and collecting the explosives from Chanch Magazine for Laikdih Deep Colliery. Therefore considering these office orders issued by the Agent/ Manager of Laikdih Deep Colliery it is clear that the concerned workman was entrusted time to time in the job of issue and receipt of explosives for Laikdih Deep colliery from Chance Magazine . It is seen that over regularisation of the concerned workman in the post of clerk in clerical grade the sponsoring union had a meeting with the management of Chanch Victoria area on two occasion i.c. in the year 1995 and 1996. The minutes of meeting during evidence of the concerned workman were marked as Ext . W-5 and W-5/ 1 . In the inceting held on 15-7-95 ( Ext . W- 5 / 1 ) it was resolved after discussion that the case of the concerned workman and another workman from time rated to monthly rated will be examined and necessary action will be taken . Till such time the workmen will not be disturbed . In the minutes of the meeting held on 11-7-1996 it was resolved that the management agreed that the details about the concerned work man will be sent to CMD for his perusal .

It is seen that thereafter concerned workman was transferred from magazine departinent to the mines as Pump Operator and since 1998 he is discharging his duties as PumpOperator.

claim for his regularisation as clerk in Clerical Grade. III . The Office Order marked as Ext. W - 1 to W-4/ 1 have exposed very clearly that the concerned workman was entrusted to perform a piccemeal nature ofjob i.c. he was entrusted in the job of issue and receipt of explosives . These orders are absolutely silent if the concerned workman was allowedto perform his duries as Magazine Clerk . WW - 1 during his evidence disclosed that not only he was engaged in the job of issue and receipt of explosive but also he had to perform thejob as Magazine clerk as the post of Magazine clerks fell vacant there four years together . MW - 1 during his evidence admitted the fact of falling vacant of two posts ofMagazine Clerk in the magazine departinent . Therefore . there is no dispute to hold that two post of Magazine Clerk remained vacant in the magazine departntent of Laikdih Deep Colliery. As issue and receipt of explosives is a part job of magazine clerk and as the post of magazine clerk remained vacant there was no way out on the part of the management to entrusted any workman in the job of issue and receipt of explosive for operation of the Mine. However, entrustment of such specific job to any worker does not confer any right to discharge the duties of Magazine Clerk. Performance of specific job does not entrust workman to get his fulfledged claim over the post in question . The office orders which have been referred to above exposed clearly that the concerned workman was entrusted by Managers /Agent to perform a particular job and not the entire job of Magazine Clerk . Therefore . burden of proof rests on the sponsoring union to establish that fulfledged responsibility was vested on the concerned workman to work as Magazine Clerk . In course of hearing the sponsoring union has failed to produce an iota of evidence based on which there is scope to uphold the contention of the concerned workman that from 1993 to 1996 he discharged all the duties as Magazine clerk . The minutes of the meeting which have been referred to above also do not specify that the concerned workman has performed thejob ofMagazine clerk and for which his regularisation in the said post was deserving . Pending decision of the appropriate authority the concerned workman only was allowed to perform his duties in the job of issue and receipt of explosives in view of Office Orders issued by the Magnager / Agent of Laikdih Deep Colliery. Therefore . considering all the documents on record I have failed to find out any such cogent material based on which there is scope to draw conclusion that the concerned workman was authorised to discharge his duties as Magazine clerk . Performance of a part of job of Magazine clerk cannot ipsofacto justified any claim to get his regularisation as Magazine clerk . Therefore , on careful consideration of all the materials on record that the claim of the sponsoring union for regularisation of the concerned workman in the post of Magazine clerk finds no basis and for which the concerned workman is not entitled to get any relief. In the result, the following Award is rendered .

" The action of the managinent of Laikdih Deep Colliery of M/ s . BCCL in not regularising Sri Ibrahiın Ali as Magazine clerk is justified. Consequently, the concerned workman is not entitled to get any relief. "

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer Now it has to be taken into consideration how far the claim of the concerned workman stands on cogent footing for his regularisation as Magazine clerk. It is the specific claim of the management that issue and receipt of explosives in the magazine are not the only duties of Magazine clerk. It is a part of job which a Magazine clerk as part of his duty has to perform along with other jobs including clerical job . Disclosing this fact management submitted that as the concerned workman only was entrusted in the job of issue and receipt of explosives in the Magazine department which is a part job he cannot [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 487.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार भा.को.को. लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 303/ 99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

1119

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4 , 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

ghutno mey chot khaney par karya key liya upaukht na mantey hue iis adhar par unkey ashrit ko naukri na diya jana uchit evam naya sangat hai ? yadi nahi to sambadhit karmkar athaba unkey ashrit kis rahat key patra hai?"

2. The case of concerned workman according to Written Statement submitted by the sponsoring union on behalf ofthe concerned workman in brief is as follows :-

[सं. एल-20012/32/99- आईआर( सी-1 ) ]

एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 9th January, 2006 S.O. 487.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 303/ 99) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court Dhanbad II now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman, which was received by the Central Governrnent on 6-1-2006.

[No. L- 20012/ 32/99 - IR( C -I ) ] S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

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

PRESENT

Shri B. Biswas, Presiding Officer .

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

REFERENCE NO . 303 OF 1999

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the management of M/ s . BCCL and theirworkman.

APPEARANCES

On the behalf of the workman : Mr. B.N. Singh , Authorised Representative.

Onthe behalf of the employer: Mr. D. K. Verma, Advocate .

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal .

Dated, Dhanbad , the 15th December , 2005 .

AWARD

The Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise ofthe powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 20012/32/ 99 - IR ( C - I ) , dated the 24th August , 1999 .

SCHEDULE

"Kya B.C.C.L Kusunda Kshetra IV key pravandh tantra dwara Shri Vasant Yadav ko unkey dono The sponsoring union submitted that the concerned workman Vasant Yadav was underground trammer at East Busseriya Colliery. They submitted that while the concerned workman was on duty he met an accident on 21-9-95 in the underground and for the said accident his both knees were awefully damaged . He was rernoved to hospital of the management for his treatment and remained under treatment for a long period but he did not recover fully and for which he became unable to move and sit freely. As a result he became disabled and was compelled to move with the help of cratch. They alleged that though the concerned workman lost his free movement , the Project Officer ofEast Busseriya Colliery vide letter No. 2929/95 dt. 1-11-96 deputed hirn to work on the surface based on the medical report bearing No. 41/4604 dt. 16-10-96 . They submitted further that as the concerned workman was not in a position to move normally it was not possible on his part to discharge duties on the surface and for which he submitted representation to the management to declare him medically unfit and to provide employment to his dependent as per provision of NCWA. So that he could look after him and his family members. But the managernent did not pay any heed to his such prayer . As a result he was compelled to raise industrial dispute in the year 1997 through the sponsoring union . During hearing of the conciliation proceeding ALC ( C ) also made his comment to asking the management to declare the concerned workman medically unfit and to provide employment to his dependent son in lieu him but that approach did not yield anyresult.

Under such circumstance the concerned workman submitted prayer before the Mcdical Board of the State Government for assessment of his disability/incapacity during pendency of the hearing of conciliation proceeding. In view of his such prayer the Medical Board of the Govt . examined him and declared him disabled and submitted its report dt . 23-2-98 in the said report he was declared physically handicapped. In spite of that medical report management did not give any importance to it and also did not consider necessary to declare him medically unfit for the purpose of giving employment to his dependent son despite repeated advice made by the ALC ( C) . Dhanbad during hearing ofthe conciliation proceeding . Ultimately as the conciliation proceeding ended in failure present reference was initiated by the Govt. of India , Ministry of Labour for adjudication . Concerned workman accordingly submitted prayer to pass award directing the management to declare him medically unfit for work sustaining injury in his both knees and also to provide employment to his dependent son on compassionate ground as per provision ofNCWA.

[PART 11- SEC. 3 (ii ) | 1120

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

3. Management on the contrary after filing Written Statement -cum - rejoinder have denied all the claims and allegation which the sponsoring union asserted in their Written Statement submitted on behalf of the concerned workman. They submitted that the concerned workman Basant Yadav while was engaged as underground trammer at East Busseriya Colliery he met an accident on 21-9-95 . They submitted that the Disability Board of the Central Hospital assessed his disability to the extent of 10% and declared the concerned workman fit for his service job . Accordingly management advised him for surface job but he did not join to his duty and started remaining himself absent from duty. They submitted that on request of the concerned workman he was again sent to the Apex Medical Board for his further medical examination and also to review the previous report . Apex Medical Board reviewed his case and declared him fit for surface duty vide their report dt . 12-10-96. Accordingly they submitted that the demand of the concerned workman for declaring him unfit is neither legal nor justified and for which his claim for employment on compassionate ground to his dependent son as per NCWA finds no basis . Accordingly management submitted prayer to pass Awará rejecting the claim of the concerned workman.

4. POINTS TO BE DECIDED

"Kya B.C.C.L Kusunda Kshetra IV key pravandh tantra dwara Shri Vasant Yadav ko unkey dono ghutne mey chot khaney par karya key liya upaukt na mantey is adhar par unkcy ashrit ko naukri na diya jana uchit evam naya sangat hai ? yadi nahi to sambadhit karmkar athaba unkey ashrit kis rahat key patra hai?"

5. FINDING WITH REASONS

his treatment during his evidence were as Ext . W - 2 and W- 2/1. This withness disclosed that he got his superannuation from his service from the month ofApril , 1999 ignoring his claim. MW- 1 in course of his evidence admitting the fact of the accident of the concerned workman as stated by him submitted that after the said accident not only proper treatment was provided to him at Company's Hospital but also he was paid wages during the period of his treatment . He further admitted that for his disablement to the extent of 10% management paid compensation to him as per provision of law. He admitted that the concerned workman submitted application for his medical test by the Apex MedicalBoard for his further medical examination relating to his fitness . In view of his prayer he was again medically examined by the Medical Officers of Apex Medical Board and he was declared physically fit to work . Accordingly in view ofthat report management provided him work on the surface. Subsequently he got his superannuation from service and accordingly this witness disclosed that claim made by the concerned workman was not justified. MW- 2 during his evidence corroborated the evidence of MW- 1 . This witness in addition further disclosed that for assessment of disability of the concerned workman resulted out of the said accident he was forwarded to Central Hospital , Dhanbad for his appearance before the Medical Board to assess the extent of his disability sustained by him . The said Medical Board examined him and submitted report to the effect that he sustained 10% permanent disability and for which they recommended surface job to him . On the basis of that recommendation he was provided the surface job but instead of joining his duty he again submitted representation for his further medical examination by the Apex Medical Board . In view of that representation and as the concerned workman did not join to his duty inspite of his duty allotted to him on the surface in view of the report submitted by the Medical Board. Central Hospital, Dhanbad a noteshect was prepared and thereafter approved by the Director of Personnel , concerned workman again was sent to the Apex Medical Board for his further medical examination . The notesheet which was prepared in that regard marked as Ext . M - 2 . The concerned workman was examined by the said Board and supported the report submittedby the Medical Board , Central Hospital , Dhanbad relating to the extent of disability sustained by him . The report during evidence of this witness was marked as Ext. M- 3 . Thereafter management again issued letter to the concerned workman directing him tojoin his duty (Ext . M- 5). This witness disclosed that as the concerned workman was declared physically disabled to the extent of 10% and as he was not declared disabled permanently by the Medical Board there was no scope to declare him medically unfit and for which question of providing employment to his dependent son on compassionate ground could not be considered . Now considering the evidence of the workman's witness and management witness and also considering the facts disclosed in the pleadings of both sides there is no dispute to hold that the concerned workman was underground Trammer at East Busseriya Colliery. It is admitted fact that while the concerned workman was on duty in the underground he met an accident on 21-9-95 and as a result of which he sustained It transpires from the record that the sponsoring Union with a view to substantiate their claim examined the concerned workınan as WW - 1 . Management also in support oftheir claim examined two witness as MW- 1 and MW- 2 . WW- 1 during his evidence disclosed that he got his appointment at East Busscriya Collicry as Trammer and his due date for super- annuation was in the year 1999. He submitted that on 21-9-95 while he was on duty he met an accident and as a result of which he sustained scrious fractured injury in his leg . Immediately after that accident he was removed to East Busseriya Hospital for his treatment and from that hospital for his further treatment he was removed to Central Hospital , Dhanbad. He disclosed that for his treatment he remained in the hospital of the management as indoor patient for one year. He submitted thatas a result of that accident he became a handicapped person and inspite of getting knowledge of his physical condition management placed him for duty on the surface which was not possible for him to perform . He requested the management to sent him to the Medical Board for declaration ofhis medical unfitness . But as the management did not take any step he attended Civil Hospital , Dhanbad and after examination the Medical Officers of the said Hospital issued a certificate assessing 45% of his physical disability. The said medical certificate during his evidence was marked as Ext . W - 1 . Other medical papers relatingto [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

serious injuries to his leg. Immediately he was taken to local colleiry hospital for his treatment and thereafter he was transferred to Central Hospital , Dhanbad for his treatment . It transferred to Central Hospital , Dhanbad for his treatment. It transpires further that in connection with his treatment the concerned workman had to remain in the said hospital for about one year as an indoor patient . The contention of the management is that during the period of his treatment in the hospital the concerned workman was not noly paid wages under injury on duty but also paid compensation for the said accident. It is admitted fact that after the said accident Medical Board of Central Hospital , Dhanbad assessed the physical disability of the concerned workman to the extent of 10 % and for which they recommended to provided him surface job . On the contrary the contention of the workman is that for the said accident his movement was totally restricted and he could not move without the help of the crutch. He further disclosed that when his physical condition came to such position he was seriously aggrieved with the report of the Medical Board for assessment of his disability to the extent of 10 % . He further disclosed that with such physical disability was not possible on his part to work even on the surface as directed by the management . Accordingly he submitted prayer for sending him again to the Apex Medical Board for declaration that he was medically unfit and simulteniously he claimed for employment of his dependent son on compassionate ground as per provision of NCWA . It is seen that in response to that prayer of concerned workman for his further medical examination by the Apex Medical Board a notesheet was prepared marked as Ext. M-2and with the approval of the Director of Personnel he was again sent to Apex Medical Board for his medical examination. It is seen that the Apex Medical Board after examination opined as follows: --

"On examination it is found that Shri Basant Yadav, UG Trammer of East Basuriya Colliery is having moderate restricted movements of the left knee which is not causing any restriction in his errect position, There is no restriction of movement in right Knee .

The members of the medical Board Committee recommended him fit for surface job on 12-10-96 . The committee still adheres to its previous decision for hisfitness for surface job.

It is pertinent to mention here that this surface job is not necessarily the job of a surface trammer . " This report was signed by as many as 5 senior Medical Officers who were members of the said Board, After that report the concerned Workman was again directed to join his duty on the surface but he did not comply the order of the management . As such the concerned workman rema ined absent till the date of his superannuation . On the contrary the concerned workman being aggrived by the decision of the Apex Medical Board appeared before the Goverment Hospital at Dhanbad where he was examined by a team of three Doctors and after examination they opined that the concerned workman sustained 45% permanent disability. The report of the Govt . Hospital during evidence of concerned workman was

1121

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/ माघ 15, 1927

marked as Ext. W- 1 . While the medical Board ofthe Govt . Hospital Dhanbad examined the concerned workman on 23-2-98, the Medical Board of the Management examined the concerned workman for assessment of his permanent disability on 14-10-96 . The Apex Medical Board on the contrary examined the concerned workman on 1-3-1997 i.e. about one year after his examination by the Apex Medical board the concerned workman was examined by the Doctorsof theGovt . Hospital at Dhanbal. It is really curious to note that while two Medical Boards of the Management after examination of the concerned workman opined that the concerned workman sustained 10 % disability, the Medical Officers of the Govt . Hospital , Dhanbad assessed that he sustained 45% physical disability. But the Doctors of the Government Hospital did not point out actually how they came to the conclusion that the concerned workman sustained 45% physical disability. Whatever may be the facts itis clear that the concerned workman was physically handicapped . Now the question which come in whether for such physical handicappedness the concerned workman was permanently disabled to perform any job or not ?

Itis admitted fact that the concerned workman submitted application for declaring him medically unfit being a permanent disabled person and also to provide employment to his dependent son on compossionate ground, As per clause 9-3-1 of NCWA - V employment would be provided to one dependant of workers who are disable permanently and also those who die while in Service. Clause 9.4.0 of NC WA- V speaks as follows : --

Clause 9.4.0 - Employment to one dependant of a workmanwho is permanently disabled in his place.

(i ) The disablement of the worker concerned should arise from injury or disease , be of a permanent nature resulting into loss of employment and it should be so certified by the Coal company concerned .

Therefore , according to this clause two conditions are required to be fulfiled. The first condition is that the disability which a worker sustained should be in permanent in nature an secondly that disability resulted loss of employment . Here in the instant case there is no dispute to hold that as a result of the said accident the concerned workman sustained permanent disability to certain extent butthe degree of that disability was not such which resulted into loss of his employment . It transpires clearly from the report of the Apex Medical Board that the disability sustained by the concerned workman as does not invite loss of employment he may be provided job on the surfacc. It is clear that it was not possible on the part of the Coal Company to certify for employment to the son of the dependent in view of claim made by the concerned workman . No doubt , the concerned workman relied on the Medical report issued by the Government Hospital at Dhandad. That report undorbtedly declared the concerned workman disabled to the extent of 45 % and he was declared handicapped but there is not cartification to that effect that due to physical disability the concerned workman was not capable to work . Therefore , there is no scope to draw any conclusion based on the report of the Govt , hospital if the concerned workman was absolutely incapable to work .

1122

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

As per NCWA, in view of my discussion above employment to the dependant son only can be provided if the worker loses his service for his disablement arising out of injury. Here it is seen that the concerned workman did not sustain to such extent of permanent disability which restrained him permanently to work . Until and unless this fact is established the provision for employment to dependant son as per Clause 9.3 ( 1 ) does not attract . Accordingly in view of the facts and circumstances discussed above the claim of the concerned workman for employment of this dependant son on compassionate ground is not sustainable as per provision of NC WA, and for which he is not entitled to get any relief. In the result , the following Award is rendered:

"The management of Kusunda Area No. VI of BCCL in finding Shri . Basant Yadav, fit for work after sustaining injury by him in his both knees and on the basis of the same denying employment to his dependent is proper and justified . Consequently the concerned workman is not entitled to get any relief. "

B. BISWAS, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 488.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार भा.को.को. लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 45/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं ० एल-20012/409/97- आईआर( सी-1 ) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi the, 9th January, 2006 S.O. 488. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government here by publishes the award ( Ref. No.45/ 99) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court Dhanbad II now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-06 .

[No. L- 20012/409/97 - IR( C- I ) ] S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO . 2) DHANBAD .

PRESENT

Shri B. Biswas ,

PresidingOfficer .

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

REFERENCE NO . 45 OF 1999

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

Employers in relation to the

management of Patherdih Coal Washery of M / s . BCCL and theirworkman .

APPEARANCES

Onthe behalf of the workman : Mr. K. Chakravorty &Mr. D. Mukherji , Ld . Advocates Onthe behalf of the employer : Mr. D. K. Verma, Ld . Advocates .

State : Jharkhand

Industry Coal .

Dated, Dhanbad, the 15th December , 2005 .

AWARD

The Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour, in exercise ofthe powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d ) of the I.D. Act . , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-20012/409/ 97- I.R . (C- I ), dated, the 18th August , 1999 .

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Patherdih Coal Washery of M /s . BCCL in terminating the services of Sri Kanhai Rewani , an unskilled workman , with effect from 11-2-74 on the ground of absence from duty; whereas the concerned workman remained under the treatment of Mahadevi Birla T.B. Sanitorium , Ranchi , with effect from 9-3-73 as per Company'sMedical Board ' recommendations is legal and justified ? And whether the action of the management in not providing employment to the dependant of Kanhai Rewani is legal and justified? If not , to what relief the dependant is entitled ? " 2. The case of sponsoring union according to written statement submitted by them in brief is as foflows:

The sponsoring union submitted that Kanhai Rewani was a permanent unskilled workman of Patherdih Coal Washery. During the period of his service he fell ill from T.B. and was remained under treatment of Colliery Doctors butas he was not cured , he was referred to Mahadevi Birla T.B. Sanitorium , Ranchi by the Management for his better treatment . They submitted that while he was under treatment there management discharged him from his service on the alleged ground of absence from duty illegally and arbitrarily taking anti labour policy.

They alleged that said termination of his service with out assigning any reason and without affording any opportunity to defend himself was ultere violation of the provision of Standing Orders applicable to the empolyces of the management . They disclosed that the hospital authority also discharged him from hospital conscquent to his discharge from service by the management and as a result of which for want of treatment he died .

They alleged that action of the management of dismissing the concerned workman from service on the alleged ground of absence from duty and the action of the भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

management in not providing employment to his dependant was not only illegal and arbitrary but also it violated the principle of natural justice.

They submitted that the dependant of the deceased worker submitted several representations to the management for providing employment on compassionate ground but such appeal was not adheared to and for which an Industrial Dispute was raised for conciliation which ultimately resulted reference to this Tribunal for abjudication.

Accordingly, the sponsoring union submitted prayer to pass award declaring that termination of Kanhai Rewani from his service was illegal and arbitrary with direction to the management to provide employment to the dependant ofthe deceased worker Kanhai Rewani with retrospective effect along with all arrears of wages and other con- sequential reliefs .

3. Management after filing written statement cum rejoinder have denied all the claims and allegations which the sponsoring union asserted in the written statement .

They submitted that no Industrial disputé can be raised by the sponsoring union on behalf of the deceased worker over his termination of service in the year 1996 , who diedmore than 20 years back . Similarly the sponsoring union can not claim employment of the dependant of the deceased worker after a lapse of more than 20 years on compassionate ground when the said deceased worker was discharged from his service .

They submitted that deceased worker Kanhai Rewani was suffering from advanced stage of T.B. and became medically unfit to perform his duties . As per condition of employment the service of a workman could be terminated ifhe becomes medically unfit to perform his duties . They disclosed that local management not only arranged for his proper treatment by the colliery Doctors but also placed him at Mahadevi Birla T.B. Sanitorium , Ranchi for his specialised treatment and for such treatment he remained there for more than a year and paid him all benefits of sickness but when it was observed that there was no scope for his case and there was no chance of his future employment they compelled to terminate him from his service as per the conditions of his employment viewing thatsaid termination was legal and bona fide.

They further submitted that providing employment to the dependant is not a right but a discretion of the management to consider each case on its merit subject to availability ofvacancy at that particular time and the existing situation in the industry. In the year 1974 there was no provision in Wage Board recommendations which could be implemented . They disclosed that in the instant case son of Late Kanhai Rewani was child and there was no scope for his employment and no compassionate ground exists in the year 1996 when he demanded for his employment.

Accordingly management submitted that based on state demand the sponsoring union is not entitled to get any relief and for which their claim is liable to be rejected.

1123 4. POINT TO BE DECIDED

"Whether the action of the management of Patherdih CoalWashery of M/ s . BCCL in terminating the services of Sri Kanhai Rewani , an unskilled workman, with effect from 11-2-74 on the ground of absence from duty; whereas the concerned workman remained under the treatment of Mahadevi Birla T.B. Sanitorium , Ranchi , with effect from 9-3-73 as per Company'sMedical Board's recommendations is legal and justified ? And whether the action of the management in not providing employment to the dependant ofKanhai Rewani is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the dependant is entitled? " 5. FINDING WITH REASONS

Ittranspires from the record that sponsoring union with aview to substantiate their claim examined Vijay Rewani son of the deceased worker i.c. Kanhai Rewani as W. W.I. Management also in support of their claim examined one witnesses M.W.1.

Considering the facts disclosed in the pleadings of both sides and also considering evidence of W. W.I there is no dispute to hold that deceased worker Kanhai Rewani was a permanent unskilled worker. It is admitted fact that for a considerable period he was suffering from T.B. and during last phase of his life he was placed at Mahadevi Birla T.B. Sanitorium, Ranchi for his better treatment . The said workman died on 15-3-75 and at that time W. W.li.c. son of Kanhai Rewani was only six months old. This witness during his evidence disclosed that his father was under treatment at Mahadevi Birla T.B. Sanitorium for about one ycar and after recovery when he came to his place of work with a view to resume his duty management declaring medically unfit terminated him from his service . Thereafter. widow of the deceased worker submitted application for her employment but that was not considered taking the plea that no female could be employed in the Washery. This witness disclosed that after attaining majority he submitted application for his employment on compassionate ground but that too was rejected by the management .

He alleged that management illegally terminated his father from service taking the ground of medically unfit though he recovered fully from his ailment and in support of his claim he relied on his father's discharge certificate issued by Mahadevi Birla T.B. Sanitorium , Ranchi (Exht. W.1 . ) M. W.I on the contrary during his evidence disclosed thatthe service of the concerned workman was terminated on the ground of his ill health by letter dtd . 6-5-74 (Exht . M. I). He disclosed that at the relevant time there was no provision for providing employment to the dependant of any workman on compassionate ground . He further submitted that no dependant of the deceased workman also submitted any application for employment on compassionate ground. Though he disclosed that fact, during his cross examination admitted that widow of the concerned workman i.e. Kanhai Rewani submitted application for her employment but her said prayer was not considered on the ground that there was contract between 1124

[ PART 11-SEC. 3 (ii ) | THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/ MAGHA 15 , 1927

management and the said workman to the effect that no employment would be given to his dependant in case of his removal from service . This witness during his cross examination disclosed that upto 1989 Patherdih Washery was under management of Hindusthan Steel Ltd. and it was taken over by the present management in the year 1983. This witness further admitted that the said workman was removed from lús service while he was under treatment atMahadevi Birla T.B. Sanitorium Ranchi .

more than fifteen months and inspite of his remaining under treatment for such a long period he did not show any sign of his improvement. Therefore this report definitely will speaks gravity of his ailment . It can be safely presumed that it was at all possible for a patient of such nature to resume his duty particularly when he was not at all declared fitby the Doctor and when it was cautioned by the Doctor to the effect . " Since he is positive , careful disposal of sputum is essential . "

Accordingly the fact which his son i.e. W.W.I disclosed during his evidence finds no basis at all to the effect that " after his recovery he came to place of work with a view to resume his duty but as he declared medically unfitby the management his service was terminated " . He was terminated from his service with effect from 11-2-74 by letter issued by the management dt 6 /7-3-74 while he was verymuch admitted in the said Sanitorium .

From the evidence of M. W.1, therefore , it transpires that Kanhai Rewani was terminated from his service w.e.f. 11-2-74 while he was under treatment at Mahadevi Birla T.B. Sanitorium and his widow submitted application in the year 1975 for her employment on compassionate ground. Further it transpires that at the relevant time management of Patherdih Washery was under control of Hindusthan SteelLtd. and there was no provision at that time to provide any employment on compassionate ground.

The letter of termination marked as Exht . M. I issued by the managernent speaks as follows . " The service of Kanhai Rewani U.G. U is hereby terminated w.e. f. 11-2-74 on account of continued absence from duty beyond 18 months on extra - ordinary leave " . This letter was issued by Washery Manager of Hindusthan Steel Ltd. , Patherdih Washery. Therefore , it goes beyond saying that at the relevant time present management i.c. BCCL was not the owner of the said Washery.

From the letter of termination it transpires that without assigning ground excepting the ground of his absence from duty beyond 18 months on extra - ordinary leave said workman was terminated from his service . It was absolutely within knowledge of the management that he was acute patient of T. B. and was under treatment at Mahadevi Birla T.B. Sanitorium at Ranchi . They had the scope to consider his medical report before issuing such letter but the crstwhile owner did not consider necessary to do so. Concerned workman was discharged from the said Sanatorium on 24-6-74 with advice as follows " The patient isbeing discharged on his request and written application . Inspite of our best possible treatment , he is not showing improvement clinically and raidologically. Since he is positive , careful disposal of sputum is essential . "

out: Therefore, from this advice two aspects have come

(1) That he was dischargedfrom the said Sanitorium on his request and written application . Therefore it is not the fact that Saniotrium Authority discharged him as he was removed from his service .

