This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

रजिस्ट्री सं. डी. एल. (एन ) 04/0007/2003-05

सत्यमेव जयते

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

प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक

WEEKLY

नई दिल्ली, जुलाई 20- जुलाई 26, 2008 , शनिवार/आषाढ़ 29-श्रावण 4, 1930

NEW DELHI , JULY 20-JULY 26 , 2008, SATURDAY/ASADHA 29- SRAVANA 4, 1930

सं. 30] No. 30]

इस भाग में भिन्न पृष्ठ संख्या दी जाती है जिससे कि यह पृथक संकलन के रूप में रखा जा सके

Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation

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

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

कार्मिक , लोक शिकायत तथा पेंशन मंत्रालय ( कार्मिक और प्रशिक्षण विभाग ) नई दिल्ली , 17 जुलाई , 2008

का. आ. 1935. केंद्रीय सरकार एतद्द्वारा दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना अधिनियम 1946 ( 1946 का अधिनियम सं. 25 ) की धारा 6 के साथ पठित धारा 5 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए झारखंड राज्य सरकार , गृह विभाग की अधि- सूचना सं. 6/सीबीआई-404/2008-2493 दिनांक 19-6-2008 द्वारा प्राप्त झारखंड सरकार की सहमति से भारतीय दंड संहिता , 1860 (1860 का अधिनियम सं. 45 ) की धारा 302 , 201 और 34 के अध ीन ललित मेहता, पुत्र श्री जगदीश मेहता , गांव- जयनगर, पुलिस स्टेशन मझियांव , जिला गढ़वाल और सचिव , विकास सहयोग केंद्र (एनजीओ ) छतरपुर, जिला पलामू संबंधी विश्रामपुर ( जिला पलामू) में दर्ज मामला सं. 71/2008 दिनांक 15-5-2008 के अन्वेषण के मामले तथा उपर्युक्त अपराधों से संबंधित अथवा संसक्त प्रयत्नों , दुष्प्रेरणों और षडयंत्रों तथा उसी संव्यवहार के अनुक्रम में अथवा उन्हीं तथ्यों से उद्भूत किसी अन्य अपराध अथवा अपराधों का अन्वेषण करने के लिए दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना के सदस्यों की शक्तियों और अधिकारिता का विस्तार सम्पूर्ण झारखंड राज्य पर करती है ।

[सं. 228/54/2008- ए.वी.डी. II ]

चंद्र प्रकाश , अवर सचिव 2644 G1/2008

MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS

(Department of Personnel and Training) New Delhi , the 17th July, 2008

S.O. 1935. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 5 read with Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act , 1946 ( Act No. 25 of1946), the Central Government with the consent of the State Government of Jharkhand . Home Departinent vide Notification No. 6/CBI -704/2008-2493 dated 19th June , 2008 , hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members ofthe Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the State of Jharkhand for investigation of Case No. 21/08 dated 15-5-2008 under sections 302 , 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860 ) registered at Vishrampur (District Palamau ) relating to murder of Lalit Mehta S/o Shri Jagdish Mehta, Village- Jainagar, Police Station Majhiaay , District Garhwa and Secretary , Vikas Sahyog Kendra (N.G.O. ) Chhatarpur , District Palamau , the abetment and conspiracy in relation to or in connection with the said offences and any other offences in the aforesaid transaction .

[No. 228/54/2008 -AVD- 11 ]

CHANDRA PRAKASH , Under Secy.

(3847) 3848

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/SRAVANA 4 , 1930

वित्त मंत्रालय (वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 15 जुलाई, 2008

का, आ. 1936. भारतीय निर्यात आयात बैंक अधि नियम, 1981 ( 1981 का 28 ) की धारा 6 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( ड. ) के उपखंड ( III ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केंद्रीय सरकार , एतद्वारा , डॉ. नागेश कुमार , महानिदेशक , विकासशील देशों हेतु अनुसंधान एवं सूचना प्रणाली, को तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए अथवा अगले आदेश होने तक, जो भी पहले हो , भारतीय निर्यात- आयात बैंक के निदेशक बोर्ड में अंशकालिक गैर- सरकारी निर्देशक के रूप में नामित करती है ।

[फा. सं. 24/4/2002- आईएफ-1 ] रमन कुमार गौड़ , अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF FINANCE (Department of Financial Services) New Delhi , the 15th July, 2008 S.O. 1936. In pursuance of sub- clause ( iii ) of clause ( e) of sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 6 of the Export Import Bank of India Act , 1981 ( 28 of 1981 ), Central overnment hereby nominates Dr. Nagesh Kumar , Director General . Research & Information System for Developing Countries ,as part time non - official Director on the Board afDirectors ofExport Import Bank of India with immediate effect for a period of three years or until further orders , whichever is earlier .

[ F No. 24/4/2002 / IF - 1 ] RAMAN KUMAR GAUR , Under Secy.

(राजस्व विभाग )

केंद्रीय उत्पाद तथा सीमा शुल्क के मुख्य आयुक्त का कार्यालय

पुणे , 23 जून , 2008

संख्या 1/2008 सी.शु. ( एन.टी. ) का. आ. 1937.- भारत सरकार , वित्त मंत्रालय , राजस्व विभाग , नई दिल्ली , द्वारा दिनांक 1-7-1994 को जारी अधिसूचना संख्या- 33/94- सीमाशुल्क ( एन.टी. ) द्वारा मुझे प्रदत्त अधिकारों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैं , एप्तद्वारा महाराष्ट्र राज्य के पुणे जिले में तालुका हवेली स्थित पुणे शहर को सीमाशुल्क अधिनियम 1962 ( 1962 का 52 ) की धारा 9 के अधीन निजी बाँडेड वेअरहाउस स्थापन करने के लिए वेअरहाउसिंग स्टेशन घोषित कर रहा हूँ।

[फा सं. Vili/48-39/मु.आ.का./पुणे क्षेत्र/06 ]

रा.ज.बेले , मुख्य आयुक्त

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] (Department of Revenue)

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS Pune , the 23rd June , 2008 No.1/2008 Cus (NT)

S.O. 1937. In exercise of the powers conferred on me by Notification No.33 /94- Cus (NT), dtd. 1-7-94 of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance , Department of Revenue, New Delhi , I hereby declare Pune City Tal -Haveli , Dist-Pune, in the State of Maharashtra to be a Warehousing Station , under Section 9 , of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), for setting up Private Bonded Warehouse .

[F.No. VIII/48-39/CCU/PZ/06] R. J. BELEY, Chief Commissioner सीमा शुल्क एवं केंद्रीय उत्पाद शुल्क आयुक्त का कार्यालय सेलम , 15 जुलाई , 2008

संख्या 2/2008 सी.शु. ( एन.टी. ) का. आ. 1938. - सीमाशुल्क अधिनियम 1962 की धारा 152 के खंड ( क) के अंतर्गत भारत सरकार , वित्त मंत्रालय , राजस्व विभाग , नई दिल्ली, द्वारा दिनांक 1-7-1994 को जारी अधिसूचना संख्या-33/94-सीमा शुल्क ( एन.टी.) द्वारा अधोहस्ताक्षरी को प्रदन शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैं , सी.पी.राव , आयुक्त, सीमा शुल्क एवं केंद्रीय उत्पाद शुल्क , सलेम एतद्वारा एस.एफ. संख्या 115/2 , सिंगलपट्टी ग्राम , नमक्कल तहसील , नमक्कल जिला तमिलनाडु राज्य को वाणिज्य विभाग , वाणिज्य एवं उद्योग मंत्रालय ,मद्रास निर्यात प्रोसेसिंग जोन , अनुमोदितनुसार शत- प्रतिशत निर्यातोन्मुख एकक के प्रयोजन के लिए सीमाशुल्क अधिनियम 1962 की धारा 9 के अनुसार भाण्डागार स्टेशन घोषित करता हूँ।

[फा. नं. सी.सं. VII1/40/02/2008/ - सीमा - शुल्क/नीति ]

सी.पी.राव , आयुक्त OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE

Salem, the 15th July , 2008 No.2 /2008 Customs (NT)

S.O. 1938. In exercise of the powers delegated to the undersigned , vide Notification No.33/94-CUS( NT) , dtd . 1-7-94 of the Government of India , Ministry of Finance , Department of Revenue , New Delhi , under clause ( a ) of Section 152 of the Customs Act , 1962 , I, C.P.RAO , Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise , Salem, hereby declare S.F.No.115 /2, Singilipatti village in Mamakkal Taluk of Mamakkal District in the state of Tamilnadu , to be a Warehousing Station , under Section 9, of the Custoins Act, 1962, for the purpose of setting up of 100% Export Oriented Unit, as approved by the Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Department of Commerce Madras Export Processing Zone , Chennai .

[F. No. C. No. VIIL/ 40/02/2008- CUS/ POL] C. P. RAO, Commissioner 3849 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

OFFICE OF THE CHIEFCOMMISSIONER OF कार्यालय मुख्य आयकर आयुक्त

INCOME TAX

उदयपुर , 15 जुलाई , 2008

Udaipur, the 15th July, 2008

अधिसूचना संख्या-08/2008-09

NotificationNo.8/2008-09

(आयकर)

(INCOME- TAX)

का.आ. 1939.- आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 ( 1961 का 43 वां) को धारा 10 के खण्ड ( 23 ग ) की उपखण्ड ( IV) के साथ पठित आयकर नियमावली , 1962 के नियम 2 ग के द्वारा प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मुख्य आयु‌क्र आयुक्त, उदयपुर एत‌द्वारा " महाराणा प्रताप स्मारक समिति, मोती मगरी , उदयपुर ( राजस्थान ) " को कर निर्धारण वर्ष 2008-09 से 2012-13 तक के लिए निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुए उक्त उपखण्ड के प्रयोजनार्थ अधिसूचित करते हैं , अथतिः-

S.O. 1939. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub -Section (iv) ofClause (23C) of Section, 10. of the Income -tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961) read with rule 2C of the Income -tax Rules , 1962 , I, Chief Commissioner of Income -tax, Udaipur hereby notify the " Maharana Pratap Smarak Samiti , Moti Magri , Udaipur (Rajasthan) " for the purpose of the said sub -clause for the assessment years 2008-09 to 2012-13 subject to the following conditions , namely:--

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

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

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

(ü) कर निर्धारिती उपर्युक्त कर निर्धारण वर्षों से संगत पूर्ववर्ती वर्षों की किसी भी अवधि के दौरान धारा 11 की उपध ारा ( v) में विनिर्दिष्ट किसी एक अथवा एक से अधिक ढंग अथवा भिन्न तरीकों से अपनी निधि ( जेवर , जवाहरात , फर्नीचर आदि के रूप प्राप्त तथा अनुरक्षित स्वैच्छिक अंशदान से भिन्न) का निवेश नहीं करेगा अथवा उसे जमा नहींकरेगा;

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

( iii) यह अधिसूचना किसी ऐसी आय के सम्बन्ध में लागू नहीं होगी , जो कि कारोबार से प्राप्त लाभ तथा अभिलाभ हो जब तक कि ऐसा कारोबार उक्त कर निर्धारिती के उद्देश्यों की प्राप्ति के प्रांसगिक नहीं हो अथवा ऐसे कारोबार के सम्बन्ध में अलग से लेखा पुस्तिकाएं नही रखी जाती हो;

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

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

(v) That in the event of dissolution , its surplus and the assets will be given to a charitable organizationwith similar objectives ;

(v) विघटन की स्थिति में इसकी अतिरिक्त राशियां और परिसम्पतियां समान उद्देश्यों वाले धर्माथ संगठन को दे दी जायेंगी;

This notification is applicable only to the recipients of income on behalf of the assessee and not any other receiptor income of such recipients . Taxability or , otherwise of the income of the assessee would be separately considered as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act , 1961.

यह अधिसूचना केवल संस्था की और से आय के प्राप्तकर्ता पर ही लागू होगी न कि इस तरह के प्राप्तकर्ता द्वारा किसी अन्य प्राप्ति अथवा आय पर । संस्था के आय की कराधेयता अथवा अन्यथा पर , आयकर अधिनियम 1961 के उपबन्धों के अनुसार पृथक रूप से विचार किया जायेगा।

[No. CCIT/UDR/ITO ( Tech)/2008-091 [संख्या मु.आ.आ./उदय/ आ.अ. ( तक.)/2008-09 ]

MUKESH BHANTI , Chief Commissioner of

Income -tax मुकेश भान्ती , मुख्य आयकर आयुक्त 2350

[PART 11 ---SEC. 3( ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

(Central Board of Direct Taxes)

(केंद्रीय प्रत्यक्ष कर बोर्ड ) नई दिल्ली, 18 जुलाई , 2008

New Delhi , the 18th July , 2008

S.O.1940 . It is hereby notified for general information that the organization Society for Health Allied Research and Education , India ( Share - India) Hyderabad, has been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of clause ( ii ) of sub- Section ( 1 ) of section 35 of the Income-tax Act , 1961 (said Act) , read with Rules 5 C and 5 D of the Income- tax Rules , 1962 (said Rules ) , with effect from 1.4.200.5 in the category of ' scientific research association ' subject to the following conditions , namely : - का. आ. 1940.-सर्वसाधारण की जानकारी के लिए एतद्‌द्वारा यह अधिसूचित किया जाता है कि केन्द्रका द्वारा आयकर मावली, 1962 ( उक्त नियमावली ) के निधन 54 और 5 ध के माथ पठित आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 ( उक्त अधिनियम ) की धारा * की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( ii ) के प्रयोजनार्थ दिनांक 1-4-2005 से संगठन सोस्गयटी फार हेल्थ एलाईड रिसर्च एंड एजूकेशन , इंडिया (एसएचएआर ई - इंडिया ) , हैदराबाद को निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन आंशिक रूप से अनुसंधान कार्यकलापों में लगी ' वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान संघ' की श्रेणी में अनुमोदित किया गया है , अर्थातः-

(i) The sole objective of the approved scientific research association ' shall be to undertake scientific research ;

(i ) अनुमोदित ' वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान संघ ' का एक मात्र उद्देश्य 'वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान करना होगा ;

(ii) The approved organization shall carry out scientific research activity by itself;

(11 ) अनुमोदित संगठन स्वयं वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान कार्य-कलाप जारी रखेगा ;

(iii) The approved organization shall maintain books of accounts and get such books audited by an accountant as defined in the explanation to sub- sectin (2) of Section 288 of the said Act and furnish the report of such audit duly signed and verified by such accountant to the Commissioner of Income- tax or the Director of Income - tax havingjurisdiction over the case , by the due date of furnishing the return of income under sub- section ( 1 ) of section 139 of the said Act:

(iii ) आदित संगठन बही - खाता रखेगा तथा उक्त अधि- नियम की धारा 288 की उप धारा ( 2 ) के स्पष्टीकरण में यथा परिभाषित किसी लेखाकार में अपनी खाता- बही की लेखा परीक्षा कराएगा और उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 139 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अंतर्गत आय विवरणी प्रस्तुत करने की नियत तिथि तक ऐसे लेखाकार द्वारा विधिवत सत्यापित एवं हस्ताक्षरित लेखा परीक्षा रिपोर्ट मामले में क्षेत्राधिकार रखने वाले आयकर आयुक्त अथवा आयकर निदेशक को प्रस्तुत करेगा ।

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

नुमोदित संगठन वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए प्राप्त दान प्रयुक्त राशि का अलग विवरण रखेगा और उपर्युक्त लआ परीक्षा रिपोर्ट के साथ लेखा परीक्षक द्वारा विधिवत सत्यापित विवरण की प्रति प्रस्तुत करेगा ।

2. केन्द्र सरकार यह अंअनुमोदन वापिस ले लेगी यदि अनुमोदित संगठन:-

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

(a) fails to maintain books of accounts referred to in sub -paragraph ( iii ) of paragraph 1 ; or क) पराग्राफ 1 के उप-पैराग्राफ ( iii ) में उल्लिखित लेखा बही नहीं रखेगाः अथवा

(b) fails to furnish its audit report referred to in sub- paragraph ( iii ) ofparagraph 1 ; or

(ख ) पैराग्राफ 1 के उप-पैराग्राफ ( iii ) में उल्लिखित अपनी लेखा परीक्षा रिपोर्ट प्रस्तुत नहीं करेगा; अथवा

( ग) पैराग्राफ 1 के उप- पैराग्राफ ( iv ) में उल्लिखित वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए प्राप्त दान एवं प्रयुक्त राशि का अपना विवरण प्रस्तुत नहीं करेगा; अथवा

(c) fails to furnish its statement of donations received and amounts applied for scientific research referred to in sub- paragraph (iv ) of paragraph 1; or

(d) ceases to carry on its research activities or its research activities are not found to be genuine; or

(घ) अपना अनुसंधान कार्य कलाप करना बंद कर देगा अथवा इसके अनुसंधान कार्य कलाप को जायज नहीं पाया जाएगा ; अथवा

(e) ceases to conform to and comply with the provisions of clause ( ii ) of sub- section ( 1 ) of section 35 of the said Act read with rules 5C and 5D of the said Ruies .

( ङ) उक्त नियमावली के नियम 5 ग और 5 घ के साथ पठित उदत अधिनियम की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( के प्रावधानों के अनुरूप नहीं होगा तथा उनका पालन नहीं करेगा ।

[Notification No. 79/2008 F.No.203 / 110/ 2007/ ITA - II ] SURENDER PAL , Under Secy .

(अधिसूतना सं. 79/2008 फा.सं.203/ 110/2007- आ.क.नि. - 11 ] सुरेन्द्र पाल , अवर सचिव 3851 [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

New Delhi , the 21st July, 2008 नई दिल्ली, 21 जुलाई , 2008

का. आ. 1941. सर्वसाधारण की जानकारी के लिए एत‌द्वारा यह अधिसूचित किया जाता है कि केन्द्र सरकार द्वारा आयकर नियमावली, 1962 ( उक्त नियमावली ) के नियम 5ग और 55 के साथ पठित आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 ( उक्त अधिनियम) की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( ii ) के प्रयोजनार्थ दिनांक 1-4-2005 से संगठन इलादेवी केटेरेक्त एंड इन्ट्राकुलर लैन्स रिसर्च सेंटर , अहमदाबाद , गुजरात को निम्नलिखित शतों के अधीन आंशिक रूप से अनुसंधान कार्यकलापों में लगी ' अन्य संस्था' की श्रेणी में अनुमोदित किया गया है , अर्थात्:-

S.O. 1941. It is hereby notified for general information that the organization Iladevi Cataract & Intraocular Lens Research Centre, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, has been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of clause ( ii ) of sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 35 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (said Act), read with Rules 5C and SE of the Income - tax Rules , 1962 ( said Rule), with effect from 1-4-2005 in the category of 'Other Institution' , partly engaged in research activites subject to the following conditions , namely: -

(i ) अनुमोदित संगठन को संदत्त राशि का उपयोग वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए किया जाएगा;

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

(ii ) अनुमोदित संगठन अपने संकाय सदस्यों अथवा नामांकित विद्यार्थियों के माध्यम से वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान जारी रखेगा;

(ii) The approved organization shall carry out scientific research through its faculty members or its enrolled students ;

(iii ) अनुमोदित संगठन बही - खाता रखेगा तक्षा उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 288 की उपधारा ( 2 ) के स्पष्टीकरण में यथा परिभाषित किसी लेखाकार से अपनी खाता-बही की लेखा परीक्षा कराएगा और उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 139 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अंतर्गत आय विवरणी प्रस्तुत करने कीनियत तिथि तक ऐसे लेखाकार द्वारा विधिवत् सत्यापित एवं हस्ताक्षरित लेखा परीक्षा रिपोर्ट मामले में क्षेत्राधिकार रखने वाले आयकर आयुक्त अथवा आयकर निदेशक को प्रस्तुत करेगा ;

(iii) The approved organization shall maintain separate books of accounts in respect of the sums receivedby 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 verified 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 of the said Act ;

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

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

(क) पैराग्राफ 1 के उप-पैराग्राफ ( iii ) में उल्लिखित लेखा बही नहीं रखेगा; अथवा

(ख) पैराग्राफ 1 के उप - पैराग्राफ ( iii ) में उल्लिखित अपनी लेखा परीक्षा रिपोर्ट प्रस्तुत नहीं करेगा; अथवा

2. The Central Government shall withdraw the approval if the approved organization : - (ग ) पैराग्राफ 1 के उप-पैराग्राफ ( iv ) में उल्लिखित वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए प्राप्त दान एवं प्रयुक्त राशि का अपना विवरण प्रस्तुत नहीं करेगा; अथवा

(a) fails to maintain separate books of accounts referred to in sub - paragraph ( iii ) of para- graph 1; or

(b) fails to furnish its audit report referred to in sub-paragraph ( iii) of paragraph 1 ; or (घ) अपना अनुसंधान कार्य कलाप करना बंद कर देगा अथवा इसके अनुसंधान कार्य कलाप को जायज नहीं पाया जाएगा ; अथवा

(c) fails to furnish its statement of the donations received and sums applied for scientific research referred to in sub- paragraph ( iv) of para- graph 1; or

(ङ) उक्त नियमावली के नियम 5 ग और 5ङ के साथ पठित उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( ii ) के प्रावधानों के अनुरूप नहीं होगा तथा उनका पालन नहीं करेगा ।

[अधिसूचना सं. 81/2008/फा.सं./203/64/2008- आ.क.नि.- II ]

(d) ceases to carry on its research activities or its research activities are not found to be genuine ; or

सुरेन्द्र पाल, अवर सचिव

3852

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008 /SRAVANA 4, 1930

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

[Notification No. 81 /2008/F.No . 203/ 64/2008/ITA- II ] SURENDER PAL, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 21 जुलाई , 2008

का. आ, 1942. सर्वसाधारण की जानकारी के लिए एतद्‌द्वारा यह अधिसूचित किया जाता है कि केन्द्र सरकार द्वारा आयकर नियमावली , 1962 ( उक्त नियमावली ) के नियम 5ग और 5ङ के साथ पठित आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 ( उक्त अधिनियम ) की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( ii ) के प्रयोजनार्थ दिनांक 1-4-2005 से संगठन हस्तीमल संचेती मैमोरियल ट्रस्ट, पुणे को निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन आंशिक रूप से अनुसंधान कार्यकलापों में लगी ' अन्य संस्था' की श्रेणी में अनुमोदित किया गया है , नामत्:-

( i ) अनुमोदित संगठन को संदत्त राशि का उपयोग वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए किया जाएगा;

(ii ) 'अनुमोदित संगठन अपने संकाय सदस्यों अथवा इसके नामांकित छात्रों के माध्यम से वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान जारी रखेगाः

( ii ) अनुमोदित संगठन वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए इसके द्वारा प्राप्त राशि के संबंध में अलग खाता बही रखेगा जिसमें अनुसंधान करने के लिए प्रयुक्त राशि दर्शाई गई हो , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 288 की उप धारा (2 ) के स्पष्टीकरण में यथा परिभाषित किसी लेखाकार से ऐसी खाता-बही , की लेखा- बही की लेखा परीक्षा कराएगा और उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 139 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अंतर्गत आय की विवरणी प्रस्तुत करने की नियत तिथि तक ऐसे लेखाकार द्वारा विधिवत् सत्यापित एवं हस्ताक्षरित लेखा परीक्षा रिपोर्ट मामले में क्षेत्राधिकार रखने वाले आयकर आयुक्त अथवा 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 वापिस ले लेगी यदि अनुमोदित संगठन:-

( क) पैराग्राफ 1 के उप-पैराग्राफ ( iii ) में उल्लिखित अलग लेखा बही नहीं रखेगा; अथवा

( ख) पैराग्राफ 1 के उप-पैराग्राफ ( iii ) में उल्लिखित अपनी लेखा परीक्षा रिपोर्ट प्रस्तुत नहीं करेगा; अथवा (ग) पैराग्राफ 1 के उप-पैराग्राफ ( iv ) में उल्लिखित वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए प्राप्त दान एवं प्रयुक्त राशि का अपना विवरण प्रस्तुत नहीं करेगा; अथवा

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] (घ) अपना अनुसंधान कार्य कलाप करना बंद कर देगा अथवा इसके अनुसंधान कार्य कलाप को जायज नहीं पाया जाएगा ; अथवा

(ङ) उक्त नियमावली के नियम 5 ग और 5ङ के साथ पठित उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 35 की उपधास ( 1 ) के खंड( ii ) के उपबंधों के अनुरूप नहीं होगा तथा उनका पालन नहीं करेगा ।

[अधिसूचना सं. 80/2008/फा. सं. 203/127/2007-आ.क.नि.- II ]

सुरेन्द्र पाल , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 21st July, 2008

S.O. 1942. It is hereby notified for general information that the organization Hastimal Sancheti Memorial Trust, Pune, has been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of clause ( ii) of sub - section (1) of Section 35 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 ( said Act) , read with Rules 5C and SE of the Income- tax Rules , 1962 (said Rule), with effect from 1-4-2005 in the category of 'Other Institution' , partly engaged in research activites subject to the following conditions , namely :-

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

(ii) The approved organization shall carry out scientific research through its faculty members or its enrolled students ;

(iii) The approved organization shall maintain separate books ofaccounts in respect of the sums receivedby 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 verified by such accountant to the Commissioner of Income- tax or the Director of Income -tax havingjurisdiction over the case, by the due date of furnishing the return of income under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 139 of the said Act ;

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

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

(a) fails to maintain separate books of accounts referred to in sub - paragraph ( iii ) of para- graph 1 ; or [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

(b) fails to furnish its audit report referred to in sub- paragraph (iii ) ofparagraph 1; or

(c) fails to furnish its statement of the donations received and sums applied for scientific research referred to in sub - paragraph ( iv) of para- graph 1; or

(d) ceases to carry on its research activities or its research activities are not found to be genuine; or

(e) ceases to conform to and comply with the provisions of clause ( ii ) of sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 35 ofthe said Act read with rules 5C and 5E ofthe said Rules .

[NotificationNo. 80/2008 /F. No. 203/ 127/2007/ITA -II ] SURENDER PAL , Under Secy .

अन्तरिक्ष विभाग बेंगलूर, 14 जुलाई , 2008

का.आ. 1943.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम , 1976 के नियम 10 के उपनियम (4 ) के अनुसरण में एत‌द्वारा अन्तरिक्ष विभाग के अधीन भारत सरकार की कम्पनी एन्ट्रिक्स कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, बेंगलूर को अधिसूचित करती है , जिसके 80 प्रतिशत से अधिक कर्मचारियों ने हिन्दीका कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है ।

[सं. 8/1/6/2008 -हि. ] के. एस. रामचन्द्र , उप सचिव DEPARTMENT OF SPACE Bangalore, the 14th July, 2008 S.O. 1943. In pursuance of sub-rule (4) of the Rule 10 oftheOfficial Language (Use for Official purpose oftheUnion) Rules , 1976, the Central Government, hereby notifies ANTRIX CORPORATION LTD . , Bangalore , a Government of India Company under Department of Space where more than 80 per cent staff have acquired the working knowledge ofHindi .

[No. 8 / 1 /6/2008- H. ] K. S. RAMACHANDRA, Dy . Secy .

सूक्ष्म, लघु और मध्यम उद्यम मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई , 2008

का.आ. 1944, केन्द्रीय सरकार राजभाषा नियम, 1976 के (संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम 10 के उपनियम (4) के अनुसरण में , सूक्ष्म, लघु और मध्यम उद्यम मंत्रालय के नियंत्रणाधीन विकास आयुक्त ( सूक्ष्म, लघु और मध्यम उद्यम) के

3853

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

निम्नलिखित कार्यालय में हिन्दी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान रखने वाले कर्मचारियों की संख्या 80 % से अधिक हो जाने के फलस्वरूप उन्हें एतदद्वारा अधिसूचित करती है :

1 सूक्ष्म, लघु और मध्यम उद्यम विकास संस्थान , खाम बंगला, कालाडुंगी रोड, हल्द्वानी , नैनीताल (उत्तराखंड ) -2631391

[सं-ई-12016/01 /2005 - हिन्दी]

प्रवीर कुमार, संयुक्त सचिव MINISTRY OF MICRO SMALL AND MEDIUM ENTERPRISES New Delhi , the 16th July , 2008 S.O. 1944.- In pursuancesuance of sub rule (4) of Rule 10 oftheOfficial Languages (Use for Official Purposes ofthe Union)Rules, 1976 the Central Government hereby notifies the following office of the Development Commissioner (MSME) under control of the Ministry of MSME , where the percentage of Hindi Knowing staff has gone above80%:

1. Micro , Small and Medium Enterprises Development Institute , Kham Bangla, Kaladungi Road , Haldwani, Nainital (Uttarakhand) -263139.

[No. E- 12016/01 /2005 -Hindi] PRAVIR KUMAR, Jt. Secy.

विदेश मंत्रालय (सी.पी.वी. प्रभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई , 2008

का. आ. 1945. - राजनयिक कौंसली अधिकारी ( शपथ एवं शुल्क) अधिनियम, 1948 ( 1948 का 41 वां ) व 2 के अंक ( क ) के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा भारत का राजदूतावास , बागदाद में श्री राजेन्द्र सिंह राणा , सहायक को 16-7-2008 से सहायक कौंसली अधिकारी का कार्य करने हेतु प्राधिकृत करती है ।

[सं. टी -4330/01/2006]

प्रीतम लाल, अवर सचिव (कौंसुलर ) MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS (C.P.V. DIVISION) New Delhi , the 16th July 2008 S.O. 1945. In pursuance of the clause ( ii ) of the Section 2ofthe Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Oaths and fees ) Act , 1948 , the Central Government hereby authorize Shri Rajender Singh Rana, Assistant to perform the duties of Assistant Consular Officer in the Embassy of India, Baghdad with effect from 16th July 2008 .

[No. T. 4330/1/2006 ] PRITAM LAL, Under Secy. ( Consular) 3854

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 26 , 2008/SRAVANA 4 , 1930

उपभोक्ता मामले , खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय

(उपभोक्तामामले विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 26 फरवरी , 2008

का.आ. 1946.-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 पयुक्त 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 माइकोसिस इंडिया , डी/ 16 , कालंद्री गेट, करनाल 132 001 , हरियाणा द्वारा विनिर्मित मधयम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " एम आई पी " श्रृंखला के स्वतः अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " माइकोसिस " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09 / 07 /215 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी

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 । इसका सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलमात्मक 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 ।

स्टॉपिंग प्लेट के मुदांकन 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 निष्पादन सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा !

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है किरक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उदत अनुमोदित 'मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे ॐ ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. से अधिक और 5000 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2× 10 या 5 × 10 * , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एभ -21 ( 101 )/2007 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 3855 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS , FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs)

New Delhi , the 26th February, 2008

s.O. 1946. 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 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 " MIP" series of medium accuracy (accuracy class - III ) andwith brand name " MYCOSYS" (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufacturedby M/ s . Mycosys India, D/ 16, Kalandri Gate, Karnal- 132001 , Haryana and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/07/215;

4 The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 1000 kg . and minimum capacity of2 kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 100 g . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

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 chaged in terms of its material , accuracy, design , circuit diagram , working principle etc. before or after sale .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument ot same series with maximum capacity above 50 kg. and up to 5,000 kg . and with number of verification scale interval ( n ) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5 g. or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k , k being 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 with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 101 )/2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 2644 G1/ 08-2 3856

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4, 1930

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 26 फरवरी , 2008

का.आ. 1947.-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 परिस्थित्तियों 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 माइकोसिस इंडिया, डी/ 16 , कालंद्री गेट , करनाल -132 001 , हरियाणा द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग II ) वाले " एम आई टी" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " माइकोसिस " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 07/ 214 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है;

MYCOSTR

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

स्टॉपिंग प्लेट के मुद्रांकन के अतिरिक्त मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबन्द भी किया जाएगा और मॉडल को बिक्की से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री, यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम , निष्पादन सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्तअनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 1 मि.ग्रा. से 50 मि.ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि.ग्रा. या उससे अधिक़ के " ई " मान के लिए 5,000 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. 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 ( 101 ) / 2007 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3857 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

NewDelhi , the 26th February, 2008

S.O. 1947.-Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type ) with digital indication of " MIT" series of high accuracy (Accuracy class - II ) and with brand name "MYCOSYS" (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Mycosys India, D/ 16, Kalandri Gate, Karnal- 132 001 , Haryana and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/214 ;

MYCOSPS

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with a maximum capacity of 30 kg . and minimum capacity of 100 g. The verification scale interval (e) is 2 g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 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 chaged in terms of its material , accuracy, design, circuit diagram , working principle etc. before or after sale .

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 approvalof the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make, and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg . and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 1mg. to 50 mg, and with number of verfication 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 × 10% , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k , 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 ( 101 )/2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 3858

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 29 फरवरी , 2008

का.आ. 1948. केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों 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;

১ । अतः अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स मेट वे इंडिया प्रा. लि. , डी नं. 1-3-41/2 , स्ट्रीट नं. 5 , हब्सीगुडा, हैदराबाद - 500 007 द्वारा विनिर्मित यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " मेट वे " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( मल्टी लोड सैल टाइप इलैक्ट्रोनिक बेब्रिज ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " आकाश ई डब्ल्यू बी " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/07/372 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल मल्टी लोड सैल आधारित वेब्रिज प्रकार का तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 50 टन है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 10 कि. ग्रा . है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभावि है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदास पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टांपिंग प्लेट को सील 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 उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी 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 5 टन से अधिक और 150 टने 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. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 182 )/2007 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3859 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण4, 1930

NewDelhi , the 29th February, 2008

S.O. 1948. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority , is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of the self indicating , non- automatic (multi load cell type electonic weighbridge) weighing instrument with digital indication of " MET WEIGH " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " AKASH - EWB " (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Met Weigh India Pvt . Ltd. , D. No. 1-3-41 /2 , Street No. 5, Habsiguda , Hyderabad- 500 007 and which isassigned the approval mark IND/09/07/372 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cells based non-automatic weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of50 tonne and minimum capacity of 200 kg . The verification scale interval (e ) is 10kg . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz altemative current power supply.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make , and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 5 tonne and up to 150 tonne and with number ofverification scale interval (n ) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g . or more and with ' e ' 1 × 10% , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k, 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 ( 182)/2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 3860

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 29 फरवरी , 2008

का.आ. 1949.- 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 मानर्क 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 सारटोरियस मेकाट्रोनिक्स इंडिया प्रा. लि. , 10 , थर्ड फेज , पीन्या, छठा मैन , के आई ए डी बी इंडस्ट्रीयल एरिया , बंगलौर -560058 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग 1 ) वाले " एम ई " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " सारटोरियस " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/07/ समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ;

उक्त मॉडल एक इलैक्ट्रो मैगनेटिक फोर्स कम्पेनसेशन प्रिंसीपल पर आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 230 ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 मि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (ई ) । मि. ग्रा. है । उपकरण की रेडिएबिलिटी ( डी) 6.01 मि. ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । लिक्विड क्रिस्टिल डायोड ( एल सी डी) प्रदर्श तौलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट 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 माडाल को बिक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री , यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम निष्पादन सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 1169 )/2007].

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3861 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

NewDelhi , the 29th February, 2008

S.O. 1949. 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 (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 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non-automatic weighing instrument with digital indication of " ME" series ofspecial accuracy (Accuracy class - 1) and with brand name " SARTORIUS" (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Sartorius Mechatronics India Private Limited, 10, 3rd Phase , Peenya, 6th Main , KIADB Industrial Area, Bangalore -560 058 and which is assigned the approval mark IND /09/07/

لا

The said model is an Electro Magnetic Force Compensation Principle based non - automatic weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 230 g and minimum capacity of 100 mg. The verification scale interval ( e) is 1 mg . The readability ofthe instrument (d) is 0.01 mg . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Liquid Crystal Diode(LCD) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 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 .

Further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50kg and with number of verification scale interval (n ) equal to or more than 50,000 for ' e' yalue of Img or more and with ' e ' 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k , 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 ( 169 )/2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 3862

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 /SRAVANA 4 , 1930

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

नई दिल्ली , 5 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1950.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स सेनदायर टैक्नॉलोजीज , बी-202 , साम्राज्य अपार्टमेंट , सबरी स्कूल के सामने, वसना रोड, बड़ोदा -390 007 द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता (यथार्थता वर्ग II ) वाले " एम टी जे " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " जे के डी " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/07/ 169 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करतो है ।

JKDScales

SENTIRE

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । इसका सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( 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 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 सौलबन्द भी किया जाएगा और मॉडल को बिक्री से पहले या बाद में उसकी सामग्री , यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम , निष्पादन सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 77 ) /2007

आर. माधुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3863 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

New Delhi , the 5th March , 2008

S.O. 1950. 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 (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 of the said Act, the CentralGovernment hereby issues and publishes the certificate ofapproval of the model of non - automatic (Tabletop type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " STJ" series of medium accuracy (accuracy class - II ) and with brand name "JKD" (herein referred to as the said model), manufacturedby M/s . Sentire Technologies, B - 202, Samarajya Apartment , Opp . Sabri School , Vasna Road, Baroda- 390007 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/ 168 ;

JKDScales

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

In addition to sealing the stamping plate sealing shall also be done to prevent opening of the machine fraudulent practices and model shall not be changed in terms of its material , accuracy, design , circuit diagram , working principle etc. before or after sale .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg and with number of verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 100 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 1 mg to 50 mg and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 5000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k, k being 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 (77)/2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 2644 G1 /08--3 3864

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 26, 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 5 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1951.-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 सेनदायर टैक्नॉलोजीज , बी-202 , साम्राज्य अपार्टमेंट , सबरी स्कूल के सामने, वसना रोड, बडोदा -390 007 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( ग्रथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " एस टी टी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का , जिसके जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " जे के डी " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/07/ 168 सामनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी करती है ।

SENTIRE

JKD

Scales

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । इसका 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 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, निष्पादन सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 कीउप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी 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 के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा.या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. 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 ( 77 )/2007 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3865 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

New Delhi , the 5th March , 2008

S.O. 1951. 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 of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic (Tabletop type) weighing instrument with digital indication of " STJ " series of medium accuracy (accuracy class - III) and with brand name " JKD" ( herein referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s . Sentire Technologies, B- 202 , Samarajya Apartment, Opp . Sabri School , Vasna Road , Baroda- 390 007and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/169;

JKD

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

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similarmake , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg to 2g or with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10% , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k , 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 ( 77)/2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 3866

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

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

नई दिल्ली , 5 मार्च , 2008

का.आ. 1952.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा ;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स सेनटायर टैक्नॉलोजीज , बी-202 , साम्राज्य अपार्टमेंट , सबरी स्कूल के सामने , वसना रोड , बडोदा 390 007 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( याथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " एस टी टी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " जे के डी " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/07/170 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 150 कि.ग्रा . है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 400 ग्रा. है । इसका सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 20 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 ।

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 , निष्पादन सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाऐगा ।

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 5 ग्रा.याः उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. में अधिक और 5,000 कि. ग्रा. 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 (77) /2007]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3867 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

New Delhi , the 5th March , 2008

S.O. 1952. 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 (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 ) 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 (Platform type) non- automatic weighing instrument with digital indication of " STP " series of medium accuracy ( accuracy class- III ) and with brand name " JKD" (herein referred to as the said model) , manufacturedby M/ s . Sentire Technologies , B- 202, Samarajya Apartment; Opp . Sabri School , Vasna Road, Baroda- 390 007and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/ 170;

JKDScales

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of150kg . and minimum capacity of 400g. The verification scale interval ( e) is 20g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternate current power supply .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of same series with maximum capacity above 50 kg. and up to 5000 kg . and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10 % , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10 %, 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 with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 ( 77) /2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 3868

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008/ SRAVANA 4, 1930

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 20 मार्च , 2008

का.. 1953.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा ;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स हाई टैक इंडिया, 12/3 , सी एस एम मार्किट, एम आर ए मार्ग , मुंबई -400 001 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " एच 150 बी श्रृंखला के अस्वचालित अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण (व्यक्ति तोलन मशीन बाथरूम स्केल ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " हाई टैक " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 07/ 142 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 150 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । लिक्विड क्रिस्टल डायोड ( एल सी 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, निष्पादन सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्तमॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी 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 100 कि. ग्रा. से अधिक और 200 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2× 10 * या 5 × 10 , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 63 )/2007]

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3869 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/श्रावण 4 , 1930

New Delhi , the 20th March, 2008

S.O. 1953. 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) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act ) and the Standards ofWeights and Measures (Approval ofModels ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise 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 with digital indication (Person Weighing Machine- Bathroom Scale ) of medium accuracy ( accuracy class - III) belonging to 'HI 150B'series with brand name " HI TEK (herein referred to as the said model) , manufacturedby M /s . Hi Tek India, 12/3 , CSM Market; MRA Marg, Mumbai -400 001 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/ 07/ 142;

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

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similarmake, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity in the range of 100kg to200kg withi verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k , k being apositive 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 (63 )/2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 3870

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008 /SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( i) ]

नई दिल्ली, 3 अप्रैल , 2008

का.आ. 1954. केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित प्राधिकारी एम एम आई नीदरलैंड मीरिनस्टिटूट , नीदरलैंड द्वार जारी मॉडल अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः, अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स मैटलर टोलेडू ( चैंगझाऊ ) स्केल्स एंड सिस्टम लि. , 11। चैंगाक्सी रोड , चेंगझाऊ , 213001 जियांग्सू, प्यूपल रिपब्लिक आफ चाइना द्वारा विनिर्मित" 8442 ( टाइगर पी ) " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " मैटलर टोलेडू " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त माडल कहा गया है ) और भारत में बिना किसी परिवर्तन या परिवर्धन के मैसर्स मैटलर टोलेडू इंडिया प्रा. , लि. , अमर हिल्स , साकी विहार , पोवाई , मुंबई, महाराष्ट्र द्वारा बिक्रित और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 13/07/240 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबल टॉप ) प्रकार का तोलन उपकरण है । जिसमें 2 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल के लिए एन 3000 सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल के संबंध में 15 कि.ग्रा. से 30 कि.ग्रा. की रेंज में अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं । यह मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) से संबंधित है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवयकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है ।

स्टॉपिंग 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 , निष्पादन सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगां ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 34)/2007 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3871 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

NewDelhi , the 3rd April, 2008

S.O. 1954. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority along with the Model approval certificate issued by the NMI Netherlands Meetinstituu, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 ( 60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with digital indication of series ' 8442 ' (Tiger P ) with brand name ' Mettler -Toledo ' and manufactured by M/ s Mettler - Toledo (changzhou ) Scales & Systems Ltd, 111 Changaxi Road, Changzhou, 213001 , Jiangsu , People Republic of China and sold in India without any alteration or additions by M/ s Mettler - Toledo India Pvt Ltd, Amar Hills , Saki Vihar Road , Powai Mumbai , Maharashtra and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 13 /07/240;

The said model is a load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type ) with maximum capacity inthe range of 15kg to 30kg in respect of verification scale interval n ≤ 3000 for value ofverification scale interval (e) 2g or more. It belongs to medium accuracy (accuracy class- III ) . It hsas a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect.

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.

[F. No. WM -21 (34)/2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 2644 GI/084 3872

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[ PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 3 अप्रैल , 2008

का.आ. 1955.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी एन एम आई नीदरलैण्ड मीटिनस्टिट्ट नीदरलैण्ड द्वारा जारी मॉडल अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र के साथ 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, 19.76 ( 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 मैटलर टोलेडू ( चेंगझाऊ ) स्केल्स एंड सिस्टम लि. , 111 चैंगाक्सी रोड , चैंगझाऊ , 213001 जियांग्सू, प्यूएल रिपब्लिक आफ चाइना द्वारा विनिर्मित " आर एन 20/वाइवा " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " मैटलर टोलेडू" ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और भारत में बिना किसी परिवर्तन या परिवर्धन के मैसर्स मैटलर टोलेडू इंडिया प्रा . लि. , अमर हिल्स , साकी विहार , पोवाई, मुंबई , महाराष्ट्र द्वारा बिक्रित और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 13/07/239 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबल टॉप ) प्रकार का तोलन उपकरण है । जिसमें 2 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल के लिए एन ≤ 3000 सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल के संबंध में 6 कि.ग्रा. से 15 कि.ग्रा. की रेंज में अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं । यह मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) से संबंधित है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव 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 , निष्पादन सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों पर परिवर्तित नहीं किया जाएगा ।

[ फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 34)/2007 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 3873

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 26, 2008/श्रावण 4 , 1930

[ भाग 11- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 3rd April , 2008

S.O. 1955.- Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority along with the Model approval certificate issued by the NMI Netherlands Meetinstituu , is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 ( 60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

.Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections ( 7 ) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of model of the non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type ) with digital indication of series ' RN 20/Viva ' with brand name ' Mettler-Toledo ' and manufactured by M/ s . Mettler - Toledo (changzhou ) Scales & Systems Ltd. , 111 Changaxi Road, Changzhou , 213001 , Jiangsu , People Republic of China and sold in India without any alteration or additions by M/s . Mettler - Toledo India Pvt . Ltd. , Amar Hills , Saki Vihar Road , Powai , Mumbai , Maharashtra and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 13/07/239 ;

The said model is a load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with maximum capacity in the range of 6kg to 15kg in respect of verification scale interval n ≤ 3000 for value of verification scale interval (e) 2g or inore . It belongs to medium accuracy ( accuracy class - III) . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect.

In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing shall also be done to prevent the opening of the machine for fradulent practices and model shall not be changed in terms of its material , accuracy , design, circuit diagram , working principle etc.

[F. No. WM- 21 ( 34 )/2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 3874

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

नई दिल्ली , 13 मई , 2008

का.आ. 1956.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों 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 आईकोन स्केल्स एंड सिस्टम , आर जैड/एफ-760/49/ 1 , राजनगर-2, पालम कालोनी , नई दिल्ली-110045 द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग II ) वाले " एन टी टी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " आईकोन " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 / 08 /45 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 30 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 250 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

ICOWN

मशीन को सील करने के तार द्वारा आधार और ऊपरी ढांचे को सीलबन्द करने तथा इसके अतिरिक्त प्राधिकारी द्वारा सामने के कोने के स्टड पर स्टाम्प को पंच करने के कारण खोला नहीं जा सकेगा । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध 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 उक्तअनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 1 मि.ग्रा. से 50 मि.ग्रा. तक 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× 10 *, 2 × 10* अथवा 5 × 10 *, क्के हैं , जहां पर ' के' धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 (09 )/2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3875 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

New Delhi , the 13th May, 2008

S.O. 1956. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non -automatic weighing instrument (Table top type ) with digital indication of high accuracy (accuracy class - II ) of series "NTT " and with brand name " ICOWN" ( herein after referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s . Icown Scales & Systems , RZ/F - 760/49/ 1, Rajnagar - II , Palam Colony, New Delhi - 110045 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/45;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non- automatic weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 30kg. and minimum capacity of 250g. The verification scale interval (e ) is 5g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

ICOWN

Themachine can not be opened since the base and the upper body is being sealed by sealing wire and stud from the opposite corner where the verification stamp is punched by the Authority. 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 instrument of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg with verification scale interval ( n ) in the range of 100 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 1mg to 50mg and with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 5000 to 50,000 for ' e' value of 100mg or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k, 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 (09)/ 2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 3876

[ PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

नई दिल्ली , 13 मई , 2008

का.आ. 1957.-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 ( ४ ) द्वारा शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए , मैसर्स आईकोन स्केल्स एंड सिस्टम , आर जैड/एफ -760/ 491, राजनगर- II , पालम कालोनी , नई दिल्ली - 1100-5 द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " एन एस टी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का , जिसके शंड को नाम " आईकोन " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदर चिह्न आई एन ही/09/08/46 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 अधिकृत क्षमता 20 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतमं क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( 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 वोल्ट और 50 हज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

ICOWN

0000

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियां 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 के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में और 5 ग्रा. या उससे के " ई " माने के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान रेंज 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, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 (09)/2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3877 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

New Delhi , the 13th May, 2008

S.O. 1957. 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 (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 ) 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 " NST " series ofmedium accuracy ( accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " ICOWN" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/ s . Icown Scales & Systems , RZ/F - 760/49/ 1 , Rajnagar - II , Palam Colony , New Delhi - 110045 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08 /46;

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

ICOWN

0000

The machine cannot be opened since the base and the upper body is being sealed by sealing wire and stud from the opposite corner where the verification stamp is punched by the Authority . 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 instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg 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 of5000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10 %, 2 × 10k or 5 × 10 % , where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same inaterials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 (09)/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 3878

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4, 1930

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 13 मई , 2008

का.आ. 1958.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स आईकौन स्केल्स एंड सिस्टम , आर जैड/एफ -760/49/ 1 , राजनगर -11 , पालम कालोनी , नई दिल्ली -110045 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " एन एस पी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " आईकोन " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 08/47 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 अधिकृत क्षमता 200 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि.ग्रा. 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 ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 घोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि ठक्त 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 5 ग्रा. अथवा उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 की रेंज में और सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से ऊपर और 5,000 किग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 के अथवा 5 × 10 , के हैं, जहां पर ' के ' धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 (09 )/2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3879 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

New Delhi , the 13th May, 2008

S.O. 1958. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use 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 the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform type ) with digital indication of medium accuracy ( accuracy class - III ) of series " NSP " and with brand name " ICOWN " (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Icown Scales & Systems , RZ/ F - 760 /49/ 1, Rajnagar - II , Palam Colony, New Delhi - 110045 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/47;

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

The machine cannot be opened since the base and the upper body is being sealed by sealing wire and studfrom the opposite corner where the verification stamp is punched by the Authority. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision ofthe 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 instrument of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg and up to 5,000 kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5gm or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10% , 2 × 10k or 5× 10 %, where ' k' is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured .

