This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

रविक्ट्री से डी एस (एन ) 04/ 0007/ 2003-05

REGD. NO , D. L, OD 04 /0007 /2003- भारत का राजपत्र The Gazette of India

प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक

WEEKLY

No.241

जून 14, 2008 , शुनिवार ज्येष्ठ 18- ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930 NEW DELHI , JUNE 8 JUNE 14 , 2008 , SATURDAY / JYAISTHA 18-JYAISTHA 24, 1930

इसे भाग में भिन्न पृष्ठ संख्त दी जाती है जिससे कि यह पृथक संकलन के रूप में रखा जा सके Separatearate Paging is given to this Part in order thatits It may be lled as a separate compilation

भाव 11 खण्ड - उप- खण्ड ( ii ) PART II-Section 3 Sub-section ( 11 )

भारत सरकार के मंत्रालयें ( रक्षा मंत्रालय को छोड़कर ) द्वारा जारी किए गए सांविधिक आदेश और अधिसूचनाएं Statutory Orders and Notifications Issued by the Ministries oftheGovernment of Indla (Other than theMinistry ofDefence)

(केन्द्री प्रत्यक्ष

दिल्ली, 5 जून, 2008

игры 1382 धारकी नकोरी के लिए प्रवशा यह अधिसूचित किया जाता है कि कोद्र सरकार द्वक्षा आयकर नियमावली, 1962 ( उक्त निवाक्याती ) के नियम ऽग और 5ङ के साथ पंडित आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 ( उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 35 की उत्प्त-भास (1 )के खंड के प्रयोजनार्थ दिनांक 1-4-2006 से संगठन दि वोलल्टरी हेल्थ सर्विसेस, बेत्लाई को निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन आशिक रूप से अनुसंधान कार्यक्रकारों में लगी ' अन्य संस्था' की श्रेणी में अनुमोदित किया गया है, तामहः

( अनुमोदित संगठन को प्रदत्त राशि का उपयोग वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए किया जाएगा;

( ii ) अनुमोदित संगठन अपने संकाय सदस्यों अथवा इसके सामांकित छात्रों के माध्यम से वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान को जारी रोगा;

2071 G1/2008

(2845)

(ii ) अनुमोदित संगठन वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए इसके द्वारा प्राप्त राशि के संबंध में अलग खाता बहीं रखेगा जिसमें अनुसंधान करने के लिए प्रयुक्त राशि दश्शाई गई हो, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 288 की उप- धारा ( 3 ) को ठीकरण में वधा परिभाषित किसी लेखककार से ऐसी खात-वही की लेखापरीक्षा कराएंगा और उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 139 की उप -धारा ( 1 ) के अंतर्गत आय की विवरणी प्रस्तुत कारने की नियत तिथि तक ऐसे लेखाकार द्वारा विधिवत सत्यापित एवं हस्तारित लेखाकार परीक्षा रिपोर्ट मामले में क्षेत्राधिकार रखने वाले आयकर आयुक्त अभवा आयकर निदेशक को प्रस्तुत करेगा :

** (iv ) अनुमोदित संगठन वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए प्राप्त दान तथा प्रयुक्त राशि का अलग विवरण रखेगा और उपर्युक्त लेखा परीक्षा रिपोर्ट के साथ लेखा परीक्षक द्वारा विधिवत सत्यापित विवरण की प्रति प्रस्तुत करेगा ।

2. केन्द्र सरकार यह अनुमोदन कपिस ले लेगी यदि अनुमोदित संगठन:-

(क ) पैराग्राफ । के उप -पैराग्राफ (iii ) में उल्लिखितअलग लेखा नही नहीं रखेंगाः अधया [PART II-Sac. 3(ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 /JYAISTHA 24, 1930

2846

(च) पैराग्राफ । के उप - पैसाफ ( iii ) में उल्लिखित अपनी लेखा परीक्षा रिपोर्ट प्रस्तुत नहीं करेगा: अथवा

(tv) The approved organization shall maintain a separate statement of donations received and amounts applled for scientific research and s copy of such statement duly certified by the auditor shall accompany the report of audit referred to above .

(ग) पैराग्राफ ) के रुप पैराग्राफ ( iv ) में उल्लिखित वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए प्राप्त दान एवं प्रयुक्त राशि का अपना विवरण प्रस्तुत नहीं करेगा; अथवा

2.The Central Government shall withdraw the approval ifthe approved organization:-

(ज ) अपना अनुसंधान कार्यकलाप करना बंद कर देगा अथवा इसके अनुसंधान कार्यकलाप को जायज नहीं पाम्ा जाएगा ; अथवा

(a) fails to maintain sepate books of accounts referred to in sub-paragraph ( ii ) of paragraph 1:

(b) fails to furnish its audit report referred to in subparagrph ( lli ) of paragraph 1; or (क ) उक्त नियमावली के निसम 5 ग और 58. के साथ पाँटत उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 35 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( ii ) के उपबंधों के अनुरूप नहीं होगा तथा उनका पालन नहीं करेगा ।

(c) falls to furnish Its statement ofthe donations received and sums applied for scientific research referred to in sub -paragraph ( iv) of paragraph 1; pr

[ अधिसूचना सं. 68/2008/फा.सं. 203/40/2008 -आ.क.मि.- [1 ] रेनूजौहरी , निषेवाक

(d) cennes to carry on its research activities or its research activities are not found to be genuine ;or MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(8) ceases to conform to and comply with the provisions of clause ( il) of sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 35 of the said Act read with rules 5C and SE of the said Rules .

(Department ofReveans) (Central Board of Direct Taxes) New Delhi , the 5th June,2008

[Notification No. 58/2008/F.No.203 /40/2008/TTA- II ] RENU JAUHRI , Director

(वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग ) नई दिल्ली, 9 जून , 2008

S.O. 1332.-it is hereby notified for general Information that the organization The Voluntary Health Services, Chennai has been approved by the Contral Government for the purpose of clause ( li ) of sub- section (1)ofSection 35 of the Income -Tax Act, 1961 ( saidAct ), read with Rules SC and 5B of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 (saidRules) , with effect from 1-4-2006 in the category of 'other Institution' partly engaged in research activities rubject to the following conditions , namely;

(1) The sums paid to the approved organization shall be utilized for scientific rosearch;

का.आ. 1333.- भारतीय स्टेट बैंक ( अनुभंगी बैंक ) अधिनियम , 1959 की धारा 25 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार , एतच्‌द्वाग , नीचे दी गई सारणी के कालम ( 2 ) में निनिर्दिष्ट व्यक्तियों को, उक्त सारणी के कालम ( 3 ) में विनिर्दिष्ट व्यक्तियों के स्थान पर , इसके कालम ( 1 ) में विनिर्दिष्ट बैंकों के निवेशक के रूप में, तत्काल प्रभाव से और अगला आदेश होने तक मामित करती है:- सारणी

(1) The approved organization shall carry out scientific research through its faculty members or Lu enrolled studentur

श्री डी.पी. भारद्वाज

डॉ. ए. भट्टाचार्य,

निदेशक,

स्टेड बैंक ऑफ परिभाला

वित्तीय सेवाएं

নিমাণ।

स्टेट बैंक ऑफ श्री एम. के. मल्होत्रा श्री एम. डी. एस. मिन्हास उप सचिव

मैसूर

वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग ।

स्टेट बैंक ऑफ श्री एल. के. मीणा श्री एम. खेकटेश्व उप सचिव

इंदौर

वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग ।

( ) The approved organization shall maintain separate books of accounts in respect of the sume received hy it for scientific research, reflect therein the amounts used for carrying out research , get such books audited by an accountant as defined in the explanation to sub- section (2) of Section 288 of the said Act and furnish the report of such audit duly signed and veified by such accountant to the Commissioner of Income - tax or the Director of Income -tax having jurisdiction over the case , by the due date of furnishing the return of income under sub- section ( 1) of Section 139 ofthe said Acı;

2847 [ भाग - 3(ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/पेण्ड 24, 1930

नई दिल्ली , 10 जून , 2008 स्टेट बैंक ऑफ श्री एस. गोपाल कृष्ण श्री एस.पी. एस. सांगचाल

अवर सचिव

हैदराबाद

वित्तीय सेवाएं

श्री अमरीक सिहे श्री एम. के. मल्होत

अवर सचिव

स्टेट बैंक ऑफ भीकानेर एण्ड

वित्तीय सेवाएं

जयपुर

का.आर. 1334,-एट्रीयकृत बैंक प्रबंध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध) योजना , 1970/1980 के खण्ड के पाण्ड ( 1 ) के सत्य पठित , बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम , 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उपधारा (3 ) के खाण्ड ( क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार एत‌द्वारा , गौचे दी गई सारणी के कालम ( 2 ) में विनिर्दिष्ट व्यक्तियों को उक्त सारणी के. कॉलम ( 3 ) में विनिर्दिष्ट व्यक्तियों के स्थान पर इसके कॉलम ( 1 ) में विनिर्दिष्ट बैंकों के निदेशक के रूप में तत्काल प्रभाव से और अगशा आदेश होने तक नामित करती है :-

[फर 9/7/2007-बीओ-[ ]

तालिका

जी. बी. सिंह , उप सचिव

केनरा बैंक

(Department ofFinancial Services)

डॉ. के.पी. कृष्णन , श्री अमिताभ वर्मा NewDelhi, the 9th June, 2008

संयुक्त सचिव ( सीएम ) ,

वित्त मंत्रालय ,

आर्थिक कार्य विभाग ,

नार्थ लाक,

नई दिल्ली

बैंक ऑफ बड़ौरा श्री अमिताभ बर्मा, श्री जी.सी. चतुर्वेदी

संयुक्त सचिव ( बीओए ) ,

8.0. 1333:-In exercise of the powers conferredby clause (s) of sub -section ( 1 ) of Section 25 of the Stats Bank of India(Subsidiary Benks) Act, 1959 , the Central Government, hereby nominates the persons specified in column 2 of the table below as Directors of the Banks specified in column 1 thereof in place of the persons specified in column 3 of the said table, with immediate effect and until further orders:-

वित्तीय सेवाएँ विभाग

TABLE

श्री बी.एस. भल्ला

यूनियन बैंक ऑफ श्री के.जी. ईप्पन ,

इंडिया

संयुक्त सचिव ( बीए ) , वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग

Dr.A. Bhattacharya, Shri D.P. Bhardwaj

StaicBank of Patiala

Dinscior,

पंचाल नैशनल बैंक श्रीमती रवनीत कौर , श्री राकेश सिंत्र Department of

संयुक्त सचिव ,

Financial Services

नितीय संभाएं विभाग

StateBank of Shri M.K. Malhotra Shri S.D.S.Minhas

Mysore DeputySecretary,

श्री आलोक भटनागर

श्री संजय सिंह,

पुनफ्‌टेड बैंक

ऑफ इंडिया

Department ofFinancial Services

संयुक्त सचिव,

Shri M.Venkate-

State Bank of

i Shri L.K. Mesna,

विधि एवंन्याप मंत्रालय , शास्त्री

Indore

shwarłu

Deputy Secretary,

भवन , नई दिल्ली

Department of

Financial Services

पंजाब एंड सिंध डॉ अनूप के, पुजारी , श्रीमंती अनिता कपूर

बैंक

संयुक्त सचिव ,

Shri S. Gopal Krishna, Shri S. P.S.

StateBank of Hyderabad UnderSecretary, Sangwan

आर्थिक कार्य विभाग ,

Department of

नार्थ ब्लाक , नई दिल्ली

Financial Services

ShriM.K.Malhotra

Shri Amrik Singh,

इंडियन ओवरसीज श्रीमती विनीता कुमार, डॉ. शशांक सक्सेना आर्थिक सलाहकार ,

बैंक

UnderSecretary,

वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग

StateBank of Bikaner& Jaipur

Depertmentof Financial Services

यूको बैंक श्री समीर कुमार सिन्हा , श्री ए. मट्‌ट्टाचार्य [F.No.9/7/2007-BO-

उप सचिव ,

वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग

G.B. SINGH, Dy.Secy.

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008 / JYAISTHA 24.131 )

2848

सुश्री पी. बोलिना ओरियंटल बैंक ऑफ कॉमर्स

सुश्री सुमिता डावरा , निदेशक, वित्तीय सेवाएंविभाग

श्रीपती विनीता कुमार सेन्ट्रल बैंक ऑफ इंडिया

डॉ शशांक सक्सेना, निदेशक, वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग

इलाहाबाद बैंक श्रीमती सुकृति लिखी , डॉ. के.पी. कृष्णन निदेशक, वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग

देना बैंक

श्री आर. एल. बनीं डॉ तरसेम चंद , उप सचिव , वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग

श्रीमती सुकृति लिखी बैंक ऑफ महाराष्ट्र

श्रो श्री.पी. भारद्वाज , निदेशक, वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग

[फा..सं. 9/7/2007-बीओ -1 ] जी. बी. सिंह , उप सचिव New Delhi , the 10th June , 2008

S.O. 1334.- In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) of Sub- section (3 ) of Section 9 of the Banking Companies ( Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings ) Act, 1970/1980 , read with sub -clause (1 ) of clause 3 of the Nationalized Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme , 1970/1980 , the Central Government, herebynominate the persons specified in column 2 of the table below as Directors of the Banks specified in column 1 thereof in place ofthe persons specified in column 3 of the said table , with immediate effect and until further orders ; ---

TABLE

3 CanaraBank

Shri Amitabh Vema

D.K.P. Krishnan , Joint Secretary, ( CM) Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs , NorthBlock, NewDelhi

Shri G.C. Bank of Baroda Shri Amitabh Verma, Joint Secretary (BOA) , Chaturvedi Department of Financial Services

Union Bank of Shri K.V.Eapen , India

Shri B.S.Bhalla Joint Secretary(ВА) , Department of Financial Services

Punjab National Smt .Ravneet Kaur , Shri Rakesh Singh Bank

Jin Secretary. Department of Financial Services

(PART II ----SEC. 3 (11 ) ]

Shei Sanjay Singh , Shri Alok United Bank of

Joint Secretary.

India

Bhatnagar Ministry of Law & Justice .

Shastri Bhawan . NewDelhi

Panjab & Sind Dr.Anup K.Pujari , Smi. Anita Kapour Bank

Jain: Secretary. Department of Femic Affairs , New Delhi

Indian Overseas Sant. inita Kuntar . Dr. Shashank Bank

Leonomic Advisor , Saxsena Departarent of

UCOBank

Shri A. Bhatia- charya Fatancial Services Shri Surmır Kumar , Sinha. Dy Secretary, Department of Financial Services

Oriental Bank of Ms. Sumita Dawra , Ms. P.Bolina Director, Department of

Financial Services

Sm. Vinita Kumar Central Bank of Dr. Shashank Saksena, India

Director. Department of Financial Services

Bank Allahabad Smt. Sukriti Likhi , Dr.K.P.Krishnan Deprennent of Financial Services

Dena Bank Dr. i arseim Chand, Shri R.L. Banerjee Deputy Secretary, Department of Financial Services

Bank of Maharashtra

Sha V.P. Bhardwaj , Smt . Sukriti Likhi Director Department of Financial Services

[F.No.9 /7/2007-BO -1 G.B. SINGH , Dy. Seey .

नई दिल्लो , 10 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1335,-बीमा विनियामक तथा विकास प्राधिकरण अधि नियम, 1999 ( 1999 का 11 की धारा 4 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए कंन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्‌द्वारा , श्री जे. हरी नारायण्ण को, 26000 रु. ( नियत ) के वेतनमान में, कार्यभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से पांच वर्षों की अवधि के लिए अथवा 65 वर्ष की आयु प्राप्त करने तक, जो भी पहले हो, बीमः विनियामक तथा विकास प्राधिकरण ( आई आर डीए ) में अध्यक्ष के पद पर नियुक्त करती है ।

[ फा. सं. 11 /8/2003- बीमा. - 111 ] मंजीत्र कुमार जिंदल, उप सचिन 2849 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 (1 ) ]

'भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

New Delhi , the 10th June , 2008

नई दिल्ली, 27 मई, 2008

का.आ. 1338. राजनयिक कौसली अधिकारी ( शपथ एवं शुल्क) अधिनियम , 1948 1948 का 41 वां व 2 के अंक ( क ) के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्‌द्वास भारत का राजदूतावास, दुवैत में श्रीविनोद कुमार शर्मा, सहायक को 27-5-2008 से सहायक कौसली अधिकारी का कार्य करने हेतु प्राधिकृत करती है ।

(सं टी-4330/01/2006] प्रीतम लाल , अवर सचिव (कोसुलर) S.O. 1335. In exercise ofthe powers conferred by Section 4 of the Insurance Regülatory and Development Authority Act, 1999 141 of 1999) , the Central Governinent bertby appoints Shri J. Hari Narayan as Chairman of the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA) in the pay scale, of Rs . 26000 (fixed) for a period of fiveyears with effect from date of assumption of charge of the post or till he attains the age of 65 years , whichever is carlier.

[F.No. 11 /8/2003 - Ins.III ]

NewDelhi , the 27th May, 2008 SANJEEVKUMAR JINDAL, Dy. Secy.

S.O. 1338.In pursuarice of the oclause (a) ofthe Section 2 of the Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Oaths and fees ) Act, 1948 the Central Government hereby authorize Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Assistant to perform the duties ofAssistant Consular Officer in the Embassy of India, Kuwait with effect from 27th May, 2008.

विदेशः मंत्रालय ( सी.पी.बी. प्रभाग) नई दिल्ली, 26 मई 2008

[No.Τ.-4330/1 /2006]

PRITAM LAL, Under Secy...(Consular) ::

नई दिल्ली, 29 मई , 2008 का.आ. 1336, राजनयिक कौसली अधिकारी ( सफ्थ एवं शुल्क) अधिनियम , 1948( 1948 का 41 वां ) व 2 के अंक ( क ) के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एत‌द्वारा भारत को हाई कमिशन , वेलिंगटन, में श्री टेटस दीना ट्याकर एदूरी, वैयक्तिक सहायक को 26-5-2008 से सहायक कौसली अधिकारी का कार्य करने हैतु प्राधिकृत करती है ।

[सटी -4330/01/2006 ] प्रीतम लाल , अवर सचिव ( कौंसुलर)

का. आ. 1339, राजनयिक कौंसलो अधिकारी (शपथ एवं शुल्क ) अधिनियम , 1948 ( 1948 का 4। वा ) व 2 के अंक ( क) के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्‌द्वारा भारत का राजदूतावास डाकार में श्री अशोक मंडल , सहायक को 29-5-2008 से सहायक कौसली अधिकारी का कार्य करने हेतु प्राधिकृत करती है । MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS

[सं. टी -4330/01/2006 ] :: (C.P.V. DIVISION) New Delhi , the 26th May, 2008

प्रीतम,लाल, अवर सचिव (कौंसुलर ) New Delhi , the29th May,2008

S.O. 1339.In pursuarice of the clause ( a) of the Section 2 of theDiplomatic and Consular Officers (Oaths and fees ) Act, 1948 the Central Government hereby authorize Shri Ashok Mandal , Assistant to perform the duties ofAssistant Consular Officer in the Embassy of India, Dakar with effect from 26th May,2008. ::

S.O. 1336. In pursuance of the clause (a) of the Section 2 of the Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Oaths and fees ) Act, 1948 the Cental Government hereby authorize Sbri Titus Deena Dayaker Eduri , Personal Assistant to perform the duties of Assistant Consular Officer in theHigh Commission of India , Wellington with effect from 26th May,2008.

[No.Τ. -4330/1 /2006]

[No.T: -4330/1/2006]

PRITAM LAL, Under Secy. ( Consular) PRITAM LAL ,Under Secy .( Consular) नई दिल्ली, 27 मई, 2008

प्रवासी भारतीय कार्य मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 3 जून , 2008 कर.आ. 1332,-राजनयिक कौसली अधिकारी ( शपथ एवं शुल्क) अधिनियम , 1948 ( 1948 का 41 वां व 2 के अंक (क ) के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एत‌द्वारा भारत का राजदूतावास ,वियंशियन में श्री विनोद कुमार, वैय‌क्तिक सहायक को 27-5-2008 से सहायक कौसली अधिकारी का कार्य करने हेतु प्राधिकृत करती है ।

[सं. दी-4330/01 /2006]

प्रीतम लाल , अवर सचिव (कौसुलर )

NowDelhi , the 27th May, 2008

का.आ.. 1340. उत्प्रवास अधिनियम , 1983 की धारा 3 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) ( 1983 का 31 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्र सरकार, एत‌द्वारा श्री बी. एस. नायक, अनुभाग अधिकारी को प्रवासी भारतीय कार्य मंत्रालय में उत्प्रवास संरक्षी के रूप में नियुक्त करती है। श्री बी. एस . नायक की नियुक्ति उत्प्रवास संरक्षी के कोलकाता स्थित कार्यालय में उनके पदभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से 3 वर्ष की अवधिअथवा आगामी आदेशों तक , जो भी स्थिति पहले हो के लिए उत्प्रवास संरक्षी- II के रूप में होगी :

2. श्री बी. एस. नायक, ने 16-4-2008 के अपराह्न से प्रवासी कार्य मंत्रालय के अधीन उत्प्रवास संरक्षी , कोलकाता के कार्यालय में उत्प्रवास. संरक्षी- ॥ का पदभार सम्भाल लिया है । S.O. 1337. In pursuance of the clause (a) of the Section 2 ofthe Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Oaths and fees ) Act, 1948 the Central Government hereby authorize Shri Vinod Kumar Personal Assistant to perform the duties ofAssistant Consular Officer in the Embassy of India,Vientiane with effect from 27th May, 2008 .

[सं. 4/2008/फा. सं. ए-22013 / 1 /2005 -पी.एं 1

[No.Τ. -4330/1 /2006]

जी. सी. राऊत , अवर सचिव PRITAM LAL , Under Secy. (Consular) 2850

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

MINISTRY OF OVERSEAS INDIAN AFFAIRS NewDelhi , the 3rd June,2008 8.0. 1340.-In exercise of the powers conferred under section 3, sub - section ( 1 ) of the Emigration Act , 1983 (31of 1983.) the Central Government appoints Shrl B.S.Nayak, Section Officer , ss Protector ofEmigrants in the Ministry ofOveracas Indian Affairs. The appointment of Shri B.S. Nayak will be POE -I , in the office of POB , Kolkatafor a period of three years from the date of taking over the charge of the post or until further orders, whichever- event takes place earlier.

2. Shri B.S. Nayak has assumed charge of the pos ofProtector ofEmigrants - II , in the office of Protector of Emigrants, Kolkata under the Ministry ofOverseas Indian Affairs inthe forenoon of 16-4-2008.

[No.4/2008/F. No. A. 22013/1 / 05 -PA]

G.C.ROUT, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली , 3 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1341 ,-उत्प्रवास अधिनियम , 1983की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) ( 1983 का 31 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, कंन्द्र सरकार , एतदु‌द्वारा श्री नरीम अहमद, अनुभाग अधिकारी को प्रवासी भारतीय कार्य मंत्रालय में उत्प्रवास संरक्षी के रूप में नियुक्त करती है । श्री नदीम अहमद की नियुक्ति उत्प्रवास संरक्षी के चंडीगढ़ स्थित कार्यालय में उनके पदभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से 3 वर्ष की अवधि अथवा आगामी आदेशों तक , जो भी स्थिति पहले हो ,के लिए उत्प्रवास संरक्षी- II के रूप में होगी ।

2. जी नदीम अहमद , ने 21-4-2008 के अपराहन से प्रणामी भारतीय कार्य मंत्रालय के अधीन उत्प्रवास संरक्षी , चंडीगढ़ के कार्यालय में उत्प्रवास संरक्षी- II का पदभार सम्भाल लिया है ।

[ सं. 3/2008 /फा. सं.ए 22013/1/2005-पीए,

जी. सी. राऊत , अवर सचिव NewDelhi , the 3rd June, 2008 S.O. 1341.-In exercise of the powers conferred under section 3 , sub - section ( 1 ) of the Emigration Acı , 1983 (31of 1983 ) the Central Government appoints Shri Nadeem Ahmad, Section Officer, na Protector of Emigrants in the Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs . The appointment of Shri Nadeem Ahmad will be POE- li , in the office ofPOE, Chandigarh for a period of three years from the date of taking over the charge of the post or until further orders , whichever event takes place earlier.

2. Shri Nadeem Ahmad has assumed charge of the postofProtectorofEmigrante- II , in the office ofProtector ofEmigrants, Chandigarh under the Ministry of Overseas IndienAffairs in the forepoon of 21-4-2008.

[No. 3/2008/F. No. A. 22013/1/05-PA]

G.C.ROUT, Under Secy.

भारी उद्योग और लोक उद्यम मंत्रालय

(भारी उद्योग विभाग )

नई दिल्ली , 23 मई , 2008

का.आ. 1342,-केन्द्रीय सरकार , सरकारी स्थान (अप्राधिकृत अभिभोगियों को बेदखली ) अधिनियम , 1971 ( 1971 का 40 ) की धारा 3 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , नीचे दी गई सारणी को स्तंभ ( 1 ) में उल्लिखित अधिकारी को , जो नागालैंड पल्प एंड

(PART II-SEC. 3(11 ) ] पेपर कंपनी लिमिटेड ( हिन्दुस्तान पेपर कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड की सममुवंगी कंपनी का अधिकारी है और केन्द्रीय सरकार के राजपत्रित अधिकारी की रैंक के समतुल्य है, उक्त अधिनियम के प्रयोजनों के लिए संपदा अधिकारी नियुक्त करती है जो अपनी अधिकारिता की सीमाओं के भीतर उक्त सारणी के स्तंभ ( 2 ) में विनिर्दिष्ट सरकारी स्थान की बाबत उक्त अधिनियम द्वारा या उसस्ते अधीन संपदा अधिकारी को प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग और अधिरोपित कर्तव्यों का पालन करेगा।

सारणी

अधिकारी का नाम सरकारी स्थान के प्रवर्ग और अधिकारिता की स्थानीय सीमाएं

नागालैंड पल्प एंड पेपर कंपनी उपप्रबंधक ( वन ) ,

लिमिटेड, तुली सोकोकचुंग ( जिला )

नागालैंड की या उसके

द्वारा या उसकी ओर

भागालैंड पल्प एंक पेपर कंपनी लिमिटेड तुली, मोकोकचुंग (जिला) नागालैंड से पट्टे पर लिए गए स्थान , ऐसा प‌ट्टाधृति स्थानों के माप और सीमा निम्नलिखित है: -

कुल क्षेत्र 697.98 एकड़

प्लाट सं. 1 उत्तर - तसुकी नाला

546 एकड़ दक्षिण-योंगলিন সালা

पश्चिम- अमगुरी-मोको- कचुंग रोड और निर्जी भूमि

पूर्व- नामामोन ग्राम की

झूम भूमि

प्लाट सं. 2 उत्तर- निजी भूमि

23.00 एकड़ दक्षिण-

वामाकेन ग्राम की

पश्चिम- कामाक्षेत ग्राम

की निजी भूमि

पूर्व- वामाकेत ग्राम

प्लाट सं. 3 उत्तर- निजी गली

13.6 एकड़ दक्षिण- निजी गली पश्चिम-अमगुरी-मोको- कचुंग रोड

पूर्व- निजी झूम भूमि

उत्तर - मिरिंगकॉग ग्राम की

115.38 एकड़

दक्षिण- मिरिंगकोंग ग्राम मिरिंगकोंग ग्राम की सूम

प्लाट सं. 4 भूমি

पश्चिम-अमगुरी

मोकोकचुंग रोड

पूर्व-मिरिंगकोंग ग्राम की

तुम भूमि

[फाइल से 8 ( 93 )/2007-पीई-VII ]

राजगोपाल मनोहर , निदेशक [ পাগ - অষ্ট 3(11) ]

MINISTRY OF HEAVY INDUSTRIES AND PUBLIC ENTERPRISES

(Department ofHeavy Industry)

NewDelhi, the 23rd May, 2008

8.0. 1342.- In exercise of the powers conferredby section 3of thePublic Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupents)Act , 1971 (40 of 1971 ), the Central Governmet herebyappointsthe officer mentioned in column (1 ) of the table below, being an officer of the Nagaland Pulp and Paper Company Limited ( a subsidiary company of Hindustan Paper Corporation Limited) and equivalent to the rank ofGazetted Officer of the Contral Government , to beEstate Officer for the purposes of the said Act, who shall exercise the powers conferred and perform the duties Imposed on the Batate Officer by or under the saldAct, within the limits of his jurisdiction in respect of the public premises specified in the coluren (2) ofthe said table.

TABLE

Designation of theOfficer

Categoriesof the public premises and local Himits of jurisdiction

DeptyManager (Forestry)Nagaland PulpandPaper Company Limited, Tuli, Mokokchung (Dist.),Nagaland

Premises belonging to or taken on lease by or on behalf ofNage land Pulp and Paper Company Limited, Tull, Mokokchung (Dist.) Nagaland , roch as the leasehold premises measuring andbounded as under :-

Total area 697.98 астм

PlotNo. 1 North -Trudi nala

546 acres Bouth -Youngilbe nala

West-Amguri -Mokok- chung Roadand privateland

Bast-Jhum land of Wamaken village

PlotNo.2 North -Privass land

23.00 sores South-Privais landof WamakenVillage West-Thum land of Wamaken village

Bast-Wamiken Villag

Plot No. 3 North -Private lano

13.6 acisa Bouth -Private lane West-Amguri -Mokok- chungRoad Bast -Privats Jhum Land

Plot No. 4 North-Jhum land of

115.38 MorengkongVillag South-Jhum land of MerengkongVillage West-Amguri -Mokok-

chungRoad East-Thum land of MerengkongVillage

[FileNo.8(93) /2007-PE-VIIJ RAJAGOPAL MANOHAR, Director

2851

भारत का राबंपत्र 1 जून 14 , 2006 /पेड 24, 1930

स्वास्एवं परिवार कल्याण मंलब (स्वास्थ्य एवं पारेकार कराण विभाग )

नई दिल्ली , 16 मई, 2001

का.आ. 1343, -फेरफार चिकित्सक अधिनियम , 1948 (1948 का 16) की बारा 10 की उपधारा (4 ) के खण्ड ( ख) द्वारा प्रदत्र सक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए भारतीय गन्तरिक परिषद् से परामर्श करते उक्त अधिनियम की अनुसूची के भाग- III में वाय निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है, अर्थात्

2. रत चिकित्सा अधिनियम , 1948 ( 1948 का 16 ) को अनुसूची के भाग- III क्रमांक 91 को बाद कॉलम 1,2 तथा 3 की मौपूरा अनिधिय

नारतीय चिनियाँ इम.भी. एस.

92. मूर्कमिनिधन ,

के दम की एस

(मानिस)

में स्कोचर किले

(भरि यह कितवर ,

2003 में या इसके बाद

प्रभ की गई हो

93. किती

एम. जी. एल.

विश्वभिरालयों

(कम्युनिी मोत

के एम डी एस

हेल्प एंड

( फी के

2005में भा इससे भार

प्रचान की गई हो)

[ संख्या बी-12018/4/2006-कोई] राम सिंह , अवर अभिय MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (Department of Hosich and Family Welfare) New Delhi , the 16th May, 2008

8.0. 1343.-in exercise of the powers conferred by oleuse (b) sub-section (4) of Section 10 of the Dentists Act, 1948 (16 of 1948) and after consultation with the Dental Council of India. Central Government hereby makes the following further umerónants In Part -Ill of the Schedule to the seld Act, namely:-

2. Under the existing entries of columas 1 , 2 & 3 after serial sumber 9i la part- Ilf of the Bebedule to the Dentists Act, 1948 ( 16 of 1948 ) the following entries shall be added, namely:-

Post Graduate degres

InOrthodontics

92. University of NewYork, New York

MDB ( Orthodontics) University of Naw York, New York equivalent to MDB (Önbodontios) of Indian Universition. (When graated on ar ather #spleriber 2003).

Master of Desisl MDB ( Community Oral Health 93. University of Bydney, Balestre la Commmunity Orsi Health & Spide Bpidemiology ) ,

University Sydney, Australia miology equivalentto MDS (Community Dentistry) of

Indise Universities .

(When granted on or after March 2005).

[ No. V- 12018/4/2006-DE ]

RAJ SINGH ,Under Secy.

2852

[PART 11-SEC. 3 (ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 /JYAISTHA 24 , 1930

उपभोक्ता मामले , खाद्य और सार्बजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय

( उपभोक्ता मामले विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 14 मार्च, 2008

का.आ. 1344.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित्त प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि सख्त 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 पधार्थता 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 शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स न्यू फेमस स्केल इलेक्ट्रानिक्स , 32 , काछी मोहल्ला , इंदौर, मध्य पद्देश द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग 1 ) वाले " एन एफ एस/टी " श्रृंखला के अस्वचालित अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " फेपस " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 / 07/ 407 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है;

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 11 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 50 ग्रा. है सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) । ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

MAX 11 kg Min 50 g 8.1 g

स्टॉपिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद किया जाएगा तथा मॉडल को बिक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री, यथार्थता, डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम निष्पादन सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का विशिष्ट स्कीम डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया 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 वक्त 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 , विभिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तौलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 1 मिली ग्रा. से 50 मिली ग्रा. तक " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 50,000 की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 100 मि. प्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5,000 से 50,000 तक और 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2× 105 या 5× 10%, के हैं, जहां पर ' के' धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 234 ) /2007 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान :

2853 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( il ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24 , 1930

MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs)

New Delhi , the 14th March, 2008

SO 1344-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 ofthe Standards of Weights and MeasuresAct, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods ofsustained 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 ofthe said Act, the Central Government bereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non -automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with digital indication of " NFS/T" series of high accuracy (Accuracy class- 11 ) and with brand name " FAMOUS" (herein referred to as the said model) , manufactured byM /s . New Famous Scale Electronics, 32, Kachhi Mohalla, Indore, M. P. and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/407;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with a maximum capacity of 11kg: and minimum capacity of50g . The verification scale interval (e) is lg. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diod (LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

MAX 11 kg Min 50 g e.1 g

The sealing shall be done to prevent opening of the machine for fraudulent practices and model shall not be changed in terms of its material , accuracy design, circuit diagram , working principle etc. before or after sale .A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above. 1..

Further, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub -section ( 12) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate ofapproval of the said model shall also cover the weighing Distrument of similar make andperformance ofsamo series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg. and with number ofverification scale intervet (n) in the range of100 to 50,000 for ' e' value of Img . to 50mg. and with number ofverification scale interval (n) in the range of5,600 to50,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg. or more and with ' e' valde of 1x16 , 2x10 or 5x10 , k being a positive or nagativewhole 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 (234 )/2007)

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director ofLegal Metrology 2071 G1/06-2 2854

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 14 , 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART I-SEC. 3 (ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 14 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1345.-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 को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स न्यूफेमस स्केल इलेक्ट्रोनिक्स , 32 , काछी मोहल्ला , इंदौर, मध्य पद्रेश द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " एन एफ एस/पी-22 " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के माडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " फेमस " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी / 09/07/408 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि.ग्रा. है , सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है । मशीन में किलोग्राम को लीटर में बदलने की सुविधा भी है ।

MAX 1000 kg Min 2 kg 6. 100 g

FAMOLEN

स्टॅपिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद किया जाएगा तथा मॉडल को विक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री , यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम निष्पादन सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा । माडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का विशिष्ट स्कीम डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया 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 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 विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित ठसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " माभ के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से 5000 कि.प्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई" मान 1 × 10*, 2 × 10 अथवा 5× 10 %, के हैं, जहां पर ' के ' धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।.

[ फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 (234 )/2007]

आर माथुरखूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 2855 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14 , 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

NewDelhi, the 14thMarch, 2008

S.O. 1345.-Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards ofWeights and Measures Act, 1976 ( 60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use andto render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferted 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"NFS/P -22" series ofmedium accuracy (Accuracy class -III) andwith brand name" FAMOUS" (herein referred to as the said model), manufactured by M/s . New Famous Scale Electronics, 32, Kachhi Mohalla, Indore, M. P. and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/408;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non -automatic weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of1000kg and minimum capacity of2kg. 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 230Volts , and 50Hertz alternative current power supply. The machine is also having facility ofconversion of kg.totire.

MAX 1000 kg Min 2 kg 6.1000

FAMOU

The sealing shall be done to prevent opening of the machine for fraudulent practices and model shall not be changed in terms of its material , accuracy design, circuit diagram , working principle etc. before or after sale. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision ofthe model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section ( 12) ofSection 36 ofthe 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 above 50kg and up to 5000kg and with number of verification scale interval ( n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 5g or more and with ' e' value of Ix10%, 2x10 or 5x10 " , k being the positive or nagativewhole 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 (234)/2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 2856

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA; JUNE 14 , 2008 /JYAISTHA 24, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 14 मार्च, 2008

का.आ. 1346.-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 यानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगादार 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 शणें का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स एल सी जी सी क्रोमैटोग्राफी साल्युशन ( प्रा. ) लि. , एल सी जी सी टावर , 161/166, पैइगाह कालोनी , आनंद थियेटर क एस पी रोड, हैदराबाद -500003 , आंध्र प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग II ) बाले " एलसी- टी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचम साइत अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एल सी जी सी " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी /09/07/ 503 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज अपरूमण तुलादण्ड प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित ( टेबलटॉप प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 2 ग्रा . है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

LCIGO

इंडिकेटर के ऊपरी कवर और नीचे छेद करके पीछे की तरफ से सीलबंद किया जाएगा । इन छेदों पर लीड तार को बांधा जाएगा । इंडिकेटर को सीलिंग में फेरबदल के बिना खोला नहीं जा सकता । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का स्कीमवार डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्मात्ता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के जैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो । मि.ग्रा. से 50 मि.ग्रा. " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 50000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि.ग्रा. या उससे अधिक तक के " ई" मान के लिए 5000 से 50000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन अंतराल ( एन ) और 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 ( 278 ) /2007 ]

[ आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 2857 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

NewDelhi, the 14th March,2008

S.O. 1346. 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 ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with digital indication of "LC- T" series of high accuracy (Accuracy class- II ) and with brand name "LCGC" (herein referred to as the said model), manufactured by M/s . LCGC Chromatography Solutions (P), Ltd. , 'LOGC Towers' 161/166, Paigah Colony, Behind Anand Theater, S. P. Road, Hyderabad- 500 003, A. P. and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/503;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non- automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with a maximum capacity of30kg and minimum capacity of 100kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 2g. It has a tare devicewith a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diod (LED) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230Volts , and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

LCIGO

- The sealing is provided at the rear side by making a hole on the bottom and top cover of the balance. A leadedwire is fastened to these holes . The balance can not be opened unless the sealing is tampered. A typical schematic diagram of sealingprovision ofthe model is given above.

Further, inexercise ofthe powers conferred by sub- section (12) ofSection 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declaresthat this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing insturment of similar thake and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50kg and with number of verification scale interval (n ) in the.. range of100 to 50000 for ' e' value of Img to 50mg and with number of verification scale interval ( n ) in the range of 5000 م 50,000 for ' e' value of 100nag or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10 , 2x10 or 5x10%, 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 (278)/2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director ofLegal Metrology 2858

PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008/JYAISTHA 24, 1930

नई दिल्ली , 14 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1347, 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 भाप 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 ( ४ ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स एल सी जी सी क्रोमैटोग्राफी साल्युशन ( प्रा. ) लि. , एल सी जी सी टावर , 161/166, पैइगाह कालोनी , आनंद थियेटर के पीछे , एस पी रोड, हैदराबाद-500003 , आंध्र प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " एलसी- टींबी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेवलटाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एल सी जी सी " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी 709/07/504 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृत गेज अपरूपण तुलादण्ड प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित ( टेबलटॉप प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरणं है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमत्ता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्त्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

LCGC

इंडिकेटर के ऊपरी कवर और नीचे छेद करके पीछे की तरफ से सीलबंद किया जाएगा । इन छेदों पर लीड तार को बांधा जाएगा । इंडिकेटर को सीलिंग में फेरबदल के बिना खोला नहीं जा सकता । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का स्कीमवार डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित माडल 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. " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक तक के " ई" मान के लिए 500 से 10000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन अंतराल ( एन ) और सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकत्तम 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 (278 ) /2007 ]

आर माथुरखूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 2859 [भाग II- खण्ड (iu ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14 , 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

New Delhi, the 14th March,2008

S.O. 1347-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 ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use andto render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) ofSection 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate ofapproval ofthe model ofnon-automatic (Table top type) weighing instrument with digital indication of " LC- TB " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class -III) and with brand name "LCGC" (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . LCGC Chromatography Solutions (P), Ltd., 'LCGCTowers' 161/166, Paigah Colony, Behind Anand Theater, S. P. Road, Hyderabad-500 003 , A. P. and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/09/504;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non -automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with a maximum capacity of30kg and minimum capacity of 100kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 5g. It has a tare device with 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diod (LED) display indicates the weighing result. The Instrument operates on 230Volts and 50Hertz alternative current power supply.

LCGC

The sealing is provided at the rear side by making a hole on the bottom and top cover of the balance . A leaded wire is fastenedto these holes . The balance can not be opened unless the sealing is tempered . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub-section ( 12) of Section 36 ofthe saidAct, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate ofapproval ofthe said model shall also cover the weighing instument of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of100 to 10000 for ' e ' value of 100mg to 2g or with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for' e' value of5g or more and with ' s ' value of 1x10k, 2x10 or 5x10 , k being a positive ornagative whole number or equal to zero manufacturedbythe 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 (278)/2007)

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director ofLegalMetrology 2860

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART IISec. 3 (ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली , 14 मार्च, 2008

का. आ. 1348.- 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 ) नियन , 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 प्रदस शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स एल सी जी सी क्रोमैटोग्राफी सङ्गल्युशन (प्रा. ) लि. , एल सी जी सी टावर , 161/166 , पैइगाह कालोनी , आनंद थियेटर के पीछे, एस मौ रोड, हैदराबाद-500 003 , आंध्र प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग II ) वाले " एलसी- पी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूजन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एल सी जी सी " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/07 /505 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमान प्रमाण - पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृत गेज नरूपण तुलादण्ड प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) का तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 600 कि.प्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2.5 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई ) 50 प्रा. 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 ।

इंडिकेटर के ऊपरी कवर और नीचे छेद करके पीछे की तरफ से सीलबंद किया जाएगा । इन छेदों पर लीड तार को बांधा जाएगा ! इंडिकेटर को सीलिंग में फेरबदल के बिना खोला नहीं जा सकता । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का स्कोमवार डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि.ग्रा. या उससे अधिक तक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन अंतराल ( एन ) और 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 पूणर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 278 ) /2007 ]

आर. माधुरबूथम , निर्देशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 2861 [भाग II-खण्ड 3( 1) ]

भारत का राजपत्र :जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

NewDelhi, the 14th March, 2008

S.O. 1348. 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 ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards ofWeights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustaineduse and i 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 weighingwei instrument (Platform type ) with digital indication of "LC- P" series of high accuracy (Accuracy class - II) andwith brand name "LCGC" (herein referred to as the said model), manufactured by M/ s . LOGC Chromatography Solutions (P ) Lad 'LCGCTowers 151/166, Paigan Colony, Behind Anand Theater , S. P. Road, Hyderabad-500003, A.P, andwhich is assigned theapproval mark END/09/07/505;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (PlatformPlatform type)type ) with a maximum capacity of1600600 kgkg andand minimumminimum capacity of2.5 kg. The verification scale interval (e ) is 50g.It has a taredevicewith 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) display indicates the weighing Fesult The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply .

Pre urt The sealing is provided at the rear side by making a hole on the bottom and top cover ofthe idicator Aleaded wire is fastenedto these holes. The indicator cannot be opened unless the sealing is tempored. Atypical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise ofthe 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 similarmake andperformance of same series with maximum capacity range above 50 kg and up to 5000 kg 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× 108; 2 × 10 or 5x× 10 kbeing the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the sameprinciple, design , accuracy and with the same materials with which, the said approvedmodel has been manufactured

[F. No. WM-21 (278 )/2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director ofLegal Metrology 2071 GI/ 08-3 2862

[PART I SEC. 3(ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 14 मार्च, 2008

का.आ. 1349.- 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 मात्रक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाढ़ 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 शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स मास्टर इंडिया एजेंसिज, नेशनल टूरिस्ट होम के सामने , एम सी रोड, पेरूमबबूर-683 542 , जिला एर्नाकुलम , केरल द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता (यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एम आई टी बी" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, -जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " मार्वल " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/07/561 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण - पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबलटॉप प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन मरिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 बोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

सत्यापन सील और स्टाम्प प्राप्त करने के लिए निचली प्लेट और इंडिकेटर के दोनों तरफ से छेद करके लीड तार द्वारा बांधकर सीलिंग की बाती है । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का स्कीमवार डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया 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 अनुभोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे तका अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि.ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक के " ई" मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " माग के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एम ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " "মান 1×10 , 2× 10%, 5 × 10 %, के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम 21 ( 292 )/2007 ] आर माधुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 2863 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

NewDelhi , the 14th March, 2008

S.O. 1349. 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 ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights andMeasures (Approval ofModels) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the CentralGovernment hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the riodel of non -automatic (Table top type) weighing instrument with digital indication of "MI- TB " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class-III ) and with brand name "MARVEL" (herein referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s . Master India Agencies, Opp .National TouristHome, M. C. Road, Perumbavoor -683 542, Ernakulam Dist . , Kerala and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 07/561;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with a maximum capacity of30kg . and minimum capacity of 100g . The verification scale interval (e) is 5g. It has a tare devicewith 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diod (LED) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230Volts, 50Hertz alternative current power supply.

MARPEL

The sealing isdone by making a hole between the bottom plate and the indicator on both the side's view by fastening a leaded wire to receive the verification seal and stamp. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision ofthe model is given above,

Further, in exercise of the powers conferredby sub -section ( 12) of Section 36 ofthe said Act , the Central Govemment hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instument ofsimilar make, accuracy and performance ofsame 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 of5g. or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10 , 2x10 or 5x10k, k being a positive or nagative 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 (292)/2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

2864

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 14 मार्च , 2008

कार, आ. 1350.- 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 आक्ति 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 को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स मास्टर इंडिया एजेंसिज , नेशनल टूरिस्ट होम के सामने , एम सी रोड, पेरूमबवूर-683 542 , जिला एर्नाकुलम , केरल द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता (यथार्थता वर्ग ) वाले " एम आई- जेपी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण (टेबलटाय प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " मार्वल " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी /09/07/560 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदनु प्रमाण - पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबलटॉप प्रकार ) तांलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 2 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत 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 ।

सत्यापन सील और स्टाम्प प्राप्त करने के लिए निचली प्लेट और इंडिकेटर के दोनों तरफ से छेद करके लीड द्वारा बांधकर सीलिंग को आती है । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का स्कीमवार डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

और कंन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 को 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 सिद्धांत, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्नी से जिससे अनुमोदित्त मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो । मि.ग्रा. से 50 मि.ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 5,000 की रेंज में और 100 मि.ग्रा. अथवा उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50,000 की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2× 10 , 5× 10*, के हैं, जहां पर ' के' धनात्मक था ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के सपतुल्य हैं ।

फा. स. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 292 )/2007 ]

आर. भाधुरबूथम, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 2865 : [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24 , 1930

Delhi , the 14th March , 2008

S.O. 1350.-Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed . authority, is satisfled that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with digital indication of "M1 - JP " series ofhigh accuracy (Accuracy class -II ) and with brand name "MARVEL" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Master India Agencies , Opp . National TouristHome, M. C. Road, Penumbavoor- 683 542, Ernakulam Dist., Kerala and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 / 07/560,

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non -automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type ) with a maximum capacity of30kg and minimum capacity of 100kg. The verification scale interval (e ) is 2g . It has a tare devicewith 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diod (LED) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts, and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

The sealing is done by making a hole between the bottom plate and the indicator on both the side's view by fastening a leaded wire to receive the verification seal and stamp . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

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 instument of similar make and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50kg and with number 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 to50,000 for ' e' value of 100mg or more and with ' e' value of 1x10 , 2x10 or 5x10 % , k being a positive or nagativewhole 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 (292)/2007]

R.MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 2866

[PART I-SEC. 3( i) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/JYAISTHA 24, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 14 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1351.-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 अअधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( B ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स मास्टर इंडिया एजेंसिज , नेशनल टूरिस्ट होम के सामने , एम सी रोड, पेरूमबबूर 683 542 , जिला एर्नाकुलम , केरल द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग-111 ) वाले " एम आई- पीटी " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक , अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण (प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " मार्वल " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन सिक आई एन डी / 09/08/ 11 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण - पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतमं क्षमता 4 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (ई) 200 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोद्ध ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और , 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

सत्यापन सील और स्टाम्प प्राप्त करने के लिए निचली प्लेट और इंडिकेटर के दोनों तरफ से छेद करके लीड़ तार द्वारा बांधकर सीलिंग की जाती है । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का स्कीमवार डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. अथवा उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 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, जहां पर ' के ' धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम 21 ( 292 )/2007 ]

आर पाथुरबूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 2867 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14 , 2008 /ज्येष्ठ 24,1930

NewDelhi, the 14th March, 2008

S.O. 1351. 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 ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (ApprovalofModels) 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 ) ofSection 36 of the saidAct, 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 " MI -PT" series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class-III) and with brand name "MARVEL" (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufacturedby M/s. Master India Agencies ,Opp.National Tourist Home, M. C. Road, Perumbavoor-683 542, Ernakulam Distt . , Kerala and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/ 11 ;

Thesaidmodel is a strain gauge type load cell based non-automatic weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of1000kg, and minimum capacity of 4kg . The verification scale interval (e) is 200g. It has a tare device with 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diod ( LED) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230Volts , and 50Hertz alternative current power supply.

The sealing is done by making a hole between the bottom plate and the indicator on both the side's view by fastening a leaded wire to receive the verification scal and stamp . A typical schematic diagram ofsealing provision ofthe model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (12) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval ofthe said model shall also cover the weighing instument of same series with maximum capacity above 50kg. and up to 5000kg . and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of500 to10,000 for 'e' value of5g, or more and with' e' value of 1x10 , 2x10 or 5x10%, kbeing the positive or pagativewhole number or equal to zero mamufactured 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 (292)/2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of LegalMetrology [PART II SEC. 3 ( ii) ] 2868

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 /JYAISTHA 24, 1930

नई दिल्ली , 14 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1352.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि इंर्वत 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 ( १ ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स गुह लाइफ प्रॉडक्ट्स, एस -239, गंगा प्लाजा , बेगम ब्रिज रोड, मेरठ-250 001 उत्तर प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग II ) वाले "जी एल टी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम "जी एल " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है । और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी 09/07/326 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित सोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतय क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्राः है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 2 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्याकलनात्मक धारित आधेयंतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कंपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद किया जाएगा तथा मॉडल को विक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री , यथार्थता, डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम निष्पादन सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का विशिष्ट स्कीम द्वायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलने उपकरण भी होंगे असे. 1 मि.ग्रा. से 50 मि.ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 50,000 की रेंज में और 100 मि.ग्रा. अथवा उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5,000 से 50,000 की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 105, 2×10* अथवा S × 10 * , के हैं, जहां पर ' के' धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम 21-( 166) /2007 ]

आर. माधुरबूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 2869 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

NewDelhi , the 14th March, 2008

$.0. 1352. 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 oftheStandards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods ofsustained 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 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type ) with digital indication of "GLT " series of high accuracy (Accuracy class- II ) and with brand name "GL" (berein referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s . Good Life Products , S-239, Ganga Plaza, Begum Bridge Road,Meerut-250001 , U. P. and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/326;

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

The sealing is done through the hole made in the bottom plate and front ofthe indicator of the scale and sealing wire is passed through these holes and the lead seal is fixed on the wire . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision ofthe model is given above.

Further, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub-section (12) ofSection 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government herebydeclares that this certificate of approval ofthe said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make andperformanceof same series with maximum capacity up to 50kg and with number of verification scale Interval (n) in the range of 100 to50,000 for ' e ' value of Img to 50mg and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of5,000 to 50,000 for' e' value of 100mg or more and with 'e' value of 1x10k, 2x10 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 ( 166)/2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 2071 01/08-4 2870

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 /JYAISTHA 24, 1930

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

नई दिल्ली , 14 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1353.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात 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 शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स गुड लाइफ प्रॉडक्ट्स , एस -239 , गंगा प्लाजा , बेगम ब्रिज रोड , मेरठ -250 001 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " जी एल पी" श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक , अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के माडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " जी एल " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी /09/07/327 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण -पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (ई ) 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन एरिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टम्पिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद किया जाएगा तथा माडल को बिक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री , यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम निष्पादन सिद्धांत आदि की शतों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा । माडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का विशिष्ट स्कीम डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया 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 माडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वार। उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित माडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से अधिक तथा 5000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10* , 2× 10 या 5 × 10 , के हैं, जहाँ पर ' के' धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम 21 ( 166)/2007)

आर. माधुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 2871

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

NewDelhi, the 14th March , 2008

S.O. 1353. 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 ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 ( 60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over périods ofsustained use andto render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- sections (7) and ( 8) of Section 36 ofthe 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" GLP" series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) and withbrand name "GL" (herein referred to as the said model ), manufactured by M/ s. Good Life Products, S-239, Ganga Plaza, BegumBridgeRoad , Meerut - 250001 , U. P. and which is assigned the approval mark İND /09/07 /327;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 1000kg and minimum capacity of 2kg . The verification scale interval (e ) is 100g. It has a tare device with 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diod (LED) display indicates the weighing resuh . The instrument operates on 230Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

The sealing is done through the hole made in the bottom plate and front of the indicator of the scale and sealing wire is passed through these holes and the lead seal is fixed on the wire . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision ofthe model is given above.

Further , in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub- section ( 12) ofSection 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instument of same seires with maximum capacity above 50kg and up to 5000kg and with number ofverification scale interval (n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10,2× 10 or 5 × 10k, k being the positive or nagative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the satne 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 ( 166)/2007)

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 2872

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24 , 1930

[PART I-SEC. 3 (ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 14 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1354, 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 बाद 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 को उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए , मैसर्स बेल स्केलस प्रा.लि. , बी-190, V, मैन II स्टेज , पोन्या इंडस्ट्रियल एस्टेट, बंगलौर -560058 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " बो एस- टी बी" श्रृंखला के अस्वचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " बेल " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 07/416 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण - पत्र जारी करती है ;

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 100 कि.ग्रा . है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 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 हैं । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टम्पिंग प्लेट को सौल करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंध किया जाएगा तथा मॉडल को बिक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री , यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम निष्पादन सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का विशिष्ट स्कीम डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 224) /2007] आर माधुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 2873 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ll) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

NewDelhi, the 14th March, 2008

S.O. 1354.-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 ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards ofWeights andMeasures (Approval ofModels) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use andto 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 (Table toptype)with digital indication of " BS-TB" series of medium accuracy ( accuracy class - III) and with brand name "BELL" (herein referredto as the said model) , manufacturedby M/s Bell Scales Pvt. Ltd. B- 190, V, Main 11 Stage, Peenya Industrial Estate, Banglore-560058, Kanataka and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/416;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non -automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with a maxinnum capacity of 30 Kg and minimum capacity 100g . The verfication scale interval (e) is 5g. 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 alternative current power supply.

In addition to sealing the stamping plate, sealing shall also be done to prevent the opening of the machine for farudlent practices and model shall not be changed in terms in terms of its material , accuracy, design , circuit diagram , working principle etc. A typical schematic diagram of the sealing arrangement of the model has been given above.

Further, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub-section ( 12 ) of section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government herebydeclares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instuments of simalr make, accuracy and performance ofsame series with maximum capacity up to 50kg , with verification scale interval (n) in the range of100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg to 2g . and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for' e ' value of5g. or more and with ' e' value of Ix10 , 2x10 or 5x10k , k being the positive or nagative 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 (224)/2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 2874

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II-SEC.3 ( ii )]

नई दिल्ली , 14 मार्च , 2008

कां.आ. 1355.-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 भाप 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 रखोगा 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 ( ४ ) द्वारा शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स बेल स्केलस प्रा.लि. , बी-190 , V, मैन II स्टेज , पीन्या इंडस्ट्रियल एस्टेट , बंगलौर -560058 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " बी एस पी टी " श्रृंखला के अस्वचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के माडल का जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " बेल" है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी 109/07/417 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी करती है;

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम भ्रमत्ता 1000 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमत्ता 4 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 200 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत्त प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टम्पिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंध किया जाएगा तथा मॉडल को बिक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री , यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम निष्पादन सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का विशिष्ट स्कीम डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

और. केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो ऽग्रा. 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 क्षमता वाले हैं और ' ई ' मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 अथवा 5 × 10 , के हैं, जहाँ पर ' के' धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।.

[ फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 (224 ) /2007 ]

आर, माथुरबूथम, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 2875 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

New Delhi , the 14th March , 2008

S.O. 1355.-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 ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights andMeasures (Approval ofModels) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use andto render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval ofnon -automatic weighing instrument(Platform type)with digital indication of "BS-PT" series of medium accuracy (accuracy class- III ) and with brand name "BELL" (herein referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s Bell Scales Pvt . Ltd. B- 190, V, Main II Stage, Peenya Industrial Estate , Banglore-560058, Karnataka and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/417;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with a maximum capacity of 1000 Kg. and minimum capacity of4kg . The verfication scale interval (e) is 200g . It has a tare device with a100 percent 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 ofthe machine for fraudulent practices and model shall not be changed in terms of its material , accuracy, design , circuit diagram, working principle etc. A typical schematic diagram of the sealing arrangement ofthe model has been given above.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 12) ofSection 36 ofthe saidAct, the Central Government herebydeclaresthat this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instuments of simale make, accuracyand performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50kg, and up to 5000kg , withverification scale interval (n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g. or more and with ' e' value of 1x10 , 2x10 or 5x10%, where k is a positiveor nagative 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 (224)/2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 2876

[PART II-SEC 3 ( ) ) THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 14 मार्च, 2008

का.आ. 1356. 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 ) बाद 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 शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स प्रभुदास जीवन नागजी , नादीबाजार, पो ओ बोक्स 12 सावरकुण्डला द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " पी जे एन -25 " श्रृंखला अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचलित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) के माहल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " दा की ब्राण्ड " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 /07/514 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त माडल एक विकृत गेन प्रकार का भार 'सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलाप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा . है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपद‌र्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विश्वत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंध किया जाएगा तथा मॉडल को बिक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री, यथार्थता, डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम निष्पादन सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया बाएगा । माडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का विशिष्ट स्कीम डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

> और केन्द्रीय सरकार तक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 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, द्विजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित माडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि.ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंरतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा में 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 है और ' ई ' मान 1× 10 , 2× 10%, 5 × 10*, के हैं, जो धनात्मक था ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा, सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 246)/2007 ]

आर. माधुरसूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 2877 [भाग -खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14 , 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

NewDelhi , the 14th March, 2008

S.O. 1356. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards ofWeights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate ofapproval of the model of non - automatic (Table top type) weighing instrument with digital indication of "PJN -25 " series of medium accuracy ( accuracy class- III) and with brand name "The KeyBrand" (berein referred to as the said model), manufactured by M/s. Prabhudas Jivan Nagil, Nadibazar , PO Box- 12, Savarkundla and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/514;

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 verfication scale interval ( e) is 5g. It has a tare devicewith a100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting diode (LED ) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operatos on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

The sealing is done through the hole made in the bottom and top cover of the instrument at the left and right side and a seal wire la passed through these holes on both sides. A Square lead seal is applied to the sealing wire on both sides ofthe indicator.A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision ofthe model is given above.

Further, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub-section ( 12 ) ofSection 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government herebydeclares that this certificate of approval ofthe 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 of100 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 of5g or more and with ' e' value of 1× 10%, 2× 10 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 (246)/2007)

R.MATHURBOOTHAM, Director ofLegal Metrology 2071G1/08-5 2878

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/TYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART I-SEC. 3(ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 14 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1357. केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित्त 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 परिस्थित्तियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स प्रभुदास जीषन नागजी, नादीबाजार , पो ओ बॉक्स 12 सावरकुण्डला द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " पी जे एन-यू" श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचलित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल, का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " दा की ब्राण्ड" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी /09/07 /516 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त माडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (ई ) 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकसनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 चोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

MAX1000kgMin2kge.100g

स्टम्पिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद किया जाएगा तथा मॉडल को बिक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री , यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम निष्पादन सिद्धांत आदि की शतों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया आएगा । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का विशिष्ट स्कीम डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया 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 सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो ऽ आ. 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 5,000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और ' ई ' मान 1 × 10 , 2× 10% , 5 × 10% , के हैं, जहाँ पर ' के' धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 (246)/2007)

आर. माधुरनूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 2879 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) )

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14 , 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

NewDelhi , the 14th March,2008

S.O. 1357.-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 ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels ) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate ofapproval ofthe model of self- indicating, non -automatic , (Platfonn type) weighing instrument with digital indication of "PIN-U " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class-III) and with brand name "The KEY BRAND" (herein referred to as the said model ), manufactured by M/s . Prabhudas Jivan Nagji , Nadibazar, PO Box- 12 , Savarkundla and which is assigned the approval mark IND / 09/07/516;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non- automatic weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of1000 kg. and minimum capacity of 2kg . The verfication scale interval (e) is 100 g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting diode ( LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

MAX 1000 kg Môn 2 kg 4,100g

The sealing is done through the hole made in the rear plate and the front body of the indicator ofthe instrument at the left and right both sides with stamping plate hole and a seal wire is passed through these holes on both sides .A square lead seal is pour through.seal wire on the both sides ofthe instrument. A typical schematic diagram ofthe sealing provision of the model has been given above.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Governmenthereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instument of same serieswith maximuni capacity above 50kg, and up to 5,000 kg. and with number of verification scale interval ( n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of Sg. or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10%, 2× 10* or 5× 10%, k being the positive or nagative 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 (246)/2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 2880

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24 , 1930

[PART 1 ]-SEC. 3 (if) )

नई दिल्ली , 14 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1358.-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 को प्रयोग करते हुए पैसर्स प्रभुदास जीवन नागजी , प्रादीबाजार, पो ओ बोक्स -12 , सावरकुण्डला द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " पी जे एन -12 " श्रृंखला अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचलित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार) के भॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " दा की ब्राण्ड " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी / 09/07/515 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 11 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 50 प्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) । 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 ।

स्टम्पिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंध किया जाएगा तथा मॉडल को बिक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री , यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम निष्पादन सिद्धांत आदि की शतों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का विशिष्ट स्कीम डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 (246) /2007 ] आर. माधुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 2881 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्रं : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

NewDelhi, the 14th March, 2008

S.O. 1358.-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 ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards ofWeights and Measures (Approval ofModels ) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods ofsustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise ofthe 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 (Tabletop type) with digital indication of "PIN-12" series ofhigh accuracy (accuracy class- 11) and with brand name "The KEY BRAND" (herein referred to as the said model), manufactured by M/ s Prabhudas Jivan Nagji , Nadibazar, PO Box-12, Savarkundla and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/07/515;

The said model is astrain gauge type load cell based non-automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with a maximum capacity of 11 Kg and minimum capacity of50g . The verification scale interval (e) is Ig . It has a taredevicewith 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.

SAMUMKUNGLAJO

A The sealing is done through the hole made in the bottom and top cover of the instrument at the left and right side and a seal wire is passed through these holes on both sides . A Square lead seal is applied to the sealing wire on both sides ofthe instrument. A typical schematic diagram of the sealing provision ofthe model given above.

Further, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub- section (12) ofsection 36 ofthe said Act, the CentralGovernment hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instument of simalr make and performance ofsame series with maximum capacity up to 50kg, and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of Img to 50mg. and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of5000 to50,000 for ' e' value of 100 mg . or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10 , 2x10 or 5x10%, k being the positive or nagativewhole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the sante principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 (246)/2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 2882

[ PART 11 SEC. 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 18 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1359.-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 मथार्थता 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 को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स मिश्रीलाल मोतीलाल , 71 , सारंग स्ट्रीट, मुबई-400003 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " एम एल पी -7 " श्रंखुला के स्वतः सूचक , अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपरकण (प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के माडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एम - लाल " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/ 07/495 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त माडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 किलो ग्राम और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 किलोग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई ) 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 ।

इंडिकेटर के नीचे की प्लेट और सामने की प्लेट मे छेद करके सीलिंग तार द्वारा मॉडल के इंडिकेटर को सील किया जाता है । सीलिंग तार को इन दो छेदों में से निकाला गया और प्लम को सीलिंग तार से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का विशिष्ट स्कीम डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है किंदक्त 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 विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से 5000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता बाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2× 10 * या 5 × 10 * , के हैं , जहाँ पर ' के ' धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्यके समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम 21 (271 ) /2007 ] आर माथुरबूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 2883 [भाग - खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14 , 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24 , 1930

New Delhi, the 18th March, 2008 '

S.О. 1359.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 ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use andto render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -sections (7) and ( 8) of Section 36 ofthe 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 " MLP-7 " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class-III) and with brand name " M- LAL" (herein referred to as the said model), manufactured by M/s . Misrilal Motilal , 71 , Sarang Street, Mumbai - 400003 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/495

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non-automatic weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 1000kg and minimum capacity of 2Kg. 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) disply indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz altemative current power supply.

1666 The sealing is done at the rear side ofthe indicator through the hole made in the bottom plate and top cover , then scalingwire is passed through these two holes and the lead seal is fixed into the wire. A typical schematic diagram ofsealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub-section ( 12 ) ofsection 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate ofapproval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instuments of same series with maximum capacity above 50kg and up to 5000kg and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for' e' value of 5g or more and with ' e' value of 1x10 , 2x10 " or 5x10% , k being a positive or nagative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer with the same principle, design and with the same materialswith which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 (271 )/2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 2884

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART I SEC. 3 (ii)]

नई दिल्ली , 18 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1360.-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 (पॉडलों 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 शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स मिश्रीलाल मोतीलाल , 71 , सारंग स्ट्रीट, मुबई-400003 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " ए एल टी -11 " श्रृंखला अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपरकण ( टेबलयप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एम- लाल " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 07/494 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी करती है । उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 किलो ग्राम और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई) ऽग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मकः धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोडा ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत्त प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

M-LAL

इंडिकेटर के नीचे की प्लेट और सामने की प्लेट में छेद करके सीलिंग तार द्वारा मॉडल के इंडिकेटर को सील किया जाता है । सीलिंग तार को इन दो छेदों में से निकाला गया और प्लग को सीलिंग तार से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का विशिष्ट स्कीम डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम 21 ( 271 ) /2007 ) आर. माधुरयूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान [ भाग 11- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

2885

भारत का राजपत्र ; जून 14, 2008 /ज्येष्ठ 24 , 1930

New Delhi , the 18th March , 2008

S.O. 1360.-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 ofthe Standards ofWeights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the saidAct, the CentralGovernment hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval ofthe Model of non -automatic (Tabletop type) weighing instrument with digital indication of " MLT- 11" series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class- III ) and with brand name "M-LAL" (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s. Misrilal Motilal, 71 , Sarang Street, Mumbai- 400003 andwhich is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/494;

The saidmodel is a strain gauge type load cell based non- automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with a maximum capacity of 30kg 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.

M-

9928 The waling is done through the hole made in the bottom plate and front of the scale, then sealing wire is passed through these two holes and the lead seal is fixed in to the wire . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision ofthe model is given above.

Further, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub-section ( 12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Govemment herebydeclares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instuments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of100 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 ' c' value of Ex10 %, 2x10 or 5x10k, k being a 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 (271 )/2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director ofLegal Metrology 2071 GL08-م 2886

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 मार्च, 2008

का.आ. 1361.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात 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 शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स जे.के. मिस्त्री एंड कंपनी, काड़िया भवन , 56 , न्यू देवास रोड, इंदौर, मध्य प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता वर्ग ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) बाले " जे के -704 " श्रृंखला के अंकन सूचक सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपरकण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " पिस्टल " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त माडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/ 07/370 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी करता है ।

उक्त माडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 500 किलो ग्राम और न्यूनतम क्षमता । किलोग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई ) 50ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) पदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्टऔर 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टॉपिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद किया जाएगा और मॉडल को बिक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री , यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम निष्पादन सिद्धान्त आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा । माडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का विशिष्ट स्कीम डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदन्त 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 माडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 प्रा. 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 , 5 × 10 , के हैं , जहाँ पर ' के ' धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[ फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम 21 ( 203 ) /2007 ]

आर माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 2887 [भाग 11 - खण्ड 3 ( ii) )

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

NewDelhi , the 18th March , 2008

S.O. 1361. 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 ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (ApprovalofModels) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use andto render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 ofthe said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate ofapproval of non -automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with digital indication of " JK-704" series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class- III ) and with brand name " PISTOL" (herein referredto as the said model) , manufactured by M/ s . J.K. Mishtry & Company, Kadia Bhawan , 56, New DevasRoad, Indore, Madhya Pradesh and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/370;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with a maximum capacity of 500kg and minimum capacity of 1kg. The verification scale interval ( e) is 50g. It has a tare device with 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) disply 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 be done to prevent opening of the machine for fraudulent practices and model shall not be changed in terms of its material , accuracy , design , circuit diagram, working principle etc. A typical schematic diagram of the sealing arrangement of the model has been given above.

Further, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub- section ( 12) ofSection 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby deciares that this certificate of approval of the said modet shall also cover the weighing instuments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50kg and up to 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 × 10 %, 2× 10 or 5x10 , k being a positive or nagative 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 (203 )/2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director ofLegal Metrology 2888

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART 11-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1362.-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 शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स जे.के. मिस्त्री एंड कंपनी, कार्डिया भवन, 56, न्यूदेवास रोड , इंदौर, मध्य प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " जे के-407" श्रृंखला के अंकन सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपरकण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " पिस्टल " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/07/369 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्त्राचालित ( टेबलटाय प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 किलो ग्राम और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई) 5ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 बोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्त्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टॉपिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सोलबंद भी किया जाएगा और मॉडल को बिक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री , यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम निष्पादन सिद्धान्त आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का विशिष्ट स्कीम डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

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

১

[ फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 203 ) /2007 ]

आर. माथुरनूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 2889 [ भाग II- खाण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14 , 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

New Delhi, the 18th March ,2008

S.O. 1362. 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 andMeasures (Approval ofModels) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods ofsustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferredby sub- sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Govemment hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of non-automatic weighing instrument (Table top type)with digital indication of" JK -407 " series ofmedium accuracy (Accuracy class -III) and with brand name " PISTOL" (here in referredtoas the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s. J.K. Mishtry & Company, Kadia Bhawan, 56, New Devas Road, Indore, Madhya Pradesh and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/369;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with a maximum capacity of 30kg. and minimum capacity of 100g. The verification scale interval (e) is 5g. It has a tare devicewith a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instruments 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 and model shall not be changed in terms of its material, accuracy, design , circuit diagram, working principle etc. A typical schematic diagram of the sealing arrangement of the model has been given above.

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 ofapproval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instuments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50kg. with verification scale interval (n) inthe range of 100 to 10,000 for 'e ' value of 100mg . to 2g . and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of5g. or more and with ' e ' value of 1x 10%, 2x10 or 5x10t, where k is a positive or nagative whole number or equal tozeromanufactured 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 (203)/2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology :

2890

[PART I SEC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008/ JYAISTHA 24 , 1930

नई दिल्ली , 18 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1363.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित्त प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा ।

अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स जे.के. मिस्त्री एंड कंपनी, काडिया भवन , 56 , न्यूदेवास रोड, इंदौर, मध्य प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग-11 ] ) वाले " जे के -740" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित तोलन उपरकण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " पिस्टल " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/07/368 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबलाप प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 किलो ग्राम है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई) 2ग्रा. 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 प्रत्याषर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

1625

स्टॉम्पिग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद भी किया जाएगा और मॉडल को बिक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री , यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम निष्पादन सिद्धान्त आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का विशिष्ट स्कीम डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम 21 ( 203 ) /2007 ]

आर. माथुरनूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) )

2891

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

New Delhi , the 18th March ,2008

S.O. 1363.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 ofthe Standards ofWeights and MeasuresAct, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions .

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7 ) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of non- automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with digital indication of" IK -740 " series of high accuracy (Accuracy class- 11 ) and with brand name " PISTOL" (herein referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s . J.K. Mishtry & Company, Kadia Bhawan , 56, New Devdas Road, Indore, Madhya Pradesh and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/368;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with amaximum capacity of 30kg . and minimum capacity of 100g. The verification scale interval (e) is 2g: It has a tare device with a100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

In addition to sealing the stamping plate, sealing shall also be done to prevent the opening of the machine for fraudulent practices and model shall not be changed in terms of its material , accuracy, design , circuit diagram , working principle etc. A typical schematic diagram of the sealing arrangement of the model has been given above.

Further, in exercise ofthe power conferred by sub- section ( 12) ofSection 36 ofthe said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval ofthe said model shall also cover the weighing instuments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50kg . with verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 100 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of Img . to 50mg. and with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 5000 to 50,000 for ' e' value of 100mg . or more and with ' e' value of 1x10 , 2x10 or 5x10 , where k is a positive or nagative 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 (203 )/2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director ofLegal Metrology 2892

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 18 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1364, 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 प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स श्री- एल आटोमेशन, नं. 9 , फर्स्ट मेन रोड, वीरंजनेया मंदिर के पास , संजीविनी नगर , पीनिया, सेकिण्ड स्टेज , हेगनहैली, बंगलौर-560091 , कर्नाटक द्वारा विनिर्मितः यथार्थता वर्ग X ( 1 ) वाले " एस आर एफ-001 " श्रृंखला के स्वचालित ग्रेवीमेट्रिक फीलिंग उपकरण ( वे फिलर ) मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " श्री- एल आटोमेशन " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन की/09/07/457 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित स्वचालित ( ग्रेवीमेट्रिक फीलिंग ) उपकरण ( वे फिलर ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 100 कि.ग्रा. है । इसकी अधिकतम भराव दर 4 भराव प्रति मिनट है । मशीन का निर्माण फ्री फ्लोइंग उत्पाद जैसे दालें, अनाज, मसाले , चाय , चीनी , चावल , बीज आदि के भराव के लिए किया गया 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 ।

मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद भी किया जाएगा और मॉडल को उसकी सामग्नी , यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम , कार्यकारी सिद्धांत आदि को शर्तों के संबंध में परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा । स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट के पास दोनो कोनों के पीछे इंडीकेटर पर लीड तार द्वारा सीलिंग की जाएगी ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 223 ) /2007 ]

आर माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 2893 [भाग 1]- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

NewDelhi , the 18th March, 2008

S.O. 1364. -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 ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods ofsustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise ofthe 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 ofthe Model of Automatic Gravimetric Filling Instrument (Weigh filler ) belonging to accuracy class X( 1 ) of ' SRF-001 ' series with brand name " SRI - LAUTOMATION" (herein referred to as the said Model), manufacturedby M/s . Shri - L. Automation , No.9, Ist Main Road, Near Veeranjaneya Temple, Sanjivini Nagar, Peenya 2nd Stage, Hegganhally, Banglore-560091 , Karnataka and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 07/457;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based Automatic Gravimetric Filling Instrument (Weigh Filler). Its maximum capacity is 100kg. Its maximum fill rate is 4 fills per minute. The machine is designed for filling the free flowing products like pulses, grains, spices , tea, sugar , rice , seeds etc. The Light Emitting diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

The sealing shall be done to prevent the opening of the machine for fradulent practices and model shall not be changed in terms ofits material, accuracy, design, circuit diagram , working principle etc. The sealing is done by lead wire at the rear end of indicator on both corner nears stamping plate.

Pis

[F. No. WM-21 (223 )/2007 )

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director ofLegal Metrology 2071 G1/08-7 2894

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 14; 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

नईदिल्ली, 18 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1365.-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 देखखें ) 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 ( ४ ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स पिन्क इलेक्ट्रानिक आई एन सी, शॉप नं. 1 , हरिओम सोसायटी के पास राजेन्द्रा पार्क , आन नेशनल हाईवे, ओढव , अहमदाबाद -15 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " पी आई टी-11 " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के माहल का जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम ' पिन्क' है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई. एन ही 109/07/459 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

PINC

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृत्ति देखें ) एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार का) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 5 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 बोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टांपिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबन्द भी किया जाएगा और मॉडल को बिक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी ,सामग्री , यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम, कार्यकारी सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा । मशीन के दाएं कोने पर छेद में से तार द्वारा और इसके पिछले भाग से भी सीलबंद किया जाएगा । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का स्कीमवार डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 (236) /2007] आर, माधुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 2895

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

[भाग II-खण्ड 3( ii) ]

NewDelhi, the 18th March, 2008

S.O. 1365-Whereas the Central Government , after considering the repart 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 ofthe Standards ofWeights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights andMeasures (Approval ofModels ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods ofsustained use andto render accurateservice under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub-sections (7 ) and (8) of Section 36 ofthe saidAct, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval ofthe Model of non -automatic (Table top type) weighing instrument with digital indication of "PIT- 1 1 " series of medium accuracy (accuracy class -III) and with the brand name " PINC" (herein referred to as the said model), manufacutred by M/s . Pinc Electronic Inc. , Shop No.1 , Nr. Hariom Society,Nr. Rajendra Park, On National Highway, Odhav, Ahmedabad- 15 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 07/459.

PINC

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with a maximum capacity of30kg and minimum capacity of 100g . The verification scale interval (e) is 5g . It has a tare devicewith 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . 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 and model shall not be changed in terms of its material , accuracy, design , circuit diagram, working principle etc. before or after sale . The sealing is done by the wire through the hole at the right corner of the machine and also at the back side . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section ( 12 ) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government herebydeclares that this certificate ofapproval ofthe said model shall also cover the weighing instruments ofsimilar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg to 2g or with verification scale interval ( n ) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of5g or more and with ' e' value of lx10 , 2x10 or 5x10 , k being the positive or nagative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM -21 (236)/2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 2896

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II SEC. 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 18 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1366.--केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात 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 ) औरं उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स पिम्क इलेक्ट्रानिक आई एन सी, शॉप नं. 1 , हरिओम सोसायटी के पास राजेन्द्रा पार्क , आन नेशनल हाईवे , ओढव , अहमदाबाद -15 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " पी आई पी एफ -6 " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित स्वतः सूचक अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम ' पिन्क ' है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी /09/07/461 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल ( नीच दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित तोलन अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 500 किलो ग्राम है और न्यूनतम क्षमता । किलो ग्राम है । सत्यापन माषमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 50 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतु‌लन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उर्सजक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है । मशीन में कि. प्रा. को लौटर में परिवर्तित करने की भी सुविधा है ।

PONC

स्टॉपिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद भी किया जाएगा और मॉडल को बिक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री, यथार्थता, डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम , कार्यकारी सिद्धान्त आदि की शर्तों के संबंध में परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा । दाएं कोने पर छेद में से तार द्वारा और इंडिकेटर के पिछले भाग से सीलबंद किया जाएगा । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का स्कीमवार डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया 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 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, व्थार्थता 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 ) और सहित 50 किलो ग्राम से अधिक और 5000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और' ई ' मान 1 × 10 *, 2 × 10 % , या 5 × 10 *, के हैं , धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम 21 (236)/2007 ]

आर माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 2897 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14 , 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

New Delhi , the 18th March , 2008

S.O. 1366.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 ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) ofSection 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 " PIPF- 6" series of medium accuracy(Accuracy class-III) and with brand name " PINC" (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufacturedby M/ s . PINC Electronic Inc. , Shop No. 1 , Nr . Hariom Society, Nr . Rajendra Park, On National Highway, Odhav, Alimedabad - 15 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/461 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non- automatic weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of500 kg and minimum capacity of 1Kg. The verification scale interval ( e) is 50g. It has a tare device with 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply . The machine is also having facility for conversation ofkgto litre.