(ii) That he did not respond to best possible treatment and for which there was no sign of his improvement either clinically or raidologically.

It has been agitated by the sponsoring union that the management illegally terminated the service of the concerned workman without giving him any opportunity to defend his case and accordingly raised Industrial Dispute 21 years after his death . It is seen that the said workman was discharged from the Sanitoriuı on his on prayer as he did not respond to his treatment clinically and radiologically. Moreover, he was a positive patient and for which in the discharge certificate Doctor advised careful disposal of his sputum. When his condition is of such scrious in nature his presence in the working place would have endangered the health of other workman as he was suffering from serious contageous discase . According to management concerned workman was an extra - ordinary leave for more than one and half ycars for his treatment but as there was no sign of his recovery they terminated his service. No medical paper is forthcoming before this Tribunal in course of hearing to show that the said workman was recovered from his ailment and declared medically fit to resume his duty. It is admitted fact that he died in the year 1975. Therefore , ifhis termination was illegal he could have easily raised Industrial dispute challenging his illegal termination from service but he did not do so . After his death his widow submitted representation to the management for her employinent but at that time she also had the scope to raise Industrial Dispute challenging illegal termination of service of her husband but she did not consider to do so . Therefore , neither the said workman nor hiswidow raised any such dispute at that relevant time . Even the widow of that workman did not raise any Industrial Dispute while her prayer for employment on compassionate ground was not considered by the erstwhile owner . Therefore , after a lapse of 21 years the Industrial Dispute which was raised by the sponsoring union suo moto challenging illegal termination of the said work man without assigning any sufficient cause for delay in raising such dispute is to be considered as state dispute . Moreover, if the discharge certificate ( Exht . W. I ) is considered there is sufficient scope to say that the said workman was not only medically unfit but also he was suffering from such serious decease that if he was allow to join it could have endangered the health ofother workmen . Considering all these aspects there is scope to say that termination of the workman Kanhai From the discharge certificate ( Exht . W. I ) it transpires that said Kanhai Rewani was admitted in the said Sanitorium on 9-3-73 . Therefore , it speaks that he was under treatment as indoor patient from 9-3-73 to 24-6-74 i.c. for

1-1 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

Rewani from service by the management can not be said to be illegal and arbitrary violating to the principle of natural justice particularly when it is evident that erstwhile owner stoodby the side of the said workman althrough and allowed him to remain on extraordinary leave beyond 18 months for his better treatment with expectation of his recovery from such serious ailment.

Apart from bringing allegation of illegal termination ofthe concerned workman by the management by raising Industrial Dispute after a lapse of 21 years of his death the sponsoring union has claimed for employment of his dependent son on compassionate ground.

Considering the materials on record it has been exposed that W.W.1 . was only six months old when his father died . It is the contention of the sponsoring union that there was no scope on the part of W.W.1 . to submit any such application at that relevant time as he was absolutely minor . There is no dispute to hold that cause of termination of the workman was for his serious ailment being a T.B. Patient i.e. as he was disabled for his serious ailment and there is least chance of recovery management considering his physical unfitness terminated him from his service . As per clause 9 : 3 : 1 of N.C.W.A. the management had the scope to provide employment to any of deceased's dependent but that was not done. No Industrial Dispute to that effect was also raised at that time . It is the contention ofthe management that at that relevant time the provision as laiddown in N. C. W.A. was not in operation . However, as a matter ofprinciple no female worker would be deployed in the Washery and for which such prayer for employmentto the widow of the deceased worker could not be acceded to .

They submitted that after a lapse of 21 years the claim of W.W.I being the son of the deceased worker could not be taken into consideration in absence of any provision to keep reserve of any vacancy to fill up in future . In support of such claim Ld . Advocate for the Management in course of hearing argument relied on the decision reported in 2005 Supreme Court Cases (L & S) 357 in National Hydroelectric Power Corporation and another Vs. Nanak Chand and another. Their Lordships of the Hon'ble Apex Court observed :

" It is to be seen that the appointment on com- passionate ground is not a source of recruitment but merely an exception to the requirement regarding appointments being made on open invitation of application on merits . Basic intention is that on the death of the employce concerned his family is not deprived of the means of livelihood . The object is to enable the family to get over sudden financial crises . "

" In Sushma Gosain V. Union of India it was observed that in all claims of appointment on compassionate grounds , there should not be any delay in appointment . The purpose of providing appointment on compassionate ground is to mitigate the hardship due to death of the bread -carner in the family. Such appointments should therefore be provided immediately to redeem the family in distress . The fact that the ward was a minor at the time of death of his father is no ground , unless the scheme itself envisage 194 G1 /06-26

1125

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006 /माघ 15 , 1927

specifically otherwise, to state that as and when such minor becomes a major he can be appointed without any time consciousness or limit. The above view was reiterated in Phoolwati v. Union of India and Union of India v. Bhagwan Singh. In Director of Education ( Secondary) v. Pushpendra Kumar it was observed that in the matter of compassionate appointment there cannot be insistence for a particular post.Out ofpurely humanitarian consideration and having regard to the fact that unless some source of livelihood is provided the family would not able to make both ends meet , provisions are made for giving appointment to one of the dependants of the deceased who may be eligible for appointment . Care has , however, to be taken that provision for ground of compassionate employment which is in the nature of an exception to the general provisions does not unduly interfere with the right of those other persons who are eligible for appointment to seek appointment against the post which would have been available , but for the provision enabling appointment being made on compassionate grounds of the dependant of the deceased employee . As it is in the nature ofexception to the general provisions it can not substitute the provision to which it is an exception and thereby nullify the main provision by taking away completely the right conferred by the main provision."

Therefore , if the observation of the Hon'ble Court is taken into consideration there is no scope at all to consider such prayer of the sponsoring union . Moreover, the sponsoring union in placing the claim for compassionate employment of W.W.I i.e. son of the deceased worker has failed to assign any extraordinary reasons based on which there was scope to consider such claim .

Accordingly in view of the facts and circumstances discussed above I hold that the sponsoring union has failedto substantiate their claim and for which they are not entitled to get any relief.

In the result the following award is rendered:

"That the action of the management of Patherdih CoalWashery of M/ s BCCL in terminating the services of Sri Kanhai Rewani , an unskilled workman, with effect from 11-2-74 on the ground of absence from duty; when the concerned workman remained under the treatment of Mahadevi Birla T.B. Sanitorium , Ranchi with effect from 9-3-73 as per Company's Medical Board's recommendation is legal andjustified. The action of the management in not providing employment to the dependant of Kanhai Rewani also is legal and justified .

Consequently, the dependant is not entitled to get any relief. "

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 489.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा .को.को. लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्व नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक 1126

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, धनबाद, 11 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 73/ 2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं . एल-20012/369/2000- आई आर( सी-1 ) ]

एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 9th January, 2006

S.O. 489. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 73/ 2001 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court , Dhanbad , 11 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 6-1-2006 .

[No. L -20012/369/2000 - IR(C - 1 )]

S.S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Present :

SHRI B. BISWAS, Presiding Officer .

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

Reference No. 73 of 2001

Parties: Employers in relation to the management of Kustore Area of M/ s BCCL and their workmen .

APPEARANCES

On behalf of the workman

Mr. N.G. Arun, Ld . Advocate .

On behalf of the employer : Mr. R.N. Ganguly, Ld . Advocate. State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal.

Dated , Dhanbad , the 15th December , 2005 .

AWARD

The Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise ofthe powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d) of the 1.D. Act , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 20012/369/ 2000 ( C- 1 ) , dated, the 2nd March , 2001 .

SCHEDULE

"Whether the claim of the RCMS that the year of appointment of Shri Bihari Kewat, Winding Engine Operator, East Bhagatdih Colliery of M/ s BCCL is 1965 and not 1971 is correet ? If so , to what relief/ reliefs is the workman entitled? "

2. The case of concerned workman according to written statement submitted by the sponsoring union on behalf in brief is as follows:

The sponsoring union submitted that the concerned workman got bis appointment as W.E. Operator in the year

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] 1965. They disclosed that there is variation of date of appointment of the concerned workman recorded in different statutory registers including the Form- B Registers of the management . Disclosing this fact they submitted that as per provision of J.B.C.C.1 . Circular '76 it was obligatory duty on the part of the management to place the concerned workman before Apex Medical Board for assessment of his age but inspite of repeated reminders management did not pay any importance to the same and for which they raised an Industrial Dispute before ALC (C) , Dhanbad for conciliation which ultimately resulted reference to this Tribunal for adjudication .

Accordingly the sponsoring union on behalf of the concerned workman submitted prayer to pass award directing the management to accept date ofbirth as well as date ofappointment of the concerned workman as recorded in the statutory records of East Bhagatdih Collicry or to send him to Apex Medical Board for assessment of his age.

3. Management on the contrary after filing written statement-cum- rejoinder have denied all the claims and allegations which the sponsoring union asserted in the written statement submitted on behalf of the concerned workman.

They submitted that the concerned workman was appointed on 19-10-71 which was elearly been recorded in the Statutory Form- B Register under his LTI . They further submitted that in the year 1987 service excerpt was issued to the concerned workman wherein also his date of appointinent was recorded as 19-10-71 with a view to give him an opportunity to submit objection if any regarding any of the entries made therein . They submitted that inspite of receiving the said service excerpt and knowing fully well ofhis date of appointment recorded therein without raising any sort of objection returned the same to the management putting his LTI therein .

Accordingly they submitted that without having any cogent reason the sponsoring union unnecessarily has raised the Industrial Dispute which is liable to be rejected.

4. POINTS TO BE DECIDED

"Whether the claim of the RCMS that the year of appointment of Shri Bihari Kewat, Winding Engine Operator , East Bhagatdih Colliery of M/ s . BCCL . is 1965 and not 1971 is correct ?

Ifso, to what relief/reliefs is the workman entitled ? " 5. FINDINGS WITH REASONS

It transpires from the record that inspite of giving sufficient opportunity as the sponsoring union failed to take appropriate steps for hearing of this case it was fixed for exparte evidence of the management . Though the instant casewas fixed for exparte hearing management also did not consider necessary to adduce any evidence on their part .

Accordingly, to answer the reference suo moto there . is no other way but to consider the facts disclosed in the pleadings of both sides .

According to written statement submitted by the sponsoring union concerned workman got his appointment [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

asW.E.Operator at East Bhagatdih Colliery in 1965. In the written statement he has made two fold prayer . His first prayer is to consider his year of appointment as 1965 and second prayer, is to assess his age through Apex Medical Board. There is no whisper in the order of reference issued by the Ministry about claim of the sponsoring union for assessment of the age of the concerned workman through Apex Medical Board and for which there is no scope to decide this issue as raised by him.

The main point for consideration is whether the concerned workman got his appointment under the management in the year 1965. It is the specific claim of the sponsoring union that the concerned workman joined at EastBhagatdih Colliery as W.E. Operator in the year 1965 . However, they admitted that there is variation between the records relating to his date of joining under the management .

On the contrary management in their written statement cum rejoinder specifically mentioned that the concerned workman joined the service of the management on 19-10-71 and that was duly recorded in the Form-B Register and the concerned workman accepted the said date as his joining date by putting his L.T.I. in the said register. Management further submitted that in the year 1987 service excerpt was issued to him wherein his date of joining was specifically recorded as 19-10-71 . The said service excerpt was issued to him with a view to seek his views relating to correctness of entries made therein . They submitted that the concerned workman returned back the said service excerpt by putting his L.T.1 . without raising any dispute relating to any entry made therein including hisdate ofjoining .

Therefore , the point for consideration is whether joining date of the concerned workman was 1965 or 19-10-71 . Inspite of getting ample opportunity the sponsoring union has failed to produce appointment letter ofthe concerned workman . This appointment letter could have exposed the veracity of the claim of the concerned workman . The sponsoring union also had the scope to submit wage slip or any sort of document issued by the management showing date of his appointment but that too was not considered by them to file . It has not been denied by the sponsoring union about receipt of the service excerpt by the workman wherein his date of birth was recorded as 19-10-71 . No satisfactory explanation is forthcoming why instead of raising immediate objection the same was returned back accepting correctness of date of appointment recorded therein .

The sponsoring union has failed to produce a single scrap of paper to show that his date of appointment was 1965 and not 19-10-71 knowing fully well of the fact that initial burden of proof was on them to justify their claim .

It is to be borne in mind that facts disclosed in the written statement can not be considered as substantive piece ofevidence until and unless the same is substantiated by cogent evidence . I find no hesitation to say that inspitę ofgetting ample scope the sponsoring union has misused the opportunity given to that effect . Accordingly based on the facts disclosed in the written statement there is no

1127

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

scope to uphold the contention of the sponsoring union that date of appointment of the concerned workman was 1965 and not 19-10-71 and for which he is not entitled to getany relief.

In the result the following award is rendered:

" That the claim of the RCMS that the year of appointment of Shri Bihari Kewat , Winding Engine Operator, East Bhagatdih Colliery of M/s . BCCL as 1965 and not 1971 is notjustified.

Consequently the concerned workman named above is not entitled to get any relief. "

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 490.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा.को.को. लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 102/ 2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल -20012/83/2000 - आईआर ( सी- I ) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi the , 9th January, 2006

S.O. 490. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 102/ 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court Dhanbad II now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 6-1-2006.

[No. L-200 12/ 83/2000- IR( C -I) ] S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO . 2) AT DHANBAD PRESENT : Shri B. Biswas , Presiding Officer .

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

REFERENCE NO . 102 OF 2000

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the management of M/ s. BCCL and their workman .

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalf of the workman : Mr. N.G. Arun, Authorised Representative ofthe workman [ PART II- SEC . 3 (ii )| 1128

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

On the behalf of the employers: Mr. H. Nath , Advocate .

Coal .

State : Jharkhand

Industry

Dated, Dhanbad , the 16th December , 2005 .

AWARD

proceeding the Enquiry Officer submitted his report holding the concerned workman guilty to the charges The Disciplinary Authority there after considering the enquiry report and also considering other material aspect dismissed the concerned workman from his service . They submitted that in dismissing the concerned workman they did not commit any illegality or took any arbitrary decision violating the principle of natural justice . Accordingly they submitted praryer to pass Award rejecting the claim ofthe conerned workman.

The Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour, in exercise ofthe powers conferred on them under Section 100 ( 1 ) ( d ) of the I.D. Act , 1947 has referred the following disputeto this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 200 12/83 / 2000 (C- 1 ) , dated, the 7th September, 2000 .

4. POINTS TO BE DECIDED

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of East Katras Collicry of M/s . BCCL in dismissing Sri Rashik Manjhi from the services of the company w.c.f. 18-6-96 is justified? If not ,to what relief is the concerned workman entitled ? "

"Whether the action of the management of East Katras Collicry of M/ s. BCCL in dismissing Sri Rashik Manjhi from the services of the company w.e.f. 18-6-96 is justified ? If not, to what relief is the concerned workman entitled ? "

5. FINDING WITH REASONS

2. Thecase ofconcerned workman according to Written Statement submitted by the sponsoring union on his behalf in brief is as follows : -

It transpires from the record that before taking the instant case for hearing on merit it was taken into consideration whether domestic enquiry held against the concerned workman was fair , proper and in accordance with the principle of natural justice . Said issue on preliminary point was decided in favour of the management vide Order No. 14 dt . 14-7-2005 by this Tribunal . Now the pointfor consideration is whether management have been able to substantiate the charge brought against the concerned workman and if so whether there is any scope to review the order of dismissal passed by the management against the concerned workman under Section 11A of the I.D. Act , 1947 .

The sponsoring union submitted that the concerned workman was a Miner /Loader at Lodna Arca . They further submitted that owing to his illness he had to remain on treatment under Colliery hospital but as his ailment aggravated hc went to his native village for his further treatment . They further alleged that knowing fully well of his ailment management taking revengeful attitude issued a chargesheet to him and thereafter without giving any scope to make his submission further dismissed him from his service . They submitted that the said order of dismissal was illegal , arbitrary and violative to the principle of natural justice. Accordingly after that order of disinissal he submitted representation to the management but to no effect and for which through the sponsoring union he raised industrial dispute for conciliation which ultimately resulted reference to this Tribunal for adjudication

The sponsoring union accordingly submitted prayer to pass award directing the management to reinstate the concerned workman to his service setting aside the said order of dismissal with full back wages and other consequential relief.

Considering the evidence of MW - I and considering the facts disclosed in the pleadings of both sides there is no dispute to hold that the concerned workman was a permanent Miner / Loader at East Katras Colliery. It is the specific allegation of the management that the concerned workman started remaining himself absent from duty w.e.f. 23-1-95 without giving any information or taking prior permission from the management and for which they were compelled to issue chargesheet vide Ictter No. EK/CS / 96 / 89 dt . 4-5-96 against the concerned workman which was duly received by him. The chargesheet during hearing was marked as Ext . M - 2 . The concerned workman submitted his reply taking the plea that owing to his illness and for his treatment at his native village he was unable to attend his place of work . Reply given by the concerned workman as was not satisfactory the Disciplinary Authority initiated domestic enquiry against the concerned workman . The reply of the concerned workman is marked as Ext . M - 3 . The enquiry procceding papers during evidence of MW - 1 were marked as Ext . M - 5 series . It is the contention of the management that the concerned workman not only remained present althrough in course of hearing of domestic enquiry but also the Enquiry Officer gave him full opportunity to defend his case. It has been submitted by MW - 1 i.c. Enquiry Officer that the concerned workman also signed day to day papers and his signatures therein are marked as Ext . M-6 series . MW - 1 after completing the enquiry submitted his report to the Disciplinary authority which during evidence marked as Ext . M - 7 . The enquiry Officer in his 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 workınan . They submitted that the concerned workman was a permanent employee of East Katras Collicry as Miner/ Loader. As he absented from duty since 23-1-1995 without information or permissionfrom the management , a chargesheet vide letter No. EK/ CS / 96/ 89 . dt . 4-5-96 was issued to him , as per Certified Standing Order applicable to the employees of the company. The concerned workman after receipt of the chargesheet submitted his reply but as the reply given by him was not satisfactory the Disciplinary Authority initiated domestic enquiry against him and they submitted that the concerned workman fully participated in the said enquiry and full opportunity was given to him to defend his case . After completion of the said enquiry 1129 [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

punishment shall be imposed upon unless a domestic enquiry has been conducted . "

report has clearly explained and assigned reason how he came to the conclusion in holding that the concerned workman was found guilty to the charge brought against him. In course of hearing the concerned workman has failed to produce any Medical paper relating to his treatment during the period of his absence. Therefore , the plea taken by him that for his illness he could not attend to his work appears to be not cogent and for which the same cannot be accepted. It is seen that the concerned workman started remaining absent from duty w.e.f. 23-1-95 and chargesheet was issued to him on 4-5-96 . Therefore , it is seen that the concerned workman remained himself absent from duty continuously from 23-1-95 to 4-5-96. Therefore , there is ample scope to say that management was justified in issuing chargesheet to the concerned workman. Considering all materials on record I find sufficient reason to hold that management have been able to substantiate the cahrge brought against the concerned workman .

It is seen that considering the report submitted by the Enquiry Officer the Disciplinary authority dismissed the concerned workman. Letter of dismissal during hearing wasmarked as Ext. M - 9 . Now the point for consideration is whether the said order of dismissal issued against the concerned workman by the management was proportionate to the misconduct committed by him and also wasjustified or not ? Section 11A of the I.D. Act , 1947 speaks as follows :-

"Where an industrial dispute relating to the discharge or dismissal of a workman has been referred to a Labour Court , Tribunal or National Tribunal for adjudication and , in the course of the adjudication proceedings , the Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal , as the case may be is satisfied that the order of discharge or dismissal was not justified, it may, by its award set aside the order of discharge or dismissal and direct reinstatement of the workman on such terms and condidtion, if any, as it thinks fit , or give such other relief ot the workman inclusing the award of any lesser punishment in lieu of discharge or dismissal as the circumstances of the case may require. "

Clause 29.1 of the Certified Standing Order has pointed out which are the minor penalties viz . ( a) Censure . (b) Fine in accordance with the P.W. Act. , 1936. (c ) Suspension without wages as substantive punishment for not more than ten days at a time. The chargesheet was issued to the concerned workman with direction to submit his reply within 48 hours after its receipt. Therefore intention of the management wasto impose minor penalty against the concerned workman . But the Disciplinary Authority violating the directive of clauses 27 ( 1 ) and 29 ( 1 ) of the Certified Standing Order dismissed the concerned workman from his service relying on the provision of clause 29 ( 1 ) ( ii ) . Application of clause 29 ( 1 ) ( ii ) comes in if any notice is given to the concerned workman under clause 27(2) ofthe Certified Standing Order. Untill and unless any such chargeseet is issued complying the direction given in Clause 27 (2 ) of the Certified Standing Order there is no scope at all to dismiss a workman service particularly when as per Chargesheet it speaks clarly that the punishment which can be awarded by the management will be only minor penalty and not major penalty. It is fact that the concerned workman remained himself absent from duty for more than one and halfyears without assigning any reason. Knowing well fully of this fact management instead of issuing chargesheet as per clause 27 ( 2 ) issued chargesheet complying clause 27( 1 ) of the Certified Standing Order . Therefore , intention of the management was not to dismiss the concerned workman from his service. As there is no provision to issue any order of dismissal based on clause 27( 1) of the Certified Standing Order I should say that management dismissed the concerned workman exceeding theirjurisdiction which is not justified. Accordingly I should say that the management issued the order of dismissal illegally and for which the same is liable to be set aside . Accordingly order of dismissal issued by the management against the concerned workman is reviewed under Section 11A of the I. D. Act considering the fact that the said order of dismissal passed against him was not justified in accordancewith the provision of Certified Standing Order. In the result, the following Award is rendered:-

"The action of the management of East Katras Colliery ofM/ s . BCCL in dismissing Sri Rashik Manjhi from the services of the company w.e.f. 18-6-96 is not justified.

Orderof dismissal issued by the management agains the workman named above is declared illegal and hence it is set aside .

Considering materials on record there is no dispute to hold that the concerned workman remained himself absent from duty without giving any information or taking permission from the management with effect from 23-1-96 . The chargesheet marked as Ext . M- 2 shows that the same was issued to the concerned workman on 4-5-96 with direction to him to submit his reply within 48 hours of receipt of the same. Clause 27.1 of the Certified Standing Orderspeaks as follows:-

Management are directed to reinstate the concerned workman to his service within three months from the date of publication of the Award in the Gazette of India.

Concernedworkman however will not get any back wages ."

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer "MINOR PENALTY : Where a workman is eharged with a misconduct which may lead to imposition of a minor penalty , he shall be informed in writing of the allegations made against him and shall be given an opportunity to explain his conduct within 48 hours . His explanation, if any shall be considered before imposing a minor penalty by the Disciplinary Authority. Provided, however, that where a workman denies the charges alleged against him , no 1130

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

PART II -SC 3 (ii ) | नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 491. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार भा ०को ० को० लि० के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , धनबाद II के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 252/ 2001) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

| सं . एल-20012/288/2001- आई आर ( सी- I ) ] एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 9th January, 2006

The sponsoring union submitted that the concerned workman was a Miner/Loader at Maheshpur Colliery under Govindpur Area in permanent capacity . They submitted that the concerned workman fell ill at his home and for which he could not attend to his duty and in that regard he informed the management . Inspite of giving information they submitted that the management issued a chargesheet to him for committing misconduct on the ground of absentism . After recovery from his ailment he came to his place of work with a view to resume his duty but he was not allowed tojointo join there . On the contrary management issued a Ictter of dismissal against him dt. 30-3-2000 . They submitted that management dismissed the concerned workman without holding any departmental enquiry and also without giving him any opportunity to defend his case. Accordingly they submitted prayer to reinstate the concerned workman but to no effect and for which he raised industrial dispute for conciliation which ultimately resulted reference to this Tribunal .

S.O. 491. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 252/ 2001 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court . Dhanbad II now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-1-06 .

[ No. L - 20012 /288 / 2001 - IR ( C - 1 ) ]

S.S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

It has been alleged by the sponsoring union that the concerned workman was dismissed from his service illegally and arbitrarily and violating the principle of natural justice and submitted prayer to pass an Award directing the management to reinstate the concerned workman to his service from the date of dismissal with full back wages .

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT:

Shri B. Biswas , Presiding Officer .

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

REFERENCE NO . 252 OF 2001

PARTIES: Employers in relation to the management of Govindpur Arca No. III of M/s . BCCL

APPEARANCES :

On the behalf of workman Mr. B. B. Pandey, Advocate.

On the behalf of the

: Mr. D.K. Verma , Advocate.

employers

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal .

Dated , Dhanbad , the 22nd December, 2005 .

AWARD

The Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise ofthe powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d) of the I.D. Act . , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 20012/ 288 / 2001 - IR ( C - I ) , dated , the 18th September, 2001 .

SCHEDULE

"Whether the dismissal of Sri Pairu Bhuia from service by the management of Maheshpur Collicry ofM/ s . BCCL isjustified ? If not , to what relief is the concerned workman entitled ?"

3. Management on the contrary after filing Written Statement- cum- Rejoinder have denied all the claims and allegations which the sponsoring union asserted in the Written Statement submitted on behalf of the concerned workman . They submitted that the concerned workman was appointed on 18-3-91 . From 1994 onwards the concerned workman was a habitual absentee . They submitted that during 1994 , 1995 and 1996 the concerned workman attended his duties for 115 days . 133 days and 77 days respectively. In order to mend his such habit management issued warning letters to him but to no effect Thereafter the concerned workman started absenting from duty from 18-2-97 without prior information and taking any permission from the management . As such unauthorised absence amounted to misconduct management issued a charge- sheet against the concerned workman giving him opportunity to submit his reply but the concerned workman did not consider necessary to submit any reply and for which the Disciplinary Authority initiated domestic enquiry against him appointing Enquiry Officer vide Order dt . 14-12-98 . Notice of enquiry was also sent to the permanent address of the concerned workman by registered post vide letter dt. 3-4-99 . Since no response was reeeived finally notice of enquiry vide letterdt. 25-5-99 was sent to the concerned workman at his home address by Regd . Post As no response was received from the concerned workman the Enquiry Officer finding no alternative conducted ex parte enquiry against the concerned workman and submitted his report holding him guilty to the charge levelled against him . They submitted that thereafter the Disciplinary Authority issued second show cause notice and supplied report of enquirydt. 10-2-2000 calling comments of the concerned workman . But the concerned workman did not submit any reply to the second show cause notice. The competent authority finding no alternative 2. The case of the concerned workman according to Written Statement submitted by the sponsoring union on his behalf in brief is as follows :-

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

dismissed the concerned workman from the services of the company. They submitted that the management did not commit any illegality and take any arbitrary decision in dismissing the concerned workman from his service.

4. POINTS TO BE DECIDED

"Whether the dismissal of Sri Pairu Bhuia from service by the management of Mahespur Colliery of M/ s. BCCL is justified, If not , to what relief is the concerned workman entitled ? "

FINDING WITH REASONS

5. Before taking up hearing of the instant case on merit it was taken into consideration whether domestic enquiry held against the concerned workman was fair, proper and in accordance with the principle of natural justice. The said issue on preliminary point was decided by this Tribunal vide Order No. 12 dt . 9-9-2005 in favour of the management . Now the point for consideration is whether management have been able to substantiate the charge brought against the concerned workman and if so whether the order or dismissal issued against the concerned workman was in conformity with the misconduct committed by him, and if that order of dismissal is required to be reviewed under Section 11A of the I.D. Act . , 1947 .