[F. No. WM -21 (09 )/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 2644 G1/08-5 3880

[PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

नई दिल्ली , 13 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1959.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों 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 एवरी इंडिया लिमिटेड , प्लाट नं. 50-59 , सैक्टर -25 , बल्लभगढ़-121004 , हरियाणा द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) के " ए 711 डब्ल्यू" श्रृंखला के अस्वचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) , जिसके जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एवरी " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) , जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09 /08 / 122 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ;

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 15 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलानात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । लिक्विड् क्रिस्टल डायोड ( एल सी डी) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

AVERY A711W

A711

यह सुनिश्चित करने के लिए कि डिस्पले को लीड सील से छेड़छाड़ के बिना नहीं खोला जा सकता सीलिंग के लिए डिस्पले के पिछले भाग में छेदों के दो पेचों के माध्यम से स्टील की तार को निकाला जाएगा और लीड प्लग से लपेटा जाएगा । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने का एक प्रारूपी योजनाबद्ध 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 100 मि. ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. 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 ( 16) /2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3881 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/श्रावण 4 , 1930

New Delhi , the 13th June , 2008

S.O. 1959. 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 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 medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) of series " A711W" and with brand name " AVERY " ( herein referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/ s . Avery India Limited, Plot No.50-59 , Sector-25, Ballabhgarh - 121004 ( Haryana) and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08 / 122 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non -automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type ) with a maximum capacity of 15 kg. and minimum capacity of 100 g. The verification scale interval (e) is 5 g . It has a tare device with a100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Liquid Crystal Diode (LCD) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply .

AVERY A711W

A711M

For sealing a steel wire is passed through two screws with holes on the back of display and crimped to a lead plug , ensuring that display can not be opened without tampering the lead seal . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision ofthemodel 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 instrument of similarmake , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg . with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg. to 2 g . or with verification scale interval ( n ) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of5 g . or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k , k being a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[ F. No. WM -21 ( 16) /2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director ofLegal Metrology 3882

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 13 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1960.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों 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;

अप्तः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स नीतिरान इंजीनियर्स प्रा.लि. , इंडस्ट्रियल प्लाट नं. 41 , सेक्टर -2 , गबरैल रोड , परवानू-173220 , ताल , कसौली डिस्ट्रिक्ट सोलन , हिमाचल प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) के " एन एच एस " श्रृंखला के अस्वचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( क्रेन प्रकार) जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " फोनिक्स " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) , जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09 / 08 / 89 सममुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है;.

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( क्रेन प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 5 टन है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 20 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 1 कि.ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता हे उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

PHOENIX

स्केल के तल पर स्टेम्प और सील का सत्थापन प्राप्त करने के लिए दो छेद युक्त पेचों को कंन्द्र से बाईं तरफ सीसायुक्त तार से कसा जाएगा । तुला की सील को तोड़े बिना खोला नहीं जा सकेगा । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने का एक प्रारूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम् उपरोक्त दिया गया ह।

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 जिससं 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 अधिक और 50 टन तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 % , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10* , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 06 )/2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3883 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

New Delhi , the 13th June , 2008

S.O. 1960. 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 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument ( Crane type ) with digital indication of medium accuracy ( Accuracy class - III ) of series " NHS " and with brand name " PHOENIX " (hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufacturedby M/s . Nitiraj Engineers Pvt . Ltd. , Unit -2 , Industrial Plot No. 11 -A, Sector -2 , Parwanoo - 173220, Tal . Kasouli , Dist . Solan , H.P. and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /08/89 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Crane type ) with a maximum capacity of 5 tonne and minimum capacity of 20 kg . The verification scale interval (e) is 1 kg . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED ) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

PHOENIX

ONIDRE TARE

Atthe bottom of the scale , two bored screws from the left to the centre are fastened with a leaded wire to receive the verification stamp and seal . The balance can not be opened without tampering the seal . 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 instrument of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity, above 500 kg . and up to 50 tonne with verification scale interval ( n ) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5 g . or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10 * or 5×10k, 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 ( 06 )/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Métrology 3884

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4. 1930

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

नई दिल्ली , 13 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1961.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों 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 नीतिराज इंजीनियर्स प्रा.लि. , इंडस्ट्रियल प्लाट नं. 41 , सेक्टर -2 , गबरैल रोड, परवानू-173 220 , ताल , कसौली डिस्ट्रिकट सोलन , हिमाचल प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) के " एन जे डब्लयू" श्रृंखला के अस्वचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " फोनिक्स " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) , और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 /08 /88 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है;

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) का तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 5 कि.ग्रा . है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 20 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) । कि.ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

WEIGHT

स्केल के तल पर स्टेम्प और सील का सत्यापन प्राप्त करने के लिए दो छेद युक्त पंचों के केन्द्र से बाईं तरफ सीसायुक्त तार से कसा जाएगा । तुला की सील को तोड़े बिना खोला नहीं जा सकेगा । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने का एक प्रारूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त 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 उक्तअनुमोदित 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 के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. 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 (06) /2008 ] आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3885 [भाग ।।- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

New Delhi , the 13th June , 2008

S.O. 1961. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority , is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 ( 60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7 ) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type ) with digital indication of " NJW " series of medium accuracy (accuracy class - 111 ) and with brand name " PHOENIX" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufacturedby M/ s . Nitiraj Engineers Pvt . Ltd. , Industrial Plot No. 41 , Sector -2, Gabrial Road, Parwanoo - 173 220, Tal . Kasouli , Distt . Solan , H.P. and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /08 /88 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type ) with a maximum capacity of 5 kg and minimum capacity of 20 g . The verification scale interval (e) is 1g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect , The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply .

WEIKIHT

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 12 ) Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg with verification scale interval (n ) in the range of100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg to 2 g and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10 : 000 for ' e ' value of5 g . or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k, 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 inaterials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[ F. No. WM - 21 ( 06 ) 2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 3886

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

नई दिल्ली , 13 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1962.-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 (मॉडालों 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 नीतिराजा इंजीनियर्स प्रा.लि. , इंडस्ट्रियल प्लाट नं. 41 , सेक्टर-2 , गबरैल रोड, परवानू-173 220, ताल , कसौली , डिस्ट्रिक्ट सोलन , हिमाचल प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) के " एन जे डब्लयू" श्रृंखला के अस्वचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " फोनिक्स " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) , जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/08/87 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 600 ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 500 मि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई) 10 मि.ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

WEIGHT

TARF ZERO

MPL

स्कोल के तल पर स्टेम्प और सील का सत्यापन प्राप्त करने के लिए दो छेद युक्त पेंचों को केन्द्र से बाईं तरफ सीसायुक्त तार से कसा जाएगा । तुला की सील को तोड़े बिना खोला नहीं जा सकेगा । माडल को सीलबंद करने का एक प्रारूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त दिया गयाहै ।

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 1 मि.ग्रा. से 50 मि.ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 50,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि.ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 120 ग्रा. से 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 अथवा 5 × 10 * , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 06 ) /2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3887 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

New Delhi , the 13th June , 2008

S.O. 1962. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non -automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with digital indication of high accuracy ( Accuracy Class - II) of series "NJW" and with brand name "PHOENIX " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s . Nitiraj Engineers Pvt . Ltd. , Industrial Plot No. 41 , Sector -2 , Gabrial Road , Parwanoo- 173 220, Tal . Kasouli , Distt . Solan , H.P. and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /08/87;

The saidmodel is a strain gauge type load cell based non -automatic weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of600 g. and minimum capacity of500 mg. The verification scale interval (e) is 10 mg: It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED ) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply .

WEIGHT

MODE SAPL PRINT

At the bottom of the scale , two bored screws from the left of the centre are fastened with a leaded wire to receive the verification stamp and seal . The balance can not be opened without tampering the seal . 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 instrument of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacities comprising from 120 g . to 50 kg . with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 100 to 50,000 for ' e' value of Img . to 50 mg . and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of5000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg . or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k, where k is 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 ( 06 )/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 2644 GI /086 3888

[ PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008 / SRAVANA 4, 1930

नई दिल्ली , 13 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1963.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्तरिपोर्ट 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 सिंघाल स्केल एंड इंजीनियरिंग वर्क्स , जी-7, साइट- सी , सूरजपुर इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया, ग्रेटर नोयडा, उत्तर प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित " एस एस सी " श्रृंखला के काउंटर मशीन के माडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " कृष्णा " है और जिसे अनुमोदन चिन्ह आई एन डी/ 09/ 08126 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

RISHNA

उक्त मॉडल एक काउंटर मशीन है जो लिवर के सिद्धांत पर कार्य करता है जिसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 5 कि.ग्रा . है । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस 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 , त्रिनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जिन की क्षमता 500 ग्रा से 50 कि.ग्रा तक है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 32 )/2008) अगर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3889 भाग 11- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

New Delhi , the 13th June , 2008

S.O. 1963. 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 (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 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of counter machine of series " SSC" and with brand name " KRISHNA" (herein referred to as the said model) , manufacturedby M/s . Singhal Scale and Engineering Works ,G- 7 , Site-C , Suraj Pur Industrial Area, Greater Noida, U.P. and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 07/ 126 ;

The said model is a Counter Machine working on the principle of lever with a maximum capacity of 5kg .

[F. No. WM- 21 (32 )/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology.

3890

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4. 1930

PART II SC Sui

नई दिल्ली , 13 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1964.-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 माय 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 अलटा टक्नोलोजिज , 4-1-873 , पी नं. , 9 , 403 , चौथा तल , बिजनेस टावर्स , तिलक रोड, एबिद , हैदराबाद द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " एटी- पीएफ " श्रृंखला के अस्वाचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का. जिसके जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " अलटा " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/08/ 123 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 क्षमता 1000 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम 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 डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

तोलन उपकरण के ऊपरी कवर और निचली प्लेट में छेदों के माध्यम से सीलिंग की गई है और इन छेदों में से तार निकालकर लीड सील को तार पर फिक्स किया जाएगा । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने का एक प्रारूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त 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 विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. से अधिक और 5000 कि. ग्रा. 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 ( 50 ) /2008 ] आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3891

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii )]

New Delhi, the 13th June , 2008

S.O. 1964. 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 (Appeal 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 (Platform type ) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) of series " AT- PF " and with brand name " ALTA" (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Alta Techonologies , 4-1-873 , P.No.9 , # 403, 4th Floor , Business Towers , Tilak Road, Abids , Hyderabad and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /08 /1-23 ;

1

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

Sealing is done through the holes made in the bottom plate and top cover of the indicator , then a wire is passed through these holes and the lead seal is fixed on the wire . 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 instrument of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50 kg and up to 5000 kg with verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10k or 5× 10%, 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 (50)/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 3892

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[ PART 11- SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

नईदिल्ली, 13 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1965.--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 ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स अल्टा टक्नोलोजिज , 4-1-873 , पी नं. 9 , 403 , चौथा तल ,, बिजनेस टावर्स , तिलक रोड, एबिद , हैदराबाद द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग 1!! ) वाले " एटी- टीबी " श्रृंखला के अस्वाचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " अल्टा" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/08 / 124 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 30 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आश्रेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत पतिशत 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 ।

तोलन उपकरण के ऊपरी कवर और निचली प्लेट में छेदों के माध्यम से सीलिंग की गई है और इन छेदों में से तार निकालकर लीट सील को तार पर फिक्स किया जाएगा । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने का एक प्रारूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त 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 मि. ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा.या उसस अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 10 कि. ग्रा. की अधिकतम क्षमता वालं 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 ( 50)/2008 : आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 3893 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/श्रावण 4 , 1930

New Delhi , the 13th June, 2008

S.O. 1965. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with digital indication of " AT- TB " series of medium accuracy ( accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " ALTA" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufacturedby M/s . Alta Techonologies , 4-1-873 , P.No.9 , # 403, 4th Floor , Business Towers , Tilak Road , Abids , Hyderabad and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/ 08/124;

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

Sealing is done through the holes made in the bottom plate and upper cover of the weighing instrument, and a wire is passed through these holes and lead seal is fixed on the wire . 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 instrument of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg to 2 g and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5 g . or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k, 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 ( 50)/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 3894 :

नई दिल्ली, 13 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1966.-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 मेकाट्रोनिक्स इंजीनियरिंग कॉरपोरेशन , नं.12 , रामया आर्केड़ , 45-51-4 आबिद नगर , अक्कय्यपलम , विशाखापतनम -530016 द्वारा विनिर्मित यथार्थता मध्यम ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) के " एम ई सी - डब्लयू बी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( वेब्रिज प्रकार ) के मॉडल का , जिसके जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " मैकाट्रोनिक्स " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/08/99 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ;

उक्त मॉडल भार सेल आधारित विकृत गेज प्रकार का अस्वचालित ( वेब्रिज प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 50 टन है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 400 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 20 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 ।

इंडीकेटर को सील करने के लिए इंडीकेटर के पीछे की प्लेट और उपरी हिस्से को शामिल करते दो छेद किए जांएगे । एक सीसायुक्त सील तार को सयापन स्टाम्प और सील प्राप्त करने के लिए इन छेदों में बांधा जाएगा । सील को तोड़े बिना इंडीकेटर को नहीं खोला जा सकंगा ! माडल 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 प्रमाण पत्र 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 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 5 टन से 150 टन तक को अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 या 5 × 10 * , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 294 ) /2007] आर. माधु थम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3895 [भाग 11 - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

New Delhi, the 13th June , 2008

S.O. 1966. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, issatisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections ( 7 ) and ( 8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Weighbridge type ) with digital indication of medium accuracy (accuracy class - 111 ) of series " MEÇ - WB " and with brand name " MECHATRONICS " (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Mechatronics Engineering Corporation , No. 12 , Ramya Arcade , # 45-51-4 , Abid Nagar , Akkayyapalem, Visakhapatnam - 530016 and which isassigned the approval mark IND/09/08 /99 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument ( Weighbridge type) with amaximum capacity of 50 tonne and minimum capacity of 400 kg . The verification scale interval (e ) is 20kg . It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED ) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply .

For sealing the indicator , two holes are made covering the rear plate and upper portion of the indicator . A leaded seal wire is fastened through these holes for receiving the verification stamp and seal . The indicator can not be opened withouttampering the seal . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above .

Further, in exercise of the power conferred by sub - section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 5 tonne and up to 150 tonne with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of5g or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k , 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 (294)/2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 2644 G1/ 08-7 3896

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

नई दिल्ली, 13 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1967.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों 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;

अप्तः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्सस्टेटवे इंडिया ( प्रा. ) लि. #447 , 4th फेज, पीन्या इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया , बंगलौर -560 058 द्वारा विनिर्मित " एस एल ए " श्रृंखला के स्वचालित वेइंग रोड व्हीकल इन मोशन जो यथार्थता श्रेणी 0.5 . से सम्बन्धित है तोलन उपकरण के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " स्टेटवे " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/08 /01 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करतीहै;

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित स्वचालिप्त वेइंग रोड व्हीकल के लिए तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 25 टन है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 500 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल 10 कि.ग्रा. 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 । इस मशीन का परीक्षण ओ आई एम एल आर 134 विशिष्टि के अनुसार किया गया है ।

इंडीकेटर के पीछे की और बाहरी कवर और आंतरिक कवर पर दो छेद करते हुए तथा तार को कसते हुए तथा सीसा सील के द्वारा सील की गई 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 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 १ ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 5 टन से अधिक तथा 100 टन तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2× 10के या 5 × 10* , के हैं , जहां पर ' के ' धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्यंके समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 296) /2007 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3897 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

New Delhi , the 13th June , 2008

S.O. 1967. 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 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of automatic instrument for Weighing road vehicle in motion belonging to accuracy class 0.5 and of series " SLA " and with brand name " STATWEIGH " (hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s Statweigh India (P) Ltd. , # 447, 4th Phase , Peenya Industrial Area, Bangalore -560 058 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /08/01 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based automatic weighing instrument for weighing road vehicle with a maximum capacity of 25 tonne and minimum capacity of 500kg. The verification scale interval is 10kg . The Light Emitting Diode (LED ) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply. The machine has been tested according to OIML R 134 specification .

The sealing has been done on the rear side of the indicator by making two holes on the outer cover and inner cover and by fastening wire and lead seal . 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 instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 5 tonne and up to 100 tonne with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5× 10k , 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 (296)/2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 3898

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008 /SRAVANA 4, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 13 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1968.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्टी में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट तथा 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 स्वीसर इंस्ट्रूमेंट्स , ए-5/बी-29 , गोपालं नगर , जनतानगर के पीछे, चांदखेड़ा, गांधी नगर -382424 , गुजरात द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता वर्ग यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले ' एस डब्ल्यू सी एस' श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचक सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( व्यक्ति तोलन मशीन सिक्के द्वारा प्रचालित बिना टिकट या टिकट मुद्रण की सुविधा सहित ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम ' स्वीसर ' है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात्उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/07/ 130 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है;

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सैल आधारित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 150 किलो ग्राम और नयूनतम क्षमता 400 ग्राम है । इसका सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल 20 ग्राम है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । लाइट इमिटिंग डायोड तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज 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 के पूर्व या उपरांत इसके सामग्री, यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम , वर्किंग सिद्धान्त आदि के रूप में कोई परिवर्तन न किया जा सके ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 ( 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 मॉडलं विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपब भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा . या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 की रेंज में सत्यः मापमान अंतराल ( दित 100 किलोग्राम से 200 किलोग्राम तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10के या 5 × 10 के , के हैं , जो धनात्मकः ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 57) /2007 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3899 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

New Delhi , the 13th June , 2008

S.O. 1968. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the models described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise 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 with digital indication (Person Weighing Machine- coin operated with or without ticket printing facility) of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) belonging to ' SWCS' series with brand name " SWISSER" (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Swisser Instruments, A-5/ B -29 , Gopal Nagar , Behind Jantanagar , Chandkheda, Gandhi Nagar- 382 424, Gujarat and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /07/ 130;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based weighing instrument with the maximum capacity of 150kg and minimum capacity is 400g . The verification scale interval (e ) is 20g . The display is of Light Emitting Diode (LED) type . The instrument operates on 230Volts , 50Hertz alternativve current power supply.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity in the range of 100kg to 200kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of500 to 10000 ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2× 10k or 5 × 10k, 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 ( 57 )/2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 3900

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

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

नई दिल्ली, 13 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1969.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोटी में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) और बाट तथा 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 प्रिसेप्सन इलैक्ट्रोनिक इंस्ट्रूमेंटस कंपनी , एच-45 , उद्योग नगर , पीरागढ़ी , नई दिल्ली -110041 द्वारा विनिर्मित ' जी पी एम टी' श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचक वाले ' टैक्सी/ओटो किराया मीटर ' के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम ' गोल्ड टेक ' हैं ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 / 08 /98 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है;

'टैक्सी/ आटो किराया मीटर' का उक्त मॉडल जिसमें मुद्रण सुविधा भी है , एक गणक उपकरण है जो लगातार योग करता है और यात्रा के किसी भी क्षण का किराया दर्शाता है जो लिए गए समय पर कतिपय स्पीड से कम तय की गई दूरी के लिए सार्वजनिक वाहन के पैसेंजर द्वारा भुगतान किया जाता है । जो कि प्राधिकृत टैरिफ के अनुसार अनुपूरक प्रभारों से अलग होता है । मीटर की रिडिंग लाईट इमिटिंग डायोड से प्रदर्शित होती है । टैक्सी/आटो किराया मीटर का ' के ' फेक्टर 1380 पल्स प्रति किलोमीटर है ।

ZERO

FonPrecision Elk

आकृति : माडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का सीलिंग डायग्राम

लीड़ और सील तार के कपटपूर्ण उपयोग से बचने के लिए मीटर के पीछे की ओर से खुले स्क्रू बोल्ट पर सीलिंग बिन्दु लगाया जाता है । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान के टाइपिंकल स्कीमेटिक डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 51 )/2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3901 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

New Delhi, the 13th June, 2008

S.O: 1969. 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 (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) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of " Taxi/Auto Fare Meter" with digital indication (hereinafter referred to as the said model) of "GPMT " series with brand name " GOLD TECH " manufactured byM/s. Precision Electronic Instruments Co. , H -45 , Udyog Nagar, Peera Garhi , New Delhi - 110041 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/98 ;

The saidModel of "Taxi/Auto Fare Meter " with printer facility is a measuring instrument which totalizes continuously and indicates the fare, at any moment of journey, the charges payable by the passenger of a public vehicle as function of the distance traveled , and below a certain speed on the lenght of the time taken , this being independent of supplementary charges according to the authorized tariffs . The reading of the meter is indicated by Light Emitting Diode ( LED) . The ' K' factor ofthe Taxi/Auto Fare Meter is 1380 pulses per kilometer.

Check ZERO

ForPrecision Eltronic

Figure- 2 Sealing diagram of the sealing provision of the model

Sealing point is affixed on the opening screw -bolt ofthe rear side of the meter to avoid fraudulent use with lead and seal wire . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the Model is given above .

[F. No. WM -21 (51 )/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 3902

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008 / SRAVANA 4, 1930

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 13 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1970.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों 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! विक्टरी स्केल्स, ओल्ड नं. 15 , न्यू नं. 128 ए , कन्नागी नगर , दूसरी गली , कोलाथुर , चेन्नई -600099 , तमिलनाडु द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता वर्ग ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले ' वी एस पी' श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम ' विनर ' है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2008/85 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है;

: उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृत गेज अप्ररूपण तुलादण्ड प्रकार का भार सैल आधारित अस्वचालित ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार का) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 किलोग्राम है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 4 किलोग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई) 200 ग्राम है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है । आकृति-2 मांडल के सूचक को सीलबंद करने का उपबंध

तुला को सील करने के लिए इसके तल प्लेट और ऊपरी कवर पर छेद किए जाएंगे और सीसायुक्त तार को स्टॉप और सील के सत्यापन प्राप्त करने किं लिए इन छेदों में कसा जाएगा । सील को तोड़े बिना उपकरण को खोला नहीं जा सकेगा । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने का एक प्रारूप योजनाबद्ध डाइग्राम उपरोक्त 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 उर्सी सामग्री से जिससे उक्तअनुमोदित मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 किलोग्राम से अधिक और 5000 किलोग्राम 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 ( 23 )/2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3903

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi, the 13th June, 2008

S.O. 1970. 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 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 non-automatic weighing instrument (Plateform type ) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuraccy-class - III ) of series " VSP " and with brand name "WINNER" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Victory Scales , Old No. 15, New No. 128 A, Kannagi Nagar , 2nd Street, Kolathur , Chennai-600099, Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/08/85;

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 is 4 kg. The verification scale interval ( e ) 200 g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Figure-2 Sealing provision of the indicator ofmodel

For sealing the indicator of the balance , holes are made at the bottom plate and the upper cover , and a leaded wire is fastened through these hoies for receiving the verification stamp and seal . The instrument cannot be opened without tampering the seal . A typical schematic diagram of sealing prevision 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 instrument of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50 kg. and upto 5000 kg . with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5 g. or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k ог 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 and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured .

[F. No. WM-21 (23 )/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 2644 G1/08-8 3904

[ PART II- SEC . 3 (ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4, 1930

नईदिल्ली, 13 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1971.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स विक्टरी स्केल्स , ओल्ड नं. 15 , न्यूनं. 128 ए , कन्नागी नगर , दूसरी गली , कोलाथुर, चेन्नई-600099 , तमिलनाडु द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता वर्गः ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले ' वी एस टी' श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम ' विनर ' है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2008/86 सममुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ;

उक्त मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक विकृत गेज अप्ररूपण तुलादण्ड प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबलटॉप प्रकार का ) तीलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 किलोग्राम और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्राम है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 5 ग्रामः 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 ।

0000

आकृति-2 मॉडल के सूचक को सीलबंद करने का उपबंध

तुला को सील करने के लिए इसके तल प्लेट और ऊपरी कवर पर छेद किए जाएंगे और सीसायुक्त तार को स्टॉप और सील के सत्यापन प्राप्त करने कि लिए इन छेदों में कसा जाएगा । सील को तोड़े बिना उपकरण को खोला नहीं जा सकेगा । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने का एक प्रारूप योजनाबद्ध डाइग्राम उपरोक्त 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 अनुस्तर और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदिप्त मॉडल का निर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि. ग्रा. से 2 मि. ग्रा. तक ' ई ' मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्राम या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 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 * या 5× 10 * , के है , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 23 ) /2008 ] आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 3905 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रीवण 4 , 1930

New Delhi , the 13th June, 2008

S.O. 1971. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the inodel of non - automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type ) with digital indication of " VST" series of medium accuracy (accuraccy class - III ) and with brand name "WINNER" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Victory Scales , Old No. 15, New No. 128 A, Kannagi Nagar, 2nd Street , Kolathur, Chennai - 600099 , Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08 / 86;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument ( Tabletop type) with a maximum capacity of30 kg . and minimum capacity is 100 g . The verification scale interval ( e) is 5 g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The light emitting Diode ( LED) display indicates the weighing results. The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply .

Figure- 2Sealing provision of the indicator of model

For sealing the balance , holes are made at the bottom plate and the upper cover , and a leaded wire is fastened through these holes for receiving the verification stamp and seal . The instrument cannot be opened without tampering the seal . 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 instrument of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg. with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg . to 2 g . and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5 g . or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10% , 2 × 10kor 5 × 10k , where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 (23)/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director ofLegal Metrology 3906

[PART II -SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 13 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1972.--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 अनुभव है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बमाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त संथा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उदत अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप-धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स जी.आर.बी. स्केल सर्विस , नं. 17/52 , अम्माइयाम्मल स्ट्रीट , पुलियाथोपे , चेन्नई-600012 , तमिलनाडु द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग II ) के " जी आर बी- जेपी " श्रृंखला के अस्वचालित , अंकक संचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार) जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " मास्टर " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/08/92 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ;

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

MASTER

EMASTER

10000

सूचक को सील करने के लिए इसके तल प्लेट और ऊपरी कवर पर दाईं तरफ से छेद किए जायेंगे तथा स्टाम्प और सील का सत्यापन करने के लिए इन छेदों के जरिये एक सीसायुक्त तार कसी जायेगी । सील को तोड़े बिना उपकरण को खोला नहीं जा सकेगा । माडल को सीलबंद करने का एक प्रांरूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त 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 । मि. ग्रा. से 50 मि. ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि. ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 120 ग्रा. से 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 ( 25 ) /2008 ]

आर. माधुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक भाप विज्ञान 3907 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/श्रावण 4 , 1930

New Delhi , the 13th June , 2008

S.O. 1972. 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 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with digital indication of high accuracy (Accuracy Class II) series "GRB and with brand name "MASTER" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . G. R. B. Scale Service , No. 17/52 , Ammaiammal Street, Puliathope, Chennai -600012 , Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/92 .

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

MASTER

@MASTER

10000

For sealing holes are made at the bottom plate and the upper cover of the weighing instrument from the right side, and fastened a leaded wire through these holes for receiving the verification stamp and seal . The instrument cannot be opened without tampering the seal . 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 instrument of similarmake , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50kg with verification scale interval (n) inthe range of 100 to 50,000 for ' e' value of Img to 50mg and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 5000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg. or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10% , 2 × 10 or 5 × 10k , where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[ F. No. WM -21 ( 25 )/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 3908

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 26, 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

नई दिल्ली, 13 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1973.-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 ( नीचें 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 शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए , मैसर्स जी.आर.बी. स्केल सर्विस , नं. 17/52 , अभ्माइयाम्मल स्ट्रीट , पुलियाथोपे चेन्नई-600012 , तमिलनाडु द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) के " जी आर बी टी बी " श्रृंखला के अस्वचालित , अंकक संचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " मास्टर " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 /08 /93 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 क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयंतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकंलनात्मक 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 ।

सूचक को सील करने के लिए इसके तल प्लेट और ऊपरी कवर पर दाईं तरफ से छेद किए जायेंगे तथा स्टाम्प और सील का सत्यापन करने के लिए इन छेदों के जरिये एक सीसायुक्त तार कसी जायेगी । सील को तोड़े बिना उपकरण को खोला नहीं जा सकेगा । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने का एक प्रारूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त 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 के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. 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 ( 25 )/ 2008 ] आर. माधुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3909 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

New Delhi , the 13th June, 2008

S.O. 1973.-Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority , is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7 ) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) ,with digital indication of " GRB -TB " series of medium accuracy ( accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " MASTER " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/ s . G. R. B. Scale Service , No. 17/52 , Ammaiammal Street , Puliathope , Chennai -600012 , Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/08/93;

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

ASTER

Forsealing holes are made at the bottom plate and the upper cover of the weighing instrument from the right side. and fastened a leaded wire through these holes for receiving the verification stamp and seal . The instrument cannot be opened without tampering the seal . 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 instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 100mg to 2g and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10 % , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10 % , where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM - 21 (25 ) /2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 3910

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 /SRAVANA 4, 1930

[ PARI II - SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 13 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1974. केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्टमें वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों 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 मैसर्सः जी.आर.बी. स्केल सर्विस , नं. 17/52 , अम्माइयाम्मल स्ट्रीट , पुलियाथोपे , चेन्नई -600012 , तमिलनाडु द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) के " जी आर बी पीटी " श्रृंग के अस्वचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेट फार्म टाइप ) जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " मास्टर " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) , जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/08/94 समनुदेशित किया गया है . अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी करती है ;

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

MASTER

सूचक को सील करने के लिए इसके तल प्लेट और ऊपरी कवर पर दाईं तरफ से छेद किए जायेंगे तथा स्टाम्प और सील का सत्यापन करने के लिए इन छेदों के जरिये एक सीसायुक्त तार कसी जायेगी । सील को तोड़े बिना उपकरण को खोला नहीं जा सकेगा । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने का एक प्रारूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त 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 एका अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से अधिक और 5000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2× 10 या 5 × 10 , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक वर्णांक या शून्यं के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 25 )/2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3911

भारत का राजंपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण4 , 1930

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

NewDelhi, the 13th June , 2008

S.O. 1974.-Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non -automatic weighing instrument (Platform type ) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy Class - III) of series " GRB - PT" and with brand name "MASTER" (hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s . G. R. B. Scale Service , No. 17/52; Ammaiammal Street, Puliathope , Chennai - 600012 , Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/94;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Plat form type) with a maximum capacity of 1000 kg. and minimum capacity of4 kg . The verification scale interval (e ) is 200g . It has atare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED ) indicates the weighing results. The instrument operates on 230 Volts, 50 Hertz alternative current power supply .

MAS STER

For sealing holes are made at the bottom plate and the upper cover of the indicator from the right side, and fastened a leaded wire through these holes for receiving the verification stamp and seal. The instrument can not be opened without tampering the seal . 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 instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50 kg . and up to 5000 kg . with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g . or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5× 10 , where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in ccordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured .

[F. No. WM-21 (25 )/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 2644 G1/08-9 3912

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008/ SRAVANA 4, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 13 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1975.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्तरिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाएं 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 जी.आर.बी. स्केल सर्विस , नं. 17/52 , अम्माइयाम्मल स्ट्रीट , पुलियाथोपे , चेन्नई -600012 , तमिलनाडु द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) के " जी आर बी एच एस " श्रृंखला के अस्वचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( हैंगिंग टाइप ) जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " मास्टर " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 08/ 95 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है;

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( हैंगिंग टाइप ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 100 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 400 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 20 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्ययकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्टऔर 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

सूचक को सील करने के लिए इसके तल प्लेट और ऊपरी कंवर पर दाई तरफ से छेद किए जायेंगे तथा स्टाम्प और सील का सत्यापन करने के लिए इन छेदों के जरिये एक सीसायुक्त तार कसी जायेगी । सील को तोड़े बिना उपकरण को खोला नहीं जा सकेगा । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने का एक प्रारूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त 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 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. से अधिक और 500 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 * या 5 × 10 , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 25 )/2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 3913 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण4, 1930

New Delhi, the 13th June , 2008

S.O. 1975. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Hanging type ) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy Class - III ) of series "GRB -HS " and with brand name "MASTER" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . G. R. B. Scale Service, No. 17/52 , Ammaiammal Street, Puliathope , Chennai - 600012, Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09 /08/95;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Hanging type ) with a maximum capacity of 100 kg and minimum capacity of 400g . The verification scale interval ( e) is 20g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

For sealing holes are made at the bottom plate and the upper cover of the indicator from the right side, and ,fastened a leaded wire through these holes for receiving the verification stamp and seal . The instrument can not be opened without tampering the seal . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above .

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

[F. No. WM - 21 (25)/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 3914

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 /SRAVANA 4, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 13 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1976.-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 ) वाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के जो के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल अणार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थिांत सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त आंधनियम को धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स जी.आर.बी. स्केल सर्विस , नं. 17/52 , अम्भाइयाम्मल स्ट्रीट , पुलियाथोपे , चेन्नई-600012 , तमिलनाडु द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता थार्थता वर्ग III ) के " जी आर बी पी सी " श्रृंखला के अस्वचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म कन्वर्सन किट टाइप) जिसकं ब्रांड का नाम " मास्टर " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/08/ 96 समनुदेशित कियां गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण - पत्र जारी करती है ;

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

MASTER

सूचक को सील करने के लिए इसके तल प्लेट और ऊपरी कवर पर दाई तरफ से छेद किए जायेंगे तथा स्टाम्प और सील का सत्यापन करने के लिए इन छेदों के जरिये एक सीसायुक्त तार कसी जायेगी । सील को तोड़े बिना उपकरण को खोला नहीं जा सकेगा । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने का एका प्रारूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त 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 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 लो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (एन ) सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. से अधिक और 5000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 % , 2× 10 % या 5 × 10 , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक यः अन्ध के सथतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 (25 )/2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3915

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/श्रावण 4, 1930

[भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii)]

New Delhi , the 13th June, 2008

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

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -sections (7 ) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform conversion kit type ) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy Class - III ) of series "GRB - PC" and with brand name " MASTER" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ), manufacturedby M/ s . G. R. B. Scale Service , No. 17/52 , Ammaiammal Street , Puliathope , Chennai -600012, Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /08/96 ;

Thesaidmodel is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument ( Platform conversion kit type) with a maximum capacity of 1000 kg and minimum capacity of 4kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 200g. It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

MASTER

For sealing holes are made at the bottom plate and the upper cover of the indicator from the right side , and fastened a leaded wire through these holes for receiving the verification stamp and seal . The instrument can not be opened without tampering the seal. 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 instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50kg and up to 5000kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10k or 5× 10k, where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 (25 )/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 3916

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[PART II- SEC . 3( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 16 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1977.-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 वी 3 इलैक्ट्रानिक्स इंडिया, 344 , के.पी.सी. नगर , बेल्लाकोविल -628111 , जिला - इरोड, तमिलनाडु द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) के " वी 3 - सी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म हेतु कन्वर्सन किट - हाईब्रिड टाइप ) और जिसकें ब्रांड का नाम " वी 3 " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/ 07/260 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है;

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म हेतु कन्वर्सन किट- हाईब्रिड टाइप ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 300 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 ।

स्टेपिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अलावा गलप्त अनुप्रयोंगों को रोकने के लिए भी मशीन को सील किया जाएगा । मॉडल की सामग्री , यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम , कार्य करने के सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों में बिक्री से पहले अथवा बाद में कोई परिवर्तन नहीं किया जाना चाहिए ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है किउक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्तअनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 50 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. से अधिक और 5000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2× 10के या 5 × 10 , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 127) /2007] आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 3917

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 16th June , 2008

S.O. 1977. 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 (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 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic weighing instrument with digital indication (Conversion Kit for Platform - Hybrid type ) with "V3 - C" series belonging to medium accuracy (Accuracy Class - III ) and with brand name "V3 " (hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s. V3 Electronics India, #344 , K.P.C. Nagar , Vellakovil - 628111 , Erode (Dist. ) ; Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/260

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

In addition to sealing the stamping plate sealing shall also be done to prevent 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 .

Further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 12) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50kg and up to 5000kg with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 50g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k, where 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 ( 127)/2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology :

3918

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008/SRAVANA 4, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 16 जून , 2008

का. आ. 1978.-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 (मॉडालों 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 मैससी वी 3 इलैक्ट्रानिक्स इंडिया , 344 , के. पी.सी. नगर, वेल्लाकोविल -628111 , जिला -इरोड , तमिलनाडु द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग-III ) के वी 3 - टी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) और जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " वी3 " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/07 / 258 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 किग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकमनात्मक 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 ।

स्टॅपिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अलावा गलत अनुप्रयोगों को रोकने के लिए भी मशीन को सील किया जाएगा । मॉडल की सामग्री , यथार्थता, डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम , कार्य करने के सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों में बिक्री से पहले अथवा बाद में कोई परिवर्तन नहीं किया जाना चाहिए ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है 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 के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा. या उपने साधक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 के या 5 × 10 , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 127 ) /20071 आर. माधुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3919 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण4, 1930

New Delhi , the 16th June, 2008

S.O. 1978.-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 CentralGovernment hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model non-automatic (Table top type) weighing instrument with digital indication of " V3 - T" series of medium accuracy (accuracy class - III) and with brand name "V3 " (herein referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s . V3 Electronics India, #344 , K.P.C. Nagar , Vellakovil- 628111 , Erode (Dist.) , Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07 /258;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with amaximum capacity of 30 kg . 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 , 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 .

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

[F. No. WM- 21 (127)/2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director ofLegal Metrology 2644GI/08-10 3920

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

नई दिल्ली , 16 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1979.-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;

अप्तः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्सी वीउ इलैक्ट्रानिक्स इंडिया , 344 , के.पी.सी. नगर , वेल्लाकोविल-628111 , जिला- इरोड, तामिलनाडु द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) के " वी 3 - पी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) और जिसके ब्रांड का नाम "वी3 " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/07/ 259 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी करती है ;

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम 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 डायोड ( एल ई डी ) तोलन परिणाम उपर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टेपिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अलावा गलत अनुप्रयोंगों को रोकने के लिए भी मशीन को सील किया जाएगा । मॉडल की सामग्री , यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम , कार्य करने के सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों में बिक्री से पहले अथवा बाद में कोई परिवर्तन नहीं किया जाना चाहिए ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 127 )/2007 ]

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

3921

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

New Delhi, the 16th June , 2008

S.O. 1979.- 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 (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 ) 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 " V3 - P " series of medium accuracy ( accuracy class - III) and with brand name " V3 " (hereinafter referred to as the said model ), manufacturedby M/ s . V3 Electronics India, #344 , K.P.C. Nagar , Vellakovil- 628111 , Erode ( Dist .), Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/ 07 /259 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 1000 kg . and minimum capacity of 4kg . The verification scale interval (e) is 200g. It has a tare device with 100 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 .

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

[F. No. WM-21 ( 127) /2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 3922

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008 /SRAVANA 4 , 1930

नई दिल्ली, 16 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1980.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों 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 वीउ इलैक्ट्रॉनिक्स इंडिया , 344 , के.पी.सी. नगर , वेल्लाकोविल-628111 , जिला - इरोड , तमिलनाडु द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग II ) को " वी 3 -जे " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) और जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " वी3 " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात्उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/07/ 257 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 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 2 ना. 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 वोल्टय और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टेंपिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अलावा गलत अनुप्रयोगों को रोकने के लिए भी मशीन को सील किया जाएगा । मॉडल की सामग्री , यथार्थता, डिजाइन, सर्किट डायग्राम , कार्य करने के सिद्धांत आदि की शतों में बिक्री से पहले अथवा बाद में कोई परिवर्तन नहीं किया जाना चाहिए ।

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 1 मि. ग्रा. से 50 मि. ग्रा. के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 50,000 की रेंज में सत्यापन मापपान अंतराल (एन ) और 100 मि.ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के" ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50,000 के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं। और " ई " मान 1 × 10* , 2× 10* या 5 × 10 *, के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 127 ) /2007 ] आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 3923 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008 / श्रावण4 , 1930

New Delhi, the 16th June , 2008

S.O. 1980. 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 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) of digital indication with "V3 - J " series belonging to high accuracy ( accuracy class - 11 ) and with brand name " V3 " (hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s . V3 Electronics India, #344, K.P.C. Nagar , Vellakovil-628111 , Erode (Dist.) , Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/257;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non-automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with a maximum capacity of 30 kg and minimum capacity of 100g . The verification scale interval (e) is 2g. It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) 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 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 .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -section ( 12) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 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 of5000 to 50,000 for ' e' value of 100mg or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5× 10k , k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

F. No. WM-21 ( 127)/2007]

[ R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 3924

[PART 11- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008 / SRAVANA 4, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 16 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1981.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल (नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा ;

अतः, अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स साईसनं इंजीनियर्स , नं.26 , अजन्ता काम्प्लेक्स , कनॉट प्लेस , टाउन सेंटर , एन -5 , सीआईडीसीओ , औरंगाबाद-431003 , महाराष्ट्र द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) के " एसएस- डब्ल्यूबीसी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( वेगब्रिज हेतु कनवर्सन किट) और जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " साईसन " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) , जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 07/98 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण - पत्र जारी करती है;

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( वेगब्रिज हेतु कनवर्सन किट ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 40 टन है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 10 कि.ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक 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 ।

स्टेंपिंग प्लेट को सील करने के अतिरिक्त गलत प्रयोग रोकने के लिए मशीन को सील किया जाना चाहिए । मॉडल की सामग्री , यथार्थता , डिजाइन , सर्किट डायग्राम , कार्य करने के सिद्धांत आदि की शर्तों में परिवर्तन नहीं किया जाना चाहिए ।

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 उक्तअनुमोदित 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 के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 5 टन से अधिक और 100 टन तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2× 10 या 5 × 10 , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 28) /2007 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3925

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 16th June , 2008

S.O. 1981. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority , is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7 ) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of non - automatic weighing instrument (ConversionKit for Weighbridge ) with digital indication of " SS - WBC" series of medium accuracy (accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " SAISUN " (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Saisun Engineers , No.26 , Ajanta Complex, Cannaught Place , Town Centre , N- 5 , CIDCO , Aurangabad-431003 , Maharastra and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/07/98 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non- automatic weighing instrument (Conversion Kit for Weighbridge) with a maximum capacity of 40 tonne and minimum capacity of 200kg. The verification scale interval (e ) is 10kg . It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

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

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

[F. No. WM-21 (28 )/2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 3926

[ PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANΑ 4 , 1930

नई दिल्ली, 16 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1982.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः, अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स काल- टेक इन्स्ट्र मेंटस , नं. 13/366 , एम.डी. रहमतुल्लाह स्ट्रीट , कडपा -516001 , आंध्र प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) के " सीटी टीबी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) और जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " कालटेक " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 07/534 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है;

0000

CAL TECH INDYMUMANT

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप 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) तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

तुला की साइड से सील और स्टम्प को प्राप्त करने के लिए टाइट लीडेड वायर द्वारा टॉप और बाटम कवर में दो छिद्र करके सीलिंग की जाती है, सील को तोड़े बिना इसे खोला नहीं जा सकता है । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का टाइपिकल सिमेटिक डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्तअनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन कें तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि. ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक की रेंज के बीच सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) या 5 ग्रा. अथवा उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) के साथ 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 ( 283 ) /2007 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3927 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

New Delhi, the 16th June , 2008

S.O. 1982.- Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic (Table top type) weighing instrument with digital indication of " CT- TB " series of medium accuracy ( accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " CAL- TECH" ( herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Cal - Tech Instruments , No. 13/366 , M.D. Rahamathullah Street , Kadapa - 516001 , A.P. and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/ 07/ 534;

0000

CAL JEGHINSTRUMENE

Thesaid 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 device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LFD) indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

The sealing is done at the side of the balance by making two holes covering the top and bottom cover by a leaded wire fastend to recive the seal and stamp , which can not be opened without tampering the seal . 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 instrument of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg to 2g or with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10 %, 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k , k being a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured,

[F. No. WM-21 ( 283) /2007]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director ofLegal Metrology 2644 G1 /08-11 3928

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली , 16 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1983.-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 काल-टेक इन्स्ट्रूमेंटस , नं. 13/366 , एम. डी. रहमतुल्लाह स्ट्रीट , कडपा -516001 , आंध्र प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) के " सीटी - पीटी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) और जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " काल- टेक " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/07/535 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 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 विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

सूचक की र साइड से सील और स्टम्प को प्राप्त करने के लिए टाइट लीडेड वायर द्वारा सूचक के बाहरी एवं आंतरिक कवर में दो छिद्र करते हुए सीलिंग की जाती है , सील को तोड़े बिना इसे खोला नहीं जा सकता है । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का टाइपिकल सिमेटिक 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 के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) के साथ 50 कि.ग्रा से अधिक और 5000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 % या 5 × 10 * , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 283 )/2007 ] आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 3929 [ भाग II --- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

New Delhi , the 16th June , 2008

S.O. 1983. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the inodel 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 (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 ) 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 " CT - PT" series of medium accuracy ( accuracy class- III) and with brand name " CAL - TECH " (herein referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M /s . Cal- Tech Instruments , No. 13/366 , M.D. Rahamathullah Street , Kadapa - 516001 , A.P. and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/07/535;

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 4kg . The verification scale interval (e) is 200g . 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 opcrates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

The sealing is done from the rear side of the indicator by making two holes covering the outer and inner cover of the indicator by a leaded wire fastened to recieve the seal and stamp , which can not be opened without tampering the seal. 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 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of same series with maximum capacity 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 5 × 10 , k beingh the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured .

[ F. No. WM- 21 (283) /2007 ]

R. MATHURBOOT HAM, Director of Legal Metrology 3930

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4, 1930

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

भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो

नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई , 2008

का.आ. 1984.- भारतीय मानक बने ( 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: -

26 जनवरी , 2008 से 31 मार्च , 2008 तक

अनुसूची

भारतीय मानक का शीर्षक

लाइसेंसधारी का नाम व पता

वैधता तिथि

क्रम संख्या

लाइसेंस संख्या

भा मा संख्या भाग/अनु वर्ष 1 .

7828291

आईएस 23-03-2009

3854: 1997

घरेलू और समान प्रयाजनों के लिएस्विच

केल्लेनर इलैक्ट्रिक 95 , बॉम्बे टाकीज कंपाउंड, लोकसेवा ट्रॉसपोर्ट कंपनी के पीछे , हिमांशु रोड, ग्रेटर बॉम्बे , मलाड ( प ) महाराष्ट्र-400 064

7825891 06-03-2009

आईएस 1293: 2005

250 वोल्ट तक की रेटित वोल्टता और 16 एम्पीयर तक की रेटित धारा के लिए प्लग सॉकेट और आउटलेट

गोल्डमेडल इलैक्ट्रिकल्स प्रा.लि. 22/23 , शुभ बिल्डिंग , सागर मंथन इंडस्ट्रियल एस्टेट, सति. ली रोड, धाने वसई- ई भोइदापाडा, महाराष्ट्र-401 208

13-03-2009

7826691

आईएस

5780: 2006

विस्फोटी गैस वायुमंडलों के लिए विद्युत उपकरण- आंतरिक

सुरक्षा " 1 " -विशिष्टि

फ्लेमप्रुफ इक्यूपमेंट्स प्रा.लि. प्लॉट नं. बी-39, अंधेरी मलाड लिंक रोड़ , सम्मुखः मोंगिनिस केक फेक्टरी , ग्रेटर बॉम्बे , अंधेरी (प ) महाराष्ट्र-400 053

7823382 21-02-2009

आईएस

बिजली के घरेलू खाद्य मिक्सर

4250: 1980

( द्रवीयरक और ग्राइंडर )

अनामिका डोमेस्टिक एप्पलायंसेस सं. 2 , महारानी इंडस्ट्रियल एस्टेट , सं. 1 , सोमनाथ रोड़, डाब्हेल गॉव दमन नानी दमन ( यूटी ) दमन एवं दिव 396 210

आई एस 24-03-2009

1100 वो. तक की कार्यकारी

829495

694: 1990

वोल्टता के लिए पीवीसी विद्युत रोधी केबल

पॉलिकेब वायर्स इंडस्ट्रीज एसआर सं. 353/1 और 2 , गांव काचीगाम , दमन काचीगाम, दमन एवं दिव -396 210

आईएस 7830076 25-03-2009

3854 : 1997

घरेलूऔर समान प्रयोजनों के लिएस्विच

ओम इलैक्ट्रिकल इंडस्ट्रीज यूनिट सं. 9 , ग्राउंड फ्लोर, गुरू गोविन्द इंडस्ट्रियल एस्टेट, ग्रेटर बॉम्बे , गौरेगॉव पूर्व महाराष्ट्र-400063

[सं. सी एम डी/ 13 : 11 ]

पी. के. गम्भीर, उप महानिदेशक ( मुहर ) [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

3931

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS

New Delhi , the 16th July,2008

S.O. 1984.-In pursunace of sub - regulation (5) of regulation 4 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Ceritification) Regulations , 1988 , the Bureau of Indian Standards , hereby notifies the grant of licences particulars of which are given below in the following schedule:

26 January 2008 to 31 March 2008

Licence No.

SI No.

Validity Date

SCHEDULE

Product

Name and Address (factory)

oftheparty

23/03/2009 7828291

06/03/2009 7825891

7826691

13/03/2009 7823382

21/02/2009 5.

7829495

24/03/2009 6.