PIMC

In addition to sealing the stamping plate sealing shall also be done to prevent opening of the machine for fraudulent practices and model shall not be changed in terms of its materail , accuracy, design , circuit diagram , working principle etc. before or after sale . The sealing is done by the wire through the hole at the right comer and at the back side ofthe indicator . A typical diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Goverrumenthereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of same series with maximum capacity up to 50Kg and upto 5000Kg and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e' value of 1x10%, 2x10 or 5x10%, k being a positive or nagative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer with the same principle , design and with the same materials withwhich, the said approved model has been manufactured,

[F. No. WM-21 (236)/2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of LegalMetrology 2898

[PART 11-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

नई दिल्ली , 18 मार्च, 2008

का.आ. 1367.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात 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 चनाए 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 शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स पिन्क इलेक्ट्रानिक आई एन सी, शॉप नं. । , हरिओम सोसायटी के पास राजेन्द्रा पार्क , आन नेशनल हाईवे , ओढव, अहमदाबाद -15 द्वारा . विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग 11 ) वाले " पी आई पी-6" शृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम ' पिन्क' है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/07/460 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 अस्वचालित ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार का ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 300 किलोग्राम और न्यूनतम क्षमता । किलोग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 20 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । उपकरण 2310 बोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

PINC

स्टॉपिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद भी किया जाएगा और मॉडल को बिक्री के पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री, यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम , कार्यकारी सिद्धान्त आदि की शतों के संबंध में परिवर्तित 'नहीं किया जाएगा । दाएं कोने पर छेद में से तार द्वारा और इंडिकेटर के पिछले भाग से सीलबंद किया जाएगा । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का स्कीमवार डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी 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. या उससे अधिक के ' ई' मान के लिए 5,000 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्राम से अधिक और 5,000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई" मान 1 × 10* , 2× 10% , 5 × 10 %, के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम 21 ( 236 ) /2007 ] आर माथुरबूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 2899 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

NewDelhi, the 18thMarch, 2008

S.O. 1367. 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 ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights andMeasures (Approval ofModels ) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions.

Now, therefore, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub- sections (7) and (8 ) ofSection 36 ofthe 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 " PIP- 6" series ofhigh accuracy (Accuracy class -11 ) and with brand name " PINC" (herein referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s . PINC Electronic Inc. , Shop No.1 , Nr . Hariom Society,Nr.Rajendra park, On National Highway, Odhav, Ahmedabad- 15 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 / 07/460.

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non -automatic weighing instrument ( Platform type ) with a maximum capacity of 300kg and minimum capacity of 1kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 20g, It has a tare devicewith 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect. The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

PHAC

In addition to sealing the stamping plate sealing shall also be done to prevent opening of the machine for fraudulent practices and model shall not be changed in terms of its material , accuracy , design , circuit diagram , working principle etc. before or after sale . The sealing is done by the wire through the hole at the right corner and at the back side ofthe indicator. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

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 instument of similar make and performance of same series with maximum capacity range above 50kg and upto 5,000kg and with number ofverification scale interval ( n) in the range of 5,000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10 , 2x10 or 5x10 , k being the positive or nagative 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 (236)/2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 2900

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 18 मार्च, 2008

का, आ. 1368.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात 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 पिन्स इलेक्ट्रानिक आई एन सी, शॉप नं. 1 , हरिओम सोसायटी के पास राजेन्द्रा पार्क, आन नेशनल हाईवे , ओढव , अहमदाबाद-15 द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च्त्व यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग II ) दाले " पी अई जे -12 " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के माडल का जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम ' पिन्स' है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी /09/07/458 समतुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण - पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

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

PINC

स्टॉपिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद भी किया जाएगा और मॉडल को विक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री, यथार्थता , डिजाइन, सर्किट डायग्राम, कार्यकारी भी सीलबंद किया जाएगा । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का स्कीमवार डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है किउक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी 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 1 मि.ग्रा. से 50 मिग्रा. तक ' ई ' मान के लिए 100 से 50,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि.ग्राम या उससे अधिक के ' ई ' मान के लिए 5000 से 50000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन अंतराल ( एन ) और 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 (236 )/2007 ]

आर. माधुरबूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 2901 [ भाग - खण्ड (K ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

NewDelhi, the 18th March,2008

S.O. 1368.-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 ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use andto render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -sections (7) and (8) ofSection 36 ofthe 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 "PIJ - 12 " series of high accuracy (Accuracy class-11 ) and with brand name "PINC" (herein referred to as the said model), manufacturedby M/s . PINC Electronic Inc. , Shop No. 1 , Near Hariom Society, Near Rajendra park, on National Highway, Odhav, Ahmedabad- 15 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/07/458;

The saidmodel is a strain gauge type load cell based non -automatic weighing instrument (Table top type ) with maximum capacity of 30kg and minimum capacity of 100g.The verification scale interval (e) is 2g. It has a tare devicewith a100 percent subtractive retained tare effect. The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

PINC

In addition to sealing the stamping plate sealing shall also be done to prevent opening of the machine for fraudulent practices and model shall not be changed in terms of its materail , accuracy, design, circuit diagram, working principle etc. before or after sale. The sealing is done by the wire through the hole at the right corner of the machine and at the back side also. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub-section ( 12 ) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said anodel shall also cover the weighing instuments ofsimilar make and performance ofsame series with maximum capacity up to 50kg and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 1mg to 50mg and with number ofverification scale interval (n ) in the range of5000 to 50,000 for ' e' value of 100mg or more and with ' e' value of 1x10 , 2x10 or 5x10%, k being a positive or nagative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design , and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F.No. WM -21 (236)/2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director ofLegal Metrology 2071 GU08-8 2902

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 27 मार्च, 2008

कर,आ. 1369, केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात 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 शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स फिशर इलैक्ट्रोनिक सिस्टम्स , 19/123/21 , ए.एम.ए. कॉम्पलैक्स , पृथोल रोड, त्रिसुर -4 , केरल द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " ए एक्स पी -7 " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक , अस्वचालित , अंकक सूधन सहित तोलन उपरकण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एक्सेंट " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त माडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/07/363 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 किलो ग्राम और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 किलोग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत ध्वकलनात्मक धारित आधेक्तुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) तोलन परिणाम उपर्शित करता है। उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टॉपिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद किया जाएगा और मॉडल को बिक्री के पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री, यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम , निष्पादन सिद्धान्त आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का विशिष्ट स्कीम डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक " 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 %, 2× 10 , 5× 10 , के हैं, जहाँ पर ' के' धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णाक या सून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21-( 206 )/2007 ]

आर माधुरबूधम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 2903 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

NewDelhi , the 27th March, 2008

$.O. 1369.-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 andMeasures (Approval ofModels ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise ofthe 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 "AXP - 7 " series ofmedium accuracy (Accuracy class-III) and with brand name " AXENT " ( herein referred to as the said model) , manufacturedby M/s . Fisher Electronic Systems, 19/123/21 , A. M. A. Complex , Poothole Road, Thrissur-4, Kerala and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/363.

Thesaidmodel is a strain gauge type load cell based non-automatic weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 1000kg. and minimum capacity of2Kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 100g. It has a tare device with 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED ) disply indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on230 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 and model shall not be changed in terms of its material , accuracy, design , circuit diagram, working principle etc. before or after sale .Atypical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (12) of section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval ofthe said model shall also cover the weighing instrument ofsame series with maximum capacity above 50kg und upto 5000kg and with number ofverification scale interval (n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 5g. or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10 , 2x10 or 5x10k, k being the positive or nagative 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.

IF No. WM-21 (206)/2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director ofLegal Metrology 2904

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II SEC. 3 ( ii) )

नई दिल्ली , 27 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1370,-केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात 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 ( B ) द्वारा शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स राहुल बिजनेस मशीन्स, यूको बैंक के समाने , जी.टी. रोड, पानीपत , हरियाणा द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता वर्ग ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " आर बी एम टी" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचक सहित, अस्वचालित तोलन उपरकण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) के माडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " लक्ष्यी " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09 /07/462 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 किलो ग्राम और न्यूनतम क्षमता 250 ग्राम है । इसका सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यावकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । लाईट इमिटिंग डायोड तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टापिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद किया जाएगा और मॉडल को बिक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री , यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम , कार्यकारी सिद्धान्त आदि की शतों के संबंध में परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा । प्रदर्श के दाएं कोने में छेद और इंडिकेटर के पिछले हिस्से में छेद के माध्यम से तार द्वारा सीलिंग की जाएगी । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का स्कीमेटिक डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

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

[ फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम 21 (255)/2007]

आर, माथुरबूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 2905 [भाग - खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

New Delhi , the 27thMarch, 2008

S.O. 1370. 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 ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights andMeasures (Approval ofModels) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use andto render accurate service under varied conditions ,

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 ofthe said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of the non -automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with digital indication of "RBMT " series of high accuracy (Accuracy class- II) and with brand name " LAKSHMI" (herein referred to as the said model) , manufacturedby M/s . Rahul Buisness Machines , Opp. UCO Bank , G.T. Road, Panipat, Haryana and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/462

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with a maximum capacity of 30kg and minimum capacity of250g . The verification scate interval ( e) is Sg. It has a tare device with 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternate current power supply.

The sealing shallbe done to prevent opening of the machine for fraudulent practices and model shall notbe changed in terms of its material , accuracy, design, circuit diagram , working principle etc. before or after sale. The sealing is done by wire through the hole at the right corner of the display and at the back side of the indicator . A typical schematic diagram ofsealing provision of the model is given above .

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 instuments of similar make and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50kg and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 50,000 for ' e' value of 1mg to 50mg and with number of verification scale interval (n ) in the range of5000 to 50,000 for' e' value of 100mg or more and with ' e' value of 1x10k, 2x10 or 5x10k , k being a positive or nagative 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 (255 )/2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 2906

[PART II-SEC.3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 27 मार्च , 2008

का. आ. 154 1 कन्द्रीय 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 आकृक्ति 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 को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स राहुल बिजनेस मशीन्स , यूको बैंक के समाने , जी.टी. रोड, पानीपत , हरियाणा द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता वर्ग (यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले * आर बी एम पी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचक सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपरकण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " लक्ष्मी " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/07/463 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

-उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 500 किलोग्राम और न्यूनतम क्षमता 5 किलोग्राम है । इसका सत्त्यापन भापमान अन्तराल 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत ध्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । लाईट इमिटिंग डायोड तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है। उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टांपिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद किया जाएगा और मॉडल को बिक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री , यथार्थत्ता , डिजाइन, सर्किट डायग्राम , कार्यकारी सिद्धान्त आदि की शर्तों के संबंध में परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा । प्रदर्श के दाएं कोने में छेद और इंडिकेटर के पिछले हिस्से में छेद के माध्यम से तार द्वारा सीलिंग की जाएगी । मॉडल के सौलिंग प्रावधान का स्कीमेटिक डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 255 ) /2007 ] आर. माधुरनूधम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 2907 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) )

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 /ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

New Delhi , the 27th March , 2008

S.O. 1371. 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 ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods ofsustained 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 non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform type ) with digital indication of " RBMP " series of high accuracy (Accuracy class - II ) and with brand name " LAKSHMI" (herein referred to as the said model ), manufactured by M/ s , Rahul Business Machines , Opp . UCO Bank, G.T. Road, Panipat, Haryana and which is assigned the approval mark IND /09 /07/463.

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non -automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with a maximum capacity of 500kg and minimum capacity of5kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 100g . It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply,

The sealing shall be done to prevent opening of the machine for fraudulent practices and model shall not be changed in terms of its material , accuracy, design , circuit diagram, working principle etc , before or after sale. The sealing is doneby wire and lead at the four bottom corner of the indicator, A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub -section ( 12 ) of section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Goverrument herebydeclares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument ofsiinilar make and performance ofsame series with maximum capacity range above 50kg . and up to 5000kg and with number of verification scale interval (n ) in the range of5000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg , or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10k, 2x10 or 5x10 , k being a positive or nagative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the sameprinciple, design, accuracy and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured .

[F. No. WM-21 (255)/2007 ]

R.MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 2908

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

नई दिल्ली , 27 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1372.-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 आकृक्ति 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 ( ४ ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स यूनिवर्सल मार्केटिंग सर्विसिज, 3 /84 - ई, ईस्ट स्ट्रीट, एटीयालूर , थिरूवरूर , तमिलनाडु द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग-111 ) वाले " यू एम एस-टी टी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचक सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपरकण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " मास्टर " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह आई एन डी/09/07/475 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित ( टेबलटाप प्रकार का ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 किलो ग्राम और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 5ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आर्धयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश क्रिकेट डिस्प्ले डायोड ( एल सी डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है। उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत्त प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

तार और लीड के माध्यम से मशीन के ऊपरी कवर और नीचे की प्लेट पर दो छेद करके मशीन को कपरपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद किया जाएगा । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का स्कीमवार प्रावधान ऊपर दिया गया 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 सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि.ग्रा से 2 ग्रा. तक ' इ ' मान के लिए 100 से 10000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापान अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्राम और या उससे अधिक के 'ई' मान के लिए 500 से 10000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन अंतराल ( एन) और सहित 50 ग्राम तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले है और " ई " मान 1×10 , 2× 10*, या 5 × 10 , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 221 ) /2007 ]

आर. माधुरबूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 2909 [भाग [ I- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

NewDelhi, the 27th March, 2008

S.O. 1372-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 ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use andto render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore , in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub- sections (7) and (8 ) ofSection 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate ofapproval of non-automatic weighing instrument (Table Top type) with digital indication of " UMS - TT" series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class- III ) and withbrand name "MASTER" (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured byM/s .Universal Marketing Services , 3/84-E East Street, Ettiyalur, Tiruvarur Dt. , Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07 / 475.

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non- automatic weighing instrument ( Table top type) with amaximum capacity of 30kg. and minimum capacity of 100g. The verification scale interval (e) is 5g. It has a tare devicewith a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) disply indicates the weighing result. The instraments operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Cabinet lock

The sealing is done by making holes on the bottom plate and upper cover ofthe on side ofthe the machine through wire and lead to prevent the opening of the machine for fraudulent practices . A typical schematic diagram of the sealing arrangement of the model has been given above .

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 instuments of similar make accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity range upto 50kg, with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg . to 2g . and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g. or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10 , 2x10 or 5x10 , where kis a positive or nagative 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 (221 )/2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 2071 GI089 2910

(PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

नई दिल्ली , 27 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1373. 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 शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स सिद्धेश सेल्स एंड सर्विसेज , 644 , बुरल लेन , सिताबुलडी, नागपुर, महाराष्ट्र द्वारा विनिर्मित द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता वर्ग ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " डीएक्स" श्रृंखला के अस्वचालित, अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपरकण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " सिमेनस " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् तक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/07 /440 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 20 किलो ग्राम है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) ऽग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) तोलन परिणाम उपद‌र्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 बोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

आकृति-2: मॉडल को सीलिंग करने के प्रावधान का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ।

स्टापिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद किया जाएगा तथा माँढत को बिक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री , यथार्थता , डिजाइन, सर्किट डायग्राम , निष्पादन सिद्धान्त आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का विशिष्ट स्कीम डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया 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 सिद्धांत, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो ऽग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 100 मि.ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. के ' ई ' मान के लिए 100 से 10000 की रेंज में सत्यापान मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) के साथ 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले है और " ई " मान 1× 10%, 2× 10* , 5× 10 % , के हैं , जहाँ पर ' के' धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूणर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 (253 ) /2007 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 2911 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

NewDelhi, the27th March,2008

S.O. 1373. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods ofsustained 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 ofthe 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" DX" series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) and with brand name "SIEMENS" (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufacturedby M/s . Siddhesh Sales & Services, 644, Burad Lane , Sitabuldi , Nagpur , Maharashtra and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/440

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non-automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with a maximum capacity of 20kg. and minimum capacity of 100g. The verification scale interval ( e) is 5g. It has a tare device with 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Fig. 2: Schematic diagram ofsealing provision of the model .

The sealing shall be done to prevent opening of the machine for fraudulent practices and model shall not be changed in terms of its material , accuracy , design, circuit diagram , working principle etc , before or after sale . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise ofthe 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 instuments ofsimilar make accuracyand performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50kg, with verification scale interval (n) in the range of100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg . to 2g. 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 1x10k , 2x10 or 5x10 , k being a positive or nagative 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 (253)/2007)

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 2912

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART 11-SEC . 3 ( 10 )]

नई दिल्ली , 27 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1374.-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 शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स सिद्धेश सेल्स एंड सर्विसेज , 644 , बुरल लेन , सिताबुलडी, नागपुर, महाराष्ट्र द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता वर्ग ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " पीएक्स " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " सिमनेस " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/109/ 07/441 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 300 किलो ग्राम है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि.ग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेवतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टॉपिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलबंद किया जाएगा और मॉडल को बिक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री , यथार्थता , डिजाइन, सर्किट डायग्राम , निष्पादन सिद्धान्त आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का विशिष्ट स्कीम डांयग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से 50000) कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले है और " ई" मान 1 × 10 *, 2 × 10 , 5× 10 * , के हैं, जहाँ पर ' के ' धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[ 'फा. सं डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 253 ) /20071

आर, माधुरबुधम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

2913

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14 , 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

NewDelhi , the27th March , 2008

S.O. 1374.-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 conformitywith the provisions ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use andto 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 Goveminent 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 "PX " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class- III ) and with brand name " SIEMENS" (herein referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s . Siddhesh Sales & Services, 644, Burad Lane , Sitabuldi , Nagpur , Maharashtra and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /07/441 .

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

The sealing shall be done to prevent opening of the machine for fraudulent practices and model shall not be changed in terms of its material , accuracy, design, circuit diagram , working principle etc. before or after sale. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision ofthe model is given above.

Further, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub- section ( 12) ofSection 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate ofapproval ofthe said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of same series with maximum capacity above 50kg, and up to 5000kg. and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 5g. or more and with' e ' value of 1x10% , 2x10k or 5x10 , k being the positive or nagative 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 (253)/2007)

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of LegalMetrology 2914

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14,2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II-SEC.3 ( ii) )

भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो

नई दिल्ली, 4 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1375.-भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम ? के उपनियम ( 1 ) खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद् द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं :

अनुसूची

स्थापित विधि स्थापित भारतीय मानक ( कों ) की संख्या

क्रम

वर्ष और शीर्षक

नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा अतिक्रमित भारतीय मानक अधवा मानकों, यदि कोई हो, की

संख्या और वर्ष

(4)

(1)

(2)

(3)

30 अप्रैल , 2008 1. आईएस 15765:2008- लौह मिश्रधातु का छलनी विशलेषण और साइज निर्धारण के लिए नमूने लेने की पद्वति

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

[संदर्भ : एमटीडी 5 /टी-32 ]

डा. ( श्रीमति ) स्नेह भाटला, वैज्ञानिक एफ एवं प्रमुख ( एमटीडी)

BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS

New Delhi , the 4th June , 2008

S.O. 1375.-In pursuance ofclause (b) ofsub-rule (1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been eastablished on the date indicated against each:

SCHEDULE

Date of Established SL No. & year of the Indian Standard

No. Established

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

(3)

(4)

(1) (2)

30April2008

1. IS 15765: 2008 - Method of sampling ferro alloys for sieve analysis and size determination

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.

[Ref:MTD5 /T-32)

DR. (Mrs.) SNEH BHATLA , Scientist ' F' & Head ( Mel Engg.)

नई दिल्ली, 4 जून, 2008

का.आ. 1376.-भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्धारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानक(कों) का विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिया गया है वह स्थापित्त हो गया है :

अनुसूची

स्थापित भारतीय मानक ( कों) की संख्या

स्थापित तिथि क्रम

सं वर्ष और शीर्षक

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

(4)

(2)

(3)

( 1)

30 अप्रैल 2008 1. आईएस 1401: 2008/ आई सी 61032: 1997 खोलों द्वारा व्यक्तियों और उपस्करों का रक्षण आउटलेट सत्यापन हेतु प्रोब ( दूसरा पुनरीक्षण ) 2915

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

[भाग - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियाँ भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन, प्र बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों: नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चण्डीगड़ , चेन्नई , मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल , मुवनेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, अयपुर, कानपुर , नागपुर , पटना, पूर्ण तथा तिरूवनन्त्रापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ ईटी 32/टी-1 ]

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

NewDelhi, the 4th June, 2008

S.O. 1376.-In pursuance of clause (b) ofsub- rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 ofthe Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars ofwhich are given in the Schedule hereto annexed has been issued:

SCHEDULE

Date ofEstablished SL. No. & Year ofthe Indian No. Standards

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

(3)

(4)

(1)

30April2008

1. IS 1401 : 2008 /IEC 61032: 1997 Protection ofPersons and Equipment byEnclosures Probes for Verification (Second Revision)

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

[Ref: ET32/T- 1 ]

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

नई दिल्ली, 4 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1377.-भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) खंड (ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्‌द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं ये स्थापित हो गए हैं:-

अनुसूची

स्थापित तिधि क्रम स्थापित भारतीय मानक(कों) की संख्या , सं. वर्ष और शीर्षक

नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा अतिक्रमित भारतीय मानक अथवा मानकों, यदि कोई हो, की संख्याऔर धर्ष

(4)

(2)

(3)

(1)

30अप्रैल, 2008

आईएस 11723 ( भाग 1 ) : 1992/आईएसओ 1940-1 : 1986 यांत्रिक कंपन ( दृढ ) रोटरों की गुणता अपेक्षाएं भाग । अनुमत्य अवशिष्ट असंतुलन ज्ञात करना (प्रथम पुनरीक्षण)

1. आईएस /आईएसओ 1940-1 : 2003 यांत्रिक कंपन स्थिर ( दृढ ) स्थिति में रोटरों की गुणता अपेक्षाओं का संतुलन भाग । संतुलन छूट की विशिष्टियों और सत्यापन

30 अप्रैल, 2008

आईएस 4119 : 1995 प्रैस- लकड़ी कोयले से जलने वाली-विशिष्टि ( दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

2. आईएस 4119 : 2008 प्रैस लकड़ी कोयले से जलने वाली विशिष्टि ( तीसरा पुनरीक्षण)

30 अप्रैल ,2008

आईएस 9730 : 1981 घरेलू खाना बनाने के बरतनों पर नान-स्टिक प्लास्टिक लेपन की विशिष्टि

3. आईएस 9730 : 2008 घरेलू खाना बनाने के बरतनों पर नान- स्टिक अप्रबलित प्लास्टिकलेपन-विशिष्टि ( पहला पुनरीक्षण) 2916

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियाँ भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों: नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चण्डीगड़ , चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद , जयपुर, कानपुर , नागपुर , पटना , पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: एम.ई.डी/जी-2 :1 ] सी. के. वेदा, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ ' एवं प्रमुख ( यांत्रिक इंजीनियरिंग )

New Delhi , the 4th June , 2008

S.O. 1377. In pursuance of clause (b) of sub- rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 ofthe Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987 , the Bureau ofIndian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the aste indicated against each :

S No.& year ofthe Indian No. Standards Established

(1) (2)

1. IS/ISO 1940-1 : 2003 Mechanical vibration Balance quality requirements for rotors in a constant (rigid ) state Part 1 Specifi- cation and verification of balance toler- ances

2. I$4119: 2008 Press- Charcoal burning -Specification (Third Revision) 3 159730-2008 Non - stick unreinforced plastics coatings on domestic cook- ing utensils- Specification ( First Revision)

SCHEDULE

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

(3)

(4) 30April ,2008 Superseding IS 11723 (Part 1 ): 1992/ ISO 1940-1 : 1986 Mechanical vibration- Balance quality require- ments ofrigid rotors Part I Deter- mination ofpermissible residual . unbalance (First Revision)

30April , 2008 154119 : 1995 Press- Charcoal burn- ing- Specification ( Second Revision)

30 April , 2008 IS9730-1981 Specification for non-stick plastics coatings on domestic cooking utensils

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

[Ref: MED/G -2:1 ] C. K. VEDA, Sc . ' F' & Head ( Mechanical Engineering)

नई दिल्ली, 4 जून , 2008

के नियम ? के उप - नियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो गये मानक( कों) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं : का.आ. 1378.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 एतद्द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिये अनुसूची

संशोधन की संख्या और तिथि

क्रम संशोधित भारतीय मानक की संख्या संख्या और वर्ष

(1)

(2)

संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि

(4)

(3)

13 अप्रैल , 2008

संशोधन न. । अप्रैल , 2008

1. आईएस 1855: 2003 खानों में वेष्टन द्वाय और व्यक्ति- रोहण द्वारा बुलाई के लिए लड़दार इस्पात के तार के रस्से- विशिष्टि ( दूसरा पुनरीक्षण )

इस संशोधन की प्रतियाँ भारतीय 'मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन , 9 बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-1111002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों: नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चण्डीगड़ , चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर , भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर , नागपुर , पटना, पूर्ण तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

(संदर्भ: एमई.डी./जी-2: 1 ] सी. के. बंदा, वैज्ञा. एफ एवं प्रमुख ( यांत्रिक इंजीनियरिंग ) 2917

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi, the 4th June, 2008

S.O. 1378. In pursuance ofclause (b) of sub- rule ( 1 ) ofRule ? ofthe 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 :

No. & year of the Indian Standards

S No.

(1)

1. IS 1855 : 2003 Stranded steel wire ropes for winding and man-riding haulage in mines- Specification (Second Revision)

SCHEDULE

Date from which the amend- ment shall have effect ...

No. & year ofthe amendment

(4)

(3)

Amendment No. 1

13April,2008

April,2008

Copy of this Standard is available for sale with the Bureau of ludian 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 , Kaapur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.

[Ref: MED/G-2: 1 ] C.K. VEDA, Sc . 'F' & Head (Mechanical Engineering)

नई दिल्ली, 4 जून , 2008

का. आ. 1379, - भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो ( प्रमाणन ) विनियम 1988 के उपनियम ( 5 ) के अनुसरण में पप्ततीय मानक ब्यूरो एत‌द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन लाइसेंसों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं , वे स्वीकृत कर दिए गए हैं: -

माग अनुभाग वर्ष

सं

भारतीय मानक

काशीर्षक

लाइसेंसधारी का नाम व भता क्रम लाइसेंस सं संख्या

स्वीकृत करने की तिथिवर्ष/माह

08-04-2008

1. 7834690

पिनाकिन अकुआ

मिनरल्स प्रा. लि.

9 5

2004

14543

पैकेजबंद पेयजल

(पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक)

मिनरल जल के

स.नं. 30/2 , धायरी-नरहे

रोड, तालुका हवेली

जिला- पुणे-411041 असावा)

1999

1417

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण

2. 7835086 09-04-2008 एस. एल. देदगांवकर

सर्राफ एंड ज्वैलर्स

महादेव मंदिर के मिश्रधातुएं, आभूषणः

शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता

और चि‌न्नांकन

सामने , गंज बाजार

जिला-अहमदनगर

414001

3. 7835995 09-04-2008 धनआयुर्वेद एग्रो

एक्वाटिक्स 2127

2004

14543

पैन्सेजबंद पेयजल

(पैकेजचंद प्राकृतिक

मिनरल जल के

आयुर्वेद बिल्डिंग

मेन बाजार , इस्लाम-

पुर तालुका वालवा

जिला सांगली-415409 10-04-2008

4. 7826287

सोनई इंडस्ट्रीज

स.नं. 157/डी,वाडी (बीके) जिला नांदेड

431602

2071 GI /DB-10

अलावा)

2004

14543

पैकेजबंद पेयजल

(पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के

अलावा) 2918

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 14, 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

5. 7836290 11-04-2008 किलर्लोस्कर ऑइल इंजिन्सलि डी-1 , 5स्टार एम आई- डीसी कगल जिला कोल्हापुर-416202 11-04-2008

6. 7836391

श्री गणेश फूड इंडस्ट्रीज गेट से 70, वार्ड नं. 5 , चिले वस्ती रामा कृषि रसायन के पास, लोनी कालभोर तालुका हवेली जिला पुणे-412201 7. 7838597 22-04-2008 पटेल ब्रदर्स 352 सी वार्ड भाउसिंगजी रोड, जिला कोल्हापुर- 416002

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

1981 10001

सामान्य प्रयोजनों के लिए समगत संपीडन प्रज्जलन ( डीजल इंजिन ) की कार्यकारिता अपेक्षाएं (20किंवा तक)

14543

2004 पैकेजबंद पेयजल (पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा)

1417

1999

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण

मिश्रधातुएं, आभूषण/

शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता

और चिह्नांकन

[सं. सी एम डी/ 13:11 ]

ए. के. तलवार, उप महानिदेशक(मुहर )

New Delhi , the 4th June,2008

S.O. 1379. In pursuance of sub - regulation (5) of the Bureau of Indian Standards ( Certification) Regulations 1988 , of the Bureau of Indian Standards , hereby notifies the grant of licences particulars ofwhich are given in the following schedule:-

SL Licence No. No.

Grant Date

Part Section Year IS No.

Title of

the Standard

Name &Address oftheParty

1. 7834690 8-4-08

Pinakin Aqua Minerals Pvt . Ltd S. No. 30/2 Dhayari-Narhe Road, Taluka Haveli District Pune-411041 94-08

2. 7835086

S. L. Dedgaonkar Saraf& Jewellers Opp .Mahadev TempleGanj BazarDistrict Ahmednagar -414001 9-4-08

3. 7835995

Dhanayurveda Agro Aquatics 2127Ayurved BldgMain Bazar IslampurTaluka WalwaDistrict Sangli-415409 10-4-08

4. 7826287

Sonai Industries S.No. 157/D Wadi (Bk)District Nanded-431602 5

9 14543

2004

Packageddrink- ingwater(other than packaged natural mineral water)

1417

1999

Gold and gold alloys, jewellery/ - artefacts- Fineness andmarking

2004 14543

Packaged drinking water (other than Packaged natural mineral water)

2004 14543

Packaged driniking water (other than packaged natural mineralwater) [ भाग -खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

2919

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 /ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

11-4-08

5. 7836290

KirloskarOil Engines Ltd. , DI , D1, 5 Star MIDC KagalDistrict Kolhapur-416202 6. 7836391 11-4-08

Shree Ganesh Food Industries , Gat No. 70, WardNo. 5 Chile Wasti Near Rama Krushi Rasayan Loni Kalbhor Taluka HaveliDistrict Pune-412201 22-4-2008

7. 7838597

PatelBrothers 352° C' Ward Bhausinghji Road DistrictKolhapur 416002

10001

1981

Performance re- quirements for con- stant speed com- pression ignition (DieselEngines) for general purposes (upto20kW)

2004 14543

Packaged drinking water(Other than packaged natural. mineralwater)

1417

1999

Gold and gold alloys, jewellery/ artefacts -Fineness andmarking

[No. CMD/13: 11 ] A.K.TALWAR, Dy . Director General (Marks)

नई दिल्ली, 6 जून , 2008

का. आ. 1380, भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड (ख) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्‌द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि अनुसूची में दिये गये मानक( कों) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये है :

अनुसूची

संशोधित भारतीय मानक ( कों ) की संख्या

क्रम सं

वर्ष और शीर्षक

(1)

(2)

1 आईएस 7970:1987 सांधित्रों के लिए टैन्टलम पाऊडर की विशिष्टि ( पहला पुनरीक्षण)

संशोधन की संख्या और तिथि संशोधन लागू होने कीतिथि

(4)

(3)

संशोधन संख्या 1 दिसम्बर, 2007 31दिसम्बर, 2007

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

[संदर्भ: एमटीडी 25 / T- 28 ] डा. ( श्रीमती ) स्नेह भाटला, वैज्ञानिक एफ एवं प्रमुख ( एमटीडी)

NewDelhi , the 6th June,2008

S. O. 1380.-In pursuance ofclause (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards herby notifies that the Indian Standards, particulars ofwhich are given in the Schedulehereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:

SCHEDULE

No. &Year ofthe amendment

Sl No.

. No. & Year ofthe Indian Standard(s) amendment(s)

(2)

(1)

Date from which the amendment shall have effect

(4)

Amendment No.1 December, 2007

1 IS7970: 1987 Specification for tantalum powder for capacitors (first revision)

31 December , 2007 2920

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ) THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008 /JYAISTHA 24, 1930

Copy ofthis 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 , Paina, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.

[Ref: MTD 25 /T- 28 ]

Dr.(Mrs. ) SNEH BHATLA , Scientist ' F' & Head (Mei Engg

नई दिल्ली , 6 जून , 2008

का. का. 1381.-भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम , 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्‌द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानक ( कों ) के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं:-

अनुसूची

कम स्थापित भारतीय मानक ( कों ) की संख्या

स्थापित तिथि वर्ष औरशीर्षक

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

(1)

(2)

(4)

(3)

30 अप्रैल, 2008

आईएस 4711: 1974

आईएस 4711 :2008 इस्पात की पाइपों ट्यूबों और फिटिंग्स के नमूने लेने की पद्धतियां ( दूसरा पुनरीक्षण )

इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियाँ भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन, 9 , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली -110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों गई चिल्ली , कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई , मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर , भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर , कानपुर, नागपुर , पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिकी हेतु उपलब्ध हैं 1

[संदर्भ: एमटीडी 19/T -28 ]

डा. ( श्रीमती ) स्नेह भाटला, वैज्ञानिक एफ एवं प्रमुख ( एमटीडी )

New Delhi , the 6th June , 2008

S.O. 1381-,in pursuance of clause (b ) ofsub -rule ( 1 ) Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards herby 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 St No.

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

No. & Year ofthe Indian Standards Established

(1) (2)

(3)

(4)

IS4711: 1974

IS4711 :2008 Methods for

30th April , 2008

sampling of steel pipes, tubes and fittings (second 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.

[Ref: MTD 19 / T- 28 ]

Dr. ( Mrs.) SNEH BHATLA , Scientist ' F' & Head (Met Engg) 2921 [ भाग II- खण्ड ३ ( ii )

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 6 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1382.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो ( प्रमाणन ) विनियम, 1988 के नियम 4 के उपनियम (5 ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एत‌द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन लाइसेंसों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं , वे स्वीकृत कर दिए गए हैं:-

अप्रैल 2008 में स्वीकृत किये गये अनुज्ञप्ति :

क्रम सं. लाइसेंस संख्या लाइसेंसी का नाम तथा पता

उत्पाद का नाम तथा आई एस अनुज्ञप्ति स्वीकृत करने की तिथि 3

11-4-2008 7836088

श्री फेस इंडक्शन मोल्स आईएस 325

मैसर्स सागा बिंडल पम्प प्रा. लि. 32 , हरि ओम एस्टेट , जी डी हाई स्कूल रोड़ हीरावाडी, नरोड़ा रोड , अहमदाबाद

2 7834084

04-04-2008

स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषणों/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन आईएस 1417: 1999

मैसर्स चामुंडा ज्वैलर्स,सालसंग मंडल के सामने , बलियादेव रोड़ , पी ओ बोरसाड, आनंद

3 7834185

04-04-2008

मैसर्स अंजली ज्वैलर्स , 7 , शक्तिशॉपिग सैटर, भमारिया नाला के बाहर , मेहसाना 384002

4 7836694

10-04-2008

स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषणों/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं आई एस 1417 : 1999

मैसर्स भगवती गोल्ड पैलेस , शॉप नंबर 1 , चावला अस्पताल के पास , देवलाली बाजार , कुबेरनगर, अहमदाबाद

5 7837090

11-04-2008 सी एम चोकसी तथा कंपनी , सोनीवाड , गोधरा , पंचमहल

6 7837292

11-04-2008 -गोल्डलाईन ज्वैलर्स , 1-2, रोनक मार्केट, एसटी वर्कशॉप रोड़, मेहसाना

7 7837191

11-04-2008

स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषणों/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन आई एस 1417 :1999

लक्ष्मी ज्वैलर्स एक्सपोर्ट प्रा. लि. , आनंद शॉपिग सेंटर, शिल्प बिल्डिंग के सामने , सी जी रोड़ नवरंगपुरा , अहमदाबाद

8 7837393

11-04-2008

स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषणों/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहर्सकन 1417 : 1999

सी एम ज्वैलर्स, सोनीवाड, गोधरा , पंचमहल मुहरांकन आई एस 1417: 1999

9 7837393

17-04-2008

सुर्दशन लाल ज्वैलर्स , जी 9/10 , शेरान प्लाजा , अंबिका निकेतन के सामने ,बस स्टैंड, पारले पांइट, अठवललाइन,सूरत

10 7838702

23-04-2008 सैलेशभाई अब्बदुलहुसेन दागिनावाला , । हुसैनी पैलेस , नवापुरा, कारवा रोड , सूरत

11 7840180

29-04-2008 चारू ज्वैलर्स, जी । यूनियन स्कैयर, गोड़ डोड रोड, सूरत

12. 7836593

11-04-2008

स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषणों/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन आई एस 1417 : 1999 पोर्टलैंड पोज़ोलोन सिमेंट आई एस 1489(पॉर्ट-1 ) 1991

मैसर्स अंबुजा सीमेंट लिमिटेड , अंबुज हाउस , परिमल क्रास रोड, परिमल गार्डन के पास , एलिसन्ब्रीज , अहमदाबाद 2922

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

1 2

13. 7839401 श्री संतोषी ज्वैलर्स, सर्वे नंबर 4756, मेहुल अपार्टमेंट के सामने , कृष्णानगर रोड़ , कृष्णानगर, अहमदाबाद

14.7835187 मैसर्स कोरोमंडल फर्टिलाईजर लिमिटेड , ( पैसटिसाइड डिविजन ) , 3204, जी आई डीसी, इंडस्ट्रियल एस्टेट, नरोडा रोड़ , अहमदाबाद 15. 7837801 मैसर्स बी आर इंडस्ट्रीज , 40 , उत्तर गुजरात इंडस्ट्रियल एस्टेट, नरोडा रोड, अहमदाबाद

16. 7834387 मैसर्स सामोर एंटरप्राईस , आर एस नंचर 430/12 तथा 431 , बनसकांटा 17. 7834488 मैसर्स ए के फूड तथा बिवरेज, 47 , अलंकार सोसाइटी , पुराने जी ई बी के पास , मोडासा , साबरकांटा 383315

18. 7834791 धरती वाटर इंडस्ट्रीज, ब्लाक नंबर 50 , प्लाट नंबर 7 , ननदिया चार रस्ताटैन, सूरत 394601

19. 7838395 मैसर्स शिव गंगा बिवरेज , प्लाट नंबर 5439 , विष्णु सिनेमा के पास , स्टेशन रोड , मानसा , गांधीनगर

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

28/04/2008

चांदी एवं चांदी मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषणों/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन आई एस 2112

09/04/2008

मैलेथियन वोटर डिसर्सीबल पाउडर 2569:1978

16/04/2008

ओपनवैल सबमर्सिबल पम्प सैट आई एस 14220: 1994

07/04/2008

पैकेजबंद पेयजल आई एस 15543

07/04/2008

पैकेजबंद पेयजल आई एस 15543

08/04/2008

पैकेजबंद पेयजल आई एस 15543

21 घ04/2008

पैकेजबंद पेयजल आई एस 15543

[ सं. सी एम डी/ 13: 11 ]

ए. के. तलवार , उपमहानिदेशक ( मुहर )

New Delhi , the 6th June, 2008

S. O. 1382. In pursuance of sub- regulation (5 ) of the regulation 4 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certification ) Regulations 1988, ofthe Bureau of Indian Standards , herby notifies the grant of licences particulars of which are given in the following schedule :

SCHEDULE

Granted Licence (April 2008 )

S.No. Licence No. Name and address of the firm 2

7836088

Saga Windel Pumps Pvt Ltd, 32 ,Hariom Estate, G D High School Road Hirawadi Naroda Road, Ahmedabad 7834084

Chamunda JewellersOpp Salsang Mandal Baliyadev Road PO Borsad Diat Anand 3.

7834185

Anjali Jewellers, 7 Shakati Shopping Centre Outside ofBhamariya Nala Mehsana 384002

7836694

Bhagwati Gold Palace Shop No. 1 Near Chawla Hospital Devlali Bazar, Kuber Nagar Ahmedabad

DateofGrant ISNumber & Product

11/04/2008 Three- phase induction Motors IS 325

04/04/2008 Gold andGoldAlloys Jewellery/Artefact IS 1417

04/04/2008 Gold and Gold Alloys Jewellery/ Artefact 1$1417

10/04/2008 Gold andGold Alloys Jewellery/ Artefact IS 1417 [ भाग II खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2923

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14 , 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

7837090

CM Choksi & Co Soniwad Godhra Panchmahal 389001 6.

7837292

Gold Line Jewellers 1-2 Ronak Market ST Work Shop Road Mahesana

7837191

Laxmi Jewellery Export Pvt Ltd Anand Shopping Centre Opp Shilp Building CG Road Navrangpura Ahmedabad 8.

7837393

CM Jewellers Soniwad Godhra Dist Panchmahal

7837902

Sudarshan Lal Jewellers G 9/10 SheronPlaza Opp Ambica Niketan Bus Stand Parlepoint Athwalines Surat

7838702

10.

Saleshbhai Abdulhusein Daginawala 1 Huseini Palace Navapura Karwa Road Surat 11.. 7840180

Charru JewelsG- 1 Union Square GhodDod Road Surat 12. 7836593

AmbujaCements Ltd Ambuja House Parimal Cross Road Near Parimal Garden Ellisbridge Ahmedabad

13.

7839401

Shrei Santosi Jewellers Survey No.4756Opp Mehul Aptt Krishnanagar Road Krishnanagar Ahmedabad

14.

7835187

Coromandel Fertilisers Limited Coromandel Fertilisers Limited(Pesticides Divsion) 3204 GIDC Industrial Estate : Ankleshwar Dist Bharuch 15.

7837801

BR Industries 40 Uttar Gujarat Industrial Estate Naroda Road Ahmedabad

7834387

16.

SamorEnterprise RS No 430/1 2 &431 Banaskatha

17. 7834488

A K.Foods & Beverages47, Alankar Society, NR . OldG.E.B Modasa, Sabarkantha 383315 18. 7834791

Dharti Water Industries Block No. 50 , Plot No. 7, Nandida Char Rasta, Ten Surat394601 19.

7838395

ShivGangaBeverages Plot No. 5439 NRVishnu Cinema Station Road Mansa Gandhinagar 4

11/04/2008 GoldandGoldAlloys Jewellery/Artefact IS 1417

11/04/2008 GoldandGoldAlloys Jewellery/Artfact IS 1417

11/04/2008.

GoldandGoldAlloys Jewellery/Artefact IS 1417

17/04/2008 Gold andGold Alloys Jewellery/Artefact IS 1417

23/04/2008 Gold andGold Alloys Jewellery/Artfact IS 1417

29/04/2008 Gold and Gold Alloys Jewellery/Artfact IS 1417

11/04/2008 Portland Pozzolana Cement Part I Flyash based IS1489 (Part 1 ): 1991

28/04/2008 Silver and SilverAlloys Jewellery/Artfacts 2112:2003

09/04/2008 Malathion Water DispersiblePowder Concentrates 2569 : 1978

16/04/2008 Openwell Submersible Pumpsets IS 14220: 1994

07/04/2008 Packaged Drinking Water ( other than Packaged Natural Mineral Water)- Specification IS 14543: 2004

07/04/2008 Packaged Drinking Water (other than Packaged Natural Mineral Water)- Specification IS 14543: 2004

08/04/2008 PackagedDrinking Water (other than Packaged Natural Mimeral Water)- Specification IS 14543:2004

21/04/2008 Packaged Drinking Water (other than Packaged Natural Mineral Water)- Specification IS 14543: 2004

[No. CMD/13: 11 ] A.K. TALWAR, Dy. Director General( Marks) 2924

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART 11-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 6 जून, 2008

का.आ. 1383.-भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो ( प्रमाणन विनयम ) , 1988 के उपनियम 5 के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतदद्वारा अभि सूचित करता है कि जिन लाईसेंसों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए है , वे रद कर दिए गए हैं:-

क्रम लाइसेंस संख्या लाईसेंसधारी का नाम

कारण

रद तिथि

टिप्पणियां

लाइसेंस के अंतर्गत वस्तु/प्रक्रम

संख्या

व पता/फर्म का नाम सम्बद्ध भारतीय मानक का शीर्षक

ष पता

एवं मानक संख्या 1 6575182

अमृता वाटरस उन्डवल्ली

भा मा संख्या

14543: 04 14/01/08 फैक्टरी बन्द होने के कारण.

पैकेजबंद पेय जल [ पैकेजबंद

प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा]

2 6588898 स्ट्रीम आक्या मिनरल्स , सत्तेनपल्ली

14543: 04 17/01/08

पैकेजयद पेय जल पैकेजबंद

प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा]

3 6695394

मानक चिन्ह का दुरुपयोग करना

14543: 04 25/01/08

पैकेजबंद पेय जल [पैकेजबंद

प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा]

धरणी एन्टरप्राइजेज , पुलिवेन्दुला

4 6702365 जै गणेश घाटर सप्लायर्स , अनन्तपुर

मानक चिन्ह का दुरुपयोग करना

14543: 04 24/01/08

पैकेजबंद पेय जल [ पैकेजबंद

प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा]

1 6684490 सीवानी ट्रेडर्स, होग्ररू

2 6685896

पैकेजबंद पेय जल [ पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा] पैकेजबंद पेय जल [ पैकेजबंद

अक्वा चाइस पैकेज्ड ड्रिंकिंग वाटर , तीरुपती

3 67004470 साई बाबा फुड्स और बेवरोज्स, नीरमाल

प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा] पैकेजबंद पेय जल [ पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा]

4 6718784

योजना परिपालन . न करने के कारण एवम मानक चिन्ह का दुरुपयोग करना 14543:04 18/02/08 मानक चिन्ह का दुरुपयोग करना

14543 : 04 08/02/08 मानक चिन्ह का दुरुपयोग करना

14543: 04 06/02/08 मानक चिन्ह का दुरुपयोग करना

4985: 02 07/02/08

पेयजल आपूर्ति के लिए

अनप्लास्टिसाइज्ड पीवीसी पाइप्स

सवौबग्याप्लास्टिक (प्रा) लिमिटेड हैद्राबाद

: 5 6731978

नायाग्ररा आक्वा इंडस्ट्रीज , रामागुंडम

पैकेजबंद पेय जल [ पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा ]

07-06-2007 को स्वतंत्र रूप से जांच करने पर कम्फरमेटिव सैम्पल असफल पाया गया 14543: 04 20:02:08 मानक चिन्ह का दुरुपयोग करना

[सं. सी.एफ.डी/13:13 ] ए. के. तलवार , उप महानिदेशक ( मुहर )

NewDelhi , the 6th June , 2008

8.0. 1383.-In pursuance of sub-regulation (6 ) ofthe regulation 5 ofthe Bureau of Indian Standards (Certification ) Regulations 1988, ofthe Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies that the licences particulars of which are given below have been cancelled? suspended with effect from the date indicated against each:-

SCHEDULE

Licences Cancelled

Listof licences Cancelled Between 01/01/2008 and 31/01/2008

Product

IS No.

Firm Name/City

Licence

S. No. No.

5 1 6575182

IS 14543 :2004 Amrutha Water Works, Undavalli

Packaged drinking water (other than packagednatural mineral water) -

2 6588898

IS 14543 :2004 Stream Aqua Minerals Sattenapali

Packaged drinking water (other than patkaged natural mineral water) -

IS14543 :2004 3 6695394 Dharani Enterprises Pulivendula

Packaged drinking water fother than packaged natural mineral water) -

4 6702365

JS 14543 :2004 Jai Ganesh Water Suppliers Anantpur

Package drinking water (other than packaged natural mineral water) -

Reason

marks Date of Cancellation

8 6

14/01/2008 Closure of Factory/ Factory Not in Operation ,

17/01/2008 Misuse al ISL Mark

25/01/2008 PrilingTest Report,

24/01/2008 Due to non- implemen- lation of STI and mis- use of standard merk during stop marking period .

[भाग - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

2925

भारत का राजपत्रं : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24 , 1930

4 1 2

1 6684490

IS14543 :2004 Sivani Traders, Oguru

2 6685896

IS14543:2004 Aqua Choice , PackagedDrinking Water,Tirupati

3 6704470

IS 14543:2004 Sai Baba Foods & Beverages, Ninnal

4 6718784

IS4995:2000 Sowbhagya Plastics (P) Limited, Hyderabad

IS14543 :2004 5 6731978 Nayagar Aqua Industries, Rama- gundam Mandal

18/02/2008 Misuse of standard mark

Packaged drinking water (other than packaged natural mineral water) .

08/02/2008 Misuse of ISI Marks

water(other than packaged natural Package drinking mineralwater)-

06/02/2008

Packaged drinking water (other than packaged natural mineralwater) -

07/02/2008

Unplasticized pvc pipesforpotable water supplies -

Failure of confirma- tive sample drawn on 07-06-2007 in inde pendent testing 20/02/2008

Packaged drinking water (other than packaged natural mineralwater) -

[No. CMD/ 13 : 13] A. K. TALWAR, Dy, Director General ( Marks)

नईदिल्ली, 9 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1384.-भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम ? के उप- नियम ( 1 ) के खंड (ख) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद‌द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं , वे स्थापित हो गए है :-

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

क्रम सं.

(1)

(2)

1 आई एस 15797 : 2008 छतों पर वर्षा जल संग्रहण मार्गदर्शी सिद्धांत

स्थापित तिथि नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा अतिक्रमित भारतीय मानक अथषा मानकों, यदि कोई हो, की संख्या और वर्ष

(3)

(4)

31/05/2008 इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियों, भारतीय मानक म्यूरो , मानक, भवन , 9 बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई , मुम्बई, तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर , भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद जयपुर , कानपुर , नागपुर , पटना, पूर्ण तथा तिरूवनन्तपुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: डब्लू आर डी/जी-117 ] ए. एम. डेविड, वैज्ञा-ई, निदेशक ( जल संसाधन विभाग)

NewDelhi , the 9th June,2008

S.O. 1384.-In pursuance of clause (b ) ofsub-rule ( 1 ) ofRule 7 ofthe Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987 the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies that the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each :

SCHEDULE

Sl . No. No. , Title and Year of the Indian Standards Established

(1)

(2)

1 IS 15797 : 2008 Roof Top Rainwater Harvesting-Guidlines

Dateof Establishment

No and Year ofthe Indian Standards, ifany, Superseded by theNew Indian Standard

(3)

(4)

31/05/2008 Copy ofthis Standard is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan , 9 Bahadur Shah ZafarMarg, New Delhi - 110002 and Regional Offices : New Delhi , Kolkata , Chandigarh , Chenni , Mumbai and also Branch Offices : Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati , Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune , Thiruvananthapuram.

2071 G1/08-11

[Ref: WRD/G- 117] A. M. DAVID , Sc . -E, Director ( Water Resources Deptt. ) 2926

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 /JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )]

अर्जन के बाबत आक्षेप:-

कोयला मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 5 जून , 2008

8 ( 1 ) कोई व्यक्ति, जो किसी ऐसी भूमि जिसके संबंध में, धारा ? की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन कोई अधिसूचना जारी की गई है , हितबद्ध है, अधिसूचना के जारी की जाने से तीस दिन के भीतर सम्पूर्ण भूमि या उसके किसी भाग या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के किन्हीं अधिकारों का अर्जन किए जाने के बारे में आक्षेप कर सकेगा ।

स्पष्टीकरण : - ( 1 ) इस धारा के अर्थान्तर्गत यह आक्षेप नहीं माना जाएगा कि कोई व्यक्ति किसी भूमि में कोयला उत्पादन के लिए स्वयं खनन संक्रियाएं करना चाहता है और ऐसी सक्रियाएं केन्द्रीय सरकार या किसी अन्य व्यक्ति को नहीं करनी चाहिए । * का.आ. 1385.केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला धारक क्षेत्र (अर्जन और विकास) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) , जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है की धारा 4 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी , भारत के राजपत्र भाग II , खंड 3 , उप-खंड ( ii ) में प्रकाशित तारीख 1 सितम्बर 2007 , भारत सरकार कोयला मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना से संख्यांक का. आ. 2472 तारीख 30 अगस्त, 2007 द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट परिक्षेत्र की भूमि में जिसका माप 654.00 हेक्टर (लगभग ) या 1615.38 एकड़ ( लगभग) है, कोयले का पूर्वेक्षण करने के अपने आशय की सूचना दी थी ।

और , केन्द्रीय सरकार का यह समाधान हो गया है , कि उक्त भूमि के भाग में कोयला अभिप्राप्य है ।

अतः , अब केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 7 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, इससे संलग्न अनुसूची में यथावर्णित 650.56 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 1606.89 एकड़ (लगभग) माप की भूमि में सभी अधिकारों का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की सूचना देती है ।

(2 ) धारा 8 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन प्रत्येक आक्षेप , सक्षम प्राधिकारी को लिखित रूप में किया जाएगा और सक्षम प्राधिकारी , आक्षेपकर्ता को स्वयं या विधि व्यवसायौ द्वारा सुने जाने का अवसर देगा और ऐसे सभी आक्षेपों को सुनने के पश्चात्और ऐसी अतिरिक्त जाँच , यदि कोई हो , करने के पश्चात् जो वह आवश्यक समझता है , वह या तो धारा 7 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन अधिसूचित भूमि के या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के संबंध में एक रिर्पोट या ऐसी भूमि के विभिन्न टुकड़ों या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के संबंध में आक्षेपों पर अपनी सिफारिशों और उसके द्वारा की गई कार्यवाही के अभिलेख सहित विभिन्न रिपोर्ट केन्द्रीय सरकार को उसके विनिश्चय के लिए देगा ।

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

1. इस अधिसूचना के अन्तर्गत आने वाले क्षेत्र के रेखांक संख्या : एन.टी.पी.सी. /सी.एम. /एस.ई.सी. 7 ( 1 ) /केरन्दारी/ 07/02 तारीख : 20 दिसम्बर 2007 का निरीक्षण उप महाप्रबन्धक (कोल माईनिंग ) , एन.टी पी.सी. प्रथम तल , पी. डी. आई. एल. बिल्डिंग , सैक्टर-1 , नोएडा (उत्तर प्रदेश ) या अपर महाप्रबन्धक ( प्रभारी ) , केरन्दारी कोल माईनिंग प्रोजेक्ट , एन.टी.पी.सी. लिमिटेड , लक्ष्मी पैट्रोल के सामने , ओल्ड बेनारस रोड , नवाब गंज, हजारीबाग-825301 या मुख्य महाप्रबन्धक (गवेषण संभाग ) , सैन्ट्रल माईन प्लानिंग एण्ड डिजाईन इंस्ट्रटीयूट, गोंडवाना प्लेस, कान्के रोड , रांची या कोयला नियंत्रक , । काउसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता-700 001 या जिला कलैक्टर जिला हजारीबाग , झारखंड के कार्यालय में किया जा सकेगा ।

2. उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 8 के उपबंधों की ओर ध्यान आकृष्ट किया जाता है जो उपबंध करता है :-

(4) केन्द्रीय सरकार द्वारा कोयला नियंत्रक , 1 , काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट कोलकात्ता-700 001 को उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 के अधीन भारत के राजपत्र भाग-11 , खंड 3 , उप-खंड ( ii ) तारीख 9 सितंबर , 2006 में प्रकाशित अधिसूचना सं. का. आ. 3629 , जिसको तत्पश्चात् भारत के राजपत्र भाग II , खंड 3 , उप- खंड ( ii ) में प्रकाशित का. आ. 2307 तारीख 18-08-2007 द्वारा संशोधित किया गया है , सक्षम प्राधिकारी के रूप में नियुक्त किया है ।

अनुसूची

केरन्दारी माइनिंग खंड

मार्च करनपुरा कोल फील्डस जिला इजारीबाग , झारखंड राज्य

सभी अधिकार

रेखांक संख्या : एन.टी.पी.सी. /सी.एम./एस.ई.सी. 7( 1 )/केरन्दारी/07/02 तारीख: 20/12/2007 (क ) राजस्व भूमि

टिप्पणी थाना और सं. जिला

ग्राम का

क्षेत्रफल ( लगभग )

हेक्टर

सं. नाम

एकड़

17.03

भाग

42.0563

01. तरहेसा केरन्दारी 10 हजारीबाग

भाग

168.75

416.8125

हजारीबाग

केरन्दारी 11

02. पाण्डू

भाग

468.3942

03. पगार

189.63

केरन्दारी 19 हजारीबाग

40.74

100.6278

पूर्ण

हजारीबाग

04. काबेद केरन्दारी 20

05. बालेदेवरी केरन्दारी 21

48.05

118.7055

हजारीबाग

पूर्ण

256.2071

भाग

103.73

06 बसरिया केरन्दारी 22

हजारीबाग

भाग 07.

69.63

लोचर

केरन्दारी 23

हजारीबाग

171.9666

637.56 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) 1574.77 एकड़ ( लगभग ) कुल योग [ भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

2927

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

( ख ) वन क्षेत्र ( अधिसूचित/गैर/अधिसूचित/जंगल झाडी)

जिला

थाना और सं.

ग्राम का

टिप्पणी

क्षेत्रफल ( लगभग)

क्र सं. नाम

हक्टर

एकड़

01. बालेदेवरी

हजारीबाग

केरन्दारी 21

7.59

18.75

पूर्ण 02.

केरन्दारी 23 हजारीबाम

5.41

लोचर.

13.37

भाग

13.00 हेक्टर ( लगभग )

कुल योग

32,12 एकड़ ( लगभग ) सारांश :

637.56 हेक्टर ( लगभग )

( क ) कुल राजस्व भूमि :

1574.77 एकड़ (लगभग)

(ख) कुल वन भूमि :

13.00 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) - 32-12 एकड़ (लगभग)

(ग) सकल योग (क + ख) : 650.56 हेक्टर ( लगभग) - 1606.89 एकड़ ( लगभग)

अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाटों की सूची :

1. ग्राम तरहेसा : 199( भाग ) ,200 , 201 ( भाग ) ,202, 204 से 213 , 214 ( भाग ) , 215 ( भाग ) , 216 , 217 (भाग ) , 218 (भाग ) , 219( माग) , 220( भाग ) , 221 ( भाग ) , 222, 223( भाग ) , 224( भाग ) , 299( भाग ) , 300( माग ) , 301 ( भाग ) , 302 से 306, 307( भाग ) , 308से 328, 329( भाग ) , 330, 331 ( भाग ) , 332( भाग) , 351 ( भाग) , 352से 385, 386( भाग ) , 387( भाग ) , 388 , 389( भाग ) , 390 से 415, 416(भाग ) , 417, 418 ( भाग ) , 419, 420( भाग ) , 421( भाग ) , 423 (भाग) , 424( भाग ) , 425 से 435 , 436( भाग ) , 437 , 298/479( भाग ) , 331/480 , 330/481 , 328/482, 327/483,327/484, 332/485, 330/486 , 328/487 , 327/488 , 366/489 , 367/490, 368/491 , 313/492, 312/493 , 310/494 , 317/495 , 403/496 , 201/499, 201/500, 202/501 , 202/502 , 203/503 , 203/504, 204/505, 204/506, 205/507 , 205/508 , 206/509 , 206/510, 207/511, 207/512 , 208/513 , 208/514 , 209/515 , 209/516, 210/517, 210/518 , 211/519 , 211/520 , 425/521,425/522

2. ग्राम पाण्डु: 157( भाग ) , 158( भाग ) , 159( भाग ) ,

216(भाग) , 217, 218( भाग) , 219( भाग) , 220( भाग ) , 221 ( भाग ) , 226(भाग ) , 227 ( भाग) , 228( भाग ) , 229( भाग ) , 280 (भाग ) , 281(भाग ) , 282, 283( भाग) , 284, 285( भाग ) , 286( भाग ) , 287, 288( भाग ) , 290( भाग ) , 340 ( भाग ) , 341 , 342( भाग) , 343 ( भाग ) , 344, 345( भाग) , 346( भाग) , 370( भाग) , 371 ( भाग ) , 375 ( भाग) , 376( भाग) , 377( माग ) , 378( भाग ) , 379( भाग) , 380 से 384, 387(भाग ) , 388 ( भाग ) , 389(भाग ) , 390, 391 (भाग ) , 392( भाग ) , 398( भाग) , 399(भाग ) , 400( भाग ) , 401 से 431 , 432( भाग) , 433(भाग ) , 434( भाग ) , 452( भाग) , 462( भाग ) , 463( भाग ) , 464( भाग ) , 465 , 466( भाग ) , 467 से 472, 473 ( भाग) , 480 ( भाग) , 482 ( भाग ) , 483 से 939 , 940( भाग ) , 941 से 1110, 1111 ( भाग ) , 1112 से 1221 , 1223 से 1320 , 1321 ( भाग ) , 1322 से1327, 1328( भाग ) , 1329( भाग ) , 1330( भाग ) , 1331 से 1357 , 1359 से 1541,1150/1546, 589/1547 , 642/1548 , 1153/1550 , 1122/1551 , 281/1558 , 682/1559 , 823/1560 , 1365/1561 , 414/1562 , 414/1563 , 659/1569 , 908/1572 , 752/1573 , 1506/1574, 156/1575 , 1346/1576, 1515/1577.

3. ग्राम फ्गार: 298( भाग ) , 299( भाग ) , 300( भाग ) , 346 , 351 ( भाग ) , 642 से 647 , 648 से 655, 656( भाग ) , 657 से 662; 663(भाग ) , 681 ( भाग ) , 682( भाग) , 683( भाग ) , 687( भाग ) , 692(माग ) , 693, 694( भाग ) , 696( भाग ) , 697. से 713 , 714 (भाग ) , 715 से 721 , 722( भाग ) , 723( भाग ) , 724, 725( भाग) , 726(भाग ) , 733 ( भाग) , 734( भाग) , 736( भाग) , 737 से 745, 746( भाग ) , 747( भाग ) , 749( भाग ) , 750( भाग ) , 751 भाग , 752 , 753, 754, 755( भाग) , 756( भाग ) , 757, 758( भाग) , 759 , 760( भाग ) , 847 ( भाग ) , 853( भाग ) , 854( भाग) , 855 , 856, 857 , 858 ( भाग ) , 859( भाग ) , 860, 861, 862( भाग ) , 863 (भाग ) , 864(भाग) , 866( भाग) , 867( भाग) , 868,869, 870, 871से 890 , 891 (भाग ) , 892, 893, 894( भाग ) , 895 ( भाग ) , 896( भाग ) , 897 , 898, 899( भाग ) , 900( भाग) , 901 , 902 ( भाग ) , 903( भाग) , 905 (भाग ) , 930( भाग ) , 931 ( भाग ) , 932( भाग ) , 1206( भाग ) , 1207( भाग) , 1208( माग) , 1993 , 1994 , 1995, 1996( भाग ) , 1997( भाग) ,1998 ( भाग) , 1999( पाग) , 2000 से 2004, 2005( भाग) , 2006, 2007 , 2008( भाग ) , 2009 से 2075 , 2076( भाग ) 2077(भाग) , 2079( भाग ) , 2080( भाग ) , 2082( भाग ) , 2088( भाग ) , 2089( भाग ) , 2090 से 2180 2181 ( भाग ) , 2182( भाग ) , 2184( भाग ) , 2185( भाग ) , 2186( भाग ) , 2187 ( भाग ) , 2188 से 2198, 2199( भाग ) , 2200, 2201 , 2202, 2203( भाग) , 2205 ( भाग ) , 2206( भाग), 2207( भाग) , 2838( भाग) , 2839( भाग ) , 2840( भाग) , 2841 (भाग ) , 2842( भाग ) , 2843 से 2853 , 2854( भाग ) , 2855 (भाग), 2856 ( भाग) , 2858 ( भाग ) , 2859( माग ); 2860 से 2880,2881 ( भाग ) , 2882, 2883, 3884( भाग ) , 2885 ( भाग ) , 2886( माग ) , 2887 से 2913, 2914( भाग ) , 2915 , 2916( भाग ) , 2917, 2918 , 2919 , 2920 , 2574/2921 , 2549/2922, 2265/2923 , 2304/2924, 2335/2925 , 2163/2926, 681/2931 ( भाग ) , 2423/2957, 2208 से 2221 , 2222 ( भाग ) , 2223( भाग ) , 2224, 2225, 2226 ( भाग ) ,2227 से 2694, 2695 ( भाग ) , 2696 , 2697(भाग) , 2701 ( भाग) , 2703, 2704( भाग) , 2718( भाग ) , 2719( भाग ) , 2720 से 2726, 2727 ( भाग ) ,2729( भाग ) , 2805( भाग ) , 2806( भाग ) , 2807, 2808( भाग ) ,2830 ( भात ) , 2831( भाग ) , 2832 ( भाग ) , 2833 ( भाग) , 2834, 2835 ( भाग ) , 2836( भाग) ,2837( भाग) ;2423/2958, 2423/2959, 2423/2960, 2928

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

2423/2961, 2423/2962 , 2423/2963,2423/2964, 2423/2965, 2423/2966, 2423/2967, 2423/2968, 2423/2969, 2423/2970, 2423/2971 , 2423/2972 , 2423/2973 , 2423/2974, 2423/2975, 2423/2976, 2423/2977, 2423/2978 , 2423/2979 , 2862/2997, 2920/2998, 2906/2999, 2927/3000.

4. ग्राम काबेद : । से 355 , 284/356 , 277/357

5. ग्राम बालेदेवरी : 1 से 804

6. ग्राम क्रसरिया : 2( भाग ) , 3( भाग ) , 4 से 8 , 9( भाग ) ,

यह रेखा इसी गांव की पूर्वी सीमा से होकर प्लाट संख्या 389 , 416 , 418 , 420, 421 , 423 , 424, 522, 389 से गुजर कर बिन्दु ' 12 ' तक आती है और तब यह रेखा दक्षिण पूर्व की ओर मुड़कर प्लाट संख्या 522, 425 , 422 से गुजरती हुई इसी गांव की सीमा के साथ बिन्दु ' ग ' त्तक आती है । इसके बाद ये देख्खा दक्षिण की ओर मुड़कर ग्राम तरहेसा के प्लाट संख्या 422, 436 , 422 , 436 से गुजरते हुए इसी ग्राम के प्लाट संख्या 436 पर स्थित बिन्दु ' घ ' पर समाप्त होती है ।

10( भाग ) , 13 ( भाग ) , 14 , 15( भाग ) , 16( भाग ) , 17 ( भाग ) , 18 से 27, 28(भाग ) , 29( भाग) , 30 ( भाग ) , 31 , 32 , 33 ( भाग ) , 34 से 45, 46( भाग ) , 47 से 201 , 202 ( भाग ) , 203 , 204, 205 ( भाग ) , 206(भाग) , 207 ( भाग ) , 208( भाग ) , 209( भाग ) , 210 , 211 , 212 , 213, 214( भाग ) , 216 से 571, 572( भाग) , 573( भाग ) , 561/575, 168/576.

रेखा घ-ङ : यह रेखा ग्राम तरहेसा के प्लाट संख्या 436 पर स्थित बिन्दु' घ' से प्रारम्भ होकर दक्षिण की ओर मुड़ती हुई ग्राम पाण्डु के प्लाट संख्या 940 , 1111 , 940 , 1321 , 940, 1328. 1330 , 1329 से गुजरती हुई इसी गांद के प्लाट संख्या 940 पर बिन्दु ' ङ' पर समाप्त होती है । 7. ग्राम लोचर : 1 ( भाग ) , 2 से 61 , 63 ( भाग ) , 69 ( भाग ) ,

108 ( भाग) , 109( भाग) , 110 से 142, 143 ( भाग ) , 144( भाग ) , 145( भाग ) , 146( भाग ) , 151 ( भाग ) , 152 ( भाग ) , 154 ( भाग ) , 155 से 157, : 158( भाग ) , 159 से 280 , 281 ( भाग ) , 282 से 339 , 6/340, 159/341 , 163/342 , 179/343 , 180/344 , 181/345 , 182/346 , 182/347 , 183/348 , 183/349 , 185/350 , 191/351 , 281/352 , 281/353, 330/354, 330/355 , 330/356 , 330/357, 330/358, 330/359, 330/360 , 330/361 , 330/362 , 330/363 , 330/364 , 330/365 , 330/366 , 330/367 , 330/368 , 330/369, 330/370, 330/371 , 330/372 , 330/373 , 330/374, 330/375 , 330/376, 330/377 , 330/378 , 330/379, 330/380 , 330/381 , 330/38, 330/383.

रेखा ङ- 51-52 -च: यह रेखा ग्राम पाण्डु के प्लाट संख्या 9410 पर बिन्दु' ङ' से प्रारम्भ होकर ग्राम बसरिया के प्लाट संख्या 2,3,6,9 , 10, 3 , 13 , 15 , 16, 17 , 18 , 13 से गुजरती हुई इसी गांव के बिन्दु ' ङ । ' तक आती है इसके बाद यह रेखा उक्त ग्राम की पूर्वी सीमा के साथ- साथ पढ़ते हुए बिन्दु ' ङ 2 ' तक आती है और तब यह रेखा इसी गांव में दक्षिण की ओर मुड़कर प्लाट सं. 28 , 27 , 34 , 29, 30 , 33 , 215 , 33 , 214. 46, 54, 48 , 214, 202, 204 , 205 , 206 , 207. 208, 209 , 214, 215, 554, 572, 573 से गुजरती हुई इसी गांव के दक्षिण पूर्व कोने पर स्थित प्लाट संख्या 573 पर बिन्दु ' च ' पर समाप्त होती है । सीमा विवरण :

रेखा क-ख: यह रेखा ग्राम पाण्डू के उत्तरी पश्चिमी कोने पर स्थित बिन्दु ' क ' से प्रारंभ होकर प्लाट संख्या 157 से गुजरती हुई ग्राम तरहेसा की उत्तरी पश्चिमी सीमा पर स्थित प्लाट संख्या 2015 के बिन्दु ' ख' पर समाप्त होती है ।

रेखा च-छ : यह रेखा ग्राम पाण्डु के प्लाट संख्या 573 के बिन्दु' च ' से प्रारम्भ होकर ग्राम लाँचर के प्लाट संख्या 63 . 109, 108, 145, 144 , 143 , 142 , 145 , 146 , 145, 158 , 151 , 156, 152, 154 से गुजरती हुई इसी गांव की दक्षिणी सीमा के पास स्थित प्लाट संख्या 154 पर बिन्दु ' छ' पर समाप्त होती है ।

रेखा ख-ग : यह रेखा ग्राम तरहेसा की उत्तरी पश्चिमी सीमा पर स्थित प्लाट संख्या 2015 के बिन्दु ' ख' से शुरु होकर प्लाट नं. 201 , 499 , 500 , 199 , 214, 215 , 217 , 218 , 219 , 220 , 221 , 230 , 223 , 224 , 300 , 301 , 299, 307, 329, 481 , 331 , 479 , 332 , 485 , 351 , 386, 387 , एवं 389 से गुजरती हुई इसी गांव की उत्तरी पूर्वी सीमा के पास स्थित प्लाट संख्या 387 के बिन्दु ' ग ' पर समाप्त होती है ।

रेखा ग- गा -ग2-43 -घ यह रेखा ग्राम तरहेसा की उत्तरी पूर्वी सीमा के पास स्थित प्लाट संख्या 387 के बिन्दु ' ग ' से प्रारंभ होकर दक्षिण की ओर मुड़ती हुई इसी गांव की पूर्वी सीमा पर ' गा ' तक आती है और उसके पश्चात्

रेखा छ- छ1 छ2-03-04-35-36-37-38-39- 10-011-12- छ13- छ14-ज: यह रेखा ग्राम लोचर की दक्षिणी सीमा के पास स्थित प्लाट संख्या 154 के बिन्दु ' छ ' से प्रारम्भ होकर उक्त ग्राम में पश्चिमी सीमा के साथ- साथ बढ़ते हुए बिन्दु ' छ। ' से होते हुए प्लाट संख्या 161 से गुजरकर बिन्दु' छ? ' प्तक आती है उसके चाद यह रेखा. ग्राम की सीमा के साथ घूमते हुए बिन्दु ' छ ' पर आकर प्लाट संख्या 161 से गुजरती हुई ' 54 ' पर आती है । फिर ये रेखा ग्राम की सीमा के साथ- साथ बढ़ते हुए ' छऽ ' पर आती है और प्लाट संख्या 161 से गुजरती हुई ' छ6 ' तक आती है । उसके बाद ये रेखा ग्राम की सीमा के 2929

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 /ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

[ भाग 11- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

साथ गुजरकर बिन्दु ' छा ' पर आती है और प्लाट संख्या 280 से होकर बिन्दु 'छ४ ' तक आती है । फिर ये रेखा ग्राम की सीमा के साथ- साथ बढ़ते हुए बिन्दु ' छ ' पर आती है फिर ये प्लाट संख्या 280 से गुजरकर बिन्दु ' छ10 ' तक आती है फिर यह रेखा ग्राम की सीमा रेखा के साथ- साथ आगे बढ़कर बिन्दु ' छा । ' तक आकर प्लाट संख्या 280 से गुजरते हुए बिन्दु ' छ12 ' पर आती है । तत्पश्वात् ग्राम की सीमा के साथ बढ़ते हुए बिन्दु ' छ13 ' पर आकर इसी गांव के प्लाट संख्या 280 , 381 , 380 से गुजरती हुई बिन्दु ' छ14' तक आती है । उसके बाद ये रेखा ग्राम की सीमा रेखा के साथ- साथ चलकर ग्राम लोचर की दक्षिण पश्चिम सीमा पर स्थित प्लाट संख्या 380 के बिन्दु ' ज ' पर समाप्त होती है ।

रेखा ज- जा- ज2 ज३- ज4 जड़ ज6 जन जB- झ यह 2841, 2840 , 2839, 2838, 2837 , 2836, 2835 , 2695, 2833 , 2832 , 2831 , 2830 , 2696 , 2005 , रेखा ग्राम लोचर की दक्षिण पश्चिम सीमा पर स्थित प्लाट संख्या 380 के विन्दु ' ज ' से प्रारम्भ होकर पश्चिम की ओर मुड़ते हुए प्लाट संख्या 3000 , 2916, 3000 से गुजरकर बिन्दु ' जा ' तक आती है । उसके बाद ग्राम की सीमा के साथ- साथ चलकर बिन्दु ' ज ' तक आती है फिर यह रेखा प्लाट संख्या 3000, 2914, 3000 से गुजरकर बिन्दु ' जड ' पर आती है । उसके बाद ग्राम की सीमा के साथ चलकर बिन्दु ' अ4 ' पर पहुँचकर प्लाट संख्या 3000 , 2886 , 2881 , 2885 , 3000, 2884, 3000 से गुजरते हुए बिन्दु ' जड ' पर पहुँचती है । उसके बाद यह रेखा ग्राम की सीमा के साथ चलकर बिन्दु ' ज6 ' पर आती है तब यह रेखा इसी ग्राम के प्लाट संख्या 2858 , 2860, 2859 , 2860, 2854 , 2856, 2855 , 2842 , 2008 , 1999 , 2701 , 1999 , 2703 , 2704, 1998 , 1997, 1996, 1994, 2718 , 2719, 2806, 2808 से. गुजरते हुए बिन्दु 'जा' तक आती है । उसके बाद यह रेखा ग्राम की सीमा रेखा के साथ चलकर विन्दु ' ज४ ' पर आकर प्लष्ट संख्या 2805, 2806 से गुजरती हुई ग्राम पगार की दक्षिण- पश्चिमी सीमा रेखा के पास प्लाट संख्या 2806 के बिन्दु ' क्ष' पर समाप्त होती है ।

रेखा इन-अ: यह देखा ग्राम पगार की दक्षिण-पश्चिमी सीमा रेखा के पास प्लाट संख्या 2806 पर बिन्दु 'ज़ ' से प्रारम्भ होकर उत्तर की ओर मुड़कर प्लाट संख्या 2729 , 2728, 2727, 2729, 1992, 2077 , 2076, 2079, 2080 , 2089, 2082 , 2088 , 2181 , 2182 , 2184, 2185 , 2186 से गुजरती हुई इसी ग्राम की प्लाट संख्या 2187 पर बिन्दु ' अ ' पर समाप्त होती है ।

रेखा अ- ट : यह रेखा ग्राम पगार के प्लाट संख्या 2187 पर स्थित बिन्दु ' ज' से प्रारम्भ होकर पूर्व की ओर मुड़कर और प्लाट संख्या 1208 , 1207 , 1206 , 932 , 931,2199 , 930, 2199, 2203 , 2205 , 2206 , 2207 , 2221 , 2222, 2223 से गुजरती हुई इसी ग्राम के प्लाट संख्या 2226 पर बिन्दु ' टः पर समाप्त होती है । रेखा ८- ठ : यह रेखा ग्राम पगार के प्लाट संख्या 2226 पर स्थित बिन्दु ' ट ' से प्रारम्भ होकर उत्तर पश्चिम की ओर मुड़कर और प्लाट संख्या 902, 901 , 903 , 900 , 899,913,896,895, 894, 891 , 867, 866, 864, 863, 862,859,858, 854,853,847 , 241 , 240 , 239,238, 746, 749, 747, 750 , 751 , 772, 755, 756, 758, 760 , 736, 734, 733 , 725, 726, 723 , 722, 351 , 346 , 300 , 299 , 298 से गुजरती हुई इसी ग्राम के प्लाट संख्या 663 पर स्थित बिन्दु ' ठ' पर समाप्त होती है ।

रेखा छ-ड : यह रेखा ग्राम पगार के प्लाट संख्या 663 पर स्थित बिन्दु ' ठ' से प्रारम्भ होकर प्लाट संख्या 677 , 681 , 682, 683, 656, 715 , 714, 687 , 693 , 692 , 694 , 695, 696 से गुजरकर इसी ग्राम के उत्तरी - पूर्वी कोने के पास प्लाट संख्या 696 पर बिन्दु ' ड ' पर समाप्त होती है ।

रेखा इ-क : यह रेखा ग्राम पगार के उत्तरी - पूर्वी कोने के पास प्लाट संख्या 696 के बिन्दु ' ड ' से प्रारम्भ होकर और उत्तर की ओर मुड़कर ग्राम पाण्डू के प्लाट संख्या 1569 , 464, 452 , 463, 464 , 462, 466 , 473 , 483 , 482, 480, 434, 433 , 432 , 398 , 400 , 398 , 392 , 370 से गुजरती हुई इसी ग्राम के प्लाट संख्या 371 पर बिन्दु ' ढ ' पर समाप्त होती है ।

रेखा व-क : यह रेखा ग्राम पाण्डू के प्लाट संख्या 371 पर स्थित बिन्दु' ढ ' से प्रारम्भ होकर और उत्तर की ओर मुड़कर प्लाट संख्या 379 , 378 , 377 , 376, 375, 387,388 , 389, 345, 346 343 , 342, 340 , 290, 285, 1558 , 281, 280, 283 , 229, 228 , 227, 226, 221 , 220, 219, 218 , 216 , 159 , 158 , से गुजरती हुई ग्राम पाण्डूके उत्तरी- पश्चिमी सीमा के कोने पर स्थित प्लाट संख्या 157 के बिन्दु ' क ' पर समाप्त होती है । [सं.43015/8/2006/पी आर आई डब्ल्यू-1 ]

एम. शहाबुद्दीन , अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF COAL New Delhi , the 5th June, 2008

S. O. 1385.-Whereas by Notification of the Government on India in the Ministry of Coal vide number S. O. 2472 dated the 30th August, 2007 under sub-section (1 ) of Section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas ( Acquisition and Development) Act , 1957 (20 of 1957) , hereinafter referred 2930

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 /JYAISTHA 24, 1930

to as the said Act , published in Part II , Section -3 , Sub- section ( ii) of the Gazette of India dated Ist September , 2007, the Central Government gave notice of its intention to prospect for coal in 654.00 hectares ( approximately) or 1615.38 Acres ( approximately) of the lands in the locality specified in the Scheduled arinexed to that notification .

And whereas , the Central Government is satisfied that coal is obtainable in a part ofthe said lands;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred bysub-section( 1 ) of Section 7 ofthe said Act, the Central Govemment hereby gives notice of its intention to acquire the land measuring 650.56 hectares (approximately) or 1606.89 Acres ( approximately) in all rights as described in the Schedule appended hereto.

1. The plan bearing No. NTPC /CM/ SEC 7 ( 1 ) / KERANDAR1/ 07/ 02 dateck the 20th December 2007 of the area covered by this notification may be inspected in the office of the Deputy General Manager Coal Mining, NTPC Ltd., 1st floor , PDIL, Building , Sector- 1 , Noida, Uttar Pradesh or in the office of AGM( I/c ).Kerandari Coal Mining Project, NTPC Ltd. , Opposite Laxmi Petrol Pump , Old Benaras Road, Nawabganj , Hazaribagh- 825301 or at the office ofthe Chief General Manager (Exploration Division ) , Central Mine Planning and Design Institute, Gondwana Place, Kanke Road, Ranchi or at the office the Coal Controller, 1 , Council House Street, Kolkatta-700001 or in the office of Distric: Collector, District Hazaribagh , Jharkhand.