6. As the sponsoring union admitted the fairness of domestic enquiry held against the concerned workman management did not adduce any evidence on their part, in course of hearing on preliminary point . However, the documents which the management relied on were marked as Ext . M - 1to M - 8 on formal proof dispensed with . It is admitted act that the concerned workman was a Miner / Loader at Mahespur Colliery and he got his appointment on 18-3-91 . It is the specific allegation of the management that as the concerned workman was in the habit of remaining himself absent from duty on different occasion they issued warning letters to him to mend his habit but they submitted that attempt in that regard went in vein. They submitted that the concerned workman started remaining himself absent from duty w.e.f. 18-2-97 without giving any information or prior permission from the management. Accordingly management issued charge sheet to the concerned workman on 19-7-97 with direction to submit his reply within 48 hours . As the concerned workman did not submit any reply to the chargesheet management initiated domestic enquiry against the concerned workman . The chargesheet during hearing was marked as Ext . M - 1 . It is admitted fact that the E.O. conducteddomestic enquiry against the concerned workman ex parte as the concerned workman in spite of receiving notice fell to appear . Representative of the concerned workman in course hearing did not raise any dispute about the fairness of the enquiry proceeding. This submission on the part of the representative of the concerned workman speaks clearly that the concerned workman was fully aware about the chargesheet and domestic enquiry. Had that not been so the representative ofthe concerned workman definitely would not accept the fairness of the domestic enquiry which was held ex parte by the Enquiry Officer. It is the specific claim of the concerned workman that for his illness he did not get scope

1131

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927-

to attend to his duty during the period in question . After recovery when he came to his place of duty management did not allow him to join . On the contrary they issued letter - of dismissal to him . It is the contention of the concerned workman that management illegally and arbitrarily dismissed the concerned workman from his service. It is seen from the chargesheet that management issued the same on 19-7-97 . It is admitted fact that the concerned workman started remaining absent unauthorisedly with effect from 18-2-97 , i.e. , from 18-2-97 till date of issuance of chargesheet on 19-7-97 was found absent . Accordingly burden of proof rests on the sponsoring union as well as ofthe workman to establish that he was absent during the period in question authorisedly after taking permission from the management. In course of hearing the representative ofthe concerned workman has failed to produce a single serap of paper to show that after taking due permission or giving duc information to the management the concerned workman went on leave and remained absent during the period from duty as referred to above . It is seen that Enquiry Officer gave sufficient opportunity to the concerned workman to defend his case in course of enquiry proceeding . The concerned workman knowing fully well about the chargesheet and also about the date of enquiry did not consider necessary to appear. Accordingly the enquiry officer conducted domestic enquiry against the concerned workman and submitted his report to the Disciplinary Authority which during hearing was marked as Ext . M - 5 . The enquiry officer in his enquiry report explained clearly the reason of his arriving into conclusion to hold the concerned workman guilty to the charge. It is seen that the enquiry officer performed all the essential formalities in procuring attendance of the concerned workman . But the concerned workman wilfully avoided to face the hearing of the enquiry proceeding . Submission of the representative of the management which has been discussed above will support definitely this claim. Accordingly after careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances I hold that the management have been able to substantiate the charge against the concerned workman .

It is seen that before issuing order of dismissal management issued a second show cause notice as well as a copy of enquiry report to the concerned workman for his reply by Regd. Post but the concerned workman did not submit any reply to that effect. Accordingly management dismissed the concerned workman from his service . The letter ofdismissal during evidence marked as Ext .M - 8 . Now the point for consideration is whether the said order of dismissal issued against the concerned workman by the management was justified, proportionate to the misconduct committed by him . Section 11 A of the I.D. Act, 1947 speaks asfollows:-

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

dismissal and direct reinstatement of the workman on such terms and conditions , if any, as it thinks fit , or give such other rclicf to the workman including the award of any lesser punishment in licu of discharge or dismissal as the circumstances of the casc may requirc . "

Therefore, before revicwing the order of dismissal it is to be considered whether order of dismissal issued against the concerned workman was justified or not ? It is seen from the chargcsheet marked as Ext . M - 2 that the concerned workınan was given 48 hours time to submit his reply. According to clause 27 ( 1 ) of the Certified Standing Orderwhere a workman is charged with a misconduct which may lead to imposition of a minor penalty, he shall be informed in writing of the allegations made against him and shall be given an opportunity to explain his conduct within 48 hours of the Certified Standing Order . As per clause 29 (1) the following penaltics come under Minor penalties:-

(a) Censure ,

(b) Fine in accordance with the P. W. Act , 1936 .

Clausc 27 (2 ) of the Certified Standing Order speaks as follows:

"Where a workman is charged with a misconduct which may lead to the imposition of a major penalty, he shall be informed in writing of the allegations against him and shall be given an opportunity to explain his conduct within a period of 7 days . " Clause 29 ( 2 ) of the Certified Standing Order relates to major penalty. As major penalty is empowered to stop increment , reduction to a lower grade or post or a stage in a time scale or discharge or dismissal from service . It is clear that the management issued chargesheet to the concerned workman and gave him opportunity to submit his reply within 48 hours as per clause 27 ( 1 ) of the Certified Standing Order. Therefore , it is clear that intention of the management was to impose minor penalty as per clause 27( 1 ) of the Certified Standing Order. Clause 27 ( 1 ) of the Certified Standing Order does not attract any punishment relating to dismissal of a workınan . Therefore , it is clear that inanagement ignoring the provision of the Certified Standing Order dismissed the concerned workman from his service illegally and arbitrarily and violating the principle of natural justice and therefore there is no scope at all to say that the said order of dismissal was justified and proportionate to the misconduct committed by him. In view of the facts and circumstances discussed above I hold that the order of punishment is liable to be set aside . In the result , the following Award is rendered:--

"The dismissal of Sri Pairu Bhuia froin service by the Management of Mahespur Collicry of M/ s . BCCL is notjustified.

Order ofdismissal issuedby the management against the workman named above is declared illegal and hence it is set aside.

[PART I- SEC . 3 (ii) ] Management are directed to reinstate the concerned workman to his service within three months from the datc of publication of the Award in the Gazette of India.

Concerned workman , however, will not get any back wagcs ."

B. Biswas , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 492.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा ०को ०को ० लि० 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 91/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं . एल-20012/ 534/2000- आई आर ( सी-1) ] एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 9th January, 2006

S.O. 492. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 91 / 2001 ) of the Central Governnient Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court Dhanbad I now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 9-1-2006 .

[ No. L- 20012/ 534/2000 - IR( C - I) | S.S. GUPTA , Under Secy. ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO . I) DHANBAD .

In the matter of reference u/ s. 10( 1 ) ( d ) (2A) of I.D. Act . Reference No. 91 of 2001

Parties : Employers in relation to the management ofM/ s . B.C.C. Ltd.

AND Their Workmen

Present : Shri Sarju Prasad, Presiding Officer..

Appearances:

For the Employers : Shri H. Nath , Advocate . For the Workmen : Shri B.B. Pandey, Advocate .

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal .

Dated, the 8th December , 2005 . AWARD

By Order No. L - 20012/ 534 / 2000 ( C -1 ) dated 29-3-2001 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has. in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub - sec . (1) and sub - section ( 2A ) of Section 10 of the Industrial 1133 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

and accordingly by order dated 26-4-2005 the preliminary enquiry was found to be fair and proper .

Disputes Act , 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:

5. Since the domestic enquiry has been found to be fairand proper the case has been placed for hearing under Sec. 11 -A of the Industrial Disputes Act .

"Whether the action of the management of M/ s . BCCL in dismissing Shri Bictor Kumar Kangari , Miner Loader Hurriladih Colliery from service w.e.f. 22-5-99 is legal , justified and proper ? If not , to what relief is the workmen entitled ? "

2. The case of the sponsoring union is that the concerned workman , Bictor Kumar Kangari was a permanent employee ofHurriladih Colliery of M/ s . BCCL under Kustore Area and was working as Miner /Loader.He was in sick leave w.e.f. 1-4-98 and was under treatinent of Dr. D. V. Singh and for that an information was given to the management on 6-4-1998 and requests were made for leave . The concerned workman after recovery from sickness reported for duty to the colliery management alongwith fitness certificate . But the management did not allow him to resume his duty. On the contrary, a charge- sheet was served upon him which is dated 7-11-98 and ultimately by letter dated 4/22-5-99 he has been dismissed from service. In fact, the allegation against the concerned workman was incorrect and the enquiry was not conducted fairly and properly and was in violation of principles of natural justice . Accordingto the sponsoring union , the punishment of dismissal is ab nitio void . The sponsoring union has claimed reinstatement of the concerned workman with full back wages.

3. The case of the management , on the other hand , is that the concerned workman absented from duty w.e.f. 1-4-98 without taking permission from the competent authority and remained absent unauthorisedly from a pretty long time. Therefore , he was issued a chargesheet dated 7- 11-98 for unauthorised absence from his duty w.e.f. 1-4-98 under clause 26-1-1 of the Certified Standing Orders of the Company . The concerned workman replied to the chargesheet on 23-11-98 which was found not satisfactory, then it was decided by the management to hold domestic enquiry against the chargesheet. The concerned workman participated in the domestic enquiry. The Enquiry Officer was appointed by the competent authority and during enquiry the concerned workman was given full opportunity to have his co - worker and also to cross - examine the management representative and his witnesses by the Enquiry Officer . The Enquiry Officer conducted the enquiry according to the rules of natural justice and in his enquiry report held that the charge against the concerned workmen was fully established . A copy of the enquiry report was provided to the concerned workman by letter No. 414 dated 17-3-1999 and the concerned workman was advised to submit his comment within 15 days. His comment was not found satisfactory. The Disciplinary Authority keeping in view the gravity of misconduct and his habitual absenteeism dismissed the concerned workman from his service by letter No. 979 dated 22-5-99 .

6. The management has brought on record the original chargeshect issuedto the concerned workman which is marked Ext. M - 1 from which it appears that the allegation against the concerned workman was for remaining absent from duty w.c.f. 1-4-98 without previous permission orsufficient reason . The concerned workman has filed his reply which has been marked Ext . M - 2 who has admitted that he was absent from duty w.c.f. 1.4.98. He has mentained that he has been suffering from jaundice therefore he was absent from duty. Ext . M - 3 is the notice of enquiry and appointment of the Enquiry Officer. Ext . M -4 is the day to day order-shect of the enquiry proceeding . The concerned workman has also admitted that he was absent from duty w.e.f. 1-4-1998 . He bas filed medical certificate dated 28-11-98 during the course of enquiry from which it appears that he was under treatment of Dr. D. V. Singh of Phus Bangla, Bhaga . From the medical certificate produced by the concerned workman it appears that he was absent from duty from 1-4-98 to 28-10-98 . The concerned workman has not produced any paper to show that he has informed the management regarding the reason for his absence from duty. The enquiry report submitted by the Enquiry Officer isExt . M- 5 by which it appears that the concerned workman has been found absent for more than 10 days without information . Ext. M-6 is the chargesheet of the management from which it appears that the concerned workman is a habitual absentee. In the year 1995 he has performed only 73 days duty, in the year 1996 only 164 days and in the year 1997 only 80 days and he was absenting from duty right from 1998 to the date of chargesheet dated 23-11-1998 . Ext . M-7 is the letter of dismissal. It appears from the chargeshect that the concerned workman was appointed on 7-9-95 and right from the date of appointment he has not completed 240 days service during any calendar year . Therefore he appears to be a habitual absentee from duty. But in the chargesheet there was no mention about his earlier absence nor any enquiry was held for carlier absenteeism. So far the concerned period is concerned it appears that he has produced a certificate that he was suffering from Jaundice and the management has not prouduced any evidence to show that the medical certificate is a fake one or got up one . Therefore , the concerned workman deserves to be reinstated in service , but without any back wages and continuity of service . The concerned workman must be diligent in future to remain present in duty throughout the year. If the concerned workman is found not to be diligent in doing duty, then the management shall be at liberty to remove him from service . Furthermore , the dismissal from service on the ground of absenteeism appears to be a bit harsh punishment .

7. In the result, I render following award-

The action of the management in dismissing Bictor Kumar Kangari , Miner Loader of Hurriladih Colliery from service is not fully justified and he is entitled for 4. The question of fairness of the domestic enquiry was first taken up as preliminary issue and ultimately after recording of the evidence of the management on preliminary issue the Advocate of the concerned workman conceded the fairness and propriety of the domestic enquiry

194 GI /06-27 1134

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

reinstatement into service without back wages and continuity of service . He must be diligent on duty and if his attendance is less than 240 days in a calendar year from the date of his reinstatement the management shall be at liberty to retrench him without any retrenchment benefits . The management is directed to implement the award within 30 days from the date of publication of the award.

SARJU PRASAD, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 493.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार भा ०को०को ० लि० 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 76/ 1998) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल-20012/ 713/97- आईआर( सी-1 ) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi the 9th January, 2006

S.O. 493. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 76/ 1998) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court Dhanbad I now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 9-1-2006 .

[No. L- 20012/713 /97- IR(C-I ) ] S.S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO.1 ) DHANBAD In the matter of reference U/ s . 10( 1 ) ( d) (2A) of I.D. Act .

Reference No. 76 of 1998

PARTIES : Employers in relation to the management of Bhowra (N) Colliery of M/ S . B.C.C. L.

AND

Their Workmen

PRESENT : Shri Sarju Prasad , Presiding Officer.

APPEARANCES :

For the Employers : None,

For the Workmen : None .

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal .

Dated, the 21st December, 2005

AWARD

By Order No. L -20012/ 713/ 97 - IR ( C - I ) dated 10-9-98 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub -sec. (1 ) and sub - section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial

PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] Disputes Act , 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:

"Whether the action of the management of Bhowra (N) Colliery of M / s . BCCL in dismissing Sri Ganery Bhuia , DCL from services ofthe company is legal & Justified? If not , to what relief the workmen is entitled?"

2. This reference case is of the year 1998. Inspite of registered notice to the workman two dates have already been expired but no step has been taken even to - day i.c : 21-12-2005 . It , therefore , secms that the workman is not interested to contest the casc .

3. In such circumstance, 1 render a ' No Dispute Award in the present case.

SARJU PRASAD, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 494. -औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा० को० को० लि० 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 100/ 1998 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल-20012/326/98- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi the 9th January, 2006

S.O. 494. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 100 / 1998) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court Dhanbad I now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 9-1-06 .

[No. L- 20012/326/ 98 - IR ( C- I ) | S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL ( NO.1 ) DHANBAD In the matter of reference U/ s. 10 ( 1 ) ( d ) ( 2A) of 1.D. Act .

Reference No. 100 of 1998

PARTIES : Employers in relation to the management of Chanch Victoria Area No. 12 of B.C.C.L. AND

Their Workmen

PRESENT : Shri Sarju Prasad, PresidingOfficer.

APPEARANCES :

None .

Forthe Employers :

For the Workmen : None .

State Jharkhand

Industry Coal .

1135

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

Dated , the 21st December, 2005

AWARD

By Order No. L-20012/ 326/ 98 - IR (C -I ) dated 4-6-99 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 foradjudication to this Tribunal:

"Whether the action of the management of Chanch Victoria Area No. 12 of BCCL in not regularising Sh . D.N. Singh , Weigh Bridge Computer Optr. in Clerical Cadre although he is working in Clerical Cadre since 19-7-94 as per approval of the management is Justified? If not , to what relief is the workmen entitled to ?"

2. This is a case of the Year 1999. Inspite of registered notice two dates have already been expired but neither the concernedworkman nor the sponsoring union no step has been taken either side . lt, therefore , appears that neither the concerned workman nor the sponsoring union is interested to contest the case .

3. In such circumstance , I render a ' No dispute ' Award in the present reference case . SARJU PRASAD, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 495.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार कान्टीनेन्टल प्रोडेक्टस, निरसा 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 107/1998 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9- 1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।।

[सं ० एल-20012/317/ 97- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi the 9th January, 2006

S.O. 495.In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref . No. 107/ 1998 ) 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 Continental Product , Nirsa and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 9-1-06 .

[No. L- 20012/317/97 - IR(C -I) S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO . 1) DHANBAD In the matter of reference U/ s . 10 ( 1 ) (d) (2A) of I.D. Act. Reference No. 107 of 1998

Parties : Employers in relation to the management ofM/s. Continental Products , Nirsha .

AND Their Workmen

Present : Shri Sarju Prasad, Presiding Officer .

Appearances:

For the Employers : None .

For the Workmen : None .

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Continental Dated. the 21st December, 2005 .

AWARD

ByOrder No. L -20012/317 /97 - IR (C - 1 ) dated 1-12-98 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub- section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

"Whether the action of M/ s . Continental Products B.O. Road, Nirsha , P.O. Nirsha , Dt. Dhanbad in stopping Md. Suleman Mistry without following duc process of law is justified ? If not , to what relief the workmen is entitled?"

2. This reference case is of the Year 1998. Inspite of registered notices being sent and two dates have already been expired no step has been taken from the side of the workman . It seems that the workman is not interested to contest his case .

3. In such circumstances , I render a ' No dispute ' Award in the present reference case .

SARJU PRASAD , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 496.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा० को० को० लि० 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 108/ 1998 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/322/97- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एस . एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव 1136

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15, 1927

New Delhi the , 9th January, 2006

S.O. 496. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 108/ 1998) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court Dhanbad I now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 9-1-06 .

[No. L - 20012/ 322 /9 7 - IR ( C - I) ] S.S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO . 1 ) DHANBAD In the matter of reference U/ S . 10( 1 ) ( d ) (2A) of I.D. Act .

Reference No. 108 of 1998

Parties : Employers in relation to the management of Mohuda Area No. II of M/ s B.C.C.L.

AND

Their Workmen

Present : Shri Sarju Prasad, Presiding Officer.

Appearances:

For the Employers : None .

For the Workmen None.

State Jharkhand

Industry : Coal Dated, the 21st December, 2005

AWARD

By Order No. L -200 12 /322/ 97-1R ( C -I ) dated 1-12-98 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exereise of the powers conferred by clause ( d ) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub- scetion ( 2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act . 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudicationto this Tribunal:

"Whether the action of the management of M / s . BCCL in not regularisation of Sh . N.N. Gope as a Clerk is legal and justified? If not . to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to? "

2. This reference ease is of the year 1998. In spite of sending registered notice even today ( 21-12-2005 ) no step has been taken by the workman. It seems that neither the concerned workman nor the sponsoring union is interested to contest the case .

3. In such circumstance , I render a ' No dispute Award in the present reference case .

SARJU PRASAD . Presiding Officer

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 497.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा०को ० को० लि० 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 112 / 1990 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं ० एल-20012/ 91/89- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता , अवर सचिव New Delhi the , 9th January, 2006

S.O. 497--.In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 112/ 1990 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court Dhanbad I now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 9-1-06.

[No. L - 20012/91 / 89 - IR ( C - I ) | S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (No. 1) DHANBAD In the matter of reference U/S . 10 ( 1 ) ( d) (2A) of the I.D. Act , 1947.

Reference No. 112 of 1990

PARTIES : Employers in relation to the management of Murulidih Colliery of M/ s . B.C.C. Ltd.

AND

Their Workmen

PRESENT : Shri Sarju Prasad, Presiding Officer .

APPEARANCES :

For the Employers : Shri D. K. Verma. Advocate Forthe Workmen Shri B. Lal , Adyoate .

State Jharkhand

Industry Coal.

Dated, the 29th December, 2005 .

AWARD

By Order No. L -20012 ( 91 )/ 89 1.R. ( Coal - 1 ) dated the 8th May, 1990 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub - section ( 1 ) and sub - sec . ( 2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

"Whether Shri Bideshi Mistry and 24 others are employces of the management of Murulidih Colliery under Mohuda Arca of M/ s . Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and their demand for departmentalisation is justified ? Ifso , to what relief the workmen are entitled to ?" 1137

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4 , 2006/ माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

ANNEXURE

Present Address

Permanent Address

Father'sName

Name of the Workers

Sl . No.

(5)

(4)

(2)

(3)

(1)

S/o Chhotu Mistry

Shri Bideshi Mistry

PutkiColliery No. 2, PO - Kusunda Distt. Dhanbad , Bihar

Vill. Chitankhari PO-Snrenda, Dist . Giridih , Bihar

S/ oManohar Mistr

Shri Prasadi Mistry

KhairaColliery, No. 5 , PO -Kusunda , Dt. Dhanbad , Bihar

Vill .Banohi , PO-Nahta, Dt. Rohtas , Bihar

S/ o Dabu Sharma

Shri Jagdish Sharma

NewMarine Colly. PO -Kusunda, Dt . Dhanbad , Bihar

Vill& P.O.

Pandol ,

Dt. Gaya, Bihar

Shri Ravindra Singh

S/ o Basudeo Singh

Vill, Panti , PO -Pachaukhar, Dt. Aurangabad, Bihar

C/ o Shri Yugal Kishore Singh , Regional Store, Ekra, PO -Bansjora Dt. Dhanbad , Bihar 5.

Shri Mohan Singh

S/ o Kamleshwari Singh

Kathgola Maidan, PO -Kusunda , Dt . Dhanbad, Bihar

Vill. Tajpur, PO-Tejpur, Dt. Bankure (W.B )

6. Ramadhar yadav

S/o Ganga Yadav

NewMarine Colly. PO-Kusunda , Dt. Dhnabad.

Vill . Jagdishpur, Po-Rajpur, Dt. Johapur (U.P. )

S/oKhadim Ansari

Shri Nasseruddin Ansari

Gopalichak No. 3, Chanak , PO -Kusunda , Dt. Dhanbad , Bihar

Vill .Manjhawli PO-Poldih, Dt . Palamau , Bihar

Shri Kedar Singh

S/o Chanderdeep Singh

Khaira Punjabi , Ghowra , PO- Kusunda , Dt . Dhanbad , Bihar

Vill. Pachpokhari , PO-Mungiaya , Dt . Aurangabad, Bihar

Shri Sarju Singh

S/ o Chnaderdeep Singh

Khaira Punjabi, Dhowra , PO -kendua , Dt . Dhanbad, Bihar

Vill. Pachpokhari , PO-Mongiya, Dt. Aurangabad, Bihar

10.

S/ o Ram Janam Singh

Shri Sikander Singh

Khaira Punjabi , Dhowra , PO - Kusunda , Distt . Dhanbad , Bihar

Vill .Pachpokhri , PO-Mongiya , Dt. Aurangabad, Bihar

11. Shri Kamta Singh

S/o Mandhari Singh

Gopalichak No. 2 , PO-Kusunda , Dt. Dhanbad, Bihar

Vill. Parasiya, Rampur, PO -Tandwa, Dt. Aurangabad, Bihar.

12.

S/ o Kishun Thakur

Shri Harihar Thakur

KhariaColliery, PO-Kusunda, Dt . Dhanbad , Bihar

Vill. Kala Kujru , PO-Khurd Kujru , Dt . Palamau , Bihar.

13.

S/ o Kishun Thakur

Shri Naresh Thakur

KhariaColliery PO-Kusunda, Dt . Dhanbad , Bihar

Vill.Kala Kejru, PO-Khurd, Kajru, Dt . Palamau , Bihar .

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii ) ] 1138

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

(4)

(5)

(3)

(2)

(1)

14.

S/ o Mathura Rewani

Shri Ram Lakhan Rewani

Kharia Colliery PO-Kusunda, Dt. Dhanbad, Bihar.

Vill . Bahera, PO-Poldih Jagdishpur, Dt. Palamau , Bihar .

15.

S/ o Ram Das Ram

Shri Jogmohan Ram

Khatrs Colliery, PO-Kusunda, Dt. Dhanbad , Bihar.

Vill. Dhurua, PO-Poldih, Jagdishpur, Dt . Palamau , Bihar.

16. Shri Jamuna Mistry

S/ o Balkesh Mistry

KhariaColliery, PO-Kusunda Dt. Dhanbad, Bihar .

Vill.Neuribar, PO-Mankcri , Dt. Palamau, Bihar .

17.

S /o Budhan Sau

Shri Shambhu Sau

Kharia Colliery, PO -Kusunda, Dt. Dhanbad, Bihar

Vill . Ghurua, PO-Poldih Jagdishpur. Dt. Palamau , Bihar .

18.

Shri Sita Ram Singh

S/ o Bindeshwari Singh

GopalichakNo. 2 , PO-Kusunda , Dt. Dhanbad, Bihar

Vill. Pandu Bazarpar, PO-Tandwa, Distt . Aurangabad , Bihar

S/o Ramu Ram

Shri Tara Chand Ram

19.

NewMarine Gopali- chak, Colliery. Dt . Dhanbad, Bihar.

Vill. Sahbajpur, PO -Kasmabad , Dt. Gazipur , (UP)

20.

Shri Lal Bihari

Ram

S/o Ganga Mistry

Vill . Sahbajpur, PO -Kasmabad, Dt.Gajipur(UP)

New Marine Gopali- chak, Colliery PO-Kusunda , Dt. Dhanbad, Bihar.

S/o Dhuri Sao

21 .

Shri Permeshwar Sao

NewMarine Gopali- chak, Colliery, PO -Kusunda . Dt. Dhanbad .

Vill Pindar-Kon. PO-Gauriyarma. Dt. -Hazaribagh, Bihar.

22.

S/ oRamji Mistry

Shri Ram Vilas Mistry

Vill. Pachkhori PO-Mungia, Dt. Aurangabad Bihar

Akra Collicry, PO- Loyabad. Dt. Dhanbad, Bihar

23.

S/ODcolal Vishawakarma

Shri Ram Parashad Vishwakarma

Vill .Madugora . PO-Mohuda , Dt . Dhanbad , Bihar.

Vill. Behura, PO-Bisambharpur, Dt. Aurangabad, Bihar.

24.

S/o Ram Deo Vishwakarma

Shri Nandlal Vishwakarma

Vill . Padugoda , PO-Mohuda, Dt. Dhanbad, Bihar.

Vill.& PO Ambori , Dt. Aurangabad, Bihar.

25.

Shri Chander Shekhar Azad

S/ o Faguni Singh

Vill . Padugoda . PO-Mohuda, Dt. Dhanbad, Bihar.

Vill.Gaji Karma, PO -Bishanbherpur. Dt. Aurangabad, Bihar.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

2. The case of the sponsoring union is that Bideshi Mistry and 24 others whose names find place in the term of reference are the workers of Murlidih Colliery who have worked for years together in the underground as well as on the surface of the mine from the year 1980 to November, 1983. They were engaged through labour contractor. They worked in Pit No. 20 and 21 of the colliery as Tyndals and Fitters and when they demanded for regularisation they were stopped from duty. According to the sponsoring union, the action of the management of M/ s. B. C.C. Ltd. , in relation to the management of Murlidih Colliery is unfair labour practice and the concerned workmen should be departmentalised/ regularised in the regular employment of M/s. B.C.C. Ltd.

3. The case of the management , on the other hand , is that none of the concerned workmen have worked under the management of Murlidih Colliery and there is no relationship of employer and employees in between the management and the concerned persons , therefore , the reference is bad and the concerned persons are not entitled to any relief. The management has further pleaded that some workers are being assigned to the contractors and it may be that some of the concerned persons might have worked under any such contractor . According to the management the employees of the management are recruited on their names being sponsored by the Employment Exchange , they are given appointment letters , identity cards , wage -slips , bonus cards , provident fund membership etc. As the concerned persons never worked under the management of M/ s . B.C.C. Ltd. they could not produce such documents .