7830076

25/03/2009

OM Electrical Industries Unit No. 9 , Ground Floor, Guru Gobind Indsutrial Estate , GreaterBombay Goregaon-E Maharashtra 400063

IS No./Part/sec Year

IS 3854: 1997 Switches for domestic and similar purposes

Kellner Elektrik 95,BombayTalkies Compound, Behind Lokseva Transport Company,Himansu Road Greater Bombay, Malad-W Maharashtra 400064

IS 1293:2005 Plugs and socket outlets of250 volts and rated current up to 16 amperes

Goldmedal Electricals Pvt . Ltd. 22/23 Shubh BLDG, Sagar Manthan Indi Estate , Bhoidapada, Sativli Road Thane VASAI - E Maharashtra 401208

IS5780:2006 Electrical Appartus for ExplosiveGas Atomospheres- Intrinsic Safety "I" -specification

FlameproofEquipments Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.B -39, Andheri Malad Link Road, Opp Monginis Cake Factory , GreaterBombay Andheri (W) Maharashtra 400053

IS4250 : 1980 Specification for Domestic Electric Food Mixers ( Liquidizes and Grinders)

AnamicaDomestic Appliances No.2, Maharani Indl Estate, No.1 , Somnath RD, Dabhel Village Damann Nani Daman (U.T) Daman & Diu 396210

IS694:1990

Polycab Wires Industries Sr. No. 353/1 & 2, Village Kachigam Damann Kachigam Daman & Diu-396210

PVC Insulated cables for working voltages upto and including 1100 V

IS 3854: 1997 Switches for domestic and similar purposes

[No. CMD/13: 11 ] P. K. GAMBHIR , Dy . Director General ( Marks ) 3932

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 /SRAVANA 4, 1930

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई , 2008

का.आ. 1985. - भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो ( प्रमाणन ) विनियमन , 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 :-

1 अप्रैल , 2008 से 25 मई , 2008

अनुसूची

लाइसेंसधारी का नाम व पता

भारतीय मानक का शीर्षक

क्रम संख्या

लाइसेंस संख्या

वैधता तिथि

भा मा संख्या भाग/अनु वर्ष 1.

7838496 21/04/2009

आईएस 1554( भाग 1) :1988

पीवीसी विद्युत राधित ( हैवी डयूटी ) बिजली के केबल भाग 1 1100 बोल्ट तक की कार्यकारी वाल्टता के लिए

तिरूपति बालाजी एंड कं. , प्लॉट सं. 227/2/2 , भिवंडी-वाडा रोड़ , गाँव खुपरी , थाने , वाडा महाराष्ट्र-421312

7834892 07/04/2009

आईएस: 4250: 1980

बिजली के घरेलू खाद्य मिक्सर (द्रवीयरक और ग्राइंडर )

एपैक्स होम एप्लायंसेस गाला नं. 1 , प्लॉट नं. 29-पी, सममुखःक्रीसेन्ट इंड. एस्टेट, कंजूर गाँव रोड़ , ग्रेटर बॉम्बे, कंजूर मार्ग- ई महाराष्ट्र-400042

3. 7833486 03/04/2009

आईएस 2148: 2004

विद्युत उपस्करों के लिए ज्वालासह आवरक

टीआरआई- एफएलपी इंजीनियर्स प्रा.लि., 11 पॉपुलस इंडस्ट्रियल एस्टेट, डोखले कम्पाउंड, रघुवीरनगर समीप चार रास्ता, थाने डोम्बीवली- ई महाराष्ट्र

7836189 10/04/2009

चिकित्सीय मेडिकल एक्स-रे इक्यूप्मेंट भाग 1 : सामान्य और सुरक्षा अपेक्षाएं

आईएस 7620: (भाग 1 ) : 1986 सिपा टेक ( इंडिया ) प्लाट ए/ 24 , जीजामाता नगर , जी.डी. अम्बेकर मार्ग , कलाचौकी ग्रेटर बॉम्बे, कॉटनग्रीन , महाराष्ट्र-400 033

5. 7841485 05/05/2009

आईएस 4250: 1980

बिजली के घरेलू खाद्य मिक्सर ( द्रवीयरक और ग्राइंडर )

कोनिका एप्लायंसेस शांति स्टेट, गाला सं. 1 / 1 - ए, चिनकाटी कामन रोड़ , थाने सगपाडा ( देवढल) महाराष्ट्र-401 208

7837797 15/04/2009

घरेलूऔर समान प्रयोजनों के लिए स्विच आईएस 3854 : 1997 प्रालाइट इंडस्ट्रीज प्लॉट सं. 24/बी , गोल्डन इंड. एस्टेट सामनाथ रोड, दमन , डाभेल, दमन एवं दीव-396210

15/04/2009

7837696

आईएस 694 : 1990

1100 वो. तक की कार्यकारी वोल्टता के लिए पीवीसी विद्युत रोधी केबल

इलैक्ट्रोमैक्स इंडस्ट्रीज , 303 , मरीन चेम्बर्स , तीसरा तल , 43 न्यूमरीन लाइन्स, ग्रेटर बॉम्बे मरीन लाइन्स, महाराष्ट्र-400 020

7840887 30/04/2009

आईएस 4250: 1980

बिजली के घरेलू खाद्य मिक्सर ( द्रवीयरक और ग्राइंडर )

मोहन खेडा इंटरप्राइसेस , शॉप नं. 4 , ग्रुप सं. 2 , यासीन चाल , हरियाली गांव , टैगोर नगर , ग्रेटर बॉम्बे, विखरोली- ई, महाराष्ट्र-400 083

9. 7837494 14/04/2009

आईएस 3854 : 1997

घरेलू और सामान प्रयोजनों के लिए स्विच

विक्टर इंडस्ट्रीज , गाला सं. 206 , दूसरा तल , बिल्डिग सं. 2 , आशीर्वाद हैवी इंड. एस्टेट, राम मंदिर रोड़ , ग्रेटर बॉम्बे , गौरेगाँव महाराष्ट्र-400 104

[ सं. सी एम डी/ 13: 11 ]

पी. के. गम्भीर , उप महानिदेशक ( मुहर ) [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

3933

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

New Delhi , the 16th July, 2008

S.O. 1985.- In pursunace of sub-regulation (5) ofregulation 4 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Ceritification) Regulations , 1988 , the Bureau of Indian Standards , hereby notifies the grant of licences particulars of which are given below in the following shcedule:

1 APRIL, 2008 TO 25 MAY, 2008

Licence No.

Sl No.

Validity Date

SCHEDULE

Product

IS No./Part/Sec

Name and Address ( factory)

oftheparty

7838496

1 .

21/04/2009 2.

7834892

07/04/2009 7833486

03/04/2009 4. 7836189

10/04/2009

05/05/2009 7841485

7837797

15/04/2009

15/04/2009 7.

7837696

30/04/2009 8. 7840887

7837494

14/04/2009 9.

IS 1554: Part

1: 1988

Tirupati Balaji & Co Plot No. 227/2/2, Bhiwandi -Wada Rd. , Village Khupari , Thane Wada, Thane, Maharashtra -421312

PVC insulated (heavy duty) electric cables: Part 1 For working voltages upto and including 1100V

IS4250: 1980 Specification for Domestic Electric Food- Mixers(Liquidizers and Grinders)

Apex Home Appliances Gala No. 1 , Plot No. 29 -P, opp: Cresent Indl . Estate , off Kanjur Village Rd. , Greater Bombay, Kanjur Marg-E, Maharashtra -400042

IS2148 : 2004 Flameproof enchlosures for electrical apparatus

Tri-Flp Engineers Pvt Ltd 11, Popular Industrial Estate , Dokhale Compound, Raghuvirnagar, NR Char Rasta, Thane , Dombivli -E , Maharashtra-421201

IS7620

Part 1 : 1986

Sypa Tech ( India) Plot A/24, Jijamata Nagar, G.D. Ambekar Marg , Kalachowk, Greater Bombay, Cottongreen Maharashtra -400033

Specification for Diagnostic Medical X- rayEquipment -Part 1: General and Safety Requirements

IS4250: 1980 Specification for Domestic Electric Food- Mixers (Liquidizers and Grinders)

Konica Appliances Shanti Estate, Gala No. 1 / 1 -A , Chinchoti Kaman Road , Thane , Sagpada ( Devdhal ) , Maharashtra- 401208

IS 3854 : 1997 Switches for domestic and similar purposes

Prolite Industries Plot No. 24/B , Golden Indl .Estate, Somnath Rd . , Daman Dabhel , Daman& Diu -396210

1S 694: 1990 PVC Insulated cables for working voltages upto and including 1100V

Electromax Industries 303 , Marine Chambers , 3rd Floor , 43 , NewMarine Lines , Greater Bombay, Marine Lines, Maharashtras -400020

IS4250 : 1980 Specification for Domestic Electric Food- Mixers(Liquidizes and Grinders)

Mohan Kheda Enterprises Shop No. 4 ,Group No. 2, Yaseen Chawl , Hariyali Village, Tagore Nagar,GreaterBombay , Vikhroli -E, Maharashtra -400083

( S3854 : 1997 Switches for domestic and similar purposes

Victor Industries GalaNo. 206 , IInd Floor Bld . No. 2 , Ashirwad Heavy Ind . Estate, Ram Mandir Road, Greater Bombay, Goregaon- W, Maharashtra -400104

[No. CMD/ 13 : 11 ] P. K. GAMBHIR, Director General (Marks) 3934

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 17 जुलाई , 2008

का.आ. 1986. - भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो ( प्रमाणन ) विनियमन , 1988 के विनियम ( 5 ) के उपविनियम ( 6 ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि निम्न विवरण वाले लाइसेंसों को उनके आगे दर्शायी गई तारीख से रद्द/ स्थगित कर दिया गया है: -

अनुसूची

लाइसेंसधारी का नाम व पता संख्या क्रम

सीएम/एल- लाइसेंस संख्या

7501158 ऑय.ए. अँड आय.सी. केम. प्राइवेट लि. डी-2 , एमआईडीसः , लोटे परशुराम, तालुकखेड, जिला रत्नागिरी -415722 2.

7550979 न्यूकेम इंडस्ट्रीज सर्वे संख्या 217/5 , पार्श्वनाथ इंडस्ट्रियल एस्टेट , परसरामपुरिया इंडस्ट्रियल लिमिटेड के पीछे, दादरा गाँव , दादरा एवं नागर हवेली-396191 लाइसेंस के अन्तर्गत वस्तु/ प्रक्रम सम्बद्ध रद्द करने की तिथि भारतीय मानक का शीर्षक

आईएस 3383 : 1982 व्हेटेबल सल्फर 02-04-2008 पावडर 80 %डब्ल्यूपी

11-04-2008 आईएस 13422: 1992 सर्जिकल रबड़ ग्लोव्हज

[सं. सी एम डी/ 13 : 13 ]

पी.के. गम्भीर , उप महानिदेशक ( मुहर )

New Delhi , the 17th July, 2008

S.Q. 1986.-In pursuance of sub - regulation ( 6) of regulation 5 of the Bureau of Indian Standards ( Certification) Regulations , 1988 , the Bureau of Indian Standards , hereby notifies that the licences particulars of which are given in the following schedule have been cancelled with effect from the date indicated against each:

SCHEDULE

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

1. 7501158 I.A. & I.C. Chem Pvt Limited, D-2, MIDC, Lote Parshuram , Tal :Khed Distt :Ratnagiri 415722

2. 7550979 New Chem Industries , Survey No. 217/5 , Parshwanath Indl Estate (Behind Parasrampuria Inds Ltd, Village Dadra, Dadra and Nagar Haveli -396191

Date of Cancellation Article/Process with relevant Indian Standard Covered by the licence cancelled

02-04-2008 IS 3383 : 1982

Wettable Sulphur Powder 80% WP

11-04-2008 IS 13422 : 1992

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

नई दिल्ली, 17 जुलाई , 2008

का.आ. 1987. - भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो ( प्रमाणन ) विनियमन 1988 के विनियम 4 के उपविनियम ( 5 ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि वे लाइसेंस जिनके विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं को उनके आगे दर्शाए गई तिथि से जारी कर दिया गया है:-

अनुसूची

लाईसेंस धारकों का नाम और पता

वैधता दि.

अनुक्रमांक लाईसेंस सं .

8/05/2009

7842285

निरलॉन लिमिटेड पहाडी गाँव , पश्चिम महामार्ग , गोरेगाँव ( पूर्व ) , मुंबई-400 063

7840584 4/05/2009

2 आदित्य इंडस्ट्रिज प्लॉट संख्या 81 , रोड संख्या 1 और 7 , सेक्टर 1 /एस , एचडीएफसी बैंक के पीछे , रायगढ़ , न्यूपनवेल -410 206 3.

7843994 14/05/2009 सेजेंटा क्रॉप प्रोटेक्शन प्रायव्हेट लिमिटेड सान्ता मोनिका वर्क्स , कोर्लिम , इल्हास , उत्तर गोवा , गोवा-403110

भा.म. /भाग/विभाग/वर्ष उत्पादन

कारखानों के लिए व्हि- बेल्ट 2494 ( भाग 1 ) : 1994 पैकेजबंद पेयजल

14543 : 2004 कीटनाशक पिरिमोफोस 13455 : 1992 मेथल ईसी [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

4 1

13/05/2009 7843691

नचिकेत एन्टरप्राईजेज , 227, देवेन्द्र इंडस्ट्रियल ईस्टेट, लोकमान्य नगर , थाणे ( पश्चिम ) -400 606

7842386 08/05/2009 मैत्रेय मॅग्नेट प्रायव्हेट लिमिटेड , इंद्रकुंज , पहली मंजिल , बालाजी हॉस्पीटल के पीछे , विरार ( पूर्व) , थाणे-401 303 6.

28/04/2009 7839502

नाईल ट्रेडींग कॉरपोरेशन , गेट संख्या 334 , गाँव- नरे , पोस्ट-कुडास वाडा, जिला थाणे 7.

26/05/2009 7845901

3935

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

डेनसिटी हायड्रोमीटर भाग 1 3104 ( भाग 1 ) : 1982

14543 : 2004 पैकेजबंद पेयजल

455 : 1989

पोर्टलैंड स्लॅग सीमेंट

गैस , पानी और सेवर्स के लिए 5382 : 1985

भैरव प्रोडक्टस इंडीया , गाला संख्या ई-1 , पूजा इंडस्ट्रियल ईस्टेट , रबर सिलिंग रिंग्स तुलशेत पाडा,लेक रोड, भांडुप ( पश्चिम ) , मुंबई-400 078

[सं. के प्र वि/ 13: 11 ] पी. के. गम्भीर , उप महानिदेशक ( मुहर )

New Delhi , the 17th July , 2008

S.O. 1987. In pursunace of sub - regulation (5 ) of regulation 4 of the Bureau of Indian Standards ( Certification) Regulations , 1988, the Bureau of Indian Standards , hereby notifies the grant of licences particulars of which are given below in the following schedule:

Validity Date

Sl . No.

Licence No.

Name and Address (factory) ofthe party 1. 7842285 08/05/2009

SCHEDULE

Product

IS No./Part/ Sec Year

IS 2494 : Part

1: 1994 V-Belts- Endless V- Belts for Industrial Purposes Part 1 : General Purpose

Nirlon Limited,

Pahadi Village, Western Express Highway,

Goregaon(E) Mumbai 400063

2. 7840584 04/05/2009 Aaditya Industries Plot No. 81 , Road No. 1 &7 , Sector 1 /S , Behind HDFCBank Raigarh New Panvel 410206 3. 7843994 14/05/2009 Syngenta Crop Protection Pvt . Ltd. , Santa MonikaWorks , Corlim , Ilhas North Goa, Goa 403110

4. 7843691 13/05/2009 Nachiket Enterprise, 227, Devendra Industrial Estate, Lokmanya Nagar , Thane ( W) 400606

5. 7842386 08/05/2009 Maitreya Meganet Pvt . Ltd. , Indrakunj , 1st Floor , Behind Balaji Hospital Virar (E ), Distt . Thane 401303

6. 7839502 28/04/2009 Nile Trading Corporation, GutNo. 334, Village , Nare P.O. Kudus , Wada Distt . Thane 7. 7845901 26/05/2009 Bhairav Products (INDIA) Gala No. E- 1 , Pooja Indl Estate, Tulshet, Pada, Lake Road , Bhandup (W) Mumbai 400078 2644 G1/08-12

IS 14543:

Packaged Drinking Water (other than Packaged Natural 2004 Mineral Water)

IS 13455 :

1992 Pesticide-Pirimiphos Methyl BC

IS 3104: Part 1:1982 Density hydrometers : Part 1 Requirements

IS14543:

Packaged Drinking Water (other than Packaged Natural 2004 Mineral Water)

IS455: 1989 Specification for Portland slag cement

IS 5382:

Specification for Rubber Sealing Rings for Gas Mains , 1985 Water and Mains and Sewers

[No. CMD/13: 11 ] P.K. GAMBHIR , Dy . Director General (Marks ) 3936

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 21 जुलाई , 2008

का. आ. 1988.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधि- सूचना संख्या का.आ. 302 तारीख 12 फरवरी , 2008 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 16 फरवरी , 2008 में प्रकाशित की गई थी , द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मध्य प्रदेश राज्य में बीना संस्थापन से राजस्थान राज्य में कोटा तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए बीना- कोटा पाइपलाइन परियोजना के माध्यम से भारत पेट्रोलियम कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय कीघोषणा की थी;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 10 मई , 2008 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं ।

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

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

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

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

अनुसूची

जिला सागर राज्य: मध्य प्रदेश तहसील : बीना

सर्वे नंबर

क्र. सं. ग्राम का नाम

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में (1) (2)

(3)

(4) 1 .

532

0.1008 आगासौद

533

0.1440

535

0.0720

536

0.0576

539

0.0360

0.0288

707

[PART 11-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] (1) (2)

(3)

(4)

763

0.1800 आगासौद (जारी )

778

0.0720

776

0.1512

777

0.3456

1212

0.3312

1213

0.0360

1214

0.0864

1215

0.1872

1206

0.2664

1185

0.0936

0.0144

1180

1181

0.0360

1184

0.0936

1177

0.0432

1176

0.0576

1175

0.2160

0.0100

1172

0.0144

1162

0.0900

1164

1194

0.0216

0.0432

1168

1165

0.0432

1166

0.0020

0.0288

1140

0.0180

1118

1117

0.0216

0.0324

1116

1115

0.0200

0.0160

1114

0.0020

1111

0.0100

1120

0.0504

1112

0.0468

1113

0.0288

1105

1104

0.0504

0.0216

1103

0.2268

1068

1069

0.0720

0.1656

1070/2-4-5

1070/3

0.0576

1070/1

0.0648

1053

0.1440 3937 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

(1)

(1 ) (2)

(3)

(4)

(2)

(3)

(4)

0.0050 1081

0.0050

आगासौद (जारी )

पुरैना (जारी )

0.0050 1079

0.0360

0.0576 1052

0.0504

0.2664

1050

0.1152

43/2

0.1584

0.1224

1045

43/1

0.1440 1046

0.2088

0.1224

39/2

1042

0.0144

0.1296

39/1

0.2664

1036

64/2

0.0432

0.1512

1037

64/5

0.2232 1035

0.0216

64/4

0.0936

0.2376

516/1

2. पुरैना

64/6

0.3024 516/4

0.0576

0.2736

0.0040

515

386

0.2684

3. बेसराकसोई

514

0.0020

385

0.1512 513

0.2664

384

0.0200

0.0876

512 .

0.0286

389

373

0.1296

392

0.0200

0.0144

360

391

0.2952

0.0504

375

398

0.3168 377/1

0.2376

0.2736

399

0.1080

374

397

0.0720 377/3

0.0576

0.0144

499-

378/1

0.2000

412

0.4320 379

0.1250

413

0.3600

0.0020

378/2

110/2

0.1440 356

0.0650

110/1

0.1512

0.2520

355

109

0.4104 352

0.2376

0.0144

108

351/2

0.0216

4. बाघारूपा

0.0144 349/2

0.2088

42/1

0.1080 348

J.0504

0.2592 330/1

0.1100

0.0432 330/2

0.0800

44/1

0.0020

0.0420

331

0.3384

0.0040

332

0.0144 329

0.0504

0.0040

0.2520

328

38/3

0.2160 327

0.2088

38/2

0.1296

0.0020

337

38/1

0.0648 239

0.5472

0.1152 238

0.0144

34/1

0.2304 52

0.2304

0.0936

34/3 3938

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4, 1930

(4)

(3)

(1) (2)

0.1440 5. ढाना

0.0020

0.3384

0.0144

0.1008

[PART II-SEC . 3(ii) ] Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said land for laying the pipeline shall, instead of vesting in the Central Government , vest on the date of the publication of thisdeclaration, in Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, free from all encumbrances .

SCHEDULE

Tehsil: Bina District : Sagar State : Madhya Pradesh

Area in Hectare

Survey No.

S. No. Name of Village

0.0288

0.1008

10/3

10/4

0.0396 (1)

(3)

(4) (2)

532

0.1008 1 Aagasaud

0.0180

10/9

10/7

0.1584

10/5

0.1008

10/6

0.0576

0.1728 [फा. सं. आर. - 31015/6/2008 ओ आर- II ]

ए. गोस्वामी , अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS New Delhi , the 21st July , 2008

S.O. 1988. Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas S.O. No. 302, dated the 12th February , 2008 , issued under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines ( Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962 ) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) published in the Gazette of India dated the 16th February, 2008 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land, specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying a pipeline for transportation of petroleum products through Bina - Kota Pipeline Project from Bina terminal in the State of Madhya Pradesh to Kota in the State of Rajasthan by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited;

And whereas the copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 10thMay, 2008;

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

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

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

And further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section (4) of Section 6 of the said Act , the Central.

533

0.1440

0.0720

535

536

0.0576

539

0.0360

0.0288

707

763

0.1800

0.0720

778

0.1512

776

777

0.3456

1212

0.3312

0.0360

1213

1214

0.0864

1215

0.1872

1206

0.2664

0.0936

1185

1180

0.0144

0.0360

1181

0.0936

1184

0.0432

1177

1176

0.0576

0.2160

1175

0.0100

1172

1162

0.0144

0.0900

1164

0.0216

1194

0.0432

1168

1165 .

0.0432

0.0020

1166

0.0288

1140

1118

0.0180

1117

0.0216

1116

0.0324

0.0200

1115

1114

0.0160 3939 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण4 , 1930

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

(3)

(4)

(1)

349/2

0.2088

0.0020

1111

2. Puraina (Contd.)

1. Aagasaud (Contd. )

0.0504

348

1120

0.0100

0.1100

0.0504

330/1

1112

330/2

0.0800 1113

0.0468

331

0.0420 1105

0.0288

332

0.0040 1104

0.0504

329

0.0216

1103

0.2520

328

0.2268

1068

327

0.2088

0.0720

1069

337

0.0020 1070/2-4-5

0.1656

0.5472

239

0.0576

1070/3

238

0.0144 1070/1

0.0648

0.2304 1053

0.1440

0.0050 1081

0.0050

0.0050 1079

0.0360

0.0576

1052

0.0504

0.2664

1050

0.1152

43/2

0.1584 1045

0.1224

43/1

0.1440

0.2088

1046

39/2

0.1224 1042

0.0144

39/1

0.1296

0.2664

1036

0.0432

64/2

1037

0.1512

0.2232

64/5

1035

0.0216

64/4

0.0936

0.2376

516/1

2. Puraina

64/6

0.3024

0.0576

516/4

0.2736 515

0.0040

386

0.2684

3. Besarakasoi

514

0.0020

385

0.1512

0.2664

513

384

0.0200 512

0.0876

389

0.0286

0.1296

373

392

0.0200 360

0.0144

0.2952

391

375

0.0504

0.3168

398

0.2376

377/1

0.2736

399

374

0.1080

0.0720

397

0.0576

377/3

499

0.0144

0.2000

378/1

412

0.4320 379

0.1250

413

0.3600 378/2

0.0020

110/2

0.1440

0.0650

356

110/1

0.1512 355

0.2520

109

0.4104 352

02376

108

0.0144 351/2

0.0216 3940

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

(4) (1)

(3)

0.0144 4. Bagharupa

42/1

0.1080

0.2592

0.0432

0.0020

44/1

0.3384

0.0144

0.0040

38/3

0.2160

0.1296

38/2

0.0648

38/1

0.1152

34/1

0.2304

34/3

0.0936 5 Dhhana

0.1440

0.0020

0.3384

0.0144

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 13 मई , 2008 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं ;

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

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

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

अनुसूची जिला बारां

तहसील : बारां

0.1008

0.0288

राज्य : राजस्थान क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में क्र. सं. ग्राम का नाम

0.1008

10/3

सर्वे नंबर

(4) (1) (2)

10/4

0.0396

0.0180

10/9

10/7

0.1584

10/5

0.1008

10/6

0.0576

0.1728

[F. No. R- 31015 / 6/2008 OR - II ]

A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली, 21 जुलाई , 2008

का. आ. 1989. केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 304 तारीख 12 फरवरी , 2008 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 16 फरवरी , 2008 में प्रकाशित की गई थी द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मध्य प्रदेश राज्य में बीना संस्थापन से राजस्थान राज्य में कोटा तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए बीना - कोटा पाइपलाइन परियोजना के माध्यम से भारत पेट्रोलियम कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय कीघोषणा की थी;

(3)

1. बामला

233

0.0558

257

0.2736

0.2268

256

259

0.2000

261/1643

0.1640

261

0.0055

262

0.2030

0.0060

263

0.0830

359

358

0.0144

356

0.1640

355

0.0660

0.1350

357

354

0.0020

376

0.0590

395

0.1190

0.0920

396

397

0.0920

405

0.0020

406

0.2645

407

0.0640 3941

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

(4)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(4)

(1)

(3)

0.0740

0.0216

870

552

1. बामला (--जारी )

1. बामला ( --जारी )

0.0020

873

556

0.0100

0.0360

0.0468

874

557

869

0.0324. 558

0.0020

867

0.0740 560

0.0270

936

0.0830 561

0.0845

962

563

0.0025

0.0396

989/1585

0.1190 562

0.0432

992

0.1135 564

0.0144

995/1592

0.0360 575

0.0432

0.0360 576

1357

0.0288

0.2290

0.0020

1360

573

0.0576

1361

578

0.0936

1363

0.1760

0.0020

579

0.3200

1364

571

0.0020

1366

0.3090 702

0.0360

0.0216 822

1385

0.0540

0.2085 821

0.0324

1396

0.6660

1395

0.0324

820

0.0504

1393

819

0.0210

0.2740

1479/1622

823

0.0200

818

0.0720

1480

0.3550 824

1481

0.2900

0.0020

1481/1654

0.0360 843/1588

0.0020

0.0504

1485

0.0100 843

0.1960

1486

844

0.0020

0.7090 814

1497

0.0396

0.0504

0.0396

1491

813

0.0020 847

0.0126

1492

0.0600

1490

846

0.0450

850

0.0364

0.0900

242

2. तूमड़ा

891-

0.0590

0.0468

243

0.0740

892

241

0.0316

0.0450

894

244

0.0936 886

0.0590

246

0.0360 883

0.0360

247

0.0432 887

0.0100

248

0.0063 882

0.0485

251

0.0522

00740

880

250

0.0234

0.0396

878

257

0.0010

0.0080

871

739

0.0594

3. खैराली

0.0880

872

804

0.0010 3942

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

(4)

(3)

(4)

(1)

(3)

(1) (2)

1172

0.0558 805

0.1260

3. खैराली (जारी )

3. खैराली

0.0306

1275/1178

0.0234

795

1174

0.1134 806

0.2538

0.0108

1173

807

0.0738

0.0216

1175

809

0.0918

0.2160

1220

0.2124

825

1221

0.0020 827

0.1098

1222

0.1754 826

0.3042

0.2178

1227

0.2034

822/1281

0.2358

1228

0.0010

822

1229

0.1818

838

0.1098

1225

856

0.1440

0.0020

1239

0.0180

857

0.0010

1240

0.3978

858

0.0025

0.0252 859

367

4. रटावद्

0.1242

860

0.0036

368/911

0.0288

861

365

0.1600

0.0010

904

0.4460

365/908

0.0760

862

373

0.1440 1246/862

0.2178

378

0.1188 878

0.2178

377

0.1880

0.0576

900

995/417

0.1944 964

0.0350

417

0.2376 899

0.1728

0.0650

420

882

0.0036

0.0010

419

966

0.0020

424

0.4176

0.0558

967

423

0.0540

0.1944

969

325

0.0244

5. लेवा

0.0010

975

324

0.1116 971

0.1908

0.0324

323

0.0198

973

0.0450

327

0.1314

974

0.8010

384

979

0.1386

386

0.0594

0.6372

981

385

0.2700

0.0108

1142

392

0.0396

0.1170

1145

0.2340

399

1154

0.0025

402

0.2304

0.0882

1155

403

0.0270 1156

0.0144

404

0.4680

0.0288

1153

410

0.2520

0.0020

1158

409

0.0360

0.0738

1151

0.0108

408 $943 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/श्रावण4, 1930

(1) (2)

(3)

(4)

(1) (2)

(3)

(4) 483

0.0360

423

5. लेवा (जारी)

0.0.04

6. बेंगना (जारी )

484

0.0810

0.6576

422

485

0.0360

01386

417

486

0.5112

414

0.1692 487

0.1656

0.0432

412

488/520

0.0036

0.0504

445

0.0396

495

0.1116

482

494

0.1638

481

0.0324 493

0.0020

483

0.0018

0.0162

491

0.0090

480

0.0288

6. बेंगना

479

0.1152

475

0.0010

0.2070

0.0180

931

0.3384.

0.0180

930

0.0180

0.1584

927

0.2484

0.0126 29

0.3240

933

0.0010

934

0.0324

0.4680

949

0.1908

0.0054

943

0.1926

0.1548

948

0.0648

0.2970

965

0.2808

0.0396

966

0.0540

0.0324

967

0.2034

0.0144

1044

0.4932

0.0180

1042

1289/1242

0.1152

0.0612

1038

84/1242

0.0180

0.0324

1039

0.0270

0.0020

1036

0.0360

0.6930

1035

0.0900

0.0108

1032

0.0108

0.1116

1024/1250

0.0126

0.1620

1024

0.0036

0.0900

1027

0.0504

0.1980

1026

274

0.0216

374

0.0900

[फा. सं. आर. - 31015/2/2008 ओ आर- II ] 374/1244

0.0684

ए. गोस्वामी, अवर सचिव 376

0.0324

New Delhi , the 21st July, 2008

406

0.1386

430

0.0036

426

0.0846

425

0.0414

427

0.0468

S.O. 1989. - Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas No. S.O. 304, dated the 12th February , 2008 , issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act , 1962 ( 50 of 1962) (hereinafter referred to as the 2644 Gl/08-13 3944

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 /SRAVANA 4, 1930

[ PART 11- SC. 3 (ii ) ]

(2)

(3)

(4)

(1)

1. Bamla

376

0.0590

395

0.1190

396

0.0920

397

0.0920

405

0.0020 said Act) published in the Gazette of India dated the 16th February, 2008 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land , specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose ofl'aying a pipeline for transportation of petroleum products through Bina - Kota Pipeline Project from Bina terminal in the State of Madhya Pradesh to Kota in the State ofRajasthan by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited;

406

0.2645

0.0640

407

And whereas the copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 13th May, 2008 ;

552

0.0216

556

0.0100

0.0468

557

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

0.0020

558

560

0.0270

0.0845

561

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

563

0.0025

562

0.0432

564

0.0144

575

0.0432 Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 6 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that the right of user in the said land , specified in the Schedule , appended to this notification, is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline ;

576

0.0288

573

0.0020

578

0.0936

579

0.0020

571

0.0020

702

0.0360 And further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section, (4 ) of Section 6 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Central Government , vest on the date ofthe publication ofthis declaration , in Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, free from all encumbrances .

822

0.0540 SCHEDULE

0.0324

821

Tehsil : Baran District : Baran State:Rajasthan

820

0.0324

819

0.0210 S. No. Name of Village Survey No. Area in Hectare

823

0.0200 (3)

(4)

(1) (2)

818

0.0720 Bamla

1 .

0.0558

233

824

0.0020 257

0.2736

843/1588

0.0020 256

0.2268

843

0.0504 259

0,2000

844

0.0020 261/1643

0.1640

814

0.0396 261

0.0055

813

0.0396

0.2030

262

0.0126

847

263

0.0060

846

0.0450 359

0.0830

850

0.0364 358

0.0144

891

0.0590 356

0.1640

892

0.0740 355

0.0660

894

0.0450 357

0.1350

886

0.0590 354

0.0020 3945 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

(1) (2)

(3)

(1) (2)

(3)

(4)

1. Bamla

0.0360

247

883

2. Tumdha

0.0432

0.0100

887

248

0.0063

0.0485

251

0.0522 882

00740

880

250

0.0234 878

257

0.0396

0.0010

0.0594

739

0,0080

871

3. Khairali

872

0.0880

804

0.0010

0.0740

805

870

0.1260

0.0234

0.0020

795

873

806

0.2538 874

0.0360

0.0738 869

0.0324

807

867

809

0.3740

0.0918

0.0330

0.2124 936

825

0.0396

962

0.1098

827

0.1190

989/1585

03042

826

992

0.1135

822/1281

0.2034

0.0360

995/1592

822

0.0010 1357

0.0360

838

0.1818

856

0.2290

1360

0.1440

857

0.0180 1361

0.0576

0.1760

858

0.3978 1363

0.3200

1364

0.0025

859

860

0.3090

1366

0.1242 1385

861

0.0216

0.0288

0.2085

1396

904

0.0010 1395

0.6660

862

0.0760

0.0504

1393

1246/862

0.2178 1479/1622

0.2740

878

0.2178 1480

0.0576

0.3550

900

1481

0.2900

964

0.0350 1481/1654

0.0360

899

0.1728 1485

0.0100

882

0.0036

0.1960

1486

966

0.0020

0.0558 1497

967

0.7090

1491

0.0504

969

0,1944

0.0020

1492

975

0.0010

0.0600

1490

971

0.1908 242

2. Tumdha

0.0900

973

0.0198 243

0.0468

974

0.1314 241

0.0316

979

0.1386 244

0.0936

981

0.6372 246

0.0360

1142-

0.0108 [PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 3946

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

(3)

(4)

(2)

(1)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

0.2340

399

Leva

0.1170

1145

3. Khairali

0.2304

402

0.0025

1154

403

0.0270 1155

0.0882

404

0.4680

0.0144

1156

410

0.2520

0.0288

1153

409

0.0360 1158

0.0020

408

0.0108

0.0738

1151

483

0.0360

0.0558

1172

484

0.0810

0.0306

1275/1178

485

0.0360

0.1134

1174

496

0.5112

0.0108

1173

0.1656

487

0.0216

1175

0.0036

488/520

0.2160

1220

0.0396

495

0.0020

1221

494

0.1638

0.1754

1222

493

0.0020

0.2178

1227

491

0.0162

0.2358

1228

0.0288

6. Bengna

0.1818

1229

0.2070

0.1098

1225

0.3384 1239

0.0020

0.0180 1240

0.0010

0.2484

0.0252

367

4. Ratavad

0.3240

0.0036

368/911

0.0324

365

0.1600

0.1908 365/908

0.4460

0.1926

0.1440

373

0.0648

0.1188

378

0.2808

0.1880

377

0.0540

0.1944

995/417

0.2034

417

0.2376

0.4932

420

0.0650

0.1152

1289/1242

419

0.0010

0.0180

84/1242

424

0.4176

0.0270

0.0540

423

0.0360

0.0244

325

5. Leva

0.0900

0.1116

324

0.0108

0.0324

323

0.0126

0.0450

327

0.0036

0.8010

384

0.0504

0.0594

386

0.0216

274

0.2700

385

374

0.0900

0.0396

0.0684 392

374/1244 3947

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

(4)

(3)

(1) (2)

0.0324

376

6. Bengna

406

0.1386

0.0036

430

0.0846

426

0.0414

425

0.0468

427

0.0504

423

422

0.0576

417

0.1386

414

0.1692

412

0.0432

445

0.0504

482

0.1116

481

0.0324

483

0.0018

480

0.0090

479

0.1152

0.0010

475

931

0.0180

930

0.0180

0.1584

927

933

0.0126

934

0.0010

949

0.4680

943

0.0054

948

0.1548

965

0.2970

966

0.0396

967

0.0324

1044

0.0144

1042

0.0180

1038

0.0612

1039

0.0324

1036

0.0020

1035

0.6930

1032

0.0108

1024/1250

0.1116

1024

0.1620

1027

0.0900

1026

0.1980

[F. N. R- 31015/2/2008 O.R. - II ]

A. GOSWAMI ; Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली, 22 जुलाई , 2008

का. आ. 1990.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 303 तारीख 12 फरवरी , 2008 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 16 फरवरी , 2008 में प्रकाशित की गई थी , द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मध्य प्रदेश राज्य में बीना संस्थापन से राजस्थान राज्य में कोटा तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए बीना- कोटा पाइपलाइन परियोजना के माध्यम से भारत पेट्रोलियम कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ।

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 17 मई , 2008 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं।

और सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन, केन्द्रीय सरकार को अपनी रिपोर्ट दे दी है । और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने , उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्, और यह समाधान हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिये अपेक्षित है , उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चिय किया है ।

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

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

अनुसूची

तहसील: मुंगावली जिला अशोक नगर राज्य : मध्य प्रदेश क्र. सं. ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में (1) (2)

(3)

(4)

100

0.1944 1. महाराज खेड़ी

12/4

0.0150

12/8

0.0390

12/7

0.0150

12/6

0.0100

12/5

0.0050

0.1400

12/3 3948

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

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

(3)

(4)

(1) (2)

(4)

(3)

12/2

0.0576

1 . महाराज खेड़ी

2. पिपरिया मल्हारगण

241

0.3200 12/1

0.1170

(जारी)

253

0.1820 11

0.0130

252

0.0300 9/201

0.4212

251

0.0150 9

0.0200

248

0.0050 2. पिपरिया मल्हारगण

0.3445

250

0.0650 8

0.2860

249

0.0520 :

0.1950

247

0.0020 23

0.0325

3. किरमिचीखेड़ी

0.0030

44मि.

0.3900

0.3510

7/1

0.2600 44/1

7/4

0.0780 45/1

0.2880

7/2

0.1235 45मि.

0.0715 43/3

0.0975

0.0390 40

0.1560

0.0130

4. मढ़ावल

0.3445

0.3055

40/1

0.0065

37/2

0.0715

40/2मि.

0.3510 37/1

0.1625

0.0780 30/4

0.0845

0.4030 33/1

0.1820

0.0715 32

0.2145

76/3क

0.1950 31

0.0100

76/3ख

0.1820 129/2

0.0150

76/3 ग

0.2405 130

0.0150

76/4

0.0650 188/मि.

0.1050

82/2

0.0910 188/2

0.0850

82/3

0.4810 195

0.2860

82/5

0.0520 196

0.2145

0.1105 197

0.1820

0.5005 204

0.2000

168

0.0100

5. टांड़ा

208

0.1750

166

0.0130 207

0.0250

167

0.0020 210

0.0500

0.4600 209

0.1400

0.5100 212

0.0065

0.3705 211

0.0200

0.1000 238

0.0325

0.0650 236

0.0130

0.0325 239

0.0130

0.2600 240

0.3400

0.0040 3949 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/श्रावण 4, 1930

(4) (1) (2)

(3)

(4)

(3)

(1) (2)

0.3055 23

38/5

0.0680

5. टांड़ा ( जारी )

7. मिर्जापुर (जारी )

38/6

0.0050 37

0.0150

0.1430

0.2050

38/2ख

0,3600

0.0200

38/3

0.0325

38/7

0.1600 25

0.0130

38/8

0.1000 359/450

0.1105

0.0975 6. नरखेड़ा

-0.0325

356/449

0.0355

0.0650

359/2

0.3100

0.5395

0.3700

359/1

357

0.1170

0.0520

४. वरी

343

0.0200

0.1625

93/4

354

0.2275

0.2925

93/1 क

367

0.0200

93/1/1

0.9165 373

0.0200

93/ 1ख/1

0.1235

0.0200

380

0.0845

93/6

0.1820

375

0.0020

93/ 1 ग

376

0.0520

93/8

0.0050 371

0.0200

0.0975

9. सोपरा

390/2

0.4875

0.0100

0.1625

377

-0.1560 338

0.0200

0.0800 405/1

0.5300

7/13

0.2115 406/451

0.0650

חר

0.2930 434

0.0260

7/5/1

0.1195 417

0.2100

0.0040

7/2ख

418/1

0.1200

7/9/2ख

0.0975 418/2

0.1500

7/9/2

0.1300 419

0.0065

7/6/ 1क

0.1945 425

0.0910

7/5/3

0.0200 424

0.3510

0.0520 421

0.0065

12/1

0.2860 423

0.2145

12/3

0.1300 422

0.0130

12/2

0.1040 106/1/2

0.1000

7. मिर्जापुर

0.0040 106/1मि.

0.0750

0.0975 109

0.1150

0.0845

0.1750

110

0.0845

0.0975

16/3

0.1105 111/2

0.1040

25/128

0.1105 100

0,0260

0.0715 113

0.0325 [PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 3950

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

(3)

(4) (1) (2)

(3)

(4)

(1 ) (2)

0.4300

24/127

0.1950

9. सोपरा (जारी )

11. सुमेर ( जारी )

0.1560 20

0.0130

81/4

0.2300 59

0.1625

0.1820 68

0.0040

81/1

0.0100 67

0.1170

81/2

0.3200 69

00780

0.0065

0.2300

0.4355 70

0.0500

0.0020

141/2ख

0.0325 71/129

0.4875

0.0500

141/2क

142

0.0520 72

0.0585

0.1365

0.0585

143

61/1/2

0.0715

0.3240

12. झागर बमूरिया

0.0250

61/1/3

0.0100

0.0460

61/1/6

63/3

0.2300 77

61/1/5

0.1400

0.2500 125/4

0.0260

123/125

0.0200 125/ 1 क/ 1

0,2405

0.0260

13. खेरखाड़ी

126

0.0650

16/2

0.2100 16/1/5/8

0.0800

10. बेरखेड़ी

17/2

0.5525 ' 16/106

0.0325

21/2

0.0200 59

0.0800

24/1ख

0.2600 80

0.0150

24/1क

0.5200 11. सुमेर

0.0910

24/2

0.1625 66

0.3000

0.1040 67

0.0975

0.0130

0.0150

0.1000 69

0.0200

41/2

0.1200

14. अमोदा

0.0030

41/1

0.1700 72/2

0.2600

42/1

0.3400 71

0.1755

42/2

0.0400 60

0.1300

42/3

0.0650 73/ 1 क

0.0040

0.2400

74/3

0.0700

0.1875

52/1

74/1

0.1625

52/2

0.0325 74/2

0.0780

51/2ख

0.0130 75

0.0050

51/1/2

0.3835 77

0.3120

51/1/3

0.0390 78

0.3640

0.0260

51/2ख2

112

0.0400

0.0020 96

0.1755

58/1

0.2745 95/3

0.1040

58/2

0.2000 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

(4)

(1 ) (2)

(1)

(3)

0.2500

14. अमोदा

16. पाटन

0.0260

233

0.0260

54/234

0.0100

0.0020

2/1

2.4375

15. मथाना

2/2

0.1105

0.0600

0.1040

0.2800

0.0150

0.4225

0.0130

0.0065

39/1

0.1430

39/2

0.2340

0.1030

39/3

39/4

0.1400

0.0200

0.2405

31/5

0.1150

3951 (3)

(4)

1.3000 17

0.1950 14

0.0200 16

0.4550 15

0.0130 62

0.0350 56

0.2450 57

0.0520 58

0.1200 59

0.2405 53

0.0300 52

0.1560 51

0.0700 68

0.3035 67

0.2300 73

0.1000 70

0.0130 72/3

0,2000

0.0780 174

0.0200 175

0.2665 175/ 1क

17. फुलेदी

0.1900

0.3600

0.2600

120/2

0.1450

120/1/3 क

0.1250

120/1/3घ

0.1900

120/ 1 /3 ग

120/3

0.2200

0.4400

120/1/1

0.4500

123

124

0.1040

131

0.0350

0.4100

137

134

0.1820

0.0715

135

0.4200

133

0.0845

16. पाटन

0.0200

0.6110

13/1

1.0075

4.0950

2644 G1 /08-14

0.1040 175/ 1ख

0.0730 174

1.1310 173

0.0325 95

0.1820 176/2ग

0.0040 176/2ख

0.5450 176मि.

0.2925 176मि.

176मि.

0.1625

0.2405 176 मि.

0.4875 176मि.

0.0975 176/2/10

0.0325 176/2झ

0.1820 176/2ज

0.3120 176/5

0.0715 172/8/27

2.2590 143 3952

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

(2)

(3)

(4)

(1)

(3)

(1)

(2)

790

0.3575

19. अथाई खेड़ा

18. बेलई

0.0260

858

0.1150 I

0.0910

0.2800

859

0.2120

734

0.0195 3

0.1820

0.0600

727/3

0.1365

953

0.1365 17

0.0150

0.2730

954

0.1625

952

0.0020 19

0.0500

955

0.2100 23

0.3500

951

0.0600 24

0.0100

956

0.2700 27

0.0150

950/2

0.0040 28

0.2535

966

0.0850 26

0.1500

967

0.0520 41

0.0200

965

0.0065 52

0.1950

935

0.0200 53

0.3575

968

0.2200 54/ 1क

0.3200

978

0.0150 54/ 1ख मि.

0.3200

256

0.0520 54/3क

0.5900

986

0.0900 56

1.0600

980

0.0100 273/2

0.1500

982

0.0455 273

0.5000

0.0065

985

0.2100

19. अथाई खेड़ा

984

0.1100

0.0250

983

0.0130 62

0.0150

118/2

0.0800 63

0.0250

20. श्यामपुरा

0.1235 57/1

0.0800

118/1

0.0020 64

0.0050

124

0.2600

0.5500

125

0.1900

116

0.1040 85

0.1100

0.1300

115

812

0.0455

114

0.1430 771

0.0065

133

0.0150 772

152

0.0020

0.1625

0.1300

0.1735 773

155

0.1625

774

153

0.0800 834

0.0130

122

0.0600 775

0.1625

120

0.0325 793

118/3

0.1820

0.2015 792

0.3120

118/4

0.1235

117/1

791

0.1885

0.0195

789

0.0050

0.0020

119 3953 [ भाग 11 - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/श्रावण 4 , 1930

(1) (2)

(3)

(4)

0.0780

श्यामपुरा ( जारी )

20.

said land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Central Government, vest on the date of the publication ofthis declaration, in Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, free from all encumbrances .

0.0150

117/2

SCHEDULE

0.0780

61/1

63/2

0.1850

Tehsil: Mungawali District

State:Madhya Pradesh 63/1

0.1885

: Ashok Nagar

0.3000

S. No. Name ofVillage Survey No. Area in Hectare 53

0.0520

(2)

(1)

(3)

(4)

0.0520

100

0.1944

1. Maharajkhedhi

0.1560

12/4

0.0150 48

0.3380

12/8

0.0390 46

0.0020

12/7

0.0150 47

0.2405

12/6

0.0100

12/5

0.0050 [फा. सं. आर. - 31015/5/2008 ओ आर-11 ]

12/3

0.1400

12/2

0.0576 ए. गोस्वामी , अवर सचिव

12/1

0.1170 New Delhi , the 22nd July , 2008

0.0130

0.4212

9/201

0.0200

0.3445

Pipariya Malhargan

0.2860

0.1950

0.0325

44/M

0.3510

44/1

45/1

0.2880

45/M

S.O. 1990.-Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas S.O. No.303 , dated the 12th February , 2008 , issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines ( Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act , 1962 (50 of 1962) (here nafter referred to as the said Act) published in the Gazette of India dated the 16th February , 2008 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land , specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying a pipeline for transportation of petroleum products through Bina- Kota Pipeline Project from Bina terminal in the State of Madhya Pradesh to Kota in the State of Rajasthan by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited ;

43/3

0.0975

0.1560 And whereas the copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 17th May, 2008 ;

39.

0.3445

0.0065

37/2

0.0715 And whereas the competent authority has , under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 6 of the said Act, submitted report to the Central Government ;

37/1

0.1625

30/4

0.0845

33/1

0.1820 And whereas the Central Government , after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline , has decided to acquire the right of user therein;

0.2145

0.0100

129/2

0.0150

130

0.0150 Now , therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that the right of user in the said land , specified in the Schedule , appended to this notification , is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;

188/M

0.1050

188/2

0.0850

0.2860

195

And further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section (4) of Section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the 3954

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

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

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4) (2)

(3)

(4)

(1)

0.2145

Tanda

0.0100

168

Pipariya Malhargan 196

0.1820

197

166

(Contd.)

0.0130

0.2000

204

167

0.0020

0.1750

208

0.4600

0.0250

207

0.5100 210

0.0500

0.3705 209

0.1400

0.1000

0.0065

212

0.0650

0.0200

211

0.0325

238

0.2600 236

0.0130

0.0040 239

0.0130

0.0680 240

0.3400

0.0150

0.3200

241

0.1430 253

0.1820

0.3600

252

0.0300

0.0325 251

0.0150

0.0130 248

0.0050

359/450

6. Narkheda

0.1105 250

0.0650

356/449

0.0355 249

0.0520

359/2

0.3100 247

0.0020

0.3700

359/1

0.0030

3. Kirmichikhedhi

357

0.1170 5

0.3900

343

0.0200

0,2600

7/1

354

0.2275 7/4

0.0780

367

0.0200 7/2

0.1235

0.0200

373

0.0715

380

0.0200 11

0.0390

375

0.1820 1 Madhhawal

0.0130

376

0.0520 40/1

0.3055

371

0.0200 40/2/M

0.3510

390/2

0.4875 12

0.0780

377

0.1625

0.4030

338

0.0200 16

0.0715

405/1

0.5300 76/3K

0.1950

406/451

0.0650 76/3KHA

0.1820

434

0.0260

0.2405

76/3Ga

417

0.2100 76/4

0.0650

418/1

0.1200 82/2

0.0910

418/2

0.1500 82/3

0.4810

419

0.0065 82/5

0.0520

425

0.0910 81

0.1105

424

0.3510 88

0.5005 3955 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

(1) (2)

(3)

(4) (2)

(3)

(4)

(1)

0.2860

12/1

421

0.0065

Sopra (Contd.)