2. Attention is hereby invited to the provisions of Section & of the said Act which provides as follows :-

Objection toAcquisition :

8( 1) Any person interested in any land in respect of which anotification under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 7has been issued, may, within thirty days of the issue of the

SCHEDULE

Kerandari MiningBlock North Karanpura Coal Fields District :Hazaribagh , Jharkhand State

ALL RIGHTS

[PART 11-SEC . 3 ( ii )]

notification , object to the acquisition of the whole or any part ofthe land or of any rights in or over such land, Explanation

(1 ) It shall notbe an objection within the meaning of the section for any person to say that he himself desires to undertake mining operation in the land for the production of the coal and such operations should not be undertaken by the Central Government or by any other person, (2) Every objection under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 8 shall be made to the Competent Authority in writing and the Competent Authority shalt give the objector an opportunity ofbeing heard either in person or by a legal practitioner and shall , after hearing all such objections and after making such further enquiry , if any, as he thinks necessary, either makes a report in respect of the land which has been notified under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 7 or of rights in or over such land, or make different reports in respect ofdifferent parcels of such lands or of rights in or over such lands ,to the Central Government , containing his recommendations on the objections, together with the record of proceedings held by him for the decision of the Government ,

(3) For the purpose this section, a person shall be deemed to be interested in land who would be entitled to claim an interest in compensation if the land or any rights in or over such land were acquired under this Act. (4) The Coal Controller, I , Council House Street , Kolkatta -700001 , has been appointed by the Central Government as the Competent Authority under the Section 3 of the said Act vide notification number S. O. 3629, published in Part - II , Section (3 ) , sub -section (ii ) of the Gazette of India dated the 9th September, 2006, which was subsequently amended vide number S. O. 2307, published inPart- II, Section ( 3 ) , sub - section ( ii ) of Gazette of India dated the 18th August , 2007.

Plan Number : NTPC/ CM / SEC 7 ( 1 )/KERANDARJ / 07/02dated20-12-2007. (A) REVENUE LAND

District

Thana and No.

SL. No. Village

이

Kerandari 10

Tarhessa

Hazaribagh Pandu

Kerandari 11

Hazaribagh 03

Kerandari 19

Pagar

Hazaribagh 04

Kabed

Kerandari 20

Hazaribagh 05

Kerandari 21

Beledeori

Hazaribagh Basaria

Kerandari 22

Hazaribagh 07 Lochar

Kerandari 23

Hazaribagh

TOTAL

Remarks Total Area (Approximately) Hectares

Acres

17.03

Part

42.0563

168.75

416.8125

Part 189.63

468.3942

Part 40.74

Full

100.6278

48.05

118.7055

Full 103.73

256.2071

Part 69.63

Part

171.9666

637.56 Hectares (approximately)

1574.77 Acres ( approximately ) 2931 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

(B) FOREST LAND

Thana and No.

District

Remarks Sl . No. Village

TotalArea (Approximately)

Acres

Hectares

7.59

Full

18.75

Kerendari 21

Baledeori

이

Hazaribagh

5.41

13.37

Part Kerendari 23

Lochar

Hazaribagh

TOTAL

13.00 Hectares (approximately)

32.12Aeres (approximately) Summary:

(A)Total Revenue Land:

637.56hectares (Approximately)

- 1574.77 acres (Approximately) (B) Total ForestLand :

-32.12 acres (Approximately) 13.00 hectares (Approximately)

-1606.89 acres (Approximately) (C)GrandTotal(A+B):

650.56hectares (Approximately)

LISTOF PLOTS TO BE ACQUIRED

1.VillageTarhessa : 199(Part) ,200,201 (Part),202,204 to 213, 214(Part ) , 215 (Part ) , 216, 217(Part ) , 218(Part) , 219(Part), 220 (Part), 221 (Part), 222, 223 ( Part), 224(Part), 299(Part) , 300(Part), 301 (Part), 302 to 306, 307(Part), 308to 328,329(Part) , 330, 331 (Part), 332(Part),351 (Part), 352to385, 386(Part), 387 (Part), 388, 389(Part), 390 to 415, 416(Part),417, 418 (Part),419, 420(Part ), 421 (Part) , 423(Part), 424(Part),425 to435, 436(Part), 437, 298/479 (Part ), 331/480 , 330/481,328/ 482,327/483, 327/484,332/485, 330/486, 328/487,327/488,. 366/489, 367/490,368/491,313/492, 312/493 , 310/494,317/ 495,403/496, 201 /499,201 /500, 202/501 , 202/502, 203/503, 203/504, 204/305,204/506, 205/507, 205/508 , 206/509,206/ 510, 207/511 , 207/512, 208/513 , 208/514,209/515, 209/516, 210/517,210/518,211/519,211 /520,425/521,425/522.

756(Part), 757,758(Part) ,759, 760(Part), 847 (Part), 853 (Part), 854(Part) , 855, 856, 857, 858(Part) , 859(Part) , 860, 861 , 862(Part),863 (Part), 864 (Part), 866( Part), 867(Part), 868,869, 870, 871 to 890, 891 (Part), 892, 893, 894(Part), 895 (Part) , 896(Part) , 897, 898, 899(Part) , 900( Part) , 901 , 902(Part), 903(Part), 905(Part ), 930(Part), 931 ( Part) , 932(Part) , 1206(Part) , 1207 (Part), 1208 (Part) , 1993 , 1994, 1995, 1996(Part ), 1997(Part ), 1998 (Part) , 1999(Part), 2000 to 2004, 2005(Part), 2006,2007 , 2008 (Part), 2009 to 2075, 2076(Part), 2077(Part), 2079(Part ), 2080 (Part), 2082 (Part), 2088 (Part) , 2089(Part), 2090 to2180 , 2181 (Part), 2182(Part), 2184(Part) , 2185(Part), 2186(Part), 2187 (Part),2188 to 2198, 2199(Part) , 2200, 2201 , 2202, 2203 (Part ), 2205 (Part), 2206(Part), 2207(Part),2838(Part) , 2839(Part ), 2840(Part ), 2841 (Part) , 2842(Part), 2843 to 2853, 2854 (Part) ,2855(Part), 2856(Part), 2858(Part), 2859(Part),2860 to 2880, 2881 (Part), 2882, 2883 , 3884(Part), 2885(Part), 2886(Part), 2887 to 2913 , 2914(Part) , 2915,2916(Part),2917, 2918, 2919, 2920, 2574/2921,2549/ 2922, 2265/2923, 2304/2924,2335/2925 , 2163/2926, 681/ 2931 (Part),2423/2957, 2208 το 2221 , 2222 (Part ), 2223(Part), 2224, 2225, 2226(Part) , 2227 to 2294, 2695(Part ), 2696, 2697 (Part ), 2701 ( Part) , 2703 , 2704 (Part ) , 2718 ( Part), 2719(Part), 2720 to 2726, 2727(Part),2729(Part), 2805(Part), 2806(Part) , 2807 , 2808( Part ) ,2830(Part), 2831 (Part), 2832(Part), 2833 ( Part) , 2834, 2835( Part ), 2836 (Part) , 2837(Part),2423/2958,2423/2959, 2423/2960,2423/2961 . 2423/2962, 2423/2963, 2423/2964, 2423/2965 , 2423/2966, 2423/2967,2423/2968,2423/2969, 2423/2970, 2423/2971 , 2423/2972, 2423/2973,2423/2974, 2423/2975,2423/2976, 2423/2977,2423/2978 , 2423/2979,2862/2997, 2920/2998, 2906/2999,2927/3000.

4.Village Kabed: 1 to 355,284/356,277/357, 2. Village Pandu : 157(Part ) , 158 (Part), 159(Part) , 216(Part) , 217, 218( Part), 219(Part), 220(Part ), 221 (Part) , 226(Part), 227(Part), 228(Part), 229(Part),280 (Part),281 (Part), 282, 283 (Part ) , 284, 285 (Part), 286(Part), 287 , 288 (Part), 290(Part), 340(Part), 341 , 342(Part), 343(Part) ,344, 345( Part), 346(Part),370(Part), 371 (Part), 375 ( Part ), 376(Part), 377(Part), 378(Part), 379(Part), 380 to 384, 387(Part) , 388 (Part), 389( Part), 390,391 (Part), 392(Part) , 398(Part), 399(Part), 400(Part ),401 to431 , 432(Part ) ,433 (Part) , 434(Part ) , 452 (Part),462(Part), 463(Part),464(Part) , 465, 466 (Part) ,467 to 472 , 473 (Part ), 480(Part) , 482 (Part ), 483 to 939, 940(Part ), 941 to 1110 , 1111 (Part) , 1112 to 1221 , 1223 to 1320, 1321 (Part), 1322 to 1327, 1328 (Part), 1329(Part) , 1330(Part), 1331 to 1357, 1359 to 1541,1150/1546, 589/1547, 642/1548 , 1153/1550, 1122/1551 , 281/1558,680/ 1559, 823/1560, 1365/1561, 414/1562, 414/1563, 659/1569,908/1572, 752/1573 , 1506/1574, 156/1575, 1346/ 1576,1515/1577.

5.Village Baledeori : 1 to 804.

6.VillageBasaria: 2(Part), 3(Part),4 to8, 9(Part), 10(Part), 13 (Part) , 14, 15 (Part) , 16(Part) , 17( Part) , 18 to27, 28(Part),29(Part), 30(Part), 31 , 32, 33(Part ), 34 to45, 46(Part), 47 to201 ,202 (Part ), 203, 204,205(Part ), 206(Part), 207 (Part ), 208(Part), 209(Part) , 210, 211 , 212, 213, 214 (Part ), 216 to 571, 572(Part), 573 (Part), 561/575 , 168/576.

3. Village Pagar : 298 ( Part ), 299( Part) , 300(Part) , 346(Part),351(Part),642 to 647, 648 to 655,656(Part), 657 το 662,663(Part ), 681 (Part) , 682( Part) , 683(Part), 687(Part), 692(Part), 693 , 694( Part ), 696(Part) , 697 to 713 , 714 (Part), 715 to721 ,722(Part), 723(Part), 724, 725 (Part),726(Part), 733(Part), 734(Part) ,736 (Part), 737 to 745, 746(Part ) ,747(Part) , 749(Part), 750(Part), 751 Part, 752, 753, 754, 755 (Part ), 2932

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

214, 202, 204 , 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 214,215, 554, 572, 57.3 and ends at the point ' F ' on plot no . 573 at the south east corner of the said village.

Line F-G: The line starts from point ' F'on plot no . 573 of village Pandu passes through the plot nos. 63, 109, 108, 145, 144, 143 , 142, 145, 146, 145, 158, 151 , 156, 152 , 154 ofthe village Lochar and ends at the point ' G ' on plot no. 154 near the southernboundary of the said village.

7. Village Lochar: 1 ( Part), 2 to 61 , 63 (Part ), 69(Part), 108(Part), 109(Part ), 110 to 142, 143 (Part), 144(Part), 145 (Part ), 146Part), 151 (Part ), 152(Part), 154(Part), 155 to 157, 158(Part), 159 to 280, 281 (Part ) , 282 to 339 , 6/340, 159/341 , 163/342, 179/343, 180/344, 181/345, 182/346, 182/347 , 183/348, 183/ 349, 185/350, 191/351 , 281/352, 281 /353,330/354, 330/355, 330/356, 330/357, 330/358, 330/359, 330/360, 330/361,330/ 362, 330/363 , 330/364, 330/365, 330/366, 330/367,330/368, 330/369, 330/370, 330/371, 330/372, 330/373 , 330/374, 330/ 375,330/376,330/377 , 330/378 , 330/379,30/380, 330/381 , 330/382, 330/383.

BoundaryDescription

Line A-B : The line starts from point 'A' at the North- West comer of village Pandu passes through the plot no. 157 and ends at the point 'B ' on plot no. 2015 at the North - West boundary of village Tarhessa.

Line B-C: The line starts from point ' B ' on plot no . 2015 at the North- West boundary of village Tarhessa passes through the plot no . 201 , 499,500, 199, 214, 215, 217, 218 , 219, 220 , 221 , 230 , 223, 224, 300, 301, 299, 307, 329,481 , 331, 479, 332 , 485, 351 , 386, 387, 389 and ends at the point ' C' on plot no. 387near North -East boundary of the said village .

LineG -G1 -G2 G3 G4G5 G6-G- 7G-8G-G9-Gio- G11-G12-G13 -G14- H : The line starts from point ' G' on plot no. 154 near the southern boundary of the village Lochar moves towards west along the village boundary upto point ' GI ' , passes throngh the plot no. 161 upto ' G2 ' , thereafter moves along the village boundary upto 'G3 ' then it passes through plot no . 161upto ' G -4 ' . The line further moves along the village boundary upto 'G5' and passes through plot No. 161 upto 'G6 ' , after that the line moves along the village boundary upto ' G7 ' then the passes through plot no . 280 upto ' G8' thereafter it moves along the village boundary upto point 'G9 ' then it passes through plot no. 280 uplo "010" . Again the boundary line moves along the village boundary upto point ' G11 ' , Tine line further moves through plot no.280 upto 'G12' and again is moves along the village boundary upis point 'G13' , passes through plot nos. 280, 381 , 380 of the same village upto "G14 ' after that the line moves along the village boundary and ends at the point 'H' on the plot no. 380 on the south -west boundary of the village Lochar .

Line C-CI -C2- C3 -D : The line starts from point ' C' on plot No. 387near North - East boundary ofthe village Tarhessa moves southwards through Eastern boundary of the same village upto point ' C1 ' , thereafter the line moves along the Eastern boundary of the same village through plot nos . 389, 416, 418, 420,421 , 423 , 424, 522, 389 upto point 'C2' and then moves towards south east along the village boundary through plot nos . 522 , 425 , 422, upto point ' C3 " . The line further moves south wards through plot nos. 422, 436 , 422, 436 of village Tarhessa and ends at point D'on the plot no. 436 of the said village.

LineD-E : The line starts from point ' D ' on plot no. 436 of the village Tarhessa moves southwards through the plot nos . 940, 1111 , 940 , 1321 , 940 , 1328, 1330, 1329 of village Pandu and ends at point ' E'on the plot no . 940 of the saidvillage.

Line E- E1 - E2- F : The line starts from point ' E'on the plot no. 940 of the village Pandu passes through the plot nos , 2, 3 , 6, 9, 10, 3 , 13 , 15, 16, 17, 18 , 13 of Village Basaria upto point 'El thereafter the line moves alone East boundary ofsame village upto point 'E2' and then it moves southwards through plot nos . 28,27, 34, 29, 30, 33 , 215, 33, 214,46, 54,48,

Line H -H1 -H2-13 - H4- HS- H6- H7-118-1 : The line starts from point ' 11 ' on the plot no. 380 on the south-west boundary of the village Lochar moves westwards , passes through the plot nos , 3000 , 2916, 3000 , upto point' [ ] thereafter moves along the village boundary upto 'H2 ' . The line further passes through plot nos . 3000. 2914 , 3000, upto point ' 113 " , then it moves along the village boundary upto *H4 and again the line passes through the plot nos.3000. 2886. 2881 , 2885, 3000, 2884, 3000 , upto 115. After the line moves along with village boundary upto point ' 16 ' , then it passes through the plot nos. 2858, 2860, 2859,2860.2854,2856 ,2855,2842,2841,28-10, 2839,2838.2837. 2836, 2835 , 2695,2833, 2832, 2831,2830,2696, 2005, 2008 , 1999,2701,1999. 2703,2704, 1993, 1997, 1996, 1994,2718,2719, 2806, 2808 of the same village upto point 'H ? ' 2933 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24 , 1930

722, 351 , 346, 300, 299, 298 and ends at the point 'L' on the plot no. 663 of the sald village.

Line L-M: The line starts from point 'L' at plot no. 663 of thereafter the line moves along the boundary ofthe saidvillage upto point 'H8 ' then the line passes through the plot nos , 2805, 2806 and ends at the point ' I' on the plot no. 2806 near the south-west boundary of the village Pagar.

Line I-J: The line starts from point ' I ' on the plot no. 2806

village Pagar and passing through plot nos. 677,681,682,683 , 656, 715,714,687, 693,692, 694,695,696 and ends at the point ' M' on the plot no . 696 near the north-east corner of the said village.

Line M-N: The line starts from point ' M' on the plot no. near the south-west boundary of the village Pagar at the plot no. 2806 ofthe village Pagar moving northwards passes through plot nos. 2729,2728,2727,2729, 1992, 2077, 2076,2079, 2080, 2089,2082,2088, 2181,2182,2184,2185, 2186 and ends at the point ' J ' on the plot no. 2187 of the said village.

LineJ-K:The line starts from point ' J ' at the plot no . 2187

696 near the north - east corner of the village Pagar and moves northwards through plot πος.1569 , 464, 452, 463, 464, 462, 466, 473, 483,482, 480,434,433, 432, 398,400,398,392, 370 ofthe village Pandu and ends at the point 'N' on the plot no. 371 of the said village, ofthe village Pagar moving towards east end passing through the plot nos . 1208, 1207 , 1206,932,931,2199,930,2199,2203, 2205, 2206, 2207, 2221 , 2222, 2223 and ends at the point ' K ' on the plot no . 2226 of the said village.

Line K- L : The line starts from point ' K' at the plot no.

Line N-Á : The line starts from point 'N' on the plot no. 371 of the village Pandu and moves northwards through plot nos. 379, 378, 377, 376,375,387,388, 389, 345, 346, 343, 342, 340, 290,285, 1558,281 , 280 , 283 , 229, 228,227, 226, 221 ,220, 219, 218, 216, 159, 158 and ends at the point 'A' on the plot no. 157 of the north-west boundary corner of the village Pandu.

2226 of the village Pagar moving towards north-west and passing through the plot nos. 902,901 ,903,900, 899,913, 896, 895, 894, 891, 867,866,864,863 , 862, 859, 858,854,853,847, 241,240,239,238,746, 749, 747,750, 751,772, 755,756,758,760,736, 734, 733 ,725, 726,723,

[No.43015/8/2006/PRJW -1 ] M. SHAHABUDEEN, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली , 12 जून 2008

का.आ. 1386.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, सरकारी स्थान ( अप्राधिकृत अधिभोगियों की बेदखली ) अधिनियम , 1971 ( 1971 का 40 ) की धारा 3 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, भारत सरकार के कोयला मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्यांक का. आ. 1857 , तारीख 24 जून , 1994 में निम्नलिखित संशोधन करती है , अर्थात्:-

उक्त अधिसूचना की सारणी में क्रम सं. 50 और उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टियों के पश्चात् निम्नलिखित जोड़ा जाएगा , अर्थात्:-

उकनी ओपन कास्ट प्रोजेक्ट के सभी स्थान और वैर्स्टन कोल फील्डस लिमिटेड , नागपुर के या उसके नियंत्रणाधीन अन्य स्थान । 51. उप-क्षेत्र प्रबंधक/अभिकर्ता , ढकनी उपक्षेत्र , ढाकघर ढकनी, पुलिस थाना शीरपुर , तहसील वानी , जिला यवतमाल ।

रींपल गाँव ओपन कास्ट प्रोजेक्ट के सभी स्थान और वैर्स्टन कोल फील्डस लिमिटेड , नागपुर के या उसके नियंत्रणाधीन अन्य स्थान । 52. उप- क्षेत्र प्रबंधक अभिकर्ता , पींपल गाँव उपक्षेत्र , डाकघर भालार, पुलिस थाना शीरपुर, तहसील वानी, जिला यवतमाल ।

जूद ओपन कास्ट प्रोजेक्ट के सभी स्थान और वैर्स्टन कोल फील्डस लिमिटेड, नागपुर के या उसके नियंत्रणाधीन अन्य स्थान । 53. उप - क्षेत्र प्रबंधक/ अभिकर्ता, जूरी ओपन कास्ट उपक्षेत्र , डाक- घर उकनी , पुलिस थाना शीरपुर , तहसील बानी , जिला यवतमाल

कोलार पिंपरी ओपन कास्ट प्रोजेक्ट के सभी स्थान और वैर्स्टन कोल फील्डस लिमिटेड, नागपुर के या उसके नियंत्रणाधीनः अन्य स्थान । 54. उप- क्षेत्र प्रबंधक/अभिकर्ता, कोलार पिंपरी ओपन कास्ट उपक्षेत्र , डाकघर भालार , पुलिस थाना वानी , तहसील वानी , जिला यवतमाल ।

राजुर उपक्षेत्र , के सभी स्थान और वैर्स्टन कोल फील्डस लिमिटेड नागपुर के या उसके नियंत्रणाधीन अन्य स्थान ।

55. उप- क्षेत्र प्रबंधक/अभिकर्ता, राजुर उपक्षेत्र, डाकघर राजुर , पुलिस थाना वानी , तहसील वानी , जिला यवतमाल ।

2071 G1 /08-12 [PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] 2934

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

' के ' खानी माईन प्रोजेक्ट के सभी स्थान और पैर्स्टन कोल फील्डस लिमिटेड नागपुर के या उसके नियंत्रणाधीन अन्य स्थान । 56. परियोजना प्रबंधक/ अभिकर्ता , ' के ' खानी माईन डाकघर घोसा, पुलिस थाना वानी, तहसील वामी, जिला यवतमाल ।

57. मुख्य महाप्रबंधक , भालार टाउनशिप , डाकघर भालार, पुलिस थाना वानी , तहसील वानी , जिला यवतमाल ।

भालार टाउनशिप , डाकघर भालार , के मुख्य महाप्रबंधक कामप्लैक्स के सभी स्थान और वैस्र्स्टन कोल फील्डस लिमिटेड नागपुर के या उसके नियंत्रणाधीन अन्य स्थान ।

(फा. सं. 43022/5/93- पीआरआईडब्ल्यू]

एम. शाहबुद्दीन , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 12th June, 2008

S.O. 1386.- In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Public Premises ( Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act , 1971 (40 of 1971 ) the Central Government hereby makes the following amendment in the notification of theGovernment of India in the Ministry ofCoal number S.O. 1857, dated the 24th June, 1994 namely:-

In the Table to the said notification, after serial number 50 and the entries relating thereto, the following shall be added, namely:-

51. Sub -Area Manager/Agent, Ukani Sub-Area , P.O, Ukani, Police Station Shirpur, Tahsil Wani , District Yavatmal.

All premises of Ukani Open Cast Project and others premises belonging to or under the control of Western Coalfields Limited, Nagpur.

52 Sub-Area Manager /Agent, Pimpal Gaon Sub-Area, P.O. Bhalar, Police Station Shirpur , Tahsil Wani , District Yavatmal .

All premises of Pimpal Gaon Open Cast Project and other premises belonging to or under the control of Western Coalfields Limited, Nagpur.

53. Sub-Area Manager/Agent , Jouri Open Caste Sub- Area, P.O. Ukani , Police Station Shirpur, Tahsil Wani , District Yavatmal.

All premises of Junad Open Cast Project and others premises belonging to or under the control of Westerm Coalfields Limited,Nagpur.

All premises of Kolar Pimpri Open Cast Project and other premises belonging to or under the control of Western Coalfields Limited, Nagpur .

54. Sub-Area Manager /Agent, Kolar Pimpri Open Caste Sub-Area, P.O. Bhalar, Police Station Wani , Tahsil Wani, District Yavatmal .

55. Sub -Area Manager /Agent, Rajur Sub-Area, P.O. Rajur, Police Station Wani , Tahsil Wani, District Yavatmal .

All premises of Rajur Sub Area and other premises belonging to or under the control of Western CoalfieldsLimited, Nagpur .

56. Project Manager /Agent, ' K' Khani Mine P.O. Ghonsa Police Station Wani , Tahsil Wani , District Yavatmal.

All premises'K ' Khani Project and other premises belonging to or under the control of Western Coalfields Limited, Nagpur .

57. Chief General Manager , Bhalar Township , P.O. Bhalar , Police Station Wani, Tahsil Wani , District Yavatmal.

All premises of Chief General Manager Complex of Bhalar Township , P.O. Bhalar, and other premises belonging to or under the control of Western Coalfields Limited,Nagpur

[F. No. 43022/5/93.PRIW]

M. SHAHABUDEEN , Under Secy.

2935

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Mumbai , Dated 15th April ,2008

AWARD PART- 1

श्रम एवं रोजगार मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 19 मई , 2008

TheGovernment of India , Ministry of Labour by its Order No.L- 12011 / 160/2002-IR(B - II ) dated 07-11-2002 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:

कर. आ. 1387- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औधोगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. -2 , मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 2/93/2002) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार की 19-5-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12011/160/2002- आई आर ( बी-11 ) ] राजिन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी

"Whether the action of the management ofBank of India, Mumbai South Zone , Mumbai in dismissal of Shri Shasikant Orak from services w.e.f. 23-11-2000 is justified? If not, what relief the workman Shri Shasikant Orak is entitled to?"

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT

New Delhi, the 19th May,2008

2.In support of their demand , General Secretary of the Bank of India Staff Union , Mumbai filed claim statement at Ex- 8 making out case that , concerned workman i.e. Orak is a member of their union and has served with first party Bank for 33 years . Accordingto union, workman Shri Orak was dismissed without following due process of law . He worked as a Special Assistant at Mumbai Central Branch of Bank of India during the relevant period.

S. Q. 1387. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 2/93/2002) ofthe Central Govt. Indus . Tribunal-cum -Labour Court, No-2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Bank of India, and their workman, received by the Central Government on 19-5-2008 .

[No. L- 1201 1 / 160/2002-IR(B - II)] RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 2 , MUMBAI

PRESENT

A. A. LAD: PRESIDING OFFICER

Reference No. CGET- 2/93 of 2002

EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF BANK OF INDIA

The General Manager (Personnel ),

Bank of India, Mumbai South Zone, Bol Building 70/80, M. G. Road, Fort, Mumbai -400 023

And

Their Workmen

The General Secretary Bunk of India Staff Union BolBuilding, Ground floor 70/80 , M. G. Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 023.

APPEARANCES :

3.Accordingto union, some fraud was detectedby Bank for which complaint was lodged by Bank with Police. Police investigated the fraud but unable to nab any culprit and closed the case . Bank was not happy with the result of the Police investigation and decided to proceed independently against workman Orak by levelling charge of forging signature of Smt . Bhambhani , the customer of Bank and encashing cheque on her forged signature and withdrawing cash from the account of Smt . Bhambhani . Opportunity was not given to concerned workman by the Inquiry Officer. Enquiry was conducted biasly. Findings given by Inquiry Officer were not given on the basis of evidence recorded in enquiry . All that hapened by violating Principles of Natural Justice and finding was given by Inquiry Officer is perverse. Even action taken by management of dismissal on the basis of said findings is not just and proper . The role played by Mrs. Zunjarao, Mr. Kotian, Mrs. Vedpathak and other officers who were concerned with handling of Savings Bank Account was not consideredby Inquiry Officer. Even admission given bywitness Manjrekar is not considered by Inquiry Officer. Management did not consider the result of investigation donebyPolice as Police unable to nab any of the culprits . Even admission ofMrs. Vedpathak that, she signed cheque while posting it on M.E.9 was not considered. So it is submitted that enquiry conducted is not just and proper and findings of the Inquiry Officer are perverse and prayed to set aside it with said dismissal .

For the Employer : Ms. Nandini Menon Advocate

For the Workmen : Mr. P. D. Patel Advocate

4. This is disputed by first party Bank by filing Written Statement at Ex- 12 making out case that reference is not maintainable as decision taken by Bank cannot be 2936

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

Assistant and he was having easy access to the record of specimen signature cards preserved by the Bank. He also used intentionally different types of initials on withdrawal slips. Bank discovered during that investigation that concerned workman had interfered with computer SB-t and SB -2 on the relevant dates and had also discovered during investigation that the turnover in the savings bank and over drafts were found to be beyond his net salary. The income of concerned workman was not proportionate. So by serving charge sheet dated 8-12-99 , concerned workınan was charge sheeted . Enquiry was conducted. Evidence was recorded by Inquiry Officer in the presence of concerned workman and his representative. Full opportunity was given to concerned workman . Bank examined officers namely Mrs. Zunjarao , Shri Kotian , Shri Palekar , Shri Engineer and Mrs. Vedpathak ali deposed in what way concerned workman had meddled with computer resulting in fraud affected on the Bank . In the deposition , these witnesses established that, concerned workman had access to two different machines and that he had accessed said in two different names and that he was also using two different initials. It was also detected that concerned workman deliberately and intentionally suppressed his identity in case of inquiry. After holding enquiry and after recording evidence by giving full opportunity to concerned workman , Inquiry Officer concluded concerned workman guilty of charges and accordingly findings were given . So it is submitted that, finding given by Inquiry Officer may be observedjust and proper and be declared that enquiry was conductedby following principles of natural justice.

5. In view of above pleadings my Ld Predecessors framed issues at Ex-20. However by application Ex -27 , both prayed to recast the issues and requested to decide point of enquiry and its findings as preliminary issue . Accordingly issues were recasted which are answered againstit.

ISSUES

FINDINGS

i. Whether this Tribunal has jurisdiction? Yes

ii. Whether eriquiry is fair and proper? Yes

iii . Whether findings are perverse? No

REASONS

Issue No. 1

challengedbefore this Tribunal. It is stated that, very serious allegations are levelled against workman Shri Orak. Allegation of fraudulently withdrawing a huge sum of money from the bank account of a customer by forged cheques which had been obtained on the basis of forged cheque requisition slips. During the relevant period concerned workman was functioning as Special Assistant atMumbai Central Branch and he was Incharge of cancellation of cheques in Savings Bank Department .On the basis of admissions given by concerned workman and with the help of evidence of sub -staff, fraud was proved against concerned workman in the inquiry. In the Inquiry, InquiryOfficerdiscovered that, concerned workman acted prejudicially to the interest ofthe Bank. The charges were specifically set out in the chargesheet and Departmental Enquiry was conducted by giving full opportunity to the concerned workman and it was conducted by following Principles of Natural Justice . Concerned workman was allowed to take assistance of his representative and appear in the enquiry proceedings .After holding enquiry , Inquiry Officer found concerned workman guilty of the charges. Copy of the enquiry report was supplied to concerned workman and showcause notice was given enquiring with himas to why serious decision of dismissal cannot be taken against him? Even personal hearing was given with this representative on the punishment and then punishment was given . He was permitted to make Departmental Appeal and after hearing him with his representative , appeal was set aside. One has to note that , first party is a public financial institution dealing with public money. Accordingly, it has taken proper decision to proceed against concerned workman as the act of the concerned workman was against the interest of the Bank and against public interest. The enquiry conducted was just and proper and punishment awarded is proportionate to the charges levelled against and proved against concerned workman. It is further stated that, during that period i.e. 8-9-97 to 29-10-97 an amount totalling to Rs . 1,52,000 was found fraudulently withdrawn from SB account No.25253 of Smt . R.T. Bhambhani and Smt . K.G.Bhambhani who were having Savings Bank account at Mumbai Central Branch . Fraud was perpetrated by using four cheque leaves from the cheque book No. 524641-650 obtained in the account on 14-8-97 on the basis ofa forged cheque requisition slips . The cheques used for defrauding bank and also the cheque book requisition slip and the acknowledgement slip were not traceable . The previous cheques series fed into the computer had been deleted. The original specimen signature card was replaced by fictitious specimen signature card in order to ensure that four cheques were duly passed by the official concerned.However said fictitious specimen signature card had also been removed after the perpetrations of the fraud to prevent detection. It was therefore evident that , frauds were perpetrated with the active involvement of a staff member who had access to the Bank's records . During that period, concerned workman was functioning as a Special

6. On the basis of stand taken by first party that this reference is not maintainable and its subject matter is of beyond jurisdiction of this Tribunal , this issue is framed. We find this contention in para. 1 of Written Statement . However no specific rase is made out by first party as to how this reference is not maintainabl ? and how this Court has no jurisdiction ? Even in the written arguments submitted by first pasty at Ex- 29, it is tried to point out by first party that the cause of concerned workman is not espoused by any registered union representing the employees of the first party Bank of which Second party 2937 [भाग - खण्ड 3(ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

is the member. However on that point there is no caseto the second party from the first party's side except that no other contention is taken by the first party as to how this Tribunal has no jurisdiction and how this matter can not bewithin the jurisdiction of this Tribunal?

is not recorded which was required to be recorded after filing documents, he feel that enquiry was not fair and proper. Except that, no case is made out by concerned workman as to how and why enquiry be treated not just and proper ? No case made out . It is not shown how not recording his statement after his producing of documents prejudice his case? Against that first party's evidence is on record in the form ofaffidavit filed in lieu ofexamination- n-chief ofN.K. Chhowala who was the InquiryOfficer .He stated, how enquiry was conducted and how opportunity was given to concerned workman and his representative. Hedescribedthat in his deposition saying that he concluded enquiry on 10-8-2000 which was started on 18-3-2000. He states that second party was allowed to represent through PravinPatel .Witnesses examined by bank were offeredto second party for cross .Enquiry proceedings were explained. Charges were also explained. In the cross, this witness states that, Police unable to detect charge of forgery leveled against concerned, workman . However he states that deposition of witness examined by management shows that concernedworkman played vital role in that transaction and was solely responsible for the encashment of that cheque of Bhambhani sisters . Even it wasbrought on record that second party workman was having access to the record of first party maintained by bank. It was also brought on record that concerned workman was having access to use the computers and access to specimen signature card record. Witnesses of management were. made available for cross.

7. It is matter of record that, union challenged the dismissal of concerned workman, There was conciliation proceeding. After submitting of failure report by Conciliation Officer , Union of India, Ministry of Labour sent the subject matter of the reference for adjudication to this Tribunal . The decision taken by Union of India in sending reference for adjudication is not challenged by first party before proper forum . For the sake of contention, I think first party has taken contention that, this Tribunal has no jurisdiction and Union has no proper representation in the establishment of first party. So for this vague case made out by first party, the subject matter brought for adjudication by the Union cannot be ignored for want of jurisdiction. When subject matter is sent for adjudication and it is observed that dispute subsist regarding dismissal of concerned workman , this Tribunal can consider it . Besides Section 2 (a) of Industrial Disputes Act permit individual workman to raise industrial dispute .Here claim statement is filed by Union . So according to me, there is no substance in the contention of first party that, this tribunal has nojurisdiction and subject matter of reference is not coming in the purview of this Tribunal . Accordingly t answer this issue to that effect.

Issue No. 2

8. This issue is framed on the basis of pleading of second party who pleaded that enquiry conducted against concernedworkman was not fair and proper.According to second party, no proper opportunity was given to him in the inquiry . So he blamed the enquiry. Against that first party made out case that full opportunity was given to concerned workman to participate in the enquiry with his representative . He was allowed to cross the management's witnesses . All documents were given to concerned workman on which first party was relying.

10. The evidence led by both and copy of Inquiry proceedings filed with Ex- 15 revels that full opportunity was given to concerned workman to participate in the enquiry. He attended all proceedings . He participated on all dates . He signed on all enquiry proceedings . Only his grievances was that after producing of documents from his side, his statemem was not recorded. But it is not pointed out in what way or manner non -recording of his statement after production of documents affect on his case? No specific case is made outby concerned workman onthatpoint. So according to me enquiry conducted against concernedworkman must be observed as conducted by following principles of natural justice. So Iconclude that enquiry is fair and proper.

IssueNo. 3

9. In support ofthe respective contentions , second party place reliance on deposition of concerned workmart Orakwho filed his affidavit at Ex-21 in lieu of examination- in-chiefwhere he made out case of that type. However în the cross this concemed workman admits that he attended enquiry proceedings and signed the said on the relevant dates along with his representative. Even he admits that , documents on which Bank relied were supplied to hirn . He also admits that six witnesses were examined by Bank in inquiry proceeding and were offered for cross to him and his representative . He also states that his statement was recorded on page 90. His grievance is that, after his evidence was recorded, he filed documents and again he was expecting that his statement should be recorded by the InquiryOfficer . According to him , when such a statement

Second party contended that findings of Inquiry Officer are perverse. In support ofthat second party place reliance on admission of management witness i.e, admission ofInquiryOfficer that Smt . Vedpathak admitted that cheques were encashed on machine No. 9 and under her signature, EvenWitness Mrs. Zunjarao also admits that said cheques were encashed under signature of Mrs. Vedpathak . Even InquiryOfficer admits that concerned workman was having opportunity to see the specimen signatures by using specimen signature card of others . So according to him though Mrs. Vedpathak admits that cheque was encashed under her signature no action was taken against her but 2938

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 /JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] concerned workman is punished for that without any reason . Whereas first party's advocate place reliance on the series of events refering access of concerned workman on all the computers as well as specimen signature card . Even it is admitted position that disproportionate amount was shown in the account of second party. According to first party, between 8-9-97 to 29-10-97 an amount totally Rs.1,52,000 was fraudulently withdrawn from SB Account No.25253 ofSmt . R.T. Bhambhani and Smt. K.G. Bhambhani withMumbai Central Branch . Said fraud was done with the help offour cheque leaves from cheque book no. 524641-650 obtained in the account on 14-8-97 on the basis ofa forged cheque requisition slip . The cheques used for frauding the bank as also the cheque book requisition slip and the acknowledgment slip were not traceable . The previous cheque series fed in the computer had been deleted and the original specimen signature card was replaced with fictitious specimen signature card in order to ensure the forged cheques were fully passed by officials concerned. However said fictitious signature card had also been removed after the perpetration of the frauds to prevent detection, According to Bank. fraud was perpetrated with the active involvement and assistance ofstaffmembers whe had access to the Banks records . It was also alleged that during relevant period , concerned workman was functioning as Special Assistant at Mumbai Central Branch andas a part ofhis duties , he was incharge of cancellation of cheques in Savings Bank Department . Even he was sitting close to the cabinet in which specimen signature cards are kept and he had easy access to the same . Even in the investigation at initial level , Bank was able to discover that concerned workman used to occupy the seat of the computer operators in SB department and he used to cancel cheques, withdrawal slips unauthorisedly by using their pass word. In the preliminary investigation, it was noticed that, concerned workman used intentionally different types of initials in token of posting of cheques/withdrawal slips to give an appearance that same had been posted by the computer operators . It was also discovered that during the course, said concerned workman worked on the computer SB- 1 & SB-2 on the relevant dates . Banks also discovered in the investigation that transactions in the SB accounts of thesecond party workman were found disproportionate and beyond hismeans and considering that aspect Bank decided tohold enquiry.Bank appointed Mr. N.K. Chhowala as the Inquiry Officer . Bank examined the Investigating Officer , Mr. K.B.Surti , Mrs. Zunjarao , Mr. Palekar and Mrs. Vedpathak as witness who deposed in what manner second party had meddled with computer resulting in frauds. In the deposition it also established that , second party had access to two different machines and had accessed the same in two different names and that he was also using two different initials. These indicate that second Party workman intentionally and deliberately acted to suppress his identity while doing those activities which is of serious nature .

12. Enquiry proceedings is produced at Ex- 15 . Evidence is recorded of witnesses from pages 3 to 20. Page 21 starts with report of Inquiry Officer and on page 23 , Inquiry Officer observed that cheque of Rs . 1,55,000 presented in clearing on 23-3-98 was returned unpaid as there was no sufficient balance in the account . Even computer showed remark that cheque series does not tally with the cheque issued by the Bank . Even Inquiry Officer found that the fraudster would have replaced the original specimen signature card by fictitious specimen signature card during business hours which was only possible to Shri Orak i.e. concerned workman and to Mrs. Zunjarao by virtue of their closeness to the specimen signature card cabinet. The possibility ofreplacing the specimen signature card were ruled out before commencement of business hours or after close of business hours as the cabinets were locked after the business hours and the keys were keptwith theManager. It is reported that the replacement of specimen signature card would have been done by staff of Savings Bank Department. It was reported that they could not get any material evidence to suspect involvement of Mrs. Bhambhani in the fraudulent withdrawal of cash . It was also noticed by Inquiry Officer that transactions of Orak is frequent and is higher side as compared to his take- home salary. It is also concerned with loan of Rs . 4 lakhs for purchase of home where Orak and Vedpathak stand guarantor. It was alsp noticed by Inquiry Officer that staff used to post cheques/ withdrawal slips in the pass word of other computer operations . Even Investigation Officerat the inquiry in initial stage concluded that fraud was committed in the inoperative joint savings bank account No.25253 of Mrs. Rukibai Bhambhani and Mrs. Kavita Bhambhani by obtaining new cheque book, deleted earlier cheque book series , missing cheque requisition slip and paid 4 cheques from Branch . Even Inquiry Officer passed strict strictures on Kotian who was leaving computer. without properly logging off. Even he was knowing that Orak was having knowledge of ALPEM Machine and its operation . He also noted that Orak was meddling with computer as evident from transaction log dated 1-10-97, 7-10-97 and 13-10-97 . He also noticed that as noted by staff during the investigation , Orak was using pass word of other computers and was having access to the specimen signature card cabinet Considering that Orak was having easy access to specimen signature card cabinet, and the disproportionate source of income in his account, he is concerned for that and responsible for the said . Even he unable to explain the reason of cash receipt ofRs . 11,500 and Rs . 10,500 dated 6-10-97 and 15-11-97 from his wife's account. So considering all that Inquiry Officer concluded that concerned workman is guilty of said charges . Even concerned workman in the cross admits that his work of place is adjoining to the cabinet where specimen cards are kept. He also admits that he has to see the cards to verify the signature of the customers . He also admits that during the banking hours computer were on and not shut down at 2939

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 /ज्येष्ठ 24 , 1930

[भाग - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

C. R. No. 46/2002

IPARTY

any time. He also admits that when computer is working it isnotnecessary to have password to open it. He admits that he was working on other computers . He admits that whencomputer is on, pass word is not necessary to open it.

Shri S.S. Deshpande, S/o Shri Shama Rao Deshpande , C/o R. H. Guttal , Plot No. 7, Pavamana, Indira Colony, Keshavapur, Hubli-580023 Karnataka State

II PARTY

13. So all these reveals that, enquiry was fair and proper and evidence was there to blame the concerned workman for the charges levelled against him . All these reveal that, Inquiry Officer was having reason to conclude concerned workman guilty of the charges levelled against him. When Inquiry Officer was having evidence , it cannot be said that his findings is on surmises and perverse as claimed. So 1 conclude that , findings ofthe Inquiry Officer are not perverse.

14. In view of discussions made above , I conclude that enquiry is fair and proper and findings not perverse. Hence the order.

ORDER

TheGeneral Manager (P), SyndicateBank, HeadOffice, Manipal- 576119 Karnataka State

AWARD

1. Enquiry is fair and proper and findings not perverse.

2.Parties to appear in the reference on the point of quantum ofpunishment.

Date: 15-4-2008

A. A. LAD, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली , 22 मई , 2008

1. The Central Government by exercising the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section 2A of the Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has referred this dispute vide order No. L- 12012/ 142/2001 - IR(B-II ) dated 21st August, 2002 for adjudication on the following schedule:

SCHEDULE

का. आ. 1388- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सिंडिकेट बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरणा श्रम न्यायालय, बैंगलोर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 46/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 21-5-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/ 142/2001- आई आर ( बी-II) ]

राजिन्द्र कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी

"Whether the action ofthe management ofSyndicate Bank is justified in dismissing the services of Shri S.S. Deshpande , Clerk w.e.f. 23-12-1998 on the grounds of doing acts prejudicial to the interest of the bank under Clause No.19.5 (i ) of Bipartite Settlement? If not , what relief the said workman is entitled to?"

New Delhi, the 22ndMay, 2008

2.A charge sheet dated 21-7-1997 at Ex . M1 (before this tribunal ) came to be served upon the first party in the followingterms:

ChargeSheet

S. 0. 1388.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award Ref. ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court , Bangalore as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Syndicate Bank and their workmen, receivedby the Central Government on 21-5-2008.

"That, one Smt . Noorjahan Pakruding Bhagwan , Gandigawad post was maintaining SB Account No. 8984 with our Itgi branch . Shri Fakruddin, the husband of Smt. Bhagwan, Headmaster KBS Boys School Gandigawad was also maintaining a SB Account No. 2971 with the said branch .

[No. L- 12012/142/2001 - IR (B- 11) ] RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, BANGALORE Dated: 14th,May, 2008

Present SHRIA. R. SIDDIQUI : PRESIDING OFFICER

That on 6-8-1996, while you were working as cashier of Itgi branch Shri F.H. Bhagwan handed over a cheque No. 395700 dated 6-8-1996 for Rs . 6090 favouring self drawn on SB account of Smt. Noorjahan with a request to credit the proceeds tohis SB account. That you instead of crediting the proceeds ofthe said cheque to SB Account No. 2971 , 2940

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008 / JYAISTHA 24 , 1930

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] encashed the said cheque and obtained payment of the same.

That on 24-8-1996 , you prepared a credit slip for Rs . 3,090. for credit of SB Account No. 2971 of Shri Bhagwan and deposited by cash the said amount ofRs . 3090.

That on 30-08-1996 Shri Bhagwan visited the branch and complained orally 신 t he had handed overthe cheque dated 6-8-1996 for Rs . 6090to you for crediting the proceeds to SB account No. 2971 but only an amount ofRs . 3090 was credited to the said account that too on 24-8-1996 . Since you were on leave he was requested to visit the branch the next day. On 31-8-1996 , he again visited the branch and gave an undated complaint . On seeing Mr. Bhagwan in the Manager's cabin you took him away, out of the branch . After some time Mr. Bhagwan returned to the cabin and informed that the matter is solved and that he has received the money back. It is seen that you have credited theAmount of Rs . 3000 on 31-8-1996 to SB account No. 2971 by preparing a credit slip. You have also informed the Manager that you have credited the balance amount of Rs . 3,000 on 31-8-1996 ,

The above circumstances clearly indicate that you have obtained unauthorisedly an amount of Rs . 6090 belonging to a customer at the branch on 6-8-1996 instead of crediting the amount to SB Account No. 2971 on 6-8-1996 itself you , credited Rs . 3090 ов 24-8-1996 and the balance of Rs . 3000 оп 31-8-1996 that too when the customer complained against you.

By your acts you committed " gross misconduct " within themeaning of Clause No.19.5 ofthe Bipartite Settlement . We ,therefore , charge you for committing gross misconduct of " doing acts prejudicial to interest of the bank " under Clause No. 19.5 (j ) of theBipartite Settlement .

3.Hisexplanation to the charge -sheet not being found satisfactory aDomestic Enquiry was ordered into the said charge sheet in the sense based on the findings of the Enquiry Officer holding him guilty ofthe charges , he was dismissed from service.

4. The case of the first party workman as made out in the claim statement in brief is as under :-

get more customers to branch. He got his friend Shri Bhagwan and his witè as customers ofthe second party bank and used to give his friendly services to them also. Charge - sheet was issued but the same is not correct. Enquiry is not fair and proper . In the enquiry except the interested person that the Investigating Officer at whose instance the enquiry was ordered, no independent person was examined in support of the charge - sheet whereas the complainant himself deposed to the effect that such a complaint was made on misunderstanding of the facts and circumstances . The first party has not conumitted any misconduct . No hand writing expert was examined and findings of the enquiry officer is perverse. The letter dated 20-5-1997 is not in his handwriting and is obtained by the Investigating Officer himself at his dictation by making the customer to believe that his complaint has been withdrawn without understanding the implications and facts altogether by the said customer ; that MEX 15 is the complaint on the basis of which the wrested charge sheet has been framed and the MEX . 15 says that Shri Bhagwan , the customer gave cheque on 7-8-1996 for Rs . 6092 to credit to his account. Further says that only Rs . 3090 has been credited as such ar enquiry may be held . In fact no cheque was given to any one on 7-8-1996 for Rs. 6092. It is not said that the said cheque was handed over to the first party by him . But the charge-sheet presumes that the said customer has handed over the said cheque to first party on 6-8-1996 and the first party got encashed the same and deposited in the customers account a sum of Rs . 3090 only on 24-8-1996 ; that on 6-8-1996 VCC standing in the name of Mrs. Bhagwan matured and the proceeds were credited to SB account No. 8984 vide MEX.7 on the same day vide MEX. 8 she withdrew Rs . 6090. Ол 24-8-1996 Mrs. Bhagwan came of the branch for crediting the amount to her husband's account No. 2971. She deposited Rs . 3090 vide MEX 11 and the relative credit slip was prepared by me but it was signed by Mrs. Bhagwan . It is seen from the records that in the claim statement evidence of WW 1 is narrated. So also the evidence of WW2 is narrated and it is contended that the enquiry officer has ignored the vital facts and solely depending upon the version submitted by the Investigating Officer gave his findings , which is perverse . The action of themanagement is not correct . Complainant was not examined by the management .. In fact the workman examined Mr. Bhagwan ; that on account of misunderstanding Mr. Bhagwan gave complaint and also gave in writing that he has no complaint again.si the workinan; that he is suffering lot and he is having wifeand two children and at present he has no income and his survival is difficult. The punishment imposed That the first party workman joined the services of the bank on 3-4-1982 as an Attender and subsequently he was promoted as clerk. He served the bank till his dismissal on 23-12-1998 while working at the Kittur Branch of Belgaum district; that while he was serving the management used to 2941 [भाग [ ] -खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24 , 1930

isdisproportionate and harsh . Workman bas not committed any act prejudicial to the interest ofthe second party bank under Clause No. 19.5 (j) of the Bipartite Settlement. Workman for these reasons and for some other reasons has prayed to pass award in his favourwith all benefits .

in service to his original post with continuity of service andwith full backwages . Aggrieved by the said award the management approached the Hon'ble High Court in Writ PetitionNo. 50276/03 challenging the said award and it is after hearing the parties through their respective counsels, hisLordship of our Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 16-02-2006 quashed the award passed by this tribunal and remanded the matter back to this tribunal for fresh disposal after hearing both the parties . After the remand, on behalf ofthe first party application dated 30-05-2006 under Section 11 ofthe ID Act, read with Rule 15 ofthe Industrial Disputes(General) Rules , 1957 was movedbefore this tribunal to issue notice/summons to two witnesses namely, Smt. Noorjahan and Shri Fakruddin Hussainsab Bhagwan (Complainant) to give evidence before this tribunal . The management resisted the above said application and after hearing the learned counsels for the parties on the said application it was rejected vide order dated 14-03-2007. Thereupon, the matter came to be posted to hear the learned counsels on merits ofthe case in the light of the observations made by his Lordship of Hon'ble High Court in the aforesaid orders on WP.

5. The management by its counter statement, while narrating the allegations made in the charge sheet, in the first instance contended that the enquiry conducted against the first party is fair and proper. On merits it contended that the workman himself prepared the credit slips for Rs .3090 on 24-08-1996 and for Rs-3000 on 31-08-1996 as per Ex. MEX.11 & 13 respectively thereby he misappropriated above said amount of Rs . 3090 for a period ofabout 17 to 18 days and the balance amount ofRs . 3000 for a period of about 15 days as he after having received the total amount of Rs . 6090 from the Complainant Shri Bhagwan on 06-08-1996 misutilised the above said amount for the above said period and thereby committed the misconduct as noted in the charge sheet. The management contended that the letter dated 30-06-1997 marked at Ex. MEX.16 given by the said complainant subsequently withdrawing his complaint at Ex. MEX 15 dated 30-06-1997 does not absolve the workman as the said complainant is stoodto his earlier complaint filed against the first party. The management further contended that the statement of the first partyand his witness examined as DWI &2 during the course of enquiry cannot be read out of context more so that from the statement of DW2 namely, the Complainant it becomes clear that he wanted to withdraw his complaint as he had settled the matter with the first party after be paid the entire amount of Rs . 6090 on the aforesaid dates . The management further contended that findings of the enquiry officer are very much based upon the oral testimony of MWI and the various documents marked during the course of enquiry genuineness of which could not have beendisputed; they being maintained by the management bank during the course of business transaction. The management also justified the punishment of dismissal passed against the first party as proportionate to the gravity ofthe misconduct committedby him.

7. Leamed counsel for the first party Shri N.G. Phadke, vehemently, argued that the main allegations made in the charge sheet that the complainant Shri Bhagwan infact had handed over the cheque of Rs.6090 to the first party on 06-08-1996 and that the first party himself got encashed the said cheque noting down the token number on the back of the cheque by himself has not been proved either by oral or documentary evidence and that the statement ofMW1 , the Investigation Officer in the enquiry being an hearsay evidence was not tobe acted upon to substantiate the aforesaid charge against the first party. He contended that the said complainant, Shri Bhagwan himself has given a letter at Ex. MEX. 16 withdrawing his earlier complaint atEx. MEX. 15 on the ground that he had given thesaid complaint on some misunderstanding and therefore, in not considering the said letter of the complainant withdrawing his complaint was the legal and factual infirmities committed by the enquiry officer. He submitted that merely, because the paying slips were preparedby the first partyhimself for depositing a sum of Rs. 3090 and Rs . 3000 vide Ex. MEX.11 & 13 , no inference can be drawn that it is the first party himself who had deposited the said amount as the first party in preparing those slips just rendered his personal service to the complainant who happened to be his friend . Therefore , learned counsel contended that the findings of the enquiry, officer which are mainly based upon the oral testimony of the Investigation Officer and not supported by other sufficient and legal evidence, suffered from perversity and therefore, impugned punistiment order passed against the first party is liable to be set aside , Learned counsel also submitted that even if it is to be taken that charge ofmisconduct has been proved against the first party, keeping in view the 6. Keeping in view the respective contentions ofthe partieswith regard to the validity and fairness or otherwise of the enquiry proceedings, this tribunal took up the said question as preliminary issue and my learned Predecessor byhis order dated 17-02-2003 answered the above said preliminary issue recording a finding to the effect that the Domestic Enquiry held against the first party by the second party is fair and proper. It is seen from the records that thereafter my learned Predecessor heard the learned counsels for the respective parties on merits of the case and by his award dated 24-03-2003 allowed the reference setting aside the dismissal order passed against the first partywith a direction to the managerment to reinstate him

2071 GM08-13 2942

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008/JYAISTHA 24, 1930

nature of the alleged misconduct, the supporting terms between the first party and the complainant and so also taking into account the fact that the amount in question was said tobe with the first party only for a period ofabout 18 to 25 days and the unblemished service rendered by the first party all along, the punishment of dismissal passed against him was quite disproportionate to the gravity of the alleged misconduct and therefore, it is a fit case where the court can exercise its discretionary powers under Section 11 A of the ID Actto modify the same.

8. On the other hand learned counsel for the management Shri TRK Prasad with equal vehemence contended that the first party having taken undue advantage of his friendly relationship with the Complainant, Shri Bhagwan, misutilised the said amount of Rs . 6090 which he encashed himself on the basis of cheque received by him from his friend Shri Bhagwan on 6-8-1996 . He contended that undisputedly, the first party even in his own admission prepared the two separate cheque slips at Ex . MEX 11 & 13 and thereby made good of the said amount crediting to the SB account of the Complainant , Bhagwan . He contended that the statement ofMWI before the enquiry officer can never be said to beahearsay evidence as it was based upon the documents maintained by the public sector bank relating to the transaction in question . He contended that the very statement of the complainant Shri Bhagwan examined as DW2 before the enquiry officer instead of giving clean chit to the first party implicates him when he admits to say that he wrote a letter to the bank withdrawing his complaint only after the first party paid back the balance amount of Rs . 3000 having already paid a sum of Rs . 3090 earlier to that under the said cheque slips vide Ex . MEX 11 & 13 respectively. Learned counsel contended that the findings of the enquiry officer are based upon sufficient and legal evidence, in the statement of MW1 and the voluminous documentary evidence including the documents at Ex . MEX.7,8,11,13,15 &16 as well as MEX.17 and other documents . Therefore, he supported the findings as valid and legal not to be interfered at the hands of this tribunal . He also contended that the misconduct committed by the first party was a serious misconduct involving moral turpitude and therefore , the punishment of dismissal was proportionate and commensurate to the gravity of the misconduct committed bythe first party.

9. After having gone through the records , more particularly, the oral and documentary evidence produced during the course of enquiry and the findings ofthe enquiry officer based on the said evidence I do not find substance in the arguments advanced for the first party as far as the proof of misconduct committed by the first party. From the reading of the enquiry findings it can be found out that the management during the course of enquiry examined the Investigation Officer as MWI and got marked 19

[PART 11-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] documents at Ex . MEX 1 to 19 to substantiate the charges ofmisconduct levelled against the first party. As against this the first party examined himself as DWI and the complainant Shri Bhagwan as DW2. Learned enquiry Officer while bringing on record the oral testimony ofMWI and the documents at Ex . MEX 1 to 18 and also referring to the oral evidence of the first party as well as his witness, analysed the evidence as recorded on pages 4 to 6 of the enquiry findings . In order to find out the truth or otherwise of the allegations made on the charge sheet as could be read from the findings , he raised three issues relevant for the purpose running as under:-

Issue No. 1 : Whether Shri Bhagwan on 6-8-1996 handed over a cheque , No. 395780 dated 6-8-1996 for Rs . 6090 to CSE for crediting the amount to SB account No. 2971 .

Issue No. 2 : Whether the CSE encashed cheque No.395780 for Rs . 6090 instead of crediting to SB account 2971 of F. H. Bhagwan .

Issue No. 3 : Whether the CSE credited to SB account 2971 of the customer a sum of Rs . 3090 on 24-8-1996 and the balance ofRs: 3000 on 31-8-1996 that too when the customer complained against him.

10. On first issue while taking into consideration the very statement of the complainant, the learned enquiry officer observed that the complainant confirmed having filed the complaint marked as MEX. 15. He noted that as per the statement of the complainant while answering question No. 19 the cheque referred by him in the complaint at Ex . MEX 15 is the cheque marked at Ex . MEX. 8. He also referred to the subsequent letter of the complainant dated 20-05-1997 marked at Ex. MEX 16written to the bank by the complainant and observed that the complainant in his cross examination admitted the contents of MEX 16 wherein he has stated that in the month of August he had given the cheque of Rs . 6090 and after one month when he came to the bank to withdraw the amount observed that only Rs . 3090 was credited to his account . He further stated that when he enquired with the first party, on the same day he paid Rs . 3000 and settled the matter. There was also a reference and discussion on the letter written by one Mr. MadhukarRao who was working at SB department on the relevant date .As per his letter at Ex . MEX 17, it is made clear that it is the first party who had given him the cheque in question fordebiting the same to the concerned account . Learned enquiry officer then observed that though DW2 (the complainant) has tried to explain the reasons for giving the complaint, he has not denied the contents of the complaint as he confirmed the contents of the complaint during the course of his cross examination . The enquiry officer then rejected the contention of the first party that thewife ofthe complainant herselfhaving visited the bank had encahsed the said cheque at Ex. MEX . 8 on 6-8-1996 2943 [भाग 1 ]-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

Moreover, when it has come in the evidence of the complainant that on 31-8-1996 he had come to the barnk to withdraw a sum of Rs . 500 question of he himself crediting a sum of Rs . 3000 to his SB Account by no imagination is conceivable much less acceptable . In the result, and the reasons foregoing this tribunal has no hesitation in its mind to come to the conclusion that the charges of misconduct as alleged in the charge sheet have been proved and substantiated by the management and that the findings of the enquiry officer bolding the workman guilty of those charges suffered from no perversity.

11.Now, the next question to be considered would be whether the punishment of dismissal passed against the first partywas not proportionate to the gravity of the misconduct committed by him. The learned counsel for the management had cited various decisions of High Courts as well as their Lordship of Supreme Court , wherein, it has been laid down that when the misconduct ofthe nature in question has been proved, the punishment imposed by the management by way of dismissal or any other punishment cannot be interfered with by this tribunal . There cannot be two opinions on the principle laid down by their lordship of Supreme Court and the High Courts on this aspect of the case. However, in my opinion in the present case there is a mitigating circumstance in favour ofthe first party in the fact that he misappropriated the amount in question temporarily for a period ofabout 18 to 25 days for a sum of Rs . 3090 then for a sum ofRs. 3000 respectively. He had reimbursed the said amount to the account of the complainant no sooner the matter cameto light . There is no case of the management that earlier to this incident the first party was also involved in the misconduct of this nature on hand. As could be read from the records , as on the date of dismissal the first party was in the service of the management for a period ofabout 16 to 17 years inviting no such complaint against him. Therefore, having regard to all these facts I am of the opinion that punishment of dismissal imposed upon the first party can be modified by the punishment of his compulsory retirement from services w.e.f. the date ofthe impugned punishment order. Hence the following award:

AWARD

The punishment of dismissal passed against the first party ishereby modified and replaced by the punishment ofhis compulsory retirement from services w.e.f. the date of impugned punishment order. No costs.

(Dictated to PA transcribed by her corrected and signedby me on 14th May, 2008) .

A. R. SIDDIQUI , Presiding Officer itself for the reason that the documentary evidence at MEX. 15,16 & 17 runs contrary to the abovesaid version and the defence taken by the first party. MW1 and DW2 would establish that the complainant handed over MEX. 8 to the first party for crediting the amount to his SB Account No. 2971. While, giving the reasonings as to whether the first party himself encashed the abovesaid cheque for Rs . 6,090 instead of crediting the same to the said account of the complainant, learned enquiry officer once again referring to the aforesaid letter at Ex . MEX 17 and the statement of MW1 recorded his reasonings to theeffect that it is the first party who had encashed the.. said cheque after having received the same from the complainant on 6-8-1996. Likewise, while raising the issue No. 3 learned enquiry officer took into account the documentary evidence at Ex. MEX 11 & 13 and on the basis ofthe very admissions of the first party that it is he himself had prepared those paying slips where under a sum of Rs . 3090 was paid with the account of the complainant on 24-8-1996 and a sum of Rs . 3000 was paid on 31-8-1996 once again with the account of the complainant , the learned enquiry officer rightly discussed and came te a right conclusion to say that there was a conflicting and contrary statement made by the first party aswell as his witness complainant as to who actually had paid sum of Rs . 3000 as per the Ex. MEX.13 as on 31-8-1996 . Therefore , after having discussed the oral and documentary evidence, the leamed enquiry officer in my opinion rightly came to the conclusion that the abovesaid Issue No. 3 was proved and answered as against the first party. Therefore , the contention of the first party that no cheque was given to him for crediting the amount to the complainant's account on 6-8-1996 but the VCC standing in the name of the wife of the complainant was matured and proceeds were credited to her account and then she withdrew the amount on the same day not being tenable was rightly rejected by the enquiry officer . He rightly concluded to say that from the oral and documentary evidence it has been established that the complainant handed over the cheque to the first party for crediting the same to his SB Account and the first party instead of crediting the same to the account, obtained the payment unauthorisedly. As noted above , learned enquiry officer also rightly rejected the defence of the first party that first complaint given by the complainant was at the result ofthe misunderstanding of the facts when the complainant as noted above , confirmed the contents of his complaint during the course of enquiry and came out with the statement that he withdrew the said complaint only after the amount in question was reimbursed to him . His contention that it is the complainant himself who paid a sum ofRs . 3000 to his SB Account on 31-8-1996 was also rightly rejected by the enquiry officer on the ground that therewas an evidence brought on record to suggest that the first party himself credited Rs . 3000 to the SB Account ofthe complainant by preparing the credit slip by himself.

2944

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24 , 1930

[ PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) |

per Goverment Notification dated 4-9-93.

नई दिल्ली, 22 मई, 2008

का. आ. 1389,-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का ( 4 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार पंजाब नेशनल बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम ऱ्यायालय नं. 2 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 70/1997 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 21-5-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/309/1996- आई. आर. ( बी- II ) ]

राजिन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी

That though the transferor New Bank of India had framed a policy, as per Government guidelines , in terms ofwhich the workman staff ofthe Bank could be transferred only within a State/ Union Territory, but the management ofthe transferee Punjab National Bank, soon after merger of erstwhile New Bank of India with it , issued orders for transfer of the workman out of Union Territory. But the management of the transferce Punjab National Bank, soon after merger oferstwhile New Bank of India with it , issued orders for transfer of the workman out of Union Territory ofDelhi to Bank's Zonal Office at Agra in U. P. New Delhi , the 22nd May,2008

That though the above transfer ofthe workman from Delhi to Agra, in another State, was wholly unjustified and not in any bona fide administrative needs of the Bank, nor was it permissible under the transfer policy of erstwhile New Bank of India , the workman who was not keeping good health at the time the orders for his transfer to Agra were served on him , reported at Bank's Zonal Office , Agra on 27-12-1993 .

S.O. 1389.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 70/ 1997) of the Central Goernment Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , No. 2, New Delhi as shown in the Annexure , inthe industrial dispute between the management of Punjab National Bank, and their workman, received by the Central Government on 21-5-2008.

[No. L- 12012/309/ 1996 - IR( B - II ) ] RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

That on the very day the workman had reported at Bank's Zonal Office Agra , orders were again issued for his second transfer to Bank's Regional Office at Bulandshahr and in deference to the said orders , the workman reported at the Regional Office of the Bank at Bulandshahr on 28-12-1993 .

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER: CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-

LABOUR COURT- IL, NEW DELHI

PRESIDING OFFICER : R.N. RAI . 1.D.No. 70/1997

IN THE MATTER OF :

Shri Anil Kumar Gupta , D-108, Prashant Vihar, Delhi - 110085.

Versurs

That as the workman was already having precarious health at the time of his transfer from Delhi to Agra , his health further deteriorated on his transfer from Zonal Office Agra to Bulandshahr and so, he had to take rest from30-12- 1993 to recoup his health and after becoming somewhat fit to work, he resumed duty at Regional Office, Bulandshahr on 28-1-1994 and was allowed to resume duty after he had explained the reasons for his inability to attend office from 30-12-1993 to 27-1-1994 to the satisfaction of the Bank.

RegionalManager , Punjab National Bank,

Bulandshahr - 110085 .

AWARD

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L- 12012/ 309/96 IR(B - II ) Central Goernment Dated 16-5-1997 has referred the following point for adjudication.

The point runs as hereunder :-

That while the workman was hoping that the management would now allow him to settle down at Bulandshahr, even if not transfer him back to Delhi, he found, to his utter shock , and dismay, that he was again transferred to Daulatpur Branch , a rural branch , on 28-1-1994 itselfby the Regional Office Bulandshahr, with the ' result that he suffered further set back in his health and he could not join at Daulatpur Branch for some time after 28-1-1994 .

"Whether the action of the management of Punjab NationalBank in terminating the services ofShri Anil Kumar Gupta Ex-Clerk -cum-Godown Keeperw.e.f. 14-11-94 by treating him voluntary retired is legal andjustified ? If not , to what reliefthe said workman is entitled?"

Theworkman-applicant has filed clain statement and it

That on recouping his health , the workman reported for duty at Daulatpur Branch on 18-3-1994 in deference to the Regional Office orders dated 28-1-1994 and he was allowed to join duty by the manager of the Branch after the workman had satisfied the management about the reasons for his inability to join duty at Branch immediately after 28-1-1994 .

has been stated therein that the workman was appointed as a Clerk-cum -Godown Keeper in erstwhile New Bank ofIndia at Delhi w.e.f. 1-9-82 and was working as such in the erstwhile NewBank of India till its undertaking was taken over/merged withPunjab National Bank, another nationalized Bank, as

That as the climatic and living conditions at Daulatpur village had an adverse impact on the already [भाग -खण्ड 3( ii) ]

2945

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

Manager, Bulandshehar , the workman sent to Regional Manager a letter dated 26-11-94 protesting against the said illegal action and demanding its withdrawal and his reinstatement in service.

The management filed written statement and it has been stated therein that the service conditions of bank employees are govermed by various awards and bipartite settlements as amended from time to time. Para 17 ( a) of theBipartite Settlement dated 10-4-89 provides as under precarious health of workman, which was worsened due tohis physical problem of back-pain, he could not attend office at the said Branch from 21-3-94 about which the Branch Management was duly kept informed by him and he had also sent a letter dated 30-4-94 to the Branch Manager, informing him that his physical trouble of pain inback and in left leg had become highly intestified due to whichhe could not even sit for an hour at a stretch , and assuring the management that he would join the duties as soon ashe recovered.

That subsequently, on being so required by management, the workman presented himself for medical examinationbefore Bank's Medical Officer,Dr. K.D. Bhalla at KarolBagh, New Delhi on 24-6-94 , when the saidDoctor examined the workman and though the workman had requested Dr. Bhalla to give to him his Report ofMedical Examination to euble him to submit it to the Bank, but the Doctor neithergave him any report nor told him of the result ofmedical examination of workman and told the workman that hewould send his report to the Bank directly.

6( a) When an employee absents himself from work for a period of 900 more consecutive days , without submitting any application for leave or for its extension or without any leave to his credit or beyond the period of leave-sanctioned originally/subsequently or when there is satisfactory evidence that he has taken up employment in India or when the management is reasonably satisfied that hehas no intention ofjoining duties, the management may at any time thereafter give a notice to the employee at his last known address calling upon him to report for duty within 30 days of the date of notice stating inter alia , the grounds for coming to the conclusion that the employee has no intention ofjoining duties and furnishing necessary evidence, where available .

That when the workman did not hear from the Bank after his medical examination by Dr. K.D. Bhalla on 24-6-94, he sent a letter dated 4-7-94 to the Regional Manager of the Bank at Bulandshehar, informing the Regional Office that he had appeared before the Medical Officer of the Bank, Dr. K.D. Bhalla on 24-6-94 for his medical examination, as directed by the Bank but had not received any communication from the Bank thereafter, nor had he been supplied with copy of the report of the said medical examination and thathe was still far from recovery and while requesting that his leave may, therefore , be extended by three months he also requested in his above letter that his case for retransfer to Delhi may also be considered sympathetically in view of his ailment and deterioration inhealth .

Unless the employee reports for dutywithin 30 days ofthe notice or gives an explanation for his absence within the said period of30 days satisfying the management that he has not taken up another employment or avocation and thathe has no intention of not joining duties , the employee The deemed to have voluntarily retired from the bank's service on the expiry of the said notice . In the event of the . employee submitting a satisfactory reply, he shall be permittedto report for duty thereafter within 30 days from the date of the expiry of the aforesaid notice without prejudice to the bank's right to take any action under the law of the rules of service . Further , para 19.16 of the Bipartite Settlement dated 19-10-96 provides as under:

Thatwhiletheworkman heard nothing from the Bank after his medical examination by the Bank's Medical Officer, Mr. K.D. Bhalla or after his letter dated 4-7-1994 as stated above, he subsequently, after more than three months since his medical examination by the Bank's Medical Officer on 24-6-1994, received a letter dated 28-9-1994 from Bank's Regional Manager, Bulandshebar, the contents of which will be referred to and commented upon at appropriate time.

That on receipt of Regional Manager's above letter dated 28-9-94, the workman submitted a reply dated 25-10-94to regional manager of the Bank at Bulandshehar

That disregarding various communications sentby

the workman , the Regional Manager, Bulandshehar in an

arbitrary and illegal manner terminated the services ofthe

worknian by a letter dated 14-11-94by treating/deeming

the workman " to have voluntarily retired from the bank's

service with immediate effect" .

That aggrieved by the above arbitrary, malafide, illegal and unjustified action ofthe management/ Regional

Any notice, order, charge- sheet, communication or intimation which is meant for an individual employee , shall be in a language understood by the employee concerned. In the case of an absent employee notice shall be sent to him by registered post with acknowledgement due . If the employee refuses to accept any notice, order, charge-sheet , written communication or written intimation în connection with disciplinary proceedings when it is sought to be served upon him , such refusal shall be deemed to be a good service upon him, provided such refusal takes place in thepresence ofat least two persons including the person who goes to effect service upon him . Where any notice, order, charge- sheet, intimation or any other official communication which is meant for an individual employee is sent to him by registered post acknowledgement due at the last recorded. address communicated in writing by the employee and acknowledged by the bank, the stime is to be deemed as goodservice.

2946

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

That the erstwhile New Bank of India was amalgamated with Punjab National Bank vide Govt. of India notification dated 4-9-93 . In terms of the scheme of amalgamation, all the employees of erstwhile New Bank of India became the employees of Punjab National Bank. Consequent upon the said amalgamation , Shri Anil Kumar Gupta, Clerk/ Godown Keeper, who was posted at that time at B.O.:B.G. Road, Delhi , was transferred to Agra Zone of thebank. He was relived on 5-11-1993 from the said Branch with instructions to report to Zonal Office, Agra, for further posting at a point of need in the Zone. Shri Gupta did not report for duties immediately and after an absence of49 days he joined at Zonal Office, Agra, on 27-12-1993 . On the same date, i.e. 27-12-1993 , Zonal Office Agra allocated him to Regional Office, Bulandshehar, for posting at a point of need. After joining his duties at Regional Office, Bulandshehahr , on 28-12-1993 he absented unauthorisedly from30-12-93 to 27-1-1994 (29 days) . During this period telegrams dated 3-1-1994, 12-1-1994 and 21-1-1994 were sent by Regional Office advising him to report for duties and treated him to have been absenting unauthorisedly. As aresult ofthese telegrams, Shri Gupta reported at Regional Office on 28-1-1994 and submitted a letter dated 28-1-1994 stating that he remained on unauthorized absence and requested to treat the period of his absence as per rules and allow him tojoin duties . His period ofabsence was taken as unauthorized.

Consequent upon his joining at Regional Office, Bulandshahar , on 28-1-1994 itself he was advised immediately to report at Daulatpur Kalan where he stood posted permanently vide letter dated 28-1-1994 . Shri Gupta did not report for his duties at the said branch upto 17-3-94 nor did he submit any information justifying his absence . However, he came to the branch on 18-3-1994 and joined his duties . He remained on duty upto 19-3-1994 and thereafter again absented without information with effect from 21-3-1994 (20th being a Sunday, the weekly offofthebranch) . The Branch Manager advised him vide telegram dated 24-3-1994 followed by registered letter dated 15-4-1994 to immediately report for duties. ShriGupta vide his letter dated 30-4-94 acknowledged the telegram and the letter referred to above and informed that the cause ofhis absence is his illness which is so intensive that he cannot work for more than one hour at a stretch . No medical certificate or leave application was enclosed with the said letter . He was informed vide letter dated 30-5-1994 that he should get himself examined from the ChiefMedical Officer, Dr. K. D. Bhalla, of the bank and submit his medical certificate in support of his illness.

Shri Gupta presented himself before Dr. Bhalla on 24-6-94 but did not submit any medical certificate, as advised. In the meantime , Dr. Bhalla vide his letter dated 30-6-94 informed the branch that on examination held on 24-6-94 Shri Gupta has been found medically fit to perform hisduties in the bank. Bank opted to wait for some time to

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] give an opportunity to Shri Gupta to join his duties but finding that he has not come forward to either explain his absence/position , the bank was left with no alternative but to take action in accordance with the provisions of para 17( a) of the Bipartite Settlement dated 10-4-89.

Accordingly, a notice dated 28-9-94 was issued în terms of the above provisions giving Shri Gupta 30 days timeto report for his duties and submit satisfactory reasons for his absence failing which he will be deemed to have voluntarily retired from bank's service on expiry of the said period of 30 days . Shri Gupta neither reported for duties nor responded towards the notice within the stipulated period; hence on expiry of 30 days time bank after having waited for 18 more days , treated him to have voluntarily retired from bank's service with effect from 14-11-94 an intimation to this effect was sent vide letter dated 14-11-94 .

It may also be mentioned that the communications sentto Shri Gupta were sent by registered A/D post in accordance with the provisions of para 19.16 of the Bipartite Settlement dated 19-10-1966. He has not denied receipt of the same.

In view ofthe above position , it is abundantly clear that bank has acted in accordance with the provisions of Bipartite Settlements and no prejudice can be said to have been caused to Shri Gupta as he was given sufficient opportunity tojoin his duties.

It is reiterated that Shri Gupta admitted in his letter dated30-4-94 that he received telegram dated 24-3-94 and letter dated 15-4-94 but could not reply and also did not take the permission to leave the station on 19-3-94. It was for the first time through his letter of 30-4-94 that he informed about his purported ailing health .It wouldhe relevant to mention that bank did not remain silent towards his letter but responded and advised him vide letter dated 23/30-5-94 that he should get himself examined from the ChiefMedical Officer at Delhi ( address of the CMD was also stated in the reply) and submit his medical certificate in support ofhis contention.

Bank never received any such letter of 4-7-94 from Shri Gupta . Rather Bank received the information from the Chief Medical Officer vide letter dated 30-6-94 informing that Shri Gupta is medically fit to perform his duties .On receipt of the said report from the Chief Medical Officer bank awaited for the response of Shri Gupta bul when it was observed that Shri Gupta has neither reported for duties nor has communicated with the bank, he was given final opportunity by way of notice dated 28-9-94 advising him that he should report for duties within 30 days time failing which he shall be deemed to have voluntarily retired from bank's service in terms of para 17 ( a ) _of Bipartite Settlement dated 10-4-89 it is denied that bank received any such letter of 4-7-94 reported to be sent by ShriGupta.

2947 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

so the workman was unauthorisedly absent from 15-11-1993 to 27-12-1993 . He was again absent from 30-12-1993 to 27-11-1994 and from 28-01-1994 to 17-03-1994 and from 24-03-1994 to 15-04-1994 and on 30-05-1994 he was examined by Doctor Bhalla, Bank's CMO and was found fit but he remained unauthorisedly absent,

No such communication was received by the bank. The bank in its notice had clearly stated that in case Shri Gupta fails to resume duties or fails to subunit explanation within 30 days ofthe date of notice he will be deemedto have voluntarily retired from bank's service on expiry of the said period of 30 days . It would be pertinent to state that even after expiry of30 days time, bank waited for 18 more days and thereafter only on 14-11-1994 took a decision to treat him to have voluntarily retired which intimation was also sent vide letter dated 14-11-1994,

It was further submitted that a letter dated 28-09-1994was issued in terms of Clause 17 BPS giving 30days notice forjoining or explaining the reasons forhis absence but the workman did not send any reply, so he was voluntarily retired on 14-11-1994.

The workman applicant has filed rejoinder. In the rejoinder he has reiterated the averments of his claim statement and has denied most of the paras of the written statement. The management has also denied most of the paras ofthe claim statement.

Evidence ofboth the parties has been taken.

Heard argument from both the sides and perused the papers on the record ,

The workman's submission is that he submitted reply to the letter dated 28-09-1994. The workman has filed photocopyAnnexures WW1 /3 , a letter sent under postal certificate. He has not filed the original receipt of letter under postal certificate . He has filed only photocopy. The management has denied the receipt of this letter. It was the duty of the workman to produce the original UPC receipt when ithas been denied but the original has not been filed, so this document is not admissible in evidence . The workman has not given any explanation in this letter along with medical certificate . If he was ill it was his duty to annex medical certificate along with this letter but there is no mention of any medical certificate in this letter, so it cannot be said that the workman gave satisfactory explanation regarding his prolonged absence .

Itwas submitted from the side of the workman that he was appointed as Clerk -cum-Godown Keeper in erstwhile New Bank of India, Delhi w.e.f. 1-9-1982. The NewBank of India merged with the PNB on 4-9-1993 as per the policy of New Bank of India . The workmen , staff ofthe bank could be transferred only within the State or Union territory but the management of PNB after merger transferred the workman with in the Union Territory of Delhi toBank Zonal Office , Agra (UP),

Itbecomes quite obvious from perusal of the record that the workman was transferred to Agra Zone on 05-11-1993 thereafter, he has remained absent three times unauthorisedly and he has worked only for hardly a month inbetween05-11-1993 to 14-11-1994 . The certificate filed by the workman only contains prescription of 2-3 medicines . The Dr. examined him and he has submitted his report that the workman is fit to resume his duties.

That the workinan was already having precarious health at the time ofhis transfer from Delhi to Agra. His health further deteriorated on transfer from Zonal Office Agra to Bulandshahar . He was permitted to join on 28-11-1994 when he explained his reasons for his inability toattendoffice from 30-12-1993 to 27-1-1994 the workman was again transferred to Daulatpur Branch, rural branch on 28-1-1994 itself by the bank,

Itwas submitted from the side of the workman that the bank has not followed the principles of natural justice and no inquiry has been held. Inquiry is not necessary for invoking clause 17 ofthe BPS.

That the bank's Doctor examined him but did not give him any medical report ..That the workman was suffering from backache and he was getting treatment from Clinic ofDr. N.C. Jain ,

That the order of volountary retirement dated 14-11-1994 of the workman is illegal and arbitrarily. He send letter to the bank regarding his illness on 26-10-1994 but the bank did not consider his letter and illegally and arbitrarily retired the workinan.

It was submitted from the side of the management that the workman was transferred on 05-11-1993 from BO BGBranch on 05-11-1993 but he reported to Zonal Office, Agra after 49 days on 27-12-1993.

The workman was not so seriously ill that he could not move. He should have approached the bank when he was served notice on 28-11-1994 for submitting explanation or reported for duty. He could have reported forduty as there is no certificate that he was not in a position to move. Hewas suffering from backache only and he could have easily concerned the branch and reported for duty and could have submitted his explanation along with medical certificate but the workman has purportedly sent explanation by UPC. He has not filed the original receipt ofUPC .

In the circumstances, it is held that the workman did not response to the letter dated 28-11-1994 and the bank has rightly treated him voluntarily retired from duty.