4. Although the management has denied the relationship of employers and employees in between the concerned persons and the management of M/ s . B.C.C. Ltd. , but the management's witness MW - 1-J . P. Panda who is Chief General Manager of Washeries Division , has stated that the concerned persons were working as contract labours under one Mahadeo Sharma who was given contract works . But the management has not filed any document to show that the said contractor was a licensee under the Contract Labour ( Regulation & Abolition ) Act nor the management has filed any paper to show that the management was registered for engagement of contractor under the aforesaid Act. The management has not filed even any tender register nor has filed any work -order given to the alleged contractor , Mahadeo Sharma . The concerned persons , on the other hand , have claimed that they have worked in the said colliery in the underground mine in the work of tyndals , fitters and also electrical helpers and in order to proveove that they have worked in the underground mine in Pits 20 & 21 they have filed certain requisition slips signed by the officials of the management . These requisition slips have been marked Ext. W - 1 series. From these requisition slips it appears that they were issued cap lamps from time to time and they were deputed to work in the underground mine by the management as contract labours . Further it appears that the cause of the concerned persons was espoused by the sponsoring union by different letters which have been marked Ext . W- 2 series . They have also filed a letter of Personnel Manager of the

1139

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4 , 2006/माघ 15, 1927

colliery dated 16/ 17-10-87 , from which it appears that on the demand of the sponsoring union to regularise the workmen working in prohibited category at Pits 20 & 21 of the mine, the Personnel Manager has informed that the records of the colliery are not available . From the re- conciliation file also it appears that the sponsoring union has clearly stated that the concerned workmen were working inPits 20 & 21 ofMurlidih Colliery. From the management's witness itself it is clear that the concerned persons were working in the colliery under a contractor, Mahadco Sharma, but the management has failed to prove that it was a genuine contract . Since the management has failed to prove that the contractor was holding a licence and the establishment of the management was registered under the provisions of Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition ) Act and they have also failed to file any tender register or any documents to prove that a licensee contractor was awarded work, it should be deemed that the contract was simply a camouflage and in fact the concerned persons were working under the supervision of the management as per the direction in the underground mine as well as in the surface of the mine under labour supplier and in order to camouflge the real issue the management has branded them as contract labours .

5. The management's witness has admitted that whoever enter into underground mine his attendance is marked in a register maintained in Form ' C ' as per the provisions of Mines Act. Under the Mines Act every mine must maintain a register in Form ' C ' for underground and in Form ' D ' for the surface of the mine and any person entering into the premises of the colliery his name must be mentioned in either of the two registers . The sponsoring union has called for the attendance register and in spite of the direction by this Tribunal the management has not filed the same nor they have given any explanation for not filing the attendance register . Therefore , in such a situation an adverse inference must be drawn against the management. Had these registers been filed it would have been proved that the concerned persons were working continuously during the years 1980 to 1983 in the underground mine as well as in the surface of the mine . These registers would have shown actual number of days worked by each of the concerned person either in the underground mine or in the surface of the mine , but management has suppressed the same . It further appears that the management initially in its written statement altogether denied that any of the concenred persons had worked in Pits 20 & 21 of Murlidih colliery, but their own witness , J. P. Panda who is an officer of higher rank ( Chief GeneralManager ) has admitted that the concerned persons were working , but they were contractor's workers . This admission has shifted onus upon the management to prove that the concerned persons were contractor's worker under avalid contract , which the management has utterly failed.

6. Therefore, on the basis of materials available on record 1 find that the concerned persons had regularly worked in the underground as well as in the surface of the mine in Pits 20 & 21 of Murlidih Colliery under the guidline and supervision of the officials of the management and they must be taken to be the employees of the management .

1140

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006 / MAGHA 15, 1927

Due to suppression of the statutory attendance register in Form 'C' and Form ' D ' an adverse inference must be drawn against the management and it must be presumed that the concerned persons have worked for more than 190/240 days in underground/ surface of the mine during a calendar year.

Therefore, the action of the management to stop work without complying of Section 25 - F of the Industrial Disputes Act is bad in law and the concerned persons deserve to be reinstated in service , but without back wages and they should be departmentalised/ regularised as General Mazdoor Category - I with effect from the date of refernece i.e. 8-5-1990 .

7. In the result , I render following award- Bideshi Mistry and 24 others whose names find place in the term of reference are the employees of the inanagement of Murlidih Colliery under Mohuda Area of M/ s. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and their demand for departmentalisation is justified and they are entitled for departmentalisation/ regularisation as General Mazdoor Category - I with effect from the date of reference i.e. 8-5-199t ) , but without any back wages . The management is directed to implement the award within 30 days from the date of publication of the award.

SARJU PRASAD , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 498. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार भा ०को० को ० लि० 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 32/ 1999 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं ० एल-20012/ 305/93- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 9th January, 2006

S.O. 498. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 32/ 1999) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court Dhanbad I now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BCCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 9-1-06 .

[No - L- 20012/305 /93 - IR (C- 1 ) ] S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO . 1 ) DHANBAD In the matter of a reference U/ s . 10( 1 ) ( d) (2A) of 1.D. Act .

REFERENCE NO . 32 OF 1999

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the management ofKatras Arca of M/ s . B.C.C.L.

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

AND

Their Workmen

PRESENT : Shri Sarju Prasad , Presiding Officer APPEARANCES :

None

For the Employers :

None

For the Workmen :

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal Dated, the 28th December, 2005

AWARD

ByOrder No. L- 20012 ( 305 )/931.R. (C - 1 ) dated 22-2-99 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 demand of union for the protection of wages of Sri Om Prakash Yadav which he was getting wages before his regularisation from piece rated to time rated category and his categorisation as per NCWA - IV of the job actually he was donig is legal and justified? If so , what relief the concerned workman is entitled?"

2. This reference case is of the year 1999. In spite of egistered notice being sent and two dates have already been expired no one has appeared on behalf of the concernedworkmen to take any step even to-day ( 28-12-05 ) . It, . therefore, appears that neither the concerned workman nor the sponsoring union is interested to contest the case .

3. In such circumstances , I render a ' No Dispute ' Award in the present reference case.

SARJU PRASAD , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 499.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार ई. सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय धनबाद 1 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 33 / 1999 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-1-06 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं ० एल-20012/ 313/98- आई आर ( सी-1) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 9th January, 2006

S.O. 499. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 33/ 1999 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court Dhanbad - I now as shown in the Annexure inthe Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of E.C.L. and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 9-1-106 .

No. L- 20012/313/98 - IR( C - 1 ) ] S.S. GUPTA. Under Secy.

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

1141 ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (No. 1) DHANBAD.

Inthe matter of reference U/S . 10( 1 ) ( d) (2A) of I.D. Act.

Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. IT- 1 / 2004) of the Industrial Tribunal , Pune as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of State Bank of India and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 10-01-2006.

Reference No. 33 of 1999

PARTIES : Employers in relation to the management of

Lakhimata Colliery ofM/s . E.C. Ltd.

[No. L- 12012/350/2001 - IR (B - I) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer AND

ANNEXURE

TheirWorkmen -

BEFORE SHRI S.S. VYAVAHARE, INDUSTRIAL PRESENT:

TRIBUNAL AT PUNE

Shri Sarju Prasad, Presiding Officer.

Reference (IT) No. 1/2004 APPEARANCES :

BETWEEN :

State Bank of India,

Forthe Employers Shri D.K. Verma, Advocate.

For the Workmen : None

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal .

Dated, the 28th December, 2005.

AWARD

(Constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955) Having perpetual succession & Common seal) , having Head Office at Mumbai and having various branches including 'Gulmohar' , 2420. East Street,

PUNE : 411 001 .

(Through the Asstt . General Manager ) 1st Party

AND

By Order No. L- 20012/313 /981.R. ( C- I ) dated 22-2-99 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 I.D. Act , 1947, referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:

Shri .Michael Fernandes , 31/6 , Kausar Baugh, Kondhwa Khurd ,

PUNE : 411 048.

"Whether the action of the management ofLakhimata Colliery of M/ s . E.C.L. is not referring Smt . Peria Bhuian , T/ Loader for Mining Board for her assessment of age is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to ?"

2nd Party

In the matter of : Reinstatement in service .

Appearances: Shri . D.V. Kulkarni , Advocate for the First Party.

2. This reference case is of the year 1999. Inspite of registered notice sent to the sponsoring union two dates have already been expired but no step has been taken by them till date (28-12-2005).

Shri Alvaria , Advocate , for the Second Party.

AWARD

3. In such circumstances it seems that the workman is not interested to contest his case . Accordingly , I render a ' No Dispute ' Award in the persent reference .

SARJU PRASAD, Presiding Offecer

नई दिल्ली, 10 जनवरी , 2006

1. 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 by the Central Govt . has referred the following , to the undersigned for its disposal according to law.

2. On receipt of the reference , notices have been issuedto First Party and Second Party. The Claim submitted by Second Party is at Exh . U - 8 . Whereas the written Statement of the First Party is at Exh . C-6 .

का. आ. 500.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण पुणे के पंचाट ( संदर्भ, सं. आई टी-1/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जोकेन्द्रीय सरकार को 10-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/350/2001- आई आर ( बी-1 ) ]

अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 10th January, 2006

3. It is the conection of the Second Party that , he was in the employment of the First Party from 4-8-1981 and he had unblemished service record, till 1994. According to the Second Party, from 1994 he started facing health problem and because of health problems , he was not in a position to attend the duty. However, whenever he had joined his services , he has submitted medical certificate . Having reason to believe about the health problems of Second S.O. 500.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central

194 GI/06-28 1142

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

Party, on 21-1-99 the Second Party was served with a chargesheet for having committed major and gross misconduct . The Second Party replied the chargesheet but , same was not accepted and the domestic enquiry was initiated against the Second Party. The Enquiry Officer, after concluding the domestic enquiry held Second Party quality for the misconduct of absentism and gross misconduct . The punishment of dimissal was awardedto the Second Party vide order dated 14-2-2000. The Second Partypreferred appeal against the said order to Dy. General Manager, who is appellate authority. The Appellate Authority gave personal hearing to the Second Party and modified the punishment of dismissal into discharge vide para 5 21 ( 5 ) (b ) of Shastri Award . The Second Party challenged it the punishment of discharge as an illegal act on the part of First Party by contending that , the enquiry initiated against him was not fair, proper and as per the principles of natural justice . Secondly, the Enquiry Officer did not consider the medical certificates submitted by Second Party for justifying absence and came to the wrong conclusion that, the Second Party unauthorisedly remained absent. The Second Party further submits that , he was punished under wrong clause of Shastri Award and therefore , the Second Party referred the dispute to the Conciliation Officer. Because of the failure of conciliation proceeding, the Desk Officer submitted the reference to the under signed.

4. The Second Party claims the relief ofreinstatement with continuity of service and back wages .

5. The First Party resisted the claim vide written Statement Exhibit C - 6 and contended that, claint of the Second Party is false, frivolous and not based on true facts . The First Party challenges the substantiality of reference contending, that , the Central Government has no authority to refer the dispute for adjudication under sec. 10 ( 1) (d) read with sec. 2 -A of the Industrial Disputes Act . While admitting, the status of Second Party as an employee of the First Party. The First Party denies that , till 1994 the Second Party has unblemished service record . According to First Party, the Second Party was in habit of remaining absent on duty on one or other ground . Because of the long standing absence , the Second Party has to face loss of pay though all Extra Ordinary Leave of the credit of Second Party were exhausted by him. According to the Second Party, inspite of noticedt . 11-9-98 and other Memos , the Second Party preferred to remain absent and thereby. he has indulged into the misconduct of disturbing smooth functioning of work at the office as well as disobeying the orders of superiors . While justifying the domestic enquiry and chargesheet issued to Second Party, the First Party submits that , the misconduct on the part of Second Party was so serious that, for awarding punishment for first misconduct , the domestic enquiry had, had to be initiated. Whilejustifying the domestic enquiry, the First Party states that, full opportunity was given to the Second Party to participate in the enquiry. Second Party exhausted the said right , by engaging defence representative . Only after giving an apportunity to the Second Party, to participate in the enquiry, and only after the Second Party was held guilty for the misconduct , the punishment of dismissal was

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] awarded to the Second Party. While justifying , the said punishment , First Party states that, the Second Party remained absent on duty for 545 days which cannot be considered leniently. Even then , while considering the appeal , the Appellate Authority has modified the punishment of dismissal into discharge and thereby, omitted the Second Party to get terminal benefits , if otherwise , Second Party is entitled. According to the First Party, because ofthe sympathy shown to the Second Party ; even repeatedly there cannot be any illegality in the order of discharge . The FirstParty therefore , prays to reject the claim .

6. On the respective contentions of the parties , I have framed following issues at Exhibit C - 4. Issue No. 3 was framed in respect of illegal termination vide order dt . 14-2-2000. Whereas the dispute has been referred by Conciliation Officer in respect of order of discharge dt . 30-5-2000 . Therefore , Issue No. 3 in recast .

7. My findings are recorded against the case.

FINDINGS ISSUES

...Yes

(1) Whether tlie domestic enquiry held against the Party No. 2was fair, proper and as per the principles of naturaljustice ?

(2) IfNo , whether First Party has proved the misconduct ofthe Second Party before Enquiry Officer & Tribunal ....Does not survive .

No.

(3) Docs Party No. 2 prove that First Party has illegally discharged him with effect from 14-2-2000 ? (RE -CAST ISSUE)

No.

(4 ) If Yes, whether Party No. 2 is entitled to get reinstatement, conti- nuity of service and back- wages ?

(5) What order ?

Asperfinal order.

8. Reasons :-

The Second Party does not dispute the fairness of enquiry and to that effect the Second Party has failed pursis Exhibit U- 12 admitting that, the domestic enquiry conducted against the Second Party was fair, proper and as per the principles ofnatural justice . In view of pursis Exhibit U- 12, it is not necessary to decide the fairness of enquiry and issue No. I can be answered in affirmative .

9. Inview of affirmative finding , on Issue No. 1 , the First Party need not require to prove the misconduct of Second Party before Enquiry Officer or Tribunal and therefore , issue No. 2 does not survive . I therefore , record my finding on Issue No. 2 to that effect .

10. Issue Nos . 3 and 4 :

Now, coming to the next important point for discussion is in respect of order of discharge passed by [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

the First Partydt . 30-5-2000 and its legality. The Second Party does not dispute about his long standing absence mentioned in the chargesheet . It is also not disputed to the Second Party that, after giving Extra Ordinary Leave to the Second Party some portion of his absentee was treated as 'without pay' or ' loss of pay ' . The report of Enquiry Officer shows that , the Second Party was habitually remaining absent which resulted into the disturbance of smooth functioning of the First Party. The Enquiry Officer has further considered that , on 4 occasions even the Second Party did not submit leave applications. The chargesheet which is at Exhibit C- 9 shows that , in spite of letter dt . 11-9-98 and 29-10-98 , the Second Party remained absent on 3 counts for six days , 5 days and six days respectively. The act on the party of Second Party remaining absent inspite ofnoticesdt. 11-9-98 and 29-10-98 is the gross misconduct .

11. In order to show that , the. First Party has committed illegality in passing the order of discharge , the Second Party has adduced his evidence on affidavit at Exh. U-13 and has tried of bring on record that , because of ill -health and on medical ground, he could not attend the duty. However , he has submitted applications with medical certificates whenever he has resumed duties .

12. Shri Alvaris , learned Counsel for the Second Party while submitting his written notes of arguments, has submitted before me that , the absence of the Second Party because of ill -health or on medical ground was not properly considered by the Enquiry Officer which resulted into the wrong conclusion of dismissal. In this connection , he had attracted my attention on the enquiry proceeding dt. 28-5-99 and submitted before me that , even the Presiding Officer had confirmed the medical certificate submitted by Second Party on joining his duty after availing the leave ; except on one occasion . According to Shri Alvaris , learned Counsel for the Second Party that , inpsite of admission on the party of the First party about the submission of medical certificates by the Second Party while joining his duty after availing leave , the finding of Enquiry Officer holding Second Party guilty for absentism, is absolutely illegal .

13. Another point that has been stressed by Mr. Alvaris learned Counsel for the Second Party about the mentioning of wrong clause of Shastri Award while inflicting punishment . While taking me to Clause No. 521 sub -clause 5, sub -clause (b) of Shastri Award , it is submitted that, under said sub - clause of 521 there is punishment of warning , censure or adverse remark against the deliquent. Accordingto Mr. Alvaris under sub- clause (b ) , there is no punishment ofdischarge. Said punishment is under sub- clause ( e) of sub-clause 5 of Clause 521 of Shastri Award . Therefore, he has challenged the punishment of discharge .

14. After giving conscious thought , while coming tothe second submission advanced by Shri Alvaris , though it is true that under sub -clause (b) ofsub-clause 5 of Clause 521 , there is no punishment of discharge and though it is true that the punishment of discharge is under sub-clause (e), to my mind, merely on this two technical ground, the action initiated against the Second Party cannot be doubted. It is significant to note that, sub -clause 5 of

1143

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

Clause 521 provides punishment of discharge under sub- clause( e) and therefore , it cannot be said that, punishment ofdischrge is not available against the gross misconduct . It is pertinent to note that, time and again though it has tried to argue on behalf of Second Party that, on every count medical certificates were submitted by the Second Party, the Second Party is not only charged for absentism , but , also for the misconduct of wilful insubordination or gross negligence . Therefore , I do not give much importance to the technical mistake about the correct clause of sub- clause 5 of Clause 521 of Shahstri Award .

15. Now, coming to the gravity of the misconduct, as earlier I have mentioned that the Second party was not chargesheeted only for absentism but , also for the gross misconduct of wilful insurbordination, disobedience of lawful order and gross negligence , under sub -clause 4 of Clause 521 of Shastri Award.

16. Even assuming for the sake of arguments , that, the Second Party was submitting medical certificates whenever he was joining the duty after availing leave. The chargesheet shows that , in spite of notices , dt . 11-9-98 and 21-10-98 , the Second Party remained absent from 16-11-98 to 21-11-98, 1-12-98 to 5-12-98 , 14-12-98 to 19-12-98 . Besides that , admittedly, from 6-1-97 to 19-12-98 the Second Party was absent from 364 days out of which 26-12-97 to 27-12-97 and 23-1-98 to 14-2-98 previlige leave on medical ground was granted to the Second Party. It is pertinent to note that , Exhibit U - 15 shows Extra Ordinary Leave of 71 days claimed by the Second Party. This document further shows that , even after granting Extra Ordinary Leave . 71 days out of 279 days leave had been treated as ' without pay' . Whereas the reamining abserice of Second Party was treated as Extra Ordinary Leave . Now, it is pertinent to note that, in fact , after notice dt . 11-9-98 and 29-10-98 it was obligatory on the party of Second Party either to report on duty immediately or to inform about his absence by justifying medical certificate . Notice dt. 11-9-98 Exh . U- 16 shows that, the Second Party was advised to joint the duty within 30 days failing to which , he was deemed to have retired compulsorily. In spite of this , the Second Party did not reply promptly. On every count, the Second Party seems to have submitted medical leave after availing the leave while joining the duty. To my mind , the Second Party who is ex - military men, well conversant with the discipline rules , is not even remotely expected to do the things which he did.

17. Another reason which could be considered for considering the genuiness of medical certificate, is the statement of the Second Party before Appellate Authority. The learned defence representative for the Second Party, in order tojustify the absentism of Second Party, has that , from 1993 onwards the Second Party was edicted to liquor. To my mind, according to the Displinary Authority, here the cat has come out of the bat . It is significant to note that, before the Enquiry Officer , to justify the absence, the ground of sickness was only accorded . However , before the Appellate Authority, total contradictory stand was taken by the Second Party and therefore , in my humble opinion, for proving the bona fides, the Second Party ought to have examined Medical Officer before the Court .

1144

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ]

Ref. No. L -40012 / 103/ 2003 - IR(DU) dated 31-12-2003

BETWEEN :

Sh. Paramveer Singh,

S/ o Sh . Samay Singh , Vill. & Post Ambuwala , Distt . Hardwar, (Uttaranchal)

AND

1. The General Post Master

However, this has not been done . Therefore , considering this aspect , I am of the clear opinion that , the Appellate Authority having reason to believe that , the Second party was edicted to liquor which adversely affected his attendance on duty; has sufficiently showered mercy to him by awarding terminal benefits , if the Second Party is entitled . The result of which, the Second Party has received amount ofGratuity. Considering the lenient view, taken by the First Party, to my mind , no modification in the order of dischrgedt . 30-5-2000 , under the guise of Sec . 11 -A of the I.D. Act is warranted.

Dehradun

2. The Assistant Supdt . of Post Offices , Hardwar(Uttaranchal ) .

AWARD

18. For the above referred reason , I have no hesitation to conclude that the Second Party has failed to prove that , he was illegally discharged and therefore , he is not entitled to get any relief. I therefore , decide Issue Nos. 3 and 4 in negative and pass the following award.

AWARD

( 1 ) Reference is answered in negative.

(2) Parties to bear their cost .

Pune

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide their Order No. L -40012/ 103 / 2003 - IR (DU) dated 31-12-2003 has referred following dispute for adjudication to the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court , Lucknow for adjudication.

Dated: 23rd Dec. 2005

S. S. VYAVAHARE, Industrial Tribunal

नई दिल्ली, 9 जनवरी , 2006

"Whether the action of the management of Deptt. of Posts in terminating the services of Sh . Paramveer Singh S/o Sh. Samay Singh , EDDA w.e.f. 21-12-2002 isjust and legal ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?"

का. आ. 501. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार डाक विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण लखनऊ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 8/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -40012/ 103/2003- आई आर (डीयू) ]

कुलदीप राय वर्मा , डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 9th January, 2006

Worker's case in brief is that worker came to know from some reliable sources that the post of EDDA under opposite party is lying vacant and therefore , he applied for the said post ofAsstt. Post Master, Post Office Hardwar. Accordingly, he was employed w.e. f. 1-3-2001 . It is further alleged that he worked till 21-12-2002 and on 21-12-2002 he was deprived of his job by verbal order of the opposite parties . It is further alleged that he worked for more than 240 days and in his place another person Manoj Kumar was employed and no notice, notice pay or compensation was awarded to the worker before depriving him of the job. The worker has therefore prayed the court that order dated 21-12-2002 be declared as illegal and should be reinstated with all consequential benefits .

S.O. 501. In pursuanceuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 8/2004 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court , Lucknow now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Deptt . ofPost and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 9-1-2006 .

The worker has filed photostat copy of charge certificate dated 1-3-2001 and 21-12-2002 together with application for employment a certificate of employment . Photostat copies of postal receipts addressed to opposite partiesdt . 14-2-2004 has been filed.

[No. L-40012/103/2003 - IR (DU)] KULDIP RAI VERMA , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM -LABOUR COURT, LUCKNOW

PRESENT :

Shrikant Shukla, Presiding Officer L.D. No. 8/2004

The opposite party has filed the written statement and disputed the claim of the worker, Param Veer Singh. It issubmitted by the opposite party that one Sh . Devi Dayal retired on 30-6-2000 . Sh. Devi Dayal was Post Master Subash Garh (Luxor) . One Shri Vinod Kumar, regular Rural EDDA was engaged in place of Shri Devi Dayal w.e.f. 1-7-2000 . It is further submitted that Shri Vinod Kumar continued to work in place of Devi Dayal till 30-6-2003 . Το substitute EDDA various persons named as Rajesh Kumar, Dinesh Kumar, Jeet Kumar , Radhey Shayam , Param Veer [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Singh, Manoj Kumar worked as stop gap arrangement . On 30-6-2003 the competent authority appointed regular Post Master at Subash Garh ( Luxor ) and therefore Shri Vinod Kumar, regular EDDA reverted back to his post ofEDDA. Thus , besides the worker , Param Veer Singh other 5 persons also worked as substitute in stop gap arrangement . Except Sh . Param Veer Singh no one else raised the dispute . It is further submitted that Param Veer Singh of his own abandoned the service on 20-12-2002 due to his personal inability and accordingly he handed over the charge on 21-12-2002 (FN) . Inability shown by Sh . Param Veer Singh was that he has to go to Metro Railway for interview and has to defend case , which is registered against him. Disputant Param Veer Singh was not appointed as such instead he was appointed on 28-2-2001 for one month on the stop gap arrangement . It is also submitted that Sh . Manoj Kumar was engaged as substitute after Sh . Param Veer Singh left the job . It is contended by the opposite party that vacancies are advertised and appointment proceedings take place and person who qualify are apointed by regular order after verification of character and the appointment letter contains the condition of service and accordingly he is bound by the service rules . All the persons engaged as substitute in the place of Vinod Kumar knew well that their services are not regular but post belongs to Vinod Kumar. It is further submitted that Industrial Court has no jurisdiction as this dispute is not industrial dispute.

Worker has filed rejoinder wherein he has reiterated the facts of his statement of claim .

Opposite party has filed following documents along with rejoinder:

1. Photostat copy of charge certificate dtd . 3-1-2001 .

2. Photostat copy of charge certificate dtd. 21-12-2002 (not legible).

3. Photostat copy of application of the worker not legible.

4. Photostat copy of certificate issued by Vinod Kumardtd . 21-12-2002

5. Photostat copy of letter of Asstt . Director General date not legible .

6. Photostat copy of judgment of Hon'ble High Court , Karnataka at Bangalore D.M. Nagesh & others v. Asstt . Supdt . , Post Officer & others passed in writ petition 21331-333/2000, 7. Photostat copy of application of Vinod Kumar addressed to Asstt . Supdt . Post Office , dtd. 1-4-2003 .

8. Photostat copy of FIR dtd. 12-3-2002 .

9. Photostat copy of charge certificate dtd. 21-12-2002, 1-3-2001.

1145

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4 , 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

10. Photostat copy of application of Paramveer dtd . 1-3-2001.

11. Photostat copy ofjudgment of Supreme Court (1998) SLT General Manager Telecom v. Srinivas Rao & others , holding Telecommunication Department ofthe Union of India as an industry.

12. Photostat copy of gradation list of Gramin Dak Sewak including Vinod Kumar.

13. Photostat copy of claim of Asstt . Post Office Supdt . 21-4-2003 submitted before ALC.

14. Photostate copy of extract of EDA Conduct rules .

15. Photostat copy of application of the worker dtd. Nil.

16. Letter of Sr. Supdt . Post Office dtd. Nil .

17. OfAsstt. Supdt . Post office dtd. Nil .

18. Replication of the worker before ALC dtd. 29-4-2003.

Worker has examined himself. The opposite party has examined Sh . R.C. Rathore, Asstt. Supdt . Post Office & Sh. Vinod Kumar

Parties have not turned up for arguments therefore perused records and evidence carefully.

Admitted facts from the evidence of parties:

1. There was one Sh. Devidayal who was working as Post Master and on his retirement Sh . Vinod Kumar became the Post Master.

2. Before the worker resuming the charge of EDDA one Sh. Radhey Shyam was engaged on the post ofEDDA & worker took charge from Sh . Radhey Shyam.

3. Worker handed over his charge to Manoj Kumar .

4. When worker left the engagement he did not go the post office where he was engaged.

5. A criminal case proceeded for instigating the modesty of a girl against the worker in the court ofCivil Judge Junior Division . The case was based onthe report of P.S. Pathri . The worker obtained the bails thereafter.

Worker has denied the document 7/36 with application ofParamveer, however, the worker has admitted the charge certificate 7/37 dtd . 1-3-2001 .

Worker has stated in the cross examination that he received the appointment letter, but he has not filed any appointment letter in support of his case & thereafter it is presumed that had he produced the appointment letter, it could have adversely affected his case .

Worker knows that one Sh . Devidayal was the Post Master in the post office who retired and on his place 1146

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

Sh .Vinod Kumar worked . One being questioned as to when Sh . Devidayal retired , worker exhibited his unawareness .

Worker has admitted in his cross - examination that he took charge from Sh . Radhey Shyam , but has not disclosed the period as to how many months or days Radhey Shyam worked.