6. Narkheda (Contd.)

0.1300

12/3

423

0.2145

0.1040

12/2

422

0.0130

0.0040

106/1/2

0,1000

7. Mirjapur

0.0975

0.0750

106/1M

0.0845

0.1150

109

0.0845

110

0.1750

0.1105

16/3

0.0975

25/128

0.1105

0.1040

111/2

0.0715 100

0.0260

0.0325

0.1950

24/127

113

0.0130 38/5

0.3055

38/6

0.0050

0.1625

38/2Kha

0.2050

0.0040

38/3

0.0200

0.1170 38/7

0.1600

00780

0.1000

38/8

0.0065 23

0.0975

0.0500

0.0325

0.0020 40

0.0650

0.0500

71/129

0.5395

0.0585

0.0520

8. Varri

0.1365

0.1625

93/4

0.0715 93/1K

0.2925

0.0100 93/1/1

0.9165

63/3

0.0460

0.1235

93 /1Kha/ 1

0.1400 93/6

0.0845

125/4

0.0260 93/1Ga

0.0020

0.2405

125/ 1Ka/ 1

93/8

0.0050

126

0.0650

0.0975

0.0800 9. Sopra

10. Berkhedhi

16/ 1Ka/5/8

0.0100

0.0325

16/106

0.1560

0.0800

0.0150

11. Sumer

7/13

0.2115

0.0910

0.2930

0.3000 7/5/1

0.1195

0.0975

0.0040

7 /2Kha

0.0150 7/9/2Kha

0.0975

0.0200 7/9/2

0.1300

0.0030 7/6/ 1Ka

0.1945

0.2600

72/2

7/5/3

0.0200

0.1755 8

0.0520

0.1300 3956

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

(3)

(4) (1) (2)

0.0040

73/1Ka

11. Sumer (Contd.)

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

(3)

(4)

0.2400 14. Amoda ( Contd .)

0.0700

74/3

74/1

0.1625

74/2

-0.0780

0.0050

0.3120

0.3640

112

0.0400

0.1755

95/3.

0.1040

0.4300

0.1560

81/4

0.2300

0.1820

81/1

81/2

0.0100

0.3200

52/1

0.1875

52/2

0.0325

51/2Kha

0.0130

51/1/2

0.3835

51/1/3

0.0390

0.0260

51/2Kha2

0.0020

58/1

0.2745

58/2

0.2000

0.2500

233

0.0260

54/234

0.0260

0.0100

0.0020

2/1

2.4375 15. Mathana

0.2300

0.4355

141/2Ka

0.0325

0.4875

141/2Ka

142

0.0520

0.0585

143

61/1/2

0.3240 12. Jhagar Bamuriya

61/1/3

0.0250

61/1/6

0.2300

0.2500

61/1/5

123/125

0.0200 13. Kherkhadhi

0.0260

16/2

0.2100

17/2

0.5525

21/2

0.0200

0.2600

24/ 1Ka

0.5200

24/ 1Ka

0.1625

24/2

0.1040

0.0130

0.1000 14. Amoda

41/2

0.1200

0.1700

41/1

42/1

0.3400

42/2

0.0400

42/3

0.0650

2/2

0.1105

0.0600

0.1040

0.2800

0.0150

0.4225

0.0130

0.0065

0.1430

39/1

39/2

0.2340

0.1030

39/3

39/4

0.1400

0.0200

0.2405

31/5

0.2405

0.1150

0.1900

0.3600

120/2

0.2600

0.1450

120/1 /3Ka

120/ 1/3Gha

0.1250

0.1900

120/ 1 /3Ga

120/3

0.2200

120/1/1

0.4400

123

0.4500

124

0.1040 3957 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

(4) (1)

(3)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1) (2)

0.0350

0.2405

176मि.

131

17. Phuledi (Contd.)

15. Mathana (Contd.)

137

0.4100

0.4875

176मि.

0.1820

134

0.0975

176/2/10

0.0715

135

176/2ञ

0.0325

0.4200

133

0.1820

176/2ण

0.0845

16. Patan

176/5

0.3120 2

0.0200

172/8/27

0.0715 3

0.6110

143

2.2590 13/1

1.0075

0.0260

18. Belai

4.0950

0.0910

1.3000

0.2120 14

0.1950

0.1820 16

0.0200

0.1365

0.4550

0.0150 62

0.0130

0.1625 56

0.0350

0.0500 57

0.2450

0.3500

0.0520

0.0100 59

0.1200

0.0150 53

0.2405

0.2535 52

0.0300

0.1500 51

0.1560

0.0200 68

0.0700

0.1950 67

0.3035

0.3575

0.2300

0.3200

54/1क

0.1000

0.3200

54/1ख मि.

54/3क

0.5900

1.0600 71

0.0130

0.1500

273/2-

0.2000

72/3

273

0.5000

0.0780

174.

19. Athai kheda

0.2100

0.0200

175

17. Phuledi

0.0250

175/ 1क

0.2665

0.0150 175/ 1ख

0.1040

0.0250

174

0.0730

57/1

0.0800 173

1.1310

0.0050

0.0325

0.5500

0.1820

176/2ग

0.1900 176/2ख

0.0040

0.1300 176Mमि.

0.5450

0.0455

812

176मि.

0.2925

0.0065

771

176मि

0.1625

772 3958

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 26 , 2008 /SRAVANA 4, 1930

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) .

(1)

(1) (2)

(3)

(2)

(3)

(4)

0.1300

0.0600 19.

773

Athai kheda (Contd.)

20. Shyampura (Contd.) 122

774

0.1625

120

0.0325 834

0.0130

0.2015

118/3

0.1625

775

118/4

0.1235 793

0.1820

117/1

0.1885 792

0.3120

119

0.0020 791

0.0195

0.0780 789

0.0050

117/2

0.0150 790-

0.3575

61/1

0.0780 858

0.1150

63/2

0.1850 859

0.2800

63/1

0.1885 734

0.0195

0.3000 727/3

0.0600

0.0520

0.1365

953

0.0520

0.2730

954

0.1560 952

0.0020

0.3380

0.2100

955

0.0020

0.0600

951

0.2405 956

0.2700

0.0100

00040

950/2

[F. N. R- 31015/5/2008 OR- 11 ] 966

09850

A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy .

967

0.0520

नई दिल्ली, 22 जुलाई , 2008

965

0.0065

935

0.0200

968

0.2200

0.0150

978

256

0.0520

986

0.0900

0.0100

980

982

0.0455

985

0.0065

984

0.1100

983

0.0130

118/2

0.0800

20. Shyampura

118/1

0.1235

124

0.0020

का. आ. 1991. केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 307 तारीख 14 फरवरी , 2008 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 16 फरवरी , 2008 में प्रकाशित की गई थी द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुपूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मध्यप्रदेश राज्य पेटोलियम उत्पादों में बीना संस्थापन से राजस्थान राज्य में कोटा तक के परिवहन के लिए बीना- कौटा पाइपलाइन परियोजना के माध्यम से भारत पेट्रोलियम कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;

125

0.2600

116

0.1040

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 24 मई , 2008 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी ;

115

0.1100

114

0.1430

133

0.0150

152

0.0020

155

0.1735

153

0.0800

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

3959 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

(4)

(3)

(1) (2)

863

0.0360

1. सहरोद (जारी )

903

0.4176

0.0072

903/1680

0.0072

903/1803

902

0.0792

0.0360

914

916

0.1440

0.1800.

917

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

0.0720

918

अनुसूची

0.1728

919

तहसील : अटरू जिला : बारां राज्य : राजस्थान

924

0.0720 क्र. सं. ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

921

0.0648

0.2520

922

(1) (2)

(3)

(4)

934

0.0144 33

0.0360

1. सहरोद

973

0.1800 36

0.1440

0.0216

943/1518

0.0360

965/1541

0.0216 31

0.1512

0.2592

965

0.4000

967

0.2016 24

0.0360

964

0,0504 25

0.1368

963

0.1080 25/1576

0.0216

0.1728

980

0.2200

0.0432

981

0.0432

0.0360

983

21/1532

0.0360

0.3456

984

0.2592

985

0.1584 18

0.0144

985/1692

0.0144 16

0.3800

1008

0.1584 16/1547

0.0432

0.0072

1008/1693

761

0.1500

1008/1700

0.0144 761/1548

0.2050

0.1512

1002

762

0.0864

1001

0.2592 767

0.0360

0.1584

1000

791

0.2800

999

0.0216 792

0.1728

0.1800

998

794

0.0360

0.0144

998/1696

805

0.0360

0.1584

997

801

0.0144

0.0504

996

802

0.3500

1034

0.1440 800

0.2088

995

0.1080 808

0.0072

0.3240

1035

799

0.1800

994

0.0144 798

0.1008

26-44 Gl/08-15 3960

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

(1)

(4)

(3)

1477

0.0216 2. छोटी

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ]

(3)

(4) (1)

358/1450

0.0144 5. खुरी (जारी )

1478

0.0072

1479

0.0216

1480

0.0144

1481

0.0252 3. काचरा

114

0.0216

0.1440 4. जिरोद

0.0144

0.0216

3/702

0.1440

5/704

0.0144

0.0360

28/708

0.0072

6/705

0.0072

0.0720

28/706

0.0144

0.2016

0.0936

0.4464

0.2160

0.4320

0.1224

0.0144

0.0360

294

0.0216 5. खुरी

295

0.0020

293

0.1884

0.1250

298

299

0.2160

0.0360

300

317

0.3300

317/1633

0.0360

0.0260

318

316

0.2300

315

0.0020

320

0.2560

330

0.0820

330/1639

0.0630

329

0.4060

358

0.1500

357

0.3240

357/1641

0.0144

355

0.0288

356

0.2450

389

0.2000

388

0.0720

392

0.0216

432

0.0360

0.1630

433

0.1100

434

439

0.0300

452

0.0650

454

0.2050

455

0.0288.

456

0.1562

457

0.0770

458

0.0020

449

0.0460

460

0.1000

461

0.0144

462

0.7676

630

0.0144

1274

1295

0.0504

1294

0.0720

1296

0.0144

1289

0.0252

1298/1651

0.0432

1298/1650

0,0040

1298

0.0200

1299

0.0470

1300

0.0530

0.0576

1301

1285

0.0040

1302

0.1000

1350

0.0700

1351

0.0630

0.1000

1352

1369

0.1080

1369/1574

0.0288

1368

0.1650

1365

0.0530 3961 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/श्रावण 4, 1930

(1) (2)

(3)

(4) (1) (2)

(4)

(3)

0.0360 1366

286

0.0040

6. निमोदा (जारी )

5. खुरी ( जारी )

1378

0.0360

151

0.1440

0.1080

129

0.0288 1379

1382

0.2232

7. मेरमातालाब

0.1080 1402

0.2950

0.0216 1400

0.0790

0.3200 1401

0.0470

0.3200

1397

0.1350

0.0864

0.2900

1398

0.2160

1396

0.0450

0.500

0,0900 1396/1578

1395

0.0216

0.3450 9

05/216

6. निमोदा

0.2300 12

0.0864

0.1950

0.3600

12/312

0.0360

0.0220

885

0.2100

0.0020

880

0.0144 94

0.0100

874

0.3560 93

0.0720

875

0.0020

0.3150

93/300

872

0.0300 91

0.1944

873

0.0260 91/381

0.0360

864

0.1080

0.0144

91/380

863

0.0072 90

0.0144

0.2660

862

101

0.0600

0.0576

732

0.0144

102

747

0.0020 103

0.2200

750

0.0040 107

0.0500

0.0240

751

104

0.0144

752

0.1794 108

0.1100

754

0.0288 106

0.0132

723

0.0810

0.2880

113

722

0.4280 113/384

0.0072

585

0.0648 116

0.0100

586

0.0100 115

0.1728

584

0.0100 115/386

0.0144

583

0.0020

0.2160

114

581

0.0750 175/387

0.0432

580

0.0400 125/387

0.0432

579

0.0040 125/315

0.0648

554/1261

0.0216 125/322

0.1800

556

0.0990 128

0.0288

557

0.0864 127

0.1440

558

0.0720 3962

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4, 1930

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

(1)

(3)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(4) 561

0.1080

303

0.0360 7. मेरमातालाब ( जारी )

8. गन्दोलिया ( जारी)

570

0.0020

299

0.0432 562

0.0500

298

0.0216 569

0.0500

303/768

0.0432 568

0.1152

736

0.2016 567

0.0020

735

615

0.2800

736/910

0.0144 513

0.0504

737

0.2880 482

0.2916

746

0.0432 483

0.1800

746/784

0.2448 485

0.0216

745

0.1152 486

0.3096

745/899

0.0216

0.1710

488

749

0.0144 490

0.0072

738

0.0432

0.0144

750

0.2880 491

752

0.0216 51

0.1584

8. गन्दोलिया

751

0.0144 52

0.1440

9. अटरू

612

0.0504

0.0144

0.2016

615

0.3916 58/774

0.1296

648

0.0036 62

0.0360

649

0.0278 62/951

0.0072

647

0.0684 61

0.0216

644/1937

0.0270 61/950

0.0072

646/1937

0.0270 64

0.0576

653

0.3240 60

0.0144

598

0.0396 81

0.0216

661

0.0144 82

0.2304

665

0.1404 83

0.2160

519

0.0020 215

0.3240

520

0.0020 214/958

0.0288

517

0.0306 269

0.0360

518

0.0072 270

0.0144

521

0.1908 265/904

0.0020

516

0.3420 265

0.1440

511

0.0558 276

0.0072

679

0.2970 278

0.1080

507

0.0378 277

0.0720

681

0.0080 287

0.2160

681/1952

0.0072 305

0.2088

682

0.0756 306

0.0864

683

0.2214 307

0.0144

501

0.2538 3963 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

(4)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(1)

(1) (2)

0.0610

0.1494

502

9. अटरू (जारी)

11. खेड़लीबांसला (जारी )

0,3600

0.0036

498

0.0216

496

0.0342

0.0500 497

0.1404

0.0700 416

0.0558

0.2520 353

0.3386

0.1872

0.3690

313

0.1080 314

0.0130

0,0820 317

0.1944

56/628

0.0100 305

0.1134

0.2520 319

0.3024

0.2520

0.0072

304/1902

0.0750 302

0.0072

0.1530

0.0558

301

0.1550

280

0.0738

0.0100

0.3220

300

0.2000

281

0.0100

195

0.1800 289

0.1224

196

0.1700 288

0.0072

0.0360

197

287

0.0384

0.0720

198

0.0036

291

199

0.0504 92

0.1490

10. लक्ष्मीपुरा

200

0.0020 91

0.0600

203

0.1872

0.1670

238

0.2664

0.0020

239

0.3240 80

0.0020

236

0.0360 76

0.2160

240

0.1080

0.1440

75.

235

0.0864 67

0.0396

233

0.2720 56

0.2970

227

0.0648 48

0.0010

520

0.0360 52

0.0020

515

0.2160 51

0.0160

0.0630

518

0.3470

525

0.1750 50

0.1728

526

0.1440 14

0.0080

528

0.0630 13

0.0300

527

0.1530 12

0.0360

549

0.1224 11

0.4350

550

0.0072 2

0.0216

11. खेड़लीबांसला

604

12. बरलां

0.0330 4

0.0144

634

0.0100 3964

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 /SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[ PART 11- SEC . 3 (ii) ] (1) (2)

(3)

(4)

(1) (2)

(3)

(4) 633

0.0100

201

12. बरलां ( जारी )

0.0360

14. बलदेवपुरा ( जारी )

608

0.1080

201/417

0.0144 631

0.0936

202

0.0288 630

0.1584

217/521

0.0288 642

0.0100

218

0.0864 629

0.2016

219

0.0720 626/1078

213

0.1080

0.1440 628

0.0400

213/441

0.0650 625

0.0216

221

0.0576 626/1076

0.3744

224

0.1628 624

0.0432

225

0.0040 623

0.4100

223

0.0720 622

0.0288

228

0.0072 621

0.4100

229

0.2044 620

0.0540

229/416

0.1860

0.0180

619

333

0.0720 618

0.0648

0.0140

335/403

617

0.5580

0.0432

332

617/1003

0.0144

324/404

0.0504

323

0.0792 849

0.0070

13. छत्रपुरा

0.0300

321

0.1260

848

323/372

0.0432 847

0.0144

324

0.0504 846

0.3960

324/477

0.0720 844

0.0360

324/406

0.0504 843

0.0100

0.0432

324/405

831

0.1052

0.0140

331

832

0.4050

829

0.0594

596

0.1720

15. दड़ा

828

538

0.0100

0.3330

0.0144

823

540

0.0540 459

0.0504

541

0.0792

542

0.1440 174

0.3800

14. बलदेवपुरा

516/728

0.0072 195

0.1584

513

0.0864 196

0.0432

510

0.0360 241/476

0.0020

512

0.0030 197

0.0720

511

0.0648 191

0.0020

508

0.0030

0.0792

198

521

0.1296 190/474

0.0020

0.0200

507

197/475

0.0360

522

0.0040 199

0.0864

523

0.1152

200 3965

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

(2)

(3)

(4)

(1)

0.0400

524

15. दड़ा (जारी )

525

0.0792

462

0.0220

455

0.0864

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

448

0.1656

SCHEDULE

0.4680

445

Tehsil : Atru

State : Rajasthan

District : Baran

444

0.0360

Area in Hectare

S. No. Name of Village Survey No.

0.0792

241/654

0.0792

241/624

0.0360

Sahrod

0.1800

241

0.1440

0.0040

243

0.0360

0.0144

239

0.1512

0.1440

240

0.4000

0.0216

216

0.0360 [फा. सं. आर. - 31015/3/2008- ओ आर-11 ]

0.1368

ए. गोस्वामी , अवर सचिव

25/1576

0.0216

0.2200

New Delhi , the 22nd July, 2008

0.0432

0.0360

21/1532

0.2592

0.0144

0.3800

16/1547

0.0432

0.1500

761

761/1548

0.2050

762

0.0864

767

0.0360

0,2800

791

S.O. 1991.- Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas No. S.O. 307 , dated the 14th February , 2008 , issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 ( 50 of 1962 ) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) published in the Gazette of India dated the 16th February, 2008 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land , specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying a pipeline for transportation of petroleum products through Bina - Kota Pipeline Project from Bina terminal in the State of Madhya Pradesh to Kota in the State ofRajasthan by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited;

792

0.1728

0.0360

794

And whereas the copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 24thMay,2008;

805

0.0360

0.0144

801

802

0.3500 And whereas the competent authority has , under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 6 of the said Act, submitted report to the Central Government ;

0.2088

800

808

0.0072

0.1800

799

798

0.1008 And whereas the Central Government , after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline , has decided to acquire the right of user therein ;

0.0360

863

0.4176

903

903/1680

0.0072

903/1803

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

3966

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

(1) (2)

(3)

(2)

(4)

(1)

(4)

(3)

902

0.0792

114

3. Kachra

0.0216 1. Sabrod ( Contd.)

914

0.0360

4. Jirod

0.1440 916

0.1440

0.0144 917

0.1800

3/702

0.0216 918

0.0720

0.1440

0.1728

919

5/704

0.0144 924

0.0720

0.0360 921

0.0648

28/708

0.0072 922

0.2520

0.0072

6/705

934

0.0144

0.0720 973

0.1800

0.0720 943/1518

0.0216

28/706

0.0144 965/1541

0.0216

0.0144 965

0.2592

0.2016 967

0.2016

0.0936 964

0.0504

0.4464 963

0.1080

0.2160 980

0.1728

0.4320 981

0.0432

0.1224 983

0.0360

0.0144 984

0.3456

0.0360 985

0.1584

5. Khuri

294

0.0216 985/1692

0.0144

295

0.0020 1008

0.1584

293

0.1884

0.0072

1008/1693

0.1250

298

1008/1700

0.0144

299

0.2160 1002

0.1512

300

0.0360 1001

0.2592

317

0.3300 1000

0.1584

317/1633

0.0360 999

0.0216

318

0.0260 998

0.1800

316

0.2300 998/1696

0.0144

315

0.0020 997

0.1584

320

0.2560 996

0.0504

330

0.0820 1034

0.1440

330/1639

0.0630 995

0.1080

329

0.4060 1035

0.3240

358

0.1500 994

0.0144

358/1450

0.0144 1477

2. Dhhoti

0.0216

357

0.3240 1478

0.0072

357/1641

0.0144 1479

0.0216

355

0.0288 1480

0.0144

356

0.2450 1481

0.0252

389

0.2000 :

3967

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

(3)

(4)

(2)

(1)

(3)

(1) (2)

0.0470

1401

0.0720

388

5. Khuri (Contd.)

1397

0.1350

0.0216

392

0.2900

1398

432

0.0360

1396

0.0450

0.1630

433

0.0500

1396/1578

0.1100

434

0.0216

1395

0.0300

439

0.0216

6. Nimoda

0.0650

452

0.0864

0.2050

454

0.3600

12/312

455

0.0288

0.0220

0.1562

456

0.0020

457

0.0770

0.0100 458

0.0020

0.0720

449

0.0460

0.3150

93/300

460

0.1000

0.1944

0.0144

461

0.0360

91/381

462.

0.7676

0.0144

91/380

630

0.0144

1274

101

0.0600

0.0504

1295

0.0144

102

0.0720

1294

0.2200

103

1296

0.0144

107

0.0500 1289

0.0252

0.0144

104

0.0432

1298/1651

0.1100

108

0.0040

1298/1650

0.0132

106

1298

0.0200

0.2880

113

0.0470

1299

0.0072

113/384

0.0530

1300

116

0.0100

0.0576

1301

0.1728

115

0.0040

1285

0.0144

115/386

0.1000

1302

0.2160

114

1350

0.0700

175/387

0.0432

0.0630

1351

0.0432

125/387

0.1000

1352

0.0648

125/315

0.1080

1369

125/322

0.1800

0288

1369/1574

128

0.0288

0.1650

1368

127

0.1440

0.0530

1365

286

0.0360

0.0040

1366

0.1440

151

0.0360

1378

129

0.0288

0.1080

1379

0.1080 1382

7. Mermatalab

0.2232

0.0216

0.2950

1402

0.3200 1400

0.0790

2644 GI/08-16 3968

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 /SRAVANA 4, 1930

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

(1)

(3)

(4)

(1) (2)

(4)

(3)

0.3200

0.0504 7. Mermatalab (Contd.) 27

513

7. Mermatalab (Contd. )

0.0864

482

0.2916 29

0.2160

0.1800

483

0.0900

485

0.0216 67

0.3450

486

0.3096 65

0.2300

488

0.1710 55

0.1950

490

0.0072 54

0.0144

0.0360

491

885

0.2100

0.1584

8. Gandoliya

880

0.0144

0.1440 874

0.3560

0.0144 875

0.0020

0.2016

872

0.0300

58/774

0.1296 873

0.0260

0.0360 864

0.1080

0.0072

62/951

863

0.0072

0.0216 862

0.2660

61/950

0.0072 732

0.0576

747

0.0020

0.0144 750

0.0040

0.0216 751

0.0240

0.2304

0.2160 752

0.1794

215

0.3240 754

0.0288

214/958

0.0288 723

0.0810

269

0.0360 722

0.4280

270

0.0144 585

0.0648

265/904

0.0020 586

0.0100

265

0.1440 584

0.0100

276

0.0072 583

0.0020

278

0.1080 581

0.0750

277

0.0720 580

0.0400

287

0.2160 579

0.0040

305

0.2088 554/1261

0.0216

306

0.0864 556

0.0990

307

0.0144 557

0.0864

303

0.0360 558

0.0720

299

0.0432 561

0.1080

298

0.0216 570

0.0020

303/768

0.0432 562

0.0500

736

0.2016 569

0.0500

735

0.0020 568

0.1152

736/910

0.0144 567

0.0020

737

0.2880 615

0.2800 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

(4) (1) (2)

(3)

0.0432

746

8. Gandoliya (Contd.)

3969

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

(2)

(3)

(1)

(4)

305

0.1134 9. Atru (Contd .)

0.2448

746/784

745

0.1152

745/899

0.0216

749

0.0144

0.0432

738

750

0.2880

0.0216

752

0.0144

751

612

0.0504 9. Atru

615

0.3916

0.0036

648

649

0.0278

319

0.3024

304/1902

0.0072

302

301

0.0558

0.0738

280

300

0.3220

281

0.0100

289

0.1224

288

0.0072

287

0.0384

0.0036

291

0.1490 10. Laxmipura

647

0.0684

644/1937

0.0270

0.0270.

646/1937

653

0.3240

598

0.0396

661

0.0144

665

0.1404

519

0.0020

520

0.0020

517

0.0306

0.0072

518.

521

0.1908

516

0.3420

511

0.0558

679

0.2970

507

0.0378

681

0.0080

0.0600

0.1670

0.0020

0.2160

0.1440

0.0396

0.2970

0.0010

0.0020

0.0160

0.3470

0.1728

0.0080

0.0300

0.0360

0.4350

0.0216 11. Khedlibansla

681/1952

0.0072

682

0.0756

683

0.2214

501

0.2538

502

0.1494

498

0.0036

496

0.0342

497

0.1404

416

0.0558

353

0.3386

313

0.3690

314

0.0130

317

0.1944

0.0144

0.0610

0.3600

0.0216

0.0500

0.0700

0.2520

0.1872

0.1080

0.0820

56/628

0.0100

0.2520 3970

[PART 11- SEC . 3 ( ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

(3)

(4)

(2)

(4)

(3)

(1)

(1) (2)

622

0.0288

0.2520

12. Barlan ( Contd.)

31. Khedlibansla ( Contd. ) 66

0.4100 67

621

0.0750

620

0,0540

0.1530

619

0.0180 98

0.1550

618

0.0648

0.0100

0.5580

0.2000

617

0.0144

617/1003

0.1800

195

0.0070

849

0.1700

196

13. Chhatrapura

848

0.1260

0.0360

197

0.0144

847

198

0.0720

846

0.3960

0.0504

199

0.0360

844

200

0.0020

843

0.0100

0.1872

203

0.1052 238

0.2664.

831

0.4050

832

0.3240

239

0.1720 236

829

0.0360

828

0.3330 240

0.1080

823

0.0144 235

0.0864

459

0.0504 233

0.2720

174

0.3800 227

0.0648

14. Baldevpura

195

0.1584 520

0.0360

196

0.0132 515

0.2160

0.0020

241/476

518

0.0630

197

0.0720 525

0.1750

0.0020

191

526

0.1440

0.0630

198

0.0792 528

0.0020 527

190/474

0.1530

197/475

0.0360 549

0.1224

199

0.0864 550

0.0072

0.1152

200

604

0.0330

12. Barlan

0.0360

201

634

0.0100

201/417

0.0144 633

0.0100

202

0.0288 608

0.1080

0.0288

217/521

0.0936

631

0.0864

218

630

0.1584

219

0.0720 642

0.0100

213

0.1440 629

0.2016

213/441

0.0650

0.1080

626/1078

0.0576 628

221

0.0400

224

0.1628 625

0.0216

225

0.0040

0.3744

626/1076

223

0.0720 624

0.0432

0.0072

228

623

0.4100 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

(4) (1)

(3)

0.2044

229

14. Baldevpura ( Contd .)

229/416

0.1860

333

0.0720

0.0140

335/403

0.0432

332

324/404

0.0504

323

0.0792

0.0300

321

323/372.

0.0432

0.0504

324

324/477

0.0720

324/406

0.0504

324/405

0.0432

0.0140

331

596

0.0594 15. Dadha

0.0100

538

540

0.0540

0.0792

541

542

0.1440

516/728

0.0072

0.0864

513

510

0.0360

0.0030

512

0.0648

511

508

0.0030

0.1296

521

0.0200

507

522

0.0040

0.1152

523

0.0400

524

525

0.0792

462

0.0220

455

0.0864

448

0.1656

3971

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

नई दिल्ली , 25 जुलाई , 2008

का. आ. 1992.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधि- सूचना संख्या का.आ. 371 तारीख 21 फरवरी , 2008 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 23 फरवरी , 2008 में प्रकाशित की गई थी , द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मध्य प्रदेश राज्य में बीना संस्थापन से राजस्थान राज्य में कोटा तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए बीना- कोटा पाइपलाइन परियोजना के माध्यम से भारत पेट्रोलियम कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय कीघोषणा की थी;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 10 जून , 2008 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी;

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

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

अनुसूची जिला : बारां

राज्य : राजस्थान तहसील : छबड़ा

445

0.4680

0.0360

444

सर्वे नंबर क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में क्र. सं. ग्राम का नाम

241/654

0.0792

(4) (1) (2)

0.0792

241/624

(3)

0.2286

135

1. खोखई

0.1800

241

0.0040

243

239

0.0144

240

0.1440

216

0.0216

0.0150

185/94

0.3924

0.1620

105

0.3060 2. खेड़ली

[F.N. R- 31015 /3 /2008 O.R. - II ]

A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy .

101

0.3636

101/130

0.0936 3972

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

(1) (2)

(3)

(4)

102

0.0936 2. खेड़ली (जारी)

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

(1)

(3)

(4)

0.0360

188

खेड़ी (जारी)

0.1656

0.0828

186

0.0940

327

0.0216 4. शेखापुर

0.1260

0.2016

0,1296

0.0072

0.1692

0.0504

0.2256

0.0020

0.1440

0.1386

0.0020

0.3132

0.0900

0.0072

0.0020

0.3096 3. खेड़ी

0.1300

0.1800

0.0288

0.0540

0,1080

111

0.0720

110

0.1050

109

0,2168

102

0.0252

103

0.0800

0.0072

107

104

0.2100

105

0.0216

106

0.0432

156

0.0750

157

0.2736

158

0.2592

193

0.1800

177

0.0020

0.0120

192/285

178

0.0740

318

0.3960

319

0.0216

317

0.2100

320

0.0600

321

0.4300

346

0.3200

353

0.2800

354

0.0030

355

0.0500

356

0.0600

357

0.2550

361

0.0720

363

0.1250

362

0.1600

368

0.0500

411

0.0720

412

0.3384

410

0.2124

409

0.0300

408

0.0600

406

0.1944

405

0.1900

414

0.0330

109

5. कछावन

0.0216

-101

0.0040

105

0.0040

106

0.2880

125

0.9600

122

0.3780

141

0.3240

142

0.0020

154

0.4250

152/176

0.0612

163

0.0972

150

0.3366

140

0.0080

0.0216 6. दीलोद

191

0.1530

190

0.1120

189

0.1800

0.1600

116

0.1170 3973

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

(3)

(1) (2)

(4) (3)

(4)

(1)

0.0360

0.0576

116/368

दीलोद (जारी)

सागोड़ा (जारी)

0.3434 117

0.3190

0.0720 119

0.3840

0.1424

120

0.6460

0.1332

0.4770

121

0.0180

74/2

123

0.3190

212/74

0.2360 125

0.2470

0.1280.

0.2470

140

0.0432 137

0.4500

0.0576

108

0.6600

163

0.0288

107

164

0.0072

0.1540

101

0.0216

165

0.2360

0.1296

100

167/510

0.0396

0.0648

167/511

0.0324

172/522

0.2972

0.0108 172/520

0.2972

0.0324 172

0.2756

213/77

0.0576 98

0.0540

7. बीलखेड़ा

0.1320 95

0.0020

0.0144

109

0,0100

180

0.0720 97

0.3100

0.0594 101

0.3200

9. कड़ीखेडी

0.3096

125

0.3240

18/155

0.3240

0.1224 117

18/154

0.2232

0.1728 118

18/127

0.0020

0.1296 121

119

0.1296

0.0040

120

0.0324

0.1872

165

0.7200

0.3240

0.2340

271

8/126

270

0.2340

[फा. सं. आर-31015/10/2008 ओ आर- II ]

0.2340

280

ए. गोस्वामी , अवर सचिव

0.0900

267

New Delhi , the 25th July, 2008

0.0400

281

S.O. 1992.- Whereasby a notification of the 282

0.0140

Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and 285

0.3600

Natural Gas S.O. No. 371 , dated the 21st February , 2008 , 284

0.0972

issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum

and Minerals Pipelines ( Acquisition of Right of User in 294

0.1260

Land) Act , 1962 ( 50 of 1962) (hereinafter referred to as the 295

0.3700

saidAct) published in the Gazette of India dated the 23rd 324

0.0288

February, 2008 , the Central Government declared its

intention to acquire the right of user in the land , specified 8

0.0432

४. सागोड़ा

in the Schedule appended to that notification for the

0.0648

purpose oflaying a pipeline for transportation of petroleum 3974

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

products through Bina - Kota Pipeline Project from Bina terminal in the State of Madhya Pradesh to Kota in the State ofRajasthan by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited;

And whereas the copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 10th June ,2008;

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

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

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

SCHEDULE

Tehsil: Chhabra District: Baran State : Rajasthan S. No. Name ofVillage Survey No. Area in Hectare (1) (2)

(3)

(4)

135

0.2286 1. Khokhai

0.0150

185/94

0.3924

0.1620 2. Khedli

105

0.3060

101

0.3636

101/130

0.0936

102

0.0936

0.1656

0.0828

0.1260

0.2016

0.1296

0.0072

0.1692

0.0504

0.2256

0.0020

[PART 11- SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

(3)

(4) (1) (2)

0.1440 Khedli (Contd.)

0.1386

0.0020

0.3132

0.0900

0.0072

0.0020

0.3096 3. Khedi

0.1300

0.1800

0.0288

0.0540

0.1080

111

0.0720

0.1050

110

109

0.2168

0.0252

102

103

0.0800

107

0.0072

104

0.2100

105

0.0216

106

0.0432

156

0.0750

0.2736

157

158

0.2592

193

0.1800

177

0.0020

0.0120

192/285

178

0.0740

191

0.1530

0.1120

190

189

0.1800

0.0360

188

186

0.0940

327

0.0216 4. Shekhapur

318

0.3960

319

0.0216

317

0.2100

320

0.0600

321

0.4500

346

0.3200

353

0.2800

354

0.0030 3975

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

(2)

(3 )

(4)

(1)

(3)

( 1) (2)

0.1296

167/510

0.0500

6. Dilod (Contd.)

4. Shekhapur (Contd.) 355

167/511

0.0648

0.0600

356

0.2972

172/522

0.2550

357

0.2972

172/520

0.0720

361

0.2756

172

0.1250

363

0.0540

7. Bilkheda

0.1600

362

0.0020

0.0500

368

0.0100

0.0720

411

0.3100 412

0.3384

0,3200

101

0.2124

410

125

0.3240

0.0300

409

117

0.3240 408

0,0600

0.2232

118

406

0.1944

121

0.0020

0.1900

405

0.1296

119

0.0330

414

0.0324

120

109

0.0216

5. Kachhavan

0.7200

165

0.0040

101

0.2340.

271

0.0040

105

270

0.2340

0.2880

106

0.2340

280

0.9600

125

0.0900

267

0.3780

122

281

0.0400

0.3240

141

282

0.0140

0.0020

142

0.3600

285

0.4250

154

284

0.0972

0.0612

152/176

294

0.1260

0.0972

163

295

0.3700

0.3366

150

324

0.0288

0.0080

140

0.0432

0.0216

8. Sagoda

6. Dilod

15-

0:0648

0.1600

0,0360

0.1170

116

0.3434

66.

0.0576

116/368

0.0720 117

0.3190

0.1424

0.3840

119

0.1332

0.6460

120

74/2

0.0180

0.4770

121

212/74

0.2360 123

0.3190

0.1280

125

0.2470

0.0432

0.2470

140

0.0576

108

0.4500

137

107

0.0288

0.6600

163

101

0.1540

0.0072

164

100

0.2360 165

0.0216

2644108-17 3976

[PART II -SEC . 3 (ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

(3)

(4)

(1) (2)

0.0396

8. Sagoda ( Contd. )

0.0324

और क्योंकि पाइपलाइन की कम लंबाई व यनम क्षेत्र की स्थिति के कारण यह उपयुक्त पाया गया है कि श्री गंगाचलम को , आन्ध्र प्रदेश के सभी जिलों के सक्षम अधिकारी के साथ-साथ उपर्युक्त पाइपलाइन के सक्षम अधिकारी का चार्ज भी दिया जाये;

0.0108

0.0324

213/77

0.0576

0.1320

109

0.0144

180

0.0720

0.0594

9. Kadikhedi

अतः अब , भारत सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 2 के खण्ड ( क ) के अनुसरण में और भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 3962 दिनांक 25-10-2005 में आंशिक संशोधन करते हुए , संलग्न सारिणी के स्तम्भ ( 1 ) में वर्णित श्री के. गंगाचलम को स्तम्भ ( 2 ) में वर्णित क्षेत्र के लिए भी सक्षम अधिकारी के कृत्यों का पालन करने के लिये नियुक्त करती है।

0.3096

सारणी

0.1224

18/155

अधिकारिता का क्षेत्र

व्यक्तिका नाम और पता

18/154

0.1728

18/127

0.1296

(2)

(1)

0.0040

आन्ध्र प्रदेश के सभी जिले 7

0.1872

और केन्द्र शासित प्रदेश 8

0.3240

पुडुचेरी का यनम क्षेत्र 8/126

[F. N. R- 31015/10/2008 OR- II]

A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy .

श्री के. गंगाचलम , डिप्टी कलेक्टर , (सेवानिवृत्त ) आन्ध्र प्रदेश सरकार , द्वारा मैसर्स रिलायन्स इन्डस्ट्रीज लिमिटेड , रिलायन्स कारपोरेट पार्क , बिल्डिंगनं. 5 , घन्सोली , थाने-बेलापुर रोड़ , नवी मुम्बई - 400701

नई दिल्ली , 24 जुलाई , 2008

[फा. सं. एल.-14014/ 11 / 2008 जी.पी. ]

के. के. शर्मा , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 24th July , 2008

का.आ. 1993.-क्योंकि भारत सरकार ने , पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 2 के खण्ड ( क ) के अनुसरण में भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 3962 दिनांक 25-10-2005 , जो भारत के राजपत्र में 29-10-2005 को प्रकाशित हुई थी, के द्वारा श्री के. गंगाचलम सहित 5 ( पाँच ) व्यक्तियों को आन्ध्र प्रदेश राज्य के सभी जिलों में मैसर्स रिलायन्स गैस ट्रांसपोर्टेशन इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर लिमिटेड द्वारा उसकी संवर्धक कंपनी , अर्थात् मैसर्स रिलायंस इंडस्ट्रीज लिमिटेड , के खोज ब्लॉकों में उत्पादित प्राकृतिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए उक्त अधिनियम के अधीन सक्षम अधिकारियों के कृत्यों का पालन करने के लिए नियुक्त किया था;

S.O. 1993. Whereas in pursuance of clause (a ) of Section 2 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipeline (Acquisition of Right of User in Land ) Act, 1962 ( 50 of 1962) (hereinafter called the said Act), Government of India , vide Notification in the Ministry ofPetroleum and Natural GasS.O. No. 3962 dated 25th October , 2005 , published in Gazette of India on 29-10-2005 , appointed 05 ( five) persons : including Shri K. Gangachalam , to perform the functions of CompetentAuthority for all the districts of Andhra Pradesh under the said Act for laying pipelines by M/ s . Reliance Gas Transportation Infrastructure Limited ( RGTIL ) for transportation of natural gas produced in the exploration blocks of its promoter Company M/ s . Reliance Industries Limited;

और , क्योंकि मैसर्स रिलायन्स इन्डस्ट्रीज लिमिटेड द्वारा देश के विभित्र हिस्सों में प्राकृतिक गैस के प्रदाय हेतु केन्द्र शासित प्रदेश पुडुचेरी के यनम क्षेत्र में पाइपलाइन ( जिसे तत्पश्चात् उपर्युक्त पाइपलाइन कहा गया है ) द्वारा केजीडी 6 ( केजी-डीडब्ल्यूएन -98 /3 ) में उत्पादित प्राकृतिक गैस का परिवहने आन्ध्र प्रदेश के पूर्वी गोदावरी जिले के तलारेवु मंडल के अन्तर्गत गडीमोगा ग्राम तक किया जाएगा ;

और, क्योंकि उपर्युक्त पाइपलाइन की लम्बाई पुडुचेरी के यनम क्षेत्र में मात्र 2.7 कि.मी. है ;

And, whereas , M/ s . Reliance Industries Limited plans to lay pipeline (herein after called the said pipeline ) in Yanam region of Union Territory of Puducherry for transporting natural gas produced in the exploration block KGD 6 ( KG- DWN - 98/3 ) to the onshore terminal near Gadimoga village in Tallarevu Mandal under East Godavari District of Andhra Pradesh for distribution to consumers in various parts of the country;

और, क्योंकि केन्द्र शासित प्रदेश पुडुचेरी का यनम क्षेत्र सभी दिशाओं में आन्ध्र प्रदेश राज्य से घिरा हुआ है ;

And, whereas , the length ofthe said pipeline in Yanam region of Union Territory of Puducherry is only 27 kms :

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

And, whereas , the Yanam region of Union Territory ofPuducherry is enclosed by the State of Andhra Pradesh from all directions ;

And, whereas , in view of the short length of the said pipeline, and the location of the Yanam region , it wouldbe expedient to give additional charge of Competent Authority forthe said pipeline to Shri K. Gangachalam , in addition to hischarge of Competent Authority for all the districts of Andhra Pradesh .

3977

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है , उस तारीख से जिसको इस अधिसूचना से युक्त भारत के राजपत्र की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती हैं , इक्कीस दिन के भीतर भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने के लिये उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के सम्बन्ध में श्रीमति भगवंती जेठवानी , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , बीना-कोटा पाइपलाइन परियोजना , भारत पेट्रोलियम कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड , बी-105 इन्द्रा बिहार तलवण्डी, कोटा-324005 (राजस्थान ) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा।

अनुसूची

राज्य : मध्य प्रदेश

जिला: गुना

तहसील : गुना

सर्वे नंबर क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में क्र. सं. ग्राम का नाम

(4) (1) (2)

Now, therefore, in pursuance of clause (a) of Section 2 ofthe said Act and in partial modification of the notification inthe Ministry ofPetroleum and Natural Gas S.O. No. 3962 dated 25th October , 2005 , Government of India hereby authorises Shri K. Gangachalam mentioned in column ( 1 ) of the Table annexed to perform the functions of the Competent Authority under the said Act for laying pipelines in the area mentioned in column (2) of the Schedule.

TABLE

Area of Jurisdiction Narne and Address of the person

All the districts of Andhra Pradesh and Yanam region ofUnion Territory of

Puducherry

Shri K. Gangachalam , Deputy Collector(Retd) , Government of Andhra Pradesh , C/o M /s Reliance Industries Ltd. ,

Reliance Corporate Park,

(3)

1. माहर

0.1690

0.1515

0,1500

404

0.1900

402

0.0750

712

0.1625

703

0.5500

0.2905

701

697

0.0065

696

0.0040

0.2930

847

0.2731

970

0.0748

971

0.4150 2. कींदर

Bldg. No.5 , Ghansoli , Thane-Belapur Road, Navi Mumbai - 400701

[F. No. L- 14014/11 /08 -GP]

K. K. SHARMA , Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली 25 जुलाई , 2008

107

0.5485

105

0.4571

104

182

0.0780

0.3380

0.0585

198

0.6200

211

0.0390

0.2870 3 सरखड़ी

253

4. टोरिया

का. आ. 1994.-केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि मध्यप्रदेश राज्य में बीना संस्थापन से राजस्थान राज्य में कोटा तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए भारत पेट्रोलियम कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

0.0520

247

0.2000

232

0.2270

0.2040 5. मावन

277

129

0.3065 6. सिंगबासा

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

0.7100

7. पिपरोदा खुर्द

0.2145

(0.0540 8. सकतपुर

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

0.0300 9. चकसकतपुर

0.2340

0.1528

0.0200 3978

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4, 1930

(1) (2)

(3)

(4)

118

0.5045 10. गनेशपुरा

117

0.5103 i

0.1105

0.0650 11 , महाराजपुरा

526

0.2500 12. पुरापोसर

500

1.2123

111

0.7010.

527

0.0150

0.1100

539

0.2665

178

114

0.0325

115

0.0260

0.6250

121

13. विनख्याई

0.1500

0.5600

115

14. विशोनिया

0.4225

0.1040

0.5690

0.1560

0.4325

0.0125

0.3793

105

103

0.1560

0.0245

0.1000

0.2350

132

15. किशमगढ़

0.4100

0.3055

0.1300

2,0300 3. रिहाना

0.3600

0.7175

0.1910

0.2860

0.2705

0.0845

0.4375 17. धनोरिया

0.7720

0.2600

0.0350

0.2200

0.0800

0.3200

0.1040

0.0715

[PART II -SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

(3)

(4) (1) (2)

147

0.8390 18. सावरामोदी

0.1430

126

0.7495

141

19. पोरूखेड़ी

130

0.3510

0.0325

100

0.7080

131

132

1.1500

0.1495

307

20. सुहाया

294

0.1820

269

0.2130

258

0.2800

298

0.0065

0.0845

308

0.0390 21. बृजाबमोरी

22. पथरिया

0.1320

0.1755

0.3120

182

23. भूराखेड़ी

0.3770

179

0.2535

120

0.1465

0.0060

0.3835

108

0.1040

130

0.0750

118

24. चुरेला

123

0.1040

0.1200

0.0550

122

0.0325

0.0715

0.4000 25. सेमराखेड़ा

0.1320

0.0260

0.0390

0.2600

123

0.1495 26. रामनगर

124

0.1430

103

0.4900

0.3150

0.3200

125

0.0325

127

0.1430

135

0.0650

120

0.0845

0.2145

0.0650

0.0050 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

3979

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/श्रावण 4 , 1930

(1)

(4)

(3)

(2)

27. टकोदिया

0.3580

0.7200 .

0.0910

175

0.5330 28. किशनपुरा

0.0475 29. भूमराखेड़ी

0.5470 चकपारसीखेड़ा

30.

182

0.6025 31. अजरोड़ा

0.4225

183

बनियानी

174

32.

0.0020

0.8140 33. पाखर

0.8890

0.1680

0.0500

0.3255 34. आनापुरा

0.9165

0.0020

35. वींदाराड़ा

0.5075

0.0325

0.2620 36. सेमरा

0.2520 37. पाठी

0.3600

0.0390 38. हमीरपुर

[फा. सं. आर. - 31015 / 11/2008 ओ आर- II ]

ए. गोस्वामी , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 25th July , 2008 S.O. 1994.-Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of petroleum products Pipeline from Bina terminal in the State of Madhya Pradesh to Kota in the State of Rajasthan should be laid by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited ;

And whereas it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying such pipeline it is necessary to acquire the right of user in land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid and which is described in the Schedule annexed hereto ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962 ) , the Central Government hereby declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;

Any person , interested in the land described in the said Schedule may within twenty one days from the date on which copies of the Gazette of India containing this notification are made available to the public , object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land to Smt . Bhagwanti Jethwani, Competent Authority, Bina- Kota Pipeline Project , Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, B - 105 Indra Vihar Talwandi , Kota - 324005 ( Rajasthan ) .

SCHEDULE

District : Guna

Tehsil : Guna

State: Madhya Pradesh

Area in Hectare

Survey No.

S. No. Name ofVillage

0.1690 1. Mahar

0.1515

0.1500

404

0.1900

0.0750

402

0.1625

712

0.5500

703

0.2905

701

0.0065

697

696

0.0040

847

0.2930

970

0.2731

971

0.0748

107

0.4150 2. Keendar

0.5485

105

104

0.4571

182

0.0780

0.3380

0.0585

0.6200

198

211

0.0390

0.2870 3. Sarkhadi

0.0520

253

4. Toriya

0.2000

247

232

0.2270

277

0.2040 5. Mavan

129

0.3065 6. Singbasa

0.7100 7. Piproda Khurd

0.2145

0.0540 8. Sakatpur

0.0300 9. Chaksakatpur

0.2340

0.1528

0.0200

0.5045

118

10. Ganeshpura

117

0.5103

0.1105

0.0650

11. Maharajpura

526

0.2500 12. Puraposar

500

1.2123

0.7010 .

111 3980

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4, 1930

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

(1)

(4) (1) (2)

(3)

(4)

527

0.3770

0.0150

179

23. Bhoorakhedi

12. Puraposar

539

0.1100

0.2535

178

0.2665

0.1465

120

114

0.0325

0.0060 115

0.0260

0.3835

108

121

0.6250

13. Vinkhyai

130

0.1040 83

0.1500.

0.0750

24. Churela

118

0.5600

115

0.1040

123

0.4225

14. Vishonia

0.1200

0.1040

0.0550 21

0.5690

122

0.0325

0.1560

0.0715

0.4325

25. Semrakheda

0.4000 39

0.0125

0.1320

105

0.3793

0.0260 103

0.1560

0.0390 65

0.0245

0.2600 36

0.1000

0.1495

123

26. Ramnagar

132

0.2350

15. Kishangarh

124

0.1430 65

0.4100

103

0.4900

0.3055

0.3150 3

0.1300

0.3200

2.0300

16. RIHANA

0.0325

125

0.3600

127

0.1430

0.7175

135

0.0650 24

0.1910

0.0845

120

0.2860

0.2145

0.2705

0.0650

0.0845

0.0050 45

0.4375

17. Dhanoriya

0.7720

0.3580 47

27. Takodiya

0.2600

0.7200 .