He absented again unauthorisedly from 30-12-1993 to 27-11-1994. Telegrams were sent to him for resuming duties. The workman resumed duty on 28-01-1994 . The workman was advised to report for duty at Daulatpur on 28-01-1994. He did not report for duty up to 17-03-1994,

Ithas been held in 2001 1 CLR 468 by the Hon'ble Apex Court as under :-

2948

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 14, 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

"Termination ofservice was validiy effected in view of the BPS and High Court erred in quashing termination . "

Ithas been further held in the case of D.K. Yadav V. JMA Industries 1993 II CLR 116 (SC) as under :-

"While allowing the impugned appeal and setting aside award of the Tribunal and judgments of the High Court is held that undue reliance on the principles ofnatural justice by the Tribunal and even by the High Court has certainly led to the miscarriage ofjustice as far as the bank is concerned that bank has followed the requirements of clause 16 of the BPS wherein the principles of natural justice are in- built and that the bank rightly held that Dayananda had voluntarily retired from the service of the bank ." 'It has been held in 2001 I LLJ as under :

"Termination of Services Employee ofBank-for unauthorized absence from duty- Employee defaulted in not offering explanation for unauthorized absence from duty nor placed any material to prove he reported for duty within 30 days of notice as required in terms of Bipartite Settlement High Court proceeded on erroneous basis of non compliancewith principles of natural justice . There was agreement between parties as to manner in which situation should be dealt with and consequences that would follow High Court's order set aside ." The management has given 30 days notice after his 90 days absence . He did not turn up. The workman allegedly sent letter under certificate ofposting. No medical certificate is attached to it . The management has denied the receipt of this letter . In case the receipt of this letter is presumed to be admitted , this letter does not disclose any sufficient reason for such long absence. The Bank's Doctor examined him and found him fit. His illness was backache . It was not so acute to prevent him from joining duty. The workman deliberately did not report to duty as he was transferred to rural branch . He was directed to report to duty or to explain . He did not report for duty. His explanation is not justified . The management has rightly treated the workman as voluntary retired.

The reference is replied thus :-

The action of the management of Punjab National Bank in terminating the services ofShri Anil KumarGupta ex-clerk-cum-Godown Keeper w.e.f. 14-11-94 by treating him voluntary retired is legal and justified . The workman applicant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.

The award is given accordingly...

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer Date: 13-05-2008

नई दिल्ली, 22 मई, 2008

का. आ. 1390,-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार विजया बैंक

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , बंगलौर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 17/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 21-5-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12011 / 186/2001- आई.आर. ( बी- II ) ] राजिन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 22nd May, 2008

S.O. 1390.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Governmenthereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 17/2002) of the Cent. Govt . Indus . Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , Bangalore as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Vijaya Bank , and their workman, received by the Central Government on 21-5-2008.

[No. L- 12011 / 186/2001 - IR(B - 11 ) ] RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM-LABOUR COURT , BANGALORE Dated: 9th May, 2008 PRESENT SHRIA. R. SIDDIQUI , PRESIDING OFFICER C.R. No. 17/2002

IPARTY

The General Secretary, Vijaya Bank Workers Organisation , 37/1 , 1st floor, Car Street, Ulsoor , BANGALORE .

Versus

II PARTY

The Regional Manager , Vijaya Bank, Head Office , Trinity Circle, BANGALORE

AWARD

1.The Central Governmentby exercising the powers conferredby clause (d) of sub -section (2A) of Section 10 ofthe industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has referred this dispute vide order No.L - 12011 / 186/2001 - IR (B - II ) dated 12th March, 2002 for adjudication on the following Schedule:

SCHEDULE

"Whether the management ofVijayaBank isjustified in dismissing Shri Francis Pius , Clerk vide order dated 5-03-1998 from service ? Ifnot, what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ? " 2. A charge sheet dated 19-03-1997, came to be issued against the first party leveling about 4 charges of [ भाग II- खण्ड (ii) ]

misconduct committed by him ( details are given in the charge sheet). The explanation offered by the first party not getting favour with the Disciplinary Authority to the aforesaid charge sheet, a Domestic Enquiry was ordered and conducted against him and on the conclusion ofthe enquiry, findings were submitted by the enquiry officer holding him guilty of the aforesaid four charges. Thereupon , he was sent with a second show cause notice with the findings of the enquiry officer proposing the punishment ofdismissal and after giving him the opportunity of personal hearing, proposed punishment was confirmed dismissing him from service. The first party raised the dispute with the conciliation officer concerned and that resulted into the present proceedings .

3.The first partybyway ofhis claim statement before this tribunal challenged validity and fairness or otherwise ofthe enquiry proceedings as well as challenged the enquiry findings as not based upon sufficient and legal evidence. He also challenged the dismissal order as unjust and illegal and requested this tribunal to pass an award setting aside the dismissal order and then to direct the management to reinstate him in service with all back wages , continuity of service and other consequential benefits .

4.The managementby its counter statement however, asserted that the enquiry proceedings were conducted in accordancewith the principles of naturaljustice giving the first partysufficient opportunity to defend himself by taking theassistance one Mr. Krishnappa , Clerk and the Regional Secretary ofVBWO, who effectively cross examined both the management witnesses and submitted his writtenbriefs . The management also contended that the findings of the enquiry officer are very much based upon sufficient and legal evidence in the statement of the two management witnesses namely MWI and MW2 and the 19 documents produced alongwith the Investigation Report at Ex . MΕΧ.Ι and also the very confession statement of the first party and the fact that the first party has reimbursed and repaid the amount he misappropriated, therefore , according to the management enquiry findings were valid and punishment ofdismissal passed against the first party wasjust and legal .

5. Keeping in view the respective contentions ofthe parties , this tribunal on 29-04-2004 framed the following Preliminary Issue :

"Whether DE conducted against the first party by the second party is fair and proper " ?

6. During the course of trial of the said issue, the management examined the enquiry officer by filing affidavit evidence and got marked 4 documents at Ex. MI to M4 including the charge sheet, proceedings of enquiry and the enquiry findings . As against this, the first party also filed the affidavit evidence and it is after hearing the learned counsels for the respective parties , this tribunal by order dated 25-09-2006 answered the above said preliminary issue in favour ofthe management recording a finding that 2071 G1/08-14

2949

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

the enquiry conducted against the first party by the management is fair and proper. Thereupon , the matter was taken up for hearing on merits and learned counsel for the first party submitted his written arguments challenging the findings of the enquiry officer as well as the impugned punishment order.

7. Whereas, learned counsel for the management supported the findings of the enquiry officer contending that they were based on sufficient and legal evidence. not to be interfered at the hands of this tribunal .

8. After having gone through the records, I do not findmuch substance in the written arguments filed on behalf of the first party. By way of the said written arguments learned counsel attacked the findings ofthe enquiry officer firstly, on the ground that the learned enquiry officer committed illegality as he mainly relied upon the statement of the Investigation Officer, MW1 and his investigation report at Ex. MEX. 1 annexed with various enclosures .He contended that none of the borrowers whose amount said to have been misappropriated by the first party by not crediting the same to their accounts , has been examined during the course of enquiry and therefore, the statement given by those borrowers before the Investigation Officer should not have been relied upon , they not being subjected to cross examination ofthe first party. He nextly contended that the alleged confession statement said to have been made by the first party on 15th August, 1997 was not to be acted upon as 15th August happened to be a holiday and therefore, legal sanctity cannot be attached to his statement recorded during the holiday. He submitted that charge against the first party was also were vague not disclosing as on what dates he received the payments from the borrowers towards the loan amount and on what dates he failed to credit those amounts as relevant ledgers and documents were not produced by the management . After having gone through the enquiry findings and so also the oral and documentary evidence produced by the management during the course of enquiry, I do not find substance in the aforesaid arguments advanced for the first party.Inorder to appreciate the aforesaid contentions raised on behalf of the first party , it appears to me worthwhile to bring on recordthe very findings of the enquiry officer on the aforesaid four charges of misconduct levelled againsı the first party running as under :

"The findings of the E.O. after careful study of the documents produced and hearing both the sides and examination of the evidences/witness are as follows vis-a- vis the charges levelled against Mr. K. Francis Pius , Clerk, Code No.11585 the CSE :

(i) It is not disputed and is proved from the verification of the Attendance Register maintained in the Branch that Mr. K. Francis Pius was working as Clerk in Vijaya Bank, Kowdle Branch from 17-7-1993 to 17-07-1996 . As revealed in the branch records 2950

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

and also as testified by MW1 and MW2 supported by MEX.1 , it is proved that Mr. K. Francis Pius the CSE was usually working in Kowdle Branch as Agricultural Assistant and some days as Cashier at the branch during the period from 1-08-1994 to 17-07-1996.

(ii) The duties and responsibilities of the Agricultural Assistant were defined in RO letter (Annexure 1 ofMEX, 1).

(iii ) From Annexure 2 to MEX . I which is duly identifiedby MWI it is evident that Mr. K. Francis Pius was issued VGVK. Receipt book containing 50 Receipt forms bearing No. 042001 to 04250 on 10-09-1995.

(iv) From Annexure 6 of MEX . I it is proved that Mr. K. Francis Pius had collected the following amount by issuing cash receipts to the borrowers:

Date Amount Name of the borrower Receipt No.

042034 9-5-96 300 K. Chikkegowda 042035 9-5-96 300 Bhadramma

042036 9-5-96 1000 Manchamma 9-5-96 500

042037

Kadaiah

9-5-96

042038

100 Chikkathayamma 9-5-96

042039

Renuka

042040 9-5-96 100 KempaBoraiah 042041 9-5-96

10 Puttanuna

042042 Not dated 200 Kempamma

Not dated 150

042043

Mahalingamma

800!

042044 Not dated

Dasaiah

Annexure 10 to MEX. I produced by the P.O. duly identifiedby MWI also confirm the above collection by theCSE.

(v) MWI and MW2 in their deposition have confirmed the non- crediting of the amount collected by the CSE as shown at ( iv) above, The branch records and documents such as Annexure 18 to MEX.1 and Annexure 20 to MEX. I also confirm such non -credit, MW1 andMW2 in their deposition have also testified to the said fact. Perusal of Annexure 20 to MEX. I also confirms this . The CSE has also paid part of the amount as per Annexure 13 to MEX , Ion 17-08-1996 ( after the investigation) . Further, Shri K. Francis Pius in his letter dated 15-08-1996 which was produced as Annexure 11 to MEX, 1 and duly identified by MWI has admitted the fact of having collected such amounis and having used the same for his personal use instead of crediting them to the

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] respective loan accounts in the bank . Ilis paying part of the amount after the investigation as stated above is a clear indication of his admitting such use. The CSE in his subsequent letter dated 13-12-1996 though had denied the charges and has alleged that his earlier statement was obtained in RO by force it cannot be relied upon as during the course of the enquiry no such unfair methods used by RO or any other official of the bank has come to light has been proved. Hence the enquiry officer concludes that charge No.1 at Page No. 2 of the charge sheet referred to above issued to the CSE has been clearly proved.

vi) As per Annexure 7 to MEX. 1 produced by the PO and duly identified by MWI and confirmed in his deposition by MW 2 Mr. K. Francís Pius did collect the following amount in the Kowdle branch of Vijaya Bank, Date

Amount Borrower

150

Not mentioned

Mhalingamma 15-06-1996

200

Padma

2000

18-06-1996

Thimmamma

250

Not mentioned

SLIRDP Account 2/86 (Name not mentioned )

900

Not mentioned

Kamalamma

Itcouldbe clearly seen that these counterfoils were not signed by any officers or the Branch Manager and MWI and MW2 have stated that these monies collected were not credited to the respective loan accounts ( also refer to Annexure 20 of MEX. 1 ) .

From Annexures 6 and 7 to MEX. I which were duly identified by MW1 it cannot be seen that receipts/ counterfoils issued to the borrowers by the CSE were not dated .

As per the deposition of MWI the CSE had retained the original cash receipts /vouchers with him alongwith the money collected . MW2 also had confirmed the same. This shows the ulterior motive of the CSE which would beyond all doubt support charge No. 2 of the charge sheel referred to above . Accordingly, the enquiry officer concludes that charge No. 2 of the charge sheet at page No. 2 of the said charge sheet stands proved.

(vii) In the aforesaid paragraphs it has been clearly proved that the CSE had collected Loan instalments from the borrowers by issuing receipts / unauthorized counterfoils and failed to credit the same to the Bank and he also 2951 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 /ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

failedto produce the originals ofthe vouchers and the third copies of the receipts issuedby him . In MEX. 1 produced by the PO and duly identified by MWI who has also confirmed the contents of the said documents while deposing during the enquiry. This has been clearly brought out in point No. 4 at PageNo. 4ofthe Investigation Report. Considering the circumstances of the case the statement of the CSE in Annexure 9 of the MEX. 1 cannot be taken as true and the EQ has every reason to agree with the Investigating Officer ( later deposed as MWI also ) that a genuine suspicion arises as whether these unused receipts were being misused by the CSE for his personal advantage. Hence , the EO considers that charge No. 3 at Page No. 2 of the said charge sheet also stands proved.

(viii) From Annexure No. 8 of the MEX. I which are producedby PO duly identified by MW1, itcould be seen that certain entries in the case of following borrowers in their pass books are altered or are fictitious : ( 1 ) Smt . Thimmamma, (2 ) Smt . Mahalingamma , (3) Smt . Sumithramma, (4) Smt . Padma and (5) Smt . Kempamma . In MEXI page No. 3 it has been stated by the Investigating official (who also testified as MW1 ) that the CSE had made the said entries . This has been confirmed by MWI at Page No. 5 of the Enquiry Proceedings . He has clearly stated that there were many corrections /over writings and the entries were not tallying with thebranch records maintained meaning to say that there were no actual credits to the loan accounts . MW2 in his deposition stated that Page No. 9 of the enquiry proceedings that these alternations were not duly authenticated by authorized officers . Since the CSE is confirmed to have made such alterations / entries his intention becomes questionable and hence the EO concludes that charge No. 4 at page No. 3 of the said charge sheet also is clearly proved.

( ix ) Neither the CSE nor the DR produced any documents /witness in their defence. The points raisedby the learned DR during cross examination do not appear to give much strength to the defence.

9.Therefore, on going through the aforesaid findings , it becomes very difficult to appreciate the arguments advanced for the first party to say that they are not based upon sufficient and legal evidence . As could be read from the findings, learned enquiry officer on each of the said four charges had discussed at length the oral and documentary evidence with reference to the charges of misconduct levelled against the first party. Learned enquiry . officer not only brought on record the evidence produced by the management but also discussed threadbare the various enclosures & annexures to the Investigation Report at Ex . MEX. 1 along with the oral testimony of the Investigation Officer MWI and the then bank manager MW2. From the reasonings given by the enquiry officer, it cannot be said that there was no sufficient and legal evidence or that there was no proper appreciation of the evidence by the enquiry officer . Merely, because the various borrowers and customers ofthe bank who had paid the amount into the hands of the first party which in turn were not deposited with their accounts with the bank by the first party were not examined during the course of enquiry, it cannot be said that the statement of MW1 , the Investigation Officer who infact recorded those statements during the course of investigation was an hearsay evidence or that it was not worth credence . As could be read from his statement and the Investigation Report he had not only recorded the statement of those borrowers but had cross checked them with the documents maintained by the bank in the usual course of his business. There was again no substance in the arguments advanced for the first party that the statement of the first party having been recorded on holiday wherein , he admitted the charges of misconduct levelled against him ought not have been acted is again devoid ofany substance . The above said statement has been recordedby the Investigation Officer during the course of Investigation and there is no legal obstacle not to record such a statement on a particular holiday. Therefore, when the first party himself admitted the charges of misconduct lovelled against him and as could be read from the aforesaid findings , he reimbursed the substantial part of the amount misappropriated by him , now he cannot be allowed to tum around and to contend that he did not make such a statement on that statement on that and he did not make good of the amount misappropriated by him. Infact in the aforesaid written arguments learned counsel for the first party did not challenged the fact that the first party had reimbursed the major portion of the amount misappropriated by him. Therefore, in the light of the above . it can be safely concluded that the aforesaid four charges of misconduct levelled against the first party have been proved by sufficient and legal evidence arid that the findings of the enquiry officer are also supported by valid and cogent reasonings based on the afores :id evidence . Therefore , bv

no stretch of imagination it can be said that the finding

suffered from perversity.

(x) Considering the above points the enquiry officer comes to a conclusion that all charges framed against Mr. K. Francis Pius , Clerk code No. 11585 vide charge sheet dated 29-3-1997 stand proved in the domestic enquiry conducted as above .

2952

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 / JYAISTIJA 24, 1930

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) )

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT, RANGALORE

Dated: Sth May, 2008

Present

Shri A. R. SIDDIQUI , PRESIDING OFFICER C. R. No. 26/2006

I PARTY

II PARTY

The Chairman -cum Shri B. Kumar,

Sri Ganesh' ,

Managing Director , Near S. P. Office, Bannanje ,

Udupi- 576101

Corporation Bank. HeadOffice, Karnataka State

10. Now, coming to the question of quantum of the punishment. Learned counsel for the first party submitted thatthe first party had rendered unblemished service right from the year 1982 , when he was served with a charge sheet in question and then was removed from service in the year 1998. Therefore , having regard to the fact that there has been no case serious misconduct or any kind of misconduct being committed by the first party in thiswhole tenure ofservice and that the charge sheet in question was the first in his period of service and so also taking into consideration the nature of the misconduct levelled against him , it appears to me that the ends ofjustice would have been'served, if the management has got rid of the services ofthe first party by just retiring him compulsorily from service there by enabling him to get his terminal benefits for the services he rendered with the management. Hence the following award:

AWARD

The dismissal order passed against the first party is hereby modified and replaced by the punishment of his retirement from services compulsorily with effect from the date ofthe impugned punishment order. No costs.

(Dictated to PA transcribed by her corrected and signed by me on 9th May, 2008 ) .

A. R. SIDDIQUI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 22 मई, 2008

का. आ. 1391 - औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार कॉरपोरेशन बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , बैंगलोर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 26/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 21-5-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/20/2005- आई आर ( बी- II ) ] ,

राजिन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 22nd May, 2008

S. O. 1391.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 26/2006) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum -Labour Court, Bangalore as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management ofCorporation Bank and their workman, received by the Central Government on 21-5-2008 .

[No. L - 12012/20/2005 - IR ( B - II ) ]

RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer

Mangalore, Karnataka State

AWARD

1. The Central Government by exercising the powers conferred by clause 1 ) of sub- section 2A of the Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 has referred this dispute vide order No. L- 12012/20/2005 - IR (B - II ) dared 26th May, 2005 for adjudication on the following Schedule:

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Corporation Bank in discharging the services of Shri B. Kumar w.e.f. 27-3-2004 as punishment is legal and justifled? li'not what relief is the workman entitled?"

2. A charge sheet dated 11-11-2003 came to be served upon the first party in the following terms ...

Charge Sheet

"That prior to your appointinent as Probationary Peon youwereworking as Temporary Peon at the Branch during the leave vacancy of other sub -staffs of the branch . That during the month of January 2003 you approached Srikrishna Industrial Cooperative Society. Ltd. , Old Post Office Road, Udupi for certain credit facilities . That with a fraudulent intention , to facilitate the said cooperative society to favourably consider your proposal , you made outand submitted the following:

(a) Forged pay slip for the month of August , 2001 showing a net salary payment of Rs . 3,982.70 .

(b) Forged authorization letter dated 16-1-2003 undertaking to remit a monthly sum ofRs . 850.0 to the Cooperative Society.

(c) Standing instruction form containing Forged singature of the officials of the Bank purported to be dated as 5-10-2001 .

Thatthe fabricated nay slip and other two documents were submitted by you to the said Cooperative Society, by 2953 [भाग ७- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

of Rs . 10,000/- and temporarily misappropriated bank's money.

affixing the bank's stamp and signing the same on behalf ofthe authorized official of the bank . That based on the said fabricated documents, the cooperative society on 22-1-2003 sanctioned and released a loan ofRs. 15,000 to you by taking the co-obligation of two other persons. That by your aforesaid acts you exposed the bank to risk and other consequences in the matter.

Your aforesaid acts and omissions on your part if proved, wouldtantamount to doing acts prejudicial to the interest of the bank gross misconduct under clause 5 (j ) of theMemorandum ofSettlement on Disciplinary Procedure dated 10-4-2002 applicable to you besides doing acts involvingmoral turpitude ."

3. The explanation offered by the first party to the charge sheet not being found satisfactory, a DE was ordered and on the completion of the enquiry proceedings , enquiry findings were submitted by the enquiry officer holding the first party guilty of the aforesaid charges and based on those findings and also furnishing opportunity of personal hearing to the first party, impugned punishment order discharging him from service was passed. His appeal against the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority before the Appellate Authority came to be dismissed resulting into the conciliation proceedings and then resulting into the present reference proceedings.

That since 26-02-2003 you were working at the branch attached to cash and clearing till you were placed under suspension on 06-09-2003 . That on several occasions , the Chief Manager of the branch received oral complaints from customers and local banks regarding shortages/differences in cash packets issued by the branch. That in order to clear the doubts and to ensure the correctness of the cash contained in the packets held in the double lock, on 21-8-2003 the entire cash held at the branch was recounted and during the course it was found that in two cash packets of Rs . 100/- denomination there was a shortage of Rs . 10 and 13 pieces respectively amount aggregatingto Rs . 2,300. That immediately the said cash shortage ofRs . 2,300 was reimbursed by the joint custodian on the same day.

That you were on leave on 21-08-2003 . That on 22-08-2003 when the Chief Manager enquired with you about the cash shortage noticed in the cash packets , you initially denied your involvement, but subsequently you accepted and agreed to reimburse the amount of Rs. 2; 300 on the salary day . That accordingly on 28-08-2003 you repaid the amount of Rs . 2,300 to the chief Manager who in turn returned the amount to the joint custodians . That your acceptance and reimbursement of the amount of Rs . 2,300 to the bank leads us to allege against you that with a fraudulent intention to derive pecuniary gain you had misappropriated the bank's money.

4.The first party, by way ofhis claim statement while narrating the allegations made in the charge sheet and what transpired during the course of investigation done by the Investigation Officer in the matter further referred to the enquiry proceedings and what transpired during the course ofenquiry proceedings . He, then contended that the enquiry officer wrongly relied upon the statement of the witnesses made during the course of investigation and therefore , he was denied an opportunity of cross examining those witnesses who were not examined during the course of enquiry. He contended that denial of the said opportunity amounts to violation of principles of natural justice and therefore, recording ofthe evidence by the enquiry officer itselfwas illegal contrary to law causing prejudice to the case of the first party . At Para 9 of the Claim Statement; the first partytook up the contention that during the course of enquiry on 5-2-2004 the enquiry officer had put him certain questions and it is on 4-3-2004 he submitted his report holding him guilty of the charges which report is illegal, perverse not based on evidence . He contended that the enquiry officer has not considered the written brief submitted by him . He contended that on the receipt of the enquiry report, the disciplinary authority ought to have issued notice on the findings ofthe enquiry officer to show cause as to why the same shall not be accepted . Under the Bipartite Settlement the first party was also entitled for notice on proposed penalty . Therefore , the procedure adopted by the Disciplinary Authority proposing the punishment ofdismissal by letter dated 9-3-2004 without giving him an opportunity to make comments on findings ofthe enquiry officer is illegal and contrary to law. In the result, findings are perverse and the impugned punishment order is illegal . He contended that the Disciplinary Authority initially based on the findings of the enquiry officer had punished him dismissing him from service and That on 05-09-2003 between 10.30 AM and 10.45 AM you requested and took from Smt . Vijayalakshmi R Rao , one of the cashiers of the branch , one tray containing two cash packets of currency notes . That while returning the cash to Smt. Vijaya Lakshmi R. Rao with a fraudulent intention you retained one cash packet of Rs.100/-. denomination amounting to Rs . 10,000 and returned other cash packet ofRs . 50. That immediately Chief Manager of the branch called you to his cabin and after thorough questioning, you admitted having retained the cash packet of Rs . 100 denomination amounting to Rs.10,000 . That out of the Rs . 10,000 you had remitted Rs . 2,000 to your Savings Bank Account No. 17237 maintained at the branch and the said amount was adjusted for passing of cheque received in clearing. That you returned an amount of Rs . 8000 to the Chief Manager and after some time you went out and brought the remaining amount ofRs . 2,000 and handed over the same to the Chief Manager, That thus with the fraudulent intention ofderiving undue pecuniary gain for yourselves, you removed the cash 2954

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[ PART I-SEC. 3 (ii ) ] inthe appeal filed by first party the punishment of dismissal was modified discharging him from service . He contended that he belongs to a weaker section of the society for the reasons best known to the superiors . Therefore , he requested this tribunal to pass an award with all consequential benefits by answering the reference in his favour.

having heard the learned counsels on the above said issue on 4-01-2007 it was answered in favour ofthe managemem recording a finding to the etlect that the DE conducted against the first party by the second party is fair andpropeт . Thereupon , I have heard the learned counsels for the respective parties on merits of the case and posted the malter this day for award .

8. Learned, counsel for the management , while. supporting the lindings of the enquiry officer as based upon sufficient and legal , oral and documentary evidence further submitted that the first party was still in probationary period when committed serious misconduct of misappropriation of the funds of the bank as well as other fraudulent acts and therefore , was legally and justly punished by the Disciplinary disinissing Lion trom service . However , the Appellate Authority took a lenient view discharging hím from service and therefore the first party deserves no tnore leniency or sympathene ew from this tribunal and his reference is liable to be rejected, Leamed counsel also took the court through the documentary as well as the oral evidence suggesting that the charges ofmisconduct against the first party, not only have been proved by evidence on record but also stand proved for the simple reason that the first party reimbursed and paid back the entire amount of misappropriation done by him . Therefore , by no stretch of imagination it can be said that findings suffered from perversity.

9. Whereas, the learned counsel for the first party argued that the investigation against the first party for the alleged misdeeds committed by hien had taken place after a longdelay on some complaint filed against him therefore, the evidenceby way of documents as well as oral produced during the course of enquiry was created for the purpose ofenquiryjust to victimize. He after contended that the evidence relied upon by the enquiry officer was not sufficient and legal to connect the first party with the guilt. He submitted that the first party being a member of weaker section of the society and working just as a Class IV official ought to have been given one more opportunity to reform himself, if at all the alleged misconduct was taken to he proved in the light of the evidence brought on record .

5. The management, apart from repeating the various allegations made in the charge sheet , at Paras 3 & 4 ofthe counter statement contended that the first party had joined its services as a probationary Peon оn 26-2-2003 at Udupí branch. He was working as a temporary peon and it is on account of vacancy occurred his services were contirmed as regular peon of the branch. It is during the course of his service , he committed serious fraudulent acts giving rise to the investigation into the matter and then giving rise to the aforesaid charge sheet issued against him . At Para 12 ofthe Counter Statement, the management contended that the explanation offered by the first party to the charge sheet issued to him was not found favour by the Disciplinary Authority, a domestic enquiry was conducted in the matter during which enquiry the first party was given sufficient opportunity to defend himself. He infact taking the assistance of one Shri K. Shivanna as his DR, attended and participated in the proceedings throughout. Thereupon the enquiry findings were submitted and it is based on those indings impugned punishinent order dismissing him from service was passed by the Disciplinary Authority aller affording him opportunity of personal hearing . In the appeal punishment of dismissal was replaced by the punishment of discharging him from service . Therefore , the management contended that fair and reasonable opportunity was given to the first party to defend himself in the enquiry and it is based on the findings of the enquiry officer, in turn supported by sufficient and legal evidence, the impugned punishment order was passed and therefore, it wasjust and legal not to be interferred at the hands ofthis tribunal . The management also contended that keeping in view the gravity of the misconduct committed by the first partyby no stretch of imagination it can be said that there was any illegality committed by the Disciplinary Authority . Therefore, the management requested this tribunal to reject the reference.

6. Keeping in view the respective contentions ofthe parties with regard to the validity and fairness or otherwise of the enquiry proceedings , this tribunal on 10-02-2006 framed the following preliminary issue :

10. On going through the record more partícularly, the findings of the enquiry officer and the oral and documentary evidence brought on record during the course ofenquiry I find substance in the arguments advanced for the management that the charges of misconduct as such have been proved against the first party beyond any shadow ofdoubt.

" Whether the DE conducted against the first party by the second party is fair and proper ?"

11. In the light of the finding recorded by this tribunat on the point of DE hulding , it to be fair and proper, the only two important questions which emerge for consideration were

(i ) Whether the findings suffered from perversity , and if not.

7. During the course of trial of the said issue , the management examined the enquiry officer as MWI and got marked in all 19 documents at EX.MI to M19 . Opportunity was given to the first party to lead evidence on his behalfbut was not availed by him . Thereupon , after 2955 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24 , 1930

(ii) The punishment imposed upon the first party by way ofdischarge from service is proportionate to the gravity ofthe misconduct committed by him.

been examined and that he was the best witness to unfold the truth . With regard to MW3 , the DR has stated that at the instance of the Chief Manager , he got the statements from the staff under threat and that the statement of the CSO was recorded under threat , force and coercion and as such the same cannot be taken into consideration . The DR has lastly contended that the CSO has been made a scapegoat.

12. As noted above , the perusal of the enquiry findings would make it abundantly clear that there was sufficient and legal oral as well as documentary evidence pressed into service on behalf of the management to substantiate the charges ofmisconduct levelled against the first party. As could be read from the findings , the learned enquiry officer based on the allegations made in the charge sheet raised three issues for the purpose of determination asunder

IssueNo.A:

The allegations under this issue are that the CSO with afraudulent intention to facilitate Srikrishna Industrial Co- operative Society Ltd. , to favourably consider his loan proposal , had forged the pay slip for the month of August 2001, forged authorization letter dated 16-01-2003 and signature of the branch official in the standing instruction form. No contentions have been urged by the DR in his written brief. During his questioning, the CSO has stated that he had availed the loan from the society, but denied that he had submitted any fabricated documents to that society.

Issue No. B:

The allegations under this issue are that on several occasions the Chief Manager ofUdupi branch had received complaints regarding shortage/difference in cash packets issued by the branch; that on 21-8-2002 after verifying the cash , there was a shortage of Rs . 2300 which was reimbursed on the same day by the joint custodians ; that on22-8-2003 when the Chief Manager enquired with the CSO, the CSO initially denied his involvement, but subsequently accepted his involvement and agreed to reimburse the amount on the salary day; that accordingly on 28-8-2003 , the CSO repaid Rs . 2300 to the Chief Manager which he returned to the joint custodians , The DR has not urged any contentions regarding this part of the charge .During his questioning the CSO has stated that he was not responsible for the shortage that the Chief Manager told that if he does not reimburse the matter will be reported to the police and press and that he will dismiss him from the bank and that he was forced to accept that he was responsible for the shortage.

Issue No. C:

The allegation under this issue is that with a fraudulent intention of deriving undue pecuniary gain for himself, the CSO temporarily misappropriated Rs . 10000. Ithas been contended by the DR that MWI does not know how many receipts and vico versa payments were made and that she has not given the details of other incidents of cash shortage. It has been further contended by the DR that the other joint custodian Shri Shekar Naika has not

13. He discussed in detail the evidence clinching each of the said issues referring to the oral restimony of the witness relevant and concerned as well as the documentary evidence brought on record . While discussingthe statement of MW3 , the Investigation Officer after taking into account the various documents namely, Ex. MI and Ex . M12 to 17, giving cogent reasons , recorded the findings on the first issue to the effect that the first party furnished fabricated documents to the society in question for availing loan and therefore was guilty of the said charge of fraudulent acts committed by him . Then, the learned enquiry officer took up the issue as to whether the first party misappropriated a sum of Rs. 2300 and subsequently on 28-08-2003 reimbursed the same. Here, again the learned enquiry officer dwelt at length upon the oral and documentary evidence more particularly, the oral testimony ofMW2 , the then , one of the joint custodian of the cash packets in question which came to be handled by the first party as a Peon for the purpose of making bundles and putting flaps and twining them . Before the enquiry officers he stood firm with the contents of Ex . M8 , the statement he made before the Investigation Officer. Therefore, having discussed the oral testimony of the said material witness in whose presence and in whose cabin the first party was handed over the aforesaid amount packets for the aforesaid purpose, the learned enquiry officer rightly came to the conclusion that the first party did misappropriate the aforesaid fund of Rs . 23001 in discharging his duties as a Peon. The 3rd issue against the first party raised by the enquiry officer was of misappropriating the fund of Rs.10,000 . While relying upon the oral testimony as well as the relevant document produced, the learned enquiry officer also took into consideration the statement of the first party himself made by way of confession admitting the fact of his misconduct committed by way of misappropriation of the funds to the tune of Rs . 10,000 in the manner indicated therein . The learned enquiry officer discussed at length the relevant statement of MWI who was the receipt Cashier when the amount in question came tobe found missing at the time of closing the balance. In no uncertain terns she stated that she closed the cash and taflied the cash received and she wrote statement at Ex . M24 putting the current account number on the reverse of the note marked as Ex . M23 as she had the practice of writing the account number on the reverse for the purpose ofidentification. The learned enquiry officer observed that [ PART II---SEC . 3 ( ii )!

2956

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

misconduct committed by the first party. However , keeping in view the fact that the first party was in to the service of the management bank as a temporary peon earlier to his being appointed as a regular peon and that there was un bad past record of his services and that appears to be the reason that he was appointed on permanent basis . Therefore , as submitted by the learned counsel for the first party, the first party deserves some sympathy and lenient view by giving him one more opportunity to serve the management so as to reloran himself in the days to cолье . Therefore, having regard to the fact that the first parly was just working as a Class - IV , coming from a weaker section of the society and was still in the probationary period, it appears to me that the ends ofjustice will be mel . if we give one more opportunity to reform himself , inducting him in the service of the management as a fresli candidate on probation to be deemed fit by the management . Hence the following award;

AWARD

The management is directed to reinstate the tiist party into its services as a Peon and as a fresh candidate putting him on fresh probation as it to be deems fit. The first party shall not be entitled to any benefits such as continuity ofservice, back wages etc. He shall be considered as a fresh candidate for all the purposes.

(Dictatedto PA transcribed by her corrected and signed by me on Sth May, 2008). A. R. SIDDIQUI , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 22 मई , 2008

का.आ. 1392.--औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार पंजान नेशनल बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों कं बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्यागिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 2 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 55/1994 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 21-5-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[ सं. एल-12012/47/94- आईआर ( बी -1 ); राजिन्द्र कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi . the 22nd May, 2008 MWI has clearly deposed that she has the practice of writing the account numbers for the purpose of identification and because of the said practice she is able to find out imunediately as to the shortage of cash tendered by M/s . Kalasanka Girija Silks . He also observed that MWI has given two cogent reasons as to why she had closed the Tellers Cash Book and in Ex . M25 she has written that the cash was tallied at 10.45 AM and it was found that Rs . 10,000 was short and the matter reportedto CM (Chief Manager ) immediately. The learned enquiry officer also took into account the fact that the first party remitted the cash of Rs . 10,000 with the Chief Manager along with payment made under Ex . M27 . He noted that MWI has been consistent in her deposition and narrated the incident in answer to question No. 27 during her cross examination , 'The enquiry officer also discussed the evidence ofMW2 , the officer of the said branch wherein she stated that the first party returned the bundle ofRs. 100 notes in the Chief Manager's cabin and that there was a shortage of 20 notes in the bundle which was also replaced by the first party after some time . She also stated that she verified the cash bundles regarding the shortage of Rs . 10,000 and that the first party reimbursed the shortage of cash of Rs . 10,000 by giving cash to the Chief Manager. The statement of MW4 was also referred in this context who spoke to the fact that amounts of Rs . 8,000 and Rs . 2,000 were given to him by the first party to be handed over to the cash officer and the cashier. In his cross examination he stated that Rs . 2000 was credited to the SB account ofthe first party and remaining Rs . 8000 was handed over to the cash officer . Therefore, relying upon the aforesaid oral as well as documentary evidence and the very fact ofreimbursement of the misappropriated amount bythe first party, in my opinion, the learned enquiry officer rightly recorded his finding on the above said issues as well holding the first party guilty ofthe said charge. In the result, as urgued for the management the enquiry findings by no stretch of imagination can be said to be sutiering from perversity. It is neither the case of ' no evidence ' nor the case of ' insufficient evidence ' nor it can be said to be a casewhere the enquiry officer did not properly scrutinize and analyse the oral and documentary evidence brought on record during the course of enquiry. Infact, during the course of argument the learned counsel for the first party did not raise or highlights any legal or factual infirmities so as to assail the findings ofthe enquiry officer. In the result, it is to be held that charges ofmisconduct levelled against the first party are very much proved by sufficient and legal evidence and therefore, the findings do not suffer from any perversity.

S. O. 1392.-In Pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Reference No. 55/1994) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Lobour Court No. 2 , New Delhi as shown in 1 ] annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Punjab National Bank and their workmen , which was received by the Centia Governinent on 21-5-2008 .

14. Now, coming to the question of proportionality of the impugned punishment order . Of course , having regard to the serious misconduct committed by the first party it is very difficult to dislodge the arguments advanced for the management that punishment of discharge from service is very much proportionate to the gravity of the

(No. L- 12012/47 /94-1R ( B - 11 ) ) RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer 2957 [ भाग II- खण्ड- 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14 , 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

ANNEXURE

effect. The harassment of the workhan reached an extent when even his salary for days worked from April 1991 to June 91 was not released.

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER: CENTRAL GOVERNMET INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT- IL, NEW DELHI

PRESIDING OFFICER: RN.RAI L.D. No. 55/1994

IN THE MATTEROF

Shri PawanGupta

S/o Shri Ram Kanwar Gupta

R/o 2 Upper Anand Parbat, NewDelhi -110005.

Versus

The Regional Manager,

That during August, 1991 the applicant was hospitalized in Sir Ganga Ram Hospital , Rajinder Nagar , New Delhi when the applicant had again applied for medical leave. Inspite of the fact that the application for medical leave was sent to the Branch Manager , Chawri Bazaar but, the Manager wrongly issued charge-sheet dated 9-7-1991 and made a futile attempt, on 20-8-91 to serve the same on the applicant when he was hospitalized in Sir Ganga Ram Hospital . As the applicant was medically unfit, therefore, the said charge-sheet was not delivered/accepted and it was therefore sent by Regd. A.D. under cover of letter dated 26-8-1991 at residence of the applicant on 29-8-1991 which was duly replied and the same was found satisfactory by the employer bank.

Punjab National Bank, F-14, Competent House, Connaught Place, New Delhi -110001 .

AWARD

TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No. L- 12012/47/ 94- IR(B - II ) dated 11-5-1994 has referred the following point for adjudication.

The point runs as hereunder :-

That the applicant submitted medical bills form Bali Nursing Home and Sir Ganga Ram Hospital for a sum of Rs. 6,556 vide his Regd A.D. letter dated 14-9-1991 which remained unpaid inspite of repeated reminders and personal requests made by the applicant . The employer bank also refused to sanction leave and also make payment to the applicant for the period when he remained on medical leave inspite of his Regd. A.D. letters dated 26-12-1991 and 24-2-1992.

"Whether the action of the management of Punjab National Bank , New Delhi in removing Shri Pawan KumarGupta , Clerk- cum -Typist from service byway of treating him as having voluntarily retired from service w.e.f. 16-7-92 is justified? If not, what relief is the said workman entitled to? " .

The workman applicant has filed claim statement . In the claim statement it has been stated that the applicant workmanjoined service with the New Bank of India (a Govt . of India Undertaking) on 27-11-78 as a Clerk- cum-Typist atits Branch Office situated at Shivaji Park, Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi . He served sincerely at various branches till he was wrongfully deemed to have voluntarily retired vide Bank's Memo dated 16-7-1992 , served on him on 1-8-92.

That the applicant reported for duty on 30-5-92 after availing medical leave up to 29-5-92 and submitted on 30-5-92 reply to notice dt. 27-4-92 and also medical fitness certificate dated 29-5-92 which were accepted by the bank- employer. That unfortunately the applicant workman suffered a sprain or soft tissue rupture of his right foot and was again unable to join duties from 13-6-92. He again submitted medical certificate and applied for leave. After recovering form his illness , when the applicant workman reported for duties on 1-8-92, he was not allowed tojoin duties and handed over a Memo dated 16-7-92 stating that he had been deemed to have voluntarily retired from service in terms ofClause 17 of the Vth Bipartite Settlement . The workman was shocked to know of this illegal act on the part ofthe management.

That the New Bank of India has been merged with Punjab National Bank (also a Govt . of India Undertaking) w.e.f. 5-9-1993 , during the pendency of the conciliation proceedings and the said Punjab National Bank is now the respondent in the above reference.

That vide his representation dated 3-8-92 the workman requested the Asstt . General Manager ofthe Bank for review of the action conveyed vide their Memo No. 1852dated 16-7-92. The review application was cursorily rejectedby the Dy. Chief(P) vide his memus dated 19-8-92 stating that there was no provision for review.

That the applicant fall ill in August 1990 and applied formedical leave, while the applicant was not keeping good health and had been applying för medical leaves supported by medical certificates in June - July 1991 the applicant workman was required to work in place oftwo employees,. thus putting much strain on him . However, he continued to discharge his duties faithfully and sincerely but it had an adverse effect on his health ,

That the action of the management in treating the workman as having voluntarily retired from service w.e.f. 16-7-92 is illegal and unjustified . The case ofthe workman is not covered under Clause 17 of the Vth Bipartite Settlement and the conditions specified therein for treating an employee as having voluntarily retired from service, are not satisfied. This is without prejudice to the workman's The applicant workman had been orally requesting the Branch manager against work of two clerks but to no

2071 GI/08-15 2958

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

contention that Vth Bipartite Settlement is not binding on the workman . No enquiry was held against the workman .

TheManagement has filed written statement. In the written statement it has been stated that the service conditions of bank employees are governed by various awards/bipartite settlements . Para 17 of the Vth Bipartite Settlement confers a prerogative on the bank that in case an employee absents from duties without leave application/ sanction of leave, he can be given 30 days notice after continuous absence of 90 days with instructions to report for duties failing which bank shall be reasonably satisfied that the concerned employee is not interested with continuing the bank on expiry of30 days time , he shall be deemed to have voluntarily retired. It is further provided that if an employee reports for duties consequent upon the above 30 days notice and , again absents within 30days of resuming the duties, he will be given another opportunity to report for duties after 30 days of absence and thereafter he shall be deemed to have voluntarily retired in case he fails to resume his duties again . In the instant case bank had taken action against Shri Pawan Gupta in terms of the above provisions and since he did not resume his duties within the notice period , he was treated to have voluntarily retired w.e.f. 16-7-92 which was conveyed to him .

That para - 19.16 ofthe Bipartite Settlement provides that if any communication/notice meant for an employee is sentby Registered Post Acknowledgement due to the last reported address of the concerned employee, it shall deem to be good service. In the instant case also all the communications were sent by Registered A.D. Post , therefore , these notices were served on the applicant.

The claim filed by the applicant has been submitted through Sh . S. K. Jain and Sh . R. K. Jain advocates , the authroised representative which is in utter violation Section 36 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 as no prior consent of the other party i.e. the Management and the Hon'ble Court has been taken .

Sh . Pawan Gupta the applicant was in the habit of absenting himself from duty from time to time even earlier to 22nd October , 1990. While working at BO Chawri Bazaar ofENBI he absented from his duty w.e.f. 22-10-90 and he reported for his duties only after he was issued a notice of 30 days by the bank on 15-12-90. After joining his duty on 14-1-91 in response to the aforesaid notice dt. 15-12-90 Sh -Gupta again absented himself from his duties form 5-2-91 and the bank issued the notice dated 8-2-91 advising him to report for duties . Sh -Gupta did not report for duties but submitted leave application for the period from 5-2-91 to 5-3-91 on medical grounds (the illness was stated to be backache) . He was advised vide Memorandum dated 5-3-91 that he should get himself examined from bank's approved Doctor and submit his medical certificate . Instead ofresponding towards this letter Sh.Gupta submitted another application dated 11-3-91

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] requesting for sanction of leave on medical ground stating his illness as lumbago spondilities. It was found proper in view ofthe facts, to depute bank's doctor to his residence and on his visit the Doctor did not find any symptoms of the said ailment , On receipt of the report of the doctor , the non-sanctioning of leave upto 13-4-91 was informed to Sh .Gupta and he was advised to report for duties. Sh . Gupta accordingly reported for duties on 20-4-91 . He once again repeated his conduct and absented from duties from 3-7-91 . He did not intimate the reasons of his absetice, he was issued notice dated 13-12-91 under the provisions of Vth Bipartite Settlement vide which he was informed among others that he has absented from duties without justification and keeping in view his past conduct, it is apparent that he has no intention to resume duty with the bank and the 30 days time was given to him to report for duties. He was also advised that if he fails to report for duties it shall be considered that he has voluntarily retired from Bank's service . However, Sh . Gupta reported for his duties only on 13th May , 1992 when another notice dated 27-4-92 was sent to him .

It was once again observed that from 13-6-92, Sh.Gupta again absented without submitting any information/justifying his absence. Therefore , in terms of the provisions of the Bipartite Settlement after the expiry of30 days i.e. on 16-7-92 he was informed that he stands voluntarily retired from bank's service.

Evidence ofboth the parties has been taken .

Heard argument from both the sides and perused the papers on the record .

It was submitted from the side of the workman that he suffered from jaundice and lumbago. He filed medical certificate of registered medical practioner . The management did not consider his medical certitificate . He was given the work of two clerks due to heavy work he fell ill . A charge-sheet was issued wrongly on 9-7-1991 when he was hospitalized in Sir Ganga Ram Hospital , No inquiry has been held . He has been illegally volountarily retired from service under 17 BPS.

Itwas submitted from the side of the management that the workman was absent for 353 days on loss of pay since 22nd October, 1990 thereafter he reported for duty after 30 days notice on 15-12-1990 . He again absented himself from duty from 5-2-1991 and bank issued him notice dated 8-2-1991 advising him to report for duty . He did not report for duty but submitted leave application for theperiod from 5-2-1991 to 5-3-1991 on medical grounds. The illness as stated was backache . He was advised vide 2959 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24 , 1930

From perusal of the records it is established that the workman has been unauthorisedly absent on 4-5 occasions . The bank's Doctor has reported that he was not suffering from any ailment. The workman was unauthorisedly absent for 353 days on loss of pay prior to 22ndOctober, 1990 and he absented on 4-5 occasions from 22-10-1990 to 16-07-1992.

In the circumstances the workman is not entitledto any back wages , Since the management has not served any notice for unauthorized absence of the workman from 13-06-1992, the order of volountary retirement is in breach ofClause 17 ofBPS on 16-07-1992 .The order ofvolountarily retired is here by set aside.'

memorandum, dated 5-3-1991 that he should get himself examined from bank's approved Doctor and submit his medical certificate. Mr. Gupta submitted another medical certificate dated 11-3-1991 requesting for sanction of leave on medical grounds stating his illness as spondilitis . The bank's Doctor examined him and he did not find any symptom ofbackache . On receipt ofthe report ofthe Doctor , the non-sanctioning of leave up to 13-4-1991 was informed to Sh.Gupta and he was advised to report for duty on 20- 4-1991 and he again absented himself from duty from30-7- 1991.Hewas issued notice dated 13-12-1991 under provisions ofclause 17th BPS and it was mentioned therein that it is apparent that he has no intention to resume duty with the bank and 30 days time was given to him .

The reference is replied thus ;-

The action of the management of Punjab National Bank, New Delhi in removing Shri Pawan Kumar Gupta, Clerk-cum-Typist from service by way of treating him as having voluntarily retired from service w.e.f. 16-7-92 is not justified.

Itwas alsowritten in the letter that ifhe fails to report fordutyitshall be considered that he has voluntarily retired from bank's service. He reported for duty on 13-5-1992 when another notice dated 27-4-1992 was sent to him. He again absented from 13-6-1992 without any information andjustifying his absence. He was volountarily retired on 16-7-1992.

The workman is entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service but without back wages . The management should reinstate the workman within two months from the date of the publication of the award.

Thus, it becomes quite obvious from perusal of the record that the workman has absented himself from duty for 353 days on loss ofpay up to 22nd October , 1990.

The award is given accordingly.

Date: 14-05-2008

That subsequent to the notice dated 27-4-1992, the workman reported for duty on 13-5-1992 and he worked up to12-6-1992.

R. N. RAI , PresidingOfficer

नई दिल्ली , 22 मई, 2008

In the instant case no 30 days notice under the provisions ofClause 17 BPS has been given to him after 12- 6-1992. It is admitted to the management that the workman worked up to 12-6-1992. No notice has been sent after 12-6- 1992. The workman has been voluntarily retired on notice dated27-4-1992, The workman has compeled with the notice dated27-4-1992 as he has resumed his work on 13-5-1992. No notice inMay or June has been sent to him .

का.आ. 1393.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार इंडस्ट्रीयल फाइनेन्स कॉरपोरेशन आफ इंडिया लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 11 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 141/1997 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 21-5-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/191-192-201-202/94-आई.आर ( बी-11 ) ]

राजिन्द्र कुमार, डेस्कअधिकारी Itappears that the workman was treated volountarily retired on notice dated 27-4-1992 whereas in compliance of that notice the workman has resumed work on 13-5-1992.

New Delhi , the 22ndMay,2008 The direction of notice dated 27-4-1992 has been complied with by the workman as he resumed duty on 23-5-1992

S. O. 1393.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Governmenthereby publishes the award (Reference No. 141/1997) , ofthe Central Governinent Industrial Tribunal- cum-Lobour Court No. Il, New Delhi as shown in the annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Industrial Finance Corporation of India Limited and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 21-5-2008.

[No. L- 12012/191-192-201-20294- IR (B- II) ]

RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer The management was duty bound to send another 30days notice for his absence from 13-06-1992 but without sending any notice, the workman has been voluntarily retired on 16-07-1992 on notice dated 27-04-1992 whichhe has complied with . As such 30 days notice under the provisions of clause 17 BPS has not been given to the workman. The statutory provisions of Clause 17 BPS has not been complied with by the management in right perspective, so the order of voluntary retirement by order dated16-07-1992 is, illegal , arbitrary and breach of the provisions ofClairse 17BPS.

2960

[PART 11- SRC. 3 ( ii ) | THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

ANNEXURE

his absence. The same is liable to be rejected on this ground also.

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER: CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT- IL, NEW DELHI

PRESIDINGOFFICER: R. N. RAI

L. D. No. 141/1997

IN THE MATTEROF

Shri Jagdish & Ors. ,

S/9. Sh. Charan Singh , Balmiki Mohalla , VillageBadli, Delhi - 110042 .

The claimants were never engaged as per the procedure prescribed for recruitment. Under the recruitinent rules ofthe management which was a statutory corporation and state within the meaning of Article 12, it had to call candidates through the Employment Exchange . Only people who were eligible and selected strictly on inerits out of all the available candidates were to be engaged . Since the claimants were not recruited through such a procedure, they cannot have any claim on the post . No relief can be granted to enable them to get it on which they never had a right in accordance with law.

Versus

The claimants are guilty of making false statements and concealing material facts . No relief can be or ought to be granted to them , in these circumstances and the claim is liable to be rejected on this ground also.

The Dy. General Manager ( Admn. ), Industrial Finance Corporation of India Limited, Bank of Baroda Building, 16, SansadMarg, New Delhi - 110001 .

Award

Without prejudice to the above preliminary objections which are without prejudice to each other, parawise reply is as under :

TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No. L- 12012/ 191- 192-201-202/ 94 - IR (B - II ) Central Government Dt . 12-09-1997 has referred the following point for adjudication..

The point runs as hereunder:-

The date from which they claim to have been employed in May, 1989 , is not legible. It is submitted that the claimants were working as casual sweepers on daily wages with the management from 1989 till May, 1993 . During this time they were only engaged for the days when they were required and they were not engaged for all the days in a month.

"Whether the action of the management of Industrial Finance Corporation of India Limited, New Delhi in terminating the services of S/Shri Jagdish , Ramji Lal , Dharambir and Sh . Suraj Prakash w.e.f. 01-06-1993 without following the provisions of Section 25 F of the ID Act, 1947 is legal and justified? If not ,to what relief the said workmen are entitled ."

That the workmen were engaged in the Head Office ofthe Industrial Finance Corporation of India as Sweeper since April/May, 1989.

During this period they have been paid their salary on 7th day of every month with daily paid workers . But instead of regularizing them , they have been turned out of job since 1-6-93 whereas they have been working for the last four years on the post of Sweeper .

The management filed written statement stating that there is no employer-employee relationship between the management and the claimants . The claimants left the services of the management on their own by joining M/ s . SelfEmployment Services Associates , w.e.f. 1-6-93 . They are not a " workkmen " within the meaning of Section 2(s) nor is the dispute an industrial dispute within the meaning ofSection 2 ( k) of the I.D.Act .

It is submitted that since the experiment of getting the premises cleaned through daily wages employees was not giving a satisfactory results , the Management was considering reverting back to the system of availing sweeping services through a contractor. It once again approached the contractor who had been rendering sweeping services prior to the year 1989. While negotiations were going on with the said contractor , the contractor wrote to the management vide its letter dated 26-5-1993 that they had engaged the claimants along with some other sweepers . The claimant had in fact rendered sweeping services through the said agency even prior to the year 1989. This fact has been deliberately concealed by them. However , on the basis of their understanding with M/s . Self Employment Services Associates and having agreed to join them, the claimants are deemed to have left the services of the management by their conduct. It is denied that the management refused them work from 1-6-1993 . Instead, they worked from 1-6-93 to 13-7-93 on the same premises , with the contractor . As already submitted that it is the claimants who themselves gave up jobby their conduct . It appears that they have been later instigated to file this clain against the management .

Theworkmen applicants have filed rejoinder. In the rejoinder theyhave reiterated the averments oftheir claim statement and have denied most of the paras of the written The contractor, M/s . Self Employment Services Associates, who took over the services of the claimants with effect from 1-6-1993 is a necessary and proper party, and the claim cannot be entertained or proceeded with in 2961 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 /ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

statement . The management has also denied most ofthe paras of the claim statement .

Evidence ofboth the parties has been taken.

Heard argument from both the sides and perused the papers on the record .

duties on all the days of the month except Sundays and holidays. They have worked froin 25 to 26 days also and 22 days also in various months . This shows that the workmenwere engaged on all the days ofthe month except of Sundays and holidays . These photocopy documents establishes the fact that the workmen worked for 240 days in every year oftheir employment .

From perusal of the pleading of the parties the following issues arise for determination -

1. Whether the workmen have completed 240 days continuous work?

2. Whether the workmen are entitled to reinstatement?

3. To what amount of back wages they are entitled?

The management witness has stated in his cross -examination that the workmen three in numbers used towork with the management. They worked on casual basis during the period of three years from 18-04-1989 to 01-06-1993 intermittently. The witness has further stated that he did not know if the worker used to work for the entire month and received payment of wages by way of salary at the end of the month.

ISSUE NO . 1

It was submitted from the side of the workmen that they were engaged in the year 1989 and they worked continuously up to May, 1993. Their services were terminated by the management without payment of retrenchment compensation and one months's pay in lieu ofnotice.

The witness,has further stated that it is not in his knowledge that the workmen have worked regularly for 240 days in each year during the said period. This witness has further admitted that sweeping work is a work of perennial nature and it is performed everyday. This witness has further admitted that they engaged M/s . Self Employment Services and instead the workman the cleaning workwas taken by the said contracting agency.

The contractor M/ s . Self Employment Services Associates took over the services of the workmen w.e.f. 1-6-1993 . They worked with him for one month.

The management witness has not denied that these workmen have not worked and they have not worked 240 days continuously.

From perusal of the documents it becomes quite obvious that the workmen were engaged from 1989 to 1993 and they have worked for 240 days in every year of their employment.

Thisissue isdecided accordingly.

ISSUE NO . 2

It was submitted from the side of the management that the contractor M/ s . Self Employment Services Associates is a necessary party . The claim suffers from non -joinder of necessary party. It was submitted that the applicants were never engaged as per the procedure prescribed for recruitment . The management is a statutory corporation. It is a State within the meaning ofArticle 12. Theseworkmen were not selected following the recruitment process . The workmen has not completed 240 days . There is no employer and employee relationship between the. management and the workmen .

It was submitted from the side of the bank that reinstatement is not the only relief in all the cases of illegal termination . Section 11 A ofthe ID Act, 1947 provides for payment of compensation also.

The workmen have annexed with the record WW1 /2, photocopy of the attendance sheets up to April , 1993 .

Itwas submitted from the side of the workman that compensation is payable in cases where an undertaking has become sick or it has been closed or it is in economic loss . Ithas not been established that the bank is in economic loss and it is a sick Industry.

Themanagement has made the endorsement " subject to checking . " These photocopies attendance sheets have not been denied by the management. It is on the letter head of the management and these sheets are of attendance register of the management . The workmen have filed photocopy of attendance sheets . The original is presumed to be in the possession of the management . The management has not produced the same . There is no endorsement (subject to checking) so the photocopy attendance sheets are admissible in evidence.

My attention was drawn by the Ld . Counsel ofthe workman to 2000 LLR523 State ofUP and Rajender Singh . The Hon'ble Apex Court ordered for reinstatement with full back wages as the services ofthe daily wager cleaner who worked for 4 years was dispensed with without following the procedure for retrenchment. In the instant case also no retrenchment compensation has been paid. This case law squarely covers the instant case.

It has been held in 1978 Lab IC 1668 that in case service of a workman is terminated illegally the normal rule is to reinstate hini with full back wages .

From perusal ofthese sheets it becomes quite obvious that the workmen worked almost from 22, 23 , 24, 25days every month. It is stablished fact that the workmen.were regularly employed by the management and they discharged 2962

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

My attention was further drawn to AIR 2002 SC 1313. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that daily wager even if serving for a short period should be reinstated.

temporary appointments cannot be the rule of public employment . At the time of making temporary appointments Articles 14, 16, 21 , 23 , 226 and 309 are infringed. There is no constitutional mandate that the government is at liberty to go on giving fixed term appointments for the entire tenure of service of an employee.

Itwas submitted from the side ofthe workman that in the instant case Sections 25 F, G of the ID Act are attracted. In section 25 of the ID Act it has been provided that if a workman has performed 240 days work and if the work is of continuous and regular nature he should be given pay in lieu of notice and retrenchment compensation.

It has been held by the Hon'hle Apex Court that there is no cessation of service in case provisions of section 25 F are not complied. In the instant case no compensation has been paid to the workman .

No such Article of the Constitution has been pointed out under which the Government or Public Sector units can continue incessantly to give temporary and fixed term appointments again and again . Since fixed term appointments and temporary appointments are not governedby any constitutional scheme , such discrimination will amount to vicious discretion . The Government of Public Sector unit will go on resorting to the method of pick and choose policy and give temporary and ad hoc appointments to their favorites and thus the principles of equality enshrined in the constitution will be given a go bye. Such is not the intent of the Hon'ble Apex Court . However, in this judgment the provisions . of the ID Act governing the services of the workman have not been declared un- constitutional , Reinstatement is the remedy provided in the ID Act fur breach of several provisions enumerated therein or for breach of service rules provided in various labour welfare legislations .

The Hon'ble Apex Court in 2006 ( 4 ) Scale has not annulled section 11 A of the ID Act and the legislature has authorized this Tribunal to set aside dismissal or discharge on its consideration and direct reinstatement. Thejudgment cited by the management is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case.

In case a workman has worked for 240 days in a year and the work is of continuous and regular nature he should be paid retrenchment compensation . In case retrenchment compensation is not paid section 25 F of the IDAct is attracted. There is no cessation of his services . He is deemed continued in service in the eye of law. In case there is breach ofsection 25 F the service is continued and reinstatement follows as a natural consequence . ID Act , 1947 has been enacted to safeguard the interest of the workmen belonging to poor segment of society . It appears that legislature wanted that such workmen should not be harassed un-necessarily so section 25 F , U , T and Clause 10 of Vth Schedule have been enacted . The objects and reasons of ID Act , 1947 show that the respondent management should not be permitted to indulge in any unfair labour practice . The workmen should not be engaged foryears and then they should be removed all of a sudden . There is provision of retrenchment compensation for his removal . Retrenchment compensation is for compensating him otherwise so that he can survive long interregnum of unemployment . In the instant case no retrenchment compensation has been paid.

Athree Judges bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court has held in 1993-11 - LW that termination of services affects the livelihood of not only of the employee but also ofthe dependents . So in case of illegal termination of service the workman should be reinstated.

It was submitted from the side of the management that the Hon'ble Apex Court in 2006 (4) Scale has putdown a complete ban on regularization and reinstatement . The Hon'ble Apex Court has held that employment can onlybe made on the basis of procedure established in that behalf envisagedby the Constitution . Equality of opportunity is the hallmark and the Constitution enshrines affirmative action to ensure that unequals are not treated equals . So public employment should be in terms of constitutional scheme.

Reinstatement should not be misconceived as regularization . By the order of reinstatement the status quo ante of the workman is restored. He is given back wages in order to compensate him for his illegal dis-engagement . This is a special remedy provided in ID Act and it has not been annulled and set aside by any judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court . The provisions of the ID Act are still constitutional and they are to be given effect too . In case the workman is reinstated with back wages the respondents have every right , after payment of back wages and reinstatement , to retrench hin validly following the principles of first come last go so that section 25. G and H of the ID Act are not violated . The management witness has admitted in his cross -examination that the work is of permanent nature. The work is being continued through contractors . It is settled law that the job of cleaning and sweeping cannot be taken from contractors .It is perennial nature ofjob It was further submitted that the Constitution Bench Judgment has afforded a right according to which the government is not precluded from making temporary appointments or engaging workers on daily wages . The Hon'ble Apex Court has not declared the provisions of ID Actun-constitutional . The Government has got no license to make always appointment of daily wagers and to continue them for life time. Fixed term tenure appointments and 2963 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( if) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

In the instant case the workmen have worked for four years. They have raised the dispute in time. The work is still existing . The management has not made any appointment in terms of any statutory rules. There is no delayin raising the dispute . The management is taking those work from the contractor's men which is absolutely illegal .

This issue isdecided accordingly.

ISSUE NO. 3

It was submitted by the management that payment of full back wages is not the natural consequenceence of the order of discharge or dismissal being set aside. It has been held in (2003 ) 6 SCC 141 that it is incumbent upon the labour court to decide the quantum of back wages.

and it has been provided in section 10(4) of the ID Act, "1947 that the contract labour should not be engaged for the work which is continuous and perennial in nature and of sufficient duration . In the instant case admittedly the work .is perennial in nature. It has been held in Uma Devi's case that thetemporary employees should be replaced by regularly selected employees . The management has acted in breach ofthisjudgment ofthe Hon'ble Apex Court. I find no force in the contention of the management that the workmen are not entitled to reinstatement as they have not been taken through proper selection . The management has not made any selection ofClass-D employees for the work ofsweeping andcleaning.After reinstatement the management may resort to process of recruitment procedure and consider the cases of these workmen in view ofthe provisions ofSections 25F, G&H ofthe I.D. Act, 1947.

Ithas been further held in this case that payment of backwages having discretionary element involved it is to be dealt with the facts and circumstances ofthe case . No definite formula can be evolved .

The management admittedly terminated the services ofthese workmen and entrusted the work of sweeping and cleaning to contractors . Contract Labour for such type of job is illegal . The work still exists , so the workmen are entitled to reinstatement ,

It has been further held in this case that payment of backwages in its entirety is the statutory sanction . In (2003) 4 SCC 27 the Hon'ble Apex Court held that in view of delay in raising the dispute and initiating the proceedings backwages need not be allowed . In the instant case there is no delay at least on the part of the workman in raising the dispute,

It was submitted from the side of the management that in (2007) 9 SCC 353 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that reinstatement with full back wagės should not be granted automatically only because it would be lawful to doso.Several factors should be considered just as statutory rules and delay in raising the dispute.

In 1978 Lab IC 1968- three Judges Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court held that payment of full back wages is the normal rule . In case services have been illegally terminated eitherby dismissal or discharge or retrenchment , in such circumstance the workman is entitled to full back wages except to the extent he was gainfully employed during the enforced idleness . In the instant case the workman was always ready to work but he was not permitted on account of invalid act of the employer .

In the instant case there is no delay. In bank casual labourers are engaged and regular status has been conferred several times. In case work is still exists , the workman should be given reinstatement . The respondents cannot retrench this workman and engage fresh hands. In that case they will commit unfair labour practice as has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in (1995) Supp . II SCR 842. It isnot proved by the management that no workman has been taken after retrenchment of this workman .

In 2005 IV AD SC 39-three Judges Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court held that reinstatement with full back wagesisjustified . In this case the workman has performed more than 240 days work and he has been retrenched without payment of compensation and pay in lieu ofnotice .

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case the workman is entitled to 25 % back wages .

The reference is replied thus :-

It has been held in 2008 Lab IC page 783 by the Hon'ble Apex Court that reinstatement does not mean confirmation , Reinstatement of daily wager would illegal . Direction given for his reinstatement being final such order would not necessarily entitle him to claim benefits of permanency.

The action of the management of Industrial Finance Corporation of India Limited, New Delhi in terminating the services of S/Shri Jagdish , Ramji Lal , Dharambir and Sh. Suraj Prakash w.e.f. 1-6-1993 without following the provisions of Section 25 F ofthe I.D. Act, 1947 is neither legal nor justified . The management should reinstate the workmen applicants along with 25% back wages within two months from the date of the publication of the award.

The award is given accordingly .

Date: 13-5-2008.

Inview ofthe judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court reinstatement does not imply confirmation/ absorption or making permanent . The management cannot disengage a workman and take another workman at his place as it would infringe the provisions of Sections 25 G & H of the I.D. Act, 1947. In the circumstances , management should reinstate this workman as casual labour. In case there is no job, the management should take action keeping in view Sections 25 G & H ofthe 1.D. Act , 1947.

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer 2964-

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ] नई दिल्ली , 22 मई , 2008

का.आ. 1394.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का. 14) की धारः 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार कलकत्ता टेलीफोन्स के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय कोलकात्ता के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 17/98 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-5-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं एल-40012/18/84-डी- II (बी ) ] सुरेन्द्र सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी

NewDelhi , the 22nd May, 2008

S.O. 1394. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 17/98) Central Goverrument Industrial Tribunal -cum - Labour Court, Kolkata as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Calcutta Telephones and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 22-5-2008.

[No. L-40012/18 /84-D- II(B) ] SURENDRA SINGH, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA

Reference No. 17 of1998

PARTIES : Employers in relation to the management of Calcutta Telephones , Calcutta AND Theirworkmen

Present: Mr. Justice C.P. Mishra, PresidingOfficer

Appearance:

On behalf of the Mr. T. Chowdhury , Advocate Management

Onbehalf ofthe Mrs. S.K. Sinha, Advocate: Workmen

Dated:9th May, 2008

Industry : Telephones .

AWARD

By Order No. L - 40012 ( 18 )/ 84 D - II ( B ) dated 13-5-1998 the Government of India, Ministry ofLabour in exercise of its powers under Section 10 ( 1 )( d) and (2A) referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:-

filed a joint statement of claims in this case. The case of the workmen in brief as it appears from the statement of claim is that they were all employed in the service of the Calcutta Telephones as casual employees . Harden Singh and Kamala Singh were appointed on 9th March , 1976 and Ist May, 1977 respectively by the Sub- Divisional Officer of Phones ( South Russa External ) and they worked continuouslywithout any break upto 31st December, 1977 . Shankar Prasad Singh worked from 1-3-1977 to 28-2-1979, whileHaradhan Das and Sisir Das worked from 1-3-1977 to 31-5-1978 without any break . All of them were terminated under the verbal order. Though all these workmen had put in uninterrupted continuous service of 240 days , they were neither paid nor offered any notice pay or retrenchment compensation as provided under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 , hereinafter to be referred to as the Act. Repeated request of the concerned workmen to the officers of the management to take them back in service were in vein as they were awaiting the decision of theHon'ble High Court in a similar case viz. Tapan Kumar Jana F's . General Manager , Calcutta Telephones . The Division Bench of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court was pleased to hold that the termination ofTapan Kumar Jana , a casual employee of Calcutta Telephones was illegal for non- compliance of the provisions of Section 25F of the Act and ordered reinstatement with full back wages . Management's Special Leave Application in the matter before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was also rejected on 16thFebruary, 1982. Thereafter , similarly placed workmen such as S/ Shri Ranjit Kumar Bhagat , Barun Kumar Bose , Pratul Chowdhury and Amal Chandra Paul were allowed to resume their duties with full back wages , but the request ofthe concerned workmen were ignored . Other two batches of28 and 18 similarly placed workmen were reinstated with full back wages after they raised industrial disputes over their illegal termination . The concerned workmen made written representation to the General Manager with a request for their reinstaternent with back wages without any effect . Thereafter the concerned workmen and also their union made representations to the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central ) for his Intervention in the matter . Conciliation proceedings were held, but it ended in failure. The Secretary to the Government of India , Ministry of Labour,however , decided not to refer the matter for adjudication . The workmen thereafter moved the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in a writ petition being C.O. No. 14919(W) of 1985 and the Hon'ble High Court in its order dated 20-2-1998 directed the Central Government to reconsider the issue and hence the present reference has been made to this tribunal for adjudication of the dispute under reference . It is accordingly prayed that the action of the management in terminating the services of the concerned workmen be held to be illegal and unjustified and the concerned workmen be held to be entitled for reinstatement in service with full back wages and all consequential benefits .

"Whether the action of the management of Calcutta Telephones , Telephone Bhawan , Calcutta in terminating the services of S/ Sh. Shankar Prasad Singh , Hardeo Singh, Haradhan Das , Sisir Kumar Das and Kamala Singh is legal and justified? If not to what reliefthe workmen are entitled to?"

2. This reference has been made at the instance of the abovementioned 5 concerned workmen . They have

3. The case of the management in its written statement is that the onus is on the workmen to prove that they were appointed and terminated on the respective dates as alleged by them in their statement of claims . They are also to prove that they worked continuously and uninterruptedly during the period in question , It is stated [ भाग 11-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

that since all records , e.g. , paid vouchers upto December , 1993 pertaining to the office of Area Manager (South), Calcutta . Telephones which inter alia includes S.D.O. Phones (South), Russa External where Hardeo Singh and Kamala Singh were alleged to have worked on and from 9-3-1976 to 31-12-1977 and 1-5-1977 to 31-12-1977 respectively were destroyed. Nothing could be ascertained as such by the management for the alleged period of working by perusing the documents/ records regarding their engagement and continuity of service for the said period. Similarly, since all records prior to 1-4-1991 pertaining to Cash Section ofSr. A.O. (Cash) , HQ, Calcutta Telephones which also include Assistant Engineer -in-Charge, Retail Telecom Store Depot. , Calcutta where Shankar Prasad Singh, Haradhan Das and Sisir Das alleged to have worked on and from 1-3-1977 to 28-2-1979, 1-3-1977 to31-5-1978 and 1-3-1977 to 31-5-1978 were destroyed and as such nothing could be ascertained by the management of such alleged period of working of the concemed workmen..Such destruction of records is stated to be under sanction and authority in terms of the provisions contained in page 96 ofPosts and Telegraphs Financial Hand Book, Volume III Part I which interalia provides the maximum stiputated period for preservation of accounts records as 5 years and the management , has relied on the departmental note- sheets for such destruction ofrecords . It is denied that the concemed workmen ever requested the management for their reinstatement. It is stated that the reference is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed for misjoinder of parties. It is further stated that the workmen are not entitled to full back wages for having failed to raise the dispute in time for their alleged termination .

4. A rejoinder is filed on behalf of the workmen denying the claims and contentions of the management in its written statement and also reiterating their own claims and contentions as made in their statement of claims . It is also stated that the allegations made in the written statement of the management is misconceived and untenable in law and fact.

5. Both the partis have exhibited certain documents in this case . The exhibits on behalfofthe workmen are Ext. W- 1 is a certificate issued by the Assistant Engineer Incharge, Retail Telecom Store Depot to Shankar Prasad Singh one of the concerned wrokmen , Ext . W-2 is a carbon copyofthe letter dated 19-5-1983 addressed to the General Manager of Calcutta Telephones by seven persons including the five concerned workmen . Ext. W-3 is carbon copy ofa letter dated 14-6-1983 addressed to the Regional Labour Commissioner ( Central ) , Kolkata by the seven persons including the five concerned workmen. Ext. W-4 is also a carbon copy of a letter dated 2-4-1984 addressed to the Regional Labour Commissioner ( Central) , Kolkata by theDivisional Branch Secretary Ex. W-5 is a certificate issued to Sisir Kumar Das one of the concerned workmen by the Assistant Engineer In- Charge, Circle stores Depot, Calcutta Telephones . Ext . W- 6 is another certificate issõed to Haradhan Das one of the concerned another workman issued by the Assistant Engineer in - charge , Circle Store Depot , Calcutta Telephones .

2071 GI08-16

2965

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

On the other hand exhibits on behalf of the management are as follows . Ext . M- 1 is Appendix -3 the list showing periods of preservation of account records of (a) Divisional Telecom District and Stores and Factories Accounts Offices and (b ) Stores Branch and (c) Telecom, Factoties . Exts . M - 2 to M- 4 are the note sheets of the management showing destruction of records .

6. All the five concerned workmen have been examined on behalf of the workmen in support of their case . WW-1 , Shankar Prasad Singh has stated in his evidence that he used to work in the Calcutta Telephones at 10 , Girish Chandra Bose Telephone Exchange , a telephone stores from 1-3-1977 to 28-2-1979 continuously and he was given a certificate for the same by Shri R.N. Mallick, Engineer . On 1-3-1979, however, he was told by the said Shri Mallick that he was no more required . Hedid not get any compensation for his retrenchment . He approached said Engineer for restoration of his service, but he was refused . He named the other concerned workmen who were removed from service along with him . All of them filed representation on 19-5-1983 before the management, but he was told by the authorities that there was a case going on in this regard and after case is decided, outcasewould be considered. That case related to workers like him where the workers got the order in their favour . Thereafter, a representation was made to the management but no reply was received . There after the concerned workmen and also the union on their behalf made representation before the conciliation officer and conciliation proceeding was initiated which ended in fajlure butthe Central Government refused to make a reference 10 the Tribunal for adjudication . Then the concerned workmen filed awrit petition before the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court and as per direction ofthe Hon'ble High Court the present reference has been made . The witness has stated that after his retrenchment from Calcutta Telephones he had worked anywhere . He has prayed for restoration of his service with due pay. In cross- examination the witness has stated that he had worked under Shri R.N. Mallick and he granted the certificate. He denied that Shri Mallick granted him the service as per his telling. He, however, has not been able tosaywhat iswritten in Ext. W -2 as it is in English. He also denied that he had not worked continuously during the period from 1-3-1977 to 28-2-1979, He has stated that Shri P.L. Bhattacharjee was the Supervisor under whom he worked and the Engineer was the overall incharge of the Stores . He has further stated that he works as agricultural labour and he did not make any attempt to procure job in any other department or anywhere after his termination from the Calcutta Telephones .

WW-2, Sisir Kumar Das has stated in his evidence that he was working in the Stares ofCalcutta Telephones at10, Girish Chandra Bose Road, Kolkata- 14from 01-03-1977 to31-05-1978 continuously and uninterruptedly. He was appointed by the said Shri Mallick , Assistant Engineerwho handedover the certificate , Ext . W- 5. He was not given any compensation at the time of his retrenchment . He used to be paid monthly on the basis of muster roll and his attendance used to be marked . He had made representation after termination of his service . He also named the other concerned workmen who were 2966

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008 / JYAJSTHA 24, 1930

removed like him. At that time a case was filed before the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court and the management told them to wait till the disposal of that case. He has prayed for my reinstatement with due benefits . In cross- examination the witness has stated that he used to take out materials from the godown and handover to the persons concerned and he used to work under the direction ofthe supervisor , Shri Prasanta Lal Bhattacharjee . Hehas identified the signatures in Ext. W -5 which he has produced in support of his working in the Calcutta Telephones and has stated the photograph was attested by himself. He , however, has not been able to say what is written in Ext . W-5 or who typed it. He has denied that he never received payment after signing muster roli and he received the payment on signing the ACG - 17 vouchers . He further stated that his attendance used to be marked by the supervisor, P.L. Bhattacharjee.

WW-3 , Haradhan Das has stated in his evidence that he worked in the Calcutta Telephones at 10 , Girish Chandra Bose Road for 14 months continuously since 01-03-1977 and he got a certificate, Ext . W-6 issued by Shri R.N. Mallick, Assistant Engineer in support of the same . Said Shri Mallick removed him but was not paid any compensation at the time of retrenchment . Altogether 5 persons were removed along with him and he named the other concerned workmen in this regard , but no reason was assigned for the same. He had moved the Hon'ble High Court in this regard but the said petition has been dismissed. He has prayed for his reinstatement in service and back wages . In cross-examination the witness has stated that at 10, Girish Chandra Bose Road there is a store ofCalcutta Telephones and he was removed from service on 31-05-1978 . He has also stated that he filed a petition before the Hon'ble High Court but there was delay in filing the same because he was under some hope on account of assurance given to him . He has further stated that his duty was to take out the materials from the stores and handover the same to the persons and he used to do the same as per direction ofShri R.N. Mallick and the Junior Engineer, Shri Harasit Mukherjee . He was all along working in the stores during the tenure of his work. He has further stated that he is an illiterate person and does not know things , but he has denied that he had never worked continuously.

WW-4, Hardeo Singh has stated in his evidence that heused to work in Exchange No. 46 of Calcutta Telephones as aMazdoor and he got and identity card in support of the same, which is marked ' X ' for identification. His work used tobe allocated by the Engineer, Shri H.R. Roy and he had worked in all for one year and 10 months regularly excepting Sundays . In cross -examination the witness has not been able to give his date of birth , full name of Shri H.R. Roy or his designation. He has , however, denied that he was 50 years old on the date of deposition . He has also denied all other suggestions put to him in this regard .

WW-5, Kamala Singh has also deposed in the same line of WW-4 and stated that he used to work in Calcutta Telephones at Exchange No. 46 as a Mazdoor regularly and he got an identity card for proving the same, which is marked ' X- 1 ' for identification , He was removed from work without any retrenchment compensation . According to him

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] one Mr. Saha used to allot work to him who also gave him the indentity card. He has prayed for his reinstatement it service with back wages . In cross- examination he has stated that he was born after 1950 and has denied that he had not worked continuously in the Calcutta Telephones and that he is not entitled to any relief as prayed for.

7. On the other hand, two witnesses have been examined on behalf of the management . MW - I , S.K. Burman is the Chief Accounts Officer (Budget ). In 1993 he wasAccounts Officer(Cass ) in the year 1993. He has stated that ACG - 17, BT-41 and ACE -2 are different types of payment vouchers and the period of preservation of these is3 years as laid down in Part - 1 of Financial Handbook , Vol . - III . He has proved the documents regarding destruction of the vouchers for the period prior to 01-04-1991 . In cross - examination he has stated that payments to daily rated workers were made through Muster Roll and in the Muster Roll both attendance and payments are recorded , but the same was also destroyed . He, however, admitted that if some case was pending , such documents was tobe treated as important . It is also stated by him that he cannot produce the list of destroyed documents . He has no knowledge about the records maintained in the Exchange Offices.

MW- 2 , Abhijit Nath is the Assistant Accounts Officer (Service Record & Estimate ) in the office of the Area Manager (South ) . In 1997-1998 he was posted there asJunior Accounts Officer ( Cash) . He has stated that he used to receive payment vouchers and those vouchers wereACG- 17 , BT -41 and ACE-2 Accounts as well as Muster Roll payment vouchers . Under Rules Muster Roll is preserved for five years and other papers are retained for three years . He has proved the note sheet, marked Ext. M- 4 relating to destruction of vouchers and stated that by that order all vouchers upto December , 1993 were destroyed . In cross - examination the witness has stated that in Muster Roll details of appointment, working and payment of casual labourers are noted . He, however , does not know if any case relating to claim for regularization of casual labourers was pending before the management or before the Hon'ble High Court at the time of destruction of records . He has also stated that the case matters are looked afterby the legal cell of the Calcutta Telephones , but he did not receive any intimation from the Legal Cell for preservation of records relating to case of any casual labourer. Hehowever has agreed that if some case is pending then the document isto be preserved till the disposal of the case . He has further stated that he had no knowledge that any case was pending before the Arca Manager (South ) regarding any casual labourers ' claim for regularization . According to him he had informed all the departments that such documents were going to be destroyed.

8. As per facts stated above on the either side it is evident that the present reference relates to the claim of the five workmen whose services were alleged to have been terminated by the management under the verbal order though they had put in continuous service of more than 240 days in a year , but they were neither paid nor offered notice or notice pay or paid any amount of retrenchment compensation as provided under Section 25F of the Act.

2967 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

held to be legally maintainable and proper as submittedby theworkmen in this regard.Also the law of limitation is not so applicable to the claim of the workman made through the reference under the Act for its adjudication on the ground ofdelay if otherwise it is so admissibe to be allowed inhis favour.

It has been submitted on their behalf that they made represantion to the management to take them back in service, but the officers of the management asked them to wait till the decision of the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta in similar case of another workman viz. Tapan Kumar Jana v. General Manager, Calcutta Telelphones which was also so decided in favour of the workman and the claim ofthe management had been rejected even after contest upto theHon'ble Supreme Court on 16-02-1982 . On the basis of that decision the other workmen , namely , Ranjit Kumar Bhagat and others were thus allowed to resume their duties with full back wages but the request of these concerned workmen were ignored and so they had made a representation to the Government to refer their dispute whichwas however not so referred and therefore they had moved further to the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta vide Writ Petition No. 14919 (W) of 1985 and thus the matter has been referred to this Tribunat for adjudication oftheir claim in this regard. The aforesaid facts so stated on behalf ofthe workmen are not challenged or have been denied by the management for the same in this connection , but they have only challenged their claim on the ground of its long delay and also about the maintainability of this joint reference of five workmen together about their individual dispute as provisions of Section 2A of the Act since different dates of their termination of services are alleged by them in this regard.