Sh. Vinod Kumar is a material witness in this case who has filed his affidavit in support of the opposite party and has been cross examined on behalf ofworker . Sh . Vinod Kumar has stated in his affidavit that he is working as EDDA in post office Subhash Garh . He has also stated that Sh . Devidayal was the Post Master who retired at the age of65 years on 30-6-2000 A.N. and he (Sh . Vinod Kumar) worked in his place since 1-7-2000 to 30-6-2003 and in his ( Sh . Vinod Kumar's) absence following persons were engaged as substitutes from time to time :

1. Sh . Rajesh Kumar,

2. Sh . Dinesh Kumar

3. Sh . Jeet Kumar

4. Sh . Radhey Shyam

5. Sh. Param Veer Singh ( the worker)

6. Sh . Manoj Kumar Singh

The engagement of the substitute were approved by Asstt . Supdt. Post Office . Sh Vinod Kumar has also stated in the affidavit as on 1-7-2003 regular Post Master was posted and accordingly he joined at the original post of EDDA. Sh . Vinod Kumar has also stated inthe affidavit that 20-12-2002 Paramveer who was working as substitute athis place told him that his interview is scheduled at Metro Railway, Delhi and he required a certificate of 2 lines so that he could manage the service at Metro Railway and also told him "मेरे गांव में एक लड़की का लफड़ा चल रहा है । इसलिए मुझे थाने व कचहरी के चक्कर काटने पड़ रहे हैं । इसलिए मैं कच्ची नौकरी नहीं कर पा रहा हूँ यदि विश्वास न हो तो थाने की रिपोर्ट. आपको दे रहा हूं । मेरा चार्ज रिपोर्ट के साथ भेज देना मैंने तो पहले ही लिखकर भेज रखा है कि मैं जब चाहूं यह कच्ची नौकरी छोड़ दूंगा और इसकाकोई दावा नहीं करूंगा ।"

No question on the above fact has been asked on behalf of the worker to discredit him.

The second witness is Asstt . Supdt. Post Office who filed the affidavit insupport of the written statement and has been cross -examined on behalf of the worker. Asstt . Supdt. Post Office has denied that the worker was ever appointed. He has also stated that Sh. Paramveer and 5 others were engaged as substitutes of Sh. Vinod Kumar. He has stated that he gave approval for engagement of Sh. Paramveer for one month only.

Asstt . Supdt.'s note on the paper No. 2/6 filed by the worker himself goes to support the statement of Sh. R.C. Rathore, Asstt. Supdt . Post Master that he accorded approval for the engagement of the worker Paramveer for one month only.

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ] There is no regular appointment letter in favour of the worker that he was a regularly appointed EDDA .

It isproved that Sh . Devidayal , Post Master retired and EDDA Sh. Vinod Kumar officiated in stop gap arrangement till new incumbent is appointed as regular post master. To meet the requirement of EDDA 6 persons (including Paramveer ) were engaged as substitutes .

Onthe careful reading of the copy of FIR it is evident that for an incident dtd . 12-3-2002 452/354/504/506 IPC Criminal case was registered against Paramveer . From reading the entire evidence onthe record that the worker Paramveer was compelled to leave the service of substitute EDDA and accordingly he left the job, the opposite party was not instrumental in terminating the worker .

It is noteworthy that the certificate filed by the worker isissued on 20-12-2002 by Sh . Vinod Kumar stating that Paramveer performed the work from1-3-2001 to 20-12-2002. This goes to show that the worker must have told the circumstances for getting the certificate on 20-12-2002 . Sh. Vinod Kumar has stated the reasons for furnishing the certificate and the fact as to why Sh . Paramveer did not want to continue with the job. It was the worker who ofhis own deserted the job of substitute EDDA, as he knew it is not a lasting job for him.

So far the question as to whether the post office department is an industry or not , I have carefully analysed all aspects of the work carried out by the postal department . It functions inclose co -operation of the workers and the management . It has functions to carry letters from one place to another as the courier service . It has additional function to encourage saving by public and as such works as banking industry also. It is irrelevant fact that it is a department of the Government . I therefore, come to the conclusion that the postal department is an industry.

From the discussions above , I come to the conclusion that the worker's claim is false and baseless . He was engaged as substitute EDDA like 5 others, in place of Sh. Vinod Kumar who was officiating as Post Master in the stop gap arrangement . It was Sh . Paramveer himself who left the job as it was not of permanent nature . The opposite party has not terminated him as alleged. Issue accordingly disposed of. Worker is not entitled to any relief.

Lucknow 27-12-2005 SHRIKANT SHUKLA , Presiding Officer. नई दिल्ली , 10 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 502. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार नार्दर्न. कोलफील्ड लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 1147 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/ माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

सीजीआईटी/एलसी/आर/ 198/ 97 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 10-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-22012/252 / 96- आई आर ( सी- II ) ]

एन.पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 10th January , 2006

S.O. 502. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT/LC/R/ 198/97) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court , Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Northern Coalfields Limited and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 10-1-2006.

[No. L- 22012/252/96-IR (C-II ) ]

N.P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR

No. CGIT/LC/R/ 198/97

Presiding Officer : Shri C.M. Singh

The Secretary,

Koyla Shramik Sabha (HMS ) ,

Northern Coalfields Ltd. ,

Amlohri Project ,

....Workman/Union

Distt. Sidhi (MP)

Versus

The General Manager,

Northern Coalfields Ltd. , Amlohri Project ,

Sidhi

Management

AWARD

Passed on this 16th day of December, 2005

1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. L- 22012 /252 / 96 - IR ( C- II ) dated 11/ 14-7-97 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :-

2. The case of workman Shri P.N. Gupta in brief is as follows . That he passed his diploma in Electrical Engineering Examination held in November 1978 with 1st Division. The management of NCL gave him appointment by order dated 3-10-79 as Foreman Trainee (Electrical and Mechanical) . On completion of training , the workman as well as Shri Y.S. Bhandari and Shri R.K. Upadhyay were regularized as Foreman in the scale of Rs . 640-1160 . Shri Y.S. Bhandari and Shri R.K. Upadhyay were junior to workman. On completion of 3 years , as foreman Grade B, hewas promoted to the post of foreman incharge ( T& S) Grade A. The workman as well as Shri B.B. Singh and Shri Y.S. Bhandari were called for test/interview for the post of Foreman incharge by letter dated 25-9-85 . The workman and other juniors were gain called for interview for promotion to the post of foreman incharge vide letter dated 19-2-87 . By order dated 26-9-87, juniors to workman were promoted as foreman incharge (E& M) but this relief was denied to the workman without any justification . The workman was never called for interview after 1987. When theworkman repeatedly protested, he was given promotion to T& S Grade A from 22-10-90 . In accordance with circular issued by NCL , Singrauli in the year 1986 since the promotion was based on DPC of 85 or 87 , the promotion has to be made from 85 or 87 and it cannot be made from 1990. An examination was held for promotion from Non- Executive to Executive on 30-12-92 . The qualification for this was 7 years total service including 3 years service in the Grade ofT& S Grade A Foreman Incharge . The workman was not promoted in the examination on the alleged ground that he had not completed 3 years service in the grade of TS Grade A. Infact due to the deliberate refusal of the management to give promotion from 1987 the workman wasdenied the opportunity. As per rules and regulations , theworkman is required to be given promotion from 1985 or in any case from 1987 when the interview and DPC were held. The requirement of passing examination has to be ignored in the case of the workman because it was due to the mistake of the management. The juniors to workman were promoted to E - 2 grade by order dated 10-8-90 and 26-12-91 . Juniors to the workman were subsequently promotedto E-3 Grade by order dated 20-11-93, 2-9-94 and 4-7-95 . The workman is entitled to similar treatment and he isentitled to be promoted to E - 2 & E- 3 grade from the date of promotion of his juniors . The workman is, therefore , entitled to promotion E- 2 from 10-8-90 and E-3 grade from 20-11-93 or 2-9-94 with all consequential benefits.

"Whether the action of the management of Amlohari Project of NCL , Singrauli in not promoting Shri P.N. Gupta, Foreman Grade " A" Amlohari Project to the postof Executive 2 and then to Executive 3 even though workmen junior to him have been posted as Executive 2 and Executive 3 is legal and justified? If not , what relief is the workman entitled and from which date?"

3. The management contested the reference and filed their Written Statement broadly denying the case set up by the workman . The case of the management in brief is as follows: That the workman was appointed as foreman (Tr. ) andjoined duty on 12-11-79 . He was regularized as foreman (E & M) w.e.f. 11-11-81 on completion of 2 years training period with the condition that he will draw increment in Foreman's scale up to the stage of Rs . 745 ( NCWA - II) only, 1148

THE GAZETIE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

beyond which he will be entitled to draw increment on obtaining/producing the Electrical Supervisory Certificate of Competency valid for mines . That the workman was asked several times for obtaining/ producing the Electrical Supervisory Certificate of Competency but he did not submit the said certificate till date . The management considered his case for further promotion to the post of foreman incharge on 20-1-1988 , but he failed in interview, hence the DPC did not recommend his name for promotion. That taking a lenient view , his case was again considered for promotion to the post of foreman incharge and the DPC had recommended him for promotion. Accordingly he was promoted to the post of foreman incharge Grade A w.e.f. 22-10-90 . The workman even after receiving repeated letters dated 20-4-85, 17-8-95, 21-5-96 and 16-8-2001 for producing Electrical Supervisory Certificate of Competency , he did not produced the same . The Electrical Supervisory Certificate of Competency is a statutory requirement for the Foreman (Electricals) for their working in mines . The selection test was conducted for promotion from Non- Executive to Executive cadre in December, 1992 and all eligibile candidates were allowed to appear in the said test . That eligibility for appearing in the said test is counted as on31stMarch of the previous year . Since the workman had not completed 3 years of service in T & S Grade -A on 31st March 1992, he could not be allowed to appear in the said test . That the CIL management has again conducted a selection test on 17-1-99 for promotion to the executive cadre. The workman was allowed to appear in the said test but the workman along with other candidates boycotted the said test and thereafter no test has been conducted so far . That the workman cannot claim promotion to the Executive Cadre as a matter of right because the promotion to the Executive cadre is based on eligibility criteria subject to availability of vacancy. As the workman had not fulfilled theprescribed criteria in December, 1992 , he could not be allowed to appear in the said test , hence his claim is totally misconceived and liable to be rejected with cost .

4. After having submitted his statement of claim, the workman absented himself from attending the proceedings in this tribunal on various dates and therefore again a notice was issued to him by registered AD post for filing rejoinder and documents. But inspite of sufficient service of notice on him , he failed to put in appearance and therefore on 28-3-05 , the reference proceeded exparte against the work man .

5. The management filed affidavit of Shri Prit Pal Singh, the then working as Dy. Personal Manager in NCL, Amlori project for proving their case .

6. I have heard Shri A.K. Shashidharan , Advocate the learned counsel for the management . I have very carefully gone through the entire evidence on record .

7. The case of the management is fully proved from the uncontroverted and unrebutted affidavit of management's witness Shri Prit Pal Singh .

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 8. The reference is therefore , answered in favour of the management and against the workman by holding that the action of the management of Amlohari Project ofNCL Singrauli in not promoting Shri P.N. Gupta, Foreman Grade "A" Amlohari project to the post of Executive 2 and then to Executive 3 even though workmen junior to him have been posted as Executive 2 and Executive 3 is legal and justified and consequently the workman is not entitled to anyrelief.

9. The parties shall bear their own cost of this reference .

10. Copy of the award be sent to the Government of India , Ministry of Labour as per rules .

C. M. SINGH , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 10 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 503.- 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 दिल्लीके पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 139/2004.) को प्रकाशित करती है, जोकेन्द्रीय सरकार को 10-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42012/287/03- आई आर ( सी- II ) ]

एन. पी. केशवन , डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 10th January, 2006

S.O. 503. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 139/ 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 Central Public Works Department, and their workman, received by the Central Government on 10-1-2006.

[No. L -42012/287/03 - IR( C-II )] N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT II, NEW DELHI

Presiding Officer : R. N. Rai I.D. No. 139/2004 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

IN THE MATTER OF :

Shri Ashutosh Kumar ,

C/o CPWD Karamchari Union, Plot No. 1 , Aram Bagh Near Udasin Mandir, Paharganj , New Delhi -55.

Versus

TheDirector General of Works ,

Central Public Works Department ,

NirmanBhawan,

NewDelhi .- 11

AWARD

TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No. L- 42012/ 287/ 2003 - IR ( CM - II ) CENTRAL GOVERNMENT DT. 17-08-2004 has referred the following point for adjudication.

The point runs as hereunder :-

"Whether the contract between the management of CPWD, and their contractor is sham and the demand of CPWD Karamchari Union for absorption/ regularization of S/ Shri Ashutosh Kumar , Satya Prakash and Tejpal ( Contract Labour) with the management of CPWD is legal and justified ? If yes , to what relief they are entitled ."

The Union has filed claim statement on behalf of the workmen. In the claim statement it is stated that the workman no. I was initially inducted in the year 1997 and the workman no. 2 was inducted in the year 1998 as Generator Operator through the private contractor , Management no. 2 for discharging the job of operating for the principal employer, management no. 1. it is stated that ever since their appointment they have been discharging their job diligently and sincerely for the management of CPWD having been posted at Electrical Division No. 1 , Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi - 1 under the Executive Engineer, Electrical i.e. management no. 2 .

That the nature of job discharged by both the workmen are perennial and permanent in nature and the job satisfy all the ingredients contained in section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition ) Act, 1970 work suiting abolition of contract labour in the said job . it is stated that the contract awarded by CPWD in favour of contractor for carrying out perennial nature ofjob is bad in law and the contract itself is vague which ought to be lifted in industrial adjudication .

Thatthe workmen are placed under the direct control and supervision of principal employer and the contractor has no role to play in day to day affairs of working of the workman . it is stated that the nature of job performed by 194 GI /06-29

1149

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4 , 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

theworkmen are similar to the workmen posted on regular basis and they work as it under the principal employer.

Thateach of the workmen has completed 240 days in each year of working , regarding the establishment of principal employer to regularize them in the principal employer. That the workmen through the union send a demand notice to the management requesting therein for their regularize/absorption in the establishment of the CPWD since there respective date of appointment through contractor with consequential benefits but the management has neither replied nor complied with the said notice.

It transpires from perusal of the order sheet that the management has not been turning up from 16-05-2005 . Notice has been sent on 16-07-2005 . Adjournment applicationwas moved on 31-01-2005 and 30-09-2004 . Notice has also been sent on 25-05-2004. The management sought adjournment on 14-03-2005 as such notice has been sent twice and the management has appeared. The workmen have filed affidavit and documents. The case proceeded ex-parte.

It transpires from perusal of the documents filed by the workmen applicants that Gate Passes to them were issued by the management . The attendance of the workmen has also been taken by the management . They have filed photocopy of the attendance register. It is supported by their affidavit . The workmen applicants have filed attendance register of Log Book of Generator Set . The workmen have filed Gate Passes issued by the management directly to them and they haved filed photocopy of attendance register maintained for running the Generators so the workmen have completed 240 days work in each year of their working. This fact is proved by the affidavits filed by the workmen and documents filed by them . The workmen have proved their case. The management has not filed even a scrap of paper despite knowledge and despite appearance . The workmen have also proved that they have not been working under any contractor and if there was any contract that was sham and the workmen should be deemed to be the employees of the management of CPWD . Contract Labour cannot be employed for perennial nature ofwork.

The reference is replied thus :----

The contract between the management of CPWD and their contractor is sham and the demand of CPWD Karamchari Union for absorption/regularization of S / Shri Ashutosh Kumar, Satya Prakash and Shri Tejpal ( Contract labour) with the management of CPWD is legal and justified. The management is directed to absorb the workmen within two months from the date of publication of the award.

Award is given accordingly.

Dated: 29-12-2005

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer 1150

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 10 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 504.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार वैस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या CGIT/LC/R/ 123 /2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 10-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं ० एल- 22012/185/01- आईआर( सी- II ) ] एन.पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi the , 10th January, 2006 S.O. 504. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT/LC/R/ 123 /2002 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Nandan Washery of WCL , and their workman , received by the Central Government on 10-1-2006.

[No. L- 22012/185/01-1R(C - 11 ) ] N. P. KESAVAN , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR

No. CGIT/ LC /R/ 123/ 2002

PRESENT :

Shri C. M. SINGH , Presiding Officer

Workman/Union The General Secretary, B. K. K. M. S ( BMS) , P. O. Parasia, Chhindwara

Versus

TheGeneral Manager , Nandan Washery of WCL , P. O. Damua, Chhindwara

Management

AWARD

Passed on this 8th day of December , 2005 1. The Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, vide its Notification No. L- 22012/ 185/ 2001 - IR ( CM - II ) dated 29-8-02 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal:-

"Whether the action of the General Manager, Nandan Washery of WCL , PO Damua, Distt . Chhindwara (MP) in not regularising Smt . Shanti Bai as Lab . Helper w.e.f. 21-12-97 is legal and justified? If not, what relief she is entitled to ?"

2. After the reference order was received , it was duly registered on 9-9-2002 and notices were issued to the parties to file their respective statements of claim . In this case in spite of sufficient service of notice on the workman/Union , no one put in appearance for Union/workman . No statement ofclaim has been filed on behalf of Union/workman . The

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] management moved an application dated 29-7-05 with the prayer to pass award in terms of settlement ( Annexure M/1) and the order ( Annexure M/2 ) . Both these annexures are attached with the aforesaid application . Thereafter the management filed original settlement dated 28-1-04 (M/ 1 ) and original office order dated 30-31-1-2004 (M/2 ) . The original settlement deed on record reveals that the settlement has been arrived at between the applicant Smt . Shantibai and the management . The signature of Smt . Shantibai on this original settlement deed has been identified by Shri A. Majumdar, Sr. Personal Officer ofthe management who made an endorsement to the effect that Smt . Shantibai made her signature on the settlement deed inhis presence.

3. The above settlement deed reveals that the dispute has been settled between the parties on the following terms and conditions :-

i It is agreed by the Management that Smt. Shantibai , W/o Late Khemchand, Cat . I who is working in Canteen , is to be regularized as Canteen Vendor, Cat . II w.e.f. 1-1-2002 .

ii. It is full and final settlement in case of Smt . Shantibai , W/ o Late Khemchand , regarding regularization.

iii. It is also agrced by the Union and the employee concerned that they shall withdraw the Industrial Dispute Case referred to the CGIT and neither the employee nor the Union will raise any more dispute in future , in any Forum .

iv. The Union will also not quote this as a precedent in any other case .

v. This form " H " settlement supercedes the earlier form "H" settlement , as described in Short recital of the case .

vi. Financial benefit , if any arises, will be given w.c.f. 1-1-2004 only.

4. The above terms and conditions appear to bejust and proper and under the circumstances , it shall be in the interest of justice to pass award in terms of settlement arrived at between the parties .

5. The award is , therefore , passed in terms of settlement without any order as to costs .

6. Copy of the award be sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour as per rules .

C.M. SINGH, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 10 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 505.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय खाद्य निगम के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 36/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 10-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं ० एल- 22012/ 183/04- आई आर( सी-11 ) ] एन.पी. केशवन, डेस्क अधिकारी [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

1151

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

New Delhi the , 10th January, 2006 S.O. 505-.In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 36/2005) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court Chennai as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Food Corporation of India and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 10-1-2006.

[No. L- 22012/ 183/04 - IR(C- 11) ]

N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT,

CHENNAI

Wednesday, the 15th June , 2005

PRESENT : K. JAYARAMAN, PresidingOfficer Industrial Dispute No. 36/2005

(Inthe matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of sub -section ( 1 ) and sub -section 2 ( A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , between the Management of Food Corporation of India and their workmen . )

BETWEEN

: I Party/ Claimant TheGeneral Secretary, The Transport & Dock Workers Union, Chennai .

AND

: II Party/ Management The Zonal Manager , Food Corporation of India, Chennai

APPEARANCE :

Forthe Claimant

: Mr. D. Purushothaman , Authorised Representative Forthe Management :Mr. Imthias , Advocate

AWARD

The Central Government, Ministry of Labour vide order No. L- 22012/ 183 / 2004 - IR ( CM - II ) dated 30-03-2005 has referred this industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication. The Schedule mentioned in that order is- "Whether the action of the Management of Food Corporation of India in refusing to pay PLR for the year 2001-02 in respect of the employees of Food Corporation of India engaged in port operation is legal and justified? If not , to what relief they are entitled?"

2. After the receipt of the referance, it was taken on file as I. D. No. 36/2005 and notices were issued toboth the parties and the I Party entered appearance through their authorised representative and the II Party /Management entered appearance through their advocate and filed their Claim Statement and Counter Statement respectively.

3. When the matter is taken up for enquiry today, the authorised representative for the I Party/Claimant files a memo stating that the matter has been settled between the parties and hence , he is not pressing this Industrial dispute.

4. Memo is recorded . As such, this industrial dispute isdismissed as not pressed. No Costs.

5. The reference is disposed of accordingly.

(Dictated to the P. A. , transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 15th June , 2005. )

K. JAYARAMAN , Presiding Officer Witnesses Examined:-

On either side

None

Documents Marked:-

: Nil

Oneither side

नई दिल्ली , 10 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 506.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एस. ई. सी . एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या CGIT/LC/R/ 107 / 2004) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 10-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल- 22012/ 243/04- आईआर ( सी- II ) ] एन.पी. केशवन , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 10th January, 2006 S.O. 506 .-- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/LC/R/107 /2004) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunai - cum - Labour Court Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Burhar Sub Area of SECL, and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 10-1-2006,

[No. L- 22012/243/04- IR (C- II ) ] N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR

NO.CGIT/LC/R/ 107/04

PRESENT :

Presiding Officer : Shri C. M. SINGH,

The Secretary,

Janta Mozdoor Sangh ( HMS ),

Workman/Union At/PO Dhanpuri , Shahdol 1152

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

Versus

The Su Area Manager,

Burhar Sub Area of SECL ,

P. Q. Dhanpuri ,

Shahdol

....Management

AWARD

Passed on this 15th day of December- 2005 1. The Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour , vide its Notification No. L - 22012/ 243 /2004 - IR (CM -II) dated 13-10-04 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal:-

"Whether the action of the Sub Area Manager, Burhar Sub Area of the South Eastern Coalfields Limited, PO: Dhanpuri , Distt . Shahdol (MP) in not allowing Shri Dineshwar S/o Shri Vinayak for duty is legal and justified? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled ? "

2. Inspite of sufficient service of notice, the workman Dineshwar failed to put in appearance before this tribunal and also failed to file his statement of claim . Therefore the reference vide order dated 28-3-2005 proceeded ex parte against the workman.

3. The case of the management in brief is as follows: that the workman has filed Writ Petition No. 1896/02 in the High Court ofjudicature at Bilaspur (CG) and interalia sought the following reliefs:

i That the Honourable Court be pleased to hold the action of the respondents in not allowing the petitioner to join duty as illegal . & ii . That the Honourable Court be further pleased to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to join duty with consequential benefits .

The workman has already chosen the forum of Honourable High Court by filing the above writ petition . Therefore the present dispute is not maintainable for the same relief.

4. The workman was selected to the post of casual piece rated loader. He was advised vide letter dated 05-01-1989 to submit his particulars for the purpose of his appointment . Consequently he was issued with an order ofappointment No. 59 dated 27-2-89 appointing him as casual Badli piece rated loader . The workman was habitual absentee . He remained absent from duty on several occasions against which he was issued with warning letters, chargesheets etc. However he did not show any improvement in his performance and conduct. He was unauthorisely absenting from duty without any intimation , permission and sanctioned leave from 01-04-91 to 02-08-1991 . Therefore he was issued the chargesheet No.1544 dated 02-8-1991 . The workman replied to the said chargesheet. As reply was not found satisfactory, it was decided to conduct a departmental enquiry. Accordingly vide order No. 426 dated 13-3-92 Shri K.C. John , the then Sr. Executive Engineer ( E& M) Subhash Mines was appointed as Enquiry Officer and Shri S.N. Singh , Establishment incharge was appointed as management

[PART II SEC. 3 (ii) ] representative. In the month of April 1991 , the management received a complaint from one Dineshwar Bharati , S/ o Vinayak Bharati belonging to Kavinagar, Gaziabad that the complainant is the real /actual candidate as Dineshwar S/ o Vinayak and the workman who is presently working in Subhash U/G Mines , namely Dineshwar Giri is not a real/ actual candidate . On receiving this complaint, the workman wasissued a letter No. 0327 dated 26-2-92 advising him to meet the Dy. Personal Manager , Burhar Sub Area for verification of records . However the workman did not turn up the office of the Dy. Personal Manager for verification ofrecords and he was absconding since then without any intimation to the management . The workman came to know about the complaint of impersonation made against him. On that day onwards , the workman was absconding. His whereabouts were not known to anybody. The letter issued athisaddress as declared by him and recorded in his form "B" Register has not been served on him and returned to the management with the remarks " addressee is not residing on the given address" . As the workman has absconding and abandoned his service , there was no need to proceed with deprartmental proceedings . Hence the disciplinary proceeding was withdrawn against him. Under the circumstances mentioned above, the workman is not entitled to any relief of reinstatement in sercice or any monetary benefits whatsoever. Consequently the order of reference is liable to be answered in favour of the management .

5. The Management filed affidavit of Shri M.L. Prajapat , Sub Area Manager Burhar Sub Area of SECL , Sohapur Area in support of their case.

6. I have heard Shri A. K. Shashi , Advocate the learned counsel for the management . I have very carefully gone through the entire evidence on record . The case of the management is fully established from the affidavit of Shri M.L. Prajapat , the management's witness as the said affidavit has remianed unrebutted and un - controverted.

7. In view of the above , the reference order is answered in favour of the management and against the workman holding that the action ofthe Sub Area Manager, Burhar Sub Area of SECL , PO Dhanpuri , Distt . Shahdol (MP) in not allowing Shri Dineshwar , S/o Shri Vinayak from duty is legal and justified and consequently the workman is not entitled to any relief.

8. The parties shall bear their own cost of this reference.

9. Copy of the award be sent to the Govt . of India , Ministry ofLabour as per rules .

C. M. SINGH , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 10 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 507.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एस. ई. सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक 1153 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4 , 2006/ माघ 15 , 1927

अधिकरण, जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या CGIT/LC/R/ 38 / 02 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 10-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं ० एल- 22012/109/01- आई आर ( सी- II ) ] एन. पी. केशवन, डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 10th January, 2006

S.O. 507. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT/LC/R/ 38/02) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum - Labour Court , Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Amlai and Chachai Sub Area of SECL , and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 10-1-2006 .

[No- L- 22012/ 109/01 - IR ( CM- II)

N. P. KESAVAN , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

years to drive the dozer of 385/410 HP and he was promoted from Grade C to Grade B w.e.f. I -7-95 . The Dozer No. 355 was surveyed off from December 1996 therefore the workman could not get the minimum experience of 3 years and he was not eligible for promotion. That he has experience of3 years to handle and drive the Dozer No. 083 having capacity of 410 HP and therefore it cannot be said that the workman was not eligible for promotion . That one co-employee named S.C. Swagri was promoted from Group- B to Group -Aby order No. 386 dated 17-4-95 despite the Dozerhaving capacity of 410 HP was not available . Looking to this fact , the act of the employer is discriminatory and deserves to be set aside . That the order of promotion was passed after considering the record and recommendations ofDepartmental Promotion Committee but the order of cancellation has not been passed after consultation of the DPC . The fact of experience has been considered by the DPC therefore , the order deserves to be set aside . That in the replay before conciliation officer, the promotion of S.C. Swagri has not been denied but no proper clarification has been given. That before passing the order of cancellation ofpromotion , the workman was not given any opportunity of hearing and therefore the order has been passed in violation of principle of natural justice and the same deserves to be quashed .

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM - LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR

NO . CGIT/LC/R/38/02

Presiding Officer : Shri C. M. SINGH

The Secretary,

M.P.K.M.S. (HMS ), Branch Amlai O.C.M.

... Workman/Union

Distt. Shahdol (MP)

Versus

The Sub Area Manager,

Amlai O.C.M. of SECL , PO Amlai , Distt. Shahdol (MP)

Shahdol

...Management

AWARD

Passed on this 16th day of December, 2005

1. The Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, vide its Notification No. L- 22012/ 109/ 2001 - IR ( CM - II ) dated 21-2-02 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :-

"Whether the action of the Sub Area Manager, Amlai O.C.M. of SECL, PO Amlai , Distt . Shahdol (MP) in concelling the promotion of Shri Jora Singh, Dozer OperatorGroupB to Dozer Operator Group A is legal &Justified? If not, to what relief he is entitled to?"