0.0350

0.0910 34

0.2200

175

0.5330

28. Kishanpura

0.0800

0.0475

29. Bhumrakhedi

0.3200

0.5470

30. Chakparsikheda

0.1040

0.6025

182

31. Ajroda

0.0715

0.4225

183

18. Sawramodi

147

0.8390

174

0.0020

32. Baniyani

126

0.1430

0.8140

33. Pakhar

19. Porukhedi

141

0.7495

0.8890 130

0.3510

0.1680 100

0.0325

0.0500

0.7080

131

0.3255

34. Aanapura

132

1.1500

0.9165 307

0.1495

20. Suhaya

35. Vindarada

0.0020

294

0.1820

0.5075 269

0.2130

0.0325 258

0.2800

36. Semra

0.2620 298

0.0065

37. Pathi

0.2520 308

0.0845

0.3600 15

0.0390

21. Brijabarmori

0.0390 65

0.1320

38. Hamirpur

22. Pathariya

0.1755

23. Bhoorakhedi

182

0.3120

[ F. No. R- 31015/ 11 /2008 OR - 111 A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy .

3981

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

APPEARANCE:

श्रम एवं रोजगार मंत्रालय

None

For the Petitioner

नई दिल्ली , 27 जून , 2008

For the Management

M/sT.S. Gopalan& Co., Advocates

AWARD

TheCentralGovernment, Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L- 12012/81/2007 ( IR-B- II ) dated 18-01-2008 referred the following Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal foradjudication.

The schedule mentioned in that order is :

का.आ. 1995.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय चैन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 5/2008 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-6-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[फा. सं. एल -12012/81 /2007 - आईआर ( बी- II ) ]

राजिन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी

"Whether the action of the Management of Union Bank of India in terminating the services of Sri G. Selvaraj , Personal Car Driver w.e.f. 18.12.2005 is legal and justified? Ifnot, to what relief is the concerned, workman is entitled?" MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT

New Delhi , the 27th June , 2008

2. After the receipt of the Industrial Dispute , this Tribunal has numbered it as ID 5/2008 and issued notices to both sides . Even though the Respondent entered appearance through their Advocate , subsequently the petitioner has not appeared before this Tribunal even after two notices and he has refused the notice sent by this Tribunal. Subsequently , he was called absent and set ex- parte after the service has been declared as sufficient.

S.O. 1995. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award Ref. (No. 5/2008) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum Labour Court , Chennai as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of The Dy . General Manager, and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 27-06-2008 .

[F. No. I - 12012/81 /2007 - IR(B - II ) ] RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT CHENNAI

Tuesday, the 25th March , 2008

Present: K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 5/2008

(In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of sub - section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , between the Management of Union Bank of India and their Workman )

BETWEEN I Party/ Petitioner

Sri G. Selvaraj

Vs.

11 Party/Management

The Dy . General Manager :

Union Bank of India ,

Nodai Regional Office ,

3. In the affidavit filed by the Chief Manager of the Respondent Bank , it is stated that the Respondent Bank is a nationalized bank and no one can enter the services of the Bank otherwise than in accordance with the laid down procedure and the Respondent Bank fills up a vacancy in the lower grade employees only from the candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchange . The managerial cadre are entitled to the perquisite of engaging the personal driver for driving the vehicle and get the salary paid to the driver reimbursed by the Bank and invariably when any Manager who is entitled to this perquisite , engages a personal driver and when he is shifted out of the place , the next incumbent preferred to retain personal driver of the previous person as his driver . This would not create a relationship as of master and servant between the Bank and personal driver so engaged by the Managerial personnel. It would appear that the petitioner was engaged as personal driver by M/ s V.J. Chandrasekhan , C.L. Thomas , N. Venkatraman and one Chandrasekhar . On enquiry , it reveals that the Manager viz . P. L. Alagappan who was living in Vadapalani which is 10 kms . away from petitioner's residence and for this reason Mr. Alagappan stopped engaging the petitioner and started engaging some other person near to his residence . The petitioner was not in the employment of the Bank, he was admittedly the personal driverofthe Chief Manager . The documents would not in any manner create a relationship of master and servant between the bank and petitioner . Therefore , there is no question of termination of employment by the Bank . Hence , the Respondent Bank prays that the claim may be dismissed with cost.

139, Broadway, Chennai 3982

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4, 1930

Point for determination is :

"To what relief the petitioner is entitled"?

inthe Industrial Dispute between the management of Punjab National Bank and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 2-6-2008 .

[F. No. L- 12012/3/ 1998 - IR(B - II ) ]

RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT, -1 , CHANDIGARH CASE NO I. D. NO. 193/98 4. As I have already pointed out the petitioner has not appeared before this Tribunal to substantiate his claim that he is entitled for reinstatement and consequent relief and since the petitioner has not established that he is entitled for reinstatement, he is not entitled to any relief in thisID. Further, no documents or satisfactory evidence have been produced by the petitioner that he is entitled to get the relief as such I find the petitioner is not entitled to anyrelief.

6. Thus , the reference is answered accordingly.

Shri Harichand Gautam , S/o Shri Jai Bhagwan , House No. 375/12 , Dhobi Mohalla , Thanesar, Kurukshetra.

Applicant

Versus

(Dictated to the PA, transcribed and typed by him , corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 25th March, 2008 .

K. JAYARAMAN , Presiding Officer Punjab National Bank , The Regional Manager , Regional Office, Kurukshetra .

Witnesses Examined : -

Respondent

None

For the I Party/Petitioner

APPEARANCES :

None

For the II Party/Management

For the workman

: Shri Sandeep Bhardwaj Documents Marked :----

: Shri Mam Chand

For the management

From the Petitioner's side

AWARD

Ex. No.

Date

Description

Passed on 17-6-08

Nil

From the Management side :

Ex. No.

Date

Description

Nil

Government of India vide notification No.L - 12012/ 3 / 98 /IR(B - II ) dated 8 /9-10-1998 referred this industrial dispute on account of failure of conciliation proceedings before the Conciliation Officer . The industrial dispute which was referred for judicial adjudication is as follows .

नई दिल्ली, 27 जून , 2008

"Whether the action of the management of Punjab National Bank in dismissing Shri Harichand Gautam , S/ o Shri Jai Bhagwan , Cash Peon vide order 19-1-93 is just and legal? If not , what relief is the workman entitled to? " का.आं. 1996. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार पंजाब नेशनल बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 1 चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 193/1998 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-6-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[ फा. सं. एल-12012/3/1998- आईआर( बी- II ) ]

राजिन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 27th June , 2008

Opportunity was given to the workman to file the claim petition . Workman in his claim petition dated 8-6-99 stated that he was appointed on the regular basis with the respondent -management w.e.f. 11-8-76 as Peon . He was dismissed from the service by the respondent management on 19-1-93 without giving any termination order, without notice and without any inquiry . His dismissal from the service is against the law and illegal . A false FIR No.23 dated 23-12-91 in PS City Thanesar was registeredagainst him and consequently , a case No. 328-1/2 of 92 was registered under Section 34 of the Police Act in the Court ofJudicial Magistrate in which he was acquitted on 8-4-96 . Earlier , a false case was also registered at the instance of Manager of the Bank against the workman which was registered as case No. 84/2 of 1992 which was decided on 28-11-92 in which warning was given to the workman by the Court due to pressure on the claimant by the bank to confess the guilt, with a view to remove the suspension of S.O. 1996.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 193/ 1998) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribuna- Cuml/ Labour Court No. 1 Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure 3983

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

theworkman and it is the case of no evidence . The inquiry report and the punishment given, being against the principle ofnatural justice are void and illegal and cannot stand.

claimant and to join the claimant on duty. The dismissal of the workman is against the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act. He has completed the service of20 years in the bank and was dismissed for no fault. On the above averments , the workman prayed for setting aside the dismissal order dated 19-1-93 and for an order of reinstatement ofthe petitioner with consequential benefits.

Learned counsel for the management has argued thatconsidering the nature of misconduct of the workman , he is rightly dismissed from the service . On perusing the materials on record , I am ofthe view that the main question for determination is ; whether a proper enquiry was conducted against the workman ? The role of Industrial Tribunal and the Labour Courts is limited . The Tribunal and the Labour Court has the jurisdiction to look whether the enquiry was conducted in a fair , reasonable and proper manner and there was no violation of the principle of natural justice? Ifproper hearing without violating the principle of natural justice is given to the workman by an Enquiry Officer duly appointed and a fair and reasonable procedure in conducting the enquiry has been followed, the Tribunal has nothing to say on the enquiry report . In this case , it is to be seen by the Tribunal , whether a reasonable , fair , equitable and proper procedure was adopted by the Enquiry Officer and a reasonable opportunity of being heard was givento the workman ?

The claim petition was opposed by the management by filing written statement. Apart from the categorical parawise refusal of the facts which find place in the claim petition of the workman , Management also narrated that Shri Gautam, the workman had misbebaved with Branch Manager of Branch Office Thanesar (Kurukshetra) on 15-7-91 and 16-7-91 after consuming liquor . Shri Gautam was accodingly placed under suspension on 22-7-1991 and an FIR in respect of the incident was also registered by the Police on 16-7-91 . Subsequently, on 23-12-91 , while Shri Gautam was under suspension , he entered the bank under the intoxication of liquor and again committed acts of insubordination for which he was served with the charge sheet dated 30-12-91 , by the competent authority. Shri Gautam was required to submit reply to the charge sheet within 7 days . He , however , did not submit any reply to the charge sheet and accordingly, the disciplinary authority decided to hold departmental enquiry into the charge sheet dated 30-12-91 vide order dated 10-2-92 . The inquiry was conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Bipatite Settlement which govern the service of the workman staff in the banking industry . Inquiry Officer , after affording the full opportunity of being heard to both of the parties , submitted his report dated 2-12-92 to the disciplinary authority holding the allegations made in the charge sheet . dated 30-12-91 as proved. The disciplinary authority, vide show cause notice dated 4-1-93 as proposed punishment ofdismissal upon Shri Gautam and fixed 18-1-93 for personal hearing . Shri Gautam appeared in the personal hearing before the disciplinary authority on 18-1-93 and again admitted his guilt and requested for leniant view in the matter . The disciplinary authority after considering the entire materials on record and the submissions made during the course ofpersonal hearing passed an order of dismissal on 19-01-93 . Shri Gautam preferred an appeal and the appellate authority rejected the appeal on 30-10-93 .

Ihave gone through the enquiry report and materials on record . Admittedly , on 28-11-92 , a Criminal Court of competent jurisdiction has convicted the workman under Section 34 ofPolice Act . The workman is convicted for his iillegal act of causing nuisance under the intoxication of wine on the basis of confessional statement of the workman. There is verdict of conviction which proved the misconduct ofthe workman at his working place. The enquiry which was held by the Enquiry Officer was not related to the incident in which he was convicted but it was for the act of misconduct committed by him on 23-12-91 at about 1.00 p.m. for misbehaving and abusing by using the filthy language to the Manager of Punjab National Bank under intoxication of wine . He was chargesheeted . Copy of the chargesheet was provided to him . As per proceedings of enquiry, the workman demanded the Hindi version of the chargesheet and the same was provided by the Enquiry Officer. He was given full opportunity for cross -examining the witness of the management and opportunity to defend himself. On perusal of the enquiry report and other materials on record including the proceedings of enquiry, it is clear that the representative of the workman cross - examined all the witnesses of the management. After enquiry report, again a notice was given to the workman with proposed punishment and along with the notice copies of enquiry report and other relevant documents was also supplied. The workman replied the notice and after affording opportunity oforal hearing the appropriate authority found him guilty and passed an order of dismissal of the workman from the service . The workman preferred an appeal which was dismissed later on .

Affidavits ofboth of the parties are on record. Entire proceedings of enquiry inculding the inquiry report , dismissal order and the order of appellate authority is also on record. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and persued the entire material on record . During the course of argurnent , the workman Shri Gautam, who was present in the court, stated that his physical and mental condition will not permit him tojoin the job , hence, hisjob be provided to his son . Learned counsel for the workman stated that considering the physical and mental condition of the workman, sympathetic view maybe taken and at least some compensation be provided to the workman for his proper survival . Learned counsel for the workman also argued that no notice before conducting the enquiry was given to

The enquiry was conducted as per the provisions of Bipertite Settlement Enquiry Officer was appointed as per the provisions of law and in the opinion of the Tribunal , 2644G1 /08-18 3984

[PART I SEC. 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 /SRAVANA 4 , 1930

Thus , considering all the facts and circumstances of the case on both conduction of enquiry and the punishment awarded , I am of the view that a fair, reasonable and proper opportuniy was afforded to the workman and the punishment given to the workman is in - proportionate to the committed misconduct . Accordingly, this reference is anwered in positive that the action of the management of Punjab National Bank in dismissing Shri Harichand Gautam S/o Shri Jai Bhagwan, Cash Peon vide order dated 19-01-93 is just and legal . Central Government be informed accordingly. File be consigned .

G. K. SHARMA , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 27 जून , 2008 औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 Enquiry Officer adopted a fair and reasonable procedure while conducting the enquiry. Full opportunity of being heard was given and accordingly , there was no violation ofprinciple ofnatural justice as well . Thus , apart from the proof of misbehaviour with the Manager of the bank by a Class IV Employee ( the workman) , it is also proved that workman was convicted by the competent Criminal Court twice for creating nuisance under intoxication . On 06-09-95 , the Criminal Court convicted the workman and awarded the punishment of warning , and again on 28-11-92, the workman was also convicted by Court of commpetent jurisdiction on his confessional statement and was also awarded the punishment for warning . The misconduct of the workman is also proved in the enquiry conducted by the Enquiry Officer for the incident of 23-12-91 , when Shri Gautam was under suspensnion for his act of misbehaviour committed on 15-07-91 and 16-07-91. Thus , on the basis of above , 1 am of the view that a fair, proper and reasonable enquiry was conducted by theEnquiry Officer and there was no violation of principle of natural justice and no interference in the enquiry report and the findings is called for.

का.आ. 1997, का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सिण्डीकेंट बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , चैन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 43/2005) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-6-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[ फा. सं. एल-12012/203/2004- आईआर ( बी- II ) ] राजिन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 27th June , 2008

Now the Tribunal has to see whether the punishment awarded to the workman is in- proportionate to the misconduct committed by him . Discipline in any organization is its backbone . If a Class IV employee , in the presence of other Class III and senior employees and the public present in the bank abuses in filthy language to the Manager , the prestige of the Organization (bank) is bound to reduce in the eyes of public . Using the abusing language under the intoxication of wine to the Manager of the bank will be considered that the workman was abusing to the organization and this is the act which should be considered as the misconduct of highest degree .

S.O. 1997. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act ; 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 43/2005) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum - Labour Court , Chennai as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Syndicate Bank , and their workman , received by the Central Government on 27-6-2008 .

[ F. No. L- 12012/203 /2004 - IR( B - II ) ] RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer Moreover , the trust and confidence of an employee in the eyes oforganization is gone . If any workman or employee loses the trust and confidence of the organization , the workman or employee is a big zero . Thus, to maintain the dignity, discipline and work culture of this organization the punishment of dismissal for the misconduct commited by the workman seems to be the proportionate punishment.

ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT , CHENNAI Tuesday , the 1st May , 2008

Present : K. JAYARAMAN , PresidingOfficer INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 43/2005

[In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) ofsub - section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , between the Management of Syndicate Bank and their Workman ] Learned.counsel for the workman , workman himself andhis son during the course of argument have requested for having leniant attitude considering the physical and mental condition of the workman . If the workman is mentally disturbed, the management is not responsible for that and thisTribunal shall not go for the causes of his mental disturbance with this exception that he may be himself responsible for his condition . The Tribunal should not be obliged for having sympathetic view just on the mental and physical condition of the workman but has to confine itself for the misconduct committed by the workman for the incident he was charged .The workman himself suggested that hisjob be provided to his son as hisjob is ofthe hereditary character .

3985 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

BETWEEN

Sri G. Sundar :

IParty/Petitioner

Vs.

The Asstt . General Manager ,

Syndicate Bank

Regional Office

No. 69 , Armenian Street Chennai-600001 :

II Party/Management

APPEARANCE :

For the Petitioner

Sri J. Narayana Murthy

: M/ sT.S. Gopalan & Co.

For the Management

AWARD

TheCentral Government , Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L - 12012/203 /2004 - IR( B - II) dated 21-04-2005 referred the following Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal foradjudication .

The schedule mentioned in that order is:

"Whether the action of the Management of Syndicate Bank in imposing the petitioner of dismissal from service ofSri G. Sundar , Clerk is legal and justified? Ifnot, towhat relief is the workman is entitled to ? "

2. After the receipt of the Industrial Dispute, this Tribunal has numbered it as ID 43/2005 and issued notices to both sides . Both sides entered appearance through their advocates and filed their Claim and Counter Statement respectively.

3. The allegations in the Claim Statement are briefly asfollows:

running a stationary mart which is totally alien to the concerned misappropriation and the same is also not true. The issuance of the cheque book and custody of cheque leaves are under the exclusive control of the Manager and the Joint Custodian , therefore , the impugned termination order is prima facie illegal and there is an error apparent on the face of the record . The second charge memo can never be construed as second show- cause notice but only as a fresh charge memo , under such circumstances , the impugned termination order is prima facie illegal . The impugned show - cause notice for the first time is created as ifthe petitioner was alone responsible for the issuance of the cheque book and for the loss of two cheque leaves . It isestablished even in the enquiry that the petitioner is not responsible for the misappropriation of the funds and misuse of cheques , while so , the findings given by the Enquiry Officer is without any legal evidence and perverse . The petitioner had been falsely implicated , victimized and the innocent petitioner was imposed the punishment as a scapegoat . The alleged cheque leaves were admittedly issued by Sri V. Marimuthu , Custodian of Nagapattinam branch of the Respondent Bank and delivered by Sri T. Kumaran , the Temporary Part -Time Sweeper to Sri R. Vincent , Accountant of Shrine Basilica stands contributed for the chances of pilferage of the cheque leaves which resulted in the commission of fraud or misconduct and the petitioner is in no way responsible for these actions . Thus , in the issue of cheque books , it is sheer negligence on the part of dealing Officers who handled the alleged specific transactions in violation of the procedure and guidelines of the bank . It is false to allege that the petitioner has recommended for the opening ofaccount by Sri Vinayakamurthy. The petitioner is in no way connected with it and he joined in the said branch during December , 2001 while Sri Vinayakamurthy opened a SB A/ c during 1996. For the loss of cheques also , it is only the two Managers viz . Sri Marimuthu and Sri Krishnamurthy are jointly and severally liable. In the deposition of enquiry , the principles of natural justice and equitywere not followed . Equal opportunity was not given tothe petitioner in the examination of the defense witnesses with regard to the other allegation that the petitioner had Rs. 18,000/- in his SB A/ c for which the petitioner has given an explanation which is an acceptable one . The findings of the Enquiry Officer with regard to this is perverse and without any substance . The allegation that the petitioner is pursuing trade and business outside the scope of employment without the bank's permission has not been established in the enquiry. Mere an credit entry of Rs. 18,000/- in his account cannot give scope for presuming or assuming that the petitioner is indulging in trade . Hence , for all these reasons , the petitioner prays this Tribunal to set aside the order of dismissal and direct the Respondent to reinstate the petitioner him in service with continuity of

service, backwages and all other attendant benefits .

The petitioner had joined in the services of the Respondent Bank viz . Syndicate Bank as early as 07-04-1983 as Attender and he , was promoted to the post of Clerk subsequently. The only duty of the petitioner in theRespondent Bank is to verify the account of the drawer and in the instant case Shrine Velankanni Account . The further work of sanctioning the withdrawal , verifying the signature, keeping the concerned cheque in safe custody are all attached with the custodian viz . the Manager and the Joint Custodian viz . another Manager . In the above said process , the petitioner is in no way connected with the said items of work . While so , a charge of misappropriation has been framed against the petitioner and the Respondent Bank after enquiry has imposed the punishment ofdismissal from service which is illegal and unjustified and arbitrary . The findings ofthe Enquiry Officer would clearly disclose that it was Sri V. Marimuthu , the Manager of the Bank who had colluded and encashed the cheques in issue and the petitioner is not in any way been responsible for either encashment or for the loss of the cheques in issue . The allegation that the petitioner was 3986

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 /SRAVANA 4 , 1930

09-04-2001 , 10-07-2001 and 07-08-2001 . Thus , it is established that he was doing the stationery business in the name of his Son in the shop let out by cousin brother of Sri A. Vinayakamurthy . Further , it is found that the petitioner has also violated the circular that one cannot issue cheque for an amount beyond the credit balance . Therefore , a charge sheet was issued and after due enquiry it was found that the charges against him are proved and after following the procedure , the Respondent Bank imposed the punishment of dismissal from service, therefore, the imposition of punishment could not be interfered with for all or any of the reasons urged by him . The nature of duties has no relevance in this case , no doubt, the principal culprit was Sri Marimuthu , the Manager ofthe Bank but the petitioner has also facilitated withdrawal of the amount by Sri A. Vinayakamurthy, therefore , the findings of the Enquiry Officer is fully justified . Even in getting an acknowledgement for the delivery of the cheque book which the petitioner had not done so clearly established the failure on the part of the petitioner in the performance ofhis duties . Hence , for all these reasons the Respondent prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs .

Point No.1

5. In this case , the first charge against the petitioner isthat while working as a Clerk in Nagapattinam branch of the Respondent Bank , he has received and debited two SB A/c No. EC - 1 of Shrine Vellankanni Basilica , two forged cheques for amounts aggregating to Rs . 3.69 lakhs fraudulently drawn in favour of his associate , Sri A. Vinayakamurthy and the second charge frained against the petitioner is that there are credits in his SB A/ c No. 189 other than salary related income and that he and his son were engaged in trade or business and further without maintaining sufficient balance in the abovesaid account, he has issued cheque dated 18-06-2001 for Rs . 1000/- in favour ofAirtel Ltd. The petitioner disputed the allegation against him and he also alleged the findings of the Enquiry Officer is perverse and based without any legal evidence . On the other hand , the Respondent Bank contended that the findings of the Enquiry officer and the imposition of punishment are justified . In this case , the petitioner examined himself as Ex . WWI and on the side of the petitioner 20documents viz . Ex. W 1 to Ex . W20 were marked . Onthe side of the Respondent , no witness was examined butRespondent marked 13 documents viz. Ex.MI to Ex.M13 . The learned counsel for the Respondent contended in this case the admitted facts are that two unauthorized forged cheques of Shrine Velankanni Basilica favouring one Sri A. Vinayakamurthy , one for Rs . 1,23,000/- and another for Rs . 2,46,000/- was received by the Nagapattinam branch on 28-2-2001 and 30-08-2001 and encashed through indian Bank, Nagapattinam. Secondly, the two disputed cheques viz .Nos . 578695 and 578671 were from the cheque books No. 578601 and 578700 issued on 19-07-2001 by the 4. As against this , the Respondent in his Counter Statement alleged that the Respondent which is a nationalized bank having a branch at Velipalayam branch, Nagapattinam. The Shrine Basilica Velankanni Church is maintaining SB A/ c with Velipalayam branch of the Respondent Bank. On 21-09-2001 , the Church authorities enquired the bank regarding the payment of two cheques bearing Nos . 578695 and 578671 for Rs . 1.23 lakhs and Rs. 2.46 lakhs respectively as they did not have the particulats in their records . The bank authorities on verification found that the above two cheques paid to Indian Bank, Nagapattinam for clearing on 20-08-2001 and 30-08- 2001 respectively and informed the Church authorities the payee's name and other details . When the Church authorities insisted for the production of the cheques , the branch did not find the cheques with them and the two cheques were missing from the stitched bundle . On enquiry in the Indian Bank , Nagapattinam , it transpired that the two cheques were issued in the name of Sri A. Vinayakamurthy and on preliminary investigation it came to light that the two cheques which are paid by the bank were missing and the payee Sri A. Vinayakamurthy has enicashed the cheque from Indian Bank , Nagoor and the said person had received the two cheques from Sri Marimuthu , the Manager of the bank and it also revealed that after encashing the cheque , Sri Vinayakamurthy paid the amount retaining 3 % as commission to Sri Marimuthu and the petitioner was aware of the two cheques in question were given for collection by Sri Vinayakamurthy through Indian Bank , Nagoor and it also came to light that the slip bundle of20-08-2001 and 30-08-2001 had been taken by the petitioner . Thus , the fraud could not have perpetuated on the bank without the knowledge or involvement of the bank staff and that having regard to the relationship of the petitionerwith Vinayakamurthy , his involvement in the fraud could not be ruled out . Further, it came to light during the investigation that Sri Vinayakamurthy was maintaining Current Account as well as SB Account in Velipalayam branch , Nagapattinam. It also came to light that the issue ofcheque book to Velankanni Basilica was not entered in the Cheque Issue Register . The circumstances that on 20-08-2001 and 30-08-2001 when the petitioner had gone to clearing house, that the debit entries covering the two cheques were made in the ledger and day book by the petitioner, that the two cheques were missing from the bundle , that the petitioner was running a Stationery Mart called Suganya Stationery Mart at Arya Pillai Koil Street , all cumulatively proved the involvement of the petitioner in the transaction. Therefore , his involvement in the fraud could not be ruled out. It is also found that the petitioner on 20-03-2001 has deposited a sum of Rs . 18,000/ -to his SB A/c No. 189 whereas his net take home salary for the said month was only Rs . 4,174/- . It is also found that he was possessing a cell phone and issued cheques for amount aggregating to Rs . 5398.51 favouring the provider which were debited to his SB A/c No. 189 on 15-03-2001 , 3987 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

Respondent Bank to Shrine Velankanni Basilica . It is also not disputed fact that on 19-07-2001 when the cheque book was issued to the Shrine Velankanni , the petitioner was given the work of SB A/c and he has not made any entry about the issue of cheque book in the Cheque Issue Register . It is also admitted fact that on 20-08-2001 and 30--08-2001 viz. the date of encashment , the petitioner went for clearing and he brought the two disputed cheques . Further on these dates viz. 20-08-2001 and 30-08-2001 , it is he who entered and debited the personal ledger of Shrine Velankanni Basilica by entering his ID number. It is also found that the two cheques were missing from the Respondent Bank branch at Nagapattinam . The learned counsel for the Respondent contended, the payee Sri A. Vinayakamurthy was not a stranger to the petitioner and onthe other hand he was very well known to the petitioner . It is also a fact that petitioner helped Sri A. Vinayakamurthy in filling up the cash credit vouchers whenever he visits the bank. Though, this circumstance will not independently show the criminal action of the petitioner , the cumulative effect of all the circumstances will clearly establish, the petitioner's involvement in the fraud could not be ruled out . Therefore, the findings ofthe Enquiry Officer that the charges framed against him have been proved is a justifiable one and cannot be questioned before this forum.

not received the acknowledgement from the account holder. When the Sr. Manager himself had done all the work and did not adhere the formalities , it is surprising how the petitioner could be found fault for this act. He further argued thatmerely because Sri A. Vinayakamurthy was known to the petitioner , it did not mean that the petitioner was responsible for the encashment of the two cheques . Though , it isalleged that Sri Vinayakamurthy has also colluded that after deducting the commission of 3 % handed over the money collected by the two cheques to the petitioner and Sri Vinayakamurthy, no satisfactory evidence was adduced about this allegation , though in the enquiry , the Enquiry Officer has admitted the statement given by Sri Vinayakamurthy before the Investigating Officer, the said Vinayakamurthy was not examined before the Enquiry Officer nor he was cross - examined by the petitioner . Though, at one time it was stated that the petitioner is responsible for , opening of account in the name of Vinayakamurthy in the Respondent Bank, for this also there is no evidence to substantiate this contention. While the statement recorded by the Investigating Officer was done behind the back of the petitioner, the same was marked as exhibits without following the principles of natural justice. If really the said Vinayakamurthy was examined in the enquiry, then everything would have come to light and it could be established whether the petitioner was guilty of the offences alleged to have made by him . Further he argued it is established that the Manager Marimuthu have given the cheque book to one Kumaran , a Temporary Attender to hand over the cheque book to the Shrine Velankanni Basilica and he alongwith Sri Krishnamurthy, another Officer had gone to the Church to deliver the cheque book but for reasons best known to the Respondent Authority the said Kumaran or Krishnamurthy were not examined in the Enquiry. It is also not known whether the saidOfficer accompanying the said Kumaran has verified the cheque books and whether the person receiving in the Church have verified the cheque book . Under such circumstances , it cannot be said that the petitioner has facilitated the fraud to be committed by the culprits . The learned counsel for the Petitioner further relied on the ruling reported in 1969, 2, LLP, 377, CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA VS. PRAKASH CHAND JAIN where the Supreme Court when dealing with the scope ofjurisdiction of the Industrial Tribunal to interfere with the findings ofthe Enquiry Officer at the domestic enquiry held "the principle that a fact sought to be proved must be supported by statements made in the presence of the person against whom enquiry isheld and the statements made behind the person charged are not to be treated as substantive evidence is one of the basic principles of natural justice which cannot be ignored on the mere ground that the domestic tribunals are not bound by technical rules of procedure contained in the Evidence Act etc. etc. In other words the findings recorded bythe Enquiry Officer must be supported by legal evidence . The evidence should consist of statements made in the presence of the workman charged and exception is 6. As against this , the learned counsel for the Petitioner contended the allegation of the Respondent against the petitioner is that the petitioner in collusion with Sri V. Marimuthu viz . the Manager of the Respondent Bank and with Sri A. Vinayakamurthy caused encashment ofthe two cheques amounting to Rs . 3.69 lakhs . Though, the charge clearly says that there is a collusion between Sri Vinayakamurthy and the petitioner , this collusion has not been established with any satisfactory evidence before the domestic tribunal . Furthermore , there is no substantial evidence to establish the fact of collusion between the Manager and the petitioner . Nowhere it is proved that the petitioner had taken out the cheque book from the stock nor he handed over the same to Sri A. Vinayakamurthy . It was also not established that the petitioner was responsible for the loss of two cheque leaves or for the forged signature found in the cheque . On the other hand it is only Sri V. Marimuthu, the Officer - In -Charge of the SB Section on that day was himself performing the work of issuing the cheque book without asking the petitioner to do the job . Though , it is alleged that the petitioner had failed to follow the procedures laid down by the Bank, it is the Sr. Officer who has taken the task of issuing the cheque to the Shrine Velankanni Basilica and furthermore he has handed over the same to the Temporary Attender, one Kumaran and he has also directed one of the Officers to accompany him to deliver the same to Shrine Velankanni Basilica . Under such circumstance, it is not known how the Respondent Bank has accused the petitioner that he was responsible for not entering the SB Cheque Issue Register /ALPM and also 3988

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] envisaged where the previous statements could be used after giving copies of the statements well in advance to the workman charged but with further qualifications that previous charge must be affirmed as truthful in a general way when the witness is actually examined in the presence of the workman charged" . Relying on this decision, the learned counsel for the Petitioner contended the Enquiry Officer in this case though relied on the Investigating Officer's findings and the statement recorded by him, the said statements were received by the Investigating Officer behind the back of the petitioner , under such circumstances , it should not have been relied on by the Enquiry Officer. On the otherhand, the Enquiry Officer based his conclusion only on the statement given by some of the witnesses who are not examined before the Enquiry Officer .

17. Butas against this , on behalf of the Respondent it is argued that the system in the bank operates on checks and counter checks and therefore no fraud on the bank can be perpetuated without the involvement or connivance of more than one person . In this case , the Manager could not have indulged in the fraud without the support of another staff, Of the various members of the staff of the Respondent Branch , the nexus of the petitioner to the fraud is more than anyone else. Further, he argued the domestic tribunal not being bound by the strict principles of law of evidence, cantake into consideration the evidence of a co - accused andit would not in any way render his finding illegal and for this proposition, he relied on the ruling reported in 49 FJR371 ASSOCIATED CEMENT CO . LTD. VS. LABOUR COURT, COIMBATORE AND ANOTHER wherein the Madras High Court has held when it is argued that the findings of the Enquiry Officer in a domestic enquiry was based on the evidence of co- accused which had not been corroborated in any manner and the finding based on such uncorroborated and untested testimony of an accomplice was not admissible in evidence and when it is argued that the finding is perverse , the High Court held " the evidence would not in any way render his finding as illegal " . Basing his argument on this judgment, in this case though the Enquiry Officer has based his finding on the statement given by the Sri A. Vinayakamurthy , though Vinayakamurthy was not examined before the Enquiry Officer, on that ground , it cannot be said that the findings of the Enquiry Officer is illegal or unjustified. Though , I find some force in the contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent , in this case no doubt it is alleged that Sri A. Vinayakamurthy has given a statement before the Investigating Officer but when it is doubted that whether Vinayakamurthy has given a statement or not , the reliance placed by the Enquiry Officer on the statement is not valid. Further , the reason given for the non- examination of the said Vinayakamurthy is not convincible and therefore 1 find Enquiry Officer's finding who has taken into consideration the statement of Vinayakamurthy is not legal .

8.Thenthe learned counsel for the Petitioner argued as regards the second charge that the petitioner for having a SB Account in SB A/c No. 189 ofthe Velipalayam Branch ofNagapattinam and when the balance of the account was only Rs . 524.52 , he has issued a cheque on 18-06-2001 for Rs . 1000 which is against the circulars and guidelines of the bank , in this case he has credited the amount of Rs . 1000 before the cheque was passed on its presentation and therefore it cannot be said that the petitioner has done agrave misconduct . Further, though the Respondent Bank alleged that the petitioner was doing stationery business in the name of his Son and the said shop was let out by the cousin of Sri A. Vinayakamurthy , it cannot be said the shop run by the petitioner's Son is owned by the petitioner . Furthermore , no rule in the service regulations of the Respondent Bank for the Son doing some business and takenthe premises owned by the cousin of Vinayakamurthy had to be treated as misconduct of the petitioner and it is well settled if the service rules or the standing Ordersdo not provide this as a misconduct, there cannot be a charge on that account and in the Glaxo Laboratories case which isreported in 1984, 1 , LLJ , 16 , the Supreme Court has held "inshort it cannot be left to the vagaries of the Management to say ex post facto that some acts of omission or commission nowhere found to be enumerated in the relevant Standing Order is nonetheless a misconduct not strictly falling under the enumerated misconduct in the relevant Standing Order but yet a misconduct for the purpose of imposing a penalty would not per se be an act of misconduct and on that ground an employee cannot be punished for the said misconduct . The learned counsel for the petitioner further argued that routing of certain transactions which was exceeding the take home salary of the petitioner cannot alone indicate that the petitioner was engaged in business activity . Similarly , issuing a cheque without keeping sufficient balance cannot be treated as misconduct . In case if the cheque was returned without any balance in the account then it may be treated as violation . In this case the petitioner deposited the amount and the cheque was passed for payment and in such case the guidelines and circulars are not the service rules but are only a guidance and by not following them cannot be treated as a misconduct . I find much force in the contention of the leamed counsel for the Petitioner. In this case , though the said Vinayakamurthy's relation, may be the owner of the shop in which the petitioner's Son is running a business , on that score we cannot conclude that this business was actually run by the petitioner. There is no evidence or documentary proof to show that the petitioner. has got interest in the business run by the petitioner's Son , as such I am not inclined to accept that the findings given by the Enquiry Officer with regard to second charge is justified . Furthermore , canvassing a customer to open an account or introducing the customer to the bank cannot be said that he has interest in the individual and he has colluded with the said customer when there is no substantial evidence [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

3989

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/श्रावण 4,1930

to prove that the petitioner has involved in the offences alleged against him , it cannot be said that he is guilty ofthe offences . Therefore , I am clearly of the opinion that the findings given by the Enquiry Officer in this case is not based on any legal evidence . On the other hand he based hisfindings only on surmises , therefore , I find this point in favour of the petitioner .

Point No. 2

"The next point to be decided in this case is to what reliefthe petitioner is entitled ? "

9. Inview ofmy foregoing findings that the action of the Respondent Management in imposing the punishment ofdismissal from service of the petitioner is not legal and justified, I find the petitioner is entitled to the relief of reinstatement . Then the next point to be decided is whether the petitioner is entitled to full backwages as claimed by him. Though the petitioner alleged in the claim statement that he was not employed anywhere and he is living at the mercy of his relatives which allegation was not disputed bythe Respondent in his counter statement since the matter ispending for very long time before this Tribunal in the interest ofjustice , I think half of the backwages will deem to be a reasonable one in the circumstance shown before me and the petitioner is entitled to continuity of service and all other attendant benefits .

9. Thus , the reference is answered accordingly .

(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him , corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 1st May, 2008)

K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer Witnesses Examined

For the 1st Party/Petitioner : WW1 Sri G. Sundar For the 2nd Party/Management : None (No oral

evidence)

Documents Marked On the Petitioner's side

Ex .No. Date Description

Ex.W1 13-02-2001 Hand Loan Receipt -1

Ex.W2 31-03-2001 S.B.E. Society Loan Voucher Ex.W3 01-04-2001 Rental Agreement of Shop Owner Ex:W4 06-04-2001 Hand Loan Voucher - I

Ex.W5 20-06-2001 E.P.F. Loan Sanction Letter Ex.W6 06-07-2001 Shop Owner Demand Draft Ex.W7 02-11-2001 FIR

Ex.W8 12-09-2003. A letter by Respondent

Ex.W9 24-09-2003 Reply

Ex.W10 07-10-2003 E.P.F. Balance Sheet

Ex.W11 13-10-2003 Letter to Respondent

Ex.W12 21-10-2003 Reply

Ex.W13 18-03-2004 Statement by Branch Manager Ex.W14 06-05-2004 Deposition of Meenakshi in C.C. No. 564/2003

Ex.W15 18-11-2000 Pondicherry Branch Manager Appreciation Letter (NPA)

! Ex.W16 29-10-2001 Suspension Order

Ex.W17 25-04-2003 Departmental Enquiry

Ex.W18 12-05-2003 Proceedings from Zonal Officer EX.W19 29-08-2003 Order ofDismissal

Ex.W20 24-11-2003 Petition to Asstt . Labour Commissioner

On the Management's side 1

Ex. No. Date Description

Ex.MI 29-10-2001 Suspension Order issued to G. Sundar

Ex.M2 18-02-2002 Charge Sheet issued to G. Sundar Ex.M3 08-03-2002 Written Statement of Defense Ex.M4 27-03-2002 Appointment of Enquiry Officer by Disciplinary Authority

Ex.M5

Enquiry Proceedings

Ex.M6 (Series)- Exhibits marked in the Enquiry Ex.M7 16-02-2003 Written briefbyG. Sundar Ex.M8 11-04-2003 Report of Enquiry Officer Ex.M9 06-05-2003 Submissions on the Enquiry Reports byG. Sundar

Ex.M10 12-05-2003 Letter No.426/ZOC/IRC/2003 /F691 of the Disciplinary Authority Ex.M11 02-06-2003 Minutes of the Personal Hearing Ex.M12 02-06-2003 Proceedings of Disciplinary Authority delivered to G. Sundar on 07-06-2003

Ex.M13 27-08-2003 Proceedings of the Appellate Authority at HO confirming the punishment 3990

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4, 1930

नई दिल्ली , 30 जून , 2008

का.आ. 1998.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार पंजाब नेशनल बैंक के प्रबंधतंश्न के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 2 नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 125/1997) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 30-6-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[फा. सं. एल-12012/413/ 1996- आईआर ( बी- II ) ]

राजिन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 30th June , 2008

S.O. 1998. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award Ref. No. 125/ 1997 of the Central Government 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 workmen , received by the Central Government on 30-06-2008 .

[F. No. L- 12012/413 / 1996 - IR( B - II) ] RAJINDER KUMAR, 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. 125/1997

IN THE MATTER OF :

Sh . O.P. Yadav,

S/ o . Balbir Singh , Kher ( V & PO) Najafgarh , NewDelhi .

Claimant

VERSUS

The Regional Manager,

Punjab National Bank , Roshanara Road , Delhi .

TheManager, Punjab National Bank , Roshanara Road, Delhi .

...Respondents

[PART 11-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

AWARD

TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No. L - 12012/ 413 / 96/IR(B - II ) Central Government Dt . 29-08-1997 has referred the following point for adjudication:

The point runs as hereunder: -

"Whether the action of the management of Punjab National Bank in dismissing the services of Sh . O.P. Yadav , Cashier w.e.f. 05-11-1994 is legal and justified ? If not , to whatrelief the said workman is entitled . "

The case of the workman is that he was working as a cashier cum Godown Keeper and was last posted in Roshanara Road, Delhi Branch of Punjab National Bank .

That the management of the Punjab National Bank i.e. the opposite party terminated illegally his services from the bank w.e.f. 05-11-1994 . The M/ o . Labour , GOI has referred the above mentioned industrial dispute for adjudication .

The allegation against the workman is that on 12-10-1993 when a sum of Rs . 75,000 was tendered for deposit bythe representative of M/ s . Montgomery Goods Carriers in their Current Account No. 1412 , he while working as Receipt Cashier, after having counted Rs . 7,000 stated that one bundle of Rs . 50 denomination consisted of only 90 notes instead of 100 notes . When the party depositing the cash desired return of the entire amount deposited by them , to enable them to re - check the cash tendered by them , since they had deposited exact sum of Rs.75, 000. Sh . O. P. Yadav informed that the slips from the bundles have been removed by him and the bank's slips had been affixed by him . He refused to return the cash to them and the party had to un-necessarily deposit a sum of Rs.500 supposed to have been less received by him .

That proper opportunity was not given to the workman . He was not permitted to cross - examine the witnesses presented by the P.O. He was not permitted to cross-examine the P.O. The principles of natural justice have not been followed during the course of inquiry.

The case of the management is that on 12-10-1993 , when a sum of Rs.75 , 000 was tendered for deposit by the representative of M /s . Mont Gomery Goods Carriers in their C/A. No.1412 , Sh. Yadav working as receipt cashier after having counted Rs.7 , 000 stated that one packet of Rs.50 denomination consisted of only 90 notes instead of 100 notes . When the party depositing the cash desired that the entire amount deposited by them be returned so thatthey can re- check the cash. Sh . Yadav informed that slips from the bundle had been removed and the bank's slips have been affixed by him as a result of the aforesaid the party was made to deposit a sum of Rs . 500.

The further case of the management is that on 19-10-1993 one Sh. Ishwar Chand visited the branch for [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

3991

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

depositing cash of Rs . 1.00 Lac in party's SF A/ cs . He in good faith handed over the cash to Sh . Yadav and went to obtain a cheque book from another dealing clerk . On his return , he was informed by Sh . Yadav that one of the packets ofRs . 50 denomination was short by 10 notes i.e. it contains only Rs.4,500 instead of Rs.5000 . According to the complainant the packet allegedly containing 10 notes less shown to him by Sh. Yadav did not belong to him as it was without bank's slip whereas the packets deposited by him borebank'sslip .

That the inquiry was conducted fairly against the workman . The workman participated in the inquiry. He cross -examined all the witnesses of the management. He was not given show cause notice before awarding punishment . He pleaded guilty in the inquiry for lenient punishment .

Evidence of both 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 the charges were forged and fabricated . The shortage of Rs.500/ was not due to his own grounds . The party made a complaint after 11 days . It is wrong that, he detained Rs.500 outof Rs.5000/- for his personal gains:

Itwas submitted from the side of management that the charges were leveled against the workman on the complaint, of the party . The party appeared before the Inquiry Officer and they deposed against the workman. The workman cross examined the witnesses . He pleaded in the inquiry proceedings that he should be given lenient punishment. The inquiry is fair. The workman has admitted in his cross examination that he cross - examined all the witnesses .

From perusal of the inquiry proceedings it becomes quite obvious that MW2 , the complainant appeared before the Inquiry Officer and he deposed that he deposited a packet of Rs.5000/ - . The workman took away 10 notes and he reported that there was Rs.500/- short .

Itbecomes quite obvious from perusal of the inquiry praceedings that Sh . Ishwar Chand also visited the branch to deposit the cash of Rs.1.00 Lac in SB account . The party handed over the entire cash to the workman and it was reported by the workman that 10 notes of 50 denominations were found short . Sh . Jinder has been examined as MW 1 . He appeared before the Inquiry Officer . The workman has corss examined the witnesses .

2644 G1 /08-19

Hehas admitted during the course of inquiry that he admitted his guilt and lenient punishment may be given to him.

Itbecomes quite obvious from perusal ofthe findings of the Inquiry Officer that he has analysed the entire evidence and he has given his finding after considering oral as well as documentary evidences .

The findings of the Inquiry Officer cannot be said to be based on no evidence .

It has been held that in a domestic inquiry the strict and sophisticated rules of evidence under the Evidence Act may not apply. All materials which are logically probative for a prudent mind are permissible . There is no allergy to hearsay evidence provided it has reasonable nexus and credibility . The departmental authorities and administrative tribunals must be careful in evaluating such material and should not glibly swallow what is strictly speaking not relevant under the Evidence Act .

"The sufficiency of evidence in proof of the finding by a domestic tribunal is beyond scrutiny. Absence of any evidence in support of a finding is certainly available for the court to look into because it amounts to an error of law apparent on the record . "

Ithas been held in 1972 (25 ) FLR 45 as under :-

"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 of the 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 ata different conclusion on the same evidence .

It has been held in this case that in domestic inquiry evidence of a solitary witness is sufficient to hold the charges proved .

Ithas been held in 2001 ( 89 ) FLR 427 as under :----

" 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 . "

From perusal of inquiry proceedings it becomes quite obvious that the workman has cross - examined all the witnesses . He was permitted to adduce his own evidence but he did not adduce his evidence . Two A/ c . Holders of the bank have been examined by the management. They have been cross - examined by the workman . Eleven days delay in filing the complaint is not a material delay . The findings of the Inquiry are based on adequate evidence . The orders of the DA and AA are also reasoned one . The 3992.

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 /SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii) ]

VERSUS

M/ s. Punjab National Bank, North Delhi Region ,

workman has committed the same misconduct on previous occasion also . The punishment imposed on the workman in view of the embezzlement of A/c . Holder's money is quite appropriate. No interference is required .

4th Floor, Rajendra Place ,

New Delhi - 110008

The reference is replied thus:

AWARD

The action of the management of Punjab National Bank in dismissing the services of Sh . O.P. Yadav , Cashier w.e.f. 05-11-1994 is legal and justified. The workman applicant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for .

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No.L- 12012/ 107/ 2002- IR(B - II ) dated 12-08-2002 has referred the following pointfor adjudication:

The award is given accordingly .

The point runs as hereunder :-

Date: 24-06-2008

R.N. RAI , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली , 30 जून , 2008

"Whether the action of the management of Punjab National Bank , New Delhi in terminating the services of Sh . Raj Kumar Katyal , Ex . Clerk - cum- Cashier by awarding the punishment of compulsory retirement is legal and justified ? Ifnot, what relief is the workman entitled to and from which date . "

'का.आ. 1999.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार पंजाब नेशनल बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 2 नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 71/2002) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 30-6-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[ फा. सं. एल-12011 / 107/2002- आईआर ( बी- II ) ]

राजिन्द्र कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 30th June , 2008

Thatthe workman while working as Clerk/ Cashier at Branch Office Yamuna Vihar he was placed under suspension vide order dated 7-5-94 and subsequently he was issued charge sheet dated 28-9-1994 . The suspension ofworkman is illegal and invalid and also being in violation ofClause 12(b) of First Bipartite Settlement . The payment ofsubsistence allowance not made in accordance with the service conditions during the period of suspension . Inspite ofpay revision the subsistence allowance was paid only onpre-revised scale . It is settled law that the revision of pay should be taken into consideration while fixing the subsistence allowance . The Bank with the object of harassing the workman and with predetermined mind to punish him did not pay the subsistence allowance on revised pay.

S.O. 1999. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award Ref. 71/2002 of the Cent . Govt. Indus . Tribunal - cum-Labour Court , No. 2, New Delhi as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Punjab National Bank North Delhi , Region and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 30-06-2008 .

[F. No. L - 12011 / 107/2002 - IR( B - II ) ]

RAJINDER KUMAR, 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 . 71/2002

IN THE MATTER OF :

Sh . R.K. Katyal ,

C-VI/12 Yamuna Vihar , Delhi- 110053 .

Thatthe workman submitted a reply dated 2-12-94 to the charge- sheet denying the allegations leveled against him . It was alleged in the charge sheet that the workman did not get the PPO delivered to the legal heirs of Smt . Kanti Devi , Pension Account No. 10484 and manipulated the PPO No.9010G to 9818 G to defraud the Bank got opened a SF Account No.15668 in the name of Smt . Kanti Devi Sharma and got credited arrear of pension of Rs . 10,206 / - in the name of Smt. Kanti Devi Sharma on 4-6-93 , and also got credited a sum of Rs . 1728/- on 5-6-93 and withdrew amounts from time to time to the tune of Rs . 20,574/ - . It was further alleged that the workman was responsible for lodging pension payment scrolls with the Link office every month but lodged in bulk in August , 1993 , the above allegations would constitute gross misconduct under para 19.5 (j ) of the Bipartite Settlement . While denying the allegations vide letter dated 22-10-94 , the workman also demanded relevant and material documents for making effective reply to the charge sheet . The documents demanded were as follows:

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

1. Copy of the PPO No. 9818 of the pensioner Smt . Kanti Devi .

2. Copy ofAccount Opening Form SF A/ C No. 15668 in the name of Smt . Kanti Devi Sharma and 3. Copy of Arrangement Register pertaining to my duties from 4-6-93 to 3-11-93 .