10. As regards the merit of the case is concerned, it is evident that accordingto the workmen as statedby them on oath that theybath that they had put an uninterrupted continuous service ofmore than 240 days for different period as stated by them in paragraphs 2 and 4 of the written statement. Their oral evidence consist of Shankar Prasad Singh , WW- 1, Sisir Kumar Das , WW-2 , Haradhan Das , WW-3, Hardeo Singh, WW -4 and Kamala Singh , WW -5- and they have stated in so many words about the specific period of theirwork and certificates issued to them by the concerned officer Shri R. N. Mallick who had signed it vide Exts. W-1 , W-5 and W-6 and the certificates marked 'X ' and ' X- 1 ' for identification. All of them have been cross-examined by the management who did not give any such evidence to rebut it so as to show the authenticity of the aforesaid cetificates to be false or not so genuine . The concerned officer Shri R. N. Mallick who had given the certificate to them was cited as a witness by the management but he was not produced to rebut the case of the workmen if thosewere not so genuine. There is no other documentary evidence produced or even referred to in the written statement filed by the management to rebut the aforesaid positive proof and evidence led by the workmen in this caseto show the period of work which was done by them , i.e., for more than 240 days in a year preceding the date of their termination ofservices . The statements as given by the witnesses who have been examinedby the management only go to show that the documents about payment of wages made to the concerned workmen are not available to be filed since those have been destroyed as the period of its preservation has been only for three years or so and there is no document as such available with them to be filed viz. muster roll , attendance sheet etc. which all have been destroyed accordingto them. The statement given by Abhijit Nath , MW-2 working in the Accounts Section has stated that ACG 17 vouchers as well as muster roll havebeen destroyed as per note sheet , Ext . M -4, showing that the vouchers upto December, 1993 were destroyed and as such not available to be filed by the management in this connection. It is also stated by him that he did not receive any intimation from the legal teli regarding pendency of any case of any labour in order to preserve thedocuments till the disposal ofthe case for this purpose. The aforesaid facts thus clearly go to show that the documents which could have shown the claim of the workmen to be otherwise about the period they have so worked in the Calcutta Telephone : have not been produced by the management. The case of the workmen, is thus taken to be correct as so stated by them in this regard. The certificates , Exts . W- 1 , W - S and W-6 and the certificates marked ' X'and X- 1 ' for identification filed on behalfofthe workmen as such showing the period of their work issued to them by the concerned officer Mr. R. N. Mallick for the respective dates as referred to above ar Correct and is a positive evidence of them to show that they continuously had worked for more than 240 days in a 9. On the persual of the said facts about the appointment of the concerned workmen in Calcutta Telephones to be its casual employees, it is evident that the workmen Hardeo Singh and Kamala Singh who were alleged to have been appointed on 09-03-1976 and 01-05-1977 respectively and said to have worked upto 31st December, 1977. It is now admitted on their behalf that by this time they must have reached the age of superannuation and retired as such and so a relief for reinstatement in their case is not called for and the learned counsel for the workmen has therefore submitted that the Tribunal can very well mould the relief in their favour as it is so availableto the concerned workmen after havingheld the order oftermination of their services to be illegal, void and inoperative by considering the said facts and circumstances of the case . Considering the aforesaid facts on record, it is evident that the plea taken by the management so far as the bar of limitation and maintainability ofthe reference challenged by it is not open. tothem as theworkmen have all along been agitating their rights and claims from the very beginning when the alleged dateoftheir termination oftheir services took place , i.e. , in the years 1978 and 1979 in this regard. It is also not in dispute and challenged by the management that the cases ofTapan Kumar Jana and Ranjit Kumar Bhagat and others similar in nature were also there for challenging the termination of their services but they were taken back and reinstated as such with full back wages . The representation was made by the workmen as well and on refusal the matter was referred to this Tribunal for its adjudication after the workmen had moved the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta for it. Thus the plea raised on behalf of the management challenging the reference on the ground of its maintaina- bility of bar of limitation or delay in the above. circumstances is devoid of any force and the reference is 2968

[PART II SEC. 3 (ii ) | THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

year before the alleged termination of their services . It further goes to prove in a positive way that they were neither paid nor offered any notice or notice pay or retrenchment compensation before termination of their services as required under Section 25F ofthe Act and thus theorder oftermination of their services cannot be saidto bejustified, legal or proper for want of compliance ofthe provisions of Section 25F of the act in this regard.

whether after proper advertisement of the vacancy or inviting application from the employment Exchange , nature of appointment , namely , whether ad hoc, short term, daily wage, temporay or permanent in character, any special qualification required for the job and the like shouldbe weighed and balanced in taking a decision regarding award ofback wages . One of the intoportant factors , which has to be taken into consideration is the length of service , which the workmen had rendered with the employer. If the workman has rendered a considerable period f service and his services are worngfully terminated. he may be awarded full or partial back wages keeping in view the fact that at his age and the qualitication possessed by him he may not be in a position to get another employment . However, where the total length ofservice rendered by a workman is very small , the award ofback wages for the complete period, i.e. , from the date of termination tilt the date of the award , which o า เร experience shows is often quite large , wouldbe inappropriate . Another important factor, which requires 10 be taken into cosideration is the nature of employmem . A regular service ofpermanent character cannot be compared to short or intermittent daily wage employment though it maybe for 240 days in a calendar year."

In another decision viz . Allahabad Jal Sansthan v . Daya Shankar Rai , (2005 ) 5 SCC 124: 2005 AIR SCW 2646 the Hon'ble Apex Court has further observed that:

11. It is well settled that Industrial Tribunal has jurisdication to direct reinstatement in case of wrongful termination as normal rule . However , there are exceptions to this rule and these exceptions have been recognized in various judgments of the Apex Court in this regard. In the case ofHaryana Tourism Corpn . Ltd. V. Fakir Chand & Ors., AIR 2003 SC4465: 2003 (8) SCC248 : 2004 -ILLJ - 256, the Hon'ble Supreme Court directed payment of compensation ofRs . 70,000/- , instead of reinstatement with 25% back wages taking into consideration factors like ( a) workerswere daily wagers , (b) workers were not recruited through employment exchange or regular mode of selection , (c) services ofthe workers were terminated long back , and (d) considering nature of work, the workers must have done similar work at least intermittently . In number of matters Hon'ble High Courts have also examined the same issue and it has repeatedly held that where a long period has lapsed since the date of termination , compensation should be paid in lieu of reinstatement and back wages. Reference in this regard may be made to the judgments in the cases of Murari Lal Sharma v . Nehru Yuva Kendra Sangathan , 2002-11 - LLJ401 ( Del ) and K. H. Pandhi v. PresidingOfficer, Addl . Labour Court & Anr. , 2004-11 - LLJ- 877 (Del) and Pal Singh v. NTPC Ltd. 2002 - IV - LLJ ( Suppl )- 1482(NOC): 2002(96) DLT877.

"We have referred to certain decisions of this Court to highlight that earlier in the event of an order of dismissal being set aside , reinstatement with full back - wages was the usual result . But now with the passage of time, in las come to be realized that industry is being compelled to pay the workman for a period during which he apparently contributed little or nothing at all, for a period that was spent unproductively , while the workman is being compelled to go back to a situation which prevailed many years ago when he was dismissed . It is necessary for us to develop a pragmatic approach to problems dogging industrial relations , However , no just solution can be offered but the golden mean may be arrived at. " 12. In the present case it is evident that two ofthe concerned workmen have already reached the age of superannuation and as such retired long ago by this time . It is further evident that now more than 25 years have elapsed since the dates of termination of their services in the year 1978 or 1979 or so in this case and they have not rendered any service at all due to all these and so looking at the facts and circumstances ofthe case instead ofgranting relief for their reinstatement with full back wages it appears tobe just and proper , keeping number of factors in mind viz. that an industry may not be compelled to pay to the workman for the period during which he apparently contributed a little or nothing at all and also as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Haryana Roadways v. Rudhan Singh (2205 AIR SCW 4634 ) that the workman who had worked for a short period, i.e. , less then a year although the tennination of his service was found to have been made in violation of Section 25F of the Act a reasonable amount of compensation may be awarded. The observation of the Hon'ble Apex Court for this are clear enough to lay down the guidelines for this purpose saying that

13. Inview ofthe above, the relief for reinstatement with back wages is not fit to be granted in favour of the concerned workmen even if the order of termination of their services is held to be legally not justified or proper i.e. being not in accordance with the provisions of Section 25F of the Act , but they can only be entitled to got a relief for compensation . The workinen as such are entitled to gel the amount of compensation looking at nature and period oftheir work instead of granting a relief of reinstatement to them with back wages. i.c. , a lump sum compensation ot Rs. 25,000/= ( Rupees twenty- five thousand ) be awarded to each or the concerned workman in the given facts and circumstances of the case of this nature . The afore mentioned amount shall be paid to the concerned workmen by the management within a period of a month from the date of this Award becomes enforceable .

The reference is answered accordingly.

C. P. MISHRA, Presiding Officer "There is no rule of thumb that in every case where the Industrial Tribunal gives a finding that the termination ofservicewas in violation of Section 25- F of the Act, entire backwages should be awarded. A host of factors like the manner and method of selection and appointment , i.e. , Dated, Kolkata, the 9th May, 2008 2969

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) )

नई दिल्ली, 22 मई , 2008

का. आ. 1395,-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार आर्केलॉजिकल सर्वे ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबंद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं.- II , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 82/97 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-5-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42011 /9/96- आई आर ( डी यू) ] सुरेन्द्र सिंह, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 22nd May, 2008 S. O. 1395. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 82/97) Central Govemment Industrial Tribunal -cum - Labour Court, No. II , New Delhi as shown in the Annxure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Archaeological Survey of India and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 22-5-2008,

[No. L-42011/9/96- IR (DU) ] SURENDRA SINGH , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALCUM- LABOURCOURT-IL, NEW DELHI

J.D. No. 82/1997 PRESIDING OFFICER : R. N.RAI .

INTHE MATTEROF:

Shri Putti Lal & others, C/o The President, Janvadi General Kaigar Mazdoor Union , Room No. 95, Barracks No. 1/10, Jamnagar House , Shahjahan Road, New Delhi 110011 .

Versus

The Director General , Archaeological Survey of India, Janpath , New Delhi

AWARD

TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No. L-42011 /9 / 96- IR(DU) Central Government Dated 24-06-1997 has referred the following point for adjudication .

The point runs as hereunder :-

"Whether the action of the management of Archaeological Survey of India in not granting permanent status/ regularization to S/ Shri Putti Lal , Babu Lal , Satya Dev, Hare Ram , Ravinder , Smt . Phool Kali and Khedan Prasad is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled for. " The workman applicant has filed claim statement . In the claim statement it has been stated that S / Shri Putti Lal , Babu Lal, Satya Dev, Hare Ram, Ravinder, Phool Kali, Khedan Prasad were engaged as daily rated workmen on the job of permanent nature as Garden Attendants.on different dates .

That the full particulars of the workmen are given as under:

S. No. Name

Father Husband's Name.

Yearof Engage- ment

1982

Shukru

1. Putti Lal

1986

Nanaku

2. Babu Lal

1988 3. Satya Dev Alagu

RamNath

1989 4. Hare Ram

1989

Babu Lal

5. Ravinder

1990

Mewa Lal

6. Phool Kali

1990

Mohan Shah

7. Khedan Prasad

That the workmen had been provided 6 days muster roll and junior workmen to them had been provided monthly muster roll to $/Shri Braham Pal , Gyanender, Rame , Gaje Rak, Mahesh , Sanjay , Karamveer, Udai Singh, Shankar , Raj Pal andBalwant w.e.f. 23-7-95 but the above workmen were discriminated in providing them monthly muster roll.

That the management also regularized the services of most junior persons S/Shri Dalbir Singh and Suresh Prasadwhowere recruited only in the year 1992 and then given temporary status in the year 1994 w.e.f. 1-9-93 in thepay scale ofRs . 750-940, which is against the deterrant interests of the workmen concerned with this dispute .

That the management given artificial breaks to the workmen from time to time with a view to exploit the poor workmen and new hands were recruited and junior persons to themwere also retained in service and were given time scale of Rs . 750-940 .

That the management is executing, performing the maintenance of buildings and operations , gardening, monuments, plantations etc. of Archaeological Survey of India and the same establishment are covered under the definition of2 (g) ofPayment ofWages Act and also under Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and being the workmen under the above Act, the above workmen are covered under Industrial Employment (Standing Orders ) Act, 1946.

That the workmen under the said establishment become permanent after completion of three months (90 days) of continuous service in the same industrial establishment including artificial breaks which will be counted for the purpose of declaring the workmen as permanent workmen as per Model Standing Orders and rules made thereunder .

That the workmen are also entitled to the wages during the artificial breaks given by the management being statutory right.

That the management also discriminated the workmen while granting temporary status to junior workmen S / Shri Dalbir Singh and Suresh Prasad w.e.f. 1-9-1993.

2970

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 /JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[ PART 11-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] That the above workers are also entitled to be declared permanent after completion of 90 days of continuous service as muster roll workers under the above management .

It is submitted that S/ Shri Suresh Ram and Dalbir Singh were engaged against the vacant post on regular basis through the employment exchange from the year 1990 and not from 1992. Same were regularized as per rules hence the contention is denied .

The daily wagers were employed as per need of seasonal work in gardens and are engaged as per need basis purely for temporary work for a particular period as per approved estimate and need of work , when the work was completedthe daily wage employees were disengaged. The same were not appointed to the post in accordance with the rules against any post so the question of declaring the workmen as permanent does not arise.

That the workmen had filed the dispute for regularization dated 22-8-1995 before the Conciliation Officer (Central) , Delhi and the first meeting was fixedby the said Authority on 17-10-95 at 11.00 hrs . vide its letter dated 26-9-95 and during the force of conciliation proceedings, the management terminated the services of S/Shri Putti Lal , Babu Lal , Satya Dev, Hare Ram, Ravinder, Smt . Phool Kali and Khedan Prasad w.e.f. 9-2-96, 9-2-96, 9-2-96, 24-1-96 , 24-1-96, 24-1-96 respectively without taking prior permission under Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act from the Conciliation Officer and the said dispute is pending for reference before the Ministry of Labour,Government of India .

It issubmitted that S/Shri Putti Lal , Satya Dev, Hare Ram, Ravinder, Smt . Phool Kali and Khedan Prasad were engaged for disposal of seasonal garden work , the same were not appointed to the post in accordance with the rules against any post so that the question of termination of their services does not arise. It is not covered in the Industrial DisputesAct.

That the services of above workmen were terminated with a view to teach them the lesson for raising lawful dispute for regularization of their services as theirjuniors were regularized in the pay scale ofRs . 750-940.

The workmen applicants have filed rejoinder . In the rejoinder they have reiterated the averments of their claim statement and have denied most of the paras of the written statement. The management has also denied most of the paras of the claim statement.

That the action ofthe management of Achaeological Survey of India in not granting the permanent status/ regularization to S/Shri Putti Lal , Babu Lal , Satya Dev, Hare Ram , Ravinder , Smt . Phool Kali and Khedan Prasad is illegal as well as unjustified.

Evidence ofboth the parties has been taken .

That all the above workmen are entitled to be regularized in the pay scale of Rs . 750-940 with all allowances.

Heard argument from both the sides and perused the papers on the record .

From perusal of the pleadings of the parties the following issues arise for adjudication:

1. Whether the concerned workmen applicants completed 240 days continuous service?

2. Whether the concerned department is an Industry ?

The management filed written statement stating therein that S/ Shri Putti Lal , Babu Lal, Satya Dev , Hare Ram, Khedan Prasad, Phool Kali were engaged as daily wagers employed as per need of seasonal work in gardens and are engaged as per need basis purely for temporary work, for a particular period as per approved estimate and need ofwork, when the work was completed the dailywage employees were disengaged.

3. Whether the workmen applicants are entitld have to reinstatement?

4. To what amount of back wages the concerned workinen are entitled?

ISSUE NO. 1.

The daily wagers were employed as per need of seasional work a gardens and are engaged as per need basis purely for temporary work, for a particular period as per approved estimate and need of work, when the work was completed the daily wage employees were disengaged .

The dailywage employees , the applicants in this case are engaged for disposal of seasonal garden work , the same were not appointed to the post in accordance with the rules against any post so that the question of disengagement and engagement does not arise and same is not agreed, hence the contention is denied.

It was submitted from the side of the workmen that Sh. Putti Lał was engaged in the year 1982 , Babu Lal was engaged in the year 1986 , Satya Dev was engaged in 1988 , Hare Ram was engaged in the year 1989, Ravinder was engaged in the year 1989 , Smt. Phool Kali was engaged in the year 1990 and Sh . Khedan Prasad was engaged in the year 1999.

It was further submitted that all these workmen were removed illegally when they raised the dispute on 22-08-1995 for regularizing their services.

The garden operation work carried out by this Division is only for improvement of environment in and around of National importance monuments and same is not profit earning work, which is not covered under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 .

The daily wage employees were engaged only for development of new garden at " Salimgarh Fort " wherein the Memorial Museum was set up by the Government of India and were disengaged after completion of garden as well as environment works .

The further case of the workmen is that these workmen were provided muster roll and junior workmen tothemhad been provided monthly muster roll with a view to deny the workmen of permanent status and continuing them on muster roll for years together which is unfair labour practice.

2971

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

[ भाग ॥ - खण्ड 3 (ii)]

The management has admitted that these workmen were engaged prior to 1990 and in 1990. The management has discriminately taken the above named workmen from 23-07-1995 and they have been given monthly muster, roll from 23-07-1995. The services of these workmen were disengaged on 22-08-1995 when they raised dispute and the management engaged monthly muster w.e.f. 23-07-1995.

The management provided monthly muster roll to Sh . Braham Pal , Gaynendrer , Rame , Gajak Rak, Mahesh, Sanjay, Karamvir, Udai Singh, Shankar , Raj Pal and Balwant w.e.f. 23-07-1995 but these workmen senior to them were not provided monthly muster roll . The management allso regularized the services of most junior workmen Sh . Dalvir Singh and Sh . Suresh Prasad whowere recruited only in the year 1992 and then given temporary status in 1994.

That the management gave artificial breaks to the workmen from time to, time to exploit the poor workmen and new hands were retained in service and were given scale of Rs . 750-940/- .

It is settled law that the management is bound to follow the rule of last come first go . After termination of theservices ofthese workmen the management has engaged on muster roll basis 11 workmen from 23-07-1995, so the management has acted in breach of Section 25 F, G & H of the ID Act, 1947 .

That the management is covered under the payment of wages act and also under Minimum Wages Act. That the workmen became permanent after completion of 90 days of continuous service. The workmen were entitledto wages during the artificial breaks and also entitld to be declared permanent employee after 90 days service.

It has been provided in Section 25 of the ID Act , 1947 that the workmen shall be deemed to be in continuous service ifthey have themselves stopped going for work. These workmen have been working alt the year round. In case the management has given artificial breaks such breaks will not be taken into account and the workmen shall be deemed to be working continuously.

It is settled lawthat Sundays and holidays are to be . calculatedwhilecalculating the working days and artificial breaks also be calculated in view of Section 25 B ofthe ID Act, 1947.

It was submitted from the side of the management that these workmen were engaged as daily wagers employed as per need of seasonal work in Gardens and are engaged as pèr need basis purely for temporary work for a particular period. They were employed as per need of the seasonal work in Gardens and are engaged as per need basis only. They are engaged for disposal of seasonal garden's work. Theywere not appointed to the post in accordance with the rules, so the question of their dis -engagement or retrenchment does not arise.

These workmen have worked for 5-8 years as admitted by the management. The management has given artificial breaksto them, so that they may not complete 240 days work continuously. Such artificial breaks shall be deemed to be in continued service .

It was further submitted that the management is not anindustry. It was further submitted that Sh. Dalvir Singh and Sh . Suresh Singh were engaged against a vacant post on regular basis through employment exchange from the year 1990 and not 1992.

The management has filed the working days of the workmen . The workmen Sh . Khedan Prasad was engaged in the year 1990 and his services were terminated on 09-02-1996. As per the management's own document he has worked for 86 days in 1990,143 days in 1991,126days in 1992,113 days in 1993 , 146 days in 1994 & 149 days in 1995.

From perusal ofthe working period provided by the workmen it cannot be said that they were engaged for seasonal work in Gardens as is the case ofthe management . The management witness has stated that he has no knowledge whether the workmen had worked for 6-10 years in the department . The management witness has also stated that the work ofthe Gardener has been given to the contractor on the basis of 5th Pay Commission recommendations . The 5th Pay Commission recommendation will not overwride the express provisions ofSection 25 F, G & H ofthe ID Act, 1947. After removing the muster roll casual employees the management cannot take the work from contractworkers .

The workmen have worked continuously in all the months and in all the years of their employment . They are not seasonal workmen . The management has given artificial breaks; it cannot be taken into account . It is not the case of the management that the workmen were not available on all thedays.

From perusal of these documents it becomes quite obvious that the workmen have worked in every month. The contention of the management that the workmen were engaged for seasonal work is not correct. Sh . Khedan baş worked from 03-01-1994 to 26-12-1994. He has performed 146 days work. Similarly as per the own admission ofthe management all the workmen have been engaged all the year round. They have been given artificial breaks deliberately to avoid the completion of their 240 days work continuously.

In the facts and circumstances of the case the workmen had worked for 240 days in all the years of their employment.

This issue is decided accordingly.

ISSUE NO , 2,

The case of the workmen is that management provided monthly muster roll to Sh . Braham Pal . Gaynendrer ,, Rame , Gajak Rak, Mahesh, Sanjay, Karamvir, Udai Singh , Shankar , Raj Pal and Balwant w.e.f. 23-07-1995.

It was submitted from the side of the workman that thejudgment ofthe Constitution Bench ( 1978 ) 3 SCR 207 2972

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

still holds the field so far as definition of 2 J of ID is concerned . The Hon'ble Apex Court in that judgment has laid down triple tests and in the light of these tests it is to be ascertained whether the respondent/ management is an Industry or not.

Ithas been held in Bangalore Water Supply that in an Industry there should be systematic activity and it should be organized by cooperation between the employer and the employees and it should be for production and / or distribution of goods and service calculated to satisfy human wants and wishes . It has been held that absence of profit motive or gainful objective is irrelevant . The true focus is functional and the decisive test is the nature ofthe activity with special emphasis on the employer and employee relations . If an organization is not carrying on trade andbusiness, it is notbeyond the purview of Industrial activities ( 1978 ) 3 SCR - Bangalore Water Supply case is aConstitution Bench judgment. It is still holding the field in the matter of adjudication of this point.

It has been held in this case that Section 2(j ) ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 which defines industry contains words of wide import as wide as the legislature could have possibly made them. The problem of what limitations.could and shouldbe reasonably read in interpreting the wide words used in section 2(j ) is far too policy oriented to be satisfactorily settled by judicial decisions. The Parliament must step in and legislate in a manner which will leave no doubt as to its intention . That alone can afford a satisfactory solution to the question which has agitated and perplexed the judiciary at all levels .

In this judgment the Hon ' ble Apex Court has laid down triple test to ascertain whether a particular unit or undertaking is an industry or not . It has been held in this case that where (i) systematic activity, ( ii) organized by cooperation between employer and employee ( the direct and substantial element is chimerical ) ( iii) for the production and/ or distribution of goods and services calculated to satisfy human wants and wishes ( not spritual or religious, but inclusive of material things or services gearedto celestial bliss e.g. making on a large scale prasad orfood).

(b) Absence of profit motive or gainful objective is irrelevant be the venture in the public, joint, private or other sector.

(c) The true focus is functional and the decisive test is the nature of the activity with special emphasis on the employer employee relations .

(d) If the organization is a trade or business it does not cease tobe one because of philanthropy animating the undertaking.

Although Section 2 ( J) uses words of the widest amplitude in its two limbs , their meaning cannot be magnified to over each itself..

The Hon'ble Apex Court has laid down further the dominant nature test. It has been held as follows :

"Where a complex of activities some ofwhich qualify for exemption, others not involves employees on the

[ PART 11 SEC. 3 ( ii ) | total undertaking some of whom are not workmen as in the University of Delhi case or some departments are not productive of goods and services if isolated . even then the predominant nature of the services and the integrated unture of the departments as explamed in the Corporation of Nagpur will be the true test . The whole undertaking will be industry although those who are not workmen by definition may not benefit by the status.

Notwithstanding the previous clauses , sovereign functions , strictly understood ( alone ) , qualify for exemption not the welfare activities of economic adventures undertaken by government or statutory bodies.

Even in departments discharging soverign functions if there are units which are industries and they are substantially severable then they can be considered to come within Section 2(j ).

The respondent's units is engaged not in a sovereign function . It has been held in the above case that even arsenal or artillery department is an industry , Industry is decided on the nature of work it is performing.

From perusal ofthe records it becomes quite evident thatthe respondent/management is engaged in systematic human activities . The respondents are not discharging duties for gains but gainful objective is irrelevant in deciding whether an undertaking is an industry or not . In case activities of the respondents are considered in the crucible of the triple tests , respondent is obviously and definitely an industry.

This issue is decided accordingly.

ISSUE NO . 3

It was submitted from the side of the bank that reinstatement is not the only relief in all the cases of illegal termination . Section 11A of the ID Act , 1947 provides for payment of compensation also.

It was submitted from the side of the workmen that compensation is payable in cases where an undertaking has become sick or it has been clused or it is in economic loss. Ithas not heen established that the bank is in econoπής loss and it is a sick Industry .

My attention was drawn by the Ld . Counsel of the workman to 2000 LLR 523 State of UP and Rajender Singh . The Hon'ble Apex Court ordered for reinstatement with full back wages as the services of the daily wager cleaner who worked for 4 years was dispensed with without following the procedure for retrenchment. In the instant case also no retrenchment compensation has been paid. This case law squarely covers the instant case.

It has been held in 1978 Lab IC 1668 that in case service of a workman is terminated illegally the normal rule is to reinstate him with full back wages .

My attention was further drawnto AIR 2002 SC 1313. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that daily wager even if serving for a short period should be reinstated.

29.73€ [

भारत का राजपत्र जूम # 2008/ज्येष्स 24, 1930: NALA

wie from the side of the workman that in the instant cise Sephone 259, 0 of the 10: Auto attracted. In section 25 of the ID Act it.it has been provided that ifa workman has performed 240 days workwor and if the worte is of counituotas and garlarinature he shouldbe given pay in Hew ofnotice and retrenchimenticompensation./

It has boon, held by the Hon'bleble Apex Court that there is no usation of service in caservice in case provisions ofsection 25F are not complied. In the instant case no compchantion has been paid to the workman

No such Article of the Constitution has begripointed out ander which the Government ar,Public Sector usi cim continue incedently to givetampony and fixodim appointments : again and again State appointments and temporary appointm governed by any coustiartiopel schame, such discriminationn will amount to vicious discretion , The Governmentof Public Sector unit will go on nesostian sa the method pick and choose policy and give temporary and ad -hoc appointments to their favorites and has the principles of equality enshrined in the Caristitation | degreteangali bye: 'Such in not the intent of the Hoви Арболовацьみ However, th this judgment the provisions of the 10 garnit governing the services of the workman Hava hot bebus declared un - constitutional . Reinstatement is the remedy provided in the ID Act for breach of severalof several Brovisions enumerated, therein or for breach of service rutesutes provPadd 13. по ложь in various labpur welfare legislation - bab 01-01 boshow In case a workman bes worked for 240 days in a year and the work is ofcontinuous and regular nature he should be paid retrenchettent compensation. trease retrenchiment compensation is not paid section 25F of the ID Act is attracted. There is no cessation of his services. He is deemed continued in service in the eye of law. In case there is breach ofλεσίδη 237 the vier ercontinued and reinstatement failova os a nemural consequence

A three Juliges Bencv of the Hon'ble Apex Golirti had held in 1993-1- LL that termination of services feetsT the iivelihood ofnot only of the employee bun aischofsbev dependents. 50 in case of illegal termination of Serviet the workman should be reinstated.

Reinstatement should not be misconceived as regularization ,By the order of reinstatement the status quo ante ofthe workman is restored . He is given backWigent order to compensate him for his illegal disengagement. This is a special remedy provided in, ID Act andand it has pot been anpalled andand set aside by any judgment of the Hon ble Apex Court , The provisions of the ID 6 constitutional and they are to be given effe

ID Act, 1947 has been enacted to safeguard the interest of the workmy belonging to poor segment of speisty. It appears that Legislature wanted that such workmen should not be harassed in - necessarily so sections 25F, U , T and Clanse 16 of 7th Schedule have been enseted. The objects and reasons of IDAct, 1947- show that the respondent management should not be permitted to indulge in any unfait libur practice . The workmen should not be engaged for years and then they shouldbe removed all ofa sudden. There is provision ofretrenchment compensation for his Tomoval Retrenchment compensation is for compensating him otherwise so that he can survive long interregnum of unemployment . In the instant case no retrenchment compensation has been paid.

.......Itwas submitted from the side of the management that in (2007) 9 SCC 353 ,353 , the Hon'ble Apex Coun bas held that remstatement with full back wages should not be granted automatically onlynly because itit wouldwould bebe lawful t do so. Several factors should be considered just as statutory rules and de lay in raising the disputatio cordl It was submitted from the side of the management thật the Hoir bie Alpex Court in 2006 (4) Sesle has put down & compléte ban vil regularization sind relhatatumom The Hoil'ble Apex Court his hold that cmployment cat only be made on the basis of procedure established to that behalf envisagedby the Constitution: Equality of oppostuputy is the hallmark and the Constitution enshrines affirmative action to ensure that unequals are not treated equals 80 pubile employment should be in terms of constitutional scheme .

case there is no dealy In the Instant case there is no still exists, the workman should be given reinstatement The respondents cannot retrench this workman and en fresh hands. In that case they will commit intan labab practice as has been held by the Hon'ble'ble Apex Chuttin (1995) Supp . II SCR 842,

Itwas further submitted thatthat the Constitution Bench Judgment has afforold d'igim decorting to which the Goveminent is that precluded troth misking leporary appointments or engaging workers on daily wages .

It has been held In 2008 Lab IC page 783 by the Hon'ble Apex Court that reinstatement does frot mean confirmation, Reinstatement of daily wager holdtid legal Direction given for his reinstatement being fimat sich der would not necessarily entitle him to claim benefits of perrianency.

In view of thejudgment of the Hon'ble Apex Cour reinstatement does not imply: confirmationéabaorption of making permanent . The Menagement cannot disengage workman and take another workman at fris place as itwould infringe the provisions of Sections 256 and Hof the Act, 1947. In the circumstances , management sald remstate the workmen as casual labouters . In case there is no job, the management should take action keeping view section 25 G and H of the ID Act, 1947. コンパのに The Hon'ble Apex Court has notnot declared the provisions of Act on-constitusional. The Government has got no license to make always appointment of daily wagers and to continue them for life time. Fixed term temire appointments and temporary appointments cannot be the ruleofpublic employment. At the time ofmalicing temporary appointments Articles 14, 16, 21, 23 , 226 and 309 are infringed. There is no constitutional mandate that the Government is at liberty to go on giving fixed term appointments for the entire tenure of service of in employee.

2071 G1/00-17 2974

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAJSTHA 24, 1930

(PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case the workman is entitled to 25% backwages .

The reference is replied thus:-

Inthe instant case of terminating the services of the concerned workmen, fresh casual labourers have been engaged. The respondent cannot retrench the concerned workmen and engage fresh hands. The management has enfringed section25 F ofthe IDAct, 1947, the principles of first come last go .They have been illegally retrenched and fresh hands have been taken on their place, as such retrenchment is absolutely illegal.

The action of the management of Archaeological Survey of India in not granting permanent status/ regularization to S/Shri Putti Lal , Babu Lal , Satya Dev, Hare Ram, Ravinder , Smt . Phool Kali and Khedan Prasad is neither legal nor justified . The management should reinstate the workmen along with 25% back wages within two months from the date of the publication of the award.

In case the workman is reinstated with back wages the respondents have every right, after payment of back wages and reinstatement, to retrench him validly following the principles of first come last go so that sections 25 G andH of the ID Act are not violated.

The award is given accordingly, Date: 13-5-2008 R. N. RAI, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 22 मई , 2008 The management has admitted that after termination of the services ofthese workmen 11 casual labourers were taken on muster roll on 23-07-1995 . These workmen had worked for 6-10 years . The management cannot arbitrarily infringe the provisions ofsection 25 H ofthe IDAct,1947. Themanagement has illegally removed these workmen and violated the provisions of sections 25 F, G & H ofthe ID Act, 1947. The work still exists , so the workmen are entitled to reinstatement.

This issue is decided accordingly.

IssueNo. 4

का. आ. 1396,-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार खादी एण्ड विलेज इण्डस्ट्रिज कमीशन के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सी जी आई टी/ एल सी/ आर/ 12/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-5-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[ सं. एल -42011 /41 / 98 - आई आर (डी. यू) ] सुरेन्द्र सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी

NewDelhi , the 22nd May, 2008 It was submitted by the managenient that payment offull back wages is not the natural consequence of the order ofdischarge or dismissal being set aside . It has been held in (2003) 6 SCC 141 that it is incumbent upon the Labour Courtto decide the quantum of back wages .

Ithas been further held in this case that payment of backwages having discretionary element involved it is to bedealt with the facts and circumstances of the case.No definite formula can be evolved.

S.O. 1396. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Indistrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/ 12/99) Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annxure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Khadi & Village Industries Commission and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 22-5-2008 .

[No. L-42011 /41 /98- IR ( DU) ] SURENDRA SINGH , Desk Officer Ithas been further held in this case that payment of backwages inits entirety is the statutory sanction, In (2003) 4SCC27 the Hon'ble Apex Court held that in view ofdelay in raising the dispute and initiating the proceedings back wages need not be allowed . In the instant case there is no delay at least on the part of the workman in raising the dispute.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM - LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR No. CGIT/LC/R/12/99 Presiding Officer : Shri C. M. SINGH In 1978 Lab IC 1968 three Judges Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court held that payment of full back wages is the normal rule. In case services have been illegally terminated either by dismissal or discharge or retrenchment, in such circumstance the workman is entitled to full back wages except to the extent he was gainfully employed during the enforced idleness . In the instant case the workman was always ready to work but he was not permitted on account of invalid act of the employer.

Workman/Union

The Secretary, Khadi Commission. Karmchari Union , Office Complex, B-3-4, Gautam Nagar , Near Chetak Bridge , Bhopal.

In 2005 IV AD SC 39 - three Judges Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court held that reinstatement with full back wages isjustified . In this case the workman has performed more than 240 days work and he has been retrenched without payment of compensation and pay in lieu of notice.

[भाग II- खण्द 3 (ii) ]

2975

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

Versus

ChiefExecutiveOfficer,

Khadi & Village

Industries Commission, 3,IrlaRoad, Vile Parle(West), Mumbai.

Director,

Management Khadi & Village Industries Commission, Office Complex, B-3-4, Gautam Nagar, Near ChetakBridge, Bhopal.

AWARD

Passed on this 9th day ofMay, 2008 1.TheGovernment of India, Ministry ofLabourvide its Notification No. L-42011 /41 /98/IR (DU ) dated 30-11-1990 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal:-

"Whether the action of the management ofDirector, Khadi & Village Industries Commission in not re- designing the post from Jeep. Driver to the post of LDC in respect of Shri Shankarlal Malviya is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled ?"

2.The case ofworkman Shri Shankarlal Malviya in brief is as follows. That he was employed on the post of driver with the managment of Director, Khadi & Village Industries Commission . He is Higher Secondary Examination passed and is eligible for the appointment of the clerk. He through the Union moved several applications to themanagement for being posted from the post of driver to the post of clerk as several vacancies for the post of clerkwere in existence. Though the management in respect ofother employees posted them on other post according to their ability and accordingly changed their post but the workman was not appointed as a clerk.

3.The case ofthe management in brief is as follows. The the management has no right to change the post of their employee from one post to the parallel grade post. That the head office, Khadi and Village Industries CommissionMumbai rejected the request ofworkman Shri Shankarlal Malviya for changing his post from driver to clerk and informed the same to the state office, Bhopal . It has been pleaded that legally the employee's post cannot be changed into another post and averment made by the workman in this respect are incorrect. It is prayed that the workman's case be dismissed with cost.

4.The order dated 8-5-08 passed on the ordersheet of this reference proceeding reveals that Shri Ashok Shrivastava, Advocate for workman and Smt. Niranjana Chourasiawere present on the said date . Shri Shrivastava submitted that the workman does not want to prosecute the reference proceeding. He requested that no dispute award be passed in the case. Smt. Chourasia conceded to the above submission made by Shri Shrivastava and therfore, the reference was closed for passing no dispute award.

5.It is clear from the above that now no indistrial dispute exists between the parties. Therefore, no dispute award is passed in this reference without any orders as to costs.

6. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employтем asperrules.

C. M. SINGH, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 22 मई , 2008

का. आ . 1397,-मौद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार सी. पी. डब्ल्यू डी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबंद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औधोगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार कौद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. - 11 , माई- दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 96/97 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , को केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-5-2008 कोप्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42011/ 11 /96 - आई आर ( डी. यू) ]

मुरेन्द्र सिंह, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 22nd May,2008 S.O. 1397.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Indistrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.96/97) CentralGovernment Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court No- II , NewDelhi as shown in the Annxure in the Indistrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the. management of CPWD and their workman , which was received by the Central Governement on22-5-2008.

[No. L-42011/ 11 /96- IR(DU)] SURENDRA SINGH, DeskOfficer

ANEEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL, TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT - IL, NEW DELHI PresidingOfficer : SHRI R. N. RAI 1.D. NO.96/1997 IN THE MATTER OF:

Sh. Ashrafi Lal & Ors;

Claimant C/ o CPWD Mazdoor Union, E-26 (Old Qtr .) , Raja Bazar , BabaKharak Singh Marg, NewDelhi.

Versus

TheExecutive Engineer (E) , Electrical Division - III, CPWD, Pushpa Bhawan, New Delhi.

-Respondents

AWARD

TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No. 1-42011 / 11/96-IR(DU) Central Government Dt . 09-/ 11-07-1997. has referred the following point for adjudication :

2976

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/JYAISTHA 24, 1930

The point runs as hereunder

"...פועל

Whether the action of the inanagement ofCPWD in terminating the services of the workmen, Lift Operators as per list enclosed at annexure " A" w.e.f. 01-02-1995 is legal and justified ? Ifnot , what relief Inatthie workmeri entitled to ?

The case of workmen applicants is that the above management camouflagedly introduced the so called contractorM/ s . Three Star Ex . Serviceman Associates but practically the workmen were working under the direct control and supervision of the management . The management made less payment sosothey raised dispute Sunder the Minimum Wages Act

The Junior Engineer has accepted that the workmen were performing their duties under the direct control and supervison of the managenient ie. CPWD . The management terminated the services of the workmen when they demanded wages of skilled workmen , The contractor is only a name lender. The workmen have worked under the control and supervision of the management, Contract Labour is prohibited for engaging workers. The operation of lift is a permanent work . All the 12 workmen were engaged, through contractors. Their services have been terminated on 01-02-1995 illegally . The contract is sham aland ruse: The workmen were the simployees of the Serveringement .

>!! we The case of the managment is that , there is no Isolationship of master and servant , The workmen were rongaged by the contractor, As per their status they are the comployee of contractor.

That the workmen filed case for less paid minimum [( yage and court has passed the order vide order dated 131:2-1997 and instructed the contractor to make payment of less paid OTA and wages . The Jr. Engineer has not terminated the services of the workmen . Their duties were ngy Goed by the Jr. Engineer

The workmen applicants have filed rejoinder. In the rejoinder they have reiterated the averiments of their claim sibieonsent and have denied most of the paras ofthe written statement. The management has also denied most ofthe paras ofthe claim statement.

Evidence ofboth the parties has been taken.

Heard argument from both the sides and perused the papers on the record, 1.

Itwas submitted from the side of the workmen that theywere engaged by the contractors but they worked under the complete control and supervision of the management. They were engaged to operate lift. The operation of lift is apermanent nature ofwork.

It-was submitted from the side of the managemient that the workmen were engaged by the contractors from April, 1993. The contract expired and another contractor engageddifferent workmen . Thiese workmen operated the lift under the control and supervision of the management from April , 1993 to 01-02-1995. The work is being still

[PART II SEC . 3 (ii) ] done through contractors . There are regular employees as well contractor's workmen . The contractor's workmen operate the lift. The contractor assigns them duty, makes payment to them . The Junior Engineer supervises not the contract workers but the work performed by them.

From perusal of the record it appears that the management has entered into contract with a contracting agency. The management has obtained registration for employment of 100 contract labourers from the ALC for maintenance etc. in various offices . The management witness has admitted that a new contractor is working at the lift even at present. The lift was given for operation to Three Star Ex . Serviceman Associates on contract basis.

The Jr. Engineer has stated before the ALC that he supervises the work of the contract workers .

In case some work is assigned to contractor workmen theremust be somebody to supervise their work. It cannot be said that the workmen worked under the guidance and control ofthe Jr. Engineer . The Jr. Engineer has to see the performance of the work of contractor. The contract was given for operation of lift. So it was the duty of the Jr. Engineer to ascertain that the work was properly performed by the contractor's workmen. It does not mean that the workinen worked under the control and supervision of the management . No document has been annexed with the recordto show that the Jr. Engineer exercised his control over them and granted them leave or made payment etc. There is no relationship of employer and employee between the parties . The work of operation of lift can be given to any contractor.

The reference is replied thus:-

The action of the management of CPWD in terminating the services of the workmen , Lift Operators as per list enclosedat Annexure " A " w.e.f. 01-02-1995 is legal and justified. The workmen applicarits are not entitled 10 get any reliefas prayed for.

The award is given accordingly.

Date: 14-05-2008 R. N. RAI ; Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 22 मई , 2008

का. आ. 1398,-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.- II , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 57/92) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो कैन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-5-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-40012/221/91- आई आर ( डी. यू. ) ] सुरेन्द्र सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी.

New Delhi , the 22nd May,2008 S.O. 1398.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Indistrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central 2997

भारत का राज 14/ 2008/ 0/114,1938TTESAD BHY

[मार्ग (il) ]

and earth station handed over To the maintenance organization and project organization was wound up .The carti station was handed over on 1905 December, 1988 mid proj boracuvues of 290989 Gowanent herelly publishes the Award (Ref. No. 157/92) Central Goyunbaubых Indajatel Tribunal - cum-Labour Court Holl:New Dele as shown in the Annexure in thbilddustrial Dlispute, dietween the employers in pelation to ithe management ofDepart of Teleport and theit wongna which was received by the Central Government.pn 22-5-2008.

root soralet

Na L1001202191 -IR (DU) ]

The workmennin applicantapplicant hashas nthớt rejoinder in the Pefolider be has relt 出。期間の区 stoimicat anhits dekindst of the pofthaila statement.The punagement bangalpo, denied was ofthe paras of the claim statement.

SUMENDICA SINGH, DeROM

Evidence ofboth the parties has been taken.

Heard argument from both the sides and perused the

papers on the redord

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL E GOVERNMENTINDUSTRIALERIBUNALACUNOPT LABOUR COURT - IL NEW DELHEDM)

NG 37/1991

In the Matter of

It was bentuk bohf the sad of meworkman that he was engaand.on 93-951984,as laboureret a copsolidated 18-92-1889. Hurestyises have been illegally terminated Sh. Krishan Palint

C/oDelhi Labourdaki sanasist to pla

tatoes.laubraitted droin this bunda of theintaangementnaangen What bormas engaged om Brainca and Sath Station , Whan the Brojech and Bench Station, even quesho, wadeern Nopped coming to mark Halet thadahim Aggarwal Bhawan, สว GTRoad, Tis Hazar

Delhi-110054

how Mehebbe

examination that thenervices of the workman were terminated on 29-01-1989.He wasHe was engaged on04-06-1988. yinen of Hồn Hể has notnot completed 240 days. The workman did patentinuously worked from nodce

11-05

The Diviường En Telocond Satellite Communication Project, 151, Transport SAPUT Bunjabi Bach New Delhi - 110035

for 240 day ogromneord it becomes quite obvious that the workman has worked from 03-06-1988101961 1967 bd bite Broilet thereafter he had given assignment on another projedina tho makman has worked from03-06-1988 to17-02-1989,

maw2 Isolind2 The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. 4002/ 22191 - R(DU), Central Government Did . 29:06-4992 has refered the following point for adjudications

The point runs as

Whether the Divisional Gogineer , Telecom, Satellite 1. New Delhi is justified in terminating the services of Ifnot, what relief he is to.

It is not his caseshatholas worked forde has neither stated in his affideri non in claim Samery thathe worked for 240 days 16 03-06-1988 and 18-02-1989 are counted it comes days.Even if it is presumed that the workman bas worked continuously he has rendered 229 days service incloting all the Sundays and holidaysy so the workman has not ed claim or in his affidavit that hefidavit that he has completed 240 day continuous work.

(.9.13) bedaise ) ti

Itis not hiscasethat some juniors to him have been retained in service and he has been retrenched. The The case ofof thethe workworkman is that he was engaged by the Director (C) Satellite Communication Project, Siri Fort, Nalathu, New Delhi wef 03-08-1998 as labourer. He was illegally terminated 8818-2-1989 . He his required statis of tammperan employne after completing 240 days of contiguous, amplexment,His, aprvices could not be

wolgan has wocked for 228 days in Joeprom 93,06-1988 to 18-02-1989-He has pat xepeload for 240, dayang Saption 25 F of the 1997 relat

Thereferenceis repling aft

TheDindiegal Engines, Erlovom Satellite Project, New Delhi, intjamitind, interminering the poprices of Sh. Krimbay Pal, DRM 26-031289workman applicant is not eatigled to get any relief as prayed for.

Date 15-5-2008

The caseof the management is that the wokhian was epagged,for anongific work, andLonon corapletion of the saidwork his services were dispensed with. On completion ofthe Singrauli work be was given employme "employ off on project the soothe pethod. The workman has the complcanzadalys, so Section 25 P'omeTo Act, 1947 swarupplicable! He was engaged in Jose, services word tehasinatted when the wordt was compared 2978

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 14, 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)] नईदिल्ली, 22 मई , 2008

Brieffacts ofthe case as stated in the claim statement are that the above Ordnance Factory, Muradnagar , District Ghaziabad is a Unit of Union of India, Ministry ofDefence and a registered factory under the provisions of the Factories Act, 1948 which is engaged in manufacturing of Arms, Ammunitions with the mark of Ordinance for the defence forces,

का. आ. 1399.- औद्योगिक अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार आर्डनेन्स फैक्ट्री के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. II , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 8/96) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-5-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-14012/3 /94- आई आर ( ही यू) ]

सुरेन्द्र सिंह , डेस्क आधिकारी

New Delhi, the 22nd May,2008

That the workman was initially appointed as Vehicle Mechanic Mate (Token No. 1962) in the Corps ofElectrical and Mechanical Engineering, Army Headquarters , New Delhi under the Ministry of Defence, Government of India, at510 Army Base Workshop , Meerut Cantt . during April , 1963by the Director ofElectrical and Mechanical Engineer (Major General) from where the workman was transferred to Ishapur Rifle Factory as a Mechanist ' C' Gde. During the year 1966 and thereafter the workman was transferred toOrdnance Factory, Muradnagar (District Ghaziabad) during the year 1971 as a Mechanist 'B ' Grade under the Ministry of Defence , New Delhi through the Director General ofOrdnance Factories , Calcutta.

5. 0. 1399.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award No. Ref. 8/96) of theCentralGovt. Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court No.-IL, New Delhi as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management ofOrdnance Factory and their workman , which was receivedbythe Central Government on 22-5-2008.

[No. L- 14012/3/94- IR(DU)]

SURENDRA SINGH, DeskOfficer

ANNEXURE

That though the workman sustained the injury during the working hours in the factory in the presence of co- workers and they also advised the workman to get his report prepared, yet he did not report the matter taking it to be a normal thing and function of the machine without insisting for an accident/ injury report .

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER: CENTRAL

GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT- 11, NEW DELHI

PRESIDING OFFICER: RN.RAI ID.NO.08/ 1990

That on 30-11-1978 , suddenly the aforesaid injury developed to such an extent that the hand upto the shoulder of the workman began to pain badly with swelling. The workman, therefore , could not join his duties from 30-11-1978 .

IN THEMATTER OF:

Shri Joel Swrami,

Son of Shri K.L. Swami , Mechanist, GradeB, T.No. 1640/ 1805 H.G.S., Resident of960 , Civil Lines, Mission Compound, Meerut (U.P.).

Versus

That the workman went into the treatment at the P.L.Sharma Government Hospital , Meerut and submitted his leave application dated 3-12-1978 to his Foreman in the Factory through one of his Co-worker Sri Mahesh Diamond (T. No. 4556 Mechanist) which he handed over in the Section and the workman continued to take treatment in the Hospital , but all efforts and treatment in vain , as he could not get relief.

TheGeneralManager,

Ordnance Factory, Muradnagar, Distrikt Ghaziabad (U.P.)

That on 8-12-78 , the workman , in spite of bad condition , sent his another leave application through his another co- worker Sri Anwar Ahmad (T.No. 1896 Mach. ) which he handed over in the Section.

AWARD

TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No. L - 14012/3/ 94 IR(DU) Central Government Dt. 27-12-1995 ha: s referred the following point for adjudication:

That on 10.12.1978 , while continuing with his treatment in P.L. Sharma Hospital , Meerut, the workman senthis another leave application by post Under Certificate ofPosting.

The point runs as hereunder:-

"Whether the action of the management ofOrdnance Factory, Muradnagar in removing from services to Shri Joel Swami S'o Shri K.L. Swami, Mechanist grade E vide orders dated 28-9-83/ 28-4-84 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to??

That after taking treatement for about 15 or 16 days in P.L. Sharma Hospital , Meerut in Allopathic System of Medicineswhen the workman could not get any relief some ofhis well wishers advised the workman concerned to go up of Homeopathic System of Medicine . Hence the workman finding no alternative, went under Homoepathic treatment in the Meerut Municipal Homoeopathic 2979 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : खून 14, 2008.ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

Dispensary, While continuing with the Homoepathie Treatment the workman sent another leave application dated 9-1-1979 to the authorities concerned under the Certificate ofPosting.

That on 21-2-1979 , the workman sent his another leave application alongwith three Medical Certificates to the authorities concerned under RegisteredA.D.Post.

adjudication or trial by Administrative Tribunid ofdisputes andcomplaintswith respect to recruitment and conditions ofservices of persons appointed to Public Services and posts in connection with the affairs of Union or of any State or ofanyLocal or other Authority within the Territory of Indiaor under the Control of the Government of India or of any Corporation or Society owned or controlled by theGovernment in pursuance of Articles 323. A of the Constitution and for matters connected therewith are incidental thereto .

The workman applicant has filed rejoinder. In the rejoinder he has reiterated the averments of his claim statement and has denied most of the paras of the written statement . The management has also denied most of the paras ofthe claim statement.

That inspite ofsubmission of leave applications from time to time alongwith medical certificates within the stipulated period of 15 days, the authorities could notbe satisfledand theyissued a charge sheet No. LB/412/PP dated 24-2-1979 under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classificiation, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 whichwas served upon the workman at his residential address 960, Mission Compound, Civil Lines, Meerut by registeredpost.

Evidence ofboth the parties has been taken.

Heard argument from both the sides and perused the papers on the record.

That the said Shri Joel Swamy T.No.1805 /HGSwhile functioning as Mech .BGde is charged for Gross is conduct unauthorised absence from duty in so far he is absenting from dutyw.e.f. 1-12-78 without permission/ submitting any unfitness Medical Certificate .

Itwas submitted from the side ofthe workman that the workiman as employed in the Ordnance Factory which is a unit ofUnion of India,M/o. Defence and is a registered factory under the provisions ofFactories Act, 1948. He was appointed as VehicleMechanic Mate in the year 1962. He was transferred to IchcharOrdnance Factory in the year 1963.

That theconcerned workman sustained injury during the working hours in the factory but he did not report the matter taking to be a normal.He did not report the incident.

The management has filed written statement. It has been stated therein that the activities/functions ofOrdnance Factory,Muradnagar are of sovereign nature which is not tobe treated as an Industry under the Industrial Act, 1947. Moreover, the condition of the services of the employees working in this organization are governed by the Fundamental and Supplementary Rules, OCS (CC&A)Rules, 1965, Civil Services (Temporary Service Rules), Revised Leave Rules , Civil Services Regulations of Civilians în Defence Service or any other Rules or Regulations that may be notified in this behalf by the appropriate Government in the official gazette.

That on 30-11-1978 the shoulder of the workman beganto painbadly with swelling, therefore, the workman could notjoinon 30-11-1978, He obtained treatment from P.L. SharmaGovernment Hospital , Meerut and submitted his leave application on 03-12-1978 through his co -worker, Sh, Mahesh Chand. On 08-12-1978 he sent another letter through Sh. Anwar Ahmed . Thereafter, he took Homeopathic treatmenet as he was not cured. He sent leave application on 09-01-1989.

That the management constituted an inquiry against him and removed him for his unauthorized absence.

That in this connection, it is also submitted that as per Govt. ofIndia, Ministry of Labour letter No. 140-22/ 1/86-D.II (B) dated 22-7-1988 , Ordnance Factoriesdo not come under the perview of Industrial Act, 1947 as their functions are ofsovereign nature which are not to be treated asan Industry under the LD.Act . A true copy ofletter dated 22-7-1988 is annexed as annexure R-1 to this reply.

Itwas submitted from the side of the management that the Ordnance Factory is carrying out work ofthe nature ofsovereign function and it is not an Industry under the ID Act, 1947.His service conditions are governed under CCS (CC&A) Rules, 1965, Civil Services RevisedRules.

That the GOI , Mio. Labour dated 22-07-1988 has declared that Ordnance Factory does not come under the purview ofID Act, 1947 as their functions are ofsovereign nature.

That ithas been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in its judgement dated 21-2-1978 in the case of Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board covering the definition of Industry under the 1.D.Act , 1947 wherein it has been held that services governed under Articles 310 and 311 of the constitution should not be considered as Industry within the meaning of the Industrial Dispute Act . Inthe present case, it is humbly submitted that the services oftheApplicant are governed under Articles of 310 and 311 of the Constitution of India, 1950 and therefore this Hon'ble Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain this Application.

That the Hon'ble Apex Court in its judgment has held that services governed under Sections 310 & 311 of the Constitution should not be considerd.as Industry within the meaning of lindustrial Dispute Act. The services ofthe applicant are governed under article 310 and 311 of That it maybe pertinent to mention here that Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 provide for adjudication or trial by AdministrativeTribunal Act, 1985 provide for 2980

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] the Constitution of Indin, 1950and therefore, the Tribunal hes nojurisdiction and Administrative Tribunal Act , 1985 is-provided for adjudication or trial .

My attention was drawn to 2005 (5) SCC page 91 paras 12 and 13. The Hon'ble Apex Court has held that long delay impedes the maintenance ofthe records , Belated claim should not be considered .

Ithas beenheld in (2001 ) 6 SCC 222 as under:-

It is admitted to the management that Ichchapur Ordnance Factory is registered under the FactorlesAct, 1948. It has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the Constitution Bench Judgment in Bangalore Water Supply that theOrdnance Factory or Artillery is ári Industry.

The analogy stated in judgment ofthe Hon'bleApex Court in Banglore Water Supply is that if arms are mahufactured by private undertaking it would be Industry in case the Government is manufacturing arms and ammonations that part of the Govertunent undertaking carinot fall beyond the purview of Industry.

" Law does not prescribe any time limit for the appropriateGoverrument to exercise its powers under Section 10 ofthe Act . It is not that this power can be exercised at any point of time and to revive matters which had sincebeen settled. Power is to be exercised reasonably and in a rational manner . There appears to us to be no rational basis on which the Central Government has exercised powers in this case after alapse of about seven years of the order dismissing the respondent from service."

In the instant case reference has been made after a delay oflong 13 years . Limitation Act is not applicable in IDcasesbut stale cases should not be considered. Delay in the instant case is inordinate and relief can be rejected on the ground ofdelay alone .

Inthe instant case the workman has absented himself unauthorisedly on several occasions . The working of the management suffered setback due to unauthorized absence ofthe workman .

Jurisdiction is always conferred by a statute .Section 14 of the CAT 1985 confers jurisdiction on Central Administrative Tribunal . The CAT has jurisdiction in regardto service matters of All India service or any Civil Services ofthe Union or a Civil Post under the Union or to apost connected with defence or any defence service. So the Jurisdiction ofthe CAT is confined to the service matters ofAll India Services or any Civil Services ofthe Union or any Civll Post under the Union or services rendered in defence. The CAT has absolutely no jurisdiction to entertain the cases of industrial workers . The workman is undoubtedly industrial worker

It has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that no industrial dispute existed or could be even said to have been apprehended the Central Government exercised powers in this case after a lapse of about seven years .

Since the Ordnance Factory is manufacturing arms and ammunitions . It is registered under the FactoriesAct, so it's an industry and it will not cease to be an industry by decitation of the M/ o . ofLabour against the provisions of the ID Act, 1947 and Constitution Berich Judgment of the Hon'bleApexCourt.

Ithas been held in 1993 AIR SCW-2224 that the delaywould certainly be fatal if it has resulted in material evidence relevant to the contention is lost and not rendered available Lapse of time results in losing the remedy and rightaswell. :

It has been also held in this case that case filed after delay of7-9 years should not be entertained.

1. find no force in the contention of the management that the service conditions are governed byCCS rules .The OCS Rules prescribe procedure for conducting inquiry.The upplicant ofCCS Rules be a set of employees in the matters of inquiry, will not make the employees holding civilpost. The employee in the instant case is an employée of the Factory registered under the Factories Act, 1948, soby mere resorting to procedure of inquiry he should not cease tobe workman . The respondents are an Industry and the petiteuner is workman.

Ithas been held in MANU /SC/0140/ 1959 that merely because the industrial dispute does not provide for a limitation for raising the dispute it does not mean that the dispute can be raised at any time and without regard to the delay and reasons therefor. There is no limitation for reference ofdisputes to an industrial tribunal even so it is only reasonable that the disputes should be referred as soon as possible after they have arisen and after conciliation proceedings have failed particularly so when disputes relate todischarge ofworkmen wholesale .

Prom perusal of the records it transpires that the workman was removed in 1983 and he has raised this dispate in the year 1996 after a long gap of 13 years . He has not explained about the delay which preverited him from raising the dispute earlier...

Inthe instant case the workman has raised the dispute after long delay of 13 years .

It has been held in AIR 1993 SC2277 that delay itself dis-entitles aworkman of remedy and right.

There is delay of nine years and in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court. The reference itself is not maintainable .

It was submitted from the side of the management that there is no explanation of delay. Not to speak of plausible or satisfactory explanation. There is no explanation at all what prevented the workman to approach this forurn after a long period of 13 years. It is settled law that stale claim made after an inordinate and unexplained period could not be entertained.

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

2981

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24 , 1930

The workman has not filed certificates which made him enable to move. He has gone on sending applications through colleagues as is alleged . Ifit is taken to be proved inthat case also the workman has remained unauthorisedly absent .Hewas suffering from shoulder paid and his medical certificate shows that he was not in a condition that he could not move, so he remained unauthorisedly absent deliberately. The inquiry is fair. The workman is not entitled toget anyrelief.

The reference is replied thus:

Theaction of the management ofOrdinance Factory, Muradnagar in removing from services to Shri Joel Swami S/o Shri K. L. Swami , Mechinist Grade E vide orders dated 28-9-83/28-4-84 is legal and justified. The workman applicant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for .

The award is given accordingly.

Date: 15-02-2008 .

R. N. RAI , PresidingOfficer नई दिल्ली, 4 जून , 2008

का, आ. 1400, जबकि मैसर्स एनटीपीसी- सेल पावर कम्पनी ( प्रा. ) लि. [कोड संख्या डी एल/26597 दिल्ली ( उत्तरी ) क्षेत्र में ) ] { तदुपरान्त प्रतिष्ठान के रूप में संदर्भित ) ने कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि और प्रकीर्ण उपबंध अधिनियम, 1952 ( 1952 का 19 ) ( एतदुपरान्त अधिनियम के रूप में संदर्भित ) की धारा 17 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( क) के अंतर्गत छूट के लिए आवेदन दिया है। 2. और जबकि, केन्द्र सरकार के विचार में अंशदान दर के मामले में उक्त प्रतिष्ठान के भविष्य निधि के नियम उसके कर्मचारियों के लिए उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 में विनिर्दिष्ट नियों की तुलना में कम हितकर नहीं है और कर्मचारी भी समान प्रकृति के किसी अन्य प्रतिष्ठान के कर्मचारियों के संबंध में उक्त अधिनियम या कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि योजना , 1952 ( एतदुपरान्त योजना के रूप में संदर्भित ) के अंतर्गत अन्य भविष्य निधि लाभ भी प्राप्त कर रहे हैं । 3. अतः केन्द्र सरकार एतद्वारा , अब उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 17 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए तथा इस संबंध में समय- समय पर विनिर्दिष्ट शतों का ध्यान में रखते हुए , उक्त प्रतिष्ठान को उक्त योजना के समस्त उपबंधों के प्रचालन से 18-5-2008 से अगली अधिसूचना तक के. लिए छूट प्रदान करती है।

[सं. एस-35015/25/2007-एस. एस-11 ] एस. डी. जेवियर , अवर सचिव New Delhi, the 4th June , 2008 $.O. 1400.-Whereas M /s NTPC - SAIL Power Company ( P) Ltd. [under Code No.DL/26597 in Delhi (North) Region ) (hereinafter referred to as the establishment) has applied for exemption under clause (a) of sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 17 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (19 of 1952) (hereinafter referred to as theAct) .

2071 Guc8-18

2. And whereas in the opinion of the Central Government , the rules of the provident fund of the said establishment with respect to the rates of contribution are not less favourable to employees therein than those specified in Section 6 of the said Act and the employees are also in enjoyment of other provident fund benefits provided under the said Act or under the Employees' Provident Funds Scheme , 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Scheme) in relation to the employees in any other establishment of similar character.

3. Now, therefore, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by clause (a) of sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 17 of the said Act and subject to the conditions specified in this regard from time to time, the Central Government, hereby, exempts the said establishment from the operation of all the provisions of the said Scheme with effectfrom 18-05-2008 until further notification.

[No. S-35015/25 /2007/-SS- II] S. D. XAVIER, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 23 मई , 2008

का.आ. 1401.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार मै. इंडियन एयरलाइन्स के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के नीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विषाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय (सं. - 11 ) , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 36/97 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-05-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -11012/38/96- आई.आर. ( सी-1 ) ]

स्नेह लता जवास , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi, the 23rd May , 2008 S.O. 1401.-in pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Governmentbereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 36/97) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (No. II); New Delhi now as shown in the annexure in Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the mangement of M/s. Indian Air lines and their workman , which was received by the Central on 23-5-2008.

[No. L- 11012/38/96- IR(C-T) ] SNEH LATA JAWAS, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRALGOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM-LABOUR COURT- B NEW DELH

PRESIDING OFFICER : R.N. RAI

I.D. No. 36/1997

Claimant IN THE MATTER OF : Smt. Rajini Puri , A- 114, Defence Colony, NewDelhi.

2982

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

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

TheGeneral Manager (IR),

were resorted to and subject to certification regarding the actual number ofdays worked by the caomptomist deputed byM/s. Caompto Electronics .

IndianAirlines Limited,

AirlinesHouse, New Delhi -110001.

-Respondents

AWARD

That inthe year 1997 a policy decision was taken to stop in house data entry work due to administrative reasons. The contract of maintenance of data entry machine of the respondent was withdrawn and an agreement was entered with another agency M / s . Apt Automation Pvt . Limited. As a result the captometers were also not required.

TheMinistryofLabour by its letter No. L- 11012/38 /. 96-IR( C-I) Central Govemment Dt. 07-03-1997 has referred the following point for adjudication :

The point runs as hereunder :-

The claimant was never an employee of the respondent there never exists relationship of employer and employee . The claimant was not under the control and supervision of the management at any point of time.

"Whether the claim of Mrs. Raji Puri that she remained in continuous employment of Indian Airlines from 1990 till 12-01-1995 is correct? If so, whether the termination of her services by the managerment w.e.f. 13-01-1995 is legal andjustified? If not, to what relief is Mrs. Raji Puri entitled and from which date ."

That as per the settlement entered into by the respondent with the recognized union of the employees Working with the respondent namely Air Corporation Employees Union the seniority and appointment of Stock Verifiers and caomptomist was merged with accounts/ audit andno separate seniority list was required bo be maintained bythe respondent for caomptomist.

The case of the workman is that she has been continuously working in the Indian Airlines right from 25-10-1989 to 12-01-1995 except for small artificial breaks.

The certification filed by the claimant was issuedby the respondent only to certify the number ofdays for which she actually worked for the purpose of making payment . The respondent had stopped in house data entry work and therefore , the caomptomists hired from M/ s . Caompto Electronics were no more required on determination of contract ofhiring of caomptometer . The claimant was no more requiredby the said M/ s . Caompto Electronics with the respondent.

The management has not issued any appointment letter in spite of demands . The management deliberately and with the object of denying permanent employmentby givingartificial break keeping the workman on temporary/ casualbasis continuously with artificial breaks just to aviod and evade her permanent absorption . She has completed 240 days of continuous service and she is entitled to protection ofSection 25 F G & H of the IDAct, 1947 .

The workman applicant has filed rejoinder. In the rejoinder she has reiterated the averments of her claim statement and has denied most of the paras of the written statement. The management has also denied most of the paras ofthe claim statement .

That the workman worked under the control and supervision of the management. The work to her was assignedby the management. The management has all the control over the workman .

Evidence ofboth the parties has been taken.

Hear argument from both the sides and perused the papers on the record.

Itwas submitted from the side of the workman that she worked continuously from 1989 to 1995 under the supervision and control of the management . She was directly engaged by the management and payment to herwas directlymade by the management. She worked under the control and superivision of the management . The officers of the management assigned duties to her. A notification dated 06-06-1992 was also issued from Indian National for thepost of Comptist in the pay scale of Rs . 1185-1785.

Thecase of the management is that the claimant was deputed by Service and Employment Department of M/s. Caompto Electronics who had agreed to place caomptometer with the respondent on hire basis vide their letter dated 22-02-1988 for operation of the machine they deputed caomptomist from their Service and Employment Department who was to be paid the sum by the respondent as detailed decided and revised by M/ s . Caompto Electronics in their letters from time to time on casual/ daily rated basis. Such caomptomist was to be deputedby themto operatethe machine as and when required on casual daily rated basis. Initialy one Mr. S.P. Sharma was deputedby M/ s . Caompto Electronics . The claimant was also one of the caomptomist deputed by M/ s . Caompto Electronics from time to time . She was initially engaged onRs. 75 per day and at last it was raised to Rs . 100 per day. Initial sanction of engagement of casual caomptomist were obtained whenever such engagement

It was submitted from the side of the management thatM/ s. Caompto Electronics supplied the comptist and machine for data entry work . The workman was engaged by M/s . Caompto Electronics . She did not work directly. The management wanted to create post of Caompomist 2983 [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 /ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

Electronics suplied caomptometer and the management directly engaged the workman .

and anotification was issued but a general ban was put on further recuitment, so no recruitment of caomptists have. been made. The work of comptist has been abolished and M/s.AptAuthomation was assigned the work ofdata entry and computers were introduced. There was no work of caomptist as computers were introduced. The workman was engagedby M/s . Crompto Electronics.

The certificates filed by the management show that. the workman has been given work periodically after obtaining sanction of the competent authority . The workman has been paid every amount after postfacto sanction , so it cannot be said that the work was of permanent and continuous nature.

However, theworkman has worked from 1989 to 1995 . The management was duty bound to pay her retrenchemnt compensation and one month's pay in lieu ofnotice. Since there is no sanctioned post and post of caomptist has been abolished, the management is taking work from computers. In the facts and cirumstances of the case, compensation should be granted.

Fromperusal ofthe records it becomes quite obvious that the management has issued certificate to the workman directlyas casual camptist and payments have beenmade to the workman directly by the management, so the workman has worked under the control and supervision of the management all along, In the circumstances the contract with M/s . Caompto Electronics is sham and ruse. The workman worked under the control and supervision ofthe management right from engagement till her retw

The workman has been dis - continued without payment of retrenchiment compensation and one month's pay in lieu of notice. Provisions of Section 25 F of the ID Act, 1947 is attracted. The workman is entitled to an amount of Rs. 1,00,000by way of compensation in lieu of reinstatement asthe post of caomptist has been abolished.

Ithasbeenheld in (2007) 9 Supreme Court Cases 353 as unde:-

The management has filed contract entered with M/s. CaomptoElectronics . M/ s. Caompto Electronics was given Rs . 125 per day and the junior caomptist were paid Rs.3,000 per month. The management has filed documents to show that they had hired a caomptometer.machine from the above company on a monthly rent of Rs. 250, both caomptist and machine w.e.f. the forenoon of 2nd February, 1998 and they employed Eaomptist periodically on periodical sanction.

The workman worked under the control and supervision of the management . She has been performing duties directly under the direction of the management. The management has paid her PLI for the years 1991-1992, 1992- 1993 & 1993-1994, she has been paid PLI by the Dy. Manager (Finance) .This documents establishes that she was treated as employee by the management . There is no document to prove that payment to the workman was madeby M/ s . CaomptoElectornics . That there is copy ofagreement MWI/ 1 but the management engaged the workman directly and paid rent of eacmptometer to the caomptist.

"Labour Law- Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - S.25 -F- Reliefto be given for violation of Grant of compensation instead of reinstatement with full back wages-When warranted -Workman appointed as daily wager, working foronly a short period, raising industrial dispute álmost six years after dismissal , and there being question as to the whether his appointment had been made in terms of the statutory rules in the first place Held, relief of reinstatement with full back wages would not be granted automatically only because it would be lawful to do so - Several factors have to be considered , two of them being as to whether appointment in question has been made in terms ofthe statutory rules, and the delay in raising the industrial dispute In present case, keeping in view the nature and period of services, and the delay in raising the industrial dispute, award ofreinstatement with backwages substitutedby compensation ofRs . 75,000 . " In the circumstances of the case the workman has been directly engaged by the management . She has worked continously from 1989 to 1995 under the control and direction ofthe management on the caomptometer supplied byM/s . Caompto Electionics .

The Hon'ble Apex Court has held that in case the post is not sanctioned, work is not continued, order of compensation shouldbe given . The workman is entitled to compensation ofRs . 1,00,000 (Rs . One Lakh Only) in lieu of reinstatement.

M/s. Caompto Electioncs was contracted out as per the documents submitted by the management and the contract was awarded to M/ s . Apt Authomation Pvt . Limited. The management has introduced computers for thework ofdata entry.

The reference is replied thus :-

Theworkman has been engaged by the management directly and she has worked regularly right from 1989 to 1995under to control and supervision of the management. It istrue that a contract has been entered with M/s . Caompto Electronics and amount of casual labour and rent of caomptometer has been sanctioned by the management. periodically, so it cannot be said that there was no post of caomptist under the management . M/s . Caompto

The claim of Mrs. Raji Puri that she remained in continuous employment of Indian Airlines from 1990 till 12-01-1995 is correct. The termination of her services by themanagement w.e.f. 13-01-1995 is neither absolutely legal nor justified. The workman applicant is entitled to an amount of Rs . 1,00,000 (Rs . One Lakh Only) by way of retrenchment compensation and one imonth's pay in lieu of 2984

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

notice within two months from the date of the publication ofthe award,

The award is given accordingly .

Date: 08-05-2008

R.N. RAI, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 23 मई , 2008

का.आ. 1402,-औद्योगिक विषाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार में मोदीलुफ्त, मैः रॉयल एयरवेज एंड मै. स्पाइस जेट लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों ओर उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय (सं.- II ) , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 39 , 49 , 46 एंड 48/2006) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-05-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -11012/ 19/2006- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] [सं. एल -11012/17/2006- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] [सं. एल -11012/3/2006- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] [सं. एल-11012/5/2006- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ]

स्नेह लता जवास , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 23rd May, 2008 S.O. 1402. in pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 39 , 49, 46&48/2006) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (No. II) New Delhi now as shown in the annexure in Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the mangement of M/ s . Modiluft, M/s . Royal Airways & M/ s. Spice Jet Ltd. , and their workman, which was received by the Central on 23-5-2008 .

[No. L-11012/ 19/2006- IR(C - I) ]

[No. L- 11012/ 17/2006-IR( C-1) ]

[No. L- 11012/3/2006-IR(C- I ]

[No. L- 11012/5/2006- IR( C- I )]

SNEH LATA JAWAS, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THEPRESIDING OFFICER: CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT- IL, NEW DELHL

PRESIDING OFFICER : R.N. RAI

I.D. Nos . 39/2006, 49/2006 , 46/2006 & 48/2006 IN THE MATTER OF:-

Shri Narender Singh & 3 Ors. ,

S/o . Sh .. Jiya Ram,

Rio . 170 , Balmukund Khand ,

Giri Nagar, Kalkaji ,

New Delhi - 110019.

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( i) ]

Versus

M/s. Modiluft Limited , M/s . Royal Airways & M.Spice Jet Limited, Cargo Complex, IGI Airpon ,

Terminal No. 1 -В ,

New Delhi - 110037 .

AWARD

The Ministry of Labour by its letter Nos. L- 11012/ 19/2006- IR (CM - 1 ) dated 19-06-2006, L- 11012/17/2006- IR (CM - 1 ) dated 19-06-2006 、 L - 11012/ 3 /2006 - IR (CM- 1 ) dated 19-06-2006 , L- 11012 /5 /2006 - IR (CM - I ) dated 19-06-2006, has referred the following point for adjudication .

The points run as hereunder :-

"Whether the action of the management of Modiluft /Royal Airways / Spice Jet Limited in terminating the services of Sh . Narender Singh w.e.f. 01-01-2002 is jusı , fair and legal ? If not , to what relief is the concerned workman entitled and from which date."

"Whether the action of the management ofModiluft ! RoyalAirways/ Spice Jet [ imited in terminating the services of Sh . Mohan w.e.f. 01-01-2002 is just, fair and legal ? If not, to what relief is the concerned workman entitled and from which date ? "

"Whether the action of the management of Modiluft Royal Airways /Spice Jet J.imited in terminating the services of Sh . Anand Prakash S/o . Sh . Daya Chand w.e.f. 01-01-2002 is just, fair and legal ? If not , to what relief is the concerned workman entitled and from which date ? " "Whether the action of the management of Modiluft RoyalAirways/ Spice Jet Limited in terminating the services of Sh . Bhagwan Dass w.e.f. 01-01-2002 is just , fair and legal ? If not , to what relief is the concerned workman entitled and from which date ? " I.D. Nos. 39/2006 ,/49 /2006 /46/2006 & 48/2006 involve common dispute. These are connected cases and they can be adjudicated by common award. The grounds of all the cases mentioned above are almost the same extept of change in dates of legal demand notice and salary and post i.e. individual particulars . So all the above mentioned cases are taken up together.

The claimants have filed claim statement . The case ofSh.Narender Singh is that he was employed at the post ofLoader on the last drawn wages of Rs . 2480 per month and he performed his duties sincerely and honestly. No complaints were made during the course ofhis employmem . No chargesheet was served on this workman . The workman was employed in Modiluft Limited initially, MGH Express Limited address 98 , Hemkunt Tower , Nehru Place , New Delhi . Thereafter the workman was transferred to M/sRoyal Airways and the management again changed [भाग - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

the name ofthe company as Spice Jet Limited and it is still operating .

That the respondents malafidely did not release the earned wages of the workman from 01-11-2001 to 01-01- 2002 and they illegally removed him on 01-01-2002 illegally and arbitrarily without serving any chargesheet on him in breach of section 25 F of the ID Act, 1947 .

That the workman sent registered demand letter dated 21.04.2005 through registered post stating therein to reinstate the workman but the respondents did not make any reply to the illegal demands and engaged fresh candidates and have engaged more than 50 workers on contract basis . That the workman is un-employed and facing starvation .

The case ofthe workman Sh. Anand Prakash is that he was engaged as Driver on the last drawn wages of Rs.6000 per month .

The case of Sh, Bhagwan Dass and Sh Mohan is that theywere employed as Loader on the last drawn salary ofRs.2480 per month. All the other grounds are common as stated above .

TheManagement has filed written statement . Inthe written statement it has been stated that the Modiluft Limited became a Scheduled Air Transport Service pursuant to its Air Transport Service Permit dated 20.11.1994 issued to it by the Director General of Civil Aviation. It was functioning with the support of technical know- how with M/ s . Lufthansa and agreement to this effect wasduly executed between the parties . The said agreement was terminated in the year 1996 and Director General of Civil Aviation did not renew its permit to operated ScheduledAir Transport Services after 19-11-1996 and the workmen ceased to be in the employment as early as in the year 1996, Thereafter, Modiluft Ltd. never did any business and it was taken over by the new management .

That the company was inoperaive between the periods 1996 to April 2005. In 2001-2002 there were no operations and hence there was no question of employing any workman . The Airline operations of the Spicejet Limited were re- launched by the New Management only on 23.5.05 after issue of new permit by Director General ofCivil Aviation on 17.5.05. It reveals that the claims of the workmen are frivolous, baseless, unfounded , and not at all maintainable.

That it is a matter of testing of employment byway ofanydocumentary evidence on affidavit ofworkman for which he is claiming back wages for the period , in which, hewas never in the employment . In fact the purpose ofthe workmen is to extact undue financial gain which shows themala fide intention ofthe workmen.

That SpiceJet Lid. came into existence w.e.f. 29.4.05 after name change . Hence there exists no relationship of

2985

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14 , 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

employer and employee between the parties and in the absence ofrelationship of master and servant this Hon'ble authority has no jurisdiction to entertain of try this suit / Statement of Claim ofthe workmen

That without admitting anything stated in the statement ofclaims it is further submitted that the workman did not approach the court after the abandonment of services in the year 1996. It is only in 2005 , when the company started its operaions; the workman with mala- fide intention approached the Conciliation Officer after a delay of nine years . The claim is therefore liable to be rejected on this ground alone as the same is barred by latches.

It is further submitted that the workmen in the present dispute are making unsuccessful desperated attempts to make the Management liable for their own faults . The workmen are trying to build up a fictitious case where he is seeking to bind the company for violation of his imaginary rights.

They have not approached the authority with the clean hands and after seeing the growth of the compaпу triedto file his frivolous claim with mala fide as well as with intent to mislead the Hon'ble authority,

It isfurther denied that the workmen did not give a single chance of grievance and that they worked with dedication . It is submitted that workmen abandoned their employment in the year, 1996 and never reported for duty thereafter . The workmen are making false statements and allegations merely to cover their latches in filing bis fictitious claims before this Hon'ble Court. It is also submitted that there is no question of serving any notice , charge sheet ofholding any enquiry against the workmen as the services of the workmen were never terminated by the management but they voluntarily abandoned their services with the management in the year 1996.

It isspecifically denied that the management terminated the services ofthe workmen. That it is a matter of testing of employment.by way of any documentary evidence on affidavit of workmen for which they are claimaing back wages for the period, in which , theywere never in the employment. In fact the purpose of the workmen is to extract undue financial gains which shows the mala fide intention of the workmen. It is submitted that there is no question of compliance with Section 25 -F of the Industrial Act, 1947 as the workmen abandoned the services of the Management and such abandonment is not envisaged under Section 25- F of the ID Act . It is further denied that the Management has violated the provisions ofSection25- F ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ("Act"). It is submitted that the workmen voluntarily abandoned their services with the Management in November 1996 and as such abandonment does not constitute termination of services for the entitlement of retrenchment compensation 2986

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 /JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] as provided in Section 25 -F of the Act and therefore there is no violation of Section 25 -F of the Act and accordingly there is no occasion for the workmen to claim retrenchment compensation as alleged.

It was submitted from the side of the respondents that. M/ s . Modiluft Limited was functioning with the support of technical knohow with M/s . Lufthansa and an agreement to this effect was duly executed by the parties . The said agreement was terminated in the year 1996 and theDirectorGeneral , Civil Aviation did not renew its permit tooperate scheduled air transport service after 19-11-1996 and the workmen ceased to be in employment as early as in the year 1996. M/ s . Modiluft never did any business and it was taken by a new management .

It is further submitted that there is no question of framing acharge sheet against the workmen as the workmen abandoned their services with the Management. Since there was not termination of services , the Management is not liable to state any reason, rather, workmen are alone responsible for the consequence following abandonment ofservices with the management , The workmen should be put to strict proof of their allegation ofalleged violation of theAct.