2. The case ofthe workman Shri Jora Singh in brief isas follows . That he is an employee of the management of SECL Sub Area, Amlai , Distt. Shahdol . He is working as a DozerOeperator. He was promoted vide order dated 6-2-99 from Group B - II Dozer Opeartor Group A. The said order was passed as per recommendations of Departmental Promotional Committee . Thereafter by order dated 31-8-99, his order ofpromotion was cancelled. That the stand ofthe management is that the workman has no experience of 3

3. The management contested the reference and filed their Written statement broadly denying the case set - up by the workman . Their case in brief is as follows . The workman was promoted from the post of Dozer Operator (Excavation) Group " B" to Dozer Operator ( Excavation ) Group " A" by oversight/ mistake . When this mistake was detected , the same was rectified by order No. 883 dated 31-8-03 concelling the office order issued by mistake. It is not the case of demotion of the workman but rectification ofmistake. The workman was not fulfilling the laid down eligibility criteria as per cadre scheme. The workman was promoted from Group " C" to Group "B " w.e.f. 1-7-95 and as such he could have completed 3 years only on 1-7-1998 . Although the eligibility criteria stipulated 3 years experince inhandling and operation of Dozer not less than 385 HP/ 410 HP class the promotion is to be effected on the basis of actual performance and availability of sanctioned vacancy. That in this area there was only a dozer No. D-355 which was quite old and hence surveyed off on 28-12-96. Since the said dozer was lying ideal due to breakdown much before survey off and the workman was promoted to Group "B" only on 1-7-95 , at any stretch of imagination , it is unbelievable for even a lay man that the workman could havecompleted 3 years . As such the workman Shri Jora Singh could not have been promoted against the provisions ofCadre Scheme which necessitated cancellation of the promotionorder. Shri S.C. Swagri with whom the workman compares himself is very senior . He was promoted to Grade "B" on 1-6-87 and before his being promoted to Group -A, hehad acquired more than requisite experience in operating 385 HP/410 HP capacity dozer and the case of Shri Swagri isnot comparable with the workman. The DPC constituted by Competent Authority to evaluate and submit a report of eligible candidates for promotion . Such recommendations are subject to approval by the Competent Authority. Once 1154

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

they submit the report , they become functus officio and there is no reason to revert to them. Once it is found that an explicit error has occurred , it is duty of the competent authority to rectify it . That the workman has miserably failed to set up a good case against the management. He was not eligible to get promotion in Group " A" due to lack ofrequisite eligibility. That he is trying to encash the benefit of an error/ mistake committed by the management for which he is otherwise not eligible . It has been prayed by the management that the claim of the workman may be rejected and the reference be answered in favour of the management.

4. After having submitted statement of claim , the workman absented himself from attending the proceedings on several dates fixed . Therefore again notice was issued to the workman by registered AD post for filing rejoinder and documents . But inspite of sufficient service of notice on him , the workman failed to put in appearance and therefore vide order dated 25-4-05 , the reference proceeded exparte against him.

5. The management filed affidavit of Shri I.N. Sasikiran , the then Sr. Personal Manager, Sharda OCM, SECL, Sohagpur Area in support of his case .

6. I have heard Shri A.K. Shashi , Advocate, the learned counsel for the management, I have very carefully gone through the entire evidence on record.

7. The case of the management is fully proved from the uncontroverted and unrebutted affidavit of management's withness Shri I. N. Sasikiran .

8. The reference is , therefore , answered in favour ofthe management and against the workman by holding that the action of the Sub Area Manager, Amlai OCM of SECL, PO Amlai distt. Shahdol ( MP) in cancelling the promotion of Shri Jora Singh Dozer Operator Group "B " to Dozer Operator Group "A" is legal and justified and consequently the workman is not entitled to any relief.

9. The parties shall bear their own cost of this reference.

10. Copy of the Award be sent to the Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour as per rules .

C. M. SINGH, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 10 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 508.- 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 133/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 10-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं ० एल- 42012/135/03 - आईआर( सी. एम- II ) ]

एन. पी. केशवन , डैस्क अधिकारी

[PART II SHC. 3 (ii)| New Delhi the , 10th January, 2006 S.O. 508. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 133/2004) 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 Central Public Works Department and their workman , received by the Central Government on 10-1-2006.

[No. L- 42012/ 135/03 - IR( CM- II) ] N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT - II , NEW DELHI PRESIDING OFFICER : R. N. RAI

I. D. No. 133/2004

IN THE MATTER OF : -

The President , All India CPWD Karamchari Union , Plot No. 1, Aram Bagh , Paharganj , New Delhi - 110055

Versus

1. The Director General of Works , Central Public Works Department , Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi - 110011 .

2. The Executive Engineer (Civil ) ,

Central Public Works Department,

Krishi Bhawan Division ,

New Delhi - 110001 .

AWARD

TheMinistry of Labour, by its letter No. L -42012/ 135/2003 - IR ( CM - II ) Central Government Dt 29-7-04 has referred the following points for adjudication .

The Point runs as hereunder :-

"Whether the contract between the management of CPWD and the contractor is sham? If so , the demand of all India CPWD Karamchari Union for regularization/ absorption of the services of S/Shri Suresh Kumar, Bhagwan Singh , Chaman Lal , Ravi Kumar, Ajay Kumar , Ashok Kumar , Sanjay Kumar and Ms. Geeta Devi , contract labourers in the establishment of CPWD , Krishi Bhawan Division , New Delhi is legal and justified and to what relief the concerned workmen are entitled. "

The union has filed claim statement on behalf of the workman and it has been stated in the claim statement that the contract . entered into between the management of CPWD and the contract is sham . The management has filed written statement and it has been stated in the written statement that the applicants have concealed the facts as regard to their 1155

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

employment , date of information to the principal employer as well as non furnishing of the proof thereof. It has been also stated that the applicants have nowhere stated that the work performed by them is ofperennial nature .

Ittranspires from perusal of the order sheet that reply was filed on 13-04-2005 and the workmen were directed to file rejoinder by 06-07-2005 but on 06-07-2005 the workmen did not turn up . Again on 8-09-05 was given for filing rejoinder. Rejoinder was not filed on that date and the workmen did not turn up . Rejoinder was not file even on 10-11-2005 . The opportunity for filing rejoinder was closed as the workmenwere not turning up and the case was posted for argument on 12-12-2005 . On 12-12-2005 the workmen did not turn up and the management was heard. The workmen have not filed rejoinder whereas sufficient opportunity has been given to them. Opportunigy for filing rejoinder has been closed . The workman have not been able to made out their case .

The reference is replied thus:-

The contract between the management of CPWD and the contractor is not sham . The demand of All India CPWD Karamchari Union for regularization/ absorption of the services of S /Shri Suresh Kumar, Bhagwan Singh , Chaman Lal , Ravi Kumar, Ajay Kumar, Ashok Kumar, Sanjay Kumar and Ms. Geeta Devi , contract labourers in the establishment of CPWD, Krishi Bhawan Division, New Delhi is neither legal nor justified. The workmen are not entitled to get any relief as prayed for .

Award is given accordingly.

Date: 15-12-2005

R.N. Rai , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 10 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 509.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार हिन्दुस्तान एरोनाटिक्स लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं. 1 , मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 03/2002) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 10-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42012/133/01- आई आर ( सी- II ) ] एन.पी. केशवन, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 10th January, 2006 S.O. 509. - In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government here by publishes the award (Ref. No. 03/2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum - Labour Court Mumbai No. 1 as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of M/ s . Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. , and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 10-01-2006 .

[No. L- 42012/ 133/01 - IR(C- II ) N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1 , MUMBAI

PRESENT:

JUSTICE GHANSHYAM DASS : Presiding Officer Reference No. CGIT- 3 of 2002

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the management of M/S . Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd.

AND

Theirworkman.

APPEARANCES :

: Shri . Anavekar, Adv. For the Management

Forthe Workman

:Ms. P. Janvekar, Adv. State

:Maharashtra

Mumbai dated the 20th day of December , 2005

AWARD

1. This is a reference made by the Central Government inexercise of its powers under clause (d) of sub - section 1 and Sub - section 2A of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (the Act for short ) . Vide Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi , Order No. L-41012/ 133 /2001 IR(CM- II) dated 18-3-2002 . The terms of reference given in the schedule are as follows:

"Whether the action of the Management of Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. Nasik in withholding the increment of Shri Shriram Arjun Mali w.e.f. 13-2-1990 and not granting promotion from 26-7-1991 and demoting from Sr. Master Technician to Master Technician is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to? "

2.The Statement of Claim dated 19-4-2002 filed by Shri Shriram Arjun Mali (hereinafter referred to as workruan) goes to show the detailed facts and circumstances for which he is alleged to have been harassed by the Senior Officers of higher cadres of Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Company ) for a sufficient long period for which he is alleged to have been debarred from getting increments , promotion and demotions as well .

3. The workman has alleged that he refused to delete theOfficers ofthe Company from a Police case and Court 1156

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii),

the Company is a Central Government undertaking and has its Aircraft Division at Ojar Township Post Office , Nasik and its Registered Office at 15/1 , Cubbon Road, PB No. 5150, Bangalore . The workman joined the services of the Company on 23-12-1966 as Mechanic " B " (Loftsman) . The workman was a chronic case of absenteeism as well as inefficient in his work performance . He was indulged in making false complaint against superiors . Consequently, disciplinary actions were initiated against the workman . He was rated below average in his Annual Confidential Report many times and the same was duly communicated tohim from time to time . The workman availed unauthorized leave and did not improve despite the series of warning letters issued to him . A proper roster of SC/ ST is maintained by the Company. The allegations made by the workman hasbeen specifically denied . The action have been initiated against the workman detailed as below:

(i ) Issued charge sheet for deliberately making false complaint against superiors knowing them to be false under Standing Orders clause No. 27 (21 ) .

( ii ) Issued Charge sheet for go - slow in the work under Standing Orders clause No. 27 ( 13 ) .

(iii) Issued charge sheet for unauthorized absence for 43 daysunder Standing Orders clause No. 27 (6) dated 25-5-1993 .

( iv) Issued charge sheet for unauthorized absence for 35 days under Standing Orders clause No. 27 (6 ) dated 29-6-1993 .

(v) Issued charge sheet for slow -down in performance of work or insisting others to resort for go slow policy under Standing Orders clause No. 27 ( 13 ) dated 2-4-1994.

(vi) Issued charge sheet for act subversive discipline and deliberately making false statement before a superior under Standing Orders clause No. 27 (9 ) (25) respectively dated 16-8-1998 .

5. It is stated that the Company with held increments on the basis of valid grounds and violation of Certified Standing Orders applicable to the workman and after holding departmental enquiries after following principles of natural justice. The punishment orders have been passed from time to time in accordance with law.

case with a result his promotion has been withheld since 26-7-1991 . He had given his representation against appointment of Shri . P. R. Barman with the then Defence Minister. In fact in 005 Shop of the Company, majority of senior officers were Bengali and they in order to take revenge against the workman who had made the complaint to the defence minister harassed him by giving adverse remark in C. R. and keeping him idle by not assigning any work . The workman had made complaint bearing No. CRC No. 420 , 9/84 in Pimpalgaon Court for the offence under Sections420, 406 and 34 of I.P.C. against Shri Sudhir Khadke and Ganpat Kolhe who were relatives of higher police department and Higher Officers of the Company , a ex- member of Union of the company. They have managed one Mr. Sitaram Ahire who is residing beside the workman to depose false statement in the above said criminal case as witness against the workman by giving money. Thereafter, the said Sitaram died suspiciously and the offence under Section 202 was lodged to that effect . Thereafter, the service was given to the son of the deceased Sitaram. This complaint was dismissed by Pimpalgaon Court by saying Civil Suit be filed, which is illegal and improper. The workman had also filed R. C. S. No. 34/86 in the Pimpalgaon Court in which the Judge Shri Kakde Saheb and Advocate of the workman did not press Company to submit the original purchase receipt of Motorcycle No. MTH-6573 Bullet, despite repeated request by the workman. It is further alleged that some Officers of the Company and its Union members managed to file complaint against the workman through one Mr. Kulkarni . The workman filed ULP complaint No. 63 of 1985 in the Industrial Court , Nasik against the General Manager and others . The workman had also filed a private complaint in Pimpalgaon Court bearing Cr. C. No. 212/85 , under section 500 of34 I. P. C. The complaint was dismissed by the Industrial Court. The workman had deposited a required fee but the accused were not produced before the Court since the legal Cell of the Company managed by playing fraud upon the Court that General Manager of the Company did not appear in the Court . The officers of the Company got annoyed with the workman and for this reason charge sheeted him by setting aside the Standing Orders and natural justice . The workman was asked on 13-10-93 by Additional General Manager, Mr. Nathani to take back the cases but he did not oblige . The Departmental Promotion Committee worked under the influence of the Senior Officers of the Company and for this reason, deprived the workman from promotion on account of the grudge in view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above , the workman was charge sheeted and punished illegally. The Officers of the Company are alleged to have been in the habit of misusing their powers and ignoring the Standing Orders and victimizing poor innocent Scheduled Tribe workers . The workman has no money or muscle power to fight against the injustice caused by the Officers of the Company who have been continuously harassing and victimizing the workman . The principles of natural justice have been violated in punishing the workman .

6. The workman filed his rejoinder and reitreated the averment made by him in the Statement of Claim as referred to above . He also stated in it that after joining in the year 1966, he was promoted to ' A' grade within seven years and after that to High Skilled Technician and subsequently to Master Technician. He was then promoted to ' F ' Group as Senior Master Technician. The problem started only when the Higher Officers of the Company started favouring Mr. Khadke . There was no cause or reason to punish the workman . There was no reason to appoint the wife and daughter of the deceased workman P. R. Barman .

4. The Written Statement has been filed by the Company on 08-10-2002 . It has been averred therein that [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

7. The workman filed his affidavit in lieu of examination in chief as a piece of evidence on 05-3-2003 . He also referred to number of documents filed by him in the aforesaid affidavit. The workman died on 18-6-2003 . Consequently, his wife moved application to adopt the affidavit filed by her husband alongwith Certificate ofdeath . She was putto cross examination wherein she admitted thatshe did not know as to what were the averments made in the affidavit made by her husband and as to whether any departmental enquiry was held against her husband. She denied that any criminal complaint was filed by her husband. She was not aware of the reasons ofthe complaint made by her husband before the Industrial Court or to the Police. She also denied that the management issued several charge sheets to her husband . The documents have also been filed by the workman as referred to above in his affidavit.

8. The Company did not led oral evidence but filed the following documents per list dated 10-12-2002:

(i) List of Senior Workman

(ii ) Acceptance letter dated 22-12-66

(iii) Appointment letterdt . 20-12-66

(iv) Charge sheet dated 30-10-91

(v) Charge sheet dated 25-7-92

(vi ) Show cause notice dated 21-1-1993

(vii ) Order of punishment dated 29-3-93

(viii) Charge sheet dated 25-5-93

(ix) Charge sheet dated 29-6-93

(x) Show cause notice dated 8-3-94

(xi) Show cause notice dated 9-3-94

(xii) Order ofpunishment dated 26-3-94

(xiii ) Charge sheet dated 2-4-94

(xiv) Charge sheet d: ed 18-4-94

(xv) Charge sheet dated 16-8-94

(xvi ) Show cause notice dated 17-9-94

(xvii) Order of punishment dated 30-9-94

(xviii) Warning letter dated 20-2-95

(xix) Warning letter dated 28-2-95 .

9. The parties had filed the written submissions in support of their case . I have gone through the record .

10. On a perusal of evidence available on record , I find sufficient evidence to justify the contention of the Company that the workman was a chronic case of 194 Gi /06-30

1157

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

absenteeism. He remained absent from time to time. A number of charge sheets were issued against him . The enquiries were held against him and he was punished in accordance with law. No violation of principles of natural justice is being pointed out on record . The outcome ofthe enquiry reports is the ground for awarding the punishment to the workman for a stoppage of increments , refusal of promotion and awarding demotion from Senior grade to Lower grade by the Competent Authority . No allegation or the evidence whatsoever is being led to show that the enquiries were not fair, and that the punishments were not being awarded by the Competent Authority. The violation ofCertified Standing Order as applicable to the workman at a number of time vide charge sheets issued by the Company isproved on record. I do not find anything wrong with the punishment awarded to the workman .

11. The entire case appears to have been woven by the workman alleging that he is a member of SC/ ST and that he has been victimized by the Senior Officers of the Company against whom he had filed criminal complaints and the complaint in the Industrial Court . The malafide on the part of the Officers of the company are alleged but no evidence worth the name is available on record to substantiate the grudge or prejudice or malafide on the part of the Senior Higher Caste Officers of the Company. The allegations that most of the workers with the Company were Bengali and for this reason they favoured Mr. Barman is by itself no reason for any grievance to the workman unless something otherwise on the part of the Officers is shown on record . The appointment of the heirs ofMr. Barman cannot be a subject matter of this reference nor anything adverse can be commented at thisjuncture. Merely because the workman has levelled wild allegations against the Officers of the Company, the contention of the workman cannot be accepted as correct . The burden lies upon the workman to substantiate the allegations levelled against the Officers ofthe Company from which no evidence worth the name is available on record and the allegations remained allegations only.

12. Considering the entire evidence on record and the discussions made above I do not find any material for which it may be concluded by any stretch of imagination that the workman was illegally refused increments . promotion and awarded demotion . The punishments are in accordance with law.

13. Hence , I conclude that the action of the management of Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. , Nasik in withholding the increment of Shri Shriram Arjun Mali w.c.f. 13-2-1990 and not granting promotion from 26-7-1991 and demoting from Sr. Master Technician to Master Technician is legal and justified. The workman is not entitled to any relief.

14. The reference is accordingly answered.

Justice GHANSHYAM DASS , Presiding Officer 1158

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 4. 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 10 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 510.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सेन्ट्रल इन्टीग्रेटेड रूरल मैनेजमेन्ट सेन्टर के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , लखनऊ के पच्चाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 37/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो के सरकार को 10-1-2006 को प्रप्या हआ था।

# एल-42012/ 103/03- आई आर ( सी-11 ) ]

गन भी. केशवन, डेस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi , the 10th January, 2016

5.0. 510. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref . No. 37/ 2004) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court , Lucknow as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Central Integrated Rural Management Centre . Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage , and their workmen , which was received in the Central Governmeat on 10401-2006.

(No. L-42012 /103 /03 - IR (C - II ) | NP KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXGRE

URAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL UNAL CUM-LABOUR COURT LUCKNOW

PRESENT:

Shri Kant Shukla , Presiding Officer

I. D. No. 37/2004

Referens No. L - 42012/ 103/2003 - IR ( CM - II) dtd. 24-3-2004.

BETWEEN

Shri Vijay Kumar Yadav So Shri Ram Kumar Yadav Ro C - 3262, Sapna Colony Lucknow

AND

1. Plant Protection Officer Central Integrated Rural Management Centre D- 3. Liberty Colony Lucknow ? The Director Plant Protection. Quarantine and Storage MH - IV, Faridabad

AWARD

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide their Order No L- 12012/ 103 /2003 - IR ( CM -II did . 24-3-2004 has referred following dispute for adjudication to the Preside cortal.cecet industrial Tribunal-

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii)]

SCHEDULE

"क्या प्लान्ट प्रोटेक्शन ऑफीसर सेन्ट्रल इन्टीग्रेटेड रूरल मैनेजमेन्ट सेन्टर, लखनऊ द्वारा श्री विजय कुमार पुत्र श्री राम कुमार यादव को माह मई, 2002 से मौखिक आदेश द्वारा नौकरी से निकाला जाना न्यायोचित तथा न्यायसंगत है ? यदि नहीं, तो संबंधित कर्मचारी किस अनुतोप का हकदार है ? " The worker's case is that he was appointed on group 'D ' Post in November. 96 by Plant Protection Officer. Central Integrated Rural Management Centre , Lucknow , but , was abruptly terminated from May, 2002 without any rhyme or reason. The worker has alleged that his services was terminated without giving any notice to him , which is sheer violation of Section 25 -F of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , though opposite party has inducted new face , in place of worker. It is also alleged that the opposite party has retrenched the worker from the post of labour without assigning any reason or giving notice in spite of the fact that posts arc vacant and juniors are working . This is also violation of Sections 25 - G and H of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. The worker approached the authorities and several representations were also submitted, but the worker was not reinstated . The worker has therefore , requested that the termination order be set aside and the worker be reinstated with full back wages and other consequential benefits .

The opposite party has disputed the claim and alleged that there is no sanctioned post of sweeper but some times for the purposes of cleaning the laboratory . casual labourers are engaged for 2-3 hours for a few days . During the year 1996-1997 the workman had worked on daily basis as a part timejob for 30 days and was accordingly paid the remuneration as per the number of working hours . Similarly during the year 1997-98 the worker had worked for 27 days in 1987-99 for 33 days and in the year 2001-02 for 150 days. The said engagement of the workman was on part time basis i.c. for 2-3 hours , purcly on causal basis . Thus, the contention of the workman that he has worked continuously from 1996 is absolutely falls and misconceived . It is further alleged that the worker was never duly appointedto any post , therefore , the question of terminating his services abruptly or otherwise docs not arise. The engagement of the worker in the laboratory as a daily labourer meant for cleaning work as and when required . Whenever there was necessity of cleaning the laboratory/ office , casual labourers were hired from market for part time work . The worker used to approach the office of the opposite party whenever there was requirement for engaging part time labourer. While engaging a parttime labourer the department does not verify or check the correctness of the name and other credential of the labourers . Since the casual labourers are engaged directly froin market as per the requirement, therefore , it is not expected that before engaging any casual labourer the department would search the same casual labourer who had worked on earlier occasion . It is submitted by the opposite party that the provisions of Section 25 - F of the Industrial Dispute Act . 1947 are not attracted in the present casc . It is submitted that while the workman had worked on part time basis , he had made a request to undersigned fou

1-4 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

issuing a certificate , so that , he may get employment some were else . The undersigned had given a certificate dated 1-2-99 stating therein that the workman is working in their office as part time contingent worker since November, 1996 whenever required . Thus , certificate itself shows that the engagement of the workman was purely on part time casual basis and he cannot derive any benefit from this certificate issuedby the opposite party. It is submitted by the opposite party that the office of Central Integrated Pest Management Centre is a laboratory of the Government of India were scientific activities are being carried out . Thus, the office of the opposite party is not an industry, hence , it does not come under the scope of the Central Disputes Act , 1947. It isalleged that the workman has not completed 240 days in a calendar year continuously and as such the provisions of Section 25 F of the ID Act is not attracted in the present case . Therefore , the opposite party has requested to adjudicate the reference in negative and worker is not entitled to any relief.

The worker has filed rejoinder in which he has reiterated the facts of statement of claim and has further alleged that worker has completed 240 days in every completed calendar year and besides the work taken by the opposite party from the said applicant was perennial in nature. The worker has denied that he had ever been engaged on hourly basis ; in fact , he has always worked for the full day and also paid accordingly, on the basis of full days' work , and not at all on hourly basis.

The worker has filed following documents in support of his case .

1. Photo Stat copy of payment vouchers paper No. 3/8 to 3/13 .

2 Photo Stat copy of Contingent bill for August , 98 paper No. 3/14.

3 Photo Stat copy of payment receipt page No. 3/ 19.

4. Photo Stat copy of extract of peon book paper No. 3/21.

5. Photo Stat copy of letter of Dr. R. P. Mishra addressed to Plant Proction Adviser, Haryana dtd. 13th July, paper No. 3/22 .

6. Photo Stat copy of letter of Dr. M.P. Mishra addressed to Dr. Pandey, dtd . 1-2-2001 paper No. 3/23 .

Worker has examined himself, whereas the opposite party has examined Dr. R. P. Mishra.

Heard arguments of parties and perused the evidence on record.

Following documents the details of which are mentioned against each are material for appreciation ofthe evidence.

1. Paper No. 3 /8- receipt of Sh . Vijay Kumar for the work performed by him from 24-5-97 to 1-6-97 who is said to be the resident of Rajaji Puram. It is receipt of 9 days of working @ Rs . 55/ - total amount Rs . 495 / - .

1159 2. Paper No. 3 / 9 -- receipt- for the period 21-7-97 to 29-7-97 @ Rs . 55/ -total amountRs. 495/- received by Vijay Kumar , Rajaji Puram, Lucknow.

3. Paper No. 3/ 10-receipt-for period from 15-9-97 to 23-9-97 for 9 days to Vijay Kumar (@ Rs. 55/ - per day.

4. Paper No. 3 / 11 -receipt for the work of 8 days from 14-6-98 to 21-6-98 @ Rs . 60 / - total amount Rs . 480/-to Vijay Kumar. On the same receipt in the lower part there is receipt for 8 daysworking from 14-6-98 to 21-6-98 to Anil Kumar.

5. Paper No. 3 / 12- reccipt- for work of 8 days from 20-7-98 to 27-7-98 @ Rs . 60 /- to Vijay Kumar Onthe same reccipt in the lower part there is receipt for 8 days of working from 20-7-98 to 27-7-98 to Azad Kumar resident of same arca .

6. Paper No. 3/ 13-reccipt for work from 17-8-98 to 25-8-98 to Anil Kumar. On the same receipt in the lower part there is receipt for work from 17-8-98 to 25-8-98 to Vijay Kumar.

7. Paper No. 3/ 14-Full -vouched Contingent Bill Including Vijay Kumar from 17-8-98 to 25-8-98 along with others .

8. Paper No. 3 / 15-reccipt for work from 8-2-99 to 15-2-99 to Vijay Kumar. On the same receipt inthe lower part there is receipt for work from 8-2-99 to 15-2-99 to Anil Kumar.

9. Paper No. 3 / 16-receipt for work 19-7-99 to 26-7-99 to Anil Kumar. On the same receipt in the lower part there is receipt for work from 19-7-99 to 26-7-99 to Vijay.

10. Paper No. 3/17 receipt for work from 1-3-2002 to 30-3-2002 to Vijay Kumar for Rs . 800/-.

11. Paper No. 3/18 receipt--for work from 1-4-2002 to 30-4-2002 to Vijay Kumar for Rs . 800/- .

12. Paper No. 3 / 19-receipt for Rs . 400/- for work paid to VijayKumar.

From all the above details the following facts are evident:

1. That Sh. Vijay Kumar has worked for 27 days in year 1997:

2. That Sh . Vijay Kumar has worked for 25 days inyear 1998.

3. That Sh. Vijay Kumar has worked for 16 days in year 1999 .

4. Thai the worker has not worked in the ycar 2000.

5. That the worker has been paid Rs . 400/- in February, 2001 .

6. That the worker has been paid for 2 months in 2002 before his disengagement in May, 2002 .

1160

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

Thus, it is not proved that the worker has worked for more than 60 days preceding the date of termination.

Dr. R. P. Mishra , witness of the opposite party has stated on oath that the safaikarmis are required to clean the laboratory in intervals so that the laboratory is not infected. Sometimes he has to engaged two part time safaiwalas and some times 4 to 5 safaiwalas . Explaining as to how workers are engaged the witness stated that Technical Officer used to engage the safaiwalas through some clerk and after work is verified by the clerk the saction is accorded to for payment .

The worker has tried to say that other person , Anil Kumar is still working with the opposite party. From the documents on record it is clear that Anil Kumar is also safaikarımchari with Vijay Kumar during work from 14-6-98 to 21-6-98 . It is admitted fact . Now is the question as to whether Vijay Kumar was terminated or Vijay Kumar left the job. Dr. R.P. Mishra , witness of the opposite party has stated on oath that after May, 2002 the services of Vijay Kumar was not available to office . He also stated that his services were not terminated . The worker has also stated in the last line of his cross - examination and admitted that he has been engaged in Pahwa Gun House since May , 2002 at the salary of Rs . 1900/- per month.

In the present case there is no appointment letter in respect of appointment of worker in the laboratory of the opposite party and there is no termination order as such . I agree with the evidence of the opposite party where its witness has steed that cleaning of laboratory required some times since cleaning is essential to disinfectant the laboratory and for that purpose safaikarmcharies were engaged for short duration as is evident from the documents referred above . It is true that some times worker has been sent to some official job elsewhere but it does not mean that he was a peon.