The Bank vide letter dated 7-11-94 informed the workman that these documents were not available . In view ofthe non -supply of these material and relevant documents , the workman was prevented from giving effective reply to the Charge-sheet. However , the workman submitted a reply dated 2-12-94 and also mentioned therein that in the absence ofthe material documents he was giving the reply .

That the Disciplinary Authority of the Bank decided to hold the enquiry wide Order dated 6-12-94 and also appointed the Enquiry Officer Shri R.N.Sharma issued notice dated 9-12-94 and fixed the first hearing on 17-12-94 , the Enquiry commenced on 17-12-94 and concluded on 19-6-1995.

That the workman demanded assistance of a lawyer in the enquiry on 17-12-94 which was denied to him by the Disciplinary Authority. The Disciplinary Authority failed to appreciate that the charge being serious and complex nature , the workman could not understand the legal intricacies and therefore a legally trained lawyer was a must to defend him . Hence reasonable opportunity to defend was denied to the workman by denying the assistance of a lawyer . The change of the Presenting Officer who was a legally trained person would not make any change as far as the requirement of assistance of a lawyer in the enquiry .

That the list of documents and witnesses were not given on the first date of enquiry. The workman was taken to surprise by not giving the list of documents and list of witnesses on the first date of enquiry itself.

That though inspection of original documents filed bytheManagement was allowed on 20-1-95 , but all original documents were not given for inspection . The Management however, produced their witnesses on 3-4-95 without giving inspection of original documents . The non supply ofthe documents demanded by the workman in his defence , casual grave prejudice to the workman as the workman was deprived of the reasonable opportunity to defend. Evident from enquiry proceedings held on 2-6-95 that the original document listed at Serial No.4 was stated to have beennot available. Only the four documents mentioned in the proceedings held on 2-6-95 were given and the rest of the documents were not given at all .

That the enquiry was concluded on 19-6-95 and the EnquiryOfficer directed the parties to furnish written briefs . TheEnquiryOfficer made his report dated nil. The enquiry findings were not furnished to the workman . Therefore , the question ofasking his comments would not arise at all.

3993

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/श्रावण 4 , 1930

The law mandates furnishing of enquiry report and asking for comments from the delinquent . This opportunity was denied to the workman .

That the enquiry officer exonerated the workman of the charges/misconducts except in respect of charge/ misconducts except in respect of charge/misconduct that the workman never lodged the scrolls after he was assigned the duty ofpension seat . It is submitted that the finding of the enquiry officer that the workman never lodged the scroll is itself contrary to the allegations leveled in the charge sheet. This itself is uncalled for. The allegation in the charge sheet is that the workman lodged the scrolls in bulk itself clears that it was lodged. Therefore , the finding of the enquiry officer in respect of this allegation is perverse .

That the Disciplinary Authority without furnishing the Enquiry Report of the Enaquiry Officer and asking for the comments on the same of the workman , straightway proposed the punishment of ' compulsory retirement' vide letter dated 18-12-1997 , this is indicative of the predetermined mind of the disciplinary authority to punish the workman . The Disciplinary Authority ought to have issued show- cause with regard to his disagreement with the Enquiry Officer first . Without doing so proposing punishment straightaway is indicative ofhis predetermined mind to punish the workman . Reasonable opportunity was also denied by the Disciplinary Authority in so far as not giving opportunity to the workman to canvass against the findings for disagreement with the Enquiry Officer . This vitiates the entire action taken against the workman .

That the Disciplinary Authority did not act independently and rather acted under the pressure and directions of Central Vigilance Commission . After lapse of more than two years of the conclusion and submission of enquiry Report , the Disciplinary Authority issued letter dated 18-12-1997 proposing the punishment . During the in between period of two years correspondence were exchanged between the Disciplinary Authority/Bank Management and the Central Vigilence Commission with regard to the Disciplinary Action against the workman . The correspondence woulddisclose that in fact the disciplinary Authority proposed a lesser punishment and only due to the pressure and directives of the Central Vigilance Commission , the Disciplinary Authority imposed the punishment of compulsory Retirement which would: not have been imposed otherwise . Thus the Disciplinary authority acted under the pressures as directives of the CVC . Hence the order of punishment dated 30-7-1998 is illegal and invalid .

The disciplinary Authority has not given any logical reasonings for disagreeing with the findings of the Enquiry Officer. The conclusions given by the Disciplinary Authority for holding the workman guilty of the misconducts are not based on any evidence . The findings of the Disciplinary Authority are therefore perverse , the Disciplinary Authority 3994

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

failed to give reasonings how and by what evidence the misconducts / charges were found proved by him against the workman . On this ground itself the enquiry is vitiated.

That the workman preferred an appeal dated 10-9-98 assailing the order of punishment dated 30-7-98 and representation dated 17-2-98 , the appellate Authority dismissed the Appeal vide order dated 4-11-99 without a speaking order . The issues raised in the Appeal have not bcen considered at all by the Appellate Authority. Non- assigning of reasons itself is indicative of non- consideration of the issues raised in the Appeal . Hence the order of the Appellate Authority is also illegal and invalid.

That the entire Disciplinary Action is vitiated for the reasons stated above . As a result the order of compulsory retirement dated 30-7-98 and the rejection of appeal dated 4-11-99 are illegal and invalid and are liable to be set aside .

That after the order of compulsory retirement the workman has been remained unemployed and is unableto sustain himself and family. The workman is surviving wholly on the support of his relations .

In the written statement filed by the management it is stated that Shri R.K.Katyal , while posted at our B.O. Yamuna Vihar , Delhi was served with the charge sheet dated 28-9-1994 on account of gross misconduct on his part and he was charged under para 19. 5 (j ) of the Bipartite Settlement . He while working on the Pension and Teller seat, allegedly defrauded the bank to the tune of Rs . 20,574 by getting pension order favouring Smt . Kanti Devi credited in a new SF Account opened by him . He also allegedly got credited the arrear of the pension to the newly opened SF Account . His reply dated 02-12-1994 to the aforesaid charge sheet was duly considered by the Disciplinary Authority , who constituted enquiry vide order dated 06-12-1994 to look into the truth of charges leveled against Shri Katyal . The report of the Enquiry Officer alongwith the record of enquiry was duly considered by the Disciplinary Authority, who Vide show cause notice dated 18-12-1997 proposed the punishment of " Compulsory Retirement under para 199.6( b ) ofthe Bipartite Settlement upon Shri Katyal . The personal hearing was fixed for 17-01-1998 , 20-02-1998 and then deferred to 07-03-1998 and finally the same was held on 04-04-1998 Shri Katyai also submitted written representation dated 20-02-1998 /04-04-1998 which was duly considered and the Disciplinary Authority passed final order dated 30-07-1998 confirming the aforesaid punishment upon Shri Katyal . Shri Katyal preferred an appeal dated 10-09-1998 , which was decided by the AppellateAuthority vide orders dated 04-11-1999 and the same were duly conveyed to Shri Katyal . " It is , therefore , submitted that the aforesaid punishment had been inflicted

[PART 11 St Stin upon Shri Katyał in accordance with the provisions ofthe Bipartite Settlement keeping in view the gravitsi allegation proved against him . It is the submission of the Bank that the departmental enquiry was conducted agnost Shri Katyał in accordance with the provisions of the Bipartite Settlement . However , in case this Hon'ble Tribunal comes to the conclusion for any reason whatsoever that the enquiry conducted was not fair, in that eventuality the bank would like to lead evidence before this thon n Tribunal to prove the allegations made against Shri Katy ! vide charge sheet dated 28-9-94 ."

That the claimant demanded for certain documen and the same were not provided by the management enabling him to submit a suitable reply to the charge shet Itis to be submitted that the claimant was informed by the Branch Manager, B.O. Yamuna Vihar. Delhi vide letter dated 7-11-1994 to visit the branch to verify the arrangemen registers as desired by the claimant as the same could not be made possible to him due to voluminous size of the same .

Itissubmitted that the copies of the documents itki by the Presenting Officer as well as the list of witness were made available to Shri Katyal in the proceedings hela on 20-01-95 after the charge sheeted employee denied the allegations made against him vide charge sheet dated 28-9-94 in response to the queryby the Enquiry Officer as to whether he was received the charge sheet , understood the allegations and whether he admits the same or net However , certain original documents could not it produced for inspection and the Presenting Officer was advised to produce the same on the next date of hearing i.e. 27-3-95 . On 27-3-95 , the enquiry was adjourned to 3-4-95 for management evidence , when two managemen witnesses were examined and also cross examined by the defence representative without raising any objection submission as to production of remaining eriginal documents . In view of this , it is submitted that no prejuilice can be said to have been caused to Shri Katyal .

It is to be submitted that while sending the Show Cause Notice dated 18-12-1997 to Shri Katyal , proposing therein the punishment of compulsory retirement , the copy of Enquiry Report was missed inadvertently . The same was sent to Shri Katyal vide letter dated 06-02-1998 muci prior to the date ofhearing fixed in the matter . Shri Katyai was advised to appear for personal hearing on 20-02-1998 .

In any case it is submitted that no prejudice na been caused to Shri Katyal on account of non - submission ofenquiry report to him earlier for his representation .

It is to be submitted that copy of the enquiry repor though not provided to claimant before the Show Cause [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

Notice, the same was provided vide letter dated 6-02-1998 , much prior to date of personal hearing fixed in the matter i.e. 20-02-1998 .

It is submitted that necessary consultations were held with the Vigilance Department since the allegation made against Shri Katyal had vigilance overtone. It is , however , categorically denied that the Disciplinary Authority did not act independently as alleged or otherwise . It is submitted that the Disciplinary Authority inflicted punishment upon Shri Katyal having regard to the gravity of allegations held to be proved against him.

It is to be submitted that the Disciplinary authority while considering the findings of the Enquiry Officer as well as the contentions raised by claimant during personal hearing and after applying his mind and on evaluating the evidences adduced during enquiry proceedings , came to conclusion for imposing the major penalty of Compulsory Retirement upon Shri R. K. Katyal . Appellate Authority consequent upon evaluating the evidences , the gravity of the charges and the nature of the punishment assigned thereto , mend , confirm the orders of the Disciplinary Authority. The concurrence of Appellate Authority for punishment ofCompulsory Retirement upon claimant re- affirms the view that the punishment of Compulsory Retirement upon claimant re - affirms the view that the punishment ofCompulsory Retirement imposed upon the claimant vide order dated 30-07-1998 of the Disciplinary Authority is commensurate to the lapses .

It is to be submitted that the punishment of Conipulsory Retirement inflicted upon the claimant vide order dated 30-7-1998 of the Disciplinary Authority and thereafter confirmed by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 04-11-1999 are in accordance with the provision envisaged in Chapter 19 of the Bipartite Settlement dated 19-10-1966 amended from time to time .

Evidence of both 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 the following illegal charges were served against him which areas under:

1. Smt . Kanti Devi , MCD Pensioner died on 14-02-1993 and her pension A/c . No. 10484 was closed . As per procedure PO ofthe closed pension A/c . in case of MCD pensioners is

3995

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

required to be handed over to the legal heirs of the pensioners with remark " pensioner died " and the Accounts Officer of the MCD is requested to append their sanction for the payment of the family pension. You , while working on the pension seat as a part of your duty were supposed to get the PPO delivered to the legal heirs for getting the needful done from the MCD but you deliberately did not do so with a malafide intention and later manipulated the relative PPO No. 9010 G to 9818 G to defraud the bank.

2. After manipulating the PPO No.90 10 G of the deceased pensioner , Smt . Kanti Devi into PPO No. 9818 G you got opened a nes SF A/ c . of the pension to the tune of Rs.10 , 206/ - in the name of Kanti Devi Sharma on 04-06-1993 .

3. On 05-06-1993 you also got credited a sum of Rs.1728 on account of pension for the month ofMay, 1993 and subsequently withdrewthe entire amount from time to time to the tune of Rs. 20 , 574 through different withdrawal slips . Further , pension was got credited to this SF A/c . No. 15668 up to October , 1993 .

4. You were also responsible for lodging pension payment scrolls with the link office every month but the same were lodged in the bulk in August, 1993 ,

Itwas submitted from the side of the workman that the management witness did not supply him the documents relied upon by the Inquiry Officer .

That the workman demanded assistance of a Lawyer in the inquiry on 17-12-1994 but the management denied the same . The list of the documents and witnesses were not given on the first date of inquiry . He was allowed inspection of the original documents filed by the management but all the original documents were not available for inspection.

That the findings of the Inquiry Officer was not made available to him before pre - decisional hearing .

Itwas submitted that the Inquiry Officer held the 3 charges not proved . The DA dis - agreed with the same but he did not give any notice regading his findings for dis- agreeemnt . The DA under the pressure and direction of CVC imposed severe punishment . The DA has not given any reasons for disagreeing with the findings .

It was submitted from the side of the management that the workman was permitted to inspect the documents . Two documents were not made available to him. As per the BPS the CSE cannot claim the assistance of a Lawyer . The 3996

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )] DA has every right to dis - agree with the findings of the Inquiry Officer . A copy ofthe inquiry report was furnished to him vide letter dated 06-02-1998 whereas the date of personal hearing was 20-02-1998.

From perusal of the records it becomes quitė obvious that the Inquiry Officer did not find charge no . 1 , 2 & 3 proved and he found charge no . 4 only proved whereas the DA found all the charges proved. The DA may dis- agree with the findings of the Inquiry Officer but he should record the reasons for his dis - agreement and a copy ofhis findings should be given before awarding the punishment.

In regard to charge no.3 it becomes quite obvious that it relates to withdrawal of Rs . 20,574 with different withdrawal slips and the pension was got credited to the SF A/ c . 156668 up to October , 1993. The Pension account has been prepared by the concerned officer . The entries have been prepared on the directions of the Incharge Officer . Smt . Kanti Devi has received the entire amount through her men and Sh . Katyal has received the amount and paid to her. Smt . Kanti Devi has not been examined . Sh . J.D. Tiwari , staff has deposed that the withdrawal for Rs . 2000, Rs . 3000 , Rs . 3000 , Rs . 1700 & Rs . 1800 do not bear the signature of the CSE. These vouchers have not been prepared by the CSE .

In the instant case the DA has not sent a copy ofhis firndings and his reasons regarding dis - agreement with the findings of the InquiryOfficer.

From perusal of the records it becomes quite obvious that the workman has not embezzled even single paise . The reciepents have received all the amounts and the same amounts which Sh . Katyal has received has been paid to Smt . Kanti Devi .

I have perused the inquiry proceedings and the findings of the Inquiry Officer . The Inquiry Officer has discussed in detail the evidence that has come on the record. It has been mentioned by the Inquiry Officer that the P.O. did not produce any oral or documentary evidence in support of the allegegation that the CSE did not deliver the PPO of Smt . Kanti Devi to her legal heir with remarks "Pensioner Died" .

From perusal of the inquiry proceedings and the findings of the Inquiry Officer it becomes quite obvious that pension files, papers and documents remained in the custody of officer , so the CSE cannot be held guilty of with holding pension files , papers and documents and PPO.

MW2 has deposed that Smt . Kanti Devi was an old lady and could not stand in a queue . MW2 made the payment to Sh. Katyal and Sh. Katyal has handed over the amount to Smt . Kanti Devi . The inquiry officer has rightly found this charge not proved . The Inquiry Officer has held that the CSE was responsible for lodging pension payments scroll with the link of each and every month but the same were lodged in August , 1993. The P.O. produced the registers of arrangement . The CSE was allotted pension work on 07-03-1993 . An employee was deputed in August to prepare the scrolls for the pending period . It was the duty ofthe CSE to lodge scroll papers after he was assigned the duties of pension sheet on 07-03-1993 .

The CSE lodged all the scrolls in bulk in August , 1993.Had he lodged the scrolls timely, the fraud in question would not have occurred ? The CSE was posted on 07-03-1993 but he lodged the scrolls in August , 1993 , so fraud in question was committed .

The CSE mentioned himself during the inquiry but the P.O. did not cross - examine as such the statement of the CSE has not been rebuted by the P.O. The Inquiry Officer has- rightly held that there is no oral or documentary evidence in regard to retaining these documents by the CSE . The P.O. did not produce any document regarding manipulation by the CSE of the pension of the PPO No. 9010 G of Smt . Kanti Devi . Her LR has received the entire amount , so there is no evidence regarding manipulation by the CSE.

From perusal of the findings of the Inquiry Officer and the findings of the DA, it becomes quite obvious that the findings of the DA are not supported by any evidence and reasonings . He has dis - agreed with the findings of the InquiryOfficer out of his freewill . There are no reasons for dis-agreement.

From perusal of the inquiry proceedings it becomes quite apparent charge no . 1 to 3 regarding embezzlement and fictitious opening PPO are not proved. The Inquiry Officer has rightly not found charge no.1 to 3 proved .

The Inquiry Officer held that an amount of Rs. 10,2061 has been credited to the account of Smt . Kanti Devi on04-06-1993 by credit voucher dated 04.06.1993 , so the charge of embezzlement of Rs . 10, 206/- is not proved. No credit voucher has been produced in the course of inquiry which the CSE has manipulated . The voucher prepared by the ' CSE has been authenticated by the Manager.

DW3 has deposed that the pension is opened and it is initialed and checked by the concerned pension Incharge. The Pension Incharge has put his signature on the same .

So far as charge no.4 is concerned regarding lodging of scrolls , it is abundantly proved that all the scrolls have been lodged at a time in August , 1993 and that has led to be fraud committed .

3997 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

The findings of the Inquiry Officer are based on evidence of the witnesses .

Court , Ernakulam as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Cochin Port Trust and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 30-06-2008 .

[ F. No. L- 35011 /7/2007 -IR(B- II) ] RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

Itwas submitted from the side of the management that the workman has taken three years in filing this case. Incase full wages are granted the bank will be put to heavy loss . It has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of delay the Tribunal should not award full back wages automatically.

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT , ERNAKULAM

Present :

Shri P. L. Norbert, B.A. , LL.B. , Presiding Officer

Inthe facts and circumstances the workman is entitled to 60% back wages all along . The punishment imposed on the workman is excessive . The DA imposed such punishment after holding all the charges proved wrongly.

(Friday the 20th day of June , 2008 /30th Jyashta 1930) I.D. 35/2007

Union :

In the instant case three charges are not proved. Only Charge No.4 is proved , so it is expedient in the interest of justice that the workman should be reinstated with stoppage of two increments cumulatively and with 60% back wages .

The General Secretary, CochinPort Staff Association , Kochi. By Adv . Sri . A.V. Xavier .

The reference is replied thus:,

Management

The Chairman, Cochin Port Trust, Kochi .

By Adv . M/s . Menon & Pai The action of the management of Punjab National Bank, New Delhi in terminating the services ofSh. Raj Kumar Katyal , Ex. Clerk cum Cashier by awarding the punishment ofcompulsory retirement is neither legal nor justified . The management should reinstate the workman with stoppage oftwo increments with 60% back wages within two months from the date of the publication of the award.

Thiscase coming up for hearing on 20-06-2008 , this Tribunal -cum - Labour-Court on the same day passed the following:

AWARD

The award is given accordingly.

Date: 20-06-2008

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 30 जून , 2008

This is a reference made under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d ) of Industrial Disputes Act claiming higher rate of interest on P.F. amounts for the period 2005-2006 . On notice both sides entered appearance. Union then field a statement to the effect that the interest rate of 6.5 % on P.F. accumulation is proper and hence the union does not want to proceed with the dispute and they are withdrawing the dispute . It means that there is no dispute for adjudication .

का.आ. 2000. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार कोचिन पोर्ट ट्रस्ट के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय ईरनाकुलम के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 35/2007) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 30-6-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

In the result an award is passed finding that the action of the management in declaring interest at 6.5% on P.F. accumulation of its employees for the period 20-05-2006 is fair andjust and the workers are not entitled for any relief.

[फा. सं. एल-35011/7/2007- आईआर ( बी- II ) ]

The award will come into force one month after its publication in the official gazette .

राजिन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 30th June , 2008

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and passed by me on this the 20thday of June , 2008 .

S.O. 2000.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 35/2007 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour

P. L. NORBERT, Presiding Officer Appendix-Nil .

3998

PART II S THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

discharging the services of Shri Amiya Kumar Sade नई दिल्ली , 30 जून , 2008

Sub- staff of Baghmore Branch under R.O. Norm Kolkata is legal and justified ? If not , what reisef the concerned workman is entitled to ?"

का.आ., 2001.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सेन्ट्रल बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय कोलकाता के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 09/05 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 30-6-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[फा. सं. एल-12011/ 158/2004 - आई आर ( बी- II ) ] राजिन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 30th June , 2008

2.This reference has been made at the instance of Central Bank National Employees ' Union ( hereinafterto be referred as the union) . The case of the workmen as it appears from the statement of claims in brief is that Shri Antiya Kumar Sahu the concerned workman was appointed in the Bank as subordinate staff/ Peon on 20th January , 1982 posted at Baranagar Branch under Regional Officer Northi He was suspended from service by a memo dated 22:20 . 06-1985 and subsequently chargesheeted vide Chargeshet No. RO/IR/ 86 /222 dated 14-04-1986 by the Disciplinary Authority. Charges leveled against the workman are as follows:

(1) He forged the signature of Smt . Ratna Sarkar , a customer in a withdrawal slip and fraudulentiy withdrawn Rs . 250/- on 20-05-1982 from het Savings A/c.No. 126.1 maintained at Baranagar Branch of the Bank.

S.O. 2001. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 09/05) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , Kolkata as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Central Bank of India and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 30-6-2008 .

(2) He forged the signature of aforesaid Smt . Ran [F. No. L- 12011 / 158 /2004- IR (B - II ) ] RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

Sarkar in a withdrawal slip and fraudulentiy withdrawn Rs . 500 on 25-05-1982 from her atorestid Saings A/ c .

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA

(3) He also forged the signature of the sand Smt . Ratna Sarkar and withdrawn Rs . 25/-on 28-0 1982 from the aforesaid Savings A/ c .

Reference No. 09 of 2005

Shri S.M. Basu . Chief Officer ( Law ) and sc Parties : Employers in relation to the management of Central Bank of India

AND

Theirworkmen.

Present : Mr. Justice C.P. Mishra Presiding Officer

Appearance:

examined on behalf ofboth the management and workime Mr. T.R. Behera, Law

and some documents were also exhibited . The housin Onbehalf of the Officer.

Manageinent

On behalf of the Workmen : Mr. D. Chatterjee, General Secretary of the union.

Indust./Banking .

State: West Bengal .

Dated: 19th June , 2008

AWARD

Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas were appointed as Enquiry Officer and Presenting Officer respectively by the Disciplinary Authority in respect of the enquiry to enquire into the charges leveled against the workman concerned In . enquiry was started on 08-05-1986 and the same w concluded on 29-07-1986. In the enquiry witnesses vac Officer in his findings submitted to the Disciplmars Authority on 22-08-1986 came to the conclusion that ihn. charges contained in the chargesheet dated 14-04-1986 г. с not been proved against the chargesheeted employee beyond reasonable doubt . It is pointed out that the witness MW- 2, Niharendu Dutta an officer working in the Savings Department stated during enquiry that the three withdi.ass.el slips in question were passed by him for payment . He a sa stated that the chargesheeted employee was absent un 24-05-1982 and 25-05-1982 and normally thePean Subordinate Staff had not got any access to the specime .. signature cards or pass book. Evidence of MW-G, DK

Mukherjee is also pointed out and it is stated that he t By Order No. L. - 12011 / 158 /2004-1R( B - 11) dated 11-01-2005 the Government of India , Ministry of Labour in exercise of its powers under Section 10( 1 ) (d) and (2A) of the industrial Dispute Act, 1947 referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

stated that the modus operandi of this fraud was by forting

the signature of the account holder and therem

withdrawing the money on the basis of forged .

"Whether the action of the management of Central Bank of India, 206 A.P.C. Road, Kolkata -700004 in 3999 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

for committing basic error of fact . It is also submitted that the chargesheet itself is malafide . The Disciplinary Authority has drawn his own imagination and imported facts and circumstances not proved in the enquiry . The Disciplinary Authority and also the Appellate Authority have not made proper evaluation ofthe evidence on record and based their conclusions on mere conjectures and surmises and their decisions are perverse . It is further stated that the findings of the Disciplinary Autority is bad in law because he has not passed a speaking or reasoned order . It is accordingly that the concerned workman be made free from all charges and he be reinstated in service with full back wages from 26-11-2002 and difference of suspension allowance from 24-05-1985 to 15-01-1996 .

3. The management of Central Bank of India, hereinafter to be referred as the management has filed a written, statement. Management firstly challenged the maintainability of the reference itself and has stated that it is ex - facie without any application of mind by the concerned authority and the same is not maintainable in law. On merits it is stated that the workman had committed frauds on several occasions at Bank's Baranagar Branch for which he was served with suspension memo dated 22/24-05-1985 by the Bank when the incidents came to its knowledge . The memo dated 10-08-1984 relates to his commission of fraudulent withdrawals of money for Rs . 250/- , Rs . 500/- and 25 / - on 20-05-1982 and 24-05-1982 respectively from HSS A/ c . No. 1261 of Miss Ratna Sarkar at Bank's Baranagar Branch by forging the signatures of the said depositor . Ultimately , it was decided to initiate the departmental enquiry against the concerned workman and he was issued with the chargesheet dated 14-04-1986 and after completion of a full - fledged departmental enquiry and giving him a personal hearing about the proposed punishment by the Disciplinary Authority , punishment of discharge from bank's service was inflicted upon him . According to the management the departmental enquiry in the instant case cannot be termed as improper as the delinquent employee was informed the charges leveled against him and he alongwith his defence representative participated in the enquiry proceedings , he was supplied with the report of the Enquiry Officer and proper hearing was also given to him about the proposed punishment to be inflicted. It is stated that it will be proved beyond doubt, ifmaterial evidence put forth in the departmental enquiry are noted upon that there is every reason on the part of the Bank management to lose confidence on the workman . Further case of the management is that the Enquiry Officer Shri S.M. Basu in the departmental enquiry totally erred in his findings dated 22-08-1986 and it was lopsided , partial and biased in as- much - as he failed to explain as to why and in what waythe charges in the chargesheet could not be found to have been proved and in what way more sorts of circumstantial and corroborative evidence was to be produced by the Presenting Officer when 11 documents on the withdrawals or Smt . Rantna Sarkar , but he did not come to the conclusion in his confidential report that some . staff members are involved . So also the evidence of MW - 4 , Amar Singh the Assistant Govt . Examiner of the questioned documents who clearly stated during enquiry in cross -examination that his opinion does not contain the detailed analysis regarding the aspects of similarities and dissimilarites as appearing in the questioned documents and standard handwritings . Evidence of DW- 1 , P. Chatterjee is also referred to wherein it is stated by him tha the writer of the disputed writings, appearing on the three withdrawal slips are definitely not written by the cor.cerned workman. It is pointed out that the concerned account holder in whose account the alleged fraud was coramitted was not produced during enquiry. The Bank authorities , however , prevailed over the Disciplinary Authority to issue another memo dated 24-02-1987 appointing another Enquiry Officer for initiating a de -novo enquiry. In such view of the matter , the concerned workman had no other alternative but to move the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in its writ jurisdiction challenging holding of de- novo enquiry being No. Civil Order 8962 (W) of 1987 and obtained, an order. of stay . However , the said writ petition was withdrawn when the Bank authorities has submitted before the Hon'ble Court that it would not proceed with de-novo enquiry. Thereafter another memo dated 13-06-1989 was issued to the workman enclosing therewith a copy of the findings of the Enquiry Officer and the Disciplinary Authority has communicated in the said memo that he has disagreed with the findings of the Enquiry Officer and proposed to award a consolidated punishment of discharge from service . After giving a personal hearing to the chargesheeted workman the Disciplinary Authority vicle order dated 26-11-2002 awarded the punishment of discharge from service with superannuation benefits against the workman concerned . The workman thereafter made an appeal against the aforesaid order of punishment, but the Appellate Authority after giving a personal hearing to the workman upheld the said punishment . It is pointed out that the Disciplinary Authority after taking personal hearing on 23-09-2002 recommended to the Central Office , VigilanceDept. vide letter No. RO/KOL /N /RM/02-03/9/1,18 dated proposed to award the punishment of bringing down to lower by two stages in the existing scale of pay for a period of two years as per Clause 6(e ) of the Bipartite Settlement dated 10-04-2002 against the concerned workman , but ultimately imposed the aforsaid punishment under Clause 6 (d ) of the said Bipartite Settlement . It is submitted that the findings of the Enquiry Officer under the provisions of the Bipartite Settlement is invulnerable and the Disciplinary Authority is bound to take them into consideration and accordingly for disciplnary action .The order ofthe Disciplnary Authority should have been drafted under paragraph 521/87 and clause 19.10 of the Bipartite Settlement. The workman was punished on charges not proved in the enquiry and thus the management is guilty

2644 G1 /08-20 4000

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[ PART 11-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] and 5 witnesses had been produced and examined by him as against only one witness and virtually one consolidated documentary evidence of the defence representative. The said Enquiry Officer also failed to explain as to why the opinions of the two handwriting experts produced by the PresentingOfficer could not be found reliable by him . By referring to the several documents and deposition of the witness it is stated that there are conclusive proof that the concerned workman committed the fraud in question . Management has denied all the claims and contentions of the workman in seriatim . It is submitted that the present order of reference and the claims of the union deserves to be rejected with cost by passing an Award in favour of the Bank holding that the action by the Bank was legal , proper and justified.

4.A rejoinder is also filed on behalf of the workman denying the claims and contentions ofthe management on its written statement and also reiterating the claims and contentions made on behalf of the workman in his statement ofclaims.

5. In this case both the parties have examined one witness each . On behalf of the workman the concerned workman Shri Amiya Kumar Sahu has been examined as WW- 1 . In his evidence he has stated that he joined the Bank on 20-01-1982 as a member of the sub - staff at Baranagar Branch. He has stated all the facts regarding his suspension, issuance of chargesheet to him and the departmental enquiry proceedings leading to his discharge from service and raising the present industrial dispute before the conciliation officer which are not in dispute . In cross- examination he has stated that he did not withdraw the amount for three instances from the account of one Ratna Sarkar . He dinied that he had not given reply to the chargesheet or that his defence representative admitted the facts of the said withdrawal in the enquiry . He has aiso denied that there was sufficient evidence to prove the charges against him.

On the other hand the management has examined Shrl S.M. Basu the concerned Enquiry Officer as MW- 1 . He has stated in his evidence that he knew the concerned workman against whom he held the departmental enquiry as an Enquiry Officer . The charge against the workman was defalcation of money . He has also stated that he had submitted his report which contains everything and as per his finding the charges against the workman were not proved . According to him he had conducted the enquiry after affording all the opportunities to both the sides in this regard . In cross - examination he has stated that he had given full opportunity to the management to prove the charges and file documents whatever they wanted .

6. Severaldocuments have been exhibited on behalf of both the parties in this case . Documents exhibited on behalf of the workman are as follows . Ext . W - 1 is a memo

dated 22/24-05-1985 issued by the Bank suspendling the concerned workman. Ext . W- 2 is the chargesheet dated 14-04-1986 issued by the Disciplinary Authority to the concerned workman . Ext . W - 3 is the written argument on behalf of the workman submitted to the Enquiry Officer . Ext. W-4 is the concerned enquiry report submitted by the Enquiry Officer . Ext . W- 5 is the memo dated 24-02-1987 issued by the Disciplinary Authority regarding appointment ofShri Rabiswar Banerjee as an Enquiry Officer to conduct de - novo enquiry against the concerned workman . Ext . W- 5/ 1 is a memo dated 21-07-1998 issued by Shri S.R. Mitra, Enquiry Officer informing the workman that the de -novo eriquiry is kept pending . Ext . W-6 is the memo dated 05-01-1996 issued to the workman informing him about the revocation of suspension order. Ext . W - 7 is a letter dated 09-01-1996 written by the Regional Manager ofthe bank to the Baranagar Branch of the Bank regarding revocation of the suspension order against the workman . Ext. W- 8 is the memo dated 14-04-1986 issued by the Disciplinary Authority regarding appointment of Shri S.M. Basu as the Enquiry Officer to conduct the enquiry in respect of the concerned workman . Ext . W - 9 is a letter dated 07-06-1989 written by Shri M.M. Guha, Advocate addressed to Shri B.R. Bhattacharya , Advocate . Ext . W- 10 is a letter dated 26-06-1989 written by Shri S.D. Chowdhury addressed to the Chief Manager , Central Bank and also to the Disciplinary Authority . Ext W -11 is a memo dated 08-08-2002 issued by the Disciplinary Authorityto the concerned workman . Ext. W- 12 is a letter 21-08-2002 addressed to the Disciplinary Authority by the workman . Ext, W - 13 is a memo dated 20-08-2002 issued by the Disciplinary Authority to the workman . Ext . W- 14 is the judgment dated 26-08-2002 passed by the Hon'ble High Court at Culcutta in W.P. 12034 ( W) of 2002. Ext . W - 15 is a memo dated 28-08-2002 issued by the Disciplinary Authority to the workman . Ext . W- 16 is a letter dated 23-09-2002 written bytheDisciplinary Authority to the workman . Ext . W- 17 is minutes of personal hearing dated 23-09-2002 held by the Disciplinary Authority in respect of the proposed punishment . Ext . W- 18 is the final order dated 26-11-2002 passedby the Disciplinary Authority against the workman. Ext. W- 19 is the memo dated 26-11-2002 issued by the Regional Manager to the workman regarding imposition of punishment upon the workman . Ext . W-20 is the minutes of personal hearing conducted on 04-03-2003 by the Appellate Authority. Ext . W - 20 / 1 is a letter dated 04-03-2003 written by the workman and his representative addressed to the AppellateAuthority. Ext . W-21 is a letter dated 21-04-2003 written by the Appellate Authority to the workman . Ext . W-22 is the judgment dated 15-06-2004 passed by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in WP 7418 ( W) of 2003. Exts . W-23 to W - 28 are the correspondences in respect of the conciliation proceedings held in this case. Ext . W - 29 is the order dated 26-07-2002 passed by the learned X1 Bench of the City Civil Court , Kolkata .

4001 [ भाग 11- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

7. On behalf of the management following documents have been exhibited . Ext. M- 1 is a letter of complaint dated 13-07-1982 written by Smt. Ratna Sarkar addressed to the Manager of the Baranagar Branch of the Bank . Ext. M- 2 is the order dated 09-06-1989 passed by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in C.O.No. 8962(W) of 1987. Ext . M-3 and M-4 are the documents in respect of the conciliation proceedings held in this case . Ext . M - 5 is the copy of H.S.S. A/ c . No. 1261 of Smt . Ratna Sarkar . Ext , M -6 is the opinion of the Govt.Examiner dated 07-03-1986 . Ext . M-7 is another opinion dated 05-08-1982 of Shri S.P .. Sarkar , Document Analyst . Ext . M - 8 is another opinion dated 23-07-1986 of Shri P. Chatterjee , Document Examiner . Ext . M-9 is the enquiry proceedings held against the workman on various dates . Ext. M - 10 is written argument submitted by the Presenting Officerbefore the Enquiry Officer in this case . Ext . M - 11 is the concerned withdrawal slips dated 20-05-1982 , 25-05-1982 and 28-05-1982 . Ext . M - 12 is the application of theworkman dated 05-08-1978 seeking employment in the Bank. Ext . M - 13 is the specimen of handwritting of the workman . Ext . M- 14 is the specimen signature card in HSS A/ c . 1261 of Smt . Ratna Sarkar. Ext. M - 15 is the confidential report dated 21-08-1982 of Shri D.K. Mukherjee, Deputy ChiefOfficer . Ext. M - 16 is a letter dated 08-07-1987 written by Shri T.K. Majumder , Presenting Officer to the Disciplinary Authority regarding the de - novo enquiry against the workman .

hand-writing experts Shri Amar Singh , MW - 4, Shri S.P. Sarkar, MW - 5 and another hand -writing expert Shri P. Chatterjee , DW - 1 and gave a positive finding in favour of the workman holding him not guilty to the chages so framed against him vide his report , Ext . W-4 .It was stated in so many words that " In view of what has been stated above in the absence of corroborative evidence 1 find that the charges in the chargesheet dated 14-04-1986 have not been proved against the chargesheeted employee Shri Sahu beyond reasonable doubt . " The matter thereafter was placed before the Disciplinary Authority for further action to be taken thereof but according to the workman the said authority did not agree to the findings of the Enquiry Officer and out of alleged vengeance tried to get another Enquiry Officer appointed to enquire into the charges . The workman thereupon challenged the said de novo enquiry as ordered against him and filed a Writ Petition No. C.O. 8962 (W) of 1987 before the Hon'ble High Court and obtained an order for stay . The Writ Petition was withdrawn by the workman and it has been submitted on his behalf that is was done so on the assurance of the Bank that they will not proceed with the de novo enquiry further. It has also come in the evidence that the workman had also filed a Civil Suit No. 1066/1989 in the Court of City Civil Court at Kolkata and obtained an order of interim injunction on 20-06-1989 and hewas reinstated in service after revoking suspension order passed against him and this continued till the said suit had been dismissed under Order 7 Rule 11 of the C.P.C. by the Civil Court on 26-07-2002 . Ext . W -29 . It is also evident that the workman had also filed two writ petitions before the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta i.e. 12034 ( W) of 2002 and 7418 ( W) of 2003 to challenge the disciplinary. proceedings being taken against him and raising an industrial dispute in this regard . It is evident that both the writpetitions were ultimately dismissed on 26-08-2002. Ext . W-14 and on 15-06-2004 , Ext . W- 22 . The Disciplinary Authority has issued Memo dated 28-08-2002 to the workman to show cause to the proposed punishment of discharge form service in pursuance of the order passed by the Hon'ble High Court and then the final order dated 26-11-2002 was passed him by the DisciplinaryAuthority vide Exts . W- 18 and W- 19 . The Appellate Authority , Thereafter, also confirmed the order of the Disciplinary Authority by passing an order dated 21-04-2003 , Ext . W-21 against the workman , who had challeged it before the Hon'ble High Court by filing the said Writ Petition No.7418 (W) of2003 which was decided on 15-06-2004 on the preliminary objection regarding maintainability ofthe WritPetition on the ground of availability of the remedy before the forums established under the Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 and thus the matter has come before this Tribunal for adjudication of the claim of the workman regarding legality and justification of the action of the manageinent in discharging him from service ofthe Bank on the basis of the impugned orders so passed against the workman by the Bank Authorities vide Exts . W- 19 and W- 21 .

8. On the persual of the aforesaid facts and evidence led by the parties it is evident that the workman has challenged the order of termination of his services on the basis of alleged enquiry held against him into the charges that he had forged the signature of one customer , Smt . Ratna Sarkar by fraudulently withdrawing an amount ofRs.250/ - on 20th May, 1982, Rs . 500/- on 25th May, 1982 and Rs . 25/ - on 28-05-2008 from her Savings Account No. 1261 maintained at Baranagar Branch ofthe Bank . He was chargesheeted and an enquiry was held against him by the Enquiry Officer, Shri S.M. Basu , Chief Officer ( Law) ofthe Bank who recorded statements of the 3 witnesses produced on behalf of the management viz . S/ Shri A.K. Chatterjee, Niharendu Dutta and D.K. Mukherjee who were officials ofthe Bank together with the statements of two handwriting experts viz . Assistant Government Document Examiner , Shri Amar Singh , MW -4 and another document Examiner, Shri S.P. Sarkar, MW- 5 who were examined as such on its behalf. The workman had produced in his defence one witness viz . Shri P. Chatterjee as DW- 1 to be a hand - writing expert who stated that the alleged withdrawal slips said to have been bearing the signatures of the workman , in fact , do not tally with the specimen writing ofthe workman and as such the charges framed against him could not be said to have been proved at all , The Enquiry Officer after having considered all the aformentioned evidence ledbefore him during the enquiry made a detailed analysis of the entire evidence led by the parties including that of the [PART II- SEC. 3 ( 11 ) 4002

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4. 1930

9. Relying upon the aforesaid facts and the matter having been agitated by the workman before the Civil Court as well as before the Hon'ble High Court and the case being ulimately dismissed, it has been argued on behalf of the managerment that this reference is not legally maintainable and barred by Res judicata as well as by law of limitation as the dispute is being raised before this froum after more than three years . This plea raised on behalf of the management , however, does not hold good as the workman had been agitating his claim before the concerned Courts seeking a legal remedy to challenge the orders passed against hini for holding de novo enquiry even after a finding given in his favour being held not so guilty during the enquiry as it was so guilty during the enquiry as it was so cortducted by the Enquiry Officer vide his report Ext . W- 4 inthis connection . The inatter thereafter remained pending before various Courts between the parties and ultimately it hadbeen referred to this Tribunal for its adjudication after the'matter was finally so disposed of by the Hon'ble High Court on 15-06-2004 , Ext . W- 22 holding that the claim of the workman could be looked into only by the Industrial Tribunal under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 and as such there is no question of any bar of hisclaim on the ground of law of limitation or even on the plea of Res Judicata as it has been so raised on behalf of the management about the same.

11. On the persual of the aforesaid facts and submissions it is also evident that there had been no direct evidence of any person who might have stated any such fact against the workman that he had personaliy seen him filling the withdrawal slips or presenting the same to the counter or for taking the amount personally as such from the Bank counter on the alleged three dates when the said fraud was said to have been committed by the workman . On the contrary , it has positively come in evidence that on one of the three dates of withdrawals when the alleged fraud had been so committed by the workman, i.e. 25-05-1982 he had not even come to the office . The account holder , Smt. Ratna Sarkar it is evident herself did not give any such evident personally against him . She also did not give her own specimen handwriting as such so that the same could also be compared by the experts examined in this regard to show that the amount in fact which was so withdrawn from her account had not been so withdrawn by she herselfat all . Thus the only evidence what is so remained against the workinan are the reports of the handwriting experts as it had been so filed by the management viz . reports of Shri Amar Singh , MW -4 and Shri S.P. Sarkar , MW - 5 in this regard , Both the experts had stated that they were of the opinion that the person who had wrote the standard writings marked A - 1 and A- 2 did not so write the questioned signatures on the ground of Basic differences in the handwriting Characteristics of the two . Shri Amar Singh , MW - 5 had stated that the person who wrote the standard writings S- 1, S - 2 and A- 3 had also written the questioned writings Q- 1 to Q- 13 and they show siinilarity in the handwriting characteristics in both general as well as individual features of the same . The discrepancy in his report were however pointed out by the defence in the cross - examination as put tohim and it was admitted by him saying that " The opinion does not contain the detailed Analysis regarding the aspects of similarities and dissimilarities as appearing in the Questioned and Standard Hand Writings ." He also admitted that a letter from the Zonal Office of the Bank had been sent to him and so received by him and it was written therein that "On the basis of the investigation we suspect that one Shri A.K. Sahu , Sub - staff in our Branch forged the signature of Snit . Ratna Sarkar on the withdrawal slips and fraudulently withdrew the amountsas aferesaid . However, to arrive at the definite conclusion, we need the opinion of handwriting expert . " The statement given by another expert who had been examined by the management viz. Shri S.P. Sarkar , MW - 5 during the enquiry also go to show that in his cross - examination he had also conceded that he had not commented upon anything regarding pen position, pen pressure , shedding . aligrunent and size of the letters and other characteristics of the writings as it had been so compared by him in this regard . Some of the 10. ¡The next point now remains to be considered regarding the merit of the claim of the workman who has chalilenged the order of his discharge as it has been so passed by the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority, Exts . W - 19 and W- 21 against him after having disagreed with the findings and report of the Enquiry Officer vide Ext . W- 4 . It is evident that the Enquiry Officer in this case had conducted a detailed enquiry aginst the workman after having framed three charges of fraud against him . He had also recorded the statements of the witnesses as it was só produced by the management as well as by the workman and after making a detailed analysis of the materials and evidence had found the charges so framed to be not so established against the workman. It is evident that the findings as given by the Enquiry Officer in his report , Ext . W-4 positively go to show that there had been no such material or evidence against the workınan as it was so led by the management in this enquiry to prove the charges framed against the workman . The Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority however did not agree to the same relying upon the reports of the handwriting experts as it was so examined by the management during the enquiry in this regard . No doubt both of them could very well have dohe it by so disagreeing with the findings of the Enquiry Officer but that must have been based and supported by a cogent evidence to rebut the positive findings ofthe EnquiryOfficer as given by him his report, Ext. W -4 in this connection.

4003 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राज़पत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

other discrepancies which were so pointed out in his report, Ext . M-7 during the cross -examination also clearly go to show that the report as it was so given by him could notbe such a conclusive report from every point of view that it must be so read against the workman to show beyond all doubt that they all bear his own handwriting on all the three withdrawal slips so used by him and which is the basis of charge of this forgery so committed by him to make a fraudulent fransaction on behalf of the account holder, Smt. Ratna Sarkar as it is so alleged against him.

On actual comparison between the disputed writings with the writings of A.K.Sahu, I find the following similarities such as , operation of " f " , looping operation of " d " , shoulder of " n " , pentwisting at first shoulder of " r " , operation of " s " , loop of " e " retracting at the top of "Y " , All the said agreement with the writings dated 5-8-78 only . Ifinddifferences in the entire operation of " self" , " only " , "thirty, fifty, twenty " , entire operation and combination of "Five" , combination of figures " 500 " , nature of the strokes after figures (amount) , axis of figure & letter " O " . There are good similarities between the request writings and the body-writings of the disputed W/slips . As they were taken in unusual manner , I have not considered them. " 12. The handwriting expert examined on behalf of the workman , i.e. Shri P.Chatterjee , DW- 1 in this connection hac also given his report, Ext . M - 8 after having made a detailed analysis of the papers and after having examined all the aforsaid documents and he had clearly found and marked the points of dissimilarity in the two writings , i , e. , questioned documents with the specimen writings of the workman concerned. He gave a clear and definite finding about the disputed writing by saying that the disputed writings on the three withdrawal slips marked Ext. M- 11 collectivelywere definitely not so written by the workman cor.cerned. The findings as given by him about it in the report Ext . M - 8 and the statement so given by him during the enquiry have made this aspect of the matter very much clear to show the basic difference which goes at the very root of the matter and the charge so framed against the workman. It says that

"On inter - se comparison between the writings of Smt. Ratna Sarkar , I find that the signatures on the W/ slip anc. S /card show upward alignment to the right , whereas on 13-7-82 the alignment is just reverse . It is strange thing when all the signatures were written on white paper ( i.e. not on rulled paper) . Moreover , the over - writings on the letter " s " of 13-7-82 writings is too much suspicious . The consistency is present between the signatures dated 26-10-81 & 27-9-75 , but is absent in 13-7-82 signature .

On inter- se comparison between the disputed signatures . I am satisfied that all the signatures show good normal variations . According to the authority, if there are good natural variations in between the disputed signatures , it strongly suggest genuineness . As a matter of fact , it is a practice that forgerer will try to forge signatures from a common model . It will be a gigantic tusk for him to copy so many signatures from so many models . There are some peculiar spelling mistakes such as , " Thwity " " Hurdedess " in all 3 W/Slips . The writings show very poor. Practically all the letters and figures were written separately . Naturally, the speed is also very slow. It is also unusual that inspite of some over -writings in all the 3 W/Slips , all have been usually passed for payment in usual course . Most of the writings are written on base lines .

13.Thus, there are reports of the handwriting experts on either side in support of their respective positive claims and contentions as it has been raised in this regard. There is no direct evidence adduced by the management in this connection at all to prove the charges by any other piece of corroborative evidence to prove the charges . The opinion of a handwriting expert as it has been so held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Murarilal v. State ofMadhya Pradesh (AIR 1980 SC 531 ) and in other number of cases go to show that an expert may go wrong because of some defect of observation , some error of premises or honest mistake of conclusion . In Ishwari Prasad v . Mohammad Isa (AIR 1963 SC 1728) it has been also held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that expert evidence ofhand - writing can never be a conclusive evidence because it is , after all , an opinion evidence only. This had been reiterated in other case of Sashi Kumar v . Subodh Kumar (AIR 1964 SC 529 ) where it has been observed that expert evidence as to hand - writing being just an opinion evidence it can rarely , if ever , take the place of substantive evidence and so before acting on such avidence, it would be desirable to consider whether it is so corroborated either by a clear direct evidence or by circumstantial evidence as well , as the case may be . The science of identification of handwriting is not so perfect unlike the science of identification of thumb impression , which is no doubt an exact science and so it does not admit ofany mistake or doubt [ AIR 1979 SC 1708 ( Jaspal Singh v. State of Punjab ) ] . In this case it is evident that no thumb impression had been so taken for its examination but as the case is that this report is only based on the examination of handwriting and signature of the workman and this could not be so perfect and conclusive to prove the charges so framed against him that it was he who had actually so. withdrawn the amount through the said withdrawal slips by not producing the pass book thereof on behalf of the actual account holder Smt . Ratna Sarkar who did not herself gave any such statement against him nor she herself gave her own specimen writing to prove this fact to be otherwise as it is so: contended about it by the mamagement in this connection ..