It was further submitted that the company was not in operation from 1996 to 22.05.2005 the Airlines operation of Spice Jet Limited were re - launched by the new management only on 23.05.2005 after issue of new permit by Director General ofCivil Aviation on 17.05.2005,

It is denied that the management ever received the alleged legal notice. It is submitted that the workmen even though have not furnished a copy of the alleged notice to themanagement.

It was further submitted that there exists no relationship of employer and employee between the parties and in the absence of relationship of master and servant the court has nojurisdiction to entertain the statement of claim.

Itwas further submitted that the wokmen abandoned their services in the year 1996 with M/s . Modiluft Limited as became sick and closed its operation as Director General , CivilAviation did not renew its permit to operate scheduled air transport services after 19.11.1996 .

It was further submitted that that the workmen left the services of M/ s . Modiluft voluntarily and they have raised this dispute after a gap of nine years . The dispute is barred by time also.

It is wrong to allege that the workmen are unemployed since 2002. They should be put to strict proof thereof .It is submitted that the Management has learnt that the workmen after voluntarily abandoning the services of theManagement started gainful employment somewhere else otherwise there is no reason to show why a claim is being filed after a gap ofnine years . It is submitted that the workmen in the present dispute are making unsuccessful desperate attempts to make the management liable for their own faults. The workmen are trying to build up a fictitious case where they are seeking to bind the company for violation of their imaginary rights .

Theworkmen applicants have filed rejoinder . In the rejoinderthey have reiterated the averments of their claim statement and have denied most ofthe paras of the written statement. The management has also denied most of the paras ofthe claim statement .

Evidence ofboth the parties has been taken.

Heard argument from both the sides and perused the papers on the record.

It was further submitted by the management that this court has no jurisdiction to entertain the case as there is no retrenchment u/s . 2( 00) (bb) of the ID Act, 1947. The workmen have voluntarily abandoned their services with M/s. Modiluft Limited when it became sick and no further permitwas renewed by the Director General , Civil Aviation . The workmen stopped coming and they undertook different jobs at that time. They have aproached this Hon'ble Tribunal when M /s . Spice Jet Limited started its operation M/s . Spice Jet Limited is not an organization in any way related to M/ s. Modiluft. The directors and the entire management is changed and M / s . Spice Jet Limited is a new organization comprising ofdifferent shareholders , Directors andProprietors.

Itwas submitted from the side of the workmen that theywere employed by the responderits after following the recruitment process. The respondents illegally detained theirwages almost for 2-3 months and removed them from service without compliance of section 25 F of the ID Act, 1947,

The case ofthe workmen is that they worked in M/s. Modiluft thereafter their services were transferred to M / s . Royal Airways . Their services were dispensed with on 01.01.2002 . The workmen have annexed with the statement of claim letters of appointment of M/ s . Modiluft. The workmen have not annexed with the record any document regarding their employment with M / s . Royal Airways or with M/s . Spice Let Limited . There is absolutely no document on the record except the affidavit of the workmen.

It was further submitted that M/ s . Modiluft Limited changed its name to M/ s . Royal Airways Limited and thereafter M/ s . Spice Jet Limited where as the same management is still continuing operation of the flights. There is only change in name, the proprietor and the shareholders are the same . The respondents have illegally removed the workmen and taken fresh hands and some of the employees have been outsourced by the present management.

2987 [ भाग 1 ]-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24 , 1930

Inthe instant case allso the workmen have filed proof oftheirworking up to 19-11-1996 whereas they have raised thedispute in the year 2006 after a delay of nine years. Thus, the reference itself sent by the Government in view of the law laid downby the Hon'ble Apex Court is barred by delay.

Ithas been held in 1993 AIR SCW 2224 that the delaywould certainly be fatal if it has resulted in material evidence relevant to the contention is lost and not rendered available . Lapse of time results in losing the remedy and right aswell .

Ithas been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that the affidavits are self serving and relation of employer and employee cannot be held established on the basis ofmere assertions made in the affidavits . In case the workmen worked upto 2002, they should have filed some documents to establish their contention . No such document has been filed. In affidavit it has been asserted that they worked withM/s .Royal Airways Limited as well as with M/s . Spice Jet Limited. The workmen's witness has admitted that he has no document except one letter issued by M/ s . Royal Airways to him regarding his submitting ofBIODATA in theyear1998.

Ithas been also held in this case that case filed after delay of7-9 years should not be entertained.

This witness has admitted that M/s . Modiluft was not in operation in the year 1996 .

From perusal of the documents on record it becomes quite obvious that the wokmen were employed by M/s. Modiluft no doubt for a short period but they have not filed any document to establish that their services were transferred toM/s . Royal Airways. The workmen's witness has admitted that M/ s. Modiluft Limited ceased to operate inthe year 1996 and it is also admitted that flight operations started from 28-04-2005.

Ithasbeenheld in MANU /SC/0140/1959 that merely because the industrial dispute does not provide for a limitation for raising the dispute it does not mean that the dispute can be raised at any time and without regard to the delay and reasons therefor . There is no limitation for reference ofdisputes to an industrial tribunal even so it is only reasonable that the disputes should be referred as soon as possible after they have arisen and after conciliation proceedings have failed particularly so when disputes relate to discharge of workmen wholesale.

From the document on record it is established that the workmen worked with M/ s . Modiluft Limited upto 19-11-1996. There is no proofoftheir working either with M/s. Modiluft or with M/s . Royal Airways or with M/s. Spice Jet Limited after 19-11-1996.

My attention was drawn to Nadungadi Bank Limited Vs. K.P. Madhavankutty as under:

In the instant case the workmen have raised the disputeafter long delay of nine years. They have not given satisfactory explanation for this extra - ordinary delay. There is no explanation worth the name in the claim statement as towhat prevented the workmen to raise the dispute earlier whereas they have not filed any proof of their working beyond 19-11-1996 . The workmen kept silent from 29-11-1996 and raised this matter in2006.

Ithas been held in AIR 1993 SC 2277 that delay itself dis-entitles aworkman of remedy and right.

There is delay of nine years and in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court . The reference itself is not maintainable .

Another question raised is whether there is retrenchmentu/'s . 2(00) (bb) ofthe workmen or the workmen have voluntarity left the services ofM/ s. Modiluft when it closed its operation . The management has annexed documents with the records regarding creation of new organization M/s . Spice Jet, the extract of proceedings of the board meeting held on June , 2001 has been annexed with the record.

Ittranspires from perusal of the document that there is no mention ofM/s . Modiluft or M/s . Royal Airways in thisdocument . M/ s . Spice Jet was constituted by different Directors.

"Law does not prescribe any time limit for the appropriate government to exercise its powers under section 10 ofthe IDAct. It is not that this power can be exercised at any point of time and to revive matters which had since heel-settled . Power is to be exercised reasonably and in a rational manner. There appears tous to be no rational basis on which the Central Government has exercised powers . In this case after a lapse ofabout seven years of the order dismissing the respondent from service . At the time reference was made no industrial dispute existed or couldbe even saidtohavebeen apprehended .Adispute which isstale could not be the subject matter of reference under section 10 ofthe ID Act. As to when a dispute can be said to be stale would depend on the facts and circumstance ofeach case. When the matter has become final, it appears to us to be rather incongruous that the reference be made under section 10 of the Act in the circumstances like the present one. In fact it could be said that there was no dispute pending at thetime when the reference in question was made.

My attention was drawn to judgment of Hon'ble MadrasHigh Court N.K. Md . Khan etc. It has been held in this case that if there is any retrenchment it shall be deemed tohave beenmade by the previous employer and it would betheprevious employer who would be competent to give Ithas been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that no industrial dispute existed or could be even said to have been apprehended with Central Government exercised powers in this case after a lapse ofabout seven years.

2988

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 / JYAISTIIA 24, 1930

the notice in accordance with the provisions of Section 25 F ofthe IDAct, 1947.

The retrenchment has been defined in the ID Act, 1947 u/s 2(00) (bb ) as termination of service. In the instant case infact there was no retrenchment or termination ofthe services . Had there been any retrenchment or termination of services, theworkmen would have made representation in the year 1996 with M's. Modiluft who stopped operation . Nodocumenthas been filed on the record by which it cannot be said that the services of the workmen were terminated in the year 1996 and they made representations. There is no document of making any representations subsequent to the alleged termination of the services .

The workmen have approached this Tribunal in 2006. The appropriate government has sent the reference in June, 2006 after 10 years of alleged termination of the services oftheworkinen . The workmen have failed to prove that their services were terminated in 2002. They have not made any representations in the year 2002 and they have not claimed any wages in the year 2002. It indicates that infact the workmen abandoned their services with M/s . Modiluft ceased to operate its flight for the reason of non- renewal ofpermit by the Director General , Civil Aviation and the workmen stopped going to M/s . Modiluft.

Some of the old shareholders and Directors ofM/s . Modiluft along with the other shareholders have created a new organization M/s . Spice Jet. The company was in- operative between 1996 to April , 2005. There was no operation in 2001 and 2002 and so there was no question ofemployment of the workmen . The airline's operation of M/s. Spice Jet Limited were re-launched by the changed management on 23-05-2005 after issue of new permitby Director General , Civil Aviation on 17-05-2005.

It appears that when the changed organization of M/s. Spice Jet Limited re- launched its operation by the new management , the workmen approached this tribunal to get employment after abandonment oftheir services in 1996.

From perusal of the documents it becomes quite obvious that the services of the workmen were not terminated in the year 2002. They voluntarily abandoned the services of M/s . Modiluft in the year 1996. The workmen for the first time approached the Conciliation Officer after complete gap of nine years .

There is no termination of the workmen either defacto ordejure.

The Tribunal resumes jurisdiction when there is retrenchment or termination of services either defacto or dejure. In the instant case the workmen themselves have abandoned their services after operation of M/ s . Modiluft ceased.

From the above it becomes quite obvious that the workmen were employed with M/s , Modiluft which stopped its flight operation for non - renewal of flight permit. It also becomes quite obvious that the workmen

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] abandoned the services of Mis. Modiluft on closing of its operation.

Theworkmenhave worked with M's . Modiluft up to 19-11-1996 and they have raised this dispute when Mis . Spice Jet Limited started its operation . The workmen have fited no document of their working with M/ s . Royal Airways or with M/ s . Spice Jet Limited . There is no termination of services of the workmen and no wages are due as theyhave remained silent for long 10 years.

M/s. Modiluft Royal Airways /Spice Jet Limited has not terminated the services of Sh . Narender Singh, Sh . Mohan , Sh . Anand Prakash & Sh . Bhagwan Dass w.e.t. 01-01-2002 . The workmen applicants are not entitled to reinstatement or retrenchment compensation . They are also not entitled to get three month's wages as mentioned in the claim statement .

The reference is replied accordingly . Date: 13-05-2008

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 23 मई , 2008

का.आ. 1403.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मे. इंडियन एयरलाइन्स 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 85/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-05-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-11012/56/2001- आई. आर. ( सी-1 )] स्नेह लता जवास , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 23rd May, 2008 S.O. 1403.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 85/2001 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Labour Court ( No. II ) New Delhi now as shown in the annexure in Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s. Indian Airlins and their workmen , which was received bythe Central Government on 23-5-2008.

[No. L- 11012/56/2001 - IR(C- 1 ) ] SNEH LATA JAWAS , Desk Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER: CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT- II NEW DELHI

I.D. No. 85/2001 , Presiding Officer : R. N. RAI

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Sh . B.S. Gosain,

-Claimant Vill: Kandari Gaow Patti Quelly, P.O : Amaari Gaow , Distt : Tehari , Garhwal , Uttranchal.

2989 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ៛) )

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

VERSUS

TheRegionalDirectors, Indian Airlines Limited,

levelled in thecharge-sheet without any reservation despite hisadmission, the inquiry officer directed the management to lead evidence and the management examined witness in thepresence ofthe workman who refused to cross-examine the witness. The workman was granted opportunity to producehis defence before the inquiry officer but he failed.

Northern Region, Airline House, Rakaariganj , New Delhi - 110001 .

-Respondents

AWARD

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No.L -11012/ 56/2001 -IR(C- I ) Central Government Dt.27-09-2001 has referred the following point for adjudication:

That the Inquiry Officer by his report dated 01-08-1998 found the charges proved. Show Cause Notice was issuedto the workman by order dated 12-10-1998, the competent authority took into consideration the past record ofservice of the workman as well as observed that.

The point runs as hereunder :-

(1) The basic pay of the workman was reduced by one stage with cumulative effect for remaining absent unauthorisedly for 47 days during May, August, 1997 vide memo dated 11-12-1990.

"Whether the action of the General Manager (Comml . ) , Indian Airlines, Northern Region , IGI Airport, New Delhi in removing Shri B.S. Gosain, Helper (C) S.No.245976 from the services of Indian Airlines Limited with immediate effect vide letter dated 31-12-1998 is justified, valid and reasonable?

(2) Hewaswarned vide memo dated 22-03-1993 for unauthorized absence for 25 days in September , December, 1992.

Ifnot, to what relief is the workman entitled ?" .

(3) His basic pay was reduced by one stage for a period of 2 years vide memo dated 16-06-1994 for unauthrozed absence of 41 days during Jan-May, 1993.

The case of the workman is that he joinded Indian Airlines as Helper on 08-08-1988 after being selectedby the Selection Committee . He was medically examined and found fit. He was not physically handicapped at the time of selection appointment.

(4) His basic pay was reduced by two stages with cumulative effect vide memo dated 22-07-1994 for un- authorized absence of97 days during May-September, 1993 .

(5) Hewas warned vide memo dated 19-06-1995 for unauthorized absence of30 days duringApril , 1995.

That on 15-04-1989 while the workman was on duty a bag belonging to a passenger got struck off in the conveyer belt. The belt was brought to halt . The workman has to take out the bag from the machine running the belt of the conveyer. He kept his leg over the belt, on account of negligence ofsome person the machine started functioning andthe conveyer belt also started moving as a result leg of the workman got damaged.

That the workman was warned on 9 occasions for remaining unauthorized absenet up to 1997. The workman did not submit any reply to the memo , accordingly.vide order dated 31-12-1998 the workman was removed from service. The workman was provided defence assistance.

That despite medical treatement the leg of the workman , left hand and nervous system of left portion of 'the body was not functioning properly.

That the medical officer of the Indian Airlines recommended that the workman should be given lightwork to relieve his pain.

The inquiry was held in accordance with the principles ofnatural justice in fair and proper manner . The workman was afforded opportunity to defend himself in the inquiry by cross -examining the management witness aswell as leading evidence in defence . The Inquiry Officer applied his mindto the proceedings of the inuiry and after proper analysis ofevidence he gave his findings.

That the management entrusted heavy work to the workman despite the recommendation of the Doctor. The workman was receiving treatment for his disableness outside so he could not resume his work on various dates'.

The workman applicant has filed rejoinder . In the rejoinder he has reiterated the averments of his claim statement and has denied most of the paras of the written statement. The management has also denied most ofthe paras ofthe claim statement.

Evidence of both the parties has been taken.

That the management held an inquiry but principles of natural justice have not been followed and the management removed him illegally from service.

Heard argument from both the sides and perused the papers on the record.

The case of the management 'is that the workman was served a charge-sheet dated 19-12-1997 for remaining unauthorisedly absent from duty . The workman has submitted explanation but it was not found satisfactory therefore, a domestic inquiry was conducted on 28-03-1998 .

Itwas submitted from the side of the workman that dueto accidentwhile on duty his leg, left hand and nervous system was affected besides treatement in the hospital he got private treatment. Heavy work was entrusted to him whereas the Doctor has recommended light duty to the workman.

In course ofthe proceedings ofthe docmestic inquiry the workman admitted his guilt with respect to the charges

2071 G1/08-19 2990

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)]

unauthorized absence for long spell and considering his previous absence the DA passed the punishrnent of removal.

It is correct that the workman met with an accident in the year 1989 but he did not make any complaint to the management that he has not been perfectly cured. He resumed his duties after his medical fitness as is evident from the report of the Doctor.

It has been held in 1972 (25) FLR 45 as under:---

It was submitted from the side of the management that the workman was unauthorisedly absent on 9 occasions and his increments were withheld and he was given wamings . He did not improve thereafter . A charge-sheet was served on him . The workman participated in the inquiry and be cross-examined the witnesses . He admitted the charges inwritingtill proper inquiry was held. The Inquiry Officer found the charges proved. The competent authority issued him show- cause notice ofpre -decisional hearing.

That the workman did not submit any explanation so hewas removed from service.

"An Industrial Tribunal would not be justified in characterizing the finding recorded in the domestic inquiry as perverse unless it can be shown that such a finding is not supported by any evidence, or is entirely opposed to the whole body ofthe evidence adduced before it . In a domestic inquiry once a conclusion is deduced from the evidence, it is not permissible to assail that conclusion even though it is possible for some other authority to arrive at a different conclusion on the same evidence. "

It hasbeen held in this case that indomestic inquiry evidence of a solitary witness is sufficient to hold the chargesproved.

From perusal of the records it transpires that the workman was absent for 11 days in January, 1997, for 26 days in July, 1997 and for 22days in August, 1997. Charge- sheet was issued to him on 19-12-1997. The workman in response to the charge-sheet dated 19-12-1997 wrote a letter to the management. He stated in that letter that due to persisting sickness in the family he was forced to take leave as there was no adult member in the family to attend them. Hehad no intention to absent himself from attending duties and he requested the management to grant him pardon and he assured that he wouldwould not give any' opportunity for complaint .

" It has been held in 2001 (89) FLR 427 as under :

From perusal ofthe inquiry proceedings it transpires that the workman before the Inquiry Officer admitted his mistake.

It is well settled that a conclusion or a finding of fact arrived at in a disciplinary inquiry can be interfered with by the court only when there is no material for the said conclusion; or that on the materials , the conclusion cannot be that of a reasonable man . "

The InquiryOfficer asked the workman ifhe has put any questionto Sh . Sharma, the workman said that he has not to put question . He was given opportunity to produce hisdefence witness . In his defence evidence , the workman has stated that he met with an accident on 05-12-1989 and he received serious injury and a steel rod has been placed in his leg . He suffered from pain , so he remained unauthorisedly absent.

From perusal of this judgment it becomes quite obvious that the Tribunal can interfere with the findings of the Enquiry Officer in case it is perverse . The Enquiry Officer has based his findings on oral as well as documentary evidence . It cannot be said that there is absolute absence of any evidence in support ofthe findings oftheEnquiry Officer.

From perusal of the Dr.'s report it becomes quite vivid that the workman met with an accident and he was recommended light duty.

The management is entrusted with the operation of Airlines . The unauthorized habitual absence of such a workman will cause unnecessary harassment . This workman was given punishment 9 times and every time he was asked to improve but he did not improve . The management after conducting a fair and proper inquiry removed the workman .

There is no letter on the record to indicate that the workman was given heavy duty. He had not ever complained that he was given heavy duty as such the management gave him light duty according to the recommendation of the Doctor ,

The workman has admitted his guilt in his own handwriting and before the Inquiry Officer, so the inquiry is fair and proper and principles of natural justice have been followed.

The workman was warned on 9 occasions for unauthorized absence and his salary has been reducedby one stage, by two stages at last when he did not improve the workman was served charge -sheet..

The reference is replied thus :-

It is quite vivid from the letter ofthe workman that in his submission to the charge-sheet he has stated that due to persistent sickness in his family he could not resume his duties. He had not taken the plea in his reply to the charge-sheet that he was himself sick and so he could not resume his duties .

The action ofthe General Manager ( Comm1 . ), Indian Airlines , Northern Region , IGI Airport , New Delhi in removing Shri B.S. Gosain , Helper ( C) S.No.245976from the services of Indian Airlines Limited with immediate effect vide letter dated 31-12-1998 is justified, valid and reasonable The workman - applicant is not entitled to get any reliefas prayed for.

The award is given accordingly.

In hisletterdated 15-01-1998 MW1 /2 , the workman has mentioned that there was sickness problem in the family sohe was forced to take leave . The workman did not even submit replyto the show - cause notice of pre- decisional hearing . The DA has mentioned his 9 occasions of Date: 06-05-2008

R. N. RAI , PresidingOfficer 2991 [भाग - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

नई दिल्ली , 23 मई , 2008

Miner/Loader on his transfer is justified and genuine ? If not, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to?"

का.आ 1404.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947(1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मै. बी.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 ( सं. II ) , धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 190/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-5-2008 को प्राप्त हुमा कता ।

[सं. एल-20012/410/98- आई.आर. (सी-1 ) ] स्नेह लता क्वास , डेस्क अधिकारी

NewDelhi , the 23rd May,2008

S.O. 1404.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 190/99) ofthe CentralGovernment Industrial Tribunal /LabourCourt (No.II ) Dhanbad now as shown in the Annexure in the IndustrialDispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/s. B.C.C.L. and their werkman , which was receivedbythe Central Government on 23-5-2008.

[No. L-20012/410/98-IR(C- I)] SNEH LATA JAWAS, Desk Officer

2. The case of the concerned workman in short is thathe is apermanent miner/ loader at Kessurgarh Colliery since long. The management to victimise the concerned workman issued a transfer order in the year 1991. The concerned workman was directed to report for his duty at MohudaArea. He was tramferred along with 117 persons and name was appearing at Sl .No.82 . As per transfer order he reported atMohuda Ares for duty but no specific order was issued and he was orally directed to report for his dirty atLohapatryColliery. Accordingly he reported at Lohapatty Collierybut the management ofLohapatty Colliery neither allowed him to resume duty nor assigned any reason for not allowing himto resume duty . The concerned workman representedto the managemont to allow him to resume his duty but none of the competent authority has taken any cognizance in the matter. In this situation the concerned workman raised industrial dispute before the ALC(C) which ended in failure and ultimately resulted reference to this Tribunal . The action of the management was vindictive in nature and anti -labour policy. Prayer has been mede to answer the reference in favour of the workman by directing the management to allow him to resume his duty and to- regularise the concerned workman with retrospective effect with full back wages and consequential benefits.

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT:

Shri Nagendra Kumar, Presiding Officer.

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

ReferenceNo. 190 of1999

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the

3. As per case of the management a transfer order was issued on 1-7-91 and the concerned workman was posted at Lohapatty Colliery. Inspite of this office order he did not report to his duty at Lohapatty Colliery and accordingly, he was not taken in the roll of Lohapatty colliery. The concerned workman never represented or reported to the management regarding his duties since 1991. The dispute was raised by the concerned workman after 6years which is not maintainable. Since the concerned workman did not report to his duty there was no question to refuse him in the duty. Prayer has been made to reject the claim ofthe concerned workman.

management of Western Jharia Area of M/s . BCC Ltd, and their workman .

APPEARANCES:

Onbehalf ofthe workman

None

Mr. H. Nath,

On behalf ofthe employers

Advocate.

4. A rejoinder has also been filed on behalfofthe employers stating that the statement made in paras Ito 5 of the W. S. ofworkman is the matter of roce rd and anything contrary is denied as false . The statement riade in paras 7 to 9 ofthe W. S. of the concerned workman are denied as baseless and false .

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated, Dhanbad, the 1st May , 2008

5. In the record any rejoinder filed by the concerned workman is not available.

AWARD

6. From perusal of record it further appears that management has filed some documents but on behalf of the concerned workman no document has been filed.

7. POINTS TO BE DECIDED

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 had referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-20012/410/ 98- IR(C- 1 ) , dated the 17th April , 1999.

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Westerni ShariaArea as well as Block II Area ofM/ s.BCCL not toallow Shri Beri Dhobi to resume his duty as Miner/ Loader on his transfer is justified and genuine ? If not, towhat relief the concerned workman is entitled to?"

"Whether the action of the management of Western JhariaArea as well as Block II Area of M /s . BCCL not to allow Shri Beri Dhobi to resume his duty as 2992

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)] 8. FINDING WITH REASONS

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalfof the workman : Mr. P. M. Prasad , Advocate

Onbehalf of the employers : Mr. S. N. Sinha, Presiding

Officer,

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal. Dated, Dhanbad the 1st May, 2008.

AWARD

The concerned workman did not appear in spite of giving suficient opportunity to file document andto producewitness in support of his claim . The materials available on record is not sufficient enough on the basis ofwhich relief can be granted to the workman . In fact, he has not established his case and accordingly he is not entitled to get any relief. Accordingly following Award is rendered:-

TheGovt. of India , Ministry of Labour, in exercise of the 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/ 555/97-1.R . dated the 30th November , 1998 .

"The action ofthe management of Western Jharia as well as Block II Area of M/s. BCCL not to allow ShriBeri Dhobi to resume his duty as Miner/Loader on his transfer is justified and genuine . Consequently, the concerned workman is not entitled togetany relief. "

SCHEDULE

NAGENDRA KUMAR, Presiding officer

नईदिल्ली, 23 मई , 2008

"Whether the action of the management of Kusunda Area of BCCL in denying employment to dependent son from second Wife of Sri Pati Barhi of Industry Collieryunder clause 9-4-3 ofNCWA- IV is justified ? If not, towhat reliefthe concerned workman is entitled ? " का, आ. 1405.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियमए 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मै. बी. सी. सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबंद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय सं . II धनबाद के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 197/98 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-5-08 का प्राप्त हुआ था ।

2. The case of the concerned workman in short is that Rajesh Kumar Sharma, is the eldest and dependent son Pati Barhi , ex - Mining Sirdar of Industry Colliery. He submitted his application with relevant document for appointment as his father was declared medically unfit. PatiBarhi Itad two wives viz. Smt . Nila Devi who is issues less and Smt . Sabita Devi who is second wife of Pati Bathi and she had given birth to Rajesh Kumar Sharma and three others.

[सं. एल. 20012/555 /97-आई. आर. (सी 1 ) ] स्नेह लता जवास , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the23rd May ,2008

S. O. 1405.In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 197/98) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court ( No. II) Dhanbad now as shown in the annexure in Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/s. B.C.C.L. and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Governizient on 23-5-2008 .

[No. L-20012/555/97-IR(C- I)] SNEH LATA JAWAS , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

3. There is a reference of summary of Judgement of the Hon'bleAllahabad High Court published in FIR ( 64 ) of 1992 (CMWP No. 1173 of 1988 ) but no such decision has been filed by the concerned workman . However, it has been stated that Rajesh Kumar Sharma who is the son of Pati Barhi and his second wife is entitled for appointment in accordence with the provisions contained in NCWA As Pati Barhi was declared medically unfit . Due to Clerical mistake the name of Rajesh Kumar Sharma has been written as Raj Kumar Sharma in the service excerpt and the matter has been clarified through the affidavit . However , the management has rejected the claim of the petitioner regarding appointment on compassionate ground. Prayer has been made to provide employment to Rajesh Kumar Sharma in accordance with the provision contained in NCWA -IV.

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

PRESENT:

SHRI NAGENDRA KUMAR, Presiding Officer,

Inthe matter ofan Industrial Dispute under Section 10( 1) (d) ofthe I.D.Act. , 1947.

REFERENCE No. 197 OF1998

PARTES: Employers in relation to the

management of Kusunda Area of BCCL and their workman,

4. On behalf of the management W. S.- cum- rejoinder has been filed from which it appears that Rampati Barhi was employed on 1-10-1954. His date of birth is 3-1-1923 . He was working as Mining Sirdar. He was declared medically unfit by the Medical Board on 22-11-1990 . He was directed not to report for duty w.e.f. 17-12-1990. The order was passed on 11 /13-12-1990 .He made an application for employment of son from his second Wife Smt.Sabita Devi . The management examined and verified the family details of the petitioner as given in para- 12 of Service Excerpt dt . 14-3-1987 and found that there was no such name entered as Rajesh Kumar Sharma as the son of Shri Pati Barhi tather there was Raj Kumar [भाग - खण्ड 3( ii ) )

Sharma aged about 18 years on 14-3-1987. An application for appointmentwas made by Rajesh Kumar Sharma under clause 9-4-1991 ofNCWA- IV on 25-1-1991 showing his age as21 years and date of birth as 8-9-1969. Since inthe service excerpt in col . 12 name of the son ofPati Barhi is Raj Kumar Sharma whereas the name of the application alleged to be son of Pati Barhi is Rajesh Kumar Sharma, management communicated vide letter dt. 20-9-1995 that the alleged dependent son cannot be provided employment under clause 9-4-2003 of NCWA-IV . As per clause 26-1-1921 of the Certified S.O. of the company contracting another marriage while wife is still alive or marriaging a person who has a wife without first obtaining the perimisssion ofthe management is an offence. In the affidavit no where it is mentioned that Rajesh Kumar Sharma and Raj Kumar Sharma is same and identical person. The service excerpt ofPati Barhi has been filed. The affidavit does not show the signature of Pati Barhi . After verifying the genuineness from the colliery statutory register the claim of the concerned workmen/ personhas been rejected.

5. In the rejoinder portion about para- 1 and 2 it is said that the same is a matter ofrecord . About para -3 it has been explained as to how the employee of BCCL cannot contract second marriage . About para 4 and 5 it has been said as to bowRaj Kumar Sharma and Rajesh Kumar Sharroa is one and the same person has not been shown. About rest paras the details have been mentioned as to how the concerned person is making false prayer and that he is not entitled for employment under clause 9-4-2003 of the NCWA. Prayer has been made to 'reject the claim of the union.

6. A rejoinder on behalf of the concerned person has been filed. Details have been given answering W.S. of the management and giving further details as to how the concerned person is entitled for the relief as prayed for. It has also been mentioned misleading, frivolous statement not based on facts of the case has been made by the management. Prayer has been made to direct the management of offer employment to Shri Rajesh Kumar S/oPati Barhi.

7. POINTS TO BE DECIDED

"Whether the action of the management of Kusunda Area ofBCCL in denying employment to dependent son from second Wife of Sri Parti Barhi of Industry Colliery under clause 9-4-2003 of NCWA IV is justified ? If not, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled ?"

8. FINDING WITH REASONS.

In this case onbehalf of the management one Kajal Kumar Mohanti has been examined . On his behalf an affidavit sworn in by Rajesh Kumar Sharma son of late Pati Barhi has been marked as Ext . M- 1 . On behalf of the concerned workman WW- I Nila Devi and WW- 2 Rajesh Kumar Sharma have been examined . On behalf of the concerned person Ext. W- I office order dt . 11 / 13-12-1990 and Ext. W-2 Certificate ofBihar Vidyalaya Pariksha Samity has been filed .

2993

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

9. Ld. Lawyer for the concerned person has vehemently argued that since Pati Barihi was declared medically unfit during his service period and he was stopped from service than his dependent son Rajesh Kumar Sharma is entitled for appointment on compassionate ground in accordance with the provision of clause 9-4-2003 ofNCWA -IV. He has submitted that due to clerical mistake name of Raj Kumar Sharma has been mentioned instead of Rajesh Kumar Sharma in the service excerpt and the matter has been clarified through an affidavit of Rajesh Kumar Sharma . He has submitted further that the witness WW- I is the first wife ofPati Barhi. She has also clarified the matter . The concerned person Rajesh Kumar. Sharma has also been examined who has clarified the mistake inthe name. In this situation the management has wrongly rejectied the claim for appointment ofRajesh Kumar Sharma. In this situation he has prayed to issue direction tothe management to provide employment to Rajesh Kumar Sharma, the eldest son ofPatiBarhi .

10. On the other hand Ld . Lawyer for the management has submitted that on the basis of the facts and circumstances of the case Pati Barhi has contracted second marriage which is an set of misconduct and the son from second wife cannot be provided employment. Evenbeside this question as well there is questionwhether Rajesh Kumar Sharma, the concerned parson is the son of PatiBarhi ornot because in the Service Excerpt the name of the son of Pati Barhi bas been mentioned as Raj Kumar Sharma. There is also difference of age. Pati Barhi has not been examined in this case and no reason has been assigned for his non-examination. He has also not filed any affidavit clarifying this position . In fact on consideration of all statutory registers as well as documents management found that Raj Kumar Sharma and Raj Kumar Sharma are not the same person and accordingly the claim of the concerned person may be rejected .

11. Before proceeding further the provision containedin Clause 9-4-2003 ofNCWA -IV is reproduced below-

"9-4-3- Employment to one dependent of aworker who is permanently disabled in his place.

The disablement of the worker concerned should arisefrom injury of disease, be of a permanent nature resulting into loss of employment and it should be so cerfified by the Coal Company concerned .

(in) In case ofdisablement arising out of general physicaldebioity so certified by Coal Company concerned , not arising out ofinjury ordisease as in Para (1) above, the concerned employee will be eligible for the benefit under this Clause ifthe employee is upto the age of58 years .

(i) The dependant for this purpose means the wiferhusband, as the case may be, married daughter son and legally adopted son , If no such direct dependent is available for employment, younger brother , widowed daughter /widowed daughter- in- law or 2994

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ) THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/JYAISTHA 24 , 1930

son-in-law residing with the employee and almost wholly dependent on the employees maybe considered.

17. Thus from his evidence it does not appear as to how the management is stating the fact that Raj Kumar and Rajesh Kumar Sharma are different persons.

(iv) The dependant to be considered for employment should be physically fit and suitable for employment and aged not more than35 years provided that the age limit shall not apply in the case of spouse."

12. In the instant case it is not in dispute that one Shri Pati Barhi was an employee of BCCL and he was declared medically unfit during the year 1990 and hewas stopped from work w.e.f. 17-12-90 which is evident from ExtW-1 .

13. As per provision contained in NCWA- IV clause 9.4.3 provides employment of the dependent of persons who is declared medically unfit and son and legally adopted son are dependent for this purpose beside other persons. In the instant case claim has been made by the concerned person for appointment under the aforesaid clause. The position of law regarding appointment of son ofmedically unfit employee has not been disputed.

18. On the other hand Nila Devi WW- 1 has stated the fact that Pati Barhi was her husband who had two wive and she is the first wife ofher husband, She was issue-less and wanted to have one baby. So she arranged marriage of herhusband with her younger sister. After her consent her husband married her younger sister Sabita Devi . Rajesh Kumar is the eldest son of Sabita Devi and Pati Barhi . They submitted representation to the management for employement of their eldest son Rajesh Sharma. However, the management refused to give employment as in the Service excerpt the name of eldest son of Pati Barhi was recorded as Rajkumar Sharma. Rajkumar Sharma and Rajesh Kumar Sharma are same and indentical person . She does not have any objection if Rajesh gets employment under the managernent . During cross - examination she has said that she had arranged marriage of her younger sister with her husband . As a result of marital relationship her sister become mother of 5 children and she has disclosed their name. Her sister also gave birth ofa female baby . She had denied the suggestion that Rajesh Kumar Sharma was not the son of her husband.

14. Now the question has to be determined whether theconcerned person is the son of Pati Barhi or not and if yes whether he is entitled for employment în case he is the son of second wife of medically unfit employee.

19. From the evidence ofthis witness it appears that her husband had married her younger sister . As a result of marital relationship birth of five sons took place . There was also a birth of one female baby who had died . From her statement it appears that Rajesh Kumar is the son of her sister and husband and Raj Kumar Sharma ( the name appears in service Excerpt) and Rajesh Kumar is one and the sameperson. There is nothing in the cross -examination or even in the examination - in-chief to doubt this witness that Rajesh Kumar Sharına and Rajkumar are not one and the same person and also to doubt that Rajesh Kumar Sharma is not the son of her husband and her sister .

15. In this case the management has rejected the claim of the concemed person . To support the contention of the management MW- 1 has stated that he knows the concerned workman Pati Barfi who was posted at Industry Colliery as Mining Sirdar. He had two wives . He cannot say if the son of first wife or the son of second wife submitted application for employment on compassionate ground. He has proved the affidavit sworn in by Rajesh Kumar Sharma. He has said that there is no provision for employment to the son of second wife in presence of first wife. As per rule of the company the son of second wife is not entitled to get any employment . During cross- examination he has said he cannot except whether first wife ofPati Barhi is alive or not . He also does not know if first wife ofPati Barhi has any issue . He also cannot say the name ofhis second wife . He cannot say if Raj Kumar and Rajesh Kumar Sharma are the same and identical person, Rajesh Kumar is the son of Pati Barihi . It appears that on the deposition of this witness the signature of Presiding Officer is missing. However, both the parties have submitted that the witness was examined by the then PresidingOfficer and they are not disputing the same and the same may be adopted.

20. From the evidence of Rajesh Kumar Sharma it appears that his father had submitted an application to the management for his employment on compassionate ground as per provision of NCWA which was considerred by the management. Though he had appeared before the Interview Board on 15-6-1992 but management did not select him taking the plea that his name appearing in the application for employment submitted by his father did not tally with his name recorded in the service excerpt prepared by the management . He has specifically stated that his father had no son named as Raj Kumar Sharma. He had said that they are four brothers viz. Rajesh Kumar Sharma , Prakash. Kumar Sharma , Pritam Kumar Sharma and Murari Kumar Sharma . He has also submitted Matriculation Certificate Ext. W-2 inwhich his name has been mentioned as Rajesh Kumar Sharma . He was stated that due to mistake his name recorded in the service excerpt as Raj Kumar Sharma instead ofRajesh Kumar Sharma son of Pati Barhi . His fatherhad nosonnamedRaj Kumar Sharma but Rajesh Kumar Sharma. His father had two wive . The first wife of his fatherhad no 16. From perusal of the evidence of this witness MW-1 it does not appear that he is aware of the entire details ofthe family of Pati Barhi . He also cannot say ifRaj Kumar and Rajesh Kumar are the same and identical person. However, he has said that Rajesh Kumar is the son ofPati Barti.

2995 [भाग 1 ] -खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

nothing on record to show that management had given anypermisson for the second marriage of Pati Barhi even whenhis firstwife is alive. In this context clause 26.1.21 of the Certified Standing ofBCCL which is act of conduct is reproducedbelow:-

"Contracting another marriage while wife is still alive or marrying a person who has a wife without first obtaining the permission of the management." issue.They live in the same house with his Bari Max. Hehad statedthat in the Service Excerpt his age was recorded as 18 years. Ifthe age recorded in the service excerpt is considered in that casehis age would be 35 years . As the management did not make demand of any document to show that Raj Kumar Sharma and Rajesh Kumar Sharma is the same and identical person he had not submitted any document. He has denied the suggestion that he is a fictitious person and claiminghimself as the son of Pati Barhi . He has further denied the suggestion that he is not the son ofhis father. Hehasalso denied that he has placed a false claim for which he is not entitledto get relief.

24. Froin perusal of the aforesaid clause it appears that BCCL employee cannot contract another marriage when first wife is still alive without obtaining permission from the management which is not a case here. In fact, several other questions have been raised by the Ld . Lawyer for the management that the second marriage during the lifetime of first wife is null and void and punishable under Indian Penal Code.

25. It has been submitted on behalf of the management that in the aforesaid circumstances the concerned person Rajesh Kumar Shanna is not entitled for employment on this ground also.

26. In para 4 ofthe W. S. ofthe concemed workman a summary of the Judgement of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court has been mentioned to show that even a daughter ofsecond wife can be appointed on compassionat ground.As said earlier this judgement has not been filed. Even from perusal of summary ofthe judgement it appears that the matter relates to rules of U. P. State Electricity Board Employment of dependent of employees dying in harness Rules, 1975. But this rule does not appear to have application in the instant case as there is Certified Standing Order applicable for workmen of Establishments under BCCL and this shows that there cannot be marriage of BCCL employee during the life time of first wife and it is done then it is an act of misconduct.

21. From the details of the funily members given by this witness the names of four brothers of Rajesh Kumar Sharma tally with the statement of WW- 1 as given in the cross-examination . From the evidence of this witness it appears that Raj Kumar Sharma and Rajesh Kumar Sharma is the one and the same person rather due to mistake in the service excerpthis name was recorded as Raj Kumar Sharma. Even he has disclosed his age as 32 years while giving deposition and the question was put to the witness on this point which does not show any material contradiction on this point. During cross -examination there is nothing to show that the management has brought such evidence on record to establish the fact that this Rajesh Kumar Sharma is afictitious person and not the son of Pati Barhi rather from his evidence it appears that he is the son of Pati Barhi , of course, from the second wife ofPati Barhi, From perusal of affidavit Ext. M- 1 it appears that Raj Kumar Sharma and Rajesh Kumar Sharma is the same and identical person. The management could not point out any specific details on the basis of which it can be said that they are two different persons.Ext . W-2 is a Matriculation Certificate which shows that Rajesh Kumar Sharma is the son of Shri Pati Badhe. However, dispute has not been raised that Barhi andBadhe are different titles . On the basis ofevidence of WW- 1 , WW- 2as well as Exts . M- 1 , W- 2 it appears that Rajesh Kumar Sharma is the son of Pati Barhi who had filed application for the employment of his son. However , it appears that as per contents and details mentioned in the W.S. of the management, the management had rejected the claim of Rajesh Kumar Sharma on the ground that he is a different person and not the son of Pati Barhi. However it appears that rejection order has not been brought on record.

27. Be as it may be, no specific provision has been shown by the Ld . Lawyer of the concerned workman that clause 9.4.3 of NCWA- IV is applicable în case ofthe son of second wife . In fact from a plain reading of the aforesaid provision it appears that son of legally married wife i.e. first wifeor even the adopted son are entitled for appointment on compassionate ground in case an employee is declared medically unfit. Thus it appears that the case of Rajesh Kumar Sharma is not covered under clause 9.4.3 ofNCWA- IV. For the reasons stated above it appears that the concerned workman is not entitled to get any relief. Accordingly the folllowing Award is rendered:-

22. In this case reference shows that it has to be decided regarding denying employment to the dependent son from second wife of Pati Barhi . Therefore , the question has to be determined whether the son of second wife is entitled for employment and whether the action of the management in denying employment isjustified.

" The action of the management of Kusunda Area of BCCL in denying employing to dependent son from second wife of Sri Pati Barhi of Industry Colliery, under clause 9.4.3 of NCWA - IV is justified. Consequently, the dependent son from second wife of Pati Barhi is not entitled to get any relief."

NAGENDRA KUMAR, Presiding Officer 23. From the evidence on record it appears that Pati Barhi had married Sabita Devi sister of his first wife Nila Deviduring the life time ofNila Devi. In fact first wife is still alive. The evidence shows that the second marriage ofPati Barhi took place with the consent of first wife that too with her sister because she had no baby. However, there is 2996

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART I-SEC. 3 (ii ) ] नई दिल्ली, 23 मई , 2008

Hon'ble Supreme Court in " Air India Statutory Corporation etc " are entitled for preferential treatment for recruitment in the establishment" .

The case of the workmen is that she was working as a field worker with the respondent w.e.f. 26-12-1994 and she gave no complaint to the officers of the respondents.

का.आ. 1406.- औद्योगिक विव्यद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसारण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मैं. एयर इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोकों और उनके कर्मचारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण// श्रम न्यायालय ( सं. 11 ) नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( सन्दर्भ संख्या 59/1999 ) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-5-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-11012/34/98- आई आर. (सी-1 ) ]

स्नेह लता जवास , डेस्क अधिकारी

That she has filed photocopy of Identity Card , duty diary . The workman was engaged with the management through Marshal Security and Detective but she worked on the direction of the officers of the respondents . The work was regular in nature being performed through contractors . The contact agreement is sham and ruse.

New Delhi, the 23rd May,2008

That she has been demanding the respondent to issue appointment letter as a regular workman but she was removed without any chargesheet on 15-06-1996 ,

The case of the management is that persons similarly situated invoked writ jurisdiction and their cases has been dismissed,

S.O. 1406. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial dispute Act, ( 14 of1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 59/1999) ofthe Central government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court (No. II) New Delhi now as shown in the annexure in Industrial Disputes between the employers in relation to the management of M/s. Air India and their workmen which was received by theCentral Government on 23-5-08.

[No. L- 11012/34/98 - IR(C- 1 ) ] SNEH LATA, JAWAS, 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 . 59/1999

In the matter of

That the workman was in employment of M/s . Marshal Security and Detective Limited who had been awarded the contract by Air India for providing watch and ward services . The said contractor was deploying his employees to M/s . Air India. They were performing the duties of security guards . The said contractor was deploying his guards to several other corporations . The employees worked at sometimes in some establishment and sometimes in other establishment. The appointment , placement, supervision , payment etc. were being controlled by the contractor . There was no employer -employee relationship . The Identity Card was issued in the name of the agency by which particular persons are employed. It is reflected on Identity Card. The contract is not sham . The workınan worked under the control and supervision of the contractor.

Smt, Mithlesh, C/oAll IndiaGeneral Trade Union(Regd.) 163, Balmukund Khand, GiriNagar, Kalkaji , NewDelhi- 110019

-Claimant

Versus

TheManager,

Evidence ofboth the parties has been taken .

M/s.Air India Limited, HansalayaBuilding , Sth Floor, Barakhamba Road, NewDelhi - 110001 -Respondents

AWARD

The case was posted on 07-04-2008 for argument. The workmen did not turn up on (07-05-2008 also . Noticeby registered post has been sent to the workmen , The workmen did not turn up for argument . The management was heard. The case is decided on its entire meril

TheMinistry ofLabour by its letter No. L-11012/34/ 98-IR(C- I ) Central Governmentdt. 16-12-1998 has referred the following point for adjudication:

The point runs as hereunder:-

The case of the workmen is that she worked under the control and supervision of the management . She was removed illegally without any charge-sheet.

"Whether the Security Guards working as contract labourers in the establishment of M/ s , Air India Limited for number ofyearsjust beforejudgment of

It was submitted from the side of management that theworkman was engaged through M/ s . Marshal Security and Detective w.e.f. 16-12-1994 and the contractor has

1 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (H) ]

2997

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 /ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

terminated her services . The workmen worked up to 15-06-1996 and Marshal Security terminated her services.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOURCOURT- I , NEW DELHI, PRESIDING OFFICER ; R. N. RAI

I.D. NO.42/2000

Inthe matter of

Theworkman has admitted in her cross -examination that shewas appointed with Marshal Security and Detective Services w.e.f. 26-12-1994 . She has further admitted that shewas issued Identity Card by the Air India as a token of herbeing employee ofM/s Marshal Security and Services. She has also admitted that it is correct to suggest that her serviceswere not terminated by M/s. Air India.

The workmen has admitted that identity Card were issued reflecting her as workman ofM/s . Marshal Security and Detective Services and her services were not terminated byAir India. She has not filed any document to show that she worked under the control and supervision of the management . She was engaged by M/s . Marshal Security and Detective Services and her services were terminated byM/ s . Marshal Secruity Services . So there is no question ofrelationship of master and servant. The workman is a contract workman and her services have been terminated by the contractor.

The reference is replied thus :-

The Security Guards working as contract labourers in the establishment of M/s . Air India Limited for number ofyears just before judgement ofHon'ble Supreme Court in "Air India Statutory Corporation etc. " are not entitled for preferential treatment for recruitment in the establisment .

The award is given accordingly.

Date: 14-05-2008

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 23 मई , 2008

का,आ. 1407,-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसारण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मै. इंडियन एयर लाइन्स के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोनकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय ( सं. 11 ) नई दिल्ली के पंचाट सन्दर्भ संख्या 42/2000 को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-5-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -11012/ 122/99- आईआर ( सी- [ ) ]

स्नेह लता अवास , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi, the 23rdMay, 2008

S.O. 1407.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the In- dustrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) the CentralGov ernment hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 42/2000 ) of theCentralGovernment Industrial Tribunal Labour Court, No. II New Delhi now as show in the annexure in Industrial Disputes between the employers in relation to the manage- ment of M/ s. Indian Airlines and their workmen which was received by the Central Government on 23-5-08.

[No. L- 11012/ 122/99 - IR(C- 1) } SNEH LATA JAWAS , Desk Officer 2071 G1 /08-20

-Caimant Sh. Mahesh Chandra , S/o Sh. PrahaladRam, R/o. L- 119A, StreetNo. 5, Mahipalpur Extension , New Delhi - 110037

Versus

TheGeneral Manager ,

Indian Airlines Limited, Gurudwara Rakab Ganj Marg, NewDelhi.

-Respondent

AWARD

TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No. L- 11012/ 122/ 99- IR(C- I) Central Government dt. 7-3-2000 has referred the following point for adjudication:

The point runs as hereunder :-

"Whether the action of the management of Indian Airlines , New Delhi , in not regularizing the services of Sh . Mahesh Chandra , Casual Competist and terminating the same w.e.f. 5-5-1995 is just and legal ? If not , to what relief is the workman entitled and from what date ?"

The case oftheworkmen is that he was continuously working in Indian Airlines Limited from 6-11-1990 to 5-5-1995 except for artificial breaks he was working as Comptist . The nature of work performed by the workmanwas permanent and perennial in nature . He was initially paid Rs . 1800/- per month and from time to time it was enhanced and lastly the workman was paid Rs .3,000,

That the management issued hotification dated 16-6-1992 in fact for the post ofComptist in the pay scale of Rs . 1185-1755 . The workmani made representation to the management seeking permanent employment but the case ofthe workman was not considered.

The case ofthe management is that the claimant was purely engaged on casual basis on account of exigencies of work . He was engaged through M /s . Caompto Electronics on casual basis . The workman was deputedby M/s. Caompto Electronics for doing the job of totaling balancing of revenue documents and accounts book and central revenue account department of the management of Captometer provided by M/s . Capto Electronics for fixed period as per the exigencies of the work.

2998

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008/JYAISTHA 24, 1930

are considered as piece of evidence, the workman has not completed 240 days work eitherd in 1990 or in 1991 or in 1993 or in 1995. He has been engaged for short spells for2- 3days work, so there is no question of breach of section 25F ofthe ID Act, 1947.

The post was advertised,but the government put a completeban on recruitment to no recruitment was made. Thereafter the use of Coptometer was drawn away due to computerization of certain activities in central revenue account, department of the management.

It is true that the management notified for recruitment for Comptist but a general ban was put on recruitment so no comptist were appointed.

The workman applicant has filled rejoinder. In the rejoinder he has reiterated the averments of his claim statement and has denied most of the paras of the written statement. The management has also denied most ofthe parasofthe claim statement.

Evidence of both the parties has been taken.

Heard argument from both the sides and persused the papers on the record.

The workmen has worked for 23 days in 1990 , 90 days in 1991,8 days in 1993 , 30 days in 1995 and every time appointment has been given to him after approval. The workman has not completed 240 days in any of the years of his employinent . The system of accounting through camptometer has been abolished . It is not the case of the workman that some junior to him has been taken in his place. He has not rendered 240 days in any of the years of his employment, so there is no question of any breach of section 25P ofthe ID Act, 1947 .

Itwas submitted from the side of the workmen that hehasworked continuously from 06-11-1990 to 05-05-1995 under the respondent . He was engaged as casual comptist. Heworked under the direct control and supervision of the management.

The reference is replied thus :-

The action of the management of Indian Airlines, New Delhi in not regularizing the services of the Sh. Mahesh Chandra, Casual Contist and terminating the same w.e.f. 05-05-1995 is just and legal . The workmen applicant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for .

It was submitted from the side of the management that the workman was not engaged by the management buthe was engaged M/ s . Compto Electronics as per the contractbasis . Payment to the workmen was made on the basis of the duty performed by him. Rs . 4,000 was paid as wages for comptist and Rs . 3,000 onwards for comptometer machine.

The award is given accordingly.

R. N. RAI , PresidingOfficer

Date:01-05-2008

The workman has annexed three certificates of payment ofwages. Initially the workmen was engaged from 06-11-1990 to 31-01-1991 and from05-02-1991 to31-03-1991 and payment to him was made accordingly.

नई दिल्ली, 23 मई , 2008

The workmen has filed photocopy of payment. Payment to him has been made from 04-11-1990 to 30-11-1991 . The workman has filed photocopy document which indicates that he was engaged from 5th August to 13th August, 1993 and payment to him was made for the period.

का.आ. 1408, -औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसारण 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 ( सन्दर्भ संख्या 41/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-5-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42012/ 11/2000-आईआर ( सी - Ⅱ ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी The workman has again filed photocopydocuments which show that payment to him was made by the management from 01-04-1995 to 30-04-1995 . The workman has filed another document which certifies that payment to himwas made from Ist May to 5th May. The workman has not filed any other document regarding payments made to him or as proof ofhis working.

New Delhi , the 23rd May,2008 Theworkmen worked from 06-11-1990 to 31-03-1991 forthe first time and he received payment thereafter in 1993 he was engaged for 8 days and in the year 1995 he was engaged from 1st April to 30th April . In the year 1995 the workman has worked for 30 days. In the year 1993 the workman has worked for 8 days and in the year 1990 he has worked for 23 days and in year 1991 he has worked for 90 days.

S.O. 1408.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 41/2001) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum-Labour Court No. II , New Delhi as shows in the annexure in Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of CPWD and their workman , which was receivedby the Central Government on 23-5-08.

[No. L-42012/ 11 /2000 - IR(C -II ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer The management has filed contract agreement with M/s.Compto Electronics . The management has denied the documents filed by the workmen but in case photocopies 2999 [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL

GOVERNMENTINDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-

LABOUR COURT- IL, NEW DELHI

The workman -applicant has filed rejoinder. In the rejoinder he has reiterated the averments of his claim statement and has denied most of the paras ofthe written statement. The management has also denied most of the paras ofthe claim statement.

PRESIDING OFFICER : R.N.RAI

Evidence ofboth the parties has been taken.

ID.No.41/2001

IN THE MATTER OF :

Heard argument from both the sides and perused the papers on the record.

Sh. Sumer Singh,,

C/o . CPWD MazdoorUnion, E-26,Raja Bazar , (Old Qurs.),

B.K.S.Marg,

NewDelhi

Claimant

Versus

Itwas submitted from the side of the workman that he has been continuously working as electrician and he passed trade test in the year 1992. He has served the management from 1986 till now. His services have not been regularized. The management has regularized the services of the junior OBCs workmen but they have refused him regularization.

TheDirector General (Works),

CPWD, Nirman Bhawan,

NewDelhi

-Respondent

AWARD

Itwas submitted from the side of the management that theworkman submitted his OBC certificate in2000, so his casewas not considered by the management. There is ban on regularization .

TheMinistry ofLabour by its letter No. L-42012/ 11 / 2000- IR(C- II) Central Government dt . 22-06-2001 has referred the following point for adjudication ;

The point runs as hereunder:-

Itbecomes quite obvious from perusal of the record thatthe other junior OBCs workmen have been regularized prior to 2000. The workman could not be regularized as he didnot submit any certificate ofOBC in the year 2000. The workmanjuniorto him have been regularized in 1995, 1996 & 1998. It is not also denied that juniors to him have not been regularized on OBC category.

"Whether the action of the DG , CPWD, Nirman Bhawan , New Delhi the SuperintendingEngineer(E), Co- ordination Circle (E), CPWD, IP Bhawan, New Delhi in not regularizing the services of the Sh. Sumer Singh as wireman w.e.f. 18-06-1986 and also not appointing/promoting him to the post of Electrician even though he was duly selected inthe trade test is legal and justified? If not, towhat relief and benefits , he is entitled to. "

The only case of the management is that there is ban on regularization . This plea is false. The management has regularized theworkman in almost every year from 1991 to 1998. The case of this workman has not been considered illegally and arbitrarily by the mariagement . He filed OBC certificate in 2000 and the management should have regularized him w.e.f. January, 2000.

The case of the workman is that he is working as wireman on muster roll and he is posted in Sucheta Kriplani Hospital . Hewas engaged w.e.f. 16-08-1986 by the Executive Engineer, PWD, Electrical Division . His services were transferredto Ram Manohar Lohiya Hospital. He is presently discharginghis duties in Suchita Kriplani Hospital.

That he passed the trade test in the year 1996. The DPC ofelectrician of direct quota has also declared him for the post ofelectrician.

It has been held in Constitution Bench Judgment that the management should consider the feasibility of regularization ofa workman who has worked for more than 10years .This workman has rendered services for 22 years . HefiledOBCcertificate in the year 2000, Junior OBCS muster roll .employees have been regularized prior to him. This workman deserves regularization and payment of all the arrears arising as a result ofregularization from 2000 .

It is not denied by the management that there is no postofelectrician . The workman deserves regularization atleast fromMarch ,2000.

The reference is replied thus:-

The action of the DG, CPWD , Nirman Bhawan, NewDelhi theSuperintending Engineer (B), Co- ordination Circle (E), CPWD, IP Bhawan, New Delhi in not regularizing the services of Sh . Sumer Singh as wireman w.e.f. 18-06-1986 and also not appointing/promoting him to the postofElectrician even though be was duly selected in the tradetest isneither legal nor justified . The workman should The case ofthe management is that he was engaged on muster roll on 16-08-1986 but he has not been regularized in regular work charge establishment for the reason oforder dated 19-11-1985 which puts restriction on regularization on daily rated worker who were engaged after 19-11-1985 and therefore, the workman has no cause ofaction against the answering management. The workman submitted his OBC certificate only on 14-02-2000 so his case for regularization as warranted could not be considered earlier because ofhis own negligence and as on date there is ban on regularization . The case for regularization can be considered after the ban on regularization is lifted.

3000

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II Sec . 3 ( ii) ] be regularized on the post ofelectrician w.e.f. March , 2000. He is also entitled to promotion and other benefits w.e.f. the date ofhis regularization within two months from the date of the publication of the award.

The award is given accordingly .

Date: 14-5-2008

R. N. RAI , PresidingOfficer

" क्या प्रबंधतंत्र सब एरिया मैनेजर, बुढार सब पुरिया साउथ ईस्टर्न कोलफील्डस लिमिटेड के प्रबंधकों द्वारा श्री उमेष कुमार क्लिपमेन टो. नं. 371 बुढार कोलरी नं. 3 को विगत ४ वर्षों से मुंशी के पद पर कार्य लिये जाने के बाद उसे मुंशी के पद पर पदोन्नत/ नियमित न करने की कार्यवाही न्यायोचित है। यदि नहीं तो संबंधित कर्मकार किस अनुतोष का हकदार हैं । "

नई दिल्ली, 23 मई, 2008

का.आ. 1409, 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 ( सन्दर्भ संख्या 99/1995 ) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-5-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-22012/529/1994- आई. आर. (सी- II ) ]

अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 23rd May,2008

2.The case of workman Shri Umesh Kumar in briefis that he was employed as Tub Munshi at Burhar Colliery No.3 for the last 8 years continuously. That the workman Umesh kumar , clipman , token No. 371 had raised an industrial dispute before Assistant Labour Commissioner (C) for his promotion /regularisation which ended in failure , During the conciliation proceedings , due to closure of Burhar Colliery, he was transferred toNavgaon project .He came to know that though he was promoted but some deduction was being made from his basic pay which caused. him financial loss . The management had knowledge that an industrial dispute of workman Umesh Kumar was pending through Koyla Mazdoor Sabha and under such circumstances , it was not just and proper to make deduction from his salary and not to promote him. It is prayed that he may be promoted and regularised on the post of Munshi .

S.O. 1409.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the In- dustrial disputes Act 1947 (14 of 1947 ) the Central Govern- ment hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 99/1995 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court , Jabalpur as shows in the Annexure in Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of SECL, and their workmen which was received by the Cen- tralGovemment on 23-5-08 .

[No. L-22012/529/ 1994- IR(C- 11)] AJAY KUMAR GAUR , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

3.The case ofthe management in brief is as follows. That workman Shri Umesh Kumar was initially appointed as Badli tub loader on 28-10-78. He was regularised to the post of clipman on 1-7-84. While the workman was working as clipman, he was selected for the post of pit munshi in clerical Grade- III . Since he has already been promoted as pitmunshi , the dispute becomes infructuous . The workman has not worked as a Raising mate for eight years as claimed by him . His pay has been fixed according to the post ofPit Munshi Clerical Grade- III .

BEFORE THE CENTRALGOVERNMENT INDUS-

TRIALTRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR

NO . CGIT/LC/R/99 /95

4. Vide order dated 7-12-2005 passed on the ordersheet of this reference proceeding , the reference proceeded exparte against the workman.

PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRIC.M.SINGH

TheGeneral Secretary,

5. As the reference procceded exparte against the workman, there is no oral evidence on behalfof the workman onrecord.

KoylaMazdoor Sabha (UTUC),

PostDhanpuri ,

Workman /Union

Distt. Shahdol ( MP)

Versus-

6. The management in order to prove their case filed affidavit of their witness Shri M.L.Prajapat , then working as SubAreaManager, Burbar Sub Area in SECL , Sohagpur area .

The Sub Area Manager ,

Burhar Sub Area of SECL,

Post. Dhanpuri ,

Distt . Shahdol

Management

7. I have heard Shri A.K.Shashi , Advocate learned counsel for the management and perused the evidence on record.

AWARD

Passed on this 6th day of May 2008

8.The case of the management is fully established and proved from the uncontroverted and unchallenged affidavit of management's witness Shri M.L. Prajapat.

1. TheGovernment of India, Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. 1. -22012/529/94 - IR ( C - II) dated 26-5-95 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal : -

9. The reference is , therefore , decided in favour of the management and against the workman without any orders as to costs as follows :-

3001 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ü ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

AWARD

Passed on this 6th day of May 2008

1. TheGovernment of India, Ministry of Labour vide itsNotification No.L -22012/36/97 - IR (C- II ) dated 17-7-98 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :-

" प्रबंधतंत्र सब एरिया मैनेजर , बुढार सब एरिया साउथ ईस्टर्न कोलफील्डस लिमिटेड के प्रबंधकों द्वारा श्री उमेष कुमार क्लिपमेन टो. नं. 371 बुकार कोलरी नं. 3 को विगत 8 वर्षों से मुंशी के पद पर कार्य लिये जाने के बाद उसे मुंशी के पद पद पदोन्नत/नियमित न करने की कार्यवाही न्यायोचित है। अतः संबंधित कर्मकार किसी अनुतोष का हकदार नहीं हैं। "

10. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government ofIndia , Ministry of Labour & Employment asperrules.

C.M. SINGH, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली 23 मई , 2008

"Whether the action of the Regional Director , Coal Mines Plannings Design Institute Ltd. R.No. V Bilaspur in imposing punishment of recovery of Rs.9800 from the wages of Sh.K.L.Adhikari, Driver- cum-Mechanic, Cat. VI Amadand Project is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?"

2.Vide order dated 4-7-05 passed on the ordersheet of this reference proceeding , the reference proceeded exparte against the workman/Union . No statement ofclaim hasbeen filed on behalf of workman/Union .

का.आ. 1410.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसारण में केन्द्रीय सरकार सी एम पी डी आई के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण जबलपुर के पंचाट ( सन्दर्भ संख्या 138/1998 ) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-5-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-22012/36/1997 - आई.आर. ( सी- 1Ⅱ ) ]

अजय कुमार गौड़, डेस्क अधिकारी

NewDelhi, the 23rd May,2008

S.O. 1410.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial disputes Act (14 of1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 138/1998 ) of the Central Govemment Industrial Tribunal-cum - Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Disputes between the employers in relation to the management of CMPDI and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 23-5-2008.

[No. L. 22012/36/ 1997- IR(C- II))

AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE .

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM -LABOUR COURT,JABALPUR

NO . CGIT/LC/R/ 138/98

PRESIDING OFFICER: SHRIC.M.SINGH

TheGeneral Secretary,

KoylaMazdoor Sabha ,

3.The case ofthe management in brief is as follows. Jeep No. MKL- 116 belonging to CMPDI Exploration Camp, Amadand was under repair at RI -V, Bilaspur and after repair on 6-5-94, workman Shri K.L. Adhikari , Cat . VI/DCM was called from Amadand Exploration Camp and asked to take back the jeep No. MKL- 116 from Bilaspur to Amadand. Workman Shri K.L. Adhikari was specifically given this assignment as he was a Driver -cum -Mechanic as he is more knowledgeable about the mechanism and driving ofthe vehicle. On 7-5-94 while thejeep was being taken to Amadand fron Bilaspur , the engine ofthe jeep got heated and ceased. The jeep had to be towed to AmadandExploration Camp by another vehicle. The jeep broke downdue to the negligence ofworkman Shri K. L. Adhikari and he was chargesheeted for the same on 2-6-94. In the departmental enquiry, the workman was found guilty ofthe charges levelled against him and vide order dated 15-9-94, it was decided to recover an amount ofRs . 9800 out of the actual expenses incurred towards the repair of the jeep . The recovery of Rs . 9800/- was made after a fair and impartial enquiry wherein the workman had participated as per clause 27.1 ( b) of the certified standing order vide which the services of the workman concerned is governed with. An appeal was made by him against the above deduction but in the appeal , he did not enlight to reconsider the decision of the deiciplinary authority. The action of the management of recovery of Rs. 9800 towards the cost of repair ofjeep damaged due to negligence of the workman is legal and proper and consequently the workman is not entitled to any relief.

SohagpurArea,

PostDhanpuri,

-Workman/Union

Distt. Shahdol (MP)

Versus

4. The management in order to prove their case filed affidavit oftheir witness Shri M. Ashok Kumar, then posted as Personnel Manager in CMPDI . RI -V, Bilaspur .

TheRegional Manager,

C.M.P.D.I, R- IV, M.V.Market,

5. I have heard Shri A. K. Shashi , Advocate for the management and perused the evidence on record.

NearBus Stand, Bilaspur.

-Management 3002

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ]

Versus

M/sFruitand Vegetable Projects ,

6. The case of the management is fully established and proved from the uncontroverted and unchallenged affidavitof management's witness Shri M. Ashok Kumar .

Mangolpuri ,

NewDelhi - 110007,

-Respondents

AWARD

1. The Ministry of Labour by its letter No.L-42012/ 111/ 1998 - IR(C - II) Central Govt . dated 05-01-2001 has referred the following point for adjudication:

The point runs as hereunder ;-

7. The reference is decided in favour of the management and against the workman/Union without any orders as to costs holding that the action of Regional Director, Coal Mines Plannings Design Institute Ltd. R. No.VBilaspur in imposing recovery ofRs . 9800 from the wages of Sh. K. L, Adhikari , Driver-cum -Mechanic, Cat . VI Amadand project is legal and justified . Consequently the workman is not entitled to any relief.

8. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Gavernment of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment asper rules.

"Whether the action of the management ofM/ s . Fruit and Vegetable Pariyojna in terminating the services ofSh . Mahesh Kumar is legal and justified ?. If not , to what reliefthe workman is entitiled",

C. M. SINGH, PresidingOfficer

नई दिल्ली, 23 मई, 2008

The case ofthe workman is that he was employedby the respondent on 17-10-1995 and he continued in employment tili termination . He was a technician in operation maintenance department . The applicant met with an accident in the factory on 05-09-1997 . The matter was brought to notice of the respondent . The applicant went on sending medical certificates during the period of his illness and he was suddenly removed.

का.आ. 1417.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार फुट एण्ड वेजिटेबल प्रोजेकट के संबद्ध नियोकों और उनके कर्मचारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं. - 2 नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( सन्दर्भ संख्या 05/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-5-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

That his retretichment is illegal because the work performed by the applicant is continuning and junior workmen to the applicant in the same department were continuing on the date of illegal retrenchment .

[सं. एल-42012/111/1998 - आई.आर. ( सी- II ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़, डेस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi , the 23rd May, 2008

S.O. 1411. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial disputeAct ( 14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 05/2001) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum - Labour Court -No . II NewDelhi as show in the Annexure in Industrial Disputes between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s. Fruit & Vegetable Projects , and their workman , which was receivedby the Central Government on 23-5-2008.

The case of the management is that the claimant was takenby the management temporary basis due to temporary pressure of work for a fixed period. The services of the applicant came to an end after temporary fixed period and the claimant was accordingly informed. He was not entitled to retrenchment compensation still he was paid one month's pay in lieu of notice and one month's wages in view ofhis two years service . No junior to the workman has been retained in service . The workman was given tempoгагу assignment and he was informed accordingly at the end of the fixed term period .

[No.142012/ 111 / 1998- IR (C- II) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

The workman applicant has filed rejoinder. In the rejoinder he has reiterated the averments of his claim statement and has denied most of the paras of the written statement . The management has also denied most of the paras ofthe claim statement .

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALCUM-

Evidence ofboth the parties has been taken.

LABOUR COURT - IL, NEWDELHI

L.D. No. 05/2001

Heard argument from both the sides and persued the papers on the record,

PRESIDING OFFICER : R.N. RAI

IN THE MATTER OF :

Sh . Mahesh Kumar,

-Claimant

S/o . Sh . Prem Singh , C/o.RashtriyaDairy Vikas Karamchari Sangh , 118, Kishanganj , Purana Rohtak Road Market, NewDelhi-110007.

It was submitted from the side of the workman that his name sponsored from employment exchange and he was given appointment for 17-10-1995 to 16-01-1996 and again from 17-01-1996 to 16-04-1996 and from 17-04-1996 10 16-10-1996 and from 17-10-1996 to 16-04-1997 and thereafter hewas engaged from 14-07-1997 to 13-09-1997 thereafter his services were arbitrarily and illegally terminated by the management . He was paid inadequate compensation.

[ भाग 1 ] - खण्ड 3( ii) ]

It was submitted from the side of the management that the workman as engaged due to increase in temporary work and every time in his appointment letter it was mentioned that his services are purely temporary and in case the fixed term is not extended his services will be terminated. No junior to the workman has been retained.

The management has filled photocopy of engagement letters . It has been specifically mentioned in the engagement letters that in case the period of fixed term is not extended by the project, his services will be deemed terminated automatically.

Ithas been also mentioned that either party may be terminated from contract of service after a notice of 24 hours.

The management witness has stated in his cross- examination that one Sh. Kiran Pal has been continued in service.Hewas in freezing department whereas the workman was in Battery Department. Sh. Kiran Pal was trainee technician and he was in diffrent department, so his services have been retained . He was working at the time of this workman.

The concerned workman has been given temporary assignment for fixed period. In all the fixed term engagement letters it has been specifically mentioned that his services will cometo end after expiry of the fixedterm.

The management witness has stated in his cross- examination that the accident took place due to negligence of the workman . Sh . Kiran Pal was not appointed in his place . He was appointed in a reserved post meant for scheduled caste as per rules. His job is of technician, no doubt but he was appointed in the Freezing Department while the concerned workman was working in the Battery Department.

3003

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24 , 1930

applicant isnot entitled to get any relief as prayed for .

The award is given accordingly.

Date:15-05-2008

R.N. RAI, PresidingOfficer नई दिल्ली , 23 मई , 2008

का.आ. 1412,--औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की भारा 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 अवलपुर के पंचाट ( सम्दर्भ संख्या 74/1993 ) को प्रक्रोशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-5-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल -22012/ 1/1993 - आई. आर. (सी- II ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi, the 23rd May,2008

S.O. 1412. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) the Central Governmenthereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 74/1993) oftheCentralGovernment Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur as shows in the Annexure in the Incdustrial Dispute between the employers in relationto the management of SECL, and their workman , which was receivedby the Central Government on 23-5-2008.

[No. L-22012/ 1/1993 - IR(C- II)] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRALGOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM-LABOUR COURT JABALPUR

NO. OGIT/LC/R/74/93

Itbecomes quite obvious from perusal of the record that the workman has been given fixed term appointment and it has been specifically mentioned in his engagement letter that his services will come to end with the expiry of the fixedterm.

The management has paid him one month's pay in lieu of notice and compensation as per the provisions of section 25F of the ID Act, 1947. Termination of the workman has been rightly effected by the management in view of section 2(00) (bb) of the ID Act, 1947.

Theworkmanwas appointed for fixed term andwhen the tenure of fixed term period was over his services came to an end authomatically accordingto the engagement letters issued to him . Termiantion of services is just and legal. No junior has been retained.

The reference is replied thus:-

The action of the management of M/s . Fruit and vegetable Pariyojna in terminating the services of Sh. Mahesh Kumar is legal and justified . The workman PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI C. M. SINGH

-Workman/Union AreaSecretary, Samyukta Khadan Mazdoor Sangh (AITUC), UnionOffice, M/62 UrjaNagar, SECL, GevraProject, Distt.Bilaspur.

Versus

-Management DeputyGeneral Manager, SECL, Gevra Project, P.O.Gevra Project Distt.Bilaspur.

AWARD

Passed on this 6th day of May 2008 1. TheGovernment of India, Ministry of labour vide its Notification No. L- 22012/1 /93 - IR( C- II) dated 6-4-93 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal:-

3004

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II SBC.3 (i ) ] "Whether the management ofGevraProject ofSouth EasternCoalfields Ltd., Bilaspur isjustified in denying Gr. I(Group -B) to S/Shri Kanhaiya Lal , Jawahar Singh andB. V. Tiwari w.e.f. 1-2-89? Ifnot, to what reliefthe workmen concerned are entitled to?"

The case ofworkmen S/Shri Kanhaiya Lal , Jawahar Singh and B. V. Tiwari is as follows . All the 3 workmen before being employed with SECL were posted as diesel operator in the irrigation department of MP Government, Forselection ofOperators, they were interviewed by SECL with Shri Maganlal and other employees . That the management of SECL issued order ofappoinment to them. Order of appointment dated 2-6-88 was also issued to Shri Maganlal . The workmen completed their period of their appointment on probation for a period of one year at Gevra Project of SECL as diesel operator . During the training period, they have been operating dozer power ( 380-420 HP) .After having completed probation period of one year, theywere regularised on the post ofdiesel operator Grade- "C" whereas Shri Maganlal after having completed the training period was regularised as operator on Gr "B " . The workmen were ordered to operate dožer Gr . " A " which is the machine of having power of70 HP . It is prayed that the workmen be regularised as dozer operator ofGr. "B " from the date of completing their training and difference ofpay be given to them.

4. The workmen namely S/ Shri Kankaiya Lal , Jawahar Singh and B. V. Tiwari completed one year as on 1-12-89 . Asper terms of appointment , their appointment in regular scale ofpay should not have been considered before expiry of one year i.e. 4-1-90 and 6-1-90 respectively . Their claim that they should be regularised as Dozer Operator Gr. [ ] (Group "B") immediately on completion of their training i.e. one year. That after completion of training period, the trainees were appointed in regular pay of scale in terms of appointment order and they have been placed in Dozer Operator Grade- II ( Group "C" ) . The Union has compared the case ofSarva Shri Kanhaiya Singh , Jawahar Singh and Badri Vishal Tiwari with Shri Maganlal and Gariba . Shri Maganlal was appointed vide office order No. 3947 dated 2-6-1988 as Dozer Operator and joined duty on 2-6-1988 and Shri Gariba was appointed vide ofice order No. 3977 dated 12-11-1987 as Dozer Operator. Shri Maganlal and Gariba were departmental candidates and they are senior to the workmen. The workmen cannot compare their case with the seniors. That the Dozer operators who are operating higher capacity machines are paid difference of wages / operating allowance , as the case may be. Shri Kanhaiyalal and others were paid difference of wages / operating allowance for operating higher capacity machines. That the workmen S/Shri Kanhaiya Lal , Jawahar Singh and B. V. Tiwari have already been promoted to the post of Dozer Operator Gr - I ( Group " B" ) w.e.f. 1-7-94. There is no discrimination and juniors to the claimants have not been placed above them . The seniority of the workmen is maintained.

5. Vide order dated 18-10-06 passed on the ordersheet of this reference proceeding, the reference proceeded exparte against the workmen/Union.

6. The management in order to prove their case filed affidavit of their witness Shri S. Ramkrishna Rao , then working as Dy, C.P.M. in Gevra Project .

7. I have heard Shri A. K. Shashi , Advocate learned counsel for the management and perused the evidence on record.

3. The case ofthe management in briefis as follows. That workmen S/ Shri Kanhaiya Lal , Jawahar Singh andB. V.Tiwari were appointed as HEMM Operator (T) vide office orderNo. 3954 dated 3-6-1988, 7409dated 30-11-1988 and 7404dated30-11-1988 and they havejoined their duties as trainee on 10-9-1988, 4-1-1989 and 6-1-1989 respectively. The vacant posts are to be filled up by recruitment. The policy of the management is that such recruitment be made from experienced workers of different organisations/ undertakings . In view of the fact that very costly HEMMs are tobe operated, such recruitees are kept on training and tried on different occassions for a certain period i.e. one year after completion of training their appointment is concerned in regular scale of pay on the basis of their suitability and vacancy position. The terms of appointment ofthe above mentioned workers is as under:-

8. The case of the management is fully established and proved from the uncontroverted and unchallenged affidavit oftheir witness Shri S. Ramakrishna Rao .

(a) The period oftraining will be one year which may be extended at the discretion of the management . During the period of the training the services of the traince is liable to be discontinued without assigning any reason .

9. The reference is, therefore , decided in favour of the management and against the workmen/Union without any orders as to costs holding that the management of GevraProject ofSouth Eastern Coalfields Ltd. , Bilaspur is justified in denying Gr . I (Group -B) to S/Shri Kanhaiya Lal , Jawahar Singh and B. V. Tiwari w.e. [. 1-2-89 , Consequently the workmen are not entitled to any relief..

10. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India , Ministry of Labour & Employment as per rules.

(b) On satisfactory completion of training , the appointment in regular scale of pay under NCWA willbe considered. On appointment the trainee will be on probation for a period of six months which is liable to be extended at the discretion of the company.