The opposite party has made available all documents to the worker and even the certificate which Dr. R. P. Mishra has certified that Sh. Vijay Kumar is working in the office as part-time contingent worker since November , 96 whenever requires . This also supports the statement of the witness , Dr. R.P. Mishra. Thus , it is clear from the evidence that worker Sh. Vijay Kumar was part - time casual worker and he was not regularly required to clean the laboratory. In the aforesaid circumstances I come to the conclusion that there is no violation of Section 25 F and G of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 as alleged by the worker. Instead he left thejob to earn more than what he was getting as part -time worker for a very short spell in a year. His disengagement from May, 2002 is not termination in the eye of law but he left the cleaning job with a view to get the better service and he successfully obtained it. The issue is decided against the worker and the worker is not entitled to any relief.

SHRIKANT SHUKLA, Presiding Officer Lucknow 14-12-2005

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] नई दिल्ली , 10 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 511.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एस. ई. सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या CGIT/LC/R/225/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 10-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-22012/355/99- आई आर ( सी- II ) ]

एन. पी. केशवन , डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 10th September , 2006 S.O. 511. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. CGIT/ LC / R/ 225 / 99 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court , Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of SECL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 10-1-2006.

[No. L -22012/355/99 - IR ( C - II ) ] N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT JABALPUR

No. CGIT/LC/R/ 225/99 Presiding Officer : Shri C. M. Singh The Secretary, Rashtriya Colliery Workers Federation , Branch: Jamuna 3110 Mine , P.O. Kotma Colliery, Shahdol

Workman/Union Versus

The General Manager , Jamuna and Kotma Area of SECL , PO: Jamuna Collicry, Distt . Shahdol (MP) Shahdol .

Management

AWARD

Passed on this 15th day of December , 2005 The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. L - 22012/ 355 / 98 /IR / ( CM - II ) dated 23-6-99 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal: -

"Whether the action of the Sub Area Manager, Jamuna U/ G Sub Area of SECL. PO: Jamuna Colliery, Distt . Shahdol (MP ) in not promoting Shri Lucas Telare . Electric Fitter Category IV to the post of Electrician/Fitter category V is justified? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled ? " 1161 भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

regularized by upgradation. In view of the aforesaid circular the workman is entitled to be regularized on the higher postofelectrician fitter in category - V. It is prayed that the tribunal may be pleased to hold that the action of the management in not promoting the workman from the post ofElectrician Fitter in Category IV ofthe post ofElectrician Fitter in Category V is unjustified, illegal and bad in law.

2. After having filed statement of claim , workman Shri Lukas Telare absented himself from appearing before this tribunal for filing his rejoinder and documents. Therefore notices were issued to him by registered AD post . Inspite ofsufficient service of notice , he failed to put in appearance and therefore vide order dated 1-8-05 , this reference proceeded ex - parte against the workman . The case of the workman in brief is as follows : -

3. The management contested the reference by filing their Written Statement . They have denied the case of the workman as mentioned in his statement of claim . Their case inbrief is as follows:-

The workman has claimed promotion from the post of Electrical Fitter Category IV to the post of Electrical Fitter Category - V and the said relief has already been granted to him vide office order No. 844 dated 14/ 19-6-02. Therfore the present reference becomes infructuous . The management is one of the arca of SECL , a company registered under the Indian Company's Act having its registered office at Bilaspur. SECL is one of the subsidiary company of coalfield India Ltd. , a Government of India undertaking. The terms and conditions of employment of the employees working in coal industry are governed by various settlements that has been executed from time to time. The said settlement is generally known as NCWA. The NCWA contains the cadre scheme . Promotional channels of all cadres are given in the cadre scheme . Shri Lukas Telare, the workman was initially reported as general mazdoor Category - 1 w.e.f. 13-2-1990 vide order dated 16-2-90 . Thereafter he was promoted to the post of electrical fitter Category - II in the month of October 1991 vide office order No. 2319/14 dated 3-12-91 . Subsequently he was promoted as Electrical Fitter , Category - IV in the month of January 1996. However , he was given notional seniority w.e.f. 1-4-1994 . A Departmental Promotional Committee was constituted by Sub Arca Manager, Jamuna UG/RO vide office order No. 97-2450 dated 24-11-97 to consider eligible employees of Jamuna 9-10 Mines for promotion. The workman's case was also considered by the DPC for promotion to the post of Electrician Category-V. However, he has not passed the trade test hence he was not found fit for promotion . As the workman belongsto ST cadre, the postwas kept vacant as per roster. the workman has claimed promotion . Promotion cannot be claimed as a matter of right as it is managerial function . It depends on various circumstances such as administrative requirement , availability of post , eligibility of the workman concerned , recommendations of DPC etc. The workman was paid the wages for the post he was holding and performing the job. Since the workman could not obtain qualifying marks in the trade test , his case was not considered by the DPC in the year 1988. As he was not qualified, he was rightly not given promotion . It has been denied that the workman is senior to Sarva Shri Thakurdeen , Mahendra Singh and Ramashray. It has been prayed by the management that under the above circumstances , the action of the management is fully justified and therefore , the reference may be answered accordingly.

4. The management in support of their case filed affidavit of Shri Rama Krishna Pushty , the then working as Sr. Personal Officer in Jamuna UG/RO.

Thathe belongs to Scheduled Tribe Community. He was initially appointed on the post of General Mazdoor on 13-3-90 , and thereafter he was promoted to the post of Electrical helper in the month of October 1991. He was again promotedto the post of electrical fitter in category I on 1-1-96 protecting his notional seniority w.e.f. 1-4-94 . Though he is categorized as Electrical Fitter in Category IV from 1-1-96 but he has been discharging his duties as Electrical Fitter in Category V from the date of his promotion to the post of Electrical Fitter in Category - IV. That the promotion of the employees working in the coal mines are governed by the cadre scheme and according to the cadre scheme, the employees having H. S. S. C/I.T. I. and Electrical qualifications and also having more than 3 years experience are entitled to be promoted to the next higher category. The workman is continuously performing the duties of electrician fitter in category V since last 5 years . But he has been paid the salary of electrical fitter in category IV. The workman fulfills all the qualifications as required under the cadre scheme . He is senior to Shri Thakurdeen S/ o Govinda who has been given promotion to the post of Electrician Fitter in Category V. That during the conciliation proceedings before the Assistant Labour Commissioner , the management filed reply admitting that the workman was eligible for promotion to the post of clectrician fitter in Category V, but his case for promotion to the said post was not considered by the Committee due to less marks obtained by him in the trade test . The management admitted that the workman belongs to ST Community and therefore, his post for promotion was kept vacant . The case of the workman (under the Reserve Quota ) alone was considered by the DPC hence , according to cadre scheme inspite of getting less marks , he could have been promoted to the post ofElectrician Fitter in Category-V and no such reserved post-can be kept vacant as per various Government circulars. That with an intention to favour Sarva Shri Thakurdeen , Mahendra Singh and Ramashray, the case of the workman was not considered for promotion whereas , he is entitled for the promotion from the date when Shri Thakurdeen and others were promoted. According to the circular dated 16-1-93 issued by the Western Coal Fields Ltd. it has been decided by the management that whenever any workman of lower category /grade has been deployed to work in a higher category /grade job and puts in 190 days or 240 days of service in a calendar year , he shall be regularized in such higher category/grade /post . It was also decided that if there is a vacant post of higher category/ grade/post available the workman working in such higher category/ grade /post shall be regularized against the vacant post and if no such higher category/ grade/post is available , the lower category/grade/ post shall be upgraded and thereafter the workman working on such post shall be 1162

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927

5. I have heard Shri A. K. Shashidharan , Advocate for the management. I have very carefully gone through the entire evidence on record .

6. The case of the management stands fully proved by the affidavit of management's witness Shri Ramakrishna Pushty as the said affidavit has remained unrebutted and uncontrovered.

7. The reference is , therefore , answered in favour of the management and against the workman by holding that the action of the Sub Area Manager, Jamuna U/ G Sub Area of SECL , PO Jamuna Colliery , Distt. Shahdot ( MP) in not promoting Shri Lukas Telare , Electrical Fitter Category IV to the post of Electrician/fitter Category V is justified and consequently the workaian is not entitled to any relief.

8. Partes shall bear their own costs of this reference.

9 Copy of the award be sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour as per rules.

C.M. SINGH, PresidingOfficer नई दिल्ली, 12 जनवरी, 2006

का.उग. 512.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार नेवल डॉकयार्ड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, न. II . मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सी. जी. आई. टी.- 2/30 आफ 2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

| रां. एल- 14012/44/04- आई आर ( डी यू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा , डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi . the 12th January . 2006

S.O. 512. -1n pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref . No. CGIT- 2/30 of2005 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cuin -Labour Court . No. 11 , Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the employees in relation to the management of Naval Dockyard and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 12-1-2006 .

[No. L- 14012/44 / 04 - IR ( DU) N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BELON THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.2 AT MUMBAI

PRESENT : BI. Kazi, Presicing Officer Reference No. CGIT - 2/30 of 2005 Employers in relation to the management of Naval Dockyard 1

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

AND

Their Workmen ( Shri Suresh D. Ubalc)

APPEARANCES :

Forthe Employer

Mr. V. Narayanan , Advocate For the Workınan

: No appearance

Mumbai , dated 6th December , 2005

AWARD

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour , New Delhi , by its order No. L - 14012/ 44/2004 - IR ( DU) dated 09-12-2004 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub - section ( 1) and sub- section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referred the following Disputeto this Tribunal for adjudication:-

SCHEDULE

" Whether the action of the Management of Naval Dockyard, Mumbai in removing the services of Shri Suresh D. Ubale , Ex - Labourer w.c.f. 27-11-2000 is legal andjustified? If not , what relief the workman is entitled to?"

2. On receipt ofOrder ofReference from Government, notices were issued to both partics ( Ex . 2 ) . Both partics were served ( Ex. 3 and 4) . The matter was adjourned from time to time for filing Statement of Claim . Management was present fromtime to time . Workman remained present only twice on 09-03-2005 and 13-5-2005 and requested for time to file Statement of Claim . Thereafter workman remained absent throughout . Ex - Parte notice was therefore issued for filing Statement of Claim by the workman on 30-11-2005 . (Εx.6) . The said Ex - parte notice was returned un- served with the postal remarks " Not Known " (Ex. 7). Till date workman has not filed his Statement of Claim nor put his appearance . Today Mr. V. Narayanan , Advocate for the Management appeared and filed application stating that workman has not filed Statement of Claim though several adjournments were given and prayed for dismissal of the case .

3. Sufficient opportunity was given to the workman . However, the workman failed to put forth his appearance or his claim before this Tribunal . In the circumstances the plea of the management is justified.

4. In view of the above the reference needs to be disposed of for default . Hence the order.

ORDER

Reference stands disposed of for default.

B.I. KAZI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 12 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 513.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार गवर्नमेन्ट ऑफ इंडिया मिंट के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नं . 11, मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सी.

1163

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4 , 2006/माघ 15, 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

जी. आई. टी. - 2/22 ऑफ 2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -16011/2/03- आई आर ( डी यू) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्कअधिकारी New Delhi , the 12th January, 2006

S.O. 513.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT- 2/22 of 2005 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court , No. II, Mumbai now as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Government of India Mint and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 12-1-2006 .

[No. L - 16011 /2/03 - IR ( DU) ] KULDEEP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2 AT MUMBAI

PRESENT:

Mr. Justice Ghanshyam Dass ( Retd.) , Presiding Officer Reference No. CGIT -2/22 of 2005 Employers in relation to the management of India Government Mint

AND

Their Workmen (Bombay Mint Employees Federation) APPEARANCES :

For the Employer

Mr. V. Narayanan , Advocate For the Workman : Mr. Umesh Nabar, Advocate Mumbai , dated the 3rd January, 2006

AWARD

The Governmerit of India, Ministry of Labour , New Delhi , by its Order No. L - 16011 /2 /2003 - IR ( DU) dated 2-12-2004 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( d) of sub - section ( 1 ) 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 Government of India Mint, Mumbai in not granting of 19% compensation for the increased working hours from 37and 1/2 hours per week to 44 hours per week isjust and legal ? If not , to what relief the workmen are entitled ?"

2. At the stage of filing of written statement by management , Union filed application (Ex. 8 ) stating that the Government of India, Ministry of Labour and Employment vide their Order No. L - 1601 1/3 /2004 - IR (DU) dated 06-06-2005 referred the above matter to the National Industrial Tribunal, Kolkata as per the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Kolkata in W.P. 8741 ( W) /2005 . The matter was kept for say of the management today ( i.c. 03-01-2006 ) . Management filed their say (Ex . 10 ) enclosing copy ofGovt . of India , Ministry of Labour and Employment Order No. L- 16011 /3 /2004 - IR ( DU) dated 06-06-2005 and prayed fortreating the matter as closed in view of the said reference having been referred before the National Industrial Tribunal , Kolkata.

3. In view of the above , I pass the following order: ORDER

Reference stands disposed of as closed .

Justice GHANSHYAM DASS ( Retd ) , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 13 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 514.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार हांगकांग एंड संघाई बैंकिंग को. लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण श्रम न्यायालय , सं. II , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई डी -97/ 1997 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 13-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/60/96- आई आर ( बी-1 ) ] अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi, the 13th January, 2006

S.O. 514. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. ID - 97 / 1997) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court, No. II , New Delhi as shown in the Annexure. in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relations to the managementagement of Hongkong & Sanghai Banking Corp. Ltd. , and their workman , which was received bythe Central Government on 13-1-2006.

[No. L - 12012/60/96 - IR ( B - I ) | AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT - 11 , NEW DELHI

PRESENT:

R N. Rai: Presiding Officer L. D. No. 97/1997

Inthe matter of:

Shri Dalip Kumar.

B-292, New Seemapuri , Shahdra, Delhi -25.

1164

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

Versus

TheManager,

Hongkong & Sanghai Banking, Corporation Limited, 28, K.G. Marg , New Delhi .

AWARD

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L - 12012/60/ 96/IR (B -I) : Central Government dt. 14-07-1997 has referred the following point for adjudication.

The point runs as under: --

"Whether the action of the Management of Hong Kong & Shanghai Banking Corpn. Ltd. , New Delhi dismissal of Sh . Dilip Kumar, sub - Staff, from service w.c.f. 3-10-92 is just , fair and legal" If not what relief the concerned workman is entitled to and from what date?"

The workman applicant has filed claim statement . It has been stated herein that the workman was working in the saidBank situated at 28, K. G. Marg, New Delhi as a subordinate staff and his services were confirmed w.e.f. 1-9-1989 after successful and satisfactory completion of his probation . He had been working sincerely and to the satisfaction of his superiors and maintained unblemish record throughout .

Since the workman was a member of the Trade Union and actively participated in the Union activities , the management issued chargesheet dated 7-3-92 and ultimately dismissed the workman vide order dated 3-10-1992 . Against the order of dismissal an appeal was preferred which was dismissed by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 14-12-1992 . Both the orders dated 3-10-1992 and 14-12-1992 were passed by the manager holding same rank.

That the dismissal of workman from the service of the bank vide order dated 3-10-1997 and disınissal of appeal vide order dated 14-12-1997 are illegal , unfair, unjust, in grossviolation of principles of natural justice , victimization and unfair labour practice.

That the brief facts are as under . The workman along with two other colleague friends namely , Shri Krishan Kaushik and Shri Rajeev Mishra went to visit their common friend on the evening of 18-2-92directly from the office and had left behind their belongings in the Bank. After mecting the common friend they came bank to the bank at about 9.30 to collect their belongings before leaving to their respective home .

ShriDalip Kumar and Shri Rajeev Mishra approached the watchman of the bank and sought perinission to enter the Bank for collecting their belongings . Since the watchman, Shri Vijay Mitra Sharma refused permission to enter the Bank; the workman left that place along with

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) | other two colleagues and proceeded to their respective home.

That to the utter dismay and shock the workman received an order of suspension on 20-2-1992 . It was alleged in the order of suspension that the workman had on the night of 18-2-1992 in a drunken state smashed the wind- screen and side windows of the Bank's cash Van parked in the Bank's parking arca . It was also alleged that the workmen had threatened and intimidated the Bank's watchman and the security guard.

Thatthe workman was subsequently charge sheeted vide chargesheet dated 7-3-1992 . It was alleged in the chargesheet that on 18-2-1992 at about 10.00 p.m. the workman in a drunken state smashed the windscreen and side window of the Bank's cash van. The charges as is evident from chargesheet , are vague and devoid of material particulars : predetermination of guilt without any enquiry. Therefore, the charge sheet is legally not sustainable and is liable to quashed being invalid and not legal .

L That the enquiry was held only in respect of Shri Kishan Kaushik and not against Shri Dalip Kumar and Shri Rajeev Mishra . The enquiry was not in accordance with law and rather in gross violation of principles of Natural Justice. Without Shri Dalip Kumar and Shri Rajeev Mishra the enquiry was held and only on the last proceedings held on 23-6-1992 they were called to answer to the questions of the management representative and then examinedby Mr. K. P. Mathur who was not appointedby Shri Dalip Kumar and Shri . Rajeev Mishra to represent their case . Till both were called in to answer the questions of Management Representative , they were asked to wait outside.

That the Management made a complaint to the police on 19-2-1992 and the allegations includes that the workman and attemptedto assault the watchman threatened and attempted to as assault the watchman and security agency guard. There was no such allegation in the charge shcet . This is further evident from the statement of the management witness , Shri Vijay Mitra Sharma . The management witness Shri Vijay Mitra Sharma has not stated thatthe workmen were drunk and he was not threatened or intimidated by the workman .

Therefore , it is clear that the intention of the management was to trap the workman and get rid off them for their union activities .

1 That the Enquiry Officer, Shri Uppal was subordinate to Mr. Alok Gupta . Sr. Accounts Manager who was the Management representative in the enquiry. The Enquiry Officer . was also subordinate to Shri John Curricat . Assistant Personal Manager ( MW2 ) and Mr. P. Wahi , Manager Operations ( WW3 ) Being a subordinate , the Enquiry Officer acted according to the wishes of his superiors and there being definite influence on the Enquiry 1165 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006 /माघ 15 , 1927

Officerby his superiors , the enquiry was vitiated by bias . The enquiry therefore was being biased is illegal , invalid , unfair and unjustified.

That there was no proper show cause notice issued by the Disciplinary Authority before passing the order of the punishment ofdismissal.

Itissubmitted that the punishment of dismissal is disproportionate to the nature of charges . The workman has maintained unblemished record and as a subordinate staff; rendered satisfactory services to this superiors with all sincerity and hard labour . The misconduct is only a mischief and therefore the punishment of dismissal depriving source of livelihood is a capital punishment. Therefore disproportionate nature of punishment and non- disclosure of reasonings to award the punishment of dismissal , the order ofpunishment dated 3-10-1992 is illegal and invalid.

That there was no evidence worth reliance and even to conclude that the workman had committed misconducts, as alleged in the charge sheet dated 7-3-1992 . The findings of the enquiry officer are based on no evidence . The MWI had stated that the workmen were not drunk, and they had not threatened or intimated . The statement of evidence of MW1 is not reliable at all, as he contradicted his own statement given earlier . Placing reliance on the statement of MW2 and MW3 who are only hearsay witnesses and more particularly when MW1 direct witness, makes contradictory statements . When the direct evidence does not prove the charges , could reliance be placed on the hearsay or circumstantial evidence? Therefore, the findings based on such evidence are illegal , invalid and the enquiry is vitiated.

The management has filed written statement . It has been stated that in the present case the bank conducted a legal , valid and proper domestic enquiry in respect of the acts of misconduct committed by the workman. The Bank relies upon the same, however, should this Hon'ble tribunal come to the conclusion that the enquiry is defective, for any reason whatsoever, the right of the Bank to adduce oral and documentary evidence afresh is reserved.

That the police report dated 2-3-1992 was relied in the enquiry. This document has no evidentiary value . Further , the police officer concerned who prepared the report dated 2-3-1992 was not produced at all in the enquiry. The workman was not subjected to any medical examination to find whether the workman was under the influence of liquor . Even the MWI who was the watchman/ Chowkidar has categorically stated that the workman was not drunk. Therefore, the findings are without any evidence and hence the enquiry is liable to be set aside being illegal , invalid and unfair.

That Shri Raj Bahadur who was the Security Guard present on 18-2-1992 nightat the time of alleged incident was not produced. In spite of demand he was not produced by the management . Due to non -production of such material witness grave prejudice has been caused to the workman . Had he been produced it would have come to light that the workman did not commit it any misconduct, as alleged in the charge-sheet .

It is false specifically repudiated that the workman had been working sincerely and to the satisfaction of his superiors and/or that he maintained unblemished record of service throughout . On the contrary, the work, conduct and performance of the workman was far from satisfactory but the bank has a proactive personnel policy whereby it is their endeavor to advise , counsel and caution the workmen regarding their performance and conduct so as to maintainharmonious, healthy and amicable industrial relations in the Bank . It was in this perspective that although the workman had from time to time indulged in acts of misconduct , he was suitably dealt with on such occasions , without casting a blemish on his service record. In any event, the averments made by the workman are irrelevant, keeping in view the chargesheet issued to him, That the parking area of the bank where the Cash Vanwas parked was easily accessible to the public. There was 24 hours ATM Machine Service available to the public . This fact has not been denied by the management.

As regards the assertion of the workman that he was a member of the trade union and that the actively participated in the union activities is denied for want of knowledge. The Bank has no record available either to confirm the membership of the workman of a trade union or much less regarding his active participation in union activities . Hence , the workman is put to very strict proof of his such assertions .

That there is a factual inconsistency in the suspension order dated 20-2-1992, the charge sheet dated 7-3-1992 and police complaint dated 19-2-1992, and also in the statement of MW1 , MW2 and MW3 such inconsistent stand/pleas themselves prove that the management with malafide intention and to victimize the workman for Union Activities took the disciplinary action against the workman.

As regard the issuance of the Chargesheet dated 7th March 1992 , the same was issued to the workman as there were gross and serious charges and allegations against him that warranted disciplinary action. Hence , he was served with the Chargesheet dated 7th March 1992. The disciplinary action was taken strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Bi -partite Settlement , a legal , valid and proper domestic enquiry was conducted and on That the enquiry was in gross violation ofprinciples of natural Justice. No reasonable opportunity was given to the workman to defend him in the enquiry. Violation of principles of natural justice vitiates the entire disciplinary action and the resultant orders dated 3-10-1992 and 14-12-1992 .

19492/ 06-31 1166

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15, 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] the submission of the report by the Enquiry Officer and consideration thereof, the service of the workman were dismissed by the Manager, Corporate Banking , who is the Punishing Authority as per the Bi - partite Settlement which was issued vide letter dated 3rd October 1992 .

Nagar, whereas Mr. Rajeev Mishra has stated that he had gone to Janakpur Mr Shree Kishan Kaushik in his testimony at the Enquiry has stated that after finishing duty he had gone together and if so , to Tilak Nagar or to Janakpuri . If all of them had gone to Tilak Nagar together to see the friend after leaving the Bank , there should be no contradiction or ambiguity. However, from the records it is disclosed in the proceedings . therefore , it appears that the alleged visit to see a friend at Tilak Nagar has been concocted .

Thereupon, the workman preferred an Appeal . The Appellate Authority who is the Manager, Northern India applied his mind and thereafter was pleased to pass order dated 14th December 1992. in the circumstances , the assertions and allegations that the order of dismissal dated 3rd October 1992 and the order of the Appellate Authority dated 14th December 1992 were passed by the Manager holding the same rank is not true nor based on records .

The defence taken that all of them had gone to the bank at around 9.30 pm when they clearly know that the Bank should be closed, to take their belongings from inside the Banks premises , is also clearly a concocted story. On the contrary, it establishes that all the three workmen had left their so - called belongings which is not of any worthy credence. There is nothing on record to fully explain and satisfy as to why it was considered imperative and necessary for the three workmen to enter the Banks premises at around 9.30 to allegedly retrieve their personal belongings .

The parties explained their respective contentions and stands before the Conciliation Officer, who , in the circumstances , proceeded to submit a failure report, which subsequently, resulted in the reference Order dated 14th July 1997 which is a matter of record. It is, further specifically repudiated that the management had any vindictive attitude during the Conciliation proceedings . Onthe contrary, the Bank clearly set out the true fects of the matter whereby it was not possible for the Bank accede to the demand of the workman for reinstatement in their services.

The workman applicant has filed rejoinder. In his rejoinder he has reiterated the averments of his claim statement and has denied inost of the paras of the written statement . The management has also denied most of the paras ofthe claim statement .

Evidence ofboth the parties has been taken.

The workman has made bald assertions and allegations that his dismissal from the services of the bank vide orders dated 3rd October and 14th October 1992 is illegal , unfair, unjust , in gross violation of principles of natural justice , victimisation and unfair labour practice. These bald allegations in the absence of any cogent evidence as also positive averments and assertions in support thereof do not merit any consideration whatsoever.

There is no controversy in the facts that on 18th February 1992, the workman concemed along withMessrs. ShreeKishan Kaushik and Rajeev Mishra left the premises of the bank after their duty hours. They returned to the banks premises at about 9.30 p.m. on the same date . All three of thein have alleged that they left their belongings inside the Bank . However, the particulars of the belongings allegedly left inside the Bank. However, the particulars of the belongings allegedly left inside the Bank. However , the particulars of the belongings allegedly left inside the Bank have not been set out or listed by them. The workman concerned even in the present Statement of Claim, has not disclosed as to what belongings he were left behind in the Bank. that necessitated his return to the Banks premises and entry therein.

It may be mentioned that as per the records of the Enquiry, it had transpired that only Mr. Rajeev Mishra had stated that his things were in the kitchen which was locked and the key was with him. However, he too has not set out precisely the belongings left by him inside the Bank. Furthermore , at the enquiry, it has been stated by Mr. Dalip Kumar that he had gone form the bank to Tilak

The workman applicant was not present on 28th October, 2005. He was a gain not present on 14th November, 2005. The workman applicant was not present even on 23-11-2005 . Argument of management was heard. The workman applicant has given his entire evidence so the reference is being adjudicated upon on the merits of the entire case . The case of the workman is that he has been illegally dismissed by the management. Principles ofjustice have not been followed during the course of inquiry. The applicant has not been given effective opportunity to cross examine the witness . The order of the Inquiry Officer is perverse, illegal and arbitrary. He has not been afforded effective opportunity to defend his case . The conclusion drawn by the Inquiry Officer is not according to judicial procedure. There is non application of mind of the Inquiry Officer. Punishment is disproportionate to the misconduct ofthe employee . It is highly shocking to the conscience of the Court . The dismissal order and order of appeal have been passed by one and the same person . The workman was not involved in the incident of smashing the window screen and the side window of the bank's van in a drunken state . The charges are vague and devoid of material particulars . The management was pre -determined to punish the workman applicant . Shri Raj Bahadur the Security Assistant has not been examined . The workman never threatened or attempted to assault the watchman . The Inquiry Officer has given his findings according to the wishes of his superior authorities . There is no medical 1167 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

examination regarding consumption of alcohol by the workman . Findings by the Inquiry Officer has been given on hearsay evidence . The workman was engaged in union activities . Inquiry was conducted in order to victimize the workman.

The case of the management is that the workman along with the other two colleagues Shri Kishan Kaushik and Shri Rajiv Mishra went to the bank at about 9.30 PM andthey approached the watchman and sought permission to enter the bank. The watchman Shri Vijay Mitra Sharma refused permission to enter the bank . The workman along with his above colleagues threatened the watchman and attempted to assault him. The complaint was made to the police on 19-02-1992. The Police also reached the place of occurrence . No FIR was registered as no congnizable case was made out.