4004

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008 /SRAVANA 4, 1930

[PART II - SEC . 3 ( ii )]

byhim in his report , Ext . W - 4 so as to say it to be perverse orbased on extraneous consideration . Both the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority in this connection did not consider the material facts as it was so placed during the enquiry to rebut the findings of the Enquiry Officer to hold the workman to be not guilty. They had only relied upon the report of the handwriting experts as it were so examined by the management ignoring the material discrepancies in their reports and evidence given for the same. They appear to have been very much influenced by the report of the Vigilance Department which they had not been so placed during the enquiry so that the workman could have an occasion to challenge and rebut the same in this connection . The past record of the workman and his admitted absence from the office on one of the three dates ofthe alleged commission of fraud had also not been looked into so as to rebut the claim of the workmen in this regard . The findings as such which was given by the Enquiry Officer in his report , Ext . W- 4 finding the workman to be not guilty could not be assailed as such by both the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority . It is evident that there is no material evidence against the workman at all to hold him guilty of the three charges so framed against him for commission of fraud by the workman concerned who was already exonerated as such by the Enquiry Officer as per his report Ext . W - 4 after holding a proper and legal enquiry which could not be assailed or held to be otherwise by the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority in view of the facts and circumstances of the case . The workınan as such could not be held guilty to the charges so frarned against him and the impugned orders dated 26-11-2002 and 21-4-2003 , Ext . W - 18 and W-21 passed against the workman concerned by the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority deserves to be set aside . The workman deserves to be reinstated in service with full back wages and all other consequential benefits available to him in , this regard .

15. So , upon consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case , evidence on record and the position of the law in the matter , I am to hold that the action of the management of Central Bank of India , 206 A.P.C. Road, Kolkata -700004 in discharging the services of Shri Amiya Kumar Sahu , Sub - staff of Baghmore Branch under R.O.North Kolkata is illegal and unjustified . The concerned workman is entitled to be reinstated in service from the date of his illegal discharge from service along with full back wages and all other consequential benefits .

The reference is answered accordingly.

Dated , Kolkata , 19th June , 2008 .

14. In view of that factual aspect of the matter and evidence so adduced in this case , it is evident that there is no direct evidence of the customer Smt . Ratna Sarkar herself so examined by the management in this enquiry since her whereabouts were not known to it as per its report , Ext . M- 16.Also there is no direct evidence of any Bank official as such to be thereagainst the workman that he had seen him so collecting the amount personally in the Bank from the Cashier on the said three dates when the alleged withdrawals had been so made by the concerned workman in this regard. On the contrary it has come in the evidence positively that on one of the three dates admittedly the workman hadinot been personally so present in the office of the Bank so that he could be directly said to have been personally so involved for the commission of fraud as it is so alleged by the management against him . The findings given by the Enquiry Officer in this connection is quite definite and positive one and after analyzing full evidence and material which were so placed before him by the management . It can not be said that it was not based on facts or legal evidence or said to be perverse so that it could have been interfered at all by the Disciplinary Authority or even by the Appellate Authority to negative the findings of the Enquiry Officer . The report of the handwriting experts as it had been so examined by the management had also been considered by the Enquiry Officer himself in his report Ext. W- 4 for the same . The evidence ofhandwriting experts as it was so filed on behalf of the management was just an opinion of the expert and by itself it could not be the sole basis of proof of the charges as substantive piece of evidence against the workmen so as to hold him guilty on that ground and basis alone . There had been no other direct evidence or cireumstantial evidence of the management to prove all these charges against the workman so as to connect him with the alleged act of making withdrawal of the amount froin the account of Smt . Ratna Sarkar vide withdrawal slips, Ext . M - 11 in this connection . The categorical finding ofthe EnquiryOfficer vide his report, Ext . W - 4 shows that the charges so framed against the workman were not proved andthe workman concerned had not been guilty for it . It is evident that the whole object of holding a domestic enquiry against a delinquent workman by the Enquiry Officer is to decide upon the facts and merits of the dispute as it is so referred to him. The report of the Enquiry Officer may be rejected or held to be vitiated where the Enquiry Officer acts mala fide , i.e. , ignores or excludes froin consideration vital and material piece of evidence or takes into consideration any irrelevant or extraneous material or where he transgresses the rules of natural justice and none of it so attributed to him in his regard to challenge the report at all . There is no such allegation or fact said against the Enquiry Officer so as to vitiate his findings as it is so given

C. P. MISHRA , Presiding Officer [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 30 जून , 2008

का. आ. 2002.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार सिडिंकेट बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 98/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 30-06-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[फा. सं. एल -12011 / 75/2003- आई.आर. (बी -1 ) ] एन. एस. बोरा , आर्थिक अधिकारी New Delhi , the 30th June , 2008 S.O. 2002. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 98/ 2003 ) of Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court - II , Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial dispute between the management of Syndicate Bank , and their workmen , received by the Central Government 30-06-2008 . on

[F. No. L-12011 /75/2003-1R( B- 1 ) ] N. S. BORA , Economic Officer

ANNEXURE

TRIBUNAL (NO. 2 ), SHRAM BHAWAN , MURLINAGAR, DHANBAD

PRESENT

Shri Nagendra Kumar, Presiding Officer Inthe matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d ) ofthe I.D. Act, 1947 Reference No. 98 of 2003

PARTIES

Employers in relation to the management of Syndicate Bank And

theirworkmen .

APPEARANCES

OnBehalfofthe Employers : Mr. Rajesh Kr . Sinha, Manager ( P)

On Behalf ofthe Workmen : Sri P.Choudhary , State Secretary,SBEU . Representative workman State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal

Dated, Dhanbad, the 9th June , 2008 .

AWARD

TheGovernment of India, Ministry of Labour in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section

4005

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

10(1)(d) of the I.D.Act , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No.L- 120 11 /75 /2003 - IR(B - 1 ) dated 9-09-2003 .

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Syndicate Bank, in not regularising the services of Sh . Amar Kumar in Syndicate Bank is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief he is entitled ? "

The record is put up in the Lok Adalat. Both the parties named above are present and files a settlement petition under their signature . Perused the settlement petition and heard both side . The settlement appears to be fair, proper and in accordance with the principle of natural justice. Accordingly the said settlement petition is accepted and an Award is passed in terms thereof which forms part ofthe Award as annexure .

NAGENDRA KUMAR, Presiding Officer FORM - H

Memorandum of Settlement arrived at Under Section 12(3) of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 between the Management of Syndicate Bank and their workmen represented by Syndicate Bank Employees Union before thePresiding Officer , Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 2 , Dhanbad on 9-6-2008 .

Parties to the Settelment :

Representing the Management

Sri Rajesh Kumar Sinha

Manager(P)

Syndicate Bank

Regional Office , Patna

Representing the Union /Workman

Sri Prabhat Choudhary , State Secretary

S. B. E. U.

Bihar State Committee

Short Recital of the Case

The State Secretary, SBEU , Bihar State Committee had raised an industrial dispute over alleged denial of regularization of Sri Samarnath Singh and 08 others Attenders / PTS working in different branches of Syndicate Bank and the matter was referred for adjudication in this Tribunal . In course of hearing both the parties agreed to settle the dispute on the following terms :

TERMS OF SETTLEMENT

It isagreed between both the parties that:

(1 ) The following Attenders and Part Time Sweepers have been regularized from the date mentioned against their names:

4006

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( in ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 26, 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

Name of the Candidates

S.No. CaseNo.

Regularised as & posted to Branch

Date of Regularisation

15-2-2007

1. 25/2003

Attender, Patna Bailey Road

Sri Samarnath Singh

15-2-2007

2. 97/2003 Sri Mani Shankar Das

AttenderDarbhanga GBPS

15-2-2007

Sri Amar Kumar

Attender, TCD Muzaffarpur

3. 98/2003

2-12-20007

Sri Sunil Kumar

PTS , Siwan

4. 103/2003

2-4-2007

PTS, Patna

Sri R. C. Uraon

5. 104/2003

2-4-2007

SriP. K. Rout

6. 105/2003

PTS,Hajipur

25-11-2005

Attender Danapur Main

7. 107/2003 Sri Sushil Kr . Ojha

Attender Patna

15-2-2007

8. 109/2003 Sri Ramji Prajapati

(2) The Union does not want to contest the case of Sri Pramod Kumar Chaudhary, Case Ref. No. 106/2003 as the management has already issued the appointment order and he has not joined the Bank so far .

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 45 / 1997) of the Central Government industrial Tribunal- cum - Labour Court No 2 , New Delhi , as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Punjab National Bank, and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 30-6-2008

[F. No. L - 12011 / 1 / 1996 - IR (B - II) ]

RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer (3) The Union has requested for inclusion of temporary service of Attenders /Part Time Sweeper into permanent service of the Bank in tune with the understanding reached with the management held at Manipal on 1.3rd . Sept, 1983 as well as the provision ofthe Bipartite Settlement in this regard.

ANNEXURE

The management agreed to look into the matter as perthe guidelines of the Bank .

Signed by:

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRA GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT- II , NEW DELHI Representing the Management

I.D. NO . 45/1997

PRESIDING OFFICER : R. N. RAI

Rajesh Kumar Sinha

IN THE MATTER OF :

Manager(P)

The General Secretary ,

Syndicate Bank Regional Office , Patna

Representing the Union/ Workmen

Punjab National Bank workers Organisation , 898, Nai Sarak, Delhi- 110006.

Prabhat Choudhary ,

Versus

State Secretary , S. B. E. U. Bihar State Committee

The Chief Personel ,

नई दिल्ली , 30 जून , 2008

Punjab National Bank, H. O. Bhikaji Cama Place, NewDelhi .

AWARD

TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No.L - 12011 /1 / 96- IR (B- II ) Central Government Dt . 9-4-1997 has referred the following point for adjudication.

the point runs as hereunder :-

का. आ. 2003. - औद्योगिक विबाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार पंजाब नैशनल बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय न. 2 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 45/1997) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 30-6-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[फा. सं. एल-12011 / 1/1996- आई आर ( बी- II ) ] राजिन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 30th June , 2008

S. O. 2003. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central

"Whether the action of the management of Punjab National Bank in effecting their circular letter No. 43 / 94 dated 12-12-1994 ( new fitinent formula ) for fixing basic pay of ex - servicemen employees and recovering of excess amount paid w.e.f 13-3-1992 is legal and justified ? If, not to what relief ar : the workmen entitled and since what date . " [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

4007

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/श्रावण 4 , 1930

staff, for duties/ responisibilites as listed in Part- II of Appendix ' B ' hereto , shall be as follows :

The workman applicant has filed claim statement . In the claim statement it has been stated that the management of Punjab Nationai Bank, herinafter referred to as ' PNB ' vide its circular No. 43/94 dated 12th December , 1994 issued the instructions regarding Pay Fixation of Ex - Serviceman re-employed in Public Sectior Banks as Award Staff. Photostat copy of the Circular is attached to this statement ofclaim ant marked as Annexure - 1 . The relevant part ofthe Circular is reproduced for ready referrence .

The PNB decided to effect the provision of this circular in the following manner :-

The pay fixation of all servicemen working in the Bank in special allowance carrying post be re- fixed.

Incases of excess payment, the recovery be waived for the period till 13-3-92.

That there is no such provision in the Settlement Award to merge the special allowance into Basic Pay of only agroup of employees , the action of the ' PNB' is against such provisions and bad. The posts that carry special allowance , particularly Armed Guard/Watchman/ Steno- graphers etc. mentioned in the circular dated 12-12-94 are listed in the special allownces part of the Settlement which says that these allowance are intended to compensate workmen for discharging certain additional duties . Consideration of this aspect has been properly done at Bank'slevel and accordingly the Pay has been fixed taking into account the Basic Pay and Dearness Allowance only and not the special allowance for the last more than 30 years in the Banking Industry .

Such discrimination is a violation of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

The ex - servicemen who joined on or after 13-3-92. such excess payment on account of refixation of pay, be recovered.

Thus the recovery was to be made in all cases w.e.f. 13-3-93.

Ifthis new instruction is allowed to be implemented then the wage structure would be arbitrarily affected those ex- servicemen who would not get any special allowance post and those who would get different allowance posts . If twoArmed Force Servicemen after retirment are posted in the Bank whose last drawn wages are same at the time of retirement, and if one is posted on special allowance post ofstenographer and another one in general clerical cadre , thenresult will be that one despite working and discharging highly skill/responsibility would get the same salary as another one . One the other hand all the employees in entire Banking Industry who perform the special allowances duties are paid special allowances over and above the general employees for discharge of such duties .

InBanking Industry, the Pay fixation/revision is being done on the basis of Settlements entered into between the workmen and the management. Prior to these settlements , the salary and other terms and conditions were fixed by Awards , popularly known as Sastry Award and Desai Award. The Special Allowances, which are being paid to the workmen is clerical and subordinate cadre right since the beginning from part of different section of the Settlement separate from the Basic Pay and the Dearness Allowance. Not only that, this position is categorically made clear in Award/Settlement itself. The very first Bipartite Settlement in the Banking Industry which was entered into on 19-10-66 says as :-

Clause 5.6 ofBPS dated 19-10-66

Such arbitrary and unilateral decision on the part of the PNB as well as the Government of India is bad in the eyes of law and against the principles of natural justices and a violation of the Art 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

"The special allowances prescribed above are intended to compensate a workman for performance or discharge of certain additional duties and functions requiring greater skill or responsibility, over and above the routine duties and functions of a workman in the same cadre.

Clause 5.2

The Bank's contention in implementing this circular as isexplained with the Assistant Labour Commissioner (C) New Delhi , is " the bank has to abide by the instructions ascommunicated by the Government and follow the same. There is no force in this contention as the circular issued by the Bank on the basis of any such instructions is illegal and unjust.

Itistherefore prayed that this Hon'ble Tribunal may bekind enough to determine the reference in favour of the workmen and issued the following directions :

In supersession of paragraph 5.282 of the Desai Award the Special allowance payable to workmen other than the members of subordinate staff , for duties/ responsibilities as listed in Part I of Appendix ' B ' shall be as follows .

The said circular No. 43/94 dated 12-12-94 be withdrawn by the PNB.

Clause 5.3

The fixation of the salary of the Ex - Servicemen be doneas per the practice and the directions as were followed Insuppression of paragraph 5.326 ofthe Desai Award the Special Allowances payable to Members of subordinate

2644 G1 /08-21 4008

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4, 1930

earlier viz . the salary of the ex - servicemen be protected taking into the account the Basic Pay plus the Dearness Allowance.

Theſtreatment of Special Allowances be done as per the provisions of the Bank's settlement and at par with the other employees placed under the similar situation of working on special allowance posts .

The Management has filed written statement . In the written statement it has been stated that the fixation of salary of ex- servicemen who are reemployed in the banks after thein release from defence services is done on the basis of instructions issued by the Government of India from time to time . These instructions were communicated to the Bank by the Ministry of Finance through Indian Banks Association which were circulated by the Bank vide Personnel Division Circular No. 953 dated 21-8-1986 . Government has advised that the pay fixation of ex- servicemen would be done through protection of Pay+ DA drawn by them at the time of retirement/release from the Armed Forces . It was further stated that Pay + DA drawan by ex-servicemen in defence force would be protected with Pay + DA in the bank i.e. Basic Pay in the Bank's pay scale would be fixed/ arrived at after deducting DA admissible in the bank from the aggregate of Pay+ DA drawn by the reemployed ex - servicemen at the time of release from the Armed Forces . These instructions were issued by the Govt. in 1986 and were followed by the bank in letter and spirit .

Later it was intimated vide letter dated 13-3-1992 of Indian Banks Association that the Government of India , Ministry of Finance ( Banking Division) desired that it be clarified to all the banks that it would be necessary to ensure that the Basic Pay + DA+ Special allowance for Armed Guards/Watchmen are taken into account while protecting the last drawan pay ( Basic Pay and D.A. thereon ) at the time of retirement/discharge from the service of Armed Forces as the special allowance is in the nature of basic pay . It was further stated that the protection of pay as above ( i.e. with special allowance component) would also be relevant if the ex - servicemen are recruited as stenographers and for any other special allowance carrying posts in clerical/subordinate grades) .

On8th of September , 1993 as a result of references from a number of banks , Indian Banks Association considered the issue in the Personnel Committee of the Association and after discussing the issue at length and taking into consideration the practical difficulties that banks encountered in making re - fitment and recovery thereof dedided that clarification given vide letter dated 13-3-1992 may be made applicable w.e.f. prospective dates and also with recoveries that may arise on account of re - fixation of pay . The Personnel Committee was of the view that the matter may be taken up with the Government with request

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] to allow waiver of recoveries that may arise on account of such re -fixation of pay. Accordingly , the matter was taken up with Ministry of Finance , Government of India and the Government conveyed their approval on the following lines .

A copy of letter dated 8-9-93 of Indian Banks Association is enclosed as Annexure ' C ' . Clause 9 ( II ) as stated above of the approval of Government had created certainconfusionand accordingly vide letter dated 10-11-1994 Indian Banks Association clarified that they had taken up the matter with the Government as regards recovery of excess payments made after 13-3-1992 . It was further stated that the Government has since confirmed that recovery of excess payments made is to be waived only upto 13-3-1992 and the recovery is to be made after 13-3-1992 . A copy of letter dated 10-11-1994 of Indian Banks Association is enclosed as Annexure ' D' .

The above guidelines are uniform for all public sector banks and are not only for PNB . As such , bank has not acted arbitrarily as alleged, rather has acted in accordance with the guidelines received from the Government through IBA . Thus , the union cannot raise the issue of protection ofpay of ex - servicemen which does not find place in the servicemen staff, hence the terms of reference is bad both in law and on facts . Thus the alleged dispute is not maintainable.

It is true that the special allowance particularly of ArmedGuards , Watchmen , Stenographers, etc. as referred in the circular dated 12-12-1994 are listed in the provisions ofBipartite Settlement which are intended to compensate the workmen for discharging certain additional duties attached to the relevant special allowance carrying posts . However, it will not be out of place to state that bank in the matter of fitment of salary of ex- servicemen is acting as per the guidelines given by the Government received through Indian Banks Association from time to time . It is also vital to state that bank has not taken away payment of special allowance to the above mentioned categories of special allowance posts , rather bank has considered the special allowance component also for pay fixation of ex - servicemen for the reason that special allowance is in the nature of basic pay. Presently it attracts dearness allowance and other benefits . Even otherwise the fixation of salary of ex- servicemen is done with a view to allow them the emoluments which they were drawing at the time of discharge from the defence forces and not to allow them anything over and above that .

The ex - servicemen re -employed as Armed Guards are in the nature of special allowane carrying posts in the clerical and subordinate cadres which continue to get the special allowance as per provisions of the Bipartite settlement . No discrimination as alleged has been caused to any of the ex- servicemen re - employed in the bank . The 4009 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

matter regarding fixation of salary and payment or non- payment of special allowances are entirely two different issues and cannot be clubbed.

It was further submitted from the side of the management that the government advised that the pay fixation ofex - servicemen would be done through protection of pay + DA drawn by them at the time of retirement from the armed force .

Itwas further submitted that the pay + DA drawn by ex- servicemen in defence forces would be protected with pay + DA in the bank. The basic pay in the banks pay scale will be fixed and arrived at after conducting DA admissible in the bank from the aggregate of pay + DA drawn by the reemployed ex - servicemen at the time of retirement from armed forces .

Itwas submitted that in view of the directions of the vernment the Personnel division vide letter dated 25-12-1994 issued guidelines for re- fixation of pay of ex-servicemen re - employed in Public Sector bank as ward staff.

By implementing the clarification issued by the Government there is no effect on the wage structure of the bank employees . It is reiterated that bank is required to protect the last pay drawn by the ex- servicemen at the time oftheir release from the armed forces as against the basic + dearness allowance + special allowance drawn by them on re- employment in the bank . It will also be pertinent to state that the union is alleging that the decision given by the Government of India is bad in the eye of law. The example cited by the union is of no relevance as the issue involved is not of payment or non -payment ofspecial allowance but is of following the employees the emoluments but is of allowing the employees the emoluments which they were drawing at the time of discharge from the defence forces .

It transpires from perusal of the record that the bank issued Circular dated 12-12-1994 mentioning in the Circular ashereunder:

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 .

A. The pay fixation of all ex - servicemen who have joined the bank in special allowance carrying post prior to 13-3-1992 be re - fixed by re - opening their case but recovery of excess payment, if any , made to them up to 13-03-1992 maybewaived.

Evidence of both the parties has been taken.

Heard argument from both the sides and perused the papers on the record .

B. The pay fixation of all ex- servicmen who have joined the bank on or after 13-3-1992 be re - fixed by re-opening their cases but excess payment, ifany made to them , be recovered.

According to the Circular the pay of ex- servicemen madewho havejoined the bank in special allowance carrying post prior to 13-03-1992 is to be re - fixed by re - opening their casesbut recovery of excess payment up to 13-3-1992 is to bewaived .

It was submitted from the side of the workmen that the special allowances was given in view of Clause 5.6 of the BPS dated 19-10-1966 . Special allowance was prescribed to compensate the workman for performance discharge of certain additional duties and functions requiring greater skill/ responsibility over and above the routine duty and functions of a workman in the same cadre .

In Clause 5 :2 and 5.3 there is mention of special allowance for additional and skilled duties performed by the ex . servicemen:

It has been also mentioned that the pay of those ex- servicemenwho joined the bank on or after 13-3-1992 is to be re - fixed by re- opening their cases . So far as part B ofthe circular is concerned it cannot be said that any injustice wouldhave been caused to the ex - servicemen as the circular is dated 12-12-1994 and excess payment is to be recovered after 13-3-1992 only . So far as part A of the circular is concerned the pay of all ex- servicemen is to be re fixed who joined prior to 13-3-1992.

Itwas further submitted that the pay of ex - servicemen has been fixed in view of the above BPS for more than 30 years. That by circular dated 12-12-1994 , the pay has been re- fixed taking into account the basic pay and DA only and not the special allowance for the last more than 30 years in the Banking Industry. The change in re - fixation of salary of ex. servicemen as per the new circular resulted in discrimination between the employees and violated Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution.

The bank acted on the circular of the government dated 21-8-1986 . It was communicated to the bank by M/o . Finance through Indian Bank Association which were circulatedby the bank by Personnel Division No: 953 dated 21-8-1986. the Bank received the direction of the government on 21-8-1986 but no action was taken till 12-12-1994 . The bank has given guidelines to re - fix the Thewage structure has been disturbed arbitrarily on the part of the PNB .

4010

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

salary of pay of ex - servicemen who have joined prior to 13-3-1992. When the bank received the instructions ofthe government on 21-8-1986 , the bank was duty bound to comply with the direction of the government but the bank was silent for about eight years and after extra - ordinary delay of eight years , the salary of those ex - servicemen who joinedjon 21-8-1986 is to be re - fixed. Such retrospectively fixation is illegal and arbitrary. The Bank has circulated guidelines on 12-12-1994 and date 13-3-1992 is mentioned. The Bank has acted negligently in not complying with the directions of the government dated 21-8-1986; the same cannot be enforced after a gap of long eight years . The ex servicemen received their wages on the basis of settlement of their wages in lieu of various provisions of BPS.

The benefits once conferred on workmen in compliance of the provisions of the BPS , cannot be arbitrarily taken away by a Ciruclar dated 12-12-1994 and refixation cannot be done after a lapse of almost eight years .

From perusal of the record it transpires that by the above circular the pay fixation of armed guard who joined the bank prior to 13-3-1992 has been be re - fixed by reopening their case but recovery of excess payment if any made to them may be waived after 13-3-1992 .

The workman has challenged the re - opening of their cases for re- fixation . The pay of the ex - servicemen have been fixed in view of the several BPS in this behalf. The ex- servicemen have been drawing their salary in view of fixation of their pay according to the settlement of the banks. It cannot be said that these ex - servicemen employed prior to 13-3-1992 have been made payment wrongly inadvertently.

The re fixing of pay ofthe ex- servicemen who joined prior to 13-3-1992 is not justified . It cannot be said that payment to them has been made due to inadvertence . It is not the case that the pay of ex - servicemen who joined prior to 13-3-1992 has been fixed in violation of certain provisions oftheBPS. The ex- servicemen were getting the emoluments in view of the settlement . Re- opening ofthe case will amount to enforcing the guidelines retrospectively. There may be workmen who have been receiving the amount and have maintained their life according to the salary being paid to them . Enactments of Parliament in rare cases are retrospective. The ex- servicemen willingly accepted the job in the bank after their discharge from military services in view ofthe pay and allowances admissible to them under several BPS .

[PART II -SEC . 3 (ii ) ] The Government direction dated 13-3-1992 for re- fixation should be rnade effective from 13-3-1992 alone . It should not be enforced retrospectively . The recovery made by the bank from the employees who sought employment of the bank prior to 13-3-1992 is absolutely unjustified, illegal and arbitrary. Government instructions should be implemented ' prospectively and not retrospectively. The re - fixation of Pay of those ex. Servicemen made who were employed prior ta 13-3- 1992 is not justified by any stretch of imagination . They have been maintaining themselves on higher emoluments . Thus, emoluments cannot be freezed by instructions of any Government .

The workmen were given allowance at the time of their joining and in view of the special allowance the workmen resumed their work under the management and they have been drawing those emoluments up to 13-3-1992 . The action of the management in re - fixing their salary from the date of Circular of the Government i.e. 21-7-1986 is illegal . The benefits once conferred of a statute or provisions cannot be taken away retrospectively after lapse of 8-10 years . The workmen who joined the management as ex - servicemen are entitled to retain their salary fixed in view of the BPS . The management should restore their previous pay and repay the deductions already made . However , the management is at liberty to recover excess payment made by re - fixing the pay of those ex-servicemen who joined on or after 13-3-1992.

The reference is replied thus:

The action of the management of Punjab National Bank in effecting their circular letter no.43 / 94 dated 12-12-1994 ( new fitment formula) for re - fixing basic pay of ex- servicemen and recovering of excess amount paidw.e.f. 13-3-1992 is neither legal nor justified . The Bank may recover excess amount of those ex - servicemen who joined on or after 13-3-1992 . The pay of ex- servicemen who joined on or after 13-3-1992 may be re - fixed in view of the Circular of the government dated 21-07-1986 . The management has illegally re - fixed the pay of those ex- servicemen who joined prior to 13-3-1992 . The management should restore the pay scale of those ex - servicemen as they were getting from their initial engagement and deductions if any made in view ofthe Circular dated 12-12-1994 is illegal . The management should restore the pay scale and re - pay the deducted amount from the pay of the ex - servicemen who joined prior to 13-3-1992 within two months from the date of the publication of the award.

The award is given accordingly .

Date: 26-6-2008

The facilities extended to them in view of settlement cannot be withdrawn abruptly and retrospectively by the guidelines of the PNB dated 12-12-1994 .

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer 4011 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 30 जून , 2008

"Whether the action of the management of All India Radio, New Delhi in not regularizing the services of Sh. Lekh Raj from the date of his initial appointment is legal and justified? If not , to what relief he is entitled to."

का.आ. 2004.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार आल इंडिया रेडियो के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार' औद्योगिक अधिकरण, नई दिल्ली नं.. 2 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 66/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 30-6-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

The case of the workman is that he was initially employed as Peon as daily wages w.e.f. 11-05-1993 under the above management and worked continuously and his wages were paid directly up to 03-12-1993 and thereafter through Padma Enterprises .

[ फा. सं. एल-42012/265/ 2001 - आईआर( सीएम- II ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़, डेस्क अधिकारी

NewDelhi , the 30th June , 2008

That the workman performed his duties w.e.f. 11-05-1993 and completed more than seven years . He has performed his duties continuously under the supervision ofthe management without any break as per seetion 25 B of the I.D. Act , 1947 so, he is entitled to be granted permanent status and regularization from the date of his initial engagement .

That he has performed 8 hours duty and he has not beenmade equal payment as has been done with regularly selected employees .

S.O. 2004. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 66/2002 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court No. 2 , New Delhi as shown in the Annexure in the Indus- trial Dispute between the management of All India Radio , and their workman , received by the Central Government on 30-6-2008 .

[F. No. L-42012/265 /2001-1R(CM- II ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, 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. 66/2002

The case of the management is that the workman was engaged through contractor and he was paid minimum wages fixed-by Ministry of Labour on hand receipt basis against certain services rendered by him. He was not engaged continuously for long period on regular basis . The hand receipt payment was made only for work of purely temporary in nature as and when required , such as water filling in coolers , supply of water to trainees . He has been engaged through contractor so he is not entitled to get equalpay for equal work . He is only entitled to get minimum wages as prescribed by the Government .

IN THE MATTER OF:

Sh . Lekh Raj ,

C/o . Janvadi General Kamgar Mazdoor Union , C/ o . E-26 (Old Quarters ) , Raja Bazar , Baba Kharak Singh Marg , New Delhi - 110001 .

Evidence of both the parties has been taken .

-Claimant

VERSUS

Heard argument from both the sides and perused the papers on the record.

The Superintending Engineer ( Training ) ,

All India Radio, Soochna Bhawan , Lodhi Road , New Delhi - 110003 .

-Respondents

It transpires from perusal of the order sheet that several dates have been given to the management for filing affidavit . The management filed affidavit on 07-12-2006 but the witness did not turn up for cross - examination . The opportunity ofevidence of the management was closed on 12-06-2008 and the workman was heard and the case was reserved for award ,

AWARD

TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No. L- 42012/265/ 2001 / IR( CM - II ) Central Govemment dated 09-08-2002-has referred the following point for adjudication :

It was submitted from the side of the workman that he was engaged as Peon on daily wages from 11-05-1993 and subsequently he has been put under the control and supervision ofthe management . The duties were assigned The points runs as hereunder :

4012

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] to the workman by the management . He was made payment on hand receipt .

contract is of no consequence when , on lifting the veil or looking at the conspectus of factors governing employment , we discern the naked truth , though draped in different perfect paper arrangement , that the real employer is the management, not the immediate contractor . Myriad devices , half-hidden in fold after fold of legal form depending on the degree of concealment needed , the type ofindustry, the local conditions and the like may be resorted towhen labour legislation casts welfare obligations on the real employer , based on Articles 38 , 39 , 42 , 43 and 43 -A of the Constitution . The Court must be astute to avoid the mischief and achieve the purpose of the law and not be misled by the maya of legal appearances . "

The workman has annexed with the record , certificate issued by the Asstt . Engineer . The Asstt . Engineer has mentioned in this certificate that the workman has been working under his control since last three years as contract labour on contract basis . It has been also mentioned in the certificate that he is sincere and hard working boy and is devoted to his duties . This certificate has been admitted by the management . So as per the admitted case of the management , the workman was working under the control and supervision of the management though as a contractor worker since 1993 up to 18-05-2004 . The year of issuance of certificate by the Asstt . Engineer is admitted to the management .

This case law has been affirmed by the Constitution Bench Judgment in Steel Authority of India . In case the security job chokes off, the workmen would be laid off. Such contract is prohibited ; it is not a contract for a given result.

The management has not produced any evidence that the workman did not work under the control and supervision of the management so there is employer- employee relationship .

From perusal of this certificate alone it becomes quite obvious that the workman was engaged through contractor but he worked under the control and supervision of the management. It is settled law that contractor's workman working under the control and supervision of the management , becomes an employee of the principal employer.

In Salmond's Treatise on the Law of Torts the distinction between a servant and independent contractor has been indicated as under : -

It is admitted to the workman that minimum Wages arebeing paid to him by the contractor , so he is not entitled to equal pay for equal work as he is not a regular employee of the management . It is not denied by the management that the workman is not performing the work of the management . The contractor has engaged him not for his work but for the work of the management . In such circumstances , contractor's workmen become an employce ofthe principal employer .

In the instant case the workman has become an employee of the principal employer i.e. the management . The management should regularize his services within two months from the date of the publication of the award .

The reference is replied thus

What then , is the test of this distinction between a servant and an independent contractor ? The test is the existence of a right of control over the agent in respect of the manner in which his work is to be done . A servant is an agent who works under the supervision and direction of hisemployer ; an independent contractor is one who is his own master . A servant is a person engaged to obey his employer's orders from timeto time ; an independent contractor is a person engaged todo certain work , but to exercise his own discretion as to the mode and time of doing it he is bound by his contract, but not by his employer's orders .

The management retains the power of controlling the work so the workman is the employees of the . respondent/ management.

The action of the management of All India Radio , New Delhi in not regularizing the services of Sh . Lekh Raj from the date of his initial appointment is neither legal nor justified. The workman applicant is entitled to regularization within two months from the date of the publication of the award . He is not entitled to equal pay for equal work .

The award is given accordingly . Date: 24-06-2008

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 30 जून , 2008

The test regarding independent contractor and interınediaries have been laid down in Hussainabhai , Calicut V. The Alath Factory Thezhilali Union Kozhikode [ (AIR 1978 SC 1410 (3 Judges ) ] " the true test may, with brevity , be indicated once again. Where a worker or group of workers labours to produce goods or services and these goods or services are for the business of another , that other is , in fact, the employer . He has economic control over the workers, subsistence , skill , and continued employinent . If he, for any reason chokes off, the worker is, virtually, laid off. The presence of intermediate contractors with whom the workers have immediate or direct relationship as

का.आ. 2005.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार डी.ई.टी. टेलीकॉम डिपार्टमेन्ट 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 नं. 2 4013 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

Singh is legal and justified ? If not, what relief he is entitled to . "

के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 34 , 35 तथा 41/94 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 30-6-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[फा. सं. एल-40012/234/92-आईआर(डी.यू. ) ]

[फा. सं. एल -4001-2/193/92- आईआर( डी.यू.) ]

[फा. सं. एल-40012/198/92- आईआर(डी.यू.) ]

"Whether the action of D.E.T. , Aligarh in terminating the services of Sh . Murli Singh , S/o.Chhater Singh is legal andjustified ? If not, what reliefhe is entitled to."

सुरेन्द्र सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 30th June , 2008 .

"Whether the action ofD.E.T. , Aligarh in terminating the services of Sh . Ram Kumar , S/o . Malkhan is legal andjustified ? If not, what relief he is entitled to. "

I. D. Nos. 34/1994, 35/1994 and 41/1994 involve com- mon dispute. These are connected cases and they can be adjudicatedby common award. The grounds of all the cases mentioned above are the same . Only date of engagement and dis - engagement are different. So all the above mentioned cases are taken up together .

S.O. 2005. -In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 34,35 , & 41/94) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court No. 2 , New Delhi as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of D.E.T. , Telecom Department and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 30-6-2008 .

[ F. No. L-40012/234/92 - IR(DU) ]

The case of the workmen is that they were appointed ascasual labourers at the office ofDET, Aligarh and worked during 1984 till November, 1992.

[F. No. L-40012/ 193 /92- IR(DU) ]

[ F. No. L-40012/ 198/92 - IR( DU) ]

SURENDRA SINGH , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT- II, NEW DELHI

That their services were illegally and arbitrarily terminated in the year 11/1992 without written orders and without any retrenchment compensation whereas they have completed 240 days continuous service in one calendar year. Juniors to them were retained in service and new hands have been appointed in violation of Section 25 F G &H ofthe ID Act, 1947.

PRESIDING OFFICER : R. N. RAI

I. D. No. 34, 35 & 41/1994

IN THE MATTER OF :

The case of the management is that the workman were engaged as casual labourer for completion of specific worker . After completion of the work the workmen were relieved. There is no question of paying retrenchment com- pehsation. The respondent is not an Industry .

Sh . Chander Bhan & 2 Ors . , C/o . V.K. Gupta, 2/363 , Namner , Agra (UP) .

VERSUS

The workman applicant has filed rejoinder . In the rejoinder he has reiterated the averments of his claim state- ment and has denied most of the paras of the written state- ment. The management has also denied most of the paras ofthe claim statement .

Evidence of both the parties has been taken.

The D.E.T. Telecome Department, Aligarh (UP) , Pin: 202001

Heard argument from both the sides and perused the papers on the record.

AWARD

The award has been given in this case by predecessor P.O. , Sh . Ganpati Sharma in the year 1997 holding that P & TDepartment is not an Industry and it has been set aside subsequently and the case has been again re - stored to its number.

TheMinistry ofLabour by its letter No. L-40012/ 234/ 92-1R( DU) Central Government Dated 05-05-1994, L -40012/193 / 92 - IR ( DU) Central Government DT . 05-05-1994 & L- 40012 / 198/92 - IR(DU) CENTRAL GOVERNMENTdt . 05-05-1994 has referred the following point for adjudication:

The points runs as hereunder: -

Itwas submitted from the side of the workmen that they have worked for 162 days in the year 1991 , 111 days in the year 1992 and 243 days in the year 1993 .

"Whether the action of D.E.T. , Aligarh in terminating the services of Sh . Chander Bhan , S/o . Ganga Dutt

It was also submitted that the muster roll list of the casual labourers were prepared counting working days from !

4014

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

17-12-1992 to 17-12-1993 . The workman has worked for 240 daysfrom 17-12-1992 to 17-12-1993 but his name has not been illegally included in the muster roll list .

It was submitted from the side of the management that the workman was given specific work . He has filed false certificate of the officers . He has not performed 240 days in the year 1993 so , his name was not rightly included in the list of muster roll casual labourers .

It was also submitted that the management is not an Industry , so the provisions of ID Act , 1947 are not appli- cable to the management .

The workmen have filed certificates issued by the management . The certificates are on the letter head of the management and bear the seal and signature of the man- agement . The workmen have filed four documents. All the documents bear the signature of either Sub - divisional Engineer of Assistant Engineer .

From these documents it becomes quite obvious that the workman has worked for 162 days in the year 1991 , 111 days in 1992 and 243 days in 1993. The workmen have stated in his cross- examination that all the documents were given to himby the Clerk . They have named the employees who gave them the certificate regarding his working days .

The management witness has stated in his cross examination that he does not know about the documents Ex. WW1 / 1to WW1 / 4 . He has also stated that he did not know ifthe documents were issued to the workman by the respondent management .

The management witness has also stated in his cross- examination that no temporary worker is working at present. All the temporary wokers till 17-12-1993 have been regu- larized by the respondent . Thus , the management witness has not denied specifically the certificate issued by the department . The certificates bear the seal and signature of the officers of the management . These certificates are on the letter head of the management so , it cannot be said that the certificates were forged.

The management has not examined the signatories of the 4 documents to establish that the signatures are forged . The management witness has expressed his unawareness about the 4 certificates issued by the department.

In certain cases photocopy documents are admissible in evidence , if the same has not been denied specifically.

1 have perused the muster roll list filed by the man- agement. On perusal of the list it becomes quite obvious . that the workman Gauri Shankar has worked for 101 days from 17-12-1992 to 17-12-1993 and he was found eligible . The workman Sh . Shanti Swarup has worked for 32 days in

PART II SC. 3 ( ii ) | between 17-12-1992 to 17-12-1993 and he was found eli- gible and his name has been entered in the muster roll list, The management witness has stated in his cross examina- tion asunder:

" I do not know if Sh . Desh Raj , Vinod . Netrapal and Khem Singh are juniors to the workman and they have been regularized by the department . The inus- ter roll Incharge maintains the register of work . No temporary worker is working at present . Temporary workers were working during the period 1989 till 1993 . Vol . All the temporary workers till 17-12-1993 have been regularized by the respondent . "

From perusal of the statement of cross - examination of this witness it becomes quite obvious that he has not denied that Sh . Desh Raj , Vinod , Netrapal and Khem Singh were not juniors to the workmen . As such the management hasregularized thejunior workman just as Desh Raj , Vinod, Netrapal and Khem Singh whereas the name of this work- man has not been included in the muster roll list prepared in December , 1993. The eligibility criteria were 240 days from 17-12-1992 to 17-12-1993 . This workman has worked for 241 days during this period and even the few workmen who have worked for 101 and 32 days have been found eligible and their name has appeared in the muster roll list .

It becomes quite obvious from perusal of the muster roll list that the management has included junior casual labourers in the muster roll list whereas the case of these workmen has not been considered and their names have not been included in the muster roll list . The management has acted in breach of section 25 G & H of the ID Act , 1947 . These workmen were eligible for being included in the muster roll list prepared in December, 1993 of all the casual labourers whose name appeared in the muster roll list have been regularized . The case of these workmen has not been considered illegally and malafidely by the management .

Itwas submitted from the side of the management that the respondent is not an Industry and the workman has approached the CAT for regularization but this case has been dismissedby the CAT.

It was decided by the D.B. of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and it was held that Telecom Department is not an Industry but later on this matter was referred to a Larger Bench of 3 Judges Bench and it has been held in ( 1997 ) 8 SCC 767 by the Hon'ble 3 Judges that Post and Tele- graph Department is an Industry , in view of the Constitu- tion Bench Judgement of the Bangalore Water Supply of 1978. As such it has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that Post and Telegraph Department is an Industry and there appears no merit in the argument of the management thatPost and Telegraph Department is not an Industry .

OA filed by the workman may have been dismissed by the CAT. The management is an Industry . CAT has no [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

jurisdiction to decide the case of industrial workers . The judgment of CAT has no binding effect as it is without jurisdiction.

The management is an Industry in view of the above said decision of 3 Judges Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court and the petitioner are workmen .

The workmen have worked for 240 days in the year 1992 and all the casual labourers who have worked for 240 days up to December, 1993 and even those who have performed 101 days and 32 days duties within that period have been enrolled in muster roll list but the management has deliberately and with malafide intention ignored the case of these workmen and they have been illegally removed from service . Their names should have been included in the muster roll list prepared in the year 1993 but the management has illegally ignored the case of the workmen . They deserved being included in the muster roll list prepared in the year 1993.

The reference is replied thus:

The action of D.E.T. , Aligarh in terminating the services of S/Sh : Chander Bhan , S /o . Ganga Dutt Singh , Murli Singh , S /o . Chhatar Singh & Sh . Ram Kumar , S/o. Malkhan is neither legal nor justified . The manage- ment should reinstate the workmen along with 25 % back wages within two months from the date of the publication ofthe award .

The award is given accordingly.

Date: 24-6-2008

R. N. RAI, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 30 जून , 2008

का.आ. 2006. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार केनरा बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 2 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 31/1998 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 30-6-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[फा. सं. एल -12012/311/1997- आईआर( बी- II ) ]

राजिन्द्र कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi, the 30th June , 2008

S.O. 2006. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) the Central Gov- ernment hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 31/1998 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court No 2, New Delhi as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Canara Bank and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 30-6-2008 .

[F. No. L- 12012/311 / 1997- IR(B- II) ] RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer 2644 G1/08-22

4015

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT- II, NEW DELHI

PRESIDING OFFICER : R. N. RAI

I.D.NO.31 / 1998 IN THE MATTER OF :

Sh. Diwan Singh , Ex- employee of Canara Bank, 76 , Khyber Pass Mess , CivilLines , Delhi .

Claimant

Versus

The Dy.General Manager, CanaraBank, Disciplinary Action Cell , CircleOffice, Cannought Place, NewDelhi.

-Respondents

AWARD

The Ministry of Labour by its letter No. L- 12012/ 311/ 1997 - IR-(B - II ) dated 20-01-1998 has referred the fol- lowing point for adjudication:

The points runs as hereunder :-

"Whether the action of the management of Canara Bank in terminating the services of Sh . Diwan Singh , Sub -staff w.e.f. 22-05-1993 is legal and justified? Ifnot to what relief the said workman is entitled ? י

The case of the workman is that he was illegally served a charge- sheet on 02-07-1993 by the Dy . G.M. Disciplinary Actions Cell on Canara Bank and alleged cer- taingross misconduct on the part of the workman which is as under :

(a) . That the workman had made arrangements to opena fictious SB A/ c. No. 32409 in the name of Sh . Kamal Kumar by misusing his official position to facilitate perpetration of fraud on thebank to the extent of Rs . 50,000/-by his acts .

(b) That the workman had tampered with the records ofthe bank to avoid detection of the above fraud by removing the A/ c . opening form of SB No.32409 and by making alteration in the ledger folio and A/ cs . " Opened & Closed" register etc.

(c) That the workman had misutilized his official position by removing the cheques /instruments entrusted to him sent in clearing, apart from 4016

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008/ SRAVANA 4, 1930

making the alterations in the total figure of clearing outward on 28-12-1992 .

Subsequent to the inquiry the workman was dismissed vide order dated 23-11-1984 .

Thatthe report of the Inquiry Officer was based on the circumstantial evidence . The Inquiry Officer has observed that there was no direct evidence . The workman cannot be dismissed on the basis of circumstantial evidence . That the workman has been held guilty of the charges without any substantial evidence . The account opening form was in safe custody of the Branch Manager and the case was handed by him only so he cannot open a fictitious account . The workman has not changed the account no. ofthe introducer . The ledger sheet was in the custody of the Ledger Keeper .

That it was not proved that the workman has actually taken the possession of the instument of refund of Rs . 10,000/-. It is not proved by the Dak Register . It was not proved that the workman was responsible for removing the instruments from the bundle of cheques in the Clearing Department .

That no attempt was made to find out as to who operated the SB A/ c . No. 32409 and fradulently digested a sum of Rs . 50,000/- by coming to the branch several times and withdrew the amount before the very eyes of the Officer Incharge. j

That it was not attempted to find out as to who was operator of SB A/c . No.32409 . The workman has a very honest record and he has been appreciation letters . The findings ofthe Inquiry Officer are perverse . The DA & AA did not consider the point raised by the workman .

The case of the management is that the workman opened fictitious A/ c . in the name ofSh . Kamal Kumar and he himself made various credit entries to that account and withdrew the amount by withdrawal slips for Rs . 8,000 & Rs.2,000.

The bar bearing no . 12564 for non MICR cheques for Rs . 28845.64 including the above said cheque and another cheque for Rs.8845.64 was sent in clearing but these cheques did not reach the clearing section and amount ofRs . 20,000 was credited to the A/ c . No. 32409 of Sh . Kamal Kumar which was withdrawn through withdrawal slips on 30-01-1993 .

That a proper and valid inquiry was held . The workman participated in the inquiry. He cross - examined all the witnesses . He was given opportunity to adduce defence evidence . The DA issued show cause notice along with the findings of the Inquiry Officer along with proposed punishment, The DA considered the representation of the workman and passed a reasoned detailed order .

The workman applicant has filed rejoinder . In the rejoinder he has reiterated the averments of his claim

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)] statement and has denied most of the paras of the written statement . The management has also denied most of the paras of the claim statement .

Evidence of both the parties has been taken .

Heard argument from both the sides and perused the papers on the record.

Itwas submitted from the side of the workman that there is no evidence against him . The Inquiry Officer held the charges proved on the basis of circumstancial evidence . The fictitious account opening form has not been removed by the workman . The workman has not made any entry in the ledger . He had not withheld two cheques of clearing.

It was submitted from the side of the management thatthe workman opened fictitious account in the name of Sh . Kamal Kumar . He introduced the account and subsequently he removed the account opening form . He altered the register where the account of the introducer was recorded. He did not submit two cheques when he wentfor clearing .

From perusal of the record it becomes obvious that three charges have been levelled against the workman . The first is regarding opening fictitious account No.32409 in the name of Sh. Kamal Kumar by the workman by using hisofficial position and to facilitate to cause loss to the bank of Rs.50,000 . - The second charge is regarding temparing with the record of the bank to avoid detection of the above fraud .

The third charge is regarding removing the cheques and instruments entrusted to him for clearing apart from making the alterations in the total figure of clearing outward on 28-12-1992.

The allegation against the workman is that he introduced account no.32409 in the name of Sh. Kamal Kumar and he opened the account. The account no. of the introducer has been wrongly written as SB A/c . No.31244 on the ledger folio and account open and close register respectively.

Thatthe workman removed the account opening form of Sh . Kamal Kumar from the banks record to avoid detection of fraud. It also transpires from perusal of the record that the address of Sh . Kamal Kumar was searched but no such Kamal Kumar was found residing at the address mentioned in the account opening form . The account was fictitious and it was opened with malafide intention of causing loss to the bank .

It was submitted from the side of the management that the workman was in clearing section of the department ofthe branch and was entrusted with the work of delivering the bars in clearing section along with cheques and instruments .

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Itwas further submitted from the side of the management that the workman lodged the clearing and he intentionally noted the wrong number of the instrument as 57834 instead of 5729 and the banks name BOA instead of American Express to avoid detection, of fraud. Thus , it . resulted in crediting an amount of Rs . 10,000 in SB A/ c . No. 32409 which was later on withdrawn by way of withdrawal slip.

It was further submitted that the workman had taken the bundle of clearing cheque along with bar and Rs . 12,08 , 700.72 to the Main Branch . On the way he rernoved the instrument of Rs . 20,000 drawn on OBC and deposited to the credit of account No. 32409 to avoid detection of fraud . He altered the bar figure from 12 , 08 , 750.27 to Rs.11,88 , 750.27 and thus , an amount of Rs. 20,000 was credited in that fictitious account and it was subsequently withdrawn through withdrawal slip for Rs . 18,000 and Rs . 2,000 .

From perusal of the inquiry proceedings it becomes quite obvious that MWI and MW5 have deposed that the workman asked for a token of Rs.20 , 000 on 06-01-1993 from SB A/c . No.32409 . The witnesses 1 and 5 have also deposed that the workman mentioned wrong no . of the instrument lodged on 28-07-1992. MW1 , 5 & 8 had confirmed the alterations in bar figure . Witnesses 1 & 5 confirmed nonsending of bar to clearing house .

Ihave perused the findings of the Inquiry Officer . The InquiryOfficer has given detailed findings and he has mentioned all the documents and the deposition of the witnesses in his finding. The witnesses have proved all the documents. It was found proved by the Inquiry Officer from record as well as from the statement of witnesses that on 28-07-1992 clearing was lodged by Sh. Deewan Singh and he intentionally noted wrong number of the instrument. The workman has not denied that he did not lodged clearing on 28-07-1992 .

The Inquiry Officer has also mentioned that on 28-12-1992 Sh . Deewan Singh took the bundle of clearing cheques along with bar and he removed the instrument for Rs . 20,000 and altered the total figure also . It is not deniedby Deewan Singh that he did not lodge clearing on 28-12-1992 and 28-07-1992 . He was working in clearing department. He has forged the instruments on two dates of clearing. On 28-07-1992 he made wrong credit entry of Rs . 10,000 in that fictitious account on 28-12-1992 he made fictitious entry of Rs.20,000 . Witnesses have also deposed that the workman received Rs . 2,000 by withdrawal slip . He was asked to take the instrument and to deliver the same to the mainbranch . He did not deliver the said instrument to the main branch and thus , Rs . 20 000 was deposited to the credit of the fictitious account of Sh . Kamal Kumar .