C.M. SINGH, Presiding Officer 3005 [भाग- खण्ड ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपुत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24 , 1930

नई दिल्ली , 26 मई , 2008

"Whetherthe action ofthe management ofPunjab and Sind Bank in terminating the services of workman Shri Kishan Lal with effect from 9-1- 2002was legal and justified ? Ifnot what reliefthe workman is entitled to and from which date?" का. आ. 1413.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार पंजाब और सिंध बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजको और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय बीकानेर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 1/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्दीय सरकार को 23-5-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं एल-12012/150/2002 -आईआर( बी- II ) ]

2. प्रसंग प्राप्त होने पर प्रकरण दर्ज रजिस्टर किया गया , दोनों पक्षों द्वारा अपने-अपने लिखित अभिवचन पेश किये गये हैं अर्थात् प्रार्थी श्रमिक किसन लाल द्वारा प्रस्तुत क्लेम आवेदन का जवाब अप्रार्थी नियोजक पश्च द्वारा दिया गया है।

राजिन्द्र कुमार , हेस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi , the 26th May, 2008

S. Q. 1413.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Govemment hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. 1/2003 ) of the Industrial Tribunal , Bikner as shown in the Annexure, inthe industrial dispute between the management ofPunjab and Sind Bank and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 23-05-2008 ,

[No. L-12012/ 150/2002-IR (B- II)] RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer

अनुबंध औमेगिक विवाद अधिकरण , बीकानेर

पीठासीन अधिकारी: हॉ. वीरेन्द्र कुमार माधुर , आर. एच. जे. एस. नं. मु. सी. आई. टी. रैफरेन्स नं. 1 सन्2003

किसन लाल किराडू पुत्र श्री सत्यनारायण किराडू, निवासी बारह गुवाड चौक, सदाफ्लड, बीकानेर,

प्रार्थी श्रमिक

विरूद्ध

दीमैनेजर, पंजाब एंड सिंध बैंक, नत्युसर गेट, बीकानेर

अफ्रर्थी/नियोजक

प्रसंग अंतर्गत धारा 10 ( 1 ) ( घ ) , औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947

उपस्थितिः-

1. श्री नेमी चन्द्र पाण्डे , अधिवक्ता , प्रार्थी श्रमिक पक्ष के लिए 2. श्री हरेन्द्र कुमार महोबिया , अधिवक्ता, अप्रार्थी नियोजक पक्ष के लिए

अभिनिर्णय दिनांक 11 अप्रैल, 2008

भारत सस्कार , श्रम मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली ने औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 जिसे आगे चलकर केदाल अधिनियम कड़ा गया है की धारा 10 की उप- धार्य ( 1 ) के खण्ड (घ ) के अधीन जारी अधि सूचना क्रमांक एल -12012/ 150/2002- आईआर ( बी-11 )दिनांक 27 जनवरी , 2003 द्वारा प्रेषित इस प्रसंग के अंतर्गत निम्न विवाद अधिनिर्णयार्थ इस अधिकरण में भेजा था:-

3. संक्षेप में, प्रकरण के तथ्य इस प्रकार से बतलाये गये हैं कि प्रार्थी श्रमिक किसन लाल किराडू ( जिसे आगे चलकर केवल प्रार्थी श्रमिक कहा गया है ) के द्वारा अपना क्लेम आवेदन इस आशय के साथ प्रस्तुत किया गया कि अधिनियम के विभिन्न प्रावधानों के अर्थ में प्रार्थी श्रमिक कर्मकार है और अप्रार्थी संस्थान उद्योग है , अप्रार्थी ने नत्युसर गेट , बीकानेर पर बैंक की शाखा दिनांक 11-06-1994 को खोली थी और इसी दिन अप्रार्थी ने प्रार्थी को चतुर्थ श्रेणी कर्मचारी चपरासी के रिक्त पद पर नियुक्ति दी थी और प्रार्थी श्रमिक ने दिनांक 11-06-1994 को बैंक में कार्यभार संभाल लिया था , जोनल मैनेजर ने पत्र दिनांक 8-11-1994 के जरिये प्रार्थी की नियुक्ति की पुष्टि कर दी थी , अप्रार्थी ने कभी उल्लेख नहीं किया कि प्रार्थी को आगामी आदेश तक अस्थाई चपरासी पद पर नियुक्त किया है , अप्रार्थी ने इसकी सेवायें दिनांक, 9-01-2002 के आदेश से समाप्त कर दी , आर्थी ने दिनांक 11-6-1994 से 9-1-2002 तक लगातार 7 साल छः माह और 29 दिन बैंक की सेवा की है , प्रार्थी की सेवाओं से अप्रार्थी सदैव पूर्ण संतोष प्राप्त करता रहा और उसके वेतन की अदायगी उसके बचत खाता सं. 287 में अप्रार्थी हर माह जमा कराता था , इस अवधि कीउपस्थिति अप्रार्थी के कार्यालय से हाजिरी रजिस्टर में अंकित है, अप्रार्थी की शाखा के अषकाश अभिलेख में प्रार्थी द्वारा अवकाशों का सक्षम अधिकारी द्वारा स्वीकृत करने के साथ योग अंकित है और अप्रार्थी के तहत शाखा के अधीनस्थ वपरासी, दफ्तरी , कैशपियन , वाटर बाय पद रिक्त हैं । आगे यह भी अंकित किया है कि अप्रार्थी ने टर्मीनेशन से पूर्व चपरासी पद की वरिष्ठता सूची जारी नहीं की है और छटनी मुआवजे का भुगतान नहीं किया है और ना ही टर्मीनेशन से पहले एक माह का नोटिस दिया है । अप्रार्थी द्वारा जोनल मैनेजर को पत्र दिनांक 28-2-1995 के जरिये प्रार्थी को स्थाई सेवा में लेने का आग्रह किया गया है जिससे भी प्रार्थी का अधिकार पुष्ट होता है और द्वितीयतः समझौते के अनुसार दिनांक 8-11-1994 से पूर्ण वेतन श्रृंखला व समय- समय पर संशोधित मंहगाई भत्ते का भुगतान प्रार्थी कोस्थाई कर्मचारी मानकर किया है जिसको केवल स्थाई कर्मचारी पाने का अधिकार है , प्रार्थी स्थाई कर्मचारी कानून की नजर में है, बैंक नियमानुसार खातेदारों के मियादी जमा और बचत खातों में परिचय करने का अधिकार केवल स्थाई कर्मचारी की है और प्रार्थी ने अनेक खातेदारों का परिचय किया है जिन्हें स्वीकार कर खाते खोले गयें है । आगे यह भी अंकित किया गया है कि प्रार्थी के साथ उसी दिन श्रीमती केशर की नियुक्ति की गई थी जिसकी नियुक्ति में भी प्रार्थी की तरह से रोजगार कार्यालय आदि किसी प्रकार की प्रक्रिया नहीं की गई थी और उक्त श्रीमती केसर आज भी बैंक की सेवा में है और 2071 G008-21 3006

[PART 11-SEC. 3(ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008 /JYAISTHA 24, 1930

प्रार्थी की सेवा समाप्त कर दी गयी है जिससे प्रार्थी के वैधानिक समानता के अधिकार का गैर - कानूनी हनन हुआ है । प्रार्थी ने दौरान बैंक सेवा अन्य रोजगार तलाश नहीं किया और अब प्रार्थी अधिक आयु होने से रोजगार कानुनन प्राप्त नहीं कर सकता है , अप्रार्थी द्वारा टर्मीनेशन किये जाने से प्रार्थी बेरोजगार हो गया है, अप्रार्थी अपने गैर- कानूनी कृत्य का लाभ खुद प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी नहीं है, प्रार्थी का जन्म दिनांक 5-5-1968 बैंक रिकार्ड में अंकित है अप्रार्थी द्वारा दिनांक 9-1-2002 को किये गये टर्मीनेशन ( छटनी ) को अवैधानिक , गैर- कानूनी और शुन्य व प्रभावहीन बतलाते हुए स्वयं को सेवासमाप्ति के दिन से बेरोजगार होगा अंकित करते हुए नियुक्ति दिन से ही स्थाई मानते हुए समस्त आर्थिक लाभ , वेतन भत्तों आदि व सेषा सम्बन्धित लाभ दिलाये जाने की प्रार्थना की है । न्यायालय की अनुमति से प्रार्थी एक द्वारा दिनांक 28-4-2006 को संशोधित क्लेम आवेदन इन्हीं तथ्योंकी पुनरावृत्ति करते हुए प्रस्तुत किया गया है ।

4. अप्रार्थी नियोजक द्वारा प्रस्तुत अपने जवाब दावे में प्रकरण का प्रतिवाद करते हुए श्रम मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना जारी होना स्वीकार करते हुए यह अंकित किया गया है कि क्लेम आवेदन के मद सं. 1 में जिस व्यक्ति का नाम रैफेरेन्स में लिखा गया है यह रैफरेन्स सेभिन्न है , अप्रार्थी का जवाब है कि प्रार्थी को पूर्ण अस्थाई रूप से कार्य करने हेतु आगामी आदेश तक के लिए लगाया गया था एवम् उसको इस संबंध में पूर्ण रूप से अवगत करा दिया गया था एवम् उसकी उसे पूर्ण जानकारी थी, अन्य सभी तथ्यों को इन्कार करते हुए यह भी अंकित किया गया है कि अप्रार्थी बैंक के जोनल मैनेजर ने न तो पत्र दिनांक 8-11-1994 द्वारा या अन्य किसी पत्र द्वारा कभी भी प्राधों की स्थाई नियुक्ति की पुष्टि' की और न ही वह इसके लिए सक्षम थे, प्रार्थी को इस तथ्य की भली- भांति जानकारी थी कि उसकी नियुक्ति कभी भी रोजगार कार्यालय के माध्यम से निर्धारित प्रक्रिया द्वारा नहीं हुई है एवम् पूर्ण रूप से अस्थाई रूप में कार्य करने हेतु आगामी आदेश के लिए रखा गया है और प्रार्थी ने पूर्णतः अस्थाई रुप में कार्य किया था, उसने 7 साल 6 माह 29 दिन तक लगातार सेवा नहीं की। प्रार्थी के संबंध में चपरासी के पद की वरिष्ठता सूची बनाने का कोई औचित्य नहीं था एवम् ना ही प्रार्थी छंटनी मुआवजा, एक माह का नोटिस या नोटिस वेतन पाने का अभिकारी था, बैंक में खाते खोलने के लिए बैंक का कोई भी खातेदार परिचय करवा सकता है और उस परिचय करवाने मात्र से वह बैंक का कर्मचारी नहीं बन सकता है , श्रीमती केसर कंवर का मामला प्रार्थी के मामले से भिन्न है और फ्रर्थी के किसी वैधानिक अधिकार का हमन नहीं किया गया है, गानों की जानकारी के अनुसार वर्तमान में प्राथीं अन्यत्र कार्य करके अपना मरण- पोषण कर रहा है , प्रार्थी का वाद छंटनी की परिभाषा में नहीं आता है , प्राथर्थी का अस्थाई कार्य आगामी आदेश होने वक भी एवम् औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम की धारा 2 (00 ) (बी.पी. ) के अनुसार दिनांक 9-1-2002 किसी भी प्रकार से गैर-कानूनी नहीं हैं एवम् अप्रार्थी ने अधिनियम के आज्ञापक प्रावधानों का कोई उत्संचन नहीं किया है , प्रार्थी लगातार अन्यत्र कार्यरत है और अपना भरण- पोषण कर रहा है , सेवा समाप्ति के दिन से प्रार्थी का बेरोजगार होगा अपने आप में अविश्वसनीय है , प्रार्थी कोई भी राहत एवम् लाभ

प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी नहीं है । अतिरिक्त आपत्तियों में यह भी आपत्तियां ली गई हैं कि विवाद का टर्म्स ऑफ रैफरेन्स त्रुटिपूर्ण है, अप्रार्थी बैंक ने समझौता अधिकारी के समक्ष प्रस्तुत अपने अवाव में यह स्पष्ट रूप से कथन किया था कि प्रार्थी को अप्रार्थी बैंक में कभी भी रिक्त स्थान भरने हेतु नियुक्त नहीं किया गया था और न ही उसे स्थाई पद के विरुद्ध नियुक्ति प्रदान की गई , अप्रार्थी बैंक भारतीय सरकार का राष्ट्रीयकृत उपक्रम है एवम् बैंक में स्थाई भर्ती के लिए रोजगार कार्यालय के माध्यम से निश्चित प्रक्रिया नियत है एवम् इस प्रक्रिया का पालन किए बिना किसी भी अधिकारी को चाहे वह कितना भी बड़ा हो स्थाई नियुक्ति के विरुद्ध नियुक्ति प्रदान नहीं कर सकता है परन्तु रैफरेंन्स करते समय इन महत्त्वपूर्ण तथ्यों पर कोई विचार नहीं किया गया एवम् मस्तिष्क से बिना विचार किए ही मैकेनिकल तरीके से टमर्स ऑफ रैफरेन्स निर्धारित कर दिए अतः रैफरेन्स त्रुटिपूर्ण है एवम् विदाउट एपलीकेशन ऑफ माईण्ड किया होने के कारण से रद्दी एवम् खरिज किए जाने योग्य है , प्रार्थी स्वच्छ हाथों से अधिकरण के समक्ष नहीं आया है , विवाद केन्द्रीय सरकार से श्रम न्यायालय से प्राप्त हुआ है जो विधि अनुसार नहीं है और पोषणीय नहीं है, अप्रार्थी पंजाब एण्ड सिंध बैंक केन्द्रीय सरकार का उपक्रम है, केन्द्रीय सरकार द्वारा बैंक में नियुक्ति हेतु दिशा-निर्देश पारित किए हुए हैं , प्रार्थी की नियुक्ति अभी भी उन दिशा-निर्देशों के अनुसार नहीं की गई है , प्रार्थी को सेवा में बने रहने का कोई अधिकार नहींहै प्रबन्धक को सेवा में नियुक्ति का कोई अधिकार प्राप्त नहीं है , स्थाई नियोजन के लिए निर्धारित प्रक्रिया दर्शाते हुए यह भी आपत्ति की गई है कि प्रार्थी के मामले में न तो नियोजन कार्यालय के मार्फत कोई सूची आई , न ही चयन समिति द्वारा योग्यता के अनुसार प्रार्थी का चयन किया गया और ना ही सक्षम व्यक्ति द्वारा प्रार्थी की कभी नियुक्ति ही की गई और न ही प्रार्थी का पदस्थापन बीकानेर शाखा में सक्षम व्यक्ति द्वारा किया गया है , प्रार्थी बैंकढोर एण्ट्री की मार्फत सेवा में बना रहना चाहता है जिसकी हजाजत कानूनन नहीं दी आ सकती है, प्रार्थी को सेवा में बना रहने का कोई अधिकार नहीं है , प्राथर्थी ने यह तथ्य छिपाया है कि उसने तत्कालीन प्रबन्धक पर स्वयं को बैंक प्रिमिसेज के मकान मालिक का रिश्तेदार होने का दबाव डालते हुए अवैध रूप से बैंकिंग सेवाओं में निर्धारित मापदण्डों को ताक में रखकर कार्य किया व भुगतान प्राप्त करता रहा है जिससे उसे सेवा में बने रहने का कोई अधिकार प्राप्त नहीं होता है न ही हो सकता है , जैसे ही सक्षम व्यक्ति की जानकारी में यह तथ्य आया उसने नियमानुसार शाखा प्रबन्धक को आवश्यक निर्देश प्रदान किए हैं, प्रार्थी ने अवैध रूप से मैनेजर पर दबाव डालकर यदि कोई लाभ गलत रूप से प्राप्त किया है तो उसके लिए बैंक उत्तरदायी नहीं है , प्रार्थी के वकील के नोटिस के जबाव में स्पष्ट रूप से सारी स्थिति बैंक के वकील ने स्पष्ट कर दी थी, बैकडोर एण्ट्री भारत के संविधान के आर्टिकल 14 व 16 उल्लघन है , कार्यरत अस्थाई व्यक्तियों को सरकार के दिशा- निर्देशों के विपरीत स्थाई नहीं किया जा सकता है फिर भी अधिनिर्णयार्थ प्रेषित यह विवाद त्रुटिपूर्ण है , बैंक ने अधिनियम के किसी भी प्रावधान का उल्लंघन नहीं किया है दिनांक 9-1-2002 को जारी आदेश मात्र उच्चाधिकारियों के आदेश का कम्युनिकेशन है जो उच्च अधिकारियों के आदेश दिनांक7-1-2002 की पालना में किए गए हैं , शाखा 3007 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 /ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

प्रवन्धक को विवाद में वर्णित कोई अनुतोष देने का अधिकार प्राप्त नहींहै । अंत में प्रार्थी का क्लेम आवेदन स्वयं के विरुद्ध हजें - दाचें सहित खारिज करने की प्रार्थना की गई है।

बुलाकीदास किराडू है , बुलाकीदास किराडू मेरा रिश्ते में भाई लगता है, मुझे जब काम पर रखा गया तब बैंक में मैनेजर एल.एन. चावला साहब थे और श्री चवला आज भी बैंक की सेवा में कार्यरत हैं जो काहीं पर अन्यत्र है उनको निकाला नहीं गया है।

5. पंक्षकारों द्वारा प्रस्तुत साक्ष्य के दौरान, प्रार्थी पक्ष की साक्ष्य में प्रार्थी श्रमिक किशनलाल किराडू ने स्वयं का शपथपत्र पेश किया है जिसके खण्डन में अप्रार्थी बैंक की ओर से तत्कालीन शाखा प्रबन्धक दीपक रस्तोगी का शपथ - पत्र पेश हुआ है , प्रत्येक पक्ष द्वारा एक- दूसरे पक्ष के साथी से जिरह की गई है एवम् प्रलेखीन साक्ष्य भी प्रस्तुत हुई है।

6. विद्वान पक्षकारों की बहस सुनी गई एवम् पत्रावली का ध्यानपूर्वक अवलोकन किया गया; हमारे समक्ष लंबित इस प्रसंग के निस्तारण के लिए प्रमुख रूप से यही विचारणीय है कि क्या प्रार्थी श्रमिक किशनलाल किराडू को दिनांक 9-1-2002 के आदेश से सेवापृथक किया जाना उचित एवम् वैध है ? यदि नहीं तो प्रार्थी श्रमिकः क्या ग्रहत किस दिनांक से प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी है ?

खण्डन में अप्रार्थी पक्ष की ओर से प्रस्तुत सम्धी दीपक रस्तोगी ने प्रस्तुत अपने शपथ- पत्र के बयान में स्वयं का पंजाब एण्ड सिंध बैंक , बीकानेर शाख्त में 31 जनवरी , 2000 से 4-5-2004 तक बतौर शशाखा प्रबन्धक के पद पर कार्यरत रहने और स्वयं को मामले के तथ्यों से परिचित होने का कथन किया है तथा व्यत्रार्थी बैंक द्वारा प्रस्तुत जवाब दावे में वर्णित तथ्यों की पुनरावर्ती करते हुए दिनांक 11-6-1994 को नत्युसर गेट, बीकानेर में अफ्रार्थी बैंक की शाखा खोलना, प्रार्थी को पूर्ण अस्थाई रूप से कार्य करने हेतु आगामी आदेश तक लगाया जाना एवम् प्रार्थी को उसके आगामी आदेश तक की अस्थाई कार्य के सम्बन्ध में पूर्ण रूप से अवगत करा देंगे एजम् उसे इसकी पूर्ण जानकारी होने का कथन करते हुए यह भी कथन किया है कि अप्रार्थी बैंक के ओगल मैनेजर में न तो यत्र दिनांक 8-11-1994 द्वारा या अन्य किसी पत्र के द्वारा कभी भी प्रार्थी की स्थाई नियुक्ति की पुष्टि की और ना ही वह इसके लिए सक्षम थे , उक्त गवाह का यह भी कथन है कि प्रार्थी को कभी भी स्थाई पद के विरुद्ध नियुक्ति प्रदान नहीं की गई अपितु पूर्णतः अस्थाई रूप से कार्य करने हेतु आगामी आदेश तक के लिए रखा गया था , प्रार्थी के सम्बन्ध में चपरासी पद की वरिष्ठता सूची बनाने का कोई औचित्य नहीं था न ही क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय या कार्मिक कार्यलय से ऐसे निर्देश ही थे किसेवा से पूर्व कोई रिट्रेन्चमैट कम्पनसेशन , नोटिस या नोटिस की एवज में कोई वेतन का भुगतान करना होगा, ना ही क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय से. इसके बारे में कोई स्वीकृति ही प्राप्त हुई थी जिसके अन्तर्गत कोई राशि भुगतान करता, जोनल मैनेजर से पत्र प्रदर्श-2 के आधार पर प्रार्थी की सेवा डिस्पेन्सविद की गई थी , प्रार्थी इंटेगी मुआवणा, एक माह का नोटिस या नोटिस वेतन पाने का अधिकारी नहीं था। उक्त गवाह का यह भी कथन है कि प्रार्थी को सेवा में बने रहने का कोई अधिकार नहीं है , प्रबन्धक को सेवा में नियुक्ति का कोई अधिकार प्राप्त नहीं है , बैंक ने औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम के किसी प्रावधान का उल्लंघन नहीं किया है , शाखा प्रबन्धक द्वारा दिनांक 9-1-2002 को जारी आदेश मात्र उच्चाधिकारियों के आदेश का कम्युनिकेशन है जो उच्च अधिकारियों के आदेश दिनांक 7-1-2002 की पालना में किए गए हैं, शाखा प्रबन्धक को विवाद में वर्णित कोई अनुतोच देने का अधिकार प्राप्त नहीं है और प्राथी कोई भी रहत प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी नहीं है। उक्त गवाह में प्रतिपरीक्षण्ण के बयान में पूछने पर यह भी बताया है कि यह सही है कि बैंक प्रार्थीका पेमेन्ट या भुगतान उसके बचत खाते में जमा करता था, मुझे पता नहीं है कि प्रार्थी ने बैंक में किस तारीख को ज्वाईन किया था, प्रार्थों के बचत खाते की प्रति प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-1 है। आगे पूछने पर यह भी बताया है कि प्रार्थी पहले भी मुझे मिलता था और आज भी मुझे मिला है , प्रार्थी के अन्यत्र कार्यरत होने की जानकारी प्रार्थी से ही मिली थी , प्रार्थी कहां पर नौकर है और उसे किक्ना वेतन मिलता है मुझे इसकी जानकारी नहीं है, प्राथी ने मुझ पर किसी प्रकार का अनुचित दबाव नहीं डाला और 7. इस सम्बन्ध में साक्ष्य के दौरान प्रस्तुत अपने शपथ -पत्र के बयान में प्रार्थी श्रमिक ने स्वयं द्वारा प्रस्तुत क्लेम आवेदन में वर्णित तथ्योंकी पुनरावृति करते हुए अपनी नियुक्ति 11-6-1994 से होनी और अपनी सेवाएं 9-1-2002 के आदेश से समाप्त कर देगा व माहवारी वेतन व अन्य भुगतान की रकम अपने बचत खाता में अप्रार्थी द्वारा जमा करने का कथम किया है और बैंक खाते की प्रमाणित प्रतिलिपि प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू 1 पेश की है तथा लगातार 7 साल , 6 माह 29 दिन की उपस्थिति अप्रार्थी के हाजरी रजिस्टर में अंकित होने का कथन किया है और यह भी बताया है कि न्यायालय ने दिनांक 21-6-2004 के द्वारा अप्रार्थी को दस्तावेज पेश करने का आदेश दिया था परन्तु अप्रार्थी ने दस्तावेज तलबी प्रार्थना-पत्र की चरण सं. 4 में दर्ज पत्र कनै प्रतिलिपि ही देश की है जो प्रदर्श हब्ल्यू 2 से अंकित की गई है, शेष दस्तावेजात पेश नहीं किए हैं, साक्ष्य के दौरान , प्रार्थी ने दस्तावेज प्रदर्श हब्ल्यू-3 , समझौता अधिकारी के समक्ष प्रस्तुत बैंक कमले की प्रमाणित प्रतिलिपि प्रदर्शन डब्ल्यू-4 , स्वयं का प्रार्थनापत्र , प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-5 , समझौता अधिकारी के समक्ष बैंक द्वारा प्रस्तुत जमाव , प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-6 एवम् स्वयं द्वारा प्रस्तुत जादुल जबाव प्रदर्शन डब्ल्यू-7 , पेश करते हुए टर्मीनेशन पत्र दिनांक 9-1-2002 को अवैधानिक, गैर -कानूनी व सून्य बतलाते हुए सभी देय लाभों सहित पूर्व पद पर सेवा की निरन्तरता व पिछले पूर्ण वेतन आदि सहित बहाल करने का अवार्ड पारित करने की प्रार्थना की है। प्रतिपरीक्षण के बयान में उक्त म्याद ने यह स्वीकार किया है कि मुझे जब बैंक में काम पर रखा था तब इस बाबत अखबार में किसी प्रकार की सूचना प्रकाशित नहीं हुई थी, मेरा नाम रोजगार कार्यालय से भी नहीं मंगवाया था , मेरा कोई इंटरव्यूनहीं हुआ था आज खुद कहा कि डायरेक्ट ही काम पर रखा या, मैं अंग्रेजी व हिन्दी जानता हूं लेकिन अंग्रेजी कम जागत हूं, मुझे वो किसी कमेटी ने इण्टरव्यू नहीं किया था बल्कि मैनेजर ने ही सीधे काम पर रखा था , मुझे ऊपर वाले अधिकारी अर्थात् जयपुर के आदेश से काम से हटाया था, मुझे काम पर रखने हेतु जनरल मैनेजर का आदेश आया था उस आदेश की प्रति मैंने पेश नहीं की है आज खुद कहाकि उक्त आदेश बैंक में है , बैंक वाली बिस्टिंग का मालिक 3008

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24,1930

[PART I-SEC. 3 (1ⅱ ) ] {

मुझसे पहले किसी अधिकारी पर अनुचित दवाव डाला हो तो इसकी मुझे जानकारी नहींहै, तत्कालीन बैंक प्रबन्धक पर अनुचित दवाव डालते समय मैं उस बैंक में नहीं था , रिकार्ड देखने से अनुचित दयाव डालने की बात मालूम पड़ी थी लेकिन उक्त रिकार्ड न्यायालय में पेश नहीं हुआ है । आगे पूछने पर उक्त गवाह ने यह भी कथन किया है कि यह कहना गलत है कि प्रार्थी का पेमेन्ट जयपुर से आता हो और फिर बैंक उक्त पेमेन्ट को प्रार्थी के खाते में जमा करता हो अजस्खुद कहा कि पेमेन्ट तो इसी शाखा से होता था , जिस अधिकारी ने इस प्रार्थी को काम पर रखा था उक्त अधिकारी आज भी बैंक की तिलक नगर शाखा में कार्यरत है , प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू 2 दस्तावेज हमारे जोनल ऑफिस का है , प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-3 को पृष्ठ हमारे शाखा से जारी हुआ था, प्रार्थी से किसी प्रकार का स्पष्टीकरण नहीं मांगा गया था ।

का कृत्य किसी भी रूप में अनुचित नहीं है। पत्रावली पर उपलब्ध साक्ष्य के द्वारा प्रार्थी ने अनार्थी संस्थान में 7 साल 6 माह 29 दिन कार्य करने का कथन किया है जिसकी पुष्टि में प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-1 , बैंक खाते की प्रमाणित प्रतिलिपि भी पेश की है , ऐसी स्थिति, में जबकि श्रमिक की 7 साल से भी अधिक लम्बी सेवावधि रही है; प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-2 , के अनुसरण में अप्रार्थी बैंक द्वारा सेवा समाप्त करने का कृत्य औद्योगिक विदाद अधिनियम की धारा 2 (00 ) के अर्थ में छंटनी के सिवाय और कुछ नहीं है, धारा 2 ( 00 ) ( बी.बी. ) के प्रावधान इस प्रकरण पर लागू नहीं होते हैं क्योंकि अप्रार्थी संस्थान द्वारा ऐसी कोई साक्ष्य पेश नहीं की गई है कि प्रार्थी की नियुक्ति किसी निश्चित अवधि के किए की गई हो और वह निश्चित अवधि समाप्त होने के साथ ही उसकी सेवामुक्ति हुई हो । हम , विद्वान अधिवक्ता प्रार्थी पक्ष द्वारा किए गए इस तर्क से पूर्णतया सहमत हैं कि प्रार्थी की सेवामुक्ति से पूर्व अधिनियम की धारा 25 - एफ की पालना में एक माह का नोटिस अथवा नोटिस वेतन एवम् छंटनी मुआवजा दिया जाना अनिवार्य था और उस जैसा कार्य करने वाले सभी चतुर्थ श्रेणी कर्मचारियों की वरिष्ठता सूची बनाई जाकर कनिष्ठतम व्यक्ति की छंटनी की जाने का प्रावधान है और इन आवश्यक प्रावधानों की पालना किए बिना प्रार्थी की सेवा समापित करना किसी भी रूप में उचित एवं वैध नहीं है । अतः प्रार्थी सेवा समाप्ति दिनांक 9-1-2002 से ही पुनः सवेतन , पूर्ववत् सेवा की निरन्तरता के साथ- साथ देय अन्य सभी लाभों सहित अप्रार्थी के नियोजन में बहाल होने का अधिकारी है परन्तु काम नहीं तो वेतन नहीं के सिद्धान्त के आधार पर प्रार्थी को सेवामुक्तिदिनांक से आज पारित अवार्ड के प्रकाशन दिनांक तक की अवधि का वेतन उसको दिलाया जाना उचित एवं न्यायसंगत प्रतीत नहीं होता है परन्तु इस अवधि में उसके द्वारा भुम्ती गई परेशानियों को दृष्टिगत रखते हुए प्रतिकर स्वरूप 5000 रुपए की प्रतिकर राशि दिलाई जानी उचित है और अवार्ड प्रकाशन से सेवा में पुनः बहाल होने के दिनांक के बीच की अवधि में पूर्ववत् देय नियमानुसार पूरा वेतन वह प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी है ।

9. अतः केन्द्रीय सरकार द्वारा प्रेषित इस प्रसंग को उत्तरित करते हुए यह पंचाट इस प्रकार से पारित किया जाता है कि:

प्रार्थी श्रमिक किशनलाल किराडू को अप्रार्थी पंजाब एण्ड

सिंध बैंक के प्रबन्ध तंत्र द्वारा 9-1-2002 से सेवा पृथक करना उचित एवं वैध नहीं है , परिणामतः प्रार्थी श्रमिक सेवा समाप्ति दिनांक 9-1-2002 से ही पुनः सवेतन , पूर्ववत सेवा की निरन्तरता के साथ- साथ देय अन्य सभी लाभों सहित अप्रार्थी के नियोजन में बहाल होने का अधिकारी है परन्तु काम नहीं तो वेतन नहीं के सिद्धान्त के आधार पर प्रार्थी सेवामुक्तिदिनांक से अवार्ड प्रकाशन दिनांक के बीच की अवधि का वेतन प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी नहीं है । इस अवधि में उसके द्वारा भुगती गई परेशानियों को दृष्टिगत रखते हुए वह प्रतिकर स्वरूप 5000 रु. की प्रतिकर राशि प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी है और अवार्ड प्रकाशन से सेवा में पुनः बहाल होने के दिनांक के बीच की अवधि में पूर्ववत् देय नियमानुसार पूरा वेतन यह प्राप्त करने का भी अधिकारी है।

8. पत्रावली पर आई समस्त मौखिक एवम् दस्तावेजी साध्य का ध्यानपूर्वक अवलोकन किया गया, हमारे समक्ष लंबित इस प्रकरण में प्रार्थी का अप्रार्थी बैंक शाखा में 11-6-1994 से 9-1-2002 तक चतुर्थ श्रेणी कर्मचारी के पद पर कार्य करने का कथन है , उसका यह भी कथन है कि जोनल मैनेजर ने पत्र दिनांक 8-11-1994 के जरिए प्रार्थी की नियुक्ति की पुष्टि की थी। पत्रावली पर प्रस्तुत दस्तावेज प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-2 , को अप्रार्थी बैंक के गवाह दीपक रस्तोगी ने जोनल ऑफिस का होना और प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-3 का पृष्ठ बैंक शाखा का * होना अपने प्रतिपरीक्षण के बयान में स्वीकार किया है । प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-2, पत्र जोनल ऑफिस से 7-1-2002 को जारी किया गया है जिसके अनुसरण में 9-1-2002 के आदेश द्वारा प्रार्थी की सेवा समाप्त की गई है , प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-1 , प्रार्थी ने अपने बैंक खाते की प्रमाणित प्रतिलिपि होने का कथन करते हुए, यह भी कथन किया है कि उसके वेतन का प्रतिमाह भुगतान इसी बैंक खाते में अप्रार्थी द्वारा जमा किया जाता था, बैंक खाते में प्रार्थी का वेतन प्रतिमाह अप्रार्थी द्वारा जमा करने के तथ्य को भी नियोजक साक्षी ने स्वीकार ही किया है । प्रस्तुत साक्ष्य से यह निर्विवादित है कि प्रार्थी श्रमिक ने अप्रार्थी संस्थान में हर सूरत में सेवा समाप्ति दिनांक 9-1-2002 के आदेश से पूर्व विगत एक कलैण्डर वर्ष में 240 दिन की सेवावधि पूर्ण कर ली थी । अप्रार्थी की ओर से प्रमुख रूप से तर्क यह दिया गया है कि चूंकि प्रार्थी की नियुक्तिबैंक में पिछले दरवाजे से हुई थी और वह भी पूर्णतया अस्थाई रूप से हुई थीऔर इस अस्थाई नियुक्ति को आदेश प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-2 , की पालना में समाप्त कर देने को अधिनियम की धारा 2( 00 ) के अर्थ में छंटनी नहीं माना जा सकता विशेषकर जबकि उसे प्रारंभ से ही पता था कि उसकी नियुक्ति कभी भी स्थाई रिक्त पद पर नहीं की गई और ना ही उस पद के लिए प्रार्थी की योग्यता थी और ना ही उसका कार्य संतोषप्रद था और मैनेजर को नियुक्ति का अधिकार प्राप्त नहीं है तथा बैंक में केन्द्रीय सरकार के दिशा- निर्देशों पर ही नियुक्ति हो सकती है : तथा स्वयं प्रार्थी श्रमिक ने प्रतिपरीक्षण के बयान में यह स्वीकार भी किया है कि उसे काम पर रखा तब अखबार में किसी प्रकार की सूचना प्रकाशित नहीं हुई, इसका नाम रोजगार कार्यालय से नहीं आया था, उसका कोई इन्टरव्यू नहीं हुआ था । पत्रावली पर आई इस साक्ष्य को आधार बनाते हुए अप्रार्थी की ओर से यह तर्क दिया गया है बिना प्रक्रिया अपनाए चल रही उस अस्थाई नियुक्ति को समाप्त कर देने 3009 [ भाग - खण्ड-3 (ⅱ) ]

भारत का रामपत्र : जून 14 , 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

उक्त अधिनियम औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम की धारा 17 (1) के अन्तर्गत प्रकाशनार्थ केन्द्रीय सरकार को भेजा जाये ।

दिनांक 27 जनवरी, 2003 द्वारा प्रेषित इस प्रसंग के अंतर्गत निम्न विवाद अधिनिर्णणार्थ इस अधिकरण में भेजा था:-

डॉ. वीरेन्द्र कुमार माम्बुर, न्यायाधीश

नई दिल्ली , 26 मई , 2008

"Whether the action of the management ofPunjab and Sind Bank in terminating services ofwork- man Shri Surajkaran with effect from 9-1-2002was legal and justified ? If not what relief thework- man is entitled to end from which date?" कर, आ. 1414,-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार पंजाय व सिंध बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबंध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय बीकानेर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 2/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-5-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

2. प्रसंग प्राप्त होने पर प्रकरण दर्ज रजिस्टर किया गया, दोनों पक्षों द्वारा अपने-अपने लिखित अभिवचन पेश किये गये हैं अर्थात् प्रांर्थी श्रमिक सूरचकारण द्वारा प्रस्तुत क्लेम आवेदन का जवाब अप्रार्थी नियोजक पक्ष द्वारा दिया गया है ।

[सं. एल-12012/151 /2002 - आई.आर. ( मी- II )

राजिन्द्र कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi, the 26thMay,2008

S. O. 1414. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Governmenthereby publishes the Award (Ref. 2/2003) of the Industrial Tribunal, Bikaner as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Punjab and SindBank and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 23-05-2008.

No. L-12012/151/2002-IR (B- U))

RAJINDER KUMAR, DeskOfficer

अनुबंध

औद्योगिक विवाद अधिकरण , बीकानेर

पीठासीन अधिकारी डॉ. वीरेन्द्र कुमार माथुर आर. एच. के. एस. नं. मु. सी. आई. टी. रैफरेन्स नं. 2 , सन् 2003

सूरज किरण पुत्र रमण लाल जाति किराडू निवासी सूरदास्त्रणी बगीची के पास नत्थूसर गेट के बाहर , बीकानेर

-प्रार्थी/श्रमिक

विरुद्ध

दी मैनेजर, पंजाब एंड सिंध बैंक, नत्युसर गेट, बीकानेर

-अप्रार्थी नियोजक

प्रसंग अंतर्गत बारा 10 ( 1 ) ( घ ) , औद्योगिक विवाद

अधिनियम , 1947

उपस्थितिः-

1. श्री नेमी चन्द्र पाण्डे , अधिवक्ता , प्रार्थी श्रभिक पक्ष के लिए ।

2. श्री हरेन्द्र कुमार महोमिया, अधिवक्ता, अप्रार्थी नियोजक पथा के लिए ।

"अधिनिर्णय"

दिनांक 16 अप्रैल , 2008

3. संक्षेप में, प्रकरण के तथ्य इस प्रकार से बतलाये गये हैं कि प्रार्थी श्रमिक सूरणकरण किराडू ( जिसे आगे चलकर केवल प्रार्थी श्रमिक कहा गया है ) के द्वारा अपना क्लेम आवेदन इस आशय के साथ प्रस्तुत किया गया है कि अधिनियम के विभिन्न प्रावधानों के अर्थ में प्रार्थी श्रमिक कर्मकार है और अप्रार्थी संस्थान उद्योग हैं , अप्रार्थी ने नत्धुसर गेट बीकानेर पर बैंक की शाखा दिनांक 11-06-1994 को खोली थी और इसी दिन अप्रार्थी ने प्रार्थी को चतुर्थ श्रेणी कर्मचारी चपरासी के रिक्त पद पर नियुक्ति दी थी और प्रार्थी श्रमिक ने दिनांक 11-06-1994 को बैंक में कार्यभार संभाल लिया था, जोनल मैनेजर ने पत्र दिनांक 8-11-1994 के जरिये प्रार्थी की नियुक्ति की पुष्टिकर दी भी, मप्रार्थी ने कभी उल्लेख नहीं किया कि प्रार्थी को आगामी आदेश तक अस्थाई चपरासी के पद पर नियुक्त किया है , अप्राथर्थी ने उसकी सेकयें दिनांक 9-01-2002 के आदेश से समाप्त कर दी, प्रार्थी ने दिनांक 11-6-1994 से 9-1-2002 तक लगातार 7 साल छः माह और 29 दिन तक बैंक की सेवा की है , प्रार्थी की सेवाओं से अप्रार्थी सदैव पूर्ण संतोष प्राप्त करता रहा और उसके वेतन की अदायगी उसके बचत खाता सं. 286 में अप्रार्थी प्रत्येक माह जमा कराता था, इस अवधिकी उपस्थिति अप्रार्थी के कार्यालय के हाजिरी रजिस्टर में अंकित है , अप्रार्थी की शाखा के अवकाश अभिलेख में प्रार्थी द्वारा अवकासों का सक्षम अधिकारी द्वारा स्वीकृत करने के बाद भाग अंकित है और अप्रार्थी के तहत शाखा में अधीनस्थ षपरासी , दफ्तरी , कैशपियन, वाटर बाय पद रिक्त है । आगे यह भी अंकित किया है कि अप्रार्थी ने टर्मनिशन से पूर्व पद की वरिष्ठता सूची जारी नहीं की है और कटनी मुआवजे का भुगतान नहीं किया है और ना ही टर्मीनेशन से पहले एक साथ सा नोटिस दिया है । अप्रार्थी द्वारा जोनल मैनेवर को पत्र दिनांक 28-2-1995 के जरिये प्रार्थी को स्थाई सेवा में लेने यहा आग्रह किया गया है जिससे भी प्रार्थी का अधिकार मुष्ट होता है और द्वित्तीयतः समाौते के अनुसार दिनांक 8-11-1994 से पूर्ण वेतन श्रृंखला व संमय - समय पर संशोभित मंहगाई भत्ते का भुगतान प्रार्थी को स्थाई कर्मचारी मानकर किया है जिसको केवल स्थाई कर्मचारी पाने का अधिकार है, प्रार्थी स्थाई कर्मचारी कानून की नजर में है, बैंक नियमानुसार खातेदारों के मियादी जमा और बचत खातों में परिचय करने का अधिकार केवल स्थाई कर्मचारी को है और प्राधी ने अनेक खातेदारों का परिचय किया है जिन्हें स्वीकार कर खाते खोले गये हैं । आने यह भी अंकित किया गया है कि प्रार्थी के साथ उसी दिन भारत सरकार, श्रम मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली ने औद्योगिक मिनाद अधिनियम , 1947 जिसे आगे चलकर केवल अधिनियम कहा गया है। की धारा 10 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( घ ) के अधीन जारी अधिसूचना कांक एल -12012/ 151 /2002- आई.आर. (श्री-11 ) , 3010

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II-SBC.3 ( ii)] श्रीमती केशर की नियुक्ति की गई थी जिसकी नियुक्ति में भी प्रार्थी की तरह से रोजगार कार्यालय आदि किसी प्रकार की प्रक्रिया नहीं की गई थी और उक्त श्रीमती फेसर आज भी बैंक की सेवा में है और प्रार्थी की सेवा समाप्त कर दी गयी है जिससे प्रार्थी के वैधानिक सम्मानता के अधिकार का गैर- कानूनी हनन हुआ है , प्रार्थी ने इस दौरान बैंक सेवा से अन्य रोजगार तलाश नहीं किया और अब प्रार्थी अधिक आयु होने से रोजगार कानूनन प्रापफा नहीं कर सकता है , अप्रार्थी द्वारा टर्मीनेशन किये जाने से प्रार्थी बेरोजगार हो गया है , अप्रार्थी अपने गैर- कानूनी कृत्य का लाभ खुद प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी नहींहै , प्रार्थों का जन्म दिनांक 23-8-1965 बैंक रिकार्ड में अंकित है अप्रार्थी द्वारा दिनांक 9-1-2002 को किये गये टीनेशन (छटनी ) को अवैधानिक, गैर- कानूनी और शून्य व प्रभावहीन बतलाते हुए स्वयं को सेवासमाप्ति के दिन से बेरोजगार होना अंकित करते हुए नियुक्ति दिन से ही स्थाई मानते हुए समस्त आर्थिक लाभ , वेतन भत्तों आदि व सेवा सम्बन्धित लाभ दिलाये जाने की प्रार्थना की है ।

4. अप्रार्थी नियोजक द्वारा प्रस्तुत अपने जवाब दाये में प्रकरण का प्रतिवाद करते हुए श्रम मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना जारी होना स्वीकार करते हुए यह जबाव दिया है कि प्रार्थी को पूर्ण अस्थाई रूप से कार्य करने हेतु आगामी आदेश तक के लिए लगाया गया था एवम् उसको इस संबंध में पूर्ण रूप से अवगत करा दिया था एवम् उसकी उसे पूर्ण जानकारी थी , अन्य सभी तथ्यों को इन्कार करते हुए यह भी ऑकत किया गया है कि अप्रार्थी बैंक के जोनल मैनेजर ने न तो पत्र दिनांक 8-11-1994 द्वारा या अन्य किसी पत्र द्वारा कभी भी प्रार्थी की स्थाई नियुक्ति की पुष्टि की और न ही वह इसके लिए सक्षम थे , प्रार्थी को इस तथ्य की भलीभांति जानकारी थी कि उसकी नियुक्ति कभी भी रोजगार कार्यालय के माध्यम से निर्धारित प्रक्रिया द्वारा नहीं हुई है एवम् पूर्ण रूप से अस्थाई रूप में कार्य करने हेतु आगामी आदेश के लिए रखा गया है और प्राथों ने पूर्णतः अस्थाई रूप में कार्य किया था, उसने 7 साल , 6 माह , 29 दिन तक लगातार सेवा नहीं की। प्रार्थी के संबंध में चपरासी के पद की वरिष्ठता सूची बनाने का कोई औचित्य नहीं था एवम् ना ही प्रार्थी छंटनी मुआवजा , एक माह का नोटिस या नोटिस वेतन पाने का अधिकारी था , बैंक में खाते खोलने के लिए बैंक का कोई भी खातेदार परिचय करवा सकता है और उस परिचय करवाने मात्र से वह बैंक का कर्मचारी नहीं बन सकता है , श्रीमती केसर कंवर का मामला प्रार्थी के मामले से भिन्न है और प्रार्थों के किसी वैधानिक अधिकार का हनन नहीं किया गया है , अप्रार्थी की जानकारी के अनुसार वर्तमान में प्रार्थी अन्यन्त्र कार्य करके अपना * भरण- पोषण कर रहा है , प्रार्थी का वाद छंटनी की परिभाषा में नहीं आता है , प्रार्थी का अस्थाई कार्य आगामी आदेश होने तक था एवम् औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम की धारा 2 (०० ) ( बी.बी. ) के अनुसार दिनांक 9-1-2002 किसी भी प्रकार से गैर - कानूनी नहीं है एवम् अप्रार्थी ने अधिनियम के आज्ञापक प्रावधानों का कोई उल्लंघन नहीं किया है , प्रार्थी लगातार अन्यत्र कार्यरत है और अपना भरण-पोषण कर रहा है , सेवा समाप्ति के दिन से प्रार्थी का बेरोजगार होना अपने आप में अविश्वसनीय है , प्रार्थी कोई भी राहत एवम् लाभ प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी नहीं है। अतिरिक्त आपत्तियों में यह आपत्तियां भी ली

गई हैं कि विवाद का टर्म्स ऑफ रेफरेन्स त्रुटि पूर्ण है , अप्रार्थी बैंक ने समझौता अधिकारी के समक्ष प्रस्तुत अपने जयाव दावे में यह स्पष्ट रूप से कथन किया था कि प्रार्थी को अप्रार्थी बैंक में कभी भी रिक्त स्थान भरने हेतु नियुक्त नहीं किया गया था और ना ही उसे स्थाई पद के विरुद्ध नियुक्ति प्रदान की गई , अप्रार्थी बैंक भारतीय सरकार का राष्ट्रीयकृत उपक्रम है एवम् बैंक में स्थाई भरती के लिए रोजगार कार्यालय के माध्यम से निश्चित प्रक्रिया नियत है एवम् इस प्रक्रिया का पालन किए बिना किसी भी अधिकारी को चाहे वह कितना भी बड़ा हो स्थाई नियुक्ति के विरुद्ध नियुक्ति प्रदान नहीं कर सकता है परन्तु रेफरेंन्स करते समय इन महत्त्वपूर्ण तथ्यों पर कोई विचार नहीं किया गया एवम् मस्तिष्क से बिना विचार किए ही मैकेनिकल तरीके से टर्म्स ऑफ रेफरेन्स निर्धारित कर दिए । अतः रेफरन्स त्रुटिपूर्ण है एवम्विदाऊट एपलीकेशन ऑफ माईण्ड किया होने के कारण रद्द एवम् खारिज किए जाने योग्य है, प्रार्थी स्वच्छ हाथों से अधिकरण के समक्ष नहीं आया है , विवाद केन्द्रीय सरकार से श्रम न्यायालय से प्राप्त हुआ है जो विधि अनुसार नहीं है और पोषनीय नहीं है , अप्रार्थी पंजाब एण्ड सिंध बैंक केन्द्रीय सरकार का उपक्रम है , केन्द्रीय सरकार द्वारा बैंक में नियुक्ति हेतु दिशा- निर्देश पारित किए हुए हैं, प्रार्थी की नियुक्तिकभी भी उन दिशा-निर्देशों के अनुसार नहीं की गई है, प्रार्थी को सेवा में बने रहने का कोई अधिकार नहीं है , प्रबन्धक को सेवा में नियुक्ति का कोई अधिकार प्राप्त नहीं है , स्थाई नियोजन के लिए निर्धारित प्रक्रिया दर्शाते हुए यह भी आपत्ति ली गई है कि प्रार्थी के मामले में न तो नियोजन कार्यालय के मार्फत कोई सूची आई , ना ही चयन समिति द्वारा योग्यता के अनुसार प्रार्थी का चयन किया गया और ना ही सक्षम व्यक्ति द्वारा प्रार्थी की कभी नियुक्ति ही की गई और ना ही प्रार्थी का पदस्थापन बीकानेर शाखा में सक्षम व्यक्ति द्वारा किया गया है , प्रार्थी बेकडोर एण्ट्री की मार्फत सेषा में बना रहना चाहता है जिसकी इजाजत कानूनन नहीं दी जा सकती है , प्रार्थी को सेवा में बने रहने का कोई अधिकार नहीं है , प्रार्थी ने इस तथ्य को छिपाया है कि उसने तत्कालीन प्रबन्धक पर स्वयं को बैंक प्रिमिसेज के मकान मालिक का रिश्तेदार होने का दबाव डालते हुए अवैध रूप से बैंकिंग सेवाओं में निर्धारित मापदण्डों को ताक में रखकर कार्य किया व भुगतान प्राप्त करता रहा है जिससे उसे सेवा में बने रहने का कोई अधिकार प्राप्त नहीं होता है ना ही हो सकता है , जैसे ही सक्षम व्यक्ति की जानकारी में यह तथ्य आया उसने नियमानुसार शाखा प्रबन्धक को आवश्यक निर्देश प्रदान किए हैं , प्रार्थी ने अवैध रूप से मैनेजर पर दबाव डालकर यदि कोई लाभ गलत रूप से प्राप्त किया है तो उसके लिए बैंक उत्तरदायी नहीं है , प्रार्थी के वकील के नोटिस के जबाव में स्पष्ट रूप से सारी स्थिति बैंक के वकील ने स्पष्ट कर दी थी , बैकडोर एण्ट्री भारत के संविधान के आर्टिकल 14 व 16 का उल्लंघन है , कार्यरत अस्थाई व्यक्तियों को सरकार के दिशा- निर्देशों के विपरीत स्थाई नहीं किया जा सकता है फिर भी अधिनिर्णयार्थ यह प्रेषित विवाद त्रुटिपूर्ण है , बैंक ने अधिनियम के किसी भी प्रावधान का उल्लंघन नहीं किया है दिनांक 9-1-2002 को जारी आदेश मात्र उच्चाधिकारियों के आदेश का कम्यूनिकेशन है जो उच्च अधिकारियों के आदेश दिनांक 7-1-2002 की पालना में किए गए हैं , शाखा प्रबन्धक को विवाद में वर्णित कोई अनुतोष देने का अधिकार प्राप्त 3011 [भाग- खण्ड ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

नहींहै । अंत में प्रार्थी का क्लेम आवेदन स्वयं के विरुद्ध खर्च सहित खारिज करने की प्रार्थना की गई है ।

दीपक रस्तोगी साहब थे , मेरी श्री रस्तोगी से किसी प्रकार की अदावत नहीं थी ।

5. पक्षकारों द्वारा प्रस्तुत साक्ष्य के दौरान , प्रार्थी पक्ष की साक्ष्य में प्रार्थी श्रमिक सूरजकरण किराडू ने स्वयं का शपथपत्र पेश किया है जिसके खण्डन में अप्रार्थी बैंक की ओर से तत्कालीन शाखा प्रबन्धक दीपक रस्तोगी का शपथपत्र पेश हुआ है , प्रत्येक पक्ष द्वारा एक- दूसरे पक्ष के साक्षी से जिरह की गई है एवम् प्रलेखीय साक्ष्य भी प्रस्तुत हुई है।

6. विद्वान पक्षकारों की बहस सुनी गई एवम् पत्रावली का ध्यानपूर्वक अवलोकन किया गया; हमारे समक्ष लबित इस प्रसंग के निस्तारण के लिए प्रमुख रूप से यही विचारणीय है कि क्या प्रार्थी श्रमिक सूरजकरण किराडू को दिनांक 9-1-2002 के आदेश से सेवापृथक किया जाना उचित एवम् वैध है ? यदि नहीं तो प्रार्थी श्रमिक क्या राहत किस दिनांक से प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी है?

7. इस सम्बन्ध में साक्ष्य के दौरान प्रस्तुत अपने शपथपत्र के भयान में प्रार्थी श्रमिक ने स्वयं द्वारा प्रस्तुत क्लेम आवेदन में वर्णित तथ्योंकी पुनरावर्ती करते हुए अपनी नियुक्ति 11-6-1994 से होनी और अपनी सेवाएं 9-1-2002 के आदेश से समाप्त कर देना व माहवारी वेतन व अन्य मुकप्तान की रकम अपने बचत खाता में अप्रार्थी द्वारा जमा करने का कथन किया है और बैंक खाते की प्रमाणित प्रति प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू 1 पेश की है तथा लगातार 7 साल , 6 माह, 29 दिम की उपस्थिति अप्रार्थी के हाजरी रजिस्टर में अंकित होने का कथन किया है और यह भी बताया है कि न्यायालय ने दिनांक 21-6-2004 के द्वारा अप्रार्थी को दस्तावेज पेश करने का आदेश दिया था परन्तु अप्रार्थी ने दस्तावेज तलबी प्रार्थनापत्र की चरण सं. 4 में दर्ज पत्र की प्रतिलिपि ही पेश की है जो प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू 2 से अंकित की गई है, शेष दस्तावेजात पेश नहीं किए हैं, साक्ष्य के दौरान , प्रार्थी ने दस्तावेज प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-3 , समझौता अधिकारी के समक्षा स्वयं द्वारा प्रस्तुत प्रार्थनापत्र प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू- 4 , 5 एवम् समझौता अधिकारी के समष्ठ अप्रार्थी बैंक द्वारा प्रस्तुत जक्षम प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-6 एवम् स्वयं द्वारा प्रस्तुत जनांबदल जवाब प्रदर्शन डब्ल्यू-7 , पेश करते हुए टर्मनिशन पत्र दिनांक 9-1-2002 को अवैधानिक, गैर- कानूनी व शून्य बतलाते हुए सभी देय लाभों सहित पूर्व पद पर सेवा की निरन्तरता व पिछले पूर्ण वेतन आदि सहित बहाल करने का अवार्ड पारित करने की प्रार्थना की है , प्रतिपरीक्षण के चयान में उक्त ग्वाह ने यह स्वीकार किया है कि मुझे जय बैंक में काम पर रख्खा था तब इस बाबत कोई रिक्तियां चाबत सूचना प्रसारित नहीं हुई थी, मुझे. सीधे ही काम पर रखा था, मेरा नाम रोजगार कार्यालय से नहीं आया था, मेरा किसी कमेटी के समकक्ष साक्षात्कार नहीं हुआ । आगे पूछने पर प्रार्थी यह भी कहता है कि मुझे नहीं पता कि किसी बैंक के मैनेजर को बैंक में रखने का पावर या अधिकार न हो , मुझे श्री जसबीर सिंह चावला ने काम पर रखा ब्या, मुझे नहीं पता कि चावला आज बैंक की सौकरी में हैं या निकाल दिया । आज खुद कहा कि वे नौकरी में हैं और बीकानेर से बाहर हैं बैंक वाली बिल्डिंग के मालिक श्री बुलाकी दास किराडू है जो मेरे सगे भाई हैं । यह कहना गलत है कि मुझे बुलाकी दास जी के कहने पर बैंक में नौकरी पर रखा है , मुझे निकालने के आदेश जयपुर से ही आये होंगे , कहां से आये इस बाबत मैंनेजर ने मुझे नहीं बताया, मैंने किसी प्रकार का इस्तीफा नहीं दिया, मुझे निकालने वाले मैनेजर श्री

खण्डम में अफ्रर्थी पक्ष की ओर से प्रस्तुत साली दीपक रस्तोगी ने प्रस्तुत अपने शपथपत्र के बयान में स्वयं का पंजाब एण्ड सिंध बैंक, बीकानेर शाखा में 31 जनवरी , 2000 से 4-5-2004 तक बतौर शाखा प्रबन्धक के पद पर कार्यरत रहने और स्वयं को मामले के तथ्यों से परिचित होने का कथन किया है और अप्रार्थी बैंक द्वारा प्रस्तुत जबाव दावे में वर्णित तथ्यों की पुनरावर्ती करते हुए दिमांक 11-6-1994 को नत्थूसर गेट बीकानेर में अप्रार्थी बैंक की शाखा खोलना, प्रार्थी को पूर्ण अस्थाई रूप से कार्य करने हेतु आगामी आदेश तक लगाया जाना एवम् प्रार्थी को उसके आगामी आदेश तक की अस्थाई कार्य के सम्बन्ध में पूर्ण रूप से अवगत करा देने एवम् उसे उसकी पूर्ण जानकारी होने का कथन करते हुए यह भी कथन किया है कि अप्रार्थी बैंक के ओनल मैनेजर ने ना तो पत्र दिनांक 8-11-1994 द्वारा या अन्य किसी पत्र के द्वारा कभी भी प्रार्थी की स्थाई नियुक्ति की पुष्टि की और ना ही वह इसके लिए सक्षम थे , उक्त गवाह का आगे यह भी कथन है कि प्रार्थी को कभी भी स्थाई पद के विरुद्ध नियुक्ति प्रदान नहीं की गई अपितु पूर्णतः अस्थाई रूप से कार्य करने हेतु आगामी आदेश तक के लिए रखा गया था , प्रार्थों के सम्बन्ध में चपरासी पद की वरिष्ठता सूची बनाने का कोई औचित्य नहीं था ना ही क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय या कार्मिक कार्यालय से ऐसे निर्देश ही थेकि सेवा से पूर्व कोई रिट्रेन्वमैट कम्पनसेशन , नोटिस या नोटिस की एवज में कोई वेतन का भुगतान करना होगा , ना ही क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय से इसके बारे में कोई स्वीकृति ही प्राप्त हुई थी जिसके अन्तर्गत कोई राशि भुगतान करता, जोनल मैनेजर के पत्र प्रदर्श-2 के आधार पर प्रार्थी की सेवा डिस्पेन्सविद की गई थी , प्रार्थी छंटनी मुआवजा , एक माह का नोटिस या नोटिस वेतन पाने का अधिकारी नहीं था। उक्त गवाह का यह भी कथन है कि प्रार्थी को सेवा में बने रहने का कोई अधिकार नहीं है, प्रबन्धक को सेवा में नियुक्ति का कोई अधिकार प्राप्त नहीं है, बैंक ने औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम के किसी प्रावधान का उल्लंघन नहीं किया है , शाखा प्रबन्धक द्वारा दिनांक 9-1-2002 को जारी आदेश मात्र उच्च्चाधिकारियों के आदेश का कम्युनिकेशन है जो उच्च अधिकारियों के आदेश दिनांक 7-1-2002 की पालना में किए गए हैं , शाखा प्रबन्धक को विवाद में वर्णित कोई अनुतोष देने का अधिकार प्राप्त नहीं है और प्रार्थी कोई भी राहत प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी नहीं है। उक्त गवाह में प्रतिपरीक्षण के बयान में पूछने पर यह भी बताया है कि यह सही है कि प्रार्थी का भुगतान बैंक प्रार्थी के बचत खाते में जमा करता था, मुझे पता नहीं है कि प्रार्थी ने बैंक में किस तारीख को जोईन किया था, प्रार्थी के बचत खाते की प्रति प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-1 है । आगे यह भी कथन किया है कि मुझे प्रार्थी का अन्यत्र कार्यरत होना प्रार्थी से ही जानकारी मिली थी और प्रार्थी मुझसे रोजाना मिलता था और आज भी मिला है , प्रार्थी कहां पर नौकर है और उसे कितना वेतन मिलता है इसकी मुझे जानकारी नहीं है , कर्मचारी ने मुझ पर किसी प्रकार का अनुचित दवाव नहीं डाला और मुझसे पहले यदि किसी अधिकारी पर अनुचित दबाव डाला हो तो मुझे इसकी जानकारी नहीं है, तत्कालीन बैंक प्रबन्धक पर अनुचित दबाव डाला गया था लेकिन दबाव डालते समय में दस बैंक में नहीं था, रेकार्ड को देखने से अनुचित दबाव का मालूम पड़ा था लेकिन उक्त रिकार्ड 3012

[PART I-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

न्यायालय में पेश नहीं किया है । यह सही है कि शाखा खुली तब मैं पदस्थापित नहीं था , मैं उक्त शाखा के खुलने के करीब 6 साल बाद आया था । यह कहना गलत है कि प्रार्थी का पेमेन्ट जयपुर से आता हो और फिर बैंक प्रार्थी के खाते में जमा करता हो आज खुद कहा किपेमेन्ट इसी शाखा बैंक से ही होता था, मैं जब इस शाखा में नहीं आया था तब भी प्रार्थी का पेमेन्ट इसी शाखा बैंक से होता था, जिस अधिकारी ने इस प्रार्थी को काम पर रखा था उक्त अधिकारी आव भी पंजाब एण्ड सिंध बैंक की तिलकनगर शाखा जयपुर में पदस्थापित है , प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू 2 दस्तावेज हमारे जोनल ऑफिस का है , प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-3 का पृष्ठ -3 हमारी शाखा से जारी हुआ था, प्राधीं से किसी प्रकार का स्पष्टीकरण नहीं मांगा गया था।

साल 6 माह 29 दिन कार्य करने का कथन किया है जिसकी पुष्टि में प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-1 , बैंक खाते की प्रमाणित प्रतिलिपि भी पेश की है, ऐसी स्थिति में जबकि श्रमिक की 7 साल से भी अधिक लम्बी सेवावधि ' रही है , प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-2 , के अनुसरण में अप्रार्थी बैंक द्वारा सेषा समाप्त करने की कृत्य औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम की धारा 2(00 ) के अर्थ में छंटनी के सिवाय और कुछ नहीं है , धारा 2( 00 ) ( बी.बी. ) के प्रावधान इस प्रकरण पर लागू नहीं होते हैं क्योंकि अप्रार्थी संस्थान द्वारा ऐसी कोई साक्ष्य पेश नहीं की गई है कि प्रार्थी की नियुक्ति किसी निश्चित अवधि के किए की गई हो और वह निश्चित अवधि समाप्त होने के साथ ही उसकी सेवामुक्ति हुई हो। हम , विद्वान अधिवक्ता प्रार्थी पक्ष द्वारा किये गये इस तर्क से पूर्णतया सहमत हैं कि प्रार्थी की सेवामुक्ति से पूर्व अधिनियम की धारा 25 - एफ की पालना में एक माह का नोटिस अथवा नोटिस वेतन एवम् छंटनी मुआवजा किया जाना अनिवार्य था और उस जैसा कार्य करने वाले सभी चतुर्थ श्रेणी कर्मचारियों की वरिष्ठता सूची बनाई जाकर कनिष्ठतम व्यक्ति को छंटनी की जाने का प्रावधान है और इन अज्ञापक प्रावधानों की पालना किए बिना प्रार्थी की सेवा समाप्तिकरना किसी भी रूप में उचित एवं वैध नहीं है । अतः प्रार्थी सेवा समाप्ति दिनांक 9-1-2002 से ही पुनः सवेतन , पूर्ववत सेवा कीनिरन्तरता के साथ - साथ देय अन्य सभी लाभों सहित अप्रार्थी के नियोजन में बहाल होने का अधिकारी है परन्तु काम नहीं तो वेतन नहीं के सिद्धान्त के आधार पर प्रार्थी को सेवा मुक्ति दिनांक से आज पारित अवार्ड के प्रकाशन दिनांक तक की अवधि का वेतन उसको दिलाया जाना उचित एवं न्यायसंगत प्रतीत नहीं होता है परन्तु इस अवधि में उसके द्वारा भुगती गई परेशानियों को दृष्टिगत रखते हुए प्रतिकर स्वरूप 5000 रुपए की प्रतिकर राशि दिलाई जानी उचित है और अवार्ड प्रकाशन से सेवा में पुनः बहाल किये जाने के दिनांक के बीच की अवधि में पूर्ववत देय नियमानुसार पूरा वेतन वह प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी है ।

9. अत्तः केन्द्रीय सरकार द्वारा प्रेषित इस प्रसंग को उत्तरित करते हुए वह पंचाट इस प्रकार से पारित किया जाता है कि: -

प्रार्थी श्रमिक सुरजकरण किराडू को अप्रार्थी पंजाब एण्ड सिंध बैंक के प्रबन्ध तंत्र द्वारा 9-1-2002 के आदेश से सेवा पृथक करना उचित एवं वैध नहीं है , परिणामतः प्रार्थी श्रमिक सेवा समाप्ति दिनांक 9-1-2002 से ही पुनः सवेतन, पूर्ववत सेवा की निरन्तरता के साथ-साथ देय अन्य सभी लाभों सहित अप्रार्थी के नियोजन में बहाल होने का अधिकारी है परन्तु काम नहीं तो वेतन नहीं के सिद्धान्त के आधार पर प्रार्थी सेवामुक्ति दिनांक से अवार्ड प्रकाशन दिनांक के बीच की अवधि का वेतन प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी नहीं है । इस अवधि में उसके द्वारा भुगती गई परेशानियों को दृष्टिगत रखते हुए वह प्रतिकर स्वरूप 5000 रु. की प्रतिकर राशि प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी है और अवार्ड प्रकाशन से सेवा में पुनः बहाल होने केदिनांक के बीच की अवधि का पूर्ववत देय नियमानुसार पूरा वेतन वह प्राप्त करने का भी अधिकारी है।

उक्त अधिनिर्णय औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम की धारा 17( 1) के अन्तर्गत प्रकाशनार्थ केन्द्रीय सरकार को भेजा जाए।

डॉ. वीरेन्द्र कुमार माथुर , न्यायाधीश 8. पत्रावली पर आयी समस्त मौखिक एवम् दस्तावेजी साक्ष्य का ध्यान पूर्वक अवलोकन किया गया, हमारे समक्ष लंबित इस प्रकरण में प्रार्थी का अप्रार्थी बैंक शाखा में 11-6-1994 से 9-1-2002 तक चतुर्थ श्रेणी कर्मचारी के पद पर कार्य करने का कथन है , उसका वह भी कथन है कि जोनल मैनेजर ने पत्र दिनांक 8-11-1994 के जरिए इसकी नियुक्ति की पुष्टि की थी । पत्रावली पर प्रस्तुत दस्तावेज प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-2 , को अप्रार्थी बैंक के गवाह दीपक रस्तौगी ने जोनल ऑफिस का होना और प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-3 का पृष्ठ सं. 3 बैंक शाखा का होना अपने प्रतिपरीक्षण के बयान में स्वीकार किया है। प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-2 , पत्र जोनल ऑफिस से दिनांक 7-1-2002 को जारी किया गया है जिसके अनुसरण में 9-1-2002 के आदेश द्वारा प्रार्थी की सेवा समाप्त की गई है , प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-1 , प्रार्थी ने अपने बैंक खाते की प्रमाणित प्रतिलिपि होने का कथन करते हुए यह भी कथन किया है कि उसके वेतन का भुगतान प्रतिमाह इसी बैंक खाते में अप्रार्थी द्वारा जमा किया आता था , बैंक खातें में प्रार्थी का वेतन प्रतिमाह अप्रार्थी द्वारा जमा करने के तथ्य को नियोजक साक्षी ने भी स्वीकार ही किया है। प्रस्तुत्त साक्ष्य से यह निर्विवादित है कि प्रार्थी श्रमिक ने अप्रार्थी संस्थान में हर सूरत में सेवा समाप्ति दिनांक 9-1-2002 के आदेश से पूर्व विगत एक कलैण्डर वर्ष में 240 दिन की सेवावधि पूर्ण करली थी । अप्रार्थी की ओर से प्रमुख रूप से तर्क यह दिया गया है कि चूंकि प्रार्थी की नियुक्ति बैंक में पिछले दरवाजे से हुई थी और वह भी पूर्णतया अस्थाई रूप से हुई थी और इस अस्थाई नियुक्ति को आदेश प्रदर्श डब्ल्यू-2 , की पालना में समाप्त कर देने को अधिनियम की धारा 2(00) के अर्थ में खंटनी नहीं माना जा सकता विशेषकर जबकि उसे प्रारम्भ से ही पत्ता था कि इसकी नियुक्ति कभी भी स्थाई रिक्त पद पर नहींकी गई और ना ही उस पद के लिए प्रार्थी की योग्यता थी और ना ही उसका कार्य संतोषप्रद था और मैनेजर को नियुक्ति का अधिकार प्राप्त नहीं है तथा बैंक में केन्द्रीय सरकार के दिशा- निर्देशों पर ही नियुक्ति हो सकती है तथा स्वयं प्रार्थी श्रमिक ने प्रतिपरीक्षक के बयान में यह स्वीकार भी किया है कि उसे काम पर रखा तब अखवार में किसी प्रकार की सूचना प्रकाशित नहीं हुई, इसका नाम रोजगार कार्यालय से नहीं आया और उसका कोई इन्टरव्यू नहीं हुआ था। पावली पर आयी इस साक्ष्य को आधार बनाते हुए अप्रार्थी की ओर से यह तर्क दिया गया है बिना प्रक्रिया अपनी चल रही इस अस्थाई नियुक्ति को समाप्त कर देने का कृत्य किसी भी रूप में अनुचित नहीं है। पत्रावली पर उपलब्ध साध्य के द्वारा प्रार्थी ने अप्रार्थी संस्थान में 7 3013 [भाग - खण्ड ( H) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 26 मई , 2008

2002 isjust and legal ? Ifnot, what relieftheworkman is entitled to?"

कां. आ. 1415. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार बैंक ऑफ बड़ौदा के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय नं.-2, चंडीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 38/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-5-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/132/2004-आईआर( बी-11 ) ]

राजिन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी

NewDelhi , the 26th May, 2008

The refereence was entered in the concerned register and notices were issued to the parties who appeared through their Counsel. The workman filed Claim Statement, hisreplication and his affidavit . The Management filed the Written Statement duly supported by an affidavit of their Assistant General Manager. They have also placed on record the report of the inquiry officer. In support ofhis . claim the workman appeared as a witness whereas the Management produced Shri K. Shankaranarayanan , Senior Manager, as their witness . The parties have also submitted Written Arguments.

S.O. 1415. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Governmentbereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 38/2004) ofthe Cent.Govt , Indus, Tribunal -cum- Labour Court No 2, Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Bank ofBarodaand their workmen received by the Central Government on 23-5-2008.

[No. L- 12012/ 132/2004-IR(B- II) ]

RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRALGOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT-I CHANDIGARH

SHRI KULDIP SINGH

PRESIDING OFFICER:

Case No. I.D. No 38/2K4 .

Registered on30-11-2004

Date ofDecision 6th August, 2007.

Jai Kishan Sio Shri Dila Ram, Village Sukhi, Po Haripur

Badam District Kurukshetra

-Petitioner

Versus

The Assistant General Manager, Bank ofBaroda, Zonal Office ,

Sector-17, Chandigarh

-Respondent

APPEARANCE

Forthe Workman:

Mr. J. G.Verра

AR

Messrs .B. B. Bagga &

For theManagement:

V. K. Diwan Advocate

AWARD

Vide their orderNo. L- 12012/ 132/2004 (IR(B- II)) dated 15th Sep. ,2004, Ministry ofLabour, Govt. of India referred the following matter for the adjudication of this Tribunal

The claim ofthe workman is that he hadjoined service with the Management as Peon on 2nd March, 2000 after being selected by the Management. That the qualification forappointment as Peon was 7th Standard with restrictions that the candidate should not have studied beyond 8th standard; that though he had appeared in the matriculation examination, but he couold not pass the same and was placed in compartment. Therefore,he was middle having passed that examination in the year 1989. Thus he did not conceal any facts from the Management even then he was charge sheeted for having studied beyond 8th Class. That the Management took wrong assumption of his having studied beyond 8th standard as his having placed in compartment could not mean his having studied beyond 8th standard; that on the asking of the Management he had filed the affidavit stating that he has not studied beyond 8th Class, which could not mean that he had appeared in the higher class examination. The workman further submitted that he had no intentions to defraud the Management and it was out of his ignorance; that he had filled in the particulars in application and the inquiry officer took that to hold that the charge is proved The Disciplinary Authority basing on the finding of the inquiry officer imposed upon him the punishment of dismissal from service. He did not consider the submissions made by the workınan. Even his appeal to the Appellate Authority was not decided judiciously. In a similar case of Saharangpur, the lesser punishment of stoppage of increments was imposed; that though the disciplinary authority had recommended only the punishment of stoppage of increment but the punishment of dismissal from service was imposed on extraneous pressure. That as per the agreement between the workers union and the Management in the year 1980 , in such cases only the punishment ofwarning was to be given; that his possessing higher qualification was no disqualification and in view of that he should not have been punished with a major punishment ofdismissal . He has prayed for setting aside . the order ofpunishment passed against him .

The Management has opposed the claim of the workman. It is submitted by them that the Management had requisitioned from the Employment Exchange a list of "whether the action of the Management ofBank of Barodato impose the punishment of dismissal from the service ofShri Jai Kishan, Peon w.e.f. 14th June ,

2071 GI08-22 3014

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/ JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART I-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]

The workman, in his statement, before this Tribunal claimed that he had registered himself with the employment exchange being 8th class pass and on the basis of that qualifcation he got the job with the Management Bank . He claimed that he had no knowledge that a 9th class pass could not be recruited in the bank; and that he had stated correct facts before the inquiry officer . Shri K. Shankaranarayanan who appeared as a witness for the Management proved his affidavit as MW - I/ 1 , In the cross examination he admitted that the circular dated 26th November, 1980 was issued by his department and admitted its contents . He admitted that the Bank was requiredto be follow circular No. 83. He denied that the rules , regulations and circulars issued by the Management were not followed in the case ofthe workman , because he was engaged in Trade Union activities.

persons fulfilling the criteria that the candidate should have passed 7th standard, but should not have studied beyond 8th standard; that he should be of 18 years and should not have completed 25 years of age . There was a relaxation of age limit in the case of SC, ST and ex- servicemen; that the workman , at the time of recruitment process for the post of Peon, submitted his employment exchange registration card, character certificate ofhaving passed 8th standard, certificate of Head Mistress , Govt. High school Haripur , Kurukshetra and an affidavit duly attesteddated28th Feb., 2000 showing that he had studied 8th pass and not studied beyond 9th class and that he never took admission or appeared in 8th class from any school or board , but in fact as per the certificate issued by the Head Mistress of the concerned school , the workman had appeared in the matriculation under roll No. 5732 , in the year. 1991-92 and was placed in compartment . That the workman knew that in case of furnishing false information he could be dismissed from service . The workman thus obtained the service by misrepresentation and by suppression of facts . It is further their case that the Management had held the inquiry against the workman in terms of bipartite settlements . During the inquiry the workman voluntarily and unconditionally admitted the charge . The Management considered his representation dated 20th April, 2002. He was also given personal hearing.

Onmerit it is their submission that the workman had appeared in matriculation examination on the day he was interviewed on 16th Feb. , 2000 but he concealed the facts , In view of his qualification he was not eligible to appy for the post of peon . Denying the claim of the workman it is stated by them that the information given by him is not correct. It is stated by them that the workman possessed distinct and different qualifcation at the time ofhis selection. The workman was not honest in submitting his particulars and committed a fraud. They denied that the Management had overlooked the representations of the workman. Accordingto them the punishment awarded to the workman was proper and not discriminatory . They denied having made deviations in following the procedure at any stage. Contesting the facts stated in the claim petition the Management stated that the claim of the workman is not maintainable and shouldbe rejected.

I have gone through the file. On record I find a copyof inquiry report dated 31st May, 2001. Although the workman has not challenged the contents of the inquiry report yet, the perusal of it shows that the domestic inquiry held was not fair and proper. It was completed hurriedly, the conclusions arrived at were without any basis. The claim of the. Management as made out in para 3 of the Written Statement is baseless as the workman did admit the charges . The inquiry proceedings clearly contains the mention about it. In reply to the question of inquiry officer , the workman categorically stated that he does not admit the charges. Otherwise also the inquiry proceedings comprised of two hand written pages . the workman desired to engage Shri Amrit Lal as his defence representative. The inquiry began on 15th Sep. , 2001 , on which day the charges were put to the workman which he denied. He was provided with the list of six documents , but no list of witnesses was produced. The inquiryproceedings were adjourned for 27th Sept. , 2001. On that day the workman is claimed to have filed a letter by which he denied the knowledge that to possess higher qualification was a dis- qualification for the post of Peon. He also claimed not to have cheated the Management and claimed to have done all in ignorance . He also claimed to have a family to support being the only male member . He also prayed for leniency in the matter. The inquiry officer wrongly claimed that the workman admitted the charges . In the words/writings of the inquiry officer, the workman had denied the charges . The conclusions arrived at by the inquiry officerwere on no evidence , filmsy, manipulated. The inquiry held was therefore improper and unfair.

The workman did not add anything substantial by his reptication and only deaffirmed the facts stated by him in the Claim Petition . He , however , reiterated that the employees recruited upto 1994 were treated differently, Although they were matriculates , but no action was taken against them. He supported his claim with a copy of the order in the case of Farah Ali , who was matric fail and was punished with only two increments . He further stated that a person who is not matriculate has to be treated as 8th pass and mere appearance in an examination higher to it could not confer any status on him.

The workman claimed that the Management gave a wrong interpretation to the recruitment criteria for the post ofpeon in the Bank more specifically the criteria with regard to the education. There is no dispute between the parties that at the time the workman was recruited , the education criteria for the post of peon was " should have passed 7th standard but should not have studied beyond 8th standard . The workman has not denied that he had appeared in the matriculation examination and was placed to compartment 3015 भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 /ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ⅱ) ]

misconduct in the performance ofhis duties. It is his share ill luck that a co-worker named Nandi Lal made a complaint against him that the workman has secured the employment by misstating the facts to the Management, otherwise they had no complaint about his working.

before the date of his applying for the post of peon and before the date ofhis interview for the said post. There is no allegation that he had added to his qualification during the period ofhis service . In para No. 3 of his. Claim Petition he admitted that the Management had put the criteria as minimum qualification 7th standard pass with that he should not have studied beyond 8th standard . Annexure R-6 is on record which is a certificate issued by the Head Mistress Govt . High School , Kurukshetra. It reads that as per the recordofthe School Jai Kishan had studied in the 9thClass, inthe said school, who had appeared in the 10th Class under RollNo. 523732 and was placed in compartment.

The perusal ofthe file shows that the parties are not at variance with regard to the fact that the workman bad studied upto matriculation and in fact had appeared in the said examination but before from the day he had for the post of peon with the Management, in responses thedemand made by the Management from the ensployment exchange; andthat as per the qualification criteria only a candidate having passed 7th standard examination could apply for the post and in no case hie should have studied after 8th standard, but in the present case the workman had studied upto matric class but he submitted wrong particulars and claimed that he has passed 8th standard examination . The copy of the personal manual of the workman, marked as Annexure R- 1 , is on record which reads that the workman had studied upto 8th standard. In reply tothe question whether he is studying for further courses. he categorically replied in negative . Thus he consciously gave his academic qualification as 8th pass.

It is also on record that in a similar case the Management while awarding the punishment to the workman took a lenient view. It was in the case of in the matter ofFarhad Ali , who was working as Peon in Bara Kalan branch ofthe Management Bank, Saharanpur District, U.P. and againstwhom also a similar allegation was lebelled. The Regional Manager ( SR) , acting as Disciplinary Authority punished the workman with stopage of two increments on both the accounts with cumulative affect, whereas in this case the Management awarded the punishment ofdismissal from service, less realizing that the same action will go a long way to effect the life of not only of the workman but also his family. He was not involved in any criminal act . It may be his bona fide plea that a person who does not pass the matriculation exam is taken to be only middle pass . The Management has not been able to show that the order passed in the Farhad Ali , case was challenged by the Management or it was overturned bythe Competent Authority . In such situation theManagement could not have followed double standard, one applying in the case of Farhad Ali and other in case of the workman even when both the workmen were guilty of same misconduct. Even the numerous circulars placed on record and issued by the Management Bank show that the Management was considerate, to propose lenient punishment in such cases.

Considering the facts and circumsatances of the case I am of the opinion that the action of the Management of Bank ofBaroda, in imposing the punishment of dismissal from service on Shri Jai Kishan , workman w.e.f. 14th June, 2002was not just and legal . It was harsh and discriminatory. The misconduct proved against him did not deserve that disproportionate punishment . The punishment is , therefore , modified and is substituted with the punishment ofstoppage of his two increments with cumulative effect. Hewill also not be entitled to appearin the test to be held for promotion to the clerical cadre for a period offive year from the date ofhis regular appointment. His dismissal is set aside . He is treated to be in service as if there was no order of dismissal from service . However , since the misconduct is proved against the workman he will not be entitled to the back wages on the principle of no work no pay. The Management is directed to take back the workman in service within three months from the date this award, becomes enforceable . The reference is answered in these terms. Let a copy of this award be sent to the appropriate government for neccessary action and the file be consigned to records after due completion.

There is no doubt that the workman had given his qualification as middle pass on the day he applied for the post and also appeared in the interview although he had appeared in the matriculation examination and was placed in compartment . The workman , therefore, withheld the facts from the Management and had he disclosed the same he would not have been considered for appointment on the post he was appointed. The fact , however , remains that by appearing in the matric exam and failing, the workman had not added any qualification to his credit . Although his statement that he had not studied after 8th standard was a wrong statement but it could be out ofignorance since matric fail was as 8th pass . There is no evidence to show that it was an intentional act ofthe workman to suppress the facts. His thinking that by having appeared in the matric exams he could notbe considered more than having passsed an 8th standard, could also be the reason. This fact couldbe clarified in the inquiry which I have said was farce and not proper. It is also a fact that by giving wrong statement about his qualifications he might have usurped the rights, ofhis co-contestants but by his action he did not cause to any loss economical or otherwise , to the Management . There has come no evidence on record to show that during the period he served the Management, he committed any

KULDIP SINGH, Presiding Officer 3016

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 / JYAISTHA 24 , 1930

नई दिल्ली , 26 मई , 2008

का.आ. 1416, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सेन्ट्रल बैंक , ऑफ इंडिया , कानपुर क्षेत्रीय ग्रामीण बैंक , क्षेत्रीय किसान ग्रामीण बैंक, यू.को. बैंक एवं भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , कानपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 35/1998 , 17/2001 , 162/1998 , 67/1999, 10/2004, 4/2006) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-5-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/40/97- आईआर ( बी- II ) ] [सं. एल-12012/62/2001- आईआर( बी-1) ] [सं. एल-12012/ 155/98- आईआर ( बी-1 ) ] [सं. एल -12012/102/98 - आईआर ( बी-II ) ] [सं. एल-12012/ 193/2003 - आईआर (बी-1 ) ] [सं. एल -12012/91/2002- आईआर( बी-1) ]

राजिन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi, the 26th May,2008

S.O. 1416.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Govemment hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 35/1998 , 17/2001 , 162/1998, 67/1999, 10/2004 and 4/2006) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Kanpur as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Bank of India, Kanpur, Kshetriya Gramin Bank, KshetriyaKisan Gramin Bank, UCO Bank and State Bank of India and their workmen which was received by the Central Government on 23-5-2008.

[No. L-12012/40/97 - IR(B- II) J

[No. L- 12012/62/2001 - IR(B- J) ]

[No. L- 12012/ 155/98-4R(B- 1) ]

[No. L- 12012/102/98- IR(B- II) ]

[No. L- 12012/ 193/2003- IR(B- 1) ]

[No. L-12012/91 /2002-IR(B-1) ]

RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SRIR. G SHUKLA, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, KANPUR

Industrial Dispute Case Nos .:-1.35 of 98, 2. 17 of 01 , 3.162 of 98 , 4. 67 of 99, 5. 10 of 04, 6. 4 of06

AWARD

In the matter ofdispute between

1. Sh. Virendra Pal S/ o Sh . Lachchu Ram Mohalla AhariaTola P.O. Ujhani Distt . Badaun

and

The Regional Manager Central Bank of India, 88 -B Civil Lines, Bareilly

[PART I-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] Central Goverment Industrial Tribunal vide notification No. L- 12012/40/97 / JR ( B - II ) dated 27-2-98 has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :-

"Whether the action of the management of Central Bank of India in not giving the preference to Sh. Virendra Pal , Ex -Тетрогагу Employee during the re-employment in the year 1991 is legal andjustified. Ifnot to what relief the said workman is entitled? " A bare perusal of the above schedule of reference order would be indicative of the fact that primafacie it is outside the ambit and scope of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 , as defined under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. Reference do not relate to the termination ofthe services of the so called workman. Even otherwise ifthe pleadings and evidence adduced by him is accepted to be true and it is presumed that the action ofthe management is neither legal nor justified in that situation the normal question which may arise would be as to from what date the concerned workman be granted relief. Mere mention ofthe year is not sufficient for grant ofrelief to the so called employee unless specific date is mentioned in the schedule of reference order . As no specific date is mentioned in the schedule ofreference order, the reference order is therefore, held to be vague and bad in law.