Mr. Wahi and Mr. John Curicatt have given hearsay evidence . It is settled law that in departmental inquiry hearsay evidence has importance of direct evidence provided there is nexus to the incident . It is settled law that Technical and Sophisticated Rules of Evidence Act are not applicable in departmental inquiries . The charges of mis-conduct can be proved on the ground of hearsay evidence provided, it is related to the incident. Mr. Wahi and Mr. John Curricatt , the two responsible officers of the bank were informed by the watchman and they reached the place of incident . The watchman told them that the workman and Shri Rajiv Mishra and Kishan Kaushik had gone there in a drunken state , they wanted to enter the bank but when they were refused they attempted to assault him and they smashed the window screen of the van. The watchman was won over by the workman . The evidence of Mr. Wahi and Mr. John Curricatt cannot be discarded as they reached the place of incident immediately. So in the instant case hearsay evidence has got importance . Shri Kishan Kumar has admitted during the course of examination that he takes alcohol , Shri Rajiv Mishra has stated that he takes alcohol sometimes. The three workmen were not available for examination of alcoholism .

It isfurther submitted by the management that proper opportunity was given to the workman applicant to cross examine the witnesses and to defend his case . He has engaged his DR and his DR has cross - examined all the witnesses . The management during the course of inquiry produced five witnesses . The representatives of the workman has cross examined all the witnesses . Shri Rajiv Mishra and Shri Kishan Kaushik have been examined by the workman. They are also alleged to have smashed the window screens of the van . The watchman Shri Vijay Mitra Sharma has also been examined.

The case of the management is proved by the hearsay evidence of Mr. John and Mr. Wahi and the evidence of the watchman Shri Vijay Mitra Sharma . It is not necessary for the management to examine all the witnesses . Theother witness Shri Raj Bahadur might have been won over by the workman so he was not called for evidence during the course of inquiry.

From perusal of the inquiry report it transpires that the workman authorized a representative to cross examine all the witnesses and the witnesses have been cross examined by his authorized representative . The management has examined Mr. P. Wahi , Manager (Operations) . The watchman informed him regarding the incident and he reached the place of occurrence . The workman and his colleagues have gone away from there but the watchman told him that they have gone there and they threatened him and attempted to assault him when did not permit them to enter the bank.

I have perused the entire record and it is quite obvious that principles of natural justice have been observed in the departmental inquiry and the workman has been afforded effective opportunity to cross examine the witness and produce his own witness . There is no violation ofany principle of natural justice. The Inquiry Officer has rightly held that the workman was involved in the incident . There is no merit in the case of the workman applicant . The inquiry is quite proper and according to the principles of natural justice . There is no defect in the inquiry. The punishment is also not disproportionate and shocking to the conscience of the court . The workman applicant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for .

The reference is replied thus: -

The action of the Management of Hong Kong & Shanghai Banking Corpn. Ltd. , New Delhi in dismissal of Sh . Dilip Kumar, Sub Staff, from service w.e.f. 3-10-92 is just, fair & legal . The workman applicant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.

Award is given accordingly.

It appears that the witness Vijay Mitra Sharma was won over by the workman. He has admitted in his evidence that he heard their noise but he did not open the shutter. After sometime he heard the noise of smashing of the window screen . Mr. John Curicatt was also present on the scene of occurrence as he was also informed by the watchman . The two witnesses Mr. John Curricatt and Mr. Wahi have been examined by the management. These two witnesses had stated that when they reached the place ofoccurrence the watchman Shri Vijay Mitra Sharma , told them that the workman along with Shri Rajiv Mishra and Mr. Kishan Kaushik went to the bank and they tried to enter the bank but they were not permitted then they smashed the window screen of the van and they attempted to assault him, they were drunken state . The two witnesses Date: 10-01-2006.

R.N. RAI , Presiding Officer 194 G1 /06-32 1168

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4 , 2006 /MAGHA 15 , 1927 ,

नई दिल्ली, 13 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 515. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक आफ इंदौर के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय सं. II , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई डी-35/1997 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 13-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल- 12011 /22/ 96-आई आर ( बी-1 ) ] अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 13th January, 2006 S.O. 515. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( ID - 35 / 1997 ) of the Central Governinent 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 State Bank of Indore and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 13-1-2006.

[No. L- 12011 /22/ 96- IR (B- I ) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT - II NEW DELHI

PRESINGING OFFICER: R.N. RAI

I.D. No.35/ 1997

IN THE MATTER OF : ---

The General Secretary.

All India State Bank of Indore, Employees Co-ordination Committee, C-28, Community Centre, Janakpuri , New Delhi -58 .

Versus

The Regional Manager , State Bank of Indore , Regional Office (V) , 16/15, WEA, Karol Bagh, New Delhi - 110005.

AWARD

TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No.L - 12011 /22/ 96 IR (B) Central Government Dt. 06-03-1997 has referred thefollowing point for adjudication.

The point runs as hereunder: -

"Whether the management of State Bank of Indore are indulging in unfair , illegal and discriminatory as set out in Annexure ( enclosed ) against their workman viz. S/ Shri P.K. Sharma and G. C. Chaturvedi who are also office bearer in capacity as Vice President and General Secretary respectively of the All India State Bank of Indore Employecs Co- ordination Committee . " The workman applicants have filed application that they have reached settlement with the management and

[ PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) | want to withdraw their case . The counsel for both the sides was present and they verified the signatures of the workmen . The workmen have withdrawn their case .

No dispute award is given. Date: 05-01-2006 ,

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 13 जनवरी , 2006

का. आ. 516.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एन.एफ. रेलवे, लुमडींग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्व नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण, गुवाहटी के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 6 ( सी ) आफ 2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 13-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं० एल- 41011/ 50/01- आईआर( बी-1 ) ] अजय कुमार, डैस्कअधिकारी New Delhi , the 13th January, 2006 S.O. 516. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award 6 ( C ) of 2002 of the Industrial Tribunal , Guwahati now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of N.F. Railway, Lumding and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 13-1-2006 .

[No. L- 41011 /50/01 - IR( B-1) AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE IN THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, GUWAHATI , ASSAM. REFERENCE NO . 6(C) OF 2002

Present:

Shri B. Bora, Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal , Gawahati .

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute between:

TheManagement of N.F. Railway, Lumding. Vs

Theirworkman

Shri H.M. Kanjilal .

APPEARENCE : Shri K.C. Sharma ,

Advocate :

For theManagement

For the Workman Shri K.K. Biswas , Advocate

Date ofAward : 4-10-2005

AWARD

The Govt. of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by a notification No. 4101 1 /50/2001 /IR (B -O) dt : 30-4-2002 referred an Industrial Dispute between the Management of N.F. Railway and their workman Shri H.M. Kanjilal on the following issue:

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

"Whether the action of the management of N.F. Railway, Guwahati in not effecting seniority of Shri H. M. Kanjilal , (ex-Khalasi ) now Telephone Operator under General Manager ( Con ) , Maligaon from the date of the screening test on 20-2-78 is justified ? If not, what relief Shri Kanjilal is entitled ?" Onreceipt of refernce , a reference case was registered and notices were issued both parties calling upon them to file their written statements/ addl . written statements and documents if any. In response to the notices both parties appeared in this Tribunal and filed their written statements. Both parties also adduced evidences both oral documentary insupport of their respective cases .

that: The case ofthe workman Shri H.M. Kanjilal in briefis Shri H.M. Kanjilal , now working as Telephone Operator under Deputy Signal & Telecommunication Engineer / TC - I / N.F. Railway, Maligaon for whose grievances this Industrial Dispute has arisen , is the workman in the instant case .

Having failed to receive any susceptible response from theManagement of the N.F. Railway to the series of representations and personal approaches to all levels by the workman in the instant case Shri . H. M. Kanjilal approached the union for raising the issue to the appropriate level for his redress from the date of his screening test held on 20-2-78 by the Chief Personnel Officer, N.F. Railway, Maligaon . The conciliation proceeding failed to arrive at a conclusion in resolving the dispute forgranting promotion and of granting promotional benefits to the aggrieved workman .

The workman Shri H.M. Kanjilal was appointed on 01-02-77 in the office of the Chief Signal & Tele- communication Engineer, Maligaon as substitute Khalasi against the regular vacancy.

Shri Kanjilal was asked to appear in the screening test held on 20-02-78 by the Chief Personnel Officer, N.F. Railway, Maligaon, under his file No. N/51 / 1 /21 , Sl . No 168 No. E/227/ 172 (N) dated 14-02-78. Shri Kanjilal appeared in the said test and in the seniority list of Khalasi/peon was published vide. The Chief Signal & Telecommunication Engineer ( P) /Maligaon's letter 'No.E/ 255 / 105 (N ) of 23-08-85 showing the date of appointment Shri Kanjilal as 22-01-79 in the regular cadre although he had apeared in the screening test on 22-02-78.

Although Sri Kanjilal duly qualified in the trade test/ screening test on 20-02-78 , his name was not included in the list published on 13-03-81 and 13-05-81 due to administrative lapse and whims .

After considering the irregulaties /lapses , the Competent Authority subsequently gave a decision for regularising the six candidates , whose names were wrongly shown in the screening test held on 20-02-78 including the workman Sri Kanjilal .

In spite of the said regularisation the Divisional Railway Manager (P) , N.F. Railway, Lumding showed his regular service from 13-03-85 vide his letter No. E /254/ 1 (selection) dated 21-05-91 and thereby deprived the workman Sri Kanjilal of his legistimate claim for correct

1169

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

seniority form the date of his regularisation of his service and elevation of the promotional grade with its consquential benefits.

The matter was personally taken by the then Chief Engineer/ Con - II . N.F. Railway, Maligaon with the Chief Personnel Officer, N.F. Railway, Maligaon vide his D.O. No.19 E/Con/HMK dated 30-12-91 and requested for assignment of correct seniorty of the workman Sri Kanjilal at parwith other persons mentioned in the said D.O. letter .

The workman Shri Kanjilal appeared and qualified in the written test for the promotion of Junior Telephone Operator in the scale ofRs . 950 1500 per Divisional Railway Manager (P) , Lumding's letter No. E/254/ 1 ( selection) dated 01-11-90 and viva - voice test on 14-12-90, but his name has not been shown in the select list whereas his juniors were given the promotion who were now working against the highergrade posts .

Against such miscarriage ofjustice the workman Sri Kanjilal represented to the Divisional Railway Manager (P) , Lumding, and the Divisional Railway Manager (P) , Lumding has informed him vide his letter No.E/254/ 1 ( selection) dated 21-05-91 stating that his regular appointment as Khalasi was approved only on 13-03-85 , and hence, his case could not considered.

Against such gross injustice the Chief Engineer (Con - II ) , Maligaon referred the matter to the Chief Personnel Officer and requested him to regularise the case of Sri Kanjilal vide the D.O. letter No. 19E/ Con/HMKdated 30-12-91 .

It is surprising to note that after 1990 many selections were conducted by the Divisional Manager (P) , Lumding for the promotions of the Telephone Operators etc. , but the workmen Sri Kanjilal was never called in any of the selection and his name was not shown in any seniority list either of the Group - C or of the Group- D categories.

The actions of the N.F. Railway administration , more particularly of the Divisional Railway Manager (P) , Lumding, in regard to the fixation of seniority and giving him promotion duly regularising his service seniority from the date of the screening test held on 20-02-78 is highly irregular, unlawful , unfair and discriminatory so as to cause miscarriage of justice to the workman Sri Kanjilal and thereby deprive him of his legitimate claims in getting the seniority and due promotion.

favour. The workman has prayed for and award in his On the other hand the case of the management in brief is as follows :

The suit is not maintainable in present from in law as well as in fact and is liable to be dismissed .

The statement made in para 1 by the workman is about his present official posting , his designation alongwith other official Bio - data which is all matter of official records and as such the Management has nothing to comment about this and admitted to the extent they arc supported by records .

1170

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 4 , 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

That , the statement made in para 2 by the workman is not correct and hence denied . In fact , the workman represented his case through one of the recognised Trade Union namely N.F. Railway Employees Union and after through discussion at the Highest level the Management was pleased to disposed of the matter and informed the Union concerned vide letter No. E/ 301/ 33 / 68 (U) dated 6-4-93 . By suppressing facts the petitioner again approached the management through Rail Mazdoor Union which is not a recognised union.

That, the statement made in para 4 by the workman is not correct and hence denied . In fact the workman was appointed as casual labour @ Rs . 6.00 per day and not as a substitute Khalasi against regular vacancy as claimed bytheworkman in the petition .

That, the statement made in para 5 by the workman is not correct that the date of appointment of the workman is 22-01-79. In fact , the Management begs to state that the workman was appointed as a casual Labour @ Rs . 6 per day on 01-02-77 by vide No. E/283 / 160 (N ) pt. II dated 01-02-77 . After completion of 6 ( six ) months service as a casual labour @ Rs. 6 per day the workman was promoted to casual Khalasi @ Rs . 9.82 per day vide No. 201 -E/ 343 (N) dated 01-09-77 . Again on completion of 2 ( two) years of continuous service the workman was posted as peon in scale Rs. 196-232 under CSTE/MLG Vide No. E/ 283/163 ( N) Loose -3 dated 22-1-79 . As the workman initially appointed as Casual Labour on 1-2-77 so date of appointment is on 1-2-77 but he was temporarily posted as peon with effect from 22-1-79 in the regular cadre.

That , the statement made in para by the workman is not correct that the workman's name was not included in the 13-3-81 and 13-5-81 seniority list due to Administrative lapse and whims. In fact, the result of screening tests were published on 13-3-85 and the question of appearing workman's name in the seniority list of 13-3-81 and 13-5-81 does not arise.

That, the statement made in para 7 by the workman is not correct and hence denied . It is not correct that the 6 (six) candidates including the workman whose screening result was published on 13-5-85 appeared in the screening test in the year 1978. In fact they had appeared in the year 1978, 1979 and 1985 respectively.

That, the statement made in para 8 & 9 by the workman is not correct and hence denied . The Management begs to state that nothing has been done to deprived any one including workman . The DRM (P ) /LMG hascorrectly showed workman's position in the seniority list which was published on 13-3-85 . As per Rule no one claimed seniority from the date of appearing in the screening test instead of the seniority can be claimed from the date of publishing of the screening test.

That, the statement made in para 10 & 11 by the workman is not correct that the workman was selected and empanelled for promotion of Junior Telephone Operator held on 01-11-90 and 14-12-90 . In fact the workman was not selected as claimed by him.

That, the statement made in para 14 by the workman isnot correct and hence denied . The promotion to J.T.O. !

[PART II-Sijc. 3 (ii ) ] is on selection basis and the workman should submit his application for option of promotion to J.T.O. In fact the workman did not submit his application to the authority for the promotion of J.T.O. Hence the question ofplacing his seniority correctly does not arise.

favour. The management has prayed for an award in his The moot question here is : Whether the action of the Management is not effecting seniority of the workman from the date of screening is justified?

Let me now examine as to when the screening in question was done and as to whether the workman is entitled to seniority from the date of screening?

Itcannot be gain said that for claiming the seniority in a particular cadre of service one must appear in the screening test and he must come out with flying colours. Mere appearence in the screening test does not entitle one to claim seniority. Moreover , the date of seniority from which one can legitimately claim is governed by the established rules of the concerned establishment . Mere length in service and the criteria of entitlement to appear in a screening test does not entitle one to claim seniority. For such a claim he must show that he came out of the screening test with flying colours.

From the written statement of the Management it can be seen that the workman was first appointed as a casual labour @ Rs . 6 per day on 01-02-77 and after completion of six months he was promoted to casual Khalasi @ Rs . 9.82 per day. Again on completion of 2 (two) years of service as Khalasi he was posted as peon in the scale of Rs . 196-232 . So he was posted as peon w.e.f. 22-01-79 in the regular cadre.

The workman claims that he appeared in the screening test in 1978 and came out successful . The workman failed to prove this claim by producing any document. The Management's stand is that the workman and 5 others appeared in the screening tests held in 1978 , 1979 and 1985 and the results of the screening test held in 1985 was published on 13-03-85 . The workman was selected in the test held in 1985 and therefore , he can not claim seniority from 1978 .

From another angle of the dispute, it can be viewed which is How can the Management hold another screening test for filling up the same vacancies without declaring the results of the screening test held earlier ? If that was done by the Railways , where was the workman ? Why he did not knock the doors of the Courts ? Why did he appear in the subsequent screening tests if he was selected in the test held in 1978 ? So, this being the situation , the claim of the workman is seemed to be doubtful .

From the Exts. 27 it transpires that the workman who appeared in the screening test held on 22-11-90 at Lumding for selection to the post of J.T.O. came out successful but he secured the last position in the merit list .

From Ext . 28 it is seen that the workman could not come out with flying colour in the viva - voice test which was held on 14-12-90 .

1171 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15, 1927

नई दिल्ली , 16 जनवरी , 2006 Ext. 29, a letter of the workman to the D.S.T.E. , N.F. Railway, Lumding which speaks clearly that the workman though was senior and working as J.T.O. w.e.f. 1-1-81 on ad-hoc basis was not selected in the screening test some of his Juniors were selected.

From Ext . 1 it is seen that the workman was first appointed as casual labour on 19-7-74 and thereafter he wasappointed as khalasi w.e.f. 1-8-77 .

का. आ. 517.- 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/ श्रम न्यायालय, हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या एलसी -112 /2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12025 /1/06- आईआर ( बी- I ) ] अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006 Since, the workman failed to pass in the screening tests held on 22-11-90 and 14-12-90 for filling -up the posts of Jr. T.O. he can not claim for seniority from the date of screening testi.e . 20-2-78 . It is not that the workman was deprived of the benefit of seniority for want of minimum length of service but he was probably deprived of the said benefit for his failure to clear the screening test..

The service of the workman as J.T.O. is not yet regularised. He is still working on ad- hoc basis . Unless he clears the screening test he can not claim regularisation ofhis service because length of service can not be the only criteria for promotion, Merit is sine - qua- non for such regularisation.

S.O. 517. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. LC- 112/2002) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court, Hyderabad now as shown in the Annexure inthe Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of State Bank of India and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 16-1-2006 .

Seniority can not be claimed in service without some strong allegation of discrimination and bias . The workman failed to show as to how he is victimised.

[No. L- 12025/1/06- IR(B- I ) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

Let me now examine another aspect of the reference. The reference is question is about the fixation of seniority ofthe workman from a certain date.

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

Present:

Shri T. Ramachandra Reddy, PresidingOfficer

Dated the 19th December, 2005 Industrial Dispute L.C. No. 112/2002

Between: Smt. V.S. Andalamma, W/o Sri K.K. Rajagopal R/o13 /228, Venkateswara Swamy Temple Street, Gudur.

... Petitioner

And

TheAssistant General Manager, StateBank of India, Region II , Tirupathi..... Responden

Appearances:

Forthe Petitioner

Forthe Respondent

: M/s . V. Hari Haran , Advocate C. Niranjan Rao , Advocate.

AWARD

The definition of Industrial Dispute as defined by Sub-section (K) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 does not cover the dispute of the workman as the dispute is an ' individual dispute . An individual dispute between the workman and his employer can not be raised andreferred unless the dispute is espoused by the union of workmen ofwhich the workman is a member. In the case inhand, the dispute is seemed be espoused by the Rail Mazdoor Union . The Management claims that the Rail Mazdoor Union which represents the workman's case is not a recognised union . It is seen from the written statement of the workman and the verification of the written statement that one Amiya Kr. Ganguly has verified the written statement . He claims himself to be the Joint Secretary of the Mazdoor Union . But no official seal is affixed to his signature in the written statement and in the verification, The workman himself has neither verified the written statement nor affixed his signatures on the written statement . The recognised union can only espouse the dispute of the individual workman . It can not raise the dispute for the workman or implead itself as a party to the dispute. Moreover a union of the workers which is not recognised by the employer can not espouse the dispute of a single workman . Hence , the dispute referred is not maintainable and reference is as noted accordingly.

Given under my hand and seal on this the 4th day ofOct. , 2005.

This is a claim petition filed under Section 2A 2 of ID Actby the petitioner Smt . Andalamma and the same was taken on file in view of the Judgement of the Hon'ble High Court ofAndhra Pradesh reported in WP. No. 8395 of 1989 dated3-8-1995 between Sri U.Chinnappa and M/ s . Cotton Corporation of India and two others.

2. The brief facts as mentioned in the petition are: that the petitioner was appointed on temporary basis and B. BORA, PresidingOfficer 1172

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 4, 2006/MAGHA 15 , 1927

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

enquiry by giving an ample opportunity to the petitioner byobserving the principles of natural justice and concluded that all the charges framed against the petitioner are proved. The Disciplinary Authority concurring with the findings of the Enquiry Officer and proposed the punishment of dismissal by issuing show - cause notice dated 13-10-1993 . The petitioner filed a Writ Petition on the file ofHon'ble High Court challenging the show -cause notice and the Hon'ble High Court held in its order dated 28-3-1998 that the enquiry was conducted in accordance with the principles of natural justice. However, it has directed the Disciplinary Authority to give an opportunity to the petitioner to raise all the objections to the second show- cause notice. Accordingly, the petitioner was given an opportunity to reply to the show -cause notice and also a personal hearing and passed orders of dismissal.

4. This tribunal has held on 14-2-2005 that the domestic enquiry held by the respondent is proper and valid.

5. It should be noted that when the domestic enquiry was held valid , this Tribunal cannot interefere with the findings arrived at by the Enquiry Officer except in few cases where the finding ofthe Enquiry Officer was perverse ormalafide or the management is the guilty of victimization . This Tribunal has to decide on the basis of material on record the said points and also whether the punishment of dismissal was disproportionate to the gravity of the charges .

later on regularbasis w.e.f. 1974. That she was placed under suspension on 29-4-1989 pending certain charges . Charge- sheet was not issued for more than two years . While the order of suspension is dated 25-4-1989 , the charge- sheet was issued to her on 7-1-1991 . On this ground alone , the charge- sheet has to be quashed . As no reasons forthcoming from the bank for the inordinate delay in issuing the charge-sheet . The callousness in which she was treated is further aggravated by the fact that the authority issued an amended charge sheet on 7-2-1991 . By proceedings dated 16-1-1992 an enquiry officer was appointed even before the amended charge -sheet was issued to her on 7-2-1992 and it was in a much hurry. The petitioner was shocked when only 15 days time was given to her. That the actual enquiry proceedings took 3 years to begin. She submitted medical certificate on 6-3-1992 that she was suffering from oys functional uterine bleeding . The enquiry was adjourned to 24-4-1992 to 28-5-1992 . She was terminally ill and could not attend the hearings and all the evidences were recorded behind her back within a period of 6 months . In fact she has filed a Writ Petition No. 21596/93 in order to prove that it was an exparte enquiry, thereby reducing it to a farce . She filed a representation on 17-9-1992 to permit her to be defended by a lawyer even the said petition was pending the enquiry was completed . Hence , the enquiry is farce and the petitioner's request by a letter dated 21-11-1992 to reopen the enquiry, in spite of that she was not given an opportunity, that the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. , by a order dated 13-10-1993 held that as the enquiry is conducted exparte without given any opportunity to the petitioner, the petitioner could raise all the objections including the grounds raised in the show -cause notice . And the bank should afford opportunity to the petitioner of being heard and then passed an appropriate speaking order. The Hon'ble High Court of A.P. Directed the petitioner to reply to the show-cause notice within one month from the date of receipt of the order and that the respondent shall dispose of the proceedings one month thereafter. Accordingly, she submitted her explanation to the second show - cause notice and also request for personal hearing. Apersonal hearing was conducted on 24-6-1998 and that proceedings dated 19-8-1998 confirmed the punishment of dismissal ofthe petitioner. Hence, the enquiry is not validly conducted.

6. In the present case, the Enquiry Officer was appointed to conduct into the alleged Fraud and manipulation of records regardings obtaining loans . The Enquiry Officer framed eight charges and served on the petitioner. The Enquiry Officer examined 27 witnesses and considered several documents and held that all the charges against the petitioner was proved. The petitioner was given anample opportunity to defend herself during the enquiry. The Enquiry Officer has discussed the evidence giving reasons for his conclusions in respecst of each charge . On considering the enquiry report, I do not see any perversity in his conclusions and that there is no malafide or victimization. As such , this Tribunal cannot interefere with the findings ofthe Enquiry Officer. The next question arises for consideration is whether the punishment of dismissal is disproportionate to the gravity of the charges. The charges against the petitioner are that the petitioner while attending the section of recurring deposit account and sundry loans , she has prepared loan documents prevailed upon the officers concerned for the sanction on the pretext ofextending customer service and withdrawn the amounts without knowledge of the account holders . The petitioner has created several loans against several customers who are having recurring deposit accounts and withdrawn the amount and misappropriated which amounts to gross misconduct . The charges made against the petitioner are very grave and the punishment ofdismissal cannot be said tobedisproportionate . Further , I do not find any mitigating circumstances which requires for the reduction of the punishment.

7. In view of the circumstances , the petition is dismissed.

3. The respondent bank filed its counter and denied the averments made in the petition and pleaded that the petitioner while working at Gudur branch as Clerk had created several loan documents on recurring deposit accounts and got sanctioned the loans and received the money taking advantage of her position in the bank. Some of the customers verified their accounts and found that there were loans on their accounts and lodged complaint to the Branch Manager, Gudur on which the petitioner was suspended on 25-4-1989 . The matter was referred to Vigilance department for thorough investigations to identify the officials connected with the fraud and the vigilence department have taken sufficient time for investigation into the matter. As such , there is a delay in appointing the Enquiry Officer for framing the charges against the petitioner. The Enquiry Officer has duly conducted the [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

1173

भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 4, 2006/माघ 15 , 1927

Dictated to Shri P. Kanaka Raju , LDC transcribedby him, corrected by me and given under my hand and seal of this Court on this the 19th December, 2005.

T. RAMACHANDRA REDDY, Presiding Officer

Appendix of evidence

No documentary or oral evidence adduced on eitherside .

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2006

का.आ. 518. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मै . एक्स सर्विसमेन्स एअरलिंक ट्रांस्पोर्ट सर्विसेज लि. 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 33/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-1-2006 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं . एल -11012/20/04- आईआर ( सी-1 ) ] एस.एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 16th January, 2006 S.O. 518. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government here by publishes the award (Ref. No.33/ 2005 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court Mumbai - II now as shown in the Annexure inthe Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s. Ex - Servicemen's Airlink Transport Services Ltd. and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 16-1-2006.

[No. L- 11012/20/04- IR(C- I) ] S. S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL No. 2 AT MUMBAI PRESENT:

B. I. KAZI , Presiding Officer REFERENCE No. CGIT/33 of2005 Employers in relation to the management ofM/s . Ex-servicemen's Airlink Transport Services Limited

AND

Their Workmen

APPEARANCES :

Forthe employer

No appearance Forthe workman

No appearance Mumbai , dated 6th December, 2005

AWARD

TheGovernment of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi , by its Order No. L - 11012/ 20 / 2004 - IR (C - 1 ) dated 15-12-2004 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( d) of sub-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 . Ex-servicemen's Airlink Transport Services Ltd. , Mumbai ( in the establishment of Air India Ltd. ) vide notice of change dated 19-02-2004 as per provisions of Section 9 - A of the Industrial Disputes Act, intending to effect the change from two days ' weekly off to one day weekly off in respect of driver staff is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief are the workmen concerned entitled and what directions are necessary in this regard?"

2.On receipt ofOrder of Reference from Government, notices were issued to both parties (Ex.2 ) . Both parties were served . (Ex.3 & 4). The matter was adjourned from time to time for filing Statement of Claim. Management was present from time to time However , Union remained absent throughout . Ex -parte notice was therefore issued for filing Statement ofClaim by the Union on 01-12-2005 (Ex.7) . The said Ex -parte notice was duly served on the Union (Ex.9) . However, the Union failed to remain present on 01-12-2005. Union also did not file its Statement of Claim till date . From the conduct of the Union , it can be said that the Union is not interested in contesting the matter and therefore inspite ofservice failed to attend .

3. In the circumstances the Reference needs to be disposed of for default. Hence the order.

ORDER

Reference stands disposed of for default .

B. I. KAZI , Presiding Officer

Printed by the Manager , Govt . of India Press , Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi- 110064 and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi- 110054.