2. In view of above conclusion based on facts ofthe case, tribunal do not consider it to be a fit case in which entire pleadings of the parties evidence oral and documentary should be dealt with in detail as in thal event to the workman is not going to achieve any benefits, as claimed by him in his pleadings.

3. Having once concluded that the case of the applicant Sri Virendra Kumar is not a case of valid Industrial Disputes Act , it is held that he is not entitled for any relief as claimed by him in pursuance the present reference made to this Tribunal .

4. In ID Case No. 35 of 1998 , award is recorded accordingly against the workman and in favour of the management of Central Bank of India.

5. So far Industrial Dispute Case No. 17 of 2001 is concerned, the same is in between Sri Pradeep Kr. Tripathi son of Sh. Ram Behari Tripathi C/ o Kanpur Kshetriya Gramin Bank Karmchari Sangh, 2 Naveen Market , Kanpur and the Manager Kanpur Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Sarvodaya Nagar, Kanpur, in which Central Government vide notification No. L- 12012//62/2001 - IR(B - 1) dated 14-5-01 has made the following reference for adjudication to the Tribunal:-

"Whether the action of the management, General Manager Kanpur Kshetriay Gramin Bank Kanpur in terminating the services ofSri Pradeep Kumar Tripathi w.e.f. 1-5-2000 is justified? If not to what relief the workman is entitled to?" 3017 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 (li) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

6.Brieflystated facts ofthe case are that the applicant was engaged by the opposite party on 13-1-92 and continued towork without any break till 3-3-2000 when the opposite party abruptly stopped taking work from the applicant without giving any orders in writing. It is also the case oftheworkman that the opposite party again engaged him in their employment on 29-4-2000 and terminated him on 1-5-2000 without there being any orders in writing. It has also been pleaded by him that he had completed more than240 days in the employment ofthe opposite party.He was being paid his wages through wouchers on day to day basis. On the basis of above allegations it has been prayed that he be reinstated in the employment of the opposite partywith continuity of service and with full backwages.

allowedany kind ofbenefit as has been claimed byhim as admittedly the claimant was a daily rated employee under the opposite party, therefore, his case cannot be termed to be a case of retrenchment . Since it is not a case of retrenchment, therefore, the claimant cannot be permitted for any protection granted in the Act . Even otherwise it has not been claimed by him that he was engaged in the employment of the bank after following the regular selection process. It is also settled legal position that engagement/ appointment de horing the recruitment rules , ifmade, cannot beheld tobe legal or valid in the eye of law . From this point ofview also, the claimant cannot be allowed for any benefit what to say grant of reinstatement by this Tribunal . Consequently on the basis of above observations, it is held that the claimant is not entitled for his reinstatement or any other benefits claimed by him pursuant to the reference order. Accordingly reference in 1. D. Case No. 17 of2001 is decided against the claimant and in favour ofthe managementbank.

7.The claim of the applicant has been contested by the oppposite party bank on a number of grounds that reference is not competent for being adjudicated as necessarypartyto the dispute ; claimant is not a workman within the meaning of Sec. 2(s) of the Act; claimant was never appointed by the opposite party bank therefore question of termination of service in his case does not arise. Claimant was never given regular pay and other benefits as are admissible to the regularly selected employees of the Bank; it has been admitted by the opposite party that the claimant on some occassion was engaged by the branch on need basis for which payments were made to him; claimant had never performed the regular and permanent work in the opposite party; officers ofthe opposite party bank who had engaged the services ofthe claimant were not competent to make regular and permanent appointment ofthe claimant; claimant had never completed 240 days of continuous service in the bank lastly it has beenpleaded that the claim of the claimant is devoid of merit and is liable to be rejected.

8.After exchange of pleadings between the parties both the contesting parties have filed oral as well as documentary evidences in support oftheir respective claim and counter claim.

9. From the own pleadings and evidence of the claimant it stands established that he was engaged on casual/daily rate basis to cater the need of the opposite party fromtimeto time for which he was paid his wages,

10A. In L. D. CaseNo. 162 of 1998 industrialdispute existsbetween Sh. Raj Kumar Shakya S/o B. P. Shakya426, W-21 Vasant Vihar, Kanpur and The Chairman, Kshetriya KisanGraminBank, Mainpuri , whereby Central Govt. MOL, NewDelhi, videnotification No. L- 12012/ 155 /98 /TR(B- II) dated 11-8-98 has referred the industrial dispute for adjudication to the tribunal which is to the effect as to whetherthe action of the management of Kshetriya Kisan GraminBank in terminating the services of Sri Raj Kumar Shakya from 30-6-83 is legal and justified? If not to what reliefthe workman is entitled? It is the common ground of the contesting parties that the claimant Sri Raj Kumar Shakya was engaged by the opposite party bank in the year 1982 on opening ofa new branch at Chitayan Branch on 15-9-82 as clerk-cum-cashier . Initially the applicant was paid on daily wages but subsequently he was being paid his salary on scale basis by the opposite party bank and during the course ofhis employment the applicant used to sign the attendance register regularly . It has also been pleaded by the applicant that he continued to work continuously during the period 9-8-82 to 30-6-83 . At this stage it maybe observed by the tribunal that applicant has not been appointed by the Chairman of the Bank on 15-9-82 as has been pleaded by him in para 3 ofhis claim statement, by order in writing . The services ofthe applicant has beenterminated by the opposite party w.e.f. 30-6-83 . Claimant has also pleaded breach of various provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 , on variety of grounds and it has been prayed by him on the strength of above facts that he be reinstated in the service of the bank with full back wages and consequential benefits .

10. In view ofabove, it will be seen if the workman has any right to claim reinstatement in the service of the opposite party.Admittedly the claimant was a daily rated worker in the employment of the opposite party. Now the controversey involved in the case has finally been set at naught by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in the leading case of Secretary State of Karnataka and others, Versus Smt. Uma Devi and others wherein it has been held bythe Hon'ble Supreme Court that a daily wager or casual worker, temporary employee or ad hoc employee engaged as stop gap arrangement has no right to claim employment. From this settled legal position the claimant cannot be

11. The Claim ofthe claimant has been contestedby the opposite party inter alia on the ground that the then Chairman of the bank engaged the claimant at Rs. 10/- per dayas daily rated employee, that the claimant did not hold any regular or permanent post in the bank in any capacity 3018

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008 / JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART I-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] inany cadre; claimant had never worked on the post of clerk-cum- cashier in the bank; he was never given any ap- pointment letter as cashier -curn -clerk on daily rate basis or onad hoc basis ; no appointment letter was ever issued to him by the opposite party; that on availability of some casual work the branch might have taken some work from the claimant on daily wage basis on the rate prevalent at the relevant time; in the end it has been admitted by the opposite party that his services as casual basis were disengaged by the bank w.e.f. 30-6-83 and in view of the facts and circumstances of the case the action of the management is neither illegal nor unjust and the claim of claimant is liable to be rejected being devoid ofmerit .

workman to attain the benefits of the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , and in such circumstances his case cannot be covered within the purview of the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. It is a matter of common knowledge that now a days in each and every department of Government of India and Public Sector Undertakings covered by the provisions of the Act , are having their own recruitment rules . Even they are also having rules to cater the need on day- to-day basis and if any engagement on temporary basis , daily basis , casual basis or ad hoc basis is made in violation ofthe rules framed for engaging such employees in that event such employee orworkman is not entitled even to hold temporary, casual , daily rated or ad hoc status under the employment of such department/ industry.

12. After exchange ofpleadings between the parties contesting parties adduced oral as well as documentary evidence in support of their claim and counter -claim,

13. Heard the arguments of the contesting parties at length and have perused the records of the case.

15. In view of above discussions, it is held that the claimant being a daily wager employed by the opposite partybank is not entitled for any relief as claimedby him as his engagement by the bank either on regular basis as claimed by him or on daily wages as claimed by the opposite partyhas not been found in accordance with the recruitment rules . Even the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is not a Bible or Ramayana for the employees working in Industrial Segments of the country and the provisions of the same cannot be invoked unless it is pleaded and proved that the action of the management is in contravention of such and such provisions of service rules and the same is found pleaded and established that they are not akin to the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. It is also settled legal position in Industrial/ Service Jurisprudence that the Courts / Industrial Tribunals or Service Tribunals should not be used as a measure for providing back door entry in the public employment to such persons who are not eligible for the post in accordance with the service rules or who had not been subjected to regular selection process as it would be opposite to the provisions ofArticle 14 ofthe Constitution of India. In view ofabove, the claimant cannot be held entitled for any relief.

16. For the reasons discussed above , the claim of theapplicant in Industrial Dispute Case No. 162 of98 stands rejected and it is held that he is not entitled for any reliefas claimed by him pursuant to the present reference order .

17. In Industrial Dispute No. 67 of99, CentralGovt. , MOL , New Delhi , vide notification No. L- 12012/ 102/98 I.R. B -II dated 19-3-99 has referred the dispute for adjudication 10 this tribunal which is to the effect as to whether action ofthe Management of UCO Bank in terminating the service of Sri Sunit Dixit w.e. f. 7-5-97 is legal and justified If notto what relief the said workman is entitled . The dispute is in between Sri Sunit Dixit C/o Sri B. P. Saxena 426 W- 2 Basant Vihar Kanpur and The Regional Manager UCO Bank , Kapurthala Market Aliganj Lucknow.

14. From the own pleadings and evidence of the opposite party it stands established that the claimant was engaged on daily basis at Rs . 10 per day and he was not paid his wages for sundays and other holidays . On the contrary it hasbeen pleaded by the claimant in his statement of claim that he was appointed by the then chairman of the bank for proposed branch to be opened on 15-9-82. From the documentary evidence it is found that the claimant has not filed any document showing that he was at any point of time was appointed by the then Chairman by order in writing. It is settled principle of law that the competent authority is supposed to perform his obligation in accordane with law and rules applicable for the time being . Even ifcompetent authority acts contravening the relevant rules or act otherwise , such acts of such authority will not confer any legat right in whose favour such act has been done. Therefore , even if it is presumed that the Chairman was competent to make appintment in the opposite party bank and that the claimant has been engaged by him in the bank that will not make Claimant entitled for claiming reinstatement in the service of the bank in the garb of the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as it is now well settled legal position that any appointment made de horing recruitment rules by competent authority ignoring the merits of other similarly situated persons shall not confer any rightto such appointee for claiming regular appointment in the service of their employer . The above settled legal position has recently been reiterated by the Hon'ble SupremeCourt of India in a leading case Secretary, State of Karnataka Versus Uma Devi and others in which principle of law as enunicated by the Apex Court has been reaffirmed that a temporary, casual , daily rated or ad hoc appointee has no right to claim permanency of service in the public employment unless he has been subjected to regular selection process and has been found fit for the post.Mere completion or more than 240 days of continuous service in industrial employment would not entitle a

17A . The claim as set up by the workman in short is that the opposite party offered him temporary employment at its Lajpat Nagar Branch , Kanpur on 12-2-94 , where he 3019 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14 , 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

performed entire regular duties of a peon and he was paid Rs.40/- per day as his wages by the opposite party. It has alsobeen pleaded that during the period ofhis employment he was not paid any wages by the opposite party for sundays andholidays . Some times payment ofwageswere paid to him through vouchers prepared in the name offake persons. Instead ofabsorbing the services ofthe workman on permanent basis, opposite party terminated his services inbreach ofprovisions of Industrial Disputes Act . Since there is gross violation ofthe provisions ofSec . 25F of I.D. Act, 1947, therefore, he be reinstated in the service of the bank with full back wages continuity of service and all consequential benefits .

which are not covered under the definition of Industrial Dispute. Ifit is so it would be totally futile exercise on the part ofthe Tribunal to detail such matter in the body ofthe award which cannot be adjudicated upon, Even otherwise the claimant cannot lay his claim against the opp . party as hehad never been appointed by the opposite party after holding regular selection process , and mere finding place in the panel workman would not ipsofacto become entitle for seeking employment in the bank, as no legal right accrue inhis favour. From this point ofview he cannot be awarded any relief as claimed by him . Reference is accordingly decided against him and in favour of the opposite party StateBank of india, Kanpur .

22. I.D. Case No. 4 of2006 is in between Sri Manoj Kumar s/o ofSri Ramesh Chander bouse No. 32BlockNo. 61/2Govind Nagar Kanpur and the Branch Manager State Bank of India I.E.L. Panki Kanpur in which CentralGovt . MOL,NewDelhi, vide notification No. L- 12012/2/91 /2002/ IR(B-1) dated 19-8-02 has referred the dispute to this tribunal for adjudication which is to the effect Kya Shakha Prabandhak Bhartiya State Bank of India IEL Panki Shakha KanpurDwaraKamkar Sri Manoj Kumar Atmaj Sri Ramesh Chander Ki Dinank 22-10-01 Se Sewa Sampat Kiyajana Nyayochit Hai ? Yadi Nahi to Sambandhit Karmkar Kis Anutosh ke Haqdar Hai ?

18. As against it , the claim of the workman has been contestedby the opposite party on a number of grounds interalia alleging that the workman was never appointed by the opposite party bank in an capacity whatsoever, he was never paid any wages , no regular work of peon were ever taken by the opposite party from the workman, there never existed any relationship of employer and employee between the workman and the bank, claim oftheworkman is barred by provisions of sec . 2(00) (bb ) of the Act, workman has never completed 240 days of service with the opposite party, he was never subjected to regular selection process, claimant is not a workman within the meaning of the provisions of the Act, and lastly it has been pleaded that the claimant is not entitled for any reliefas his claim is devoid ofmerit, therefore , claim ofthe workman berejected.

19. In view of findings recorded by the tribunal in para 14, 15 and 16 ofthis award , the tribunal is not inclined to record separate findings in the instant case as the same would operate as findings in the instant case. Therefore in this case too it is held that the workman is not entitled for any relief as claimed by him and the reference is bound to be decided against the workman . Reference in I.D. Case No. 67 of99 is therefore , answered accordingly.

20. I.D. Case No. 10 of2004 is in between Anil Pal Singh son ofDevi Singh 179/7 outside Khanderav Gate Behind Babulal Factory Jhansi and The Dy. General Manager StateBank ofIndia Zonal Office Mall Road Kanpur inwhich Central Govt. Ministry ofLabour , New Delhi vide notification No. L- 12012/93/2003 (IR)(B - 1) dated30-1-2004 has referred the dispute for adjudication to the effect as to whether the action of the management of Dy . General Manager, State Bank of India, Kanpur, in not giving employment to Sri Anil Pal Singh son of Sri Devi Singh even though he was in the panel of 1989 and he waitedtill 1997 isjustified ? If not what relief he is entitled to ?

23. Workman in his claim petition has alleged that he was appointed by the opposite party against vacancy fellvacantdue to retirement of one Sri Dularey,Daftry cum sweeper at banks Panki Branch on 1-12-99by the then branch manager on the application made by him seeking hisappointment. He continuously worked with the opposite partyw.e.f. 1-12-99 to 21-10-2001 . He also became entitled for regularisation according to the provisions of Bipartite Settlement after rendering 90 days of continuous service. As adevice ofunfair labour practice he was being paid his wages through cheques which were accepted by the workmanto retain his employment with the opposite party. He was not shown any reason for termination of his employmentby the opposite party therefore the action of the bank is in violation of the provisions of Section 25F and25N ofthe I.D. Act. In his place opposite party engaged another person to perform the same workwhich was being performedby the workman . It has also been pleaded that the action of the management bank in terminating the services of the workman is against the provisions of law and in violation ofthe provisions of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. He also made a representation before the bank on 23-10-01 requesting therein to reinstate him in the employment of the bank. Lastly it has been pleaded that the workman be reinstated in the service of the bank and he be also paid his entire back wages and other attached benefits .

24. On the contrary, the claim of the workman has been contested by the opposite party on the ground that there never existed any relationship of employer and 21. From a bare perusal of the schedule ofreference order it is quite obivious that reference order has not been happily worded and schedule of reference order is absolutely outside the scope and ambit of the provisions ofSec. 2-A of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, therefore, it is quite impossible to adjudicate the matter on such issues 3020

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14 , 2008/JYAISTHA 24, 1930

employee between them and the workman , thus the reference is bad in law. Workman has never completed 240 days ofcontinuous service in 12 calendar months preceding the date ofalleged termination, therefore, the provisions of sec . 25F of the Act are not applicable in the case of the petitioner, the petitioner was independant person/ contractor for specificjob distinct and different from bank employee having no control of bank , not governed by service conditions of the the bank as applicable to regular employee appointed through due process and even otherwise paragraph 16.9 of Desai Award has excluded casual or persons engaged to dojob work . It has alsobeen pleaded that the petitioner is intending to seek back door employment in contravention of set rules and procedure for recruitment in the bank which are made by recruitment board after identification of vacancies advertisement , written test and interview etc. it has been denied by the opposite party bank that it ever engaged or appointed the petitioner. On the basis of above pleadings it has been prayed that the claim of the petitioner suffers from merit and is therefore rejected. In view ofabove and also in view offindings recorded by the tribumal in para 14, 15 and 16 of this award and further in view of admitted position of the case that the workman had never been paid his wages at par to those of regular employee of the bank as it is the own case of the petitioner that opposite party used to make payment through cheques, the tribunal do not consider it expedient to discuss oral as well as documentary evidence lead by the contesting parties as it would be futile exercise on the part of the tribunal to record same findings in in the instant case as they will operate as findings of the tribunal in the instant case.

25. Therefore , in view of above, it is held that the petitioner is not entitled for any reliefas claimed by him in his statement of claim and is claim is also liable to be rejected on the ground that petitioner has failed to substantiate his claim that there existed relationship of master and servant between him and the opposite party everexisted. Thus he is held not entitle for the relief claimed by him and his claim is therefore decided against him and in favour of the opposite party bank.

R. G. SHUKLA , PresidingOfficer नई दिल्ली, 27 मई , 2008

का. आ. 1417, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 143 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 , गुवाहाटी के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 25/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-05-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-22012/212/2003- आई, आर ( सीएम- II ) ]

अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी

[PART II SEC . 3 ( ii)) New Delhi , the 27th May, 2008

S.O. 1417-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award Ref. 25/2004 ofthe Central Government industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court, Guwahati as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Food Corporation of India, and their workmen received by the Central Govemment on 27-05-2008.

[No. L-22012/212/2003 -IR(CM-II )] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRALGOVT. INDUSTRIALTRIBUNAL- CUM-LABOUR COURT, GUWAHATI, ASSAM Present: Sri H.A. Hazarika,

Presidingofficer,

CGIT-cum - Labour Court, Guwahati .

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute between:

TheManagement of F.C.I , Ulubari , Guwahati .

Versus

TheJoint. Secretary , F.C.I Workers Union , Kolkata .

Ref. Case No. 25 of2004 APPEARANCES

FortheManagement : Sri P. K. Roy , Advocate, Sri S.K. Chakrabarty, Advocate.

For the Union :

Sri A , Dasgupta , Advocate. Sri S. Chakrabarty , Advocate .

DateofAward : 16-5-2008 .

AWARD

1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi vide its Notification No. L-22012 /212/2003- IR(CM- II ) : dated 24-03-2004 referred this Industrial Dispute arose between the Management Food Corporation of India, andtheir workmen in exercise of power conferred by Clause- (d) ofSub -Section ( 1 ) and Sub - Section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) for adjudication on the basis of the following Schedule:-

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of FCI , Dimapur and Shilong for removing/shifting of FC ] Departmental workers from the operational works at CWC Depot, Dimapur is legal and justified ? If not , towhat relief the concerned workmen are entitled ?"

AND

"Whether the notification of Govt. of India, Ministry ofLabourdated 29-6-1989 in respect of prohibition of contract labour system at FSD , FCI , Dimapur is applicable for CWC Depot , Dimapur where the FCI is using the depot for storage and stacking of food grains on hire. If so , to what relief the workmen concerned are entitled ?" 3021 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) )

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14 , 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

2. The matter was pending in the State Industrial Tribunal at Guwahati and on inception of this CGIT-cum- Labour Court as per procedure the proceeding (record) is transferred and this CGIT-cum - Labour Court received the same on 6-12-2004. On being appearances of both the parties, the matter is proceeded for adjudication and to pass Award here as per procedure.

Forinstance, Management was receiving 2669 of wagon during 2001-2002 which increased to 3632 numbers of wagon in2002-2003 . Further the salary and incentive also increased to Rs . 53,87,516 from the tune of Rs. 21,34,265. Asthe transfer ofworkers from CWC to FCI being instance of service and while FCI own their own godown the gang of workers were transferred from CWC to FCI godown. The objection against the transfer is not maintainable . Such transferdoes not require prior notice . The relevant transfer is not change the service condition. It is done as per standing orders . The transfer is also not detrimental to the benefits with the workmen and they are benefitted out of it . They cannot claim any other benefit under the law. The Management of FCI have not appointed any contract labourer any where in their establishments at Dimapur against theNotification issued by the Government of India on 29-6-1989 for abolition of contract labourer. The CWC appointed their own contract labourer for handling and transporting job in their own depot at Dimapur and after such appointment inform the District Manager, Dimapur. The FCI only hired and used the CWC depot at Dimapur while they had not their own godownbut after construction oftheir own godown the FCI cannot engaged their labour atCWC godown. The Notification dated 29-6-89 prohibited employment of contract labour by the FCI in the various godowns and depots in the establishment of the FCI in India and not by the CWC in the establishment of the CWC. Apart from the storing by FCI, the CWC also storage in respect of other private parties and government organizations .The Notification issued by the Government of India dated 29-6-1989 does not put any restriction on the part ofCWC and does not applicable to the CWCdepot atDimapur. The workmen of FCI who are regular workmen of the FCI establishment cannot be aggrieved by such appointment made by the CWC . That management has properly transferred the force of workmen , to their own godown of FCI . The management has not violated the Notification issued by the Government and prayed to answer the Schedule in their favour.

5. Perused the documents submitted by the respective parties and their evidences . The FCI worker's Union examined Amarlal Roy and Sri Dulal ChandraNath. The Management examined Sri Aswani Kr . Singh. The learnedAdvocate for the union cross-examined the witness ofthe management and the learned Advocate of the union also cross -examined the management witness .

3. The case of the Food Corporation of India Worker's Union in brief is that the labours of the Union used to do the works of carrying loading and unloading at 40 storage depots of Food Corporation of India . The FCI hadgot some depots of their own and some are hired for procurement of food grains and distribution . Food Corporation of India use to procure, store , distribution of foodgrains and has got hundred of food storage depot . One of such hired depot situated at Dimapur, Nagaland, which is owned by Central Warehousing Corporation . In thisDepot the contract labourers were engaged on the basis of direct payment system . For revisions of wage structure a mutual discussion took place between the Union concerned and the management of the FCI and a settlement was arrived at on 24-5-1984 . As per this settlement the separate wage structure and other benefits were given to theworkers including the workmen working in the Dimapur, Central Warehousing Corporation. After the settlement theworkers were benefited due to system of direct payment. On 29-6-1989 the Govt. of India, on the strength of Section 10 (1 ) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition ) Act , 1970 issued a Notification whereby engagement of contract labourer in 56 different godowns of Food Corporation of India were prohibited . One of such depot listed at serial No. 40 is at Dimapur. While the deployment ofcontract labour in the godown of CWC at Dimapur were prohibited the Food Corporation of India brought the workers engaged under direct payment system . Accordingly the workers working in CWC godown at Dimapur have been transferred to the own godown of FCI. This being illegal action the union made an Industrial Dispute before the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) but the dispute could not be settled and as a result of which, the matter is referred before this Tribunal. As system ofContract Labour is abolished the management should not continue to keep contract labours at CWC keeping of contract labour is as prohibited. Hence the action of Management is denied by Union is illegal and prayed to pass the award in favour of the Union.

6. The briefcontention ofthe evidence ofUW.1 Sri Amarlal Roy that FCI who use to do the work of procurement of foodgrains and distribution of the same. One of such hired depots shifted at Dimapur, Nagaland ownedby the Central Warehousing Corporation for loading and unloading of food grains. There was a dispute as regards replacement of contract labour system by direct payment system and the dispute was settled on 24-5-1984 by mutual discussion between the FC ) workers ' Union and 4. The case of the management in brief is that the FoodCorporation of India engaged permanent workers at CWC godown and their monthly wages were paid by FCI . At that initial stage the Food Corporation of India had no godown oftheir own . But later on the Food Corporation of India commissioned the own godown having the capacity of10,000 metric tones. As daily out put increased in the new godown and there was difficulty in sending labour force along with loaded trucks for unloading at CWC .

2071 G1/08-23 3022

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] the Management of the FCI . Ext. A is the copy of that settlement . On 29-06-1989 the Government of India promulgated a Notification under Section 10( 1 ) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition ) Act, 1970 and whereby the engagement ofcontract labour in 56 different godowns and depots of Food Corporation of India was prohibited. Food storage depots at Dimapur is one of such depot . According to that Notification the contract labour deployed at the godown at Dimapur is also prohibited. The engagement of contract labourer apparently illegal and in contravention of the Notification dated 29-06-1989 . Earlier workers worked in the godown of CWC have been transferred to the godown ofFCI . Against that illegal action they raised Industrial Dispute lodging complaint before the Regional Labour Commissioner , Guwahati on 9-9-2002. In cross- examination , Sri Amarlal Roy said that he is the Vice President of the Union. He has not submitted any document and he is the Vice President of the Union concerned . He is authorized by the Union to depose in this matter but no authorization letter is submitted. FCI have engaged contract labour in CWC godwon but relating to that he has not submitted any documents . At the time of reference CaseNo. NTB - I of 1989 FCI had no godown of their own at Dimapur . He denied that the claim of theUnion isbaseless . W.W. 2, Sri Dulal Chandra Nath deposed that he is a member of the FCI workers ' Union since 1970. Their Union is covered throughout India . Amarlal Roy is their Vice President and he used to work throughout the N.E. Region. The relevant dispute was represented by Sri Amarlal Roy before ALC ( C ) , Silchar for conciliation . Amarlal Roy is also authorized by the Union to represent the Union and to take necessary step in this Tribunal . Prior to Amarlal Roy, Parusram Suren was authorized by the Union to represent the Union before this Tribunal and due to health condition as he unable to take necessary step , Amarlal Roy is taking their necessary step before this Tribunal . In cross-examination he said he has not submitted any letter that Amarlal Roy is one of the 9 Vice President of their Union. The letter received by Amarlal Roy to represent the Union is not exhibited.

Act. It is also raised by the workmen concerned that Management has appointed a contractor at CWC Dimapore Depot. The Union is not sure about their claim . The grievances made by the workers ' Union is not maintainable. This transfer does not require any prior notice. It is covered under provision of the standing orders . The transfer benefitted the workmen . The management of the FCI did not appoint any contractor anywhere in their establishment at Dimapur after the Notification issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi dated 29-6-1989. The CWC, Dimapur appointed their own contractor for handling and transport job in their own depot at Dimapur and after such appointment informed the District Manager, FCI , Dimapur vide Letter No. CW/ DMP/1I & T/2002-2003/ 407 dated 29-8-2002 that the said contractor would render handling works oflabourers w.e.f. 2-9-2002 and accordingly requested the District Manager to discontinue the engagement of FCI handling tabourers in the Central Warehousing , Dimapur. That by the notification dated 29-6-1989 prohibited the FCI for engaging of contract labour atDimapur. The workers engaged were brought under direct payment system in the regular establishment of the FCL. Since the FCI has constructed their own godown at Dimapur. The godowns being at Railway siding the concerned workmen were transferred to the newly constructed to their own godown at Dimapur to meet its administrative and operational requirement . That the transfer was made on justified ground. The CWC cat appoint thier own contract labour and the prohibition notice cannot be made applicable to the CWC , Dimapur . In cross- examination the witness deposed that he was posted District Area Manager , FCL. Presently at District Office at Dimapur and he is working here since 7-6-2006 . The FC ] have got their won godown for storage of food and apart from that godown the FCI used to take other godown on occupancy basis from Central Warehousing Corporation and other private and State Government depots as and when required . The Government of India issued a Notification prohibiting of engagement of contract labourer in food storage depot of FCI at Dimapur . The FCI have constructed their own godown. Their own employees used to do the work of loading and unloading in their own godown . The CWC godown at Dimapur can be used by some other organizations also . The labourers working in CWC godown are not FCI workers or labourers . Before construction of FCI godown , the FCI workers were working in the CWC godown . After construction of their own godown all workers were transferred to their won godown for loading and unloading works. Ext . E series are relating to the labour payment made by the FCI to CWC employees for handling FCI goods and CWC used to distribute the amount to the labourers . These labourers are not exclusively working for FCI and they are at liberty to work for other organizations or parties . CWC can engage the labourers

for FCI goods . He is not aware whether the FCI goods are 7. The solitary witness of the FCI , Management Sri Aswini Kumar Singh deposed that the whole gang of workmen who were working at hired depot of Central Warehousing Corporation at Dimapur has been transferred to the depot owned by the FCI at Dimapur for the administration / operational interest of the FCI . The Union made an Industrial Dispute before the Regional Labour Commissioner. Guwahati vide No. F.C.L.W./RLC ( GHT)/ 2002/535 dated 09-09-2002 . That the FCI transferred the workmen concerned from the FCI operational sites at the hired CWC owned godown of the newly constructed FCI godown without taking recourse to that Section - 9-A ofthe Industrial Dispute Act , 1947. The transfer has changed the service of the workmen. But the claim of the Union is nοι maintainable as per purview of4th Schedule of the Industrial storage at CWC godown at Dhubri and Goalpara . He also 3023 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (li) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

evidence and documents in the record, I find the management has rightly transferred the FCI workers from the CWC godown to their own godown at Dimapur and it is legal andjustified,

not aware that FCI have food storage at Bongaigaon and Khanapara . The CWCmanagement have appointmem their owncontractor for handling and transporting job in their own depot atDimapur and after such appointment informed theDistrict Manager FCI, Dimapur , vide letter No. CW/ DMP/HNT/2002-03/407 dated29-8-2002 that said contractor would render handling works of labour w.e.f. 2-9-02.

8. It is pertinent to note here that this Referredmatter has got two Schedules. The first is whether the action of the management ofFCI , Dimapur and Shillong for shifting ofFCI Departmental workers from the operational works at CWC Depot, Dimapur is legal and justified; The second Schedule iswhether the notification of Government of India, Ministry ofLabour dated 29-6-89 in respect ofprohibition of contract labour system at FSD, FCI, Dimapur is picable for CWC Depot, Dimapur where the FCI is using the depot, for storage and stacking of food grains on hire.

10. As regards second part of the Schedule, on careful scrutiny of Notification which is Ext. C, I find the government under sub -Section-1 of Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation andAbolition) Act, 1970 (37 of1970),the Central Government prohibits the employment of contract labourers in the godown and depot of FCI specified in the schedule annexed in the notification . On careful scrutiny, I also find this Notification prohibitsonly theFCI for employment of contract labour in the godown and depots of the FC1. The FCI and CWC are two organizations . There is no direction about the implementation of the notification by the CWC. Hence, in myopinion clearly the notification Ext . C is not applicable in case of CWC. Further, there is no evidence of any agreement that FCI appointed any contractor to engage labourers. Aletter bearing No. CW/DMP /H & T/2002-03/ 407 dated 29-8-2002, issued by CWC to FCI shows that CWC requested the FCI to withdraw their labourers from CentralWarehousing Corporation Dimapur with effect from 2-9-02. Considering all evidences and documents in the record, I find the FCI has not violated the notice. The CWC godowns use by other organization also and as per evidence FCI do not pay any hiring charge when CWC depot is not use by FCI for storage by them . It is found in cross examination that the labours working at CWC are not FCI labourers or workers.

On careful scrutiny of the documents and evidence inthe record I find the FCI used to hire the godowns under CWC on occupancy basis. The CWC godowns are not onlyused by the FCI and it is used by the private parties and other organizations also . The CWC use to take money from FCI duringthe period while they use to store the food grains at their godown and for that the FCI use to pay money directly to the CWC. I also find the FC1 has not engaged any contractor and it appears to me the loading and unloading is done by the labours of the Contractor of CWC . Under the above facts and circurnstances , I find the laboures working at CWC godown are under the control and management of the CWC. As FCI has got their own godown they do not use the CWC godown at all times. Sometimes they use it and the works done by the laboures ofCWC . Under the above facts and circumstances, I find theNotification is not applicable to CWC even the godown isoccasionallyuse by FCI on hire basis.

11. Under the above facts and circumstances the first part of the schedule as well as the second part ofthe schedule are decided against the FCI workers ' Union, It is pertinent to note here that FCI has got their own godown where their labourers or employee are working. They used to hire the CWC godown which is of a different organization. CWC used to rent it out not only FCI but other organization also to store or any other purpose of goods.Hence, bere it can not be accepted that FCI used contract labourers at CWC godown, Dimapur . The request made by CWC to discontinue the labourers ofFCI at CWC with effect from 2-9-02 clearly show that the FCI has not engaged any contractor at CWC.

12. Under the above facts and circumstances I find action of the management of FCI is not against the notification. Further , there is no evidence also that FCI have engaged contractor at CWC godown, Dimapur . in the result, both the parts of the schedule are decided against the Union.

13. Prepare the award accordingly and send the same tothe government immediately .

H. A. HAZARIKA, Presiding Officer 9. On careful scrutiny of the evidence I findwhen the FCI , Dimapur has constructed their own godown at Dimapur, they transferred the whole gang of workers working at CWC godown, Dimapur. It is found CWC godown is a hired godown and prior to their own godown, FCI used to keep their workers at CWC. I find the workers or the whole gang transferred to FCI own godown at Dimapur are economically or other way not discriminated as such transfer is not detrimental to FCI workers. Theyare treated as per provision and procedure of the FCI department. The union could not show anything detrimental to the workmen due to this transfer . The FCI has got right to transfer their employees to the benefit and function ofthe FCI . In my opinion there is no illegal action madebytheManagement ofFCI . On careful scrutiny | find at one point in the written argument the Union also not stressed on this point of transfer and appears to me this point is abandoned by them . However , considering the

2071 GI /08-24.

3024

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/JYAISTHA 24, 1930

नई दिल्ली , 27 मई , 2008

का,आ 1418,--औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार यूको बैंक के प्रबंध तंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट. औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 2, धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 23/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-5-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-12011 /99/2006- आई आर ( बी- II ) ] राजिन्द्र कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 27th May, 2008

S.O. 1418. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.23/2007 ) of the Central Government Indus .Tribunal -Cum-Labour Court,No. 2, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the management of UCO Bank and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 26-05-2008.

[No.L-12011/99/2006- IR (B- II ) ] RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT

Shri Nagendra Kumar , PresidingOfficer

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

Reference No. 23 of2007

Parties: Employers in relation to the management of UCO Bank and their workman

APPEARANCE:-

:Shri . B.Prasad, State On behalf of the Workman

Secretary UCO Bank EmployeesAsso-

ciation .

:Shri Anil Kr. Sinha LawOfficer

Onbehalf of the employers

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Banking . Dated , Dhanbad, the 7th May , 2008 AWARD

TheGovt . of India, Ministry ofLabour, in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10(1 )(d ) of the I. D. Act , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their order No. L - 12011/99/ 2006- IR(B -II) dated , the 1st May, 2007.

[PART II-SEC. 3( i) )

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management ofUCOBank Regional Office, Patna in denying the post ofALPMΟ în respect of Shri K.K. Jain, Clerk-cum-Cashier as per the seniority isjustified and legal ? If not, what relief the workman is entitled ? "

2. InThis reference a petition has been submitted on behalf ofthe workman side praying therein to pass a 'No dispute Award on the ground that the concerned work- man has expressed his reluctance to proceed with the hear- ing ofthe reference as he has got promotion to the officer grade from clerical cadre . The representative of the management raised no objection in view ofthe submission made by the representative of the workman .

Perused the petition and heard both side, Since the concerned workman involved in the dis- pute is not willing to proceed with the hearing of this case ashe has got promotion from clerical cadre to officergrade, I do not find any reason to drag the same for daysto- gether . Under such circumstances , a ' No dispute Award is passed in this case presuming non - existence of any industrial dispute between the parties.

NAGENDRA KUMAR, Presiding Officer नईदिल्ली , 27 मई , 2008

का.आ 1419, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार यूको बैंक के प्रबंध तंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 2, धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 64/2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो कंन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-5-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल -120] 1 /45/2006- आई आर( बी- II ) ] राजिन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 27th May , 2008

S.O. 1419.- In pursuance of Section 17 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Governmenthereby publishes the award (Ref. No.64/2006) of the Central Government Indus. Tribunal -Cum- Labour Court,No. 2, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of UCO Bank and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 26-5-2008.

No. L- 12011 /45/2006- IR (B - II ) ] RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

Shri Nagendra Kumar, Presiding Officer

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10 (1) ( d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 3025

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

ReferenceNo. 64 of2006

Parties: Employers in rolation to the muutgement of UCOBank and their workznan.

Appearanees : Onbehalf of the Workman

Shri B.Prasad, Stats Secretary, UCOBank EmployeesAsso- ciation.

:ShriAnllKr. Sinha, LawOfficer

Onbehalfof the employers

State: Jharkhand

Industry: Banking Dated,Dhanbad, the 7th May, 2008

AWARD

TheGovt. of India, Ministry ofLabour , in exercise of thepowers 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- 12011/45/ 2006/IR(B- II) dated , the 3rd October,2006

SCHEDULE

2006) of Central Governmeat Industrial Tribunal-Cum- Labour Court, Ernakulanı as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management ofFederalBank Ltd. , and their workmen , received by the Central Govemanent on 27-05-2008.

[No. L- 12012/250/ 1994- IR(B-1)] N. S. BORA, EconomicOfficer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENTINDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM -LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM PRESENT: Shiri P. L. Norbert, B.A., LL.B., PresidingOfficer

(Wednesdaythe 19th day of March, 2008/29th Phalguna 1929)

1.D. No. 310/2006

(L. D. No.4/96 ofLabour Court, Ernolaslan) Workman

: V. J. Jayan, Vazheperambil House, Blamakdasra, Kochi-682026.

ByAdv. Sri . Ashok B. Shenoy.

Management

"Whether the demand made by the UCO Bank Employees Association, Patna for regularisation of service ofShri Abhay Kumar, Part-time employeeby the management of UCO Bank is legal and Justified ? Ifnot, what relief the disputant concerned entitledto?"

2.In this reference a petition has been submitted on behalfofthe workman side praying therein to pass a 'No dispute' Award on the ground that the dispute in question has been settled between the parties and the concerned workman has been awarded relief in view of such settle- ment. The representative of the management has agreed upon the submission made on behalf of the workman side .

Perused the petition and heard both sides.

Since the dispute in question has been settled and as prayer has been made to pass a 'No dispute ' Award in this case , I do not find any reason to drag on the instant reference case any more. Under such circumstances , a 'No dispute' Award is passed in this reference presuming non- existence of any industrial dispute between the parties.

NAGENDRA KUMAR, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 27 मई, 2008

का. भा. 1420,-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केंद्रीय सरकार फेडरल बैंक लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केंद्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अभिकरण , इरनाकुलम के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 310/2006 ) को प्रकाशित करेंती है, जो केंद्रीय सरकार को 27-05-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [ संख्या एल-12012/250/1994 - कमाई आर ( बी-1 ) ]

एन. एस. बोरा , आर्थिक अधिकारी NewDelhi, the27thMay,2008 S.O. 1420. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 310/ : The Chairman, M/s. Federal Bank Ltd. , HeadOffice,Alwaye-683 102 ByAdvocates M/s. B. S. Krishnan Associates Thiscase comingup for final bearing on 14-03-2008, thisTribunal-com- Labour Court on 19-03-2008 passed the following:

AWARD

This is a reference made under Section 10 (1) (d) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The reference is:

"Whether the action of the management of M/s, Federal Bank Ltd. ,Alwaye in terminating the services ofSri. V. J. Jayan, Casual Labourer of their ErnakulamNorth Branch w.e.f. 18-04-94 on completion of85 days service is justified. When the casual vacancy continues to be there ? Ifnot, to what relief the workman is entitled ?"

2.The facts of the case in brief are as follows :

Theworkman Sri V. J. Jayan was employed with the management bank, as temporary bankman , ErnakulamNorth Branch on 19-10-93. Heworkedtill 18-04-1994.Altogether hehadworked85days under different spells. On 18-04-94 hewas terminated from service .He was working in a regular vacancy of bankman . His juniors were retained while he was terminated from service. After his termination temporary and permanent hands were taken in the vacancy ofbankmen. No notice of termination or compensationwas given to the workman. The termination is illegal , against : Sastry Award, Bipartite settlements and provisions of Industrial Disputes Act . The workman is entitled for re- instatement, regularisation with full backwages , continuity of service and other consequential benefits.

3026

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 14, 2008/JYAISTHA 24, 1930

3.Accordingto the management the workman was appointed as temporary bankman on daily wage basis for certain stipulated periods and he had worked for a total period of 85 days at different occasions from 19-10-1993 to 18-04-1994.His appointment was not against any permanent vacancy. Hewas not retrenched. At the end of the period ofappointment he was relieved from duty. Therefore he is not entitled for a notice or retrenchment compensation . There is no violation of any of the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, Sastry Award or Bipartite settlements . No juniors were retained when the workman was terminated from service. Applications were invited in 1994 for the permanent post of bankmen and the workman too had applied for the post . However he did not succeed in the interview. There is no illegality in not continuing him in service, He is neither entitled for reinstatement nor for regularisation nor for any other reliefs.

4. In the light of the above contentions the following points arise for consideration :-

1. Is the termination legal ?

2. Is the workman entitled for re- instatement and regularisation ?

3. To what reliefs, if any, is the workman entitled ?

The evidence consists of the oral testimony of WW1 and WW2 on the side of the workman and no evidence on the side of management . WW2 is the Vice President of trade unionwho was examined in 1. D. 269/2006, a similar case.A petition was filed by the workman before the State Labour Court, Ernakulam on 02-09-2002 with a prayerto look into thedeposition of WW2 in I.D. 37/95 (10/269/2006 of this court) was allowed.

5. Point No. 1 : The claim statement as well as the written statement contain the admission that the workman was appointed as temporary bankman at different spells . But accordingtothe workman he was appointed against a permanent vacancy. While the management contends that hewas engaged in leave vacancy and sometimes dueto increase in work.

"Temporary employee is defined in SastryAward in Para 508C which is applicable to all banks and which was adopted in Bipartite Settlements ." Itreads:

"Temporary employee" means an employeewho hasbeen appointed for a limited period for work which is ofan essentially temporary nature , or who is employed temporarily as an additional employee inconnectionwith a temporary increase inwork of apermanent nature."

In the subsequent Desai Award the definition was carried over and later in the 1st Bipartite Settlement dated 19-10-1966 "четporary employee ' was defined in Clause 20.7 as follows :-

"Temporary employee " will mean a workman who has been appointed for a limited period for work

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] which is of an essentially temporary nature , orwho is empoyed temporarily as an additional workman in connection with a temporary increase in work of a permanent nature and includes workman other than a permanent workman who is appointed in temporary vacancy caused by the absence of a particular permanent workman . "

It is relevant to note the next clause, 20.8:

"Atemporary workman may also be appointedto fill a permanent vacancy provided that such temporary appointment shall not exceed a period of 3 months during which the bank shall make arrangements for filling up the vacancy permanently

Tothe 1st Bipartite Settlement Federal Bank was not aparty.Theybecame a party to the 3rd Bipartite Settlement of1979 dated01-08-79 . Clause 1 ofthat Bipartite Settlement reads as follows:-

"In resperct of49 banks listed in Schedule - l to thisMemorandum of Settlement except StateBank of India, Indian Overseas Bank, State Bank of Saurashtra and Bank of Baroda , it is agreed that the provisions of the Sastry Award and of the DesaiAward as modified by the Memorandum of Settlements dated 19th October , 1966 , 12th October, 1970, 23rd July, 1971 and 8th November. 1973 referred to above shall govern the service conditions except to the extent that the same are modified by this settlement. "

L 6. The definition of ' temporary employee' in 1st Bipartite Settlement is not altered or modified in 3rd Bipartite Settlement. Therefore the same definition contained in Sastry Award and modified by the 1st Bipartite Settlements applyto Federal Bank and its employees . Either as per the provisions of Sastry Award or Bipartite Settlements, a temporary employee does not get a right to continue in employment, but are entitled to certain privileges like, to remain in service until juniors are retrenched on the principle of' last come first go and preference in case of recruitment to permanent posts . As a matter of right a temporary employee cannot claim that he is entitled to continue in service or he should be regularized . As per Clause 20.8 of 1st Bipartite Settlement temporary appointment shall not exceed 3 months, within which period arrangement hasto be made for regular appointment through recruitment . Though as per $-2 (s ) of I.D. Act even a temporary employee or a casual employee is a ' workman' , he does not get a right for permanency, but only a right u/s -25F of the Act for retrenchment notice and compensation provided he has worked continuously for a period of one year or 240 days prior to his termination . So far as the workman is concerned, admittedly he worked Only for 83 days in different spells and not continuously during an year, much less prior to his termination . Therefore. he is not eligible for the bencfit u/s -25F of I.D. Act .

3027

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 /ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

[ भाग - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

for appointment of temporary workmen for a period not exceeding 3months and for further employment the bank hastomake arrangement for regular recruitment (Para 20.8 offirstBipartite Settlement) .

7.The learned counsel for the workman submits that the managernent is resorting to unfair labour practice by appointing a person on temporary basis at different spelis. The intention is to deny such person of the beneifts of a permanent employee . He contends that the workman in this case was appointed in a permanent vacancy and the vacancy continued even after his termination . There was no need to give artificial breaks during his service. Hence the intention ofthe bank was to deprive him of the benefits due to a permanent employee . The termination therefore is illegal.

9. Moreover, the Federal Bank Bulletin dated 23-09-1987 (Para 2) says that in the case of sub-staff, temporary appointment can be made only to a vacancy arising out of long absence/leave of permanent incumbent and pot in a vacancy caused by promotion , transfer , retirement, suspension , termination , dismissal , death, etc. It is also provided that as far as possible no temporary appointment shall be made during casual leave vacancies . InPara 3 it is stated that temporary appointmet shall not be given to a candidate for more than 85 days and at a titne not exceeding 10 days . Further paragraphs in the Bulletin says thatappointment order and reljeving order shall be given to temporary employees , a panel of suitable persons shall be prepared and temporary appointments shall be made only out of the panel , a register called 'the Register for TemporaryAppointments ' shall be maintained , the names of persons, who Complete 85 days ' service, shall be removed from the panel and they shall not be further engaged, etc. It is in compliance with the said clauses in theBulletin aswell as Para 20.8 of 1st Bipartite Settlement thatworkers are posted as temporary bankmen for a period not exceeding 85 days . The intention may be to avoid claims oftemporary employees for regularisation . So far as branches are concerned they are merely following the instructions in the Bulletin as well as the Bipartite Settlement . The unions are parties to the Bipartite Settlements and they are aware of the position of a temporary bankman and the manner of his appointment. Still the unions agreed to the terms in Para 20.8 of 1st Bipartite Settlement, according to which the temporary appointment shall not exceed 3 months.

10.But the learned counsel for the workmen submits that the management is indulging in unfair labour practice inthe matter of temporary appointments. Let me now refer to item No. 10 of Part I of Vih Schedule to I.D. Act which enumerates unfair labourpractice.

"to employworkmen as badlis , casuals or temporaries and to continue them as such for years , with the object of depriving them of the status and privileges of permanent workmen."

The above provision clarifies that the practice of temporary appointment for several years is to be treated as an unfair labour practice and not temporary appointments for shorter spells . However the learned counsel for the workman , relying on the decision of Madras High Court reported in K. Rajendran V. Dir (Perst )Pro & Eqp . Cor . of India Limited, New Delhi and Ant . 1995 III -L.L.J . (Suppl) 240, argued that non - renewal of contract shall not be used as a weapon against the workman by the management in order to take him out of the purview of retrenchment u/s- 2(co) of 1.D.Act . In the reported case the petitioner in the 8.Accordingto the bank the workman was appointed not in a permanent vacancy but in leave vacncies under different spells. WW1 is the workman. According to him whenhe joined service one Rai and Krishnan were working in the bankas permanent bankmen (page 8-WW1) . He says that even when the above 2 permanent bankmen were present theworkman and similar other temporary bankmen were allotted work alternatively (page -8). He admits that the work was not continuous but there were breaks in between for one week or less (page -9) . He has no case that the permanent bankmen were , at any time, transferred or promoted or had superannuated or retrenched. WW2 is vice President of trade union . He too does not say that either at the time when the workman had joined service on 19-10-1993 , there was a permanent vacancy of bankinen in Ernakulam north branch or when he was relieved from duty on 18-04-1994. In para 6 of the written statement it is mentioned that as per notification inviting application for the post of bankmen the workman had applied on 02-05-1994. This is subsequent to the termination of the service of workman on 18-04-1994. Assuming that the notification was prior to his termination from sercvice , still there is no evidence to show that the permanent vacancies notified included the vacancies in Ernakulam north branch also. There is no such evidence adduced by the workman . Whereas admittedly 2 persons (Rai and Krishnan) were working as permanent bankmen at the time the workman was in service, Workman admits that he was called for an interview and be had attended the interview, but he does notknow who were the successful candidates (page 5 and 6 ofWW1) . Therefore the contention of the workman that he was appointed against a permanent vacancy of a bankman in Ernakulam north branch cannot be true , Equally there is no force in the contention that such a permanent vacancy continued even at the time of termination of his service on 18-04-1994 . Hence the appointment of the workman could only be in leave vacancy or to meet the exigencies ofwork in the bank during 1993-94 on temporary basis. He admits that similar casual labourers were appointed and they were working in turn at different spells during 1993-94. The workman had worked altogether 85 days within a period of 6 months. The last spell of appointment wasjust for one day and after that day's work he was relieved. Thereafter he was not employed . There is provision in the first Bipartite Settlement dated 19-10-1996

2071 G1 /08-25 3028

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/JYAISTHA 24, 1930

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]

present case it cannot be said that the management has exploited the workman. He worked only for a period of85 days. The workman has not been able to show any motive for the management to terminate his service. Thus no unfair labour practice is adopted by the management .

11. I have already mentioned that since the workman has not worked for a period of one year or 240 days continuously prior to termination he is not entitled for the benefits us -25F of I.D. Act . The question is, what other rights does he get under Bipartite Settlement or under the provisions of Sastry award or I.D. or I.D. Act ? The Bipartite Settlements do not speak of any right to continue as temporary workman or for regularization . A temporary workman like any other candidate can apply for recruitment to a regular post -and if he is qualified he is to be preferred to the general candidate . That alone is provided in the Bipartite Settlement .

12.As per Para 522.4 of Sastry award a temporary workman is entitled for 14 days ' notice for termination of service . The provision reads :-

"Theservice of an employee other than a permanent employee or probationer may be terminated , and he may leave service , after 14 days ' notice . if such an employee leaves service without giving such notice he shall be liable for a week's pay (including all allowances ) " .

writ petition was appointed as messenger initially for 44 days and thereafter for different spells with a break of one day. He continued to be so appointed for a period of 3years . Then he was terminated from service . However the post of messenger continued without filling it. It was held by the Madras High Court that the intention of the management was to take the workman out of scope of retrenchment u/s -2( oo) of 1.D. Act . It is further observed that S-2(00) (bb) is to be strictly construed and if there is any hint ofvictimization or exploitation of the workman the provision should be interpreted in favour of the workman . Inthe reported case, considering the factual position there, itwas held that the termination amounted to retrenchment falling within S-2( 00 ) of I.D. Act and it was an unfair Labour practiceandtherefore the petitioner in that case was entitled for thebenefits u/s-25F of the Act. However , on facts, the case on hand differs from the reported case . The workman was appointed on 19-10-1993 and he had worked for 85 days altogether till 18-04-1994 during a period of 6 months .. During the break periods many other temporary workers were engaged in the same post . This appointment of the workman cannot be treated as one falling within item No. 10 of Vth Schedule of the I.D. Act. In order to bring it under item No. 10 the service should have been for a pretty long time. Whereas in the reported decision the same person was working for 3 years with a break of one day each and nobody else was appointed in his place during the breaks. After his retrenchment the vacancy continued and nobody elsewas appointed . That is not the position in the present case.The workman had worked only for 85 days in leave vacancies during a period of 6 months at different spells. Since his service was only for a short period no bad motive canbe alleged for non - renewal of contract. Hence there is no retrenchment u/s- 2(oo) of I.D. Act. Therefore it cannot be said that there is any unfair labout practice . Two more decisions were cited by the learned counsel for the workman. But they differ on facts. MPBk. Karmachari Sangh V. Syndicate Bk. and Anr. 1997 III-LL.J. (Suppl ) 536 was a case in which a casual worker worked for more than 240 days continuously during a period of one year. He had worked four years altogether . The other case is Bikki Ram S/o . Sh. Lalji V. the OP IT. Cum- L.C. , Rohtak 1996 III - L.L.J (Suppl) 1126. In that case the workman had worked for more than 240 days continuously during an year . Naturally he was entitled to the benefits u/s -25F of I.D. Act. Thus , these two cases also differ from the instant case . The learned counsel had also referredto Balbir Sing V. Kurushetra Central Coop . Bank Ltd and Ors . 1990 1 -LL.L.J . 443 and D. H. Shrike and Ors . V. Zilla Parishad, Yavatmal andOrs. 19901 - L.L.J . 445. In both cases it is observed that since the provision u/s -2(00) (bb) is like an exception to S-2 (oo) strict construction of S-2 (oo) (bb) should be adopted by courts and if there is any attemptby the management to exploit an employee by not reneweing the contract, the provision should be interpreted in favour of the workman. But in the facts and circumstances of the

The learned counsel for the workman argues that whatever be the nature of appointment, whether for a definite period or for an indefinite period , the workman is entitled for 14 days' notice before termination . But if this argument is accepted it will lead to an embarrassing position. For example , the workman in this case was appointed inètially for one day only . If the management wanted to terminate his service after a day's work he cannot be given a long notice of 14 days and there is no occasion for giving such a long notice. Hence it follows that a temporary appointment or causal appointment shall be one for an indefinite period in order to claim 14 days ' notice. In the instant case the appointment was not for an indefinite period , but fordefinite periods. The workman has no case that he was working continuously. He admits that he was appointed at different spells with breaks and different persons were employed during such breaks. II it is argued that indefinite period is purposely made definite by the management with ulterior motive of depriving the workman of certain benefits , then the further question would arise as to how many of the workers similarly employed on temporary basis in the same leave vacancy or even in a permanent vacancy (but only one vacncy) should be given 14 days' notice to discontinue the service ofall of them. However, the evidence go to show that the workman was appointed only for definite periods and it was done in accordance with Para 20.8 of 1st Bipartite Settlement and para 3 of Federal Bank Bulletin . Therefore Para 522.4 of Sastry award is not applicable to the instant case and the workman is not entitled for 14 day's notice.

[भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

13. Itwas then submitted by the learned counsel for the workman that the workman is entitled to one month's pay and allowances as per Para 524( 1) of Sastry award. It reads:

"Temporary employees who are engaged for indefinite periods shall be entitled to one month's pay and allowances . Where,however, temporary employees are engaged for definite periods which havebeen mentioned in their appointment letters, no compensation will be payable" .

This provision also will not come to the help of the workman as he was engaged for definite periods. Such personsare not entitled for compensation as per the above clause. Thus the provisions of Sastry award referred by the learned counsel for the workman re not applicable to thiscase.

' . 14. Itwas then contended by the learned counsel for the workman that S. 25G and H of I.D. Act are violatedby the management. He says so because accordingto him, wiile the workman was terminated his juniors were retained. Therefore, the rule of' last come first go' was not followed by the management in the matter of termination of service. It is to be noted that there was no vacancy of bankman in Ernakulam north branch during 1993-94. The recruitment made in 1994 not necessarily mean that there was vacancy in Ernakulam north branch. Applications were invited for vacancies that arose all over the branches of Federal Bank as per theinstructions of Head Office . There is no evidence before this courtto say that the workman was the first person tobe appointed as temporary bankman in Ernakulam north branch. There is equally no evidence to show that anyone of the temporary employees similarly appointed during 1993-94 was junior to him. There were similar temporary employees who were relieved of their duties at the end of their service period . The workman could examine oneof themto prove that while the workman was retrenched hisjuniorswere retained in the bank . WW2 the union office bearer who must be aware of the appointments in the bank has not stated that any junior employee was retainedwhile theworkman was retrenched. Therefore , I am not able to find that there is any violation of S.25G of1.D. Act .

15.It was then contended that S.25H of I.D. Act is violated . S.25H reads :

"Re-employment of retrenched workmen-Where any workmen are retrenched and the employer proposesto take into his employment any persons , he shall , in such manner as may be prescribed, give an opportunity to the retrenched workmen who are citizens of India to offer themselves for re- employment, and such retrenched workmen who offer themselves for re -employment shall have preference over other persons" .

To attract this provision , first of all, the person claiming preference in recruitment should be a retrenched workman . I have already found that the claimant in this

3029

भारत का राजापत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

case is not a retrenched workman coming within S-2 (00) of I.D. Act. So S.25H has no application . That apart, the recruitment to fill vacancies of bankman was made after termination of service of the workman . According to the management (See written statement) the workman had submitted an application in 1994 for recruitment to permanentpost. The workman says that he had applied for the permanent post of the bankman as per notification in May,1994 and he had attended the interview. Buthe is not aware of the result. According to the management as per the recruitment successful candidates were taken . Thus the workman was given opportunity to apply and appear for the selection to the permanent post of bankman . Buthe did not succeed. That is not the fault of management . Therefore, I find that there is no violation of S.25H of 1.D. Act

Thus , none of the provisions of I.D. Act , Bipartite Settlementsor Sastri award are violated by the management: Point is answered accordingly.

16Point Nos. (2) & (3) :

In view of the above findings it follows that the workman is not entitled for reinstatement, regularisation or forbackwages or for any other relief.

In the result, an award is passed finding that the action of the management in terminating the service of Shri. V.J. Jayan , Casual Labour, Ernakulam North branch w.e.f. 18-04-94 is legal and justified and he is not entitled for any relief. The parties are directed to suffer their respective costs.

The award will take effect one month after its publication in the Official Gazette.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed and typed by her corrected and passed by me on this the 19th dayofMarch , 2008.

P. L. NORBERT, PresidingOfficer

APPENDIX

Witnesses for the workman :- WW1-01-01-2002 - Sri . V.J. Jayan . WW2-05-08-2002- Sri . M.P. Koshy ( Evidence taken in I.D.No.269/06)

Witness for the Management - Nil.

Exhibits for the Workman - Nil . Exihibits for the Management -Nil .

नई दिल्ली, 27 मई, 2008

का.आ. 1421 ,-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केंद्रीय सरकार लार्ड कृष्णा बैंक लि. प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केंद्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , इरनाकुलम के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 41/2006 ) , को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केंद्रीय सरकार को 27-05-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।.

[संख्या एल-12012/85/2004- आई. आर. (बी-1 ) ] एन . एस. बोरा , आर्थिक अधिकारी 3030

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/JYAISTHA 24, 1930

NewDelhi , the 27th May, 2008 8.O. 1421.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 41/2006) of Central Government Industrial Tribunal -Cum-Labour Court, Ernakulam as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Lord Krishna Bank Ltd. , and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 27-05-2008 .

[No. L- 12012/85/2004- IR(B- 1)] N. S. BORA, EconomicOfficer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRALGOVERNMET INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM PRESENT: Shri P. L. Norbert, B, A. , LL.B. , Presiding Officer

(Wednesday, the 26th day of March , 2008/6th Chaitra1930)

LD.41/2006

I.D. 14/2004 ofLabour Court, Ernakulam) Union

: TheGeneral Secretary,

Lord KrishnaBank Employees Union , Nair Samajam Building , Chendamangalam, Pin -683 512.

ByAdv. Shri Ashok B. Shenoy.

Management

: The Chairman,

Lord Krishna Bank Ltd. , Indian Express Building, Kaloor, Kochi-682017.

ByAdvocate Shri Saji Varghese

This case coming up for hearing on 19-03-2008, this Tribunal-cum -Labour Court on 26-03-2008 passed the following:

AWARD

This is a reference made under Section 10 ( 1 ) (d) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The reference is :-

"Whether the punishment of dismissal imposed to Mr. V. M. Ramakrishnan by the management of Lord Krishna Bank Lid . , is just, fair and correct ? If not , to what reliefMr. V. M. Ramakrishnan is entitled to ?"

2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows :-

Shri V. M. Ramakrishnan was a Deposit Collector of Dhanavardhana Savings Deposit at Chendamangalam branch of Lord Krishna Bank . While so , on 27-12-2001 Assistant Manager of the bank while verifying entries in the daily collection statement with Dhanavardhana Savings Deposit Account Collection Register , he found a sheet , numbered as pages 37 and 38, torn away . The workman was questioned by him . The torn sheet was recovered from workman's handbag . He was placed under suspension , a charge sheet was issued and an enquiry was ordered. In the domestic enquiry the workman was found guilty of misappropriation of money and acting prejudicial to the

[ PART 11-SEC. 3 (ii ) ] interest of the bank and he was dismissed from service. That is challenged by the workman,

3. Accordingto the union which has espoused the cause of the workman the enquiry is vitiated for violation ofthe principles of natural justice. The workman was denied opportunity to be defended by a lawyer despite the fact that the Presenting Officer was a legally trained person and a Senior Officer of the bank, that the enquiry proceedingswere in English , but the workman was unable to understand it as he is illiterate , that the documents on the management side were marked without proof, that the summoneddocuments were not produced by the management, that the documents tendered by the workman were not marked and that the Enquiry Officer was acting with a biased mind and in a discriminatory maллет . The findings of the Enquiry Officer are perverse. The punishment imposed is illegal and excessive. The family background and the extenuating circumstances of the workman were not considered by the Disciplinary Authority while imposing the punishment . The workman is without anyjob after suspension and the family is starving .

4. In the written statement the management contends that the Enquiry Officer conducted the enquiry complying with the principles of natural justice . The workman fully supported the enquiry. He was represented by the Secretary of the union. List of witnesses and documents on the management side were furnished to the workman . The witness of management was examined in the presence of workman and defence representative . He was cross examinedby the defence . The workman was given opportunity to adduce evidence . However the defence representative stated that the defence had no witness and no documents. Defence was given opportunity to submit argument notes . But even after 10 days no arguments note was submitted . On the basis of the evidence the Enquiry Officer found the workman guilty of the charges. Considering the seriousness of the offence the disciplinary authority imposed the punishment of dismissal . The punishment is commensurate with the gravity of misconduct . No objection was raised by the workman or his defence representative during enquiry regarding conduct of the enquiry in English or non production of original documents . The defence representative had cross examined the witness in English . The documents marked were attested copies of originals . The workman is not entitled to be re - instated or punishment reduced .

5. In the light of the above contentions the following points arise for consideration :

1. Is the enquiry proper ?

2. Are the findings of Enquiry Officer correct ?

3. To what relief , if any , the workman is entitled ?

The evidence consists of the oral testimony of MW1 and Ext . M1 . Enquiry file on the side of the manageinent and no evidence on the side of defence .

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

6. Point. No. 1 -The validity of enquiry is questioned on 6 grounds.

(1) The enquiry proceedings were in English . But the workman is illiterate and was not able to follow the proceedings. It has come out in evidence that the workman was a matriculate at the time of enquiry . He was defended bydefence representative, the Secretary of the union who was a graduate. MWI has deposed before this court that at no point of time the defence had objected to the proceedings being conducted in English. More over the management witnesses were cross examined by defence representative in English . There is no merit in the contention now that the enquiry proceedings were in English which had handicapped the workman.

(2) The next grievance of the workman is that hewas not allowed to be assisted by a lawyer in the enquiry . Though in the claim statement it is pleaded that the presentingofficer was a law-graduate MW- 1 does not admit it.But he says that the presenting officer is a post - graduate . Unless the presenting officer was a legally trained person or an advocate the defence could not have made a request to take the assistance of the lawyer on defence side. No such provision enabling the workman to take the assistance ofthe lawyer is pointed out by the union. Hence there is no illegality indenying legal assistancce by a practising lawyer.

(3)Accordingto the union 8 documents were marked by the Enquiry Officer without proving them through competent witnesses. MW 1 says that the documents marked were attested copies. However no objection was raised by the defence at the time of enquiry regarding marking. Moreover copies of documents were already furnishedto the workman. I find from Ext. M1 Enquiry File that the documents marked were copies attested by the Branch Manager. Having not raised any objection before the Enquiry Officer there is no merit in raising such an objection before this court. The strict rule of evidence is notapplicableto domestic enquiry and there is no illegality in marking attested copies.

(4) The union submits that the original documents available with management were not produced by them. Had they produced them they would have proved the innocence of the workman. However no such request for production of original documents was made by the union at the time of Enquiry. Therefore the management was not bound to produce the originals.

(5) The next contention of the union is that the documents tendered by the workman were not marked by theEnquiryOfficer . But the proceedings ofenquiry reveal that despite opportunity given to the workman to adduce evidence the defence representative submitted that the defence had neither witnesses nor documents . No documents were also produced . The contention of the union is without anybasis.

(6) The last contention of the union is that the Enquiry Officer acted with a biased mind and in a

3031

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008 /ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

discriminatory manner . Other than the pleading in the claim statement no attempt was made to substantiate the contention. It is not explained in what manner the Enquiry Officerwasbiased and what was the discriminatory conduct of the Enquiry Officer. The allegation is baseless and warrants no consideration .

(7) The enquiry proceedings show that ample opportunity was given to the workman in defending the charges. He was assisted by the Secretary of the union .All throughout the enquiry the workman and defence representative were present . The management witnesses were cross examined . Copies of documents and witness listwere furnished to the defence . More than 10 days time was given for submitting argument notes of the defence side.But no argument note was submitted . Thus the Enquiry Officer conducted the enquiry fully complying with the principles of natural justice and following the procedure for enquiry. There is no illegality or impropriety in the conduct of enquiry and hence the point is found against the union,

8. Point No. 2 :-The charge sheet levelled against theworkman is contained at pages 1 and 2 of Ext. Ml . The charge is that the workman after collecting Rs . 1,000 from account holder Sri K. F. Biju on 24-12-2001 failed to remit it in bank on the due date of 26-12-2001 , which was the next working day . On 27-12-2001 when the Assistant Manager Sri K. F. Samuel verified the entries in the daily collection statement with D.S.D. Account Collection Registerhe found a sheet of the register removed by trearing it. Since the workman was the only deposit collector he was questioned. Workman then took out the torn away sheet from his bag saying that it was accidentally torn off. That sheet shown payment of Rs. 1,000 to the workman by account holder Biju. Though the amountwas entered in the collection pass book issued tothe customer the amount was not included in the D.S.D. daily collection statement and the amount was not remitted оп 26-12-2001 . Later the amount was remitted by the workman. Hence the bank alleges misappropriation of money and doing an act prejudicial to the interest of the bank.

9. One witness was examined and 8 documents were marked on the side of the management toprove the charges.. Ext. M8 isa letter of the workman addressed to the Manager ofthebranch.He admits the guilt in unequivocal terms. It is signed by the workman. However the suggestion of the union when MW1 was in box was that the letter was obtained by the branch manager by force. MW1 denied it and said that it was a voluntary act. The suggestion ofthe union is an after thought. Ext. MB is dated 28-12-2001 . The charge sheetwas given to the workman on 17-01-2002 .He was asked to offer his explanation regarding the charges. Buthe did not submit any explanation. Had the letter been written due to coercion he was free to say so at least by replying to the charges . He was placed under suspension 3032

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008/JYAISTHA 24, 1930

on 17-01-2002 itself. Hence there was no difficulty for him to take any stand he wanted after the charge sheet was issued. Therefore there is no merit in the contention that he had admitted the guilt due to force or threat .

10. Ext. M1 (in Domestic Enquiry ) is cash collection record in respect of DSDA/ c No. 3242 of Sri . K. S. Biju . An amount of Rs . 1,000/- is seen collected on 24-12-2001 . Ext . M3 is D.S.D. collection statement . The amount is not seen noted as collected on 24-12-2002 in Ext . M3 . Ext . M4-2 is D.S.D. Account Collection Register (Photostat copy of torn away sheet) concerning the account of Sri Biju. Rs . 1,000/- is seen collected on 24-12-2001 . The amount collected on 24-12-2001 had tobe remitted in bank on the next day on 25-12-2001 . But that being a holiday the amount should have been deposited on the next working day on 26-12-2001. However the amount was not remitted. The matter was reported to Deputy General Managerbythe Branch Manager by Ext . 5 on 27-12-2001. The amount was remitted in the account of the customer by the workman on 27-12-2001 . Through Ext . M7 withdrawal slip by debiting the account of the workman. TheAssistantManager Sri . K. F. Samuel was examined in the enquiry as the sole management witness ( MW1 ) and he supported the charge against the workman. Apart from the records of the bank there is clear admission of the guilt in Ext . M8 letter of the worker . There is no contra evidence . The findings ofEnquiry Officer are therefore in order and there is no reasonto interfere with it .

11. Point No. 3 :-It was submitted by the learned counsel for the union that the workman was in service from 1975 to 26-07-2003 when he was dismissed from service.He worked about 28 years . His past is clean . He hails from a poor family background and he is the sole bread winner of the family . The amount involved is small . These circumstances should have been taken into consideration by the Disciplinary Authority while imposing a harsh punishment of dismissal from service . The learned counsel for the management argued that the small amount of money misapopropriated is not a mitigating circumstance . The misconduct is grave in nature, whatever be the amount. However it is relevant to note that the workman Sri . Ramakrishnan was in service for long time of28 years as deposit collector . There is no prior disciplianary action against him. The management has not doubted his integrity at any time prior to this incident or issued any memo to him on account of any lapses on his part . He has rendered long and good service until the unfortunate incident accurred. It is seen from Ext .M5 letter of the Branch Manager to D.G.M. that when the discrepancy was detected and workman was questioned he attempted to commit suicide in the bank itselfby hanging himself on fan . The timely intervention of officers of the bank saved him. He regrets for the incident. After having spent long peiod in bank it is difficult for him to get another job at this old age. According to him he is jobless and his family is starving. Considering all these mitigating circumstances I think that the punishment imposed is excessive . I feel that the ends of justice will be served by converting dismissal into discharge with superannuation benefits.

[PART 11-SEC.3(ii ) ) In the result, an award is passed holding that the findings of Enquiry Officer is fair and proper, but the punishment of dismissal is converted into one of discharge with superannuation benefits .

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed and typed by her corrected and passed by me on this the 26th day of March , 2008 .

P. L. NORBERT , Presiding Officer APPENDIX

Witness for the Management MWI - 05-03-2007 Shri Pradap. Exhibits for theManagement MI-Enquiry file.

नई दिल्ली, 27 मई , 2008

का.आ. 1422.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केंद्रीय सरकार साऊथ सेन्ट्रल रेलवे प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केंद्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण बंगलौर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 67/1999 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केंद्रीय सरकार को 27-05-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल -41012/ 177/1998- आई आर ( बी -1 ) ] एन. एस. बोरा , आर्थिक अधिकारी New Delhi , the 27th May, 2008 $ .O. 1422.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14, of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 67/1999) of Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum -Labour Court, Bangalore as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of South Central Railway, and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 27-05-2008.

[ No. 1. -41012/177/ 1998- IR(B- 1 ) ] N. S. BORA, Economic Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT, BANGALORE

Dated: 5th May , 2008 PRESENT Shri A. R. SIDDIQUI , Presiding Officer C. R. No. 67/1999

IParty

II Party The Chief Works Manager, Hubli Workshops . South Central Railway , Hubli , Karnataka State.

Shri Abdulaziz , S/ o . Abdulwaheb , C/ o . A. I. Shideek , Advocate, Patil Galli , Hubli , Karnataka State 3033 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 14, 2008/ज्येष्ठ 24, 1930

AWARD

1. The Central Government by exercising the powers conferredby clause (d) of sub- section 2A of the Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 has referred this dispute vide order No. L-41012/177/98 - IR( B - I) dated 4th May 1999 for adjudication on the following schedule :

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action ofthe Chief WorksManager, Workshop, South Central Railway, Hubli in dismissing the service of Shri Abdul Aziz A Shaiksanadi , Welder is justified ? If not, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to ? "

2.Acharge sheet dated 13-03-1993 issued to the first partyworkman alleging his unauthorized absence for 161 days between 01-01-1992 and 31-12-1992 . ADomestic Enquirywas conducted and on the findings of the enquiry officer holding him guilty of misconduct of unauthorized absence, the Diciplinary Authority imposed the penalty of reductionto lower grade of pay of Rs . 990 in the scale of Rs .950-1500 for a period of36 months (NR) w.e.f. 1-03-1996. The first partybeing aggrieved by the said order appears 10 have preferred an appeal and to his misfortune the appellate authority instead of allowing his appeal to set aside the above punishment order replaced the said order with a punishment of removal from service. The first party then appears tohave raised the dispute with the conciliation authority resulting into the present proceedings.

asMW1 and got marked 7 documents at Ex. M1 to M7, The first party did not evidenced on his behalf. After hearing the learned counsel for the respective parties, this tribunal by order dated 9-08-2005 recorded a finding to the effect that enquiry held against the first party by the second party is not fair and proper. Thereafter, on merits of the case the management examined its second witness as MW2 said to have been working as a Assistant Workshop Manager, South Western Railway, Hubli by filling his affidavit. His statement in the affidavit relevant for the purpose is to the effect that the first party during the year 1992 remained unauthorizedly absent from 1-01-1992 to 31-12-1992 and that he is a habitual unauthorized absentee . Thereafter,he gave the details about the enquiry conducted against him and the impugned punishment order passed by the Disciplinary Authority as well as the Appellate Authority . In his cross examination he denied the suggestion that his affidavit averments that the first party was a habitual absentee are false. It was elicited that the absence of the first party from duty in the year 1992 for about a period of 161 days was not continuous absence but in different periods and that charge sheet did not disclose the specific dates of his absence so also the counter statement filed by the management was silent on that . It was elicited that no separate notices were issued to the first party on each and every period of his absence whenever he resumed duty after the absence period. He admitted that whenever he (the first party) resurned duty be had produced medical certificate with leave letters on those occasions and those documents are not produced in the court . He admitted that there is a provision under the Railway Rules for different kinds of leave enabling the workman to remain absent on leave even for a period of one year .He was unable to say if the first party has many days of leaveto his credit in the year 1992.

3. The first party by way of his claim statement challenged, in the first instance , the enquiry proceedings as conducted against the principles of natural justice, the enquiry findings suffering from perversity and the punishment order as unjust and illegal . His main contention rather the stand taken by him in his claim statement was to the effect that on account of his ill health, suffering from a disease called ' fits ' he was forced to go on leave and submitted his leave letters with medicat certificates for the leave period availed during the year 1992-93. Therefore, accordingto him his absence from duty was against the leave and on medical ground supported by medical' certificates . Therefore, it cannot be held to be unauthorized absence.

4. Whereas , the management by its counter statement, came out with the case that the first party remained unauthorisedly absent from duty for the above said period without getting the leave sanctioned or without submitting any medical certificate from the Railway Doctors by whom he was supposed to take the treatment if he was suffering from any illness . The management also contended that the enquiry was conducted in accordance with the principles of natural justice , findings suffered from to perversity and that impugned punishment order passed by the appellate authority was legal and just keeping in view the gravity of the misconduct committed by the first party.

6. As against this the first party exarnined himself and got theree documents marked namely the copy of his application before the ALC, the Objection Statement filed by the management and the copy of the failure report made by the ALC. In his cross examination his representation dated 25-04-1994 was marked at Ex. M8. In his cross examination it was elicited that he did not report for duty fora period of 161 days from 1-01-1992 to 31-12-1992( it ought tohave been between 1-01-1992 and 31-12-1992), The witness however, volunteered that he had gone on leave and stated that he had produced the documents before this tribunal for seeking the leave for the said period. It was elicited that he suffered from the fits disease throughout the year 1992. He admitted that as per the rules the railway employee must go to the railway Doctor if suffered from disease . He added to say that he had gone to the railway hospital but the doctor was not available. It was elicited that he had produced the documents for having suffered from the disease and for having taken treatment from the doctor during the year 1991 .

5. In the light of the respective contentions of the parties with regard to the validity and fairness or otherwise of the enquiry proceedings this tribunal took up the said question as Preliminary Issue . During the course of trial of the said issue the management examined the enquiry officer

7. Now, therefore, in the light of the aforesaid oral and documentary evidence , learned counsel for the management vehemently contended that the charge, of unauthorized absence from duty for a period of 161 days during the year 1992 has been very much substantiated by 3034

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 14, 2008 / JYAISTHA 24 , 1930

the management in the light of the statement of MW2 and in the light of the very admissions made by the first party in that regard. He contended that though the first party claimed to have submitted leave applications and medical certificates on very occasion of his remaining absent from duty, no document as such was produced supporting his contention. Therefore when there is no record to suggest that he remained absent from duty as against the leave, it is tobe presumed that it was the absence from duty without getting the leave sanctioned and without due intimation to theauthority concerned. Learned counsel further submitted if at all the first party suffered from any disease he was supposed to take the treatment from the doctors at railway hospitals and not from any private doctor .

8. Whercas , learned counsel for the first party submitted that mainly because the first party did not take the treatment from railway doctors , it cannot be said that henever suffered from any disease. He invited the attention of this tribunal to the statement of MW2 in his cross examination wherein in no uncertain terms he admitted that the first party used to produce private medical certificates with leave letters whenever he resumed the duty after remaining absent from duty. Learned counsel further contended that the charge of urlauthorized absence against the first party itself is very vague and unspecific as admittedby the said witness of the management itself. He contended that when the first party remained absent on different occasions for a total period of 161 days in the year 1992, it was necessary for the management to come out with a specific case with specific periods shown in the charge sheet even if, no action was taken against the first party for his absence on each and every occasion.

9. On going through the records one thing which emerges out very clearly rather a fact which is not disputed by both the parties is that the first party was remaining absent from duty for a period of 161 days on different occasions in the year 1992. The first party though in his deposition before this tribunal stated that he has got the documents of seeking leave and medical certificates but did not produce any one to support his said statement . Therefore, in the absence of any document or any copy of leave application being produced by the first party much less the medical certificates , it is to be presumed that he remained absent from duty without prior intimation to the authority concerned and without getting his leave sanctioned . However , here is the case where the management witness himself admits in his cross examination that whenever the first party was resuming duty after remaining absent he was producing the private medical certificates with leave letters on those occasions . Therefore , having regard to the said admission made by the management witness itself, it becomes very difficult to

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ⅱ ) ]

appreciate the management's contention that the first party was remaining absent from Juty without getting the leave sactioned or without producing the medical certificates . lt is interesting to note that not a single document has been produced by the management before this tribunal except the self serving statement of MW2 in two sentences to say that absence of the first party was unauthorized . It was well argued for the first party that even the charge sheet issued against the first party was very much vague not disclosing the specific periods of absence except to say that the first party was remained absent from duty for a total period of 161 days between 01-01-1992 and 31-12-1992 . Therefore , taking into consideration the aforesaid statement of MW2 , the fact that no documents were produced by the management in support of the charge of misconduct levelled against the first party and not ignoring the fact that the first party also did not produce any paper to suggest that he remained absent from duty against the leave sanctioned and that he was producing medical certificates in support of his contention that his leave was on medical ground . 11 appears to be a fit case where lenient view can he taken against the first party by restoring the very same punishment which was imposed upon by the Disciplinary Authority with 40 per cent of the back wages from the date of original punishment order till the date of impugned punishment order passed by the AppellateAuthority . He shall get 25 per cent of the back wages from the date of impugned punishment order till the date of his reinstatement with the benefit of continuity of service during the aforesaid period and other consequential benefits.Hence the following Award:

AWARD

The first party is hereby imposed with a punishment of penalty of reduction to the I ower grade on pay of Rs . 990 in the scale of Rs.950-1500 for a period of36 months (NR) with effect from01-03-1996 .

The management is directed to reinstate the first party into its services in the said grade and scale of pay with 40 per cent of the back wages from the date of original punishment order passed by the Disciplinary Authority till the date of the impugned punishment order passed by the Appellate Authority. The management shall pay backwages at the rate of 25 per cent from the date of impugned punislument order till the date of his reinstatement with any consequential benefits for the period mentioned above. No costs .

(Dictated to PA, transcribed hy her , corrected and signed by me on 5th May 2008)

A. R. SIDDIQUI , Presiding Officer

Printed by the Manager , Govt . of India Press . Ring Road, Mayapurı , New Delhi - 110061 and Published by the Controller of Publications , Delhi - 110054 .