I find no merit in the argument of the workman that the Inquiry Officer held the charges proved on the ground

4017

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

ofcircumstantial evidence . The duties of clearing on three occasions were assigned to the workman and he made alterations in the instrument on one occasion for Rs .10 , 000, an amount for Rs . 20,000 and on third occasions for Rs . 20,000. The management has examined 8 witnesses during the course of the inquiry and the workman has cross- examined all the witnesses . The Inquiry proceedings also reveal that he was given opportunity to give defence evidence and to submit written argument . Show cause notice was given to him . Findings of the Inquiry Officer were also given to him . The DA & AA have passed reasoned order .

It is settled law that in a domestic inquiry the strict and sophisticated rules of evidence under the Evidence Act may not apply . All materials which are logically probative for a prudent mind are permissible. There is no allergy to hearsay evidence provided it has reasonable nexus and credibility . The departmental authorities and administrative tribunals must be careful in evaluating such material and should not glibly swallow what is strictly speaking not relevant under the Evidence Act ." It is also settled law that the sufficiency of evidence in proof of the finding by a domestic tribunal is beyond scrutiny. Absence of any evidence in support of a finding is certainly available for the court to look into because it amounts to an error of law apparent on the record.

It has been held in 1972 (25 ) FLR 45 as under :

"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 of the 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 has been held in this case that in domestic inquiry evidence of a solitary witness is sufficient to hold the charges proved.

It has been held in 2001 ( 89 ) FLR 427 as under:

" 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 . "

From the above it becomes quite obvious that the workman himself opened the fictitious account in the name of Sh . Kamal Kumar and removed the account opening form and altered the ledger and changed the account no . of theintroducer . He was himself introducer of that account . It is also found proved that on three occasions he manipulated the instrument entrusted to him and made false 4018

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

entry in the SB account of Sh. Kamal Kumar and he himself withdrew the entire money by withdrawal slips .

Witnesses have deposed regarding obtaining of rupees two thousand by the workman himself on the withdrawal slip from the above fictitious account. It was none but the workman who opened the fictitious account andmade fake credit entires and withdrew the entire amount ofRs . 50,000.

The findings of the Inquiry Officer are based on cogent documentary as well as oral evidence . The Inquiry Officer has considered all the aspects of the case and has held the charges proved separately . Principles of natural justice have been observed . Inquiry is not vitiated.

The punishment imposed on the workman is neither disproportionate nor shocking to the conscience of the court . He indulged in opening fictitious account making false entries and embezzled Rs . 50,000 , so the punishment imposed is warranted and just. No interference regarding punishment is also required . The inquiry is fair and valid.

The reference is replied thus :

The action of the management of Canara Bank in terminating the services of Sh. Diwan Singh, Sub - staffw.e.f. 22-05-1993 is legal and justified . The workman applicant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for .

The award is given accordingly .

Date: 25-06-2008

R.N. RAI, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 1 जुलाई , 2008

का.आ. 2007.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मै. मोदीलुप्त/रॉयल एयरवेज स्पाइस जेट लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय ( सं. 2 ) नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 111/2008 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 1-7-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[फा. सं. एल -11012/38/2007- आईआर ( सी-1 ) ] स्नेह लता जवास, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 1st July, 2008

SO . 2007. In pursuance of Section 17 of the lindustrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 111 / 2008 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court (No. 2) New Delhi now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management ofM/s . Modiluft/Royal Airways , Spice Jet Ltd and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 1-7-2008 .

[ F. No. L- 11012/38/2007-1R(C - I ) ] SNEH LATA JAWAS, Desk Officer

[PART 11-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT- IL, NEW DELHI

PRESIDING OFFICER : R.N. RAI

1.D. No. 111/2008 IN THE MATTER OF :

Sh. Jamal Khan, S/ o . Sh . Afjal Khan , C/o . Sh . P.L. Srivastava, CB-280, Ring Road , Naraina , NewDelhi - 110028 .

...... Claimant

VERSUS

The General Manager, M/s. Spice Jet Limited, Plot No.319, Phase- IV, Udyog Vihar, Gurgaon , Haryana

.......Respondents

AWARD

TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No. L- 11012 /38 / 2007/IR(CM - I) Central Government Dated 18-02-2008 has referred the following point for adjudication:

The points runs as hereunder: -

"Whether the action of the management of Modiluft/ Royal Airways /Spicejet Ltd. , New Delhi in dismissing the services of Sh . Jamal Khan , Electrician w.e.f. 01-01-2002 is justified and legal ? If not , to what relief is the concerned workman entitled and from which date . "

Notice through registered post has been sent to the workman on reference dated 18-02-2008 . The Ministry of Labour has also sent intimation to the workman by regis- tered post with a direction to decide the case within a period of three months .

Notice was sent on 05-02-2008 for filling claim . Claim was not filled on 05-02-2008 , 30-05-2008 & 13-06-2008 . It has not been filed so far .

The satutory period for disposal of such cases is mly three months .

Itappears that the worman is not interested in con- sting the case .

No dispute award is given .

Date: 19-06-2008

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 1 जुलाई , 2008

का.आ. 2008. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार पंजाब नेशनल बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 2 नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 193/1997 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 1-7-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[ फा..सं. एल-12012/ 132 / 1997- आईआर ( बी- II ) ] राजिन्द्र कुमार डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the Ist July, 2008

S.O. 2008. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 193/ 1997) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court No. 2, New Delhi as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Punjab National Bank and their workman , received by the Central Government on 1-7-2008 .

[F. No. L- 12012/ 132/ 1997 -IR (B - II) ] RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT- IL, NEW DELHI PRESIDING OFFICER: R.N. RAI

I.D. No. 193/1997 IN THE MATTER OF :

Sh . Radha Kishan , Ex . Peon, Punjab National Bank , 13/ 17A Tilak Nagar , NewDelhi

... Claimant

Versus

1. The Chairman, Punjab National Bank , PNB House, Bhikaji Cama Place, NewDelhi.

2. The Chief Manager , PNB , East Patel Nagar, New Delhi .

.Respondents

AWARD

TheMinistry of Labour by its letter No. L- 12012/132/ 97- IR(B - II ) Central Government Dated 28-11-1997 has re- ferred the following point for adjudication:

The points runs as hereunder:-

4019

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

"Whether the action of the management of Punjab National Bank in dismissing the services of Shri Radha Kishan, Peon is leagal and justified? If not , to what relief the said workman is entitled . "

The case of the workman is that while he was posted at BO: East Patel Nagar, a fraud of Rs.27,000/ - reportedly unearthed in BO: East Patel Nagar . The management under the threat of Police action prevailed upon the workman and forced him to sign on dotted line admitting his involve- ment in this case . The workman was placed under suspen- sion . Charge-sheet was served upon him . Sh . N. K. Garg was appointed Inquiry Officer. He did not afford opportu- nity to the workman to participate in the inquiry. He gave his finding on the alleged confessional letter of the work- man. The workman was made to sign that letter . The order of dismissal of the workman is arbitrary , unjust , malafide and illegal and is liable to be set aside.

That the punishment is arbitrary . S/Sh . Hanuman Parsad, Chander Kishore , Rattan Singh and Sh . Vinod Kumar were involved in the same offence but they have been awarded lesser punishment.

The case of the management is that Sh . Radha Kishan was appointed in the bank on 31-01-1984 as peon and was posted at. BO: East Patel Nagar, New Delhi . He was con- firmed in the bank services w.e.f. 31-07-1984 and passed matric examination in the month of May, 1988. In terms of the Rules governing him he officiated as clerk as and when required by the branch. He was placed under suspension on 12-12-1998 when fraud ofRs . 27,000/ - came to light along with his involvement . He was served with charge- sheet dated 09-01-1992 alleging that he had committed fraud of Rs . 27,000 by making fictitious credit entries in the ac- count ofparties maintained at BO: East Patel Nagar . He has also destroyed the evidence like related ledger sheets , ac- count opening forms , vouchers etc. and it was alleged against him that he has committed a gross misconduct in terms of the BPS by doing acts prejudicial to the interest of the bank which had led to a serious loss . Sh . Radha Kishan vide his letter dated 29-11-1990 had admitted his involve- ment . The bank had also lodged complaints with the police authorities . However, in accordance with the provisions of the BPS the bank waited for one year and thereafter served charge- sheet dated 09-01-1992 on Sh . Radha Kishan . A departmental inquiry was constituted by the DA vide his orders dated 03-09-1992 and Sh . N. Garg was appointed as Inquiry Officer . Ample opportunity was provided to Sh. Radha Kishan to attend the inquiry proceedings in the terms of the principle of natural justice but he did not attend the inquiry most of the time despite being given adequate notice to appear in the same . The Inquiry Officer inhis report dated 10-03-1994 has held Sh . Radha Kishan guilty of the charges levelled against him i.e. commiting frauds in connivance with certain customers and that the fraud was committed intentionally and knowingly . The charges levelled on Sh . Radha Kishan stood established.

4020

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/SRAVANA 4 , 1930

The DA vide orders dated 24-06-1994 proposed the punishment of dismissal from bank's service without no- tice. It is further submitted that along with show-cause notice dated 24-06-1984 the workman was provided with a copy of the inquiry report submitted by the Inquiry Of- ficer. Hewas afforded personal hearing on 02-07-1994 . He appeared for the personal hearing before the DA on the Said date. The DA vide his orders dated 15-07-1994 con- firmed the punishment of dismissal from service of Sh . Radha Kishan . Sh . Radha Kishan then preferred an appeal dated 20-08-1994 and was afforded a personal hearingd on 15-10- 1995 , the AA observed that the charges proved against Sh. Radha Kishan were very serious and taking into con- sideration all the aspects of the case he did not find any ground to interfere with the decision taken by the DA im- posing upon Sh . Radha Kishan the punishment of " dis- missal without notice " . As such the appeal preferred by Sh . Radha Kishan was rejected vide a speaking order of the Appellate Authority .

That the workman absented himself from the inquiry proceedings . The Inquiry Officer gave several opportuni- ties in view of non -participation of the workman in the course of inquiry . He gave his findings on the confes- siqnal statement of the workman . The inquiry proceeded ex-parte. Neither the workman nor his DR participated in the enquiry on several dates . The inquiry is fair and valid .

The workman applicant has filed rejoinder . In the reijonder he has reiterated the averments of his claim state- ment and has denied most of the paras of the written state- ment . The management has also denied most of the paras of the claim statement .

Evidence of both the parties has been taken .

Heard argument from both the sides and persued the papers on the record .

It was submitted from the side of the workman that the inquiry has been conducted ex- parte . No witness has been examined in the inquiry . The workman has not given opportunity to defend his case . The findings of the In- quiryOfficer are perverse . The DA & AA acted with closed mind.

It was submitted from the side of the management that 10-12 opportunities were given to the workman . The workman sought adjournment on un- necessary grounds . The Inquiry Officer was compelled to hold the inquiry ex- parte. The workman has confessed all the charges in his own handwriting without any pressure and threat .

From perusal of the inquiry proceedings it becomes quite obvious that the Inquiry Officer on 16 occasions adjourned the proceedings of the inquiry. The charge- sheeted employee was not present to defend himself. The DR was present on 30-04-1993 and 22-06-1993 thereafter no defence representative turned up before the Inquiry Officer. Opportunities were given on 25-06-1993 , 14-07- 1993, 30-07-1993 , 06-08 .-1993,22-10-1993 & 21-01-1994 , at last the InquiryOfficer proceeded ex -parte .

[PART II-SC. 3 ( ii) ] It also becomes quite obvious that the Inquiry Of- ficer has given hirn sufficient time to participate in the in- quiry. The charges against is that he connived in making victitious entries in SF A/ c . No.35441 , for Rs.380.36 of Md . Farique ofRs.6000 in SF A/c . No.31129 of Abdul Rahim for Rs.18000 and in the A/c of Sh . Naresh for Rs . 3000. The further charge is that he destroyed the bank records such as ledger sheet , ADF and vouchers .

It has been held in AIR 1976 SC that in case a work- man intends or ateempts to stultify the inquiry and his attitude is of complete non- coperatation , the inquiry should beheld fair.

In the instant case several adjournments have been granted to the workman but the workman himself declined totake part in the proceedings and failed to remain present as such even ex -parte inquiry is fair in view of SLR 1970 Delhi & AIR 1976 SC .

The Inquiry Officer has based his findings on the confessional letter of the workman dated 29-11-1990 . The photocopy ofthe letter dated 29-11-1990 has been filed on the record. It is written in Hindi . It is in the handwriting af the workman . The workman has mentioned in this letter that somehow or the other he got deposited Rs . 20,000 and he would deposit rest amount shortly. He has further mentioned that he has committed mistake and he has pray ed in that letter that he is in poverty . He has requested for lenient action and promise that he would never commit any misconduct . All the documents in which entries were made have been filed on the record .

The confessional letter has been written by the work- man in his own handwriting and he has signed it . It cannon be said that it was obtained under police threat or pressure on the workman .

The workman has embezzled Rs . 27,000 from A'c . of three A/ c . Holders by making false entries . The manage- ment instituted the inquiry, when the fraud was detected: the workman deliberately did not participate in the inquiry as in view of his categorical confession of his misconduct there remains nothing for his defence .

From perusal of the record it becomes quite obvious that the workman was involved in the embezzlement of Rs . 27,000 . The inquiry was held ex - parte after giving sev- eral adjournments to the workman . The workman and his DR withdrew from the inquiry proceedings . The inquiry is fair and valid. The punishment imposed on the workman in view of embezzlement and forgery of the record is quite appropriate.

The reference is replied thus :

The action of the management of Punjab National Bank in dismissing the services of Shri Radha Kishan , Peon islegal and justified . The workman applicant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for .

The award is given accordingly.

Date: 20-06-2008

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer 4021 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/ श्रावण4, 1930

AWARD

नई दिल्ली , 2 जुलाई , 2008

The Government of India in the Ministry of Labour, in exercise ofpowers conferred by Clause (d) of sub- section (1) and sub - section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) have referred the following dispute for adjudication vide their Order No.L 22012/435/ 95- IR(C-II) , dated 3-10-2002.

का.आ. 2009. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय खाद्य निगम के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , भुवनेश्वर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 109/2002 ) .को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 2-7-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।.

[फा. सं. एल-22012/435/ 1995 - आईआर (सी-II ) ]

"Whether the action of the Management of Food Corporation of India in terminating the services of Shri Brundaban Samal w.e.f. 5-5-1993 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to?"

अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 2nd July, 2008

S.O. 2009. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No_109/ 2002) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court , Bhubaneswar as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Food Corporation of India and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 2-7--2008 .

[ F. No. L-22012/435/ 1995 - IR( C- II) ] AJAY KUMARGAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT, BHUBANESWAR

Present: Shri N.K.R. Mohapatra , Presiding Officer , C.G.I.T. -cum - Labour Court, Bhubaneswar .

Industrial Dispute Case No. 109/2002

Date ofPassing Award - 12th June , 2008

Between: The Management of the District Manager , Food Corporation of India , Link Road, Cuttack - 12.

... 1st Party-Management .

And

2. In his Claim Statement it is alleged by the workman that after being duly selected by a selection board the Management posted him as a peon - cum - water carrier in the Storage Depot of the Food Corporation of India at Chowduar in the year 1989. But on the merger of the said depot with the Jagatpur depot he was terminated from service from 5-5-1993 without any rhyme and reason or notice pay or with any retrenchment compensation as prescribed under section 25 - F of the Industrial Disputes Act.Being aggrieved with such termination the workman raised an Industrial Dispute before the Asst. Labour Commissioner (Central) which ended in a failure report . In the meantime he filed O.J.C. No. 5923/96 claiming regularization . In that case the Management took a stand that the petitioner was never engaged either on casual or ondailywage basis but he was allowed to supply drinking water and was paid Rs . 2.50 towards the cost of the water supplied once in a day and he did the said work for about 14 months alone but not that , he was engaged on permanent basis . Since the representation of the workman was pending by the time the above O.J.C. was filed, the Hon'ble Court after considering the submissions of the Counsel for the Management disposed of the said O.J.C. with a direction to the Management to consider duly such representation taking into account the applicable regulations . As the Management did not consider his representation favourably and as in the meantime the Government of India refused to make any reference on the basis of the failure report earlier submitted by the Asst . Labour Commissioner (Central ), the disputant - workman filed another O.J.C. No. 6223/2000 whereupon, it is alleged, the present reference was made by the Government .

Their Workman, Shri Brundaban Samal , Vill . Mukundpur, P.O. Karmul, Distt . Dhenkanal .

2nd Party- Workman .

Appearances :-

M/s. M. K. Mohapatra ,

Advocate .

... For the 1st Party- Management .

... For the 2nd Party- Workman.

M/s. Komal Ray, Advocate .

3.While meeting the above challenge of the workman the Management filed its Written Statement claiming that the workman was never appointed as Peon - cum-Water Carrier on the basis of any selection made by the selection committee nor the storage godown at Chowduar (where the workman claims to have had been posted) was ever merged with the Jagatpur Storage Depot . According to the Management the disputant- workman was simply selling water on his own accord to the staff working in the Chowduar Depot once in a day and for that he was being paid Rs . 2.50/ - towards the cost of the water and such 4022

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 /SRAVANA 4 , 1930

cannot be considered as a workman so as to attract the provisions of Section 25 - F of the Industrial Disputes Act . Inthis regard it be noted here that , part - time workers having not been excluded from the definition of the term "workman" as defined under the Industrial Disputes Act, the argument as advanced by the Management carries no water .Accordingly this issue is answered affirmatively

ISSUE NOS . II& III

7. These issues are taken up together as they are inter- linked .

engagement and payment was made at the depot level with which the District Manager ( Management) was nothing to do . It is further contended by the Management that since the said depot was officially closed with effect from 31-10-1992 the question of the workman working beyond such date does not arise. It is further contended by theManagement that the workman at first filed O.J.C. No. 5923/96 claiming regularization which was disposed of by the High Court with a direction to the Management to consider the pending representation of the workman and that the Management having passed an order rejecting the said representation in its order dated 13-1-1999 , the workman again filed another O.J.C. No. 6223/2000 and also O.J.C. No. 1428/2002 when the Government of India did not refer the matter to the Tribunal . As regards to some service certificates to which the disputant- workman has referred to in his Statement of Claim , it is further contended by the Management that these service certificates were never issued by the competent authority and that the same are forged and manufactured one's and , therefore , the reference is liable to bel answered in negation , the entire story as advanced by the workman being totally false , baseless and fabricated.

4. On the basis of the above pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed.

ISSUES

1.Whether the reference is maintainable ?

2. Whether the action of the Management of Food Corporation of India in terminating the services of Shri Brundaban Samal w.e.f. 5-5-1993 is legal and justified?

3. Ifnot to what relief the workman is entitled to ?

5.Theworkman has examined himself in support of his case . He has also marked two hand written certificates purported to have been issued in his favour by the Asst . Depot Supdt in support of his service period. The Management on the other hand has examined the concerned Asst. Depot Supdt . of Chowduar FCI Depot under whom the workman claims to have had worked . The documents marked Ext . - A to B/3 have also been produced from the side of the Management to show that there was no master and servant relationship between the Management and the disputant-workman.

FINDINGS

ISSUE NO.1

Itisdeposed by the workman that on the basis of a recruitment test held by the Management he was posted in Chowduar FCI Depot in the year 1989 but on the event of shifting ofthe depot to Jagatpur he was refused employment from 5-5-1993 without any notice or any retrenchment benefit though he had worked continuously from Sept. 1989 till such date . It is the further evidence of the workman that at the time of such appointment he was issued with necessary appointment letter but no such letter has been produced by the workman though the onus was on him to prove such engagement . He has ofcourse offered an explanation during cross examination that the said appointment letter and few other documents were stolen while staying along with the Depot Manager (M.W. - 1 ) in one of the rooms of the depot . But such an explanation cannot be accepted inasmuch as his subsequent evidence discloses that no such incident was ever reported to the police . On the other hand the Depot Manager who has been examined as M. W. - 1 says that he was never residing with the disputant in any of the rooms of the Depot nor there was any burglary in the Depot premises at any point of time. According to him ( M. W. - 1 ) there was no such room available in the Depot for human habitation as the adjacent rooms were in dilapidated condition . In view of the above the claim of the workman that he was issued with an appointment letter and that the said letter was stolen while staying in the Depot premises cannot be believed . However, to supplement his above stand the workman has produced two hand written so called service certificates are purported to have been issued to him by the Asst . Depot Supdt . (M. W. - 1 ) and another by name Shri A.C. Naik, (marked as Exts . - 1 and 2 ) with an explanation that the same were issued to him by the above two persons when his original certificates were stolen away. Such of the stand of the workman also does not inspire confidence as the Management Witness No.1 has disputed his purported signature in Exts.-l. According to him he writes his surname as " Das " while Ext . - 1 carries a surname as " Dash " . Thus , the so-called service certificates cannot also be trusted upon and utilized in favour of the disputant - workman as his above approaches appear to have been tainted with falsehood . Butnone-the- less his entire claim cannot be rejected out- right on that ground if he is found otherwise entitled to some benefits .

6. No evidence worth the name has been adduced by the Management in regard to the non- maintainability of the present reference . It was , however, argued by the Management that the engagement of the workman being part- time in nature to supply few buckets of water intermittently on consideration of Rs . 2.50/- per day, he [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

8. It is the settled law that under section 25 - F of the Industrial Disputes Act no workman can be retrenched without notice or retrenchment compensation if he has worked continuously for 240 days in the preceeding year . To show that there was no master and servant relationship between the Management and the disputant, the Management has produced some vouchers marked Ext. -B , B/l to B/3 to show that the workman was engaged to supply few buckets of water intermittently at the rate of Rs . 2.50 per day. The Management has also submitted a detailed list marked as Ext. -A indicating therein the various dates on which the workman was asked to supply water in the above rate . This list is for the period from 1989 to 30-4-1990 . The vouchers marked Ext . - B series relates to the period 1-3-90 to 3-3-90, 5-3-90 to 9-3-1990 , 13-3-1990 to 17-3-1990 and 19-3-1990 to 24-3-1990 as reflected in the list (Ext . - A). These documents thus undoubtedly disclose that the engagement of the workman was not continuous up till 24-3-1990 . These vouchers further indicate that such engagement was also not on the basis of any appointment being made by the Management. Rather it indicates that the workman used to supply water as and when necessary at the rate of Rs . 2.50 per day up till April 1990.

4023

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 008/श्रावण 4 , 1930

it is held that the action of the Management in refusing emi oyment to the workman is bad under law as per Section 25- of the Industrial Disputes Act. From the discussions made earlier it is crystal clear that the workman was never appointed on the basis of any recruitment test and therefore considering the factual aspect of the case and the meager remuneration he was getting at the time of such refusal of employment I hold that in lieu of reinstatement and back wages it would be proper to direct the Management to pay aconsolidated compensation ofRs . 7,000 to the workman within a period of two months from the date ofpublication ofthe Award .

10.Accordingly the reference is answered with the above direction to the Management .

N. K. R. MOHAPATRA, Presiding Officer LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE 2nd PARTY -WORKMAN .

W.W. - 1 - Shri Brundaban Samal .

LIST OF DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED ON BEHALF OF THE 2nd PARY- WORKMAN .

Ext. -1- Copy of the experience certificate granted to the workman by the Asst . Depot Supdt , F.C.I. Ext. -2- Copy of another experience certificate granted to the workman by Shri A.C. Nayak .

LIST OF WITNESSES ON BEHALF OF THE IST PARTY MANAGEMENT

M.W. - I - Shri Bhagabat Prasad Das

9. In so far as the claim of the workman that he had also worked beyond April 1990 the evidence as adduced by the Management Witness No.1 shows that the FCI Depot at Chowduar was shifted to Jagatpur during 1993 and it was finally shifted in all respect in 1998. The letter No. QC . 25(20)/ 89 - Misc . dated 5-12-1992 of the Dy. Manager FCI addressed to the Zonal Manager of FCI which is available onrecord being filed by the workman shows that the Depot at Chowduar was in operative since December 1989 and its entire stock was shifted to Jagatpur Depot from October 1992. The evidence of the M. W. - 1 who was then the Asst . Depot Supdt of Chowduar further shows that even after shifting ofthe stock to Jagatpur Depot himself and another watcher used to attend the Depot office at Chowduar pending final shift of the Depot office to Jagatpur . His evidence further shows that , while the Depot at Chowduar was in operational stage the workman used to supply water intermittently as and when required on a consideration of Rs . 2.50 per day till he was disengaged from 5-5-1993 and for such engagement he was being paid from out ofcontingency fund . But since except Ext . -B series no other vouchers have been filed by the Management for the period from May 1990 to May 1993, I find no justification as to why it shall be believed as claimed by the workman that his engagement from May 1990 onwards was on regular basis to attend miscellaneous work including supply of water. Since the evidence of the workman discloses that during such period he was paid at the rate of Rs . 75 per month and no documents having been filed by the Management to negatise his said claim I further hold that, bythe time the workman was refused employment on 5-5- 1993 he had worked continuously for 240 days in the preceeding year . As admittedly no advance notice or retrenchment compensation has been paid to the workman 2644 Gl /08-23

LIST OF DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED ON BEHALF OF THE IST PARTY - MANAGEMENT

Ext. -A- Copy ofthe work list or Shri Brudaban Sarmal .

Ext. -B-Copy of money receipt submitted by the workman dated3-3-90.

Ext. -B/I - Copy of the money receipt dated 17-3-1990 submitted by the workman.

Ext. -B/2 -Copy of money receipt dated 24-3-1990 submitted bythe workman.

Ext. -B/3 -Copy of money receipt dated 9-3-1990 submitted bytheworkman.

नई दिल्ली, 2 जुलाई , 2008.

का.आ. 2010. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक ऑफ पटियाल के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 802/2 K5 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 2-7-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[फा. सं. एल-12012/28/2000- आईआर( बी-1 ) ]

एन. एस. बोरा , आर्थिक अधिकारी 4024

[PART 11-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 /SRAVANA 4 , 1930

New Delhi , the 2nd July , 2008

S.O. 2010. In pursuance of Section 17 of the In- dustrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Gov- ernment here by publishes the Award (Ref. No , 802/ 2K5 ) of Central Government Industrial Tribunal -Cum - Labour Court- II Chandigarh , as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of State Bank of Patiala, and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 2-7-2008.

[ F. No. L- 12012/ 28 /2000- IR(B- 1 )]

N. S. BORA, Economic Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT- II ,

SCTOR 18- A CHANDIGARH

Presiding Officer : Shri Kuldip Singh

CASE I.D. NO: 802/2K5

The claim of the workman is that she had continuously worked from June , 1995 till 6th of May , 1997 assweeper- cum-peon in the management bank , Sector 22-B , Chandigarh and was appointed as daily wager against a permanent post . The management opened their new branch in Sector 32D , Chandigarh to which she was transferred with the assurance that she will be confirmed onthe job where she had worked from June , 1997 to June , 1998. Then again she was transferred to the Management Branch in Sector 22 - B , Chandigarh . By her representation dated 15-10-1998 , she requested the management to regularize her in service because she had put in a continuous service of 240 days in a year , but the management instead ofregularizing her terminated her service on 26-10-1998 , without passing any order and without complying with the provisions of Section 25 of the Industrial Disputes Act , hereinafter to be reffered as act . They retained juniors to her in service while terminated her services and thereby further violated the provisions of the Act . She has prayed for her reinstatement in service with all consequential relief.

Registered on: 6-9-2005

Date ofDecision: 17-6-2008

SMT. KRISHNA WI/O SH . BALBIR SINGH, H. NO . 2233 , DADU MAJRA COLONY, CHANDIGARH

PETITIONER

Versus

CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF PATIALA, THE MALL , PATIALA ( PB . )

RESPONDENT

APPEARANCE

For theworkman : Mr.Neelam Singh , Advocate

For theManagement : Mr. N. K. Zakhmi , Advocate

AWARD

The following reference was received from the Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide their Letter no . 1-12012/ 28/2000 / IR(B - 1 ) dated 28-6-2000 :-

"Whether the action of the Management of State Bank of Patiala in terminating the services of Smt . Krishna w/o Sh . Balbir Singh w.e.f. 26-10-1998 is just and legal? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to ? "

The claim of the workman has been opposed by the management . It is submitted by them that the reference is not maintainable since the workman has not served the management for 240 days in 12 calendar months preceding the date of her disengagement . Their further claim is that the workman was engaged on contract basis basically for fetching water and was paid at the rate settled with her . She was also paid for doing miscellaneous work for the branch . She was only part time casual worker and had never worked for the period equal to the peon of the bank . Denying that the casual work available in the bank was of the sanctioned post , it is submitted by them that the said work is not done through the regular employee and for that the management used to engage persons for fix period and for a particular work . If any of them came daily to the bank to perform her duty he or she could not claim to be in the employment of the bank and as per the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court the disengagement of such person could not constitute retrenchment as the entry of such was a back door entry . Their further submission is that there was no vacancy available against which the workman could have been engaged. The workman was never appointed in the bank nor did she ever work under their director control . Claiming that the workman was engaged in Sector 22 - B , Chandigarh Branch of the Management purely on daily wages on working days and was paid Rs . 30 as wages as each day. Her services were utilized for limited purposes e.g for bringing water and the manageinent was not supervising her work . They did not exercise any economic or disciplinary control over her. The management further denied that workman was transferred/ shifted to other branches and stated that her services were taken on need basis and her contract was for specified period for which she was paid . The workman used to work for an hour or two everyday . She was not recruited by the management . Since the workman was not engaged by the management, the question of her termination by them did not arise. Admitting that the workman had made the representation to the bank it stated by them that the same was rejected holding that the contentions raised were The notice of the reference was given to the parties who appeared through their representatives and the counsel . The workman filed the statement of claim and after the filing of written statement by the management she filed the rejoinder besides her affidavit in support of her pleadings . She also placed on record photocopies of a number ofdocuments marked as Annexure A- 1 to A- 23 . The management filed the affidavit of Sh. Vijay Kumar Modi in support of their pleadings . The workman appeared as a witness and also produced S/ Sh. Ashok Kumar & Avtar Singh as her witnesses . The management examined Sh . Vijay Kumar Modi as their witness . They also placed on record duly certified statement, showing the dates on which the workman was made payment by the management, duly supported original vouchers.

[ भाग 11- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

misconceived and wrong . They further denied that management had ever violated the provisions of the Act. According to them , the action of the management was justified . They admitted that workman had served in different branches ofthe management bank on contract for cleaning the premises of the bank. They described the other averments as misconceived, misstated and submitted that the claim of the workman is not maintainable , therefore , the reference may be decided against her .

The workman , by her rejoinder , contested that claim ofthe management that she was engaged on contract or that she was engaged only to fetch water and stated that she had continuously worked for them for 240 days from June, 1995, so she was entitled to be regularized in service. The management had recruited persons after June , 1995 on regular basis which proved that the management has regular vacancies with them . They retained her juniors in service whereas terminated her services .

The workman appeared as witness and proved her affidavit exhibitW 1. She admitted that she was engaged on 12th of July, 1997 on contract basis @ 30/ - rupees per day and did the job of sweeping . She denied that she was working only for one and half hour a day . She further admitted that her engagement was not though the employment exchange nor the post was advertised . Her attendance was also not marked like regular employees . She was also not given the appointment or termination order . She claimed that she had worked in Sector 22 branch of the bank for three months after having worked in 32 Sector branch . She further admitted that she was not given order in writing transferring her from one branch to another . She denied that she is working else where after the expiry ofcontractual engagement. Ashok Kumar who appeared as witness for the workman produced the vouchers for the period 28th of June , 1997 to 20th of May , 1998 and stated that some times the workman used to supply water during her cleaning time . He claimed that the workman used to work for two hours a day and was paid rupees 30/- for the same . Avtar Singh another witness of the workman produced photo copies of vouchers for the period August 1995 to 1st of May, 1997 and stated that the original of those vouchers were not traceable . He further stated that the photo copies produced by him were given him by the petitioner and that he cannot verify the signatures on the vouchers unless the originals are shown to him.

The management produced Shri Vijay Kumar Modi as their witness who admitted the contents of his affidavit and stated that as per the record the workman was engaged casual labour for three months for fetching water from 1st of August, 1998 on daily wages @ 30/- . He admitted that before serving in the 22-B branch , the workman had served for 84 days from 12th of July , 1997. In the year 1998 she had served for 67 days up to 20th of March , 1998 and thus had served intermittently. She was not paid for Sundays . The permission to engage her was not taken from the controlling office . As per record the workman had not served for 240 days in the year preceding the date of her disengagement. He further claimed that workman was not sent to work in 32-B branch of the management Bank and she herself had

4025

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26 , 2008/ श्रावण4 , 1930

got thework there . He denied that the workman had worked from June, 1995 to Sept, 1998 as daily wager or that she had worked for 240 days in a calendar year .

I have gone through the file and have also considered the written submissions made by the counsel for the parties and the authorities referred to by them.

Itisonrecord that two employees of the management appeared as witness of the workman and produced the original and photo copies of the vouchers prepared by the management in acknowledgement of payment of wages to the workman . These vouchers help in understanding the nature of engagement of the workman . She has claimed that she was engaged as daily wager whereas the claim of the management is that she was engaged on contract . They have placed much reliance on the statement of the workman in which she admitted that she had been engaged on. contract although in the written arguments they admitted on page 2 that "her services were utilized for carrying water buckets from outside the premises of the branch on purely daily wage and casual basis including holidays " . In my opinion the reliance placed by the management is not justified. The statement of the workman has to be read in conjunction with her pleadings; that of the management and the documents placed on record. The vouchers, original and photo copies , clearly show that the workman was paid for cleaning and sweeping at the rate of rupees 30 per day . Sweeping Shewas also paid for fetching the water for the management bank. In these vouchers there is nothing to show that the workman was working on contract . The management has not produced any evidence such as the office noting, orders of competent authority for engaging the workman and on what terms and conditions . That could very well show the nature of engagement of the workman . There is also nothing mentioned in these vouchers that the workman was engaged only for an hour or for an hour and half, everyday and for what period she was engaged. These documents, however, clearly show that the workman had worked continuously and in no case she had served the management for less than 240 days in the calendar year preceding the date of her disengagement. Her engagement thus was a daily wager for unspecified period and such an engagement cannot be styled as contractual .

The claim of the management that the workman was not transferred to their 32 Sector branch by the management and she herself had managementlent the engagement in that branch has no effect on the claim of the workman since both the branches were working under the management . The management at page 3 of their written arguments admitted that " her services were also intermittently utilized in Sector 32B branch of the bank at the rate of Rs . 30 per day as mutually agreed between the workman and the management . " This proves that the engagement of the workman in both the branches was by their orders . Therefore there was no break in her service . There is also nothing on record to show that the management had given notice to the workman before terminating her services or had paid her the wages for the notice period. There is also nothing to show that the workman was paid retrenchment compensation . The management, therefore , did not follow 4026

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 /SRAVANA 4 , 1930

ANNEXURE

the provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 before the termination of her services . The disengagement of the workman was therefore , bad in law and the same is quashed .

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR

NO . CGIT/LC/R/97/04

Presiding Officer : SHRI C.M.SINGH

TheGeneral Secretary , Daily Wages Bank Employees Association , 9, Sanwar Road , Ujjain (MP), Ujjain

.Workman /Union

Versus

TheDeputyGeneral Manager , State Bank of India , Zonal Office , Harnidia Road , Bhopal(MP)

.... Management

AWARD

Passed on this 19th day of June , 2008

1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No.L - 12012/107/2004 - IR ( B - I ) dated 17-8-04 has referred the following dispute for adjudication bythis tribunal :

Now the question arises as to what relief the workman is entitled to . It is admitted by the workman that her engagement was not done through the employment exchange nor there was advertisement of the post in the news papers when she was engaged. The engagement of the workman therefore , was not in accordance with rules and regulations and can be termed as back door entry. In the light of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case Secretary, State of Karnataka and others versus Uma Devi and others Appeal (civil) 3595-3612 of 1999 decided on 10-4-2006 , She is not entitled to re- instatement in service . However , she is entitled to the compensation as the management did not follow the provisions of Section 25 - F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 before disengaging her . She had served the management for more than three years when she was disengaged. She has also suffered in prosecuting her case in these about ten year , both mentally and economically. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case I am ofthe opinion that she is entitled to a compensation of rupees seventy five thousands . The management is directed to pay this amount to her within three months from the date this award becomes enforceable. In case of their failure to pay the same within the prescribed period, she will be entitled to interest on the awarded amount @ 9% P.A. from the date of award . In these terms the reference isanswered and the award is passed .

Let a copy of the award be sent to the appropriate Government for necessary action and the file be consigned to records after due completion .

"Whether the action of the management of Dy.General Manager , State Bank of India, Bhopal in terminating the services of Sh. Madanlal Parmalia, w.e.f. 15-9-94 is justified ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled for ?"

KULDIP SINGH, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 2 जुलाई , 2008

2.Inthis reference proceeding , no body for the parties put in appearance inspite of sufficient service of notice on them . The reference was proceeding exparte against workmen /Union and 13-6-08 was the date fixed for filing WS by the management but on the said date , no body put in appearance for the parties and no exparte WS was filed by the management .

का.आ. 2011.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इडियां के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 97/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 2-7-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

3. Under the above circumstances , the Tribunal was leftwith no option but to close the reference for award and in this manner , the reference was closed for award .

[फा. सं. एल-12012/107/2004- आईआर( बी-1 ) ] एन. एस. बोरा , आर्थिक अधिकारी. New Delhi , the 2nd July , 2008

4. It appears from the above that the parties have no interest in the reference -proceeding and perhaps no industrial dispute is left hetween them. Therefore under the circumstances , it shall be just and proper to pass no dispute award without any orders as to costs .

5. In view of the above , no dispute award is passed without any orders as to costs .

S.Q. 2011. In pursuance of Section 17 of the In- dustrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Gov- ernment hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 97/2004 ) of Central Government Industrial Tribunal -Cum- Labour Court Jabalpur, as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dis- pute between the management of State Bank of India, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 2-7-2008.

6. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India , Ministry of Labour & Employment asper rules.

C. M. SINGH, Presiding Officer [F. No. L- 12012/ 107/2004 - IR (B - 1 ) ] N. S. BORA, Economic Officer 4027 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 2 जुलाई, 2008

का.आ. 2012.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 264/1997 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 2-7-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[ फा. सं. एल -12012/122/1996- आईआर ( बी-1 ) ]

एन. एस. बोरा , आर्थिक अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 2nd July, 2008

wager . That Late Shri Kesri Ram Raikwar, father of the workman had also been in the employment of the management on regular post of Waterman . That he was retired from the services ofthe Bank on 31-12-1990 . That after his retirement, the workman was appointed on the regular post of Waterman/Messenger in regular pay scale with other facilities . That since then , he continuously worked as Waterman/Messenger till 22-8-94 , the date on which his services were terminated. That before terminating his services , no opportunity of hearing was provided to him . That he was also not given any retrenchment compensation . That he was terminated from services by the Branch Manager, SBI , Silwana , Distt . Raisen , MP on the false ground of being careless in discharging his duties . It is prayed by the workman that the order of terminating him from service be held illegal and he be reinstated in service with all back wages .

S.O. 2012. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No.264/1997) ofCentral Government Industrial Tribunal - Cum -Labour Court Jabalpur . as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of State Bank of India, and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 02-7-2008.

3.Vide order dated 2-3-07 passed on the order sheet of this reference proceeding, the case proceeded exparte against the management . The management failed to file their Written Statement .

[ F. No. L- 12012/ 122/ 1996- IR(B - 1 ] N. Ş . BORA , Economic Officer

ANNEXURE

4. Workman Shri Daulat Ram Raikwar filed his own affidavit in support of his case .

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT , JABALPUR

5. I have heard Shri Mahesh Sharma , Advocate learned counsel for the workman and perused the evidence onrecord.

NO. CGIT/LC/R/264/97 Presiding Officer: SHRI C.M.SINGH Shri Daulat Ram Raikwar , S/O Shri Keliram Raikwar, Resident ofSilwani , Po Silwani ,

-Workman/Union

Distt. Raisen(MP)

Versus

The chief General Manager , State Bank of India, Bhopal .

-Management

AWARD

Passed on this 23rd day of May 2008

1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide itsNotification No. L- 12012/ 122/96 - IR(B1) dated 4-9-97 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal:-

6. It is worthwhile to mention here that no . written statement has been filed by the management denying the averments made in the statement of claim by the workman, which is indicative ofthe fact that the management has not putany contest to the claim of the workman. Besides the above, the affidavit filed by the workman in support of his case has remained unchallenged and uncontroverted. The case of the workman, is therefore , fully proved and establishedfrom. his affidavit which has remained unchallenged and uncontroverted. It has not been averred in the statement of claim that after termination of his services , the workman had not been gainfully employed . The workman has also not stated on oath in his affidavit that after his termination from services , he was not gainfully employed, therefore I find myself unable to direct the management to reinstate him in service with back wages but he is entitled to the relief that he may be reinstated in services as order of termination of service is illegal and Improper .

7. In view of the above , the reference is answered in favour of the workman and against the management with costs holding the following -

" क्या भारतीय स्टेट बैंक का श्री दोलतराम रैकवार को उनके पिता के स्थान पर अनुकम्पा नियुक्ति देकर और दिनांक 1-1-91 से 22-8-94 तक नौकरी करवाकर अनुचित ढंग से बिना किसी एन्क्वायरी , रिट्रैचमेंट कम्पनसेशन आदि के नौकरी से निकाल देना न्यायोचित है ? यदि नहीं तो कर्मकार किस रियायत का हकदार है ? "

2. The case of workman Shri Daulat Ram Raikwar in brief is as follows . That he was appointed on the post of Part-timeWaterman in the year 1982by the Branch Manager, State Bank of India , Silwani , Distt . Raisen ( MP) . That he continuously worked as such till 1990. That he was in the employment of the management of the Bank as a daily

" भारतीय स्टेट बैंक का श्री दोलतराम रैकवार को उनके पिता के स्थान पर अनुकम्पा नियुक्ति देकर और दिनांक 1-1-91 से 22-8-94 तक नौकरी करवाकर अनुचित ढंग से बिना किसी एन्क्वायरी , रिट्रैचमेंट कम्पनसेशन आदि के नौकरी से निकाल देना न्यायोचित नहीं है । अतः कर्मकार बिना पूर्व वेतन के सेवा में पुनः स्थापित किये जाने का अधिकारी है । 4028

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

8. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India , Ministry of Labour & Employment as per rules .

C. M. SINGH, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 2 जुलाई , 2008

का.आ. 2013.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबोध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण चैन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 75/2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 2-7-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [ फा. सं. एल-12012/27/2006 - आईआर ( बी-1 ) ]

एन. एस. बोरा , आर्थिक अधिकारी New Delhi , the 2nd July, 2008

S.O. 2013.-In. pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Governmenthereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 75/2006) ofCentral Government Industrial Tribunal - Cum -Labour Court Chennai . as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of State Bank of India, and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 2-7-2008.

[ F. No. L- 12012/27 /2006 - IR(B - 1 ) ]

N. S. BORA, Economic Officer

ANNEXURE : BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, CHAENNAI Monday, the 24th March , 2008

Present : K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 75/2006 (Inthe matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of sub - section ( 1 ) and sub -section 2 ( A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947( 14 of 1947) , between the Management of State Bank of India and their workmen) BETWEEN

Sri A. Thangavelu

: 1st Party/Petitioner No. 3/46, Housing Unit

Thomas Park

Race Course Road

Coimbatore-641018

AND

The Dy. General Manager : 2nd Party/Respondent State Bank of India , Zonal Office Kurinchi Complex State Bank Road

Coimbatore

Appearance

For the 1st Party/Petitioner : M/ s Balan Haridas , R.

Kamatchi Suderasan For the 2nd Party/Management : M/ sV.R. Gopalarathnam

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

AWARD

The Central Government, Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L- 12012/27/2006 IR(B - 1) dated 07-08-2006 referred the following Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication.

The schedule mentioned in that order is :

"Whether the action of the Management of State Bank of India , Coimbatore Branch in imposing punishment ofremoval from services of Sri A. Thangavelu is legal and justified? If not to what relief the workman is entitled to " ?

2. After the receipt of the Industrial Dispute , this Tribunal has numbered it as ID 75/2006 and issued notices to both sides . Both parties entered appearance through their Advocates and filed their claim statement and counter statement respectively.

3. The allegations in the claim statement are briefly asfollows:

The petitioner was working in the Respondent Bank as Assistant ( Accounts/Cash) for more than 17 years in the Ganesapuram branch of the Respondent Bank. While so, by an order dated 23-10-2002 , the Respondent suspended the petitioner from the service . A charge sheet was issued on 18-10-2002 . Even though the petitioner has submitted an explanation , the Respondent Management proceeded to hold a Domestic Enquiry against the petitioner . The Enquiry Officer who was deputed to enquiry the matter has held the two charges framed against the petitioner have been proved and the Disciplinary Authority imposed the punishment of removal from service with superannuation benefits against the petitioner by its order dated 10-11-2003 in a mechanical manner . The first charge framed against the petitioner was that he has changed the credit voucher on 09-10-2002 relating to one Sri Natarajan A/ c No. 9/1605 to one Sri Balasubramanian A/ c 1/20 and defrauded the amount . The second charge framed against the petitioner was that the petitioner was in the habit of borrowing money from the customers of the bank . Both the charges are vague and without any particulars . Further , with regard to second charge , there had been no details to the allegation from which customer the petitioner borrowed or when he had borrowed. Only in the enquiry , the Respondent Management has introduced documents through witnesses of whom there is no reference of any sort in the charge sheet. Therefore, based on a case set- up in the enquiry for the first time, the petitioner cannot be punished. Only due to a small clerical error which had happened in the normal course of banking is sought to be alleged as defrauding . The petitioner came to know that there had been mistake in the credit of Rs . 25,000/- in the account of Sri M.P. Balasubramanian which should have been credited in the account of Sri Natarajan. Immediately. he informed M.P. Balasubramanian about this and he has made arrangement to remit the said amount of Rs . 25,000/- inthe account of Natarajan . The Branch Manager instead ofappreciating the efforts taken by the petitioner to rectify 4029

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

not satisfactory, departmental action was taken against him and after following the procedures the Enquiry officer had submitted his report dated 05-8-2003 to the Disciplinary Authority. The Disciplinary Authority after following the usual procedure has proposed the punishment of removal from service and after hearing the petitioner imposed the same punishment on him by his order dated 15-12-2003 which was also confirmed by the Appellate Authority by his order dated 16-6-2004 . At no stretch of imagination , it can be said as illegal , arbitrary or contrary to law or in violation of principles of natural justice . The Domestic Enquirywas held in just and proper manner after following the principles of natural justice , It is false to state that the petitioner had not made any statement admitting that he having committed the alleged misconduct and he has signed in the dictated statement of the Branch Manager . The said statement was made voluntary without any threat or coercion by the officials . Though , it is alleged that there is no financial loss to the bank, even if there is no financial loss , the misconduct alleged and proved in the enquiry is sufficient to warrant the punishment of removal from the service as in the bank's service devotion and integrity are réquirement from any employee . It is false to allege that the letter-dated 28-10-2002 had been marked without giving any opportunity. The document was marked with the consent and therefore , the contents thereof can be construed to be proved . The Disciplinary Authority only after reaching a conclusion that the charges have been proved has imposed the punishment having regard to the nature , content and magnitude of the misconducts alleged and proved in the enquiry . The employment in bank which deals with public money requires trust and confidence and the Respondent Bank has lost the confidence in the petitioner on account of the misconducts committed by him and proved in the enquiry and therefore it will not be safe to retain him in service which will be prejudicial to the interest of the bank, the Respondent prays that claim may be dismissed costs:

Thepoint for determination are :

the mistake unfortunately started witch hunting and made allegations against the petitioner . Further , he was also asked to give a written statement the as dictated by him otherwise he threatened that if the petitioner does not give the said statement then it will result in serious disciplinary proceedings . No other go , the petitioner has given a statement as dictated by the Branch Manager. In the enquiry, the Respondent Management neither examined Sri M. P. Balasubramanian nor examined Sri R. Natarajan who are the two material witnesses . Though , the Respondent Management relied on the alleged letter given by them which was addressed to the Investigating Officer , eventhe Investigating Officer was not examined. Therefore , the letters being not marked through the author or through the person to whom it was addressed has no evidential value. Therefore, the allegation that the petitioner has defrauded the bank is without any substance. With regard to second charge, it was alleged that the petitioner had borrowed excess amount outside borrowing without prior permission. No doubt, one Sri Selvaraj who is alleged to have advanced money to the petitioner was examined in the enquiry, he was not subjected to cross - examination , therefore, his evidence cannot be taken into consideration . Though, one Sri Swaminathan was examined to prove the second charge, he has not specifically stated the date , place or time when he has supposed to have advanced money to the petitioner . Therefore , the evidence given by hirn before the Enquiry officer is without any substance . The petitioner's appeal against the order of Disciplinary Authority was dismissed in a most arbitrary fashion and the Appellate Authority without applying his mind has rejected the appeal preferred by the petitioner. The petitioner had rendered 17 years of unblemished record of service and therefore , the punishment imposed by the Respondent authority is grossly disproportionate to the alleged charge and this Tribunal has got every power to interfere in the imposition of punishment under Section- 11A of the ID Act . Hence , for all these reasons , the petitioner prays to pass an award to reinstate him service with full back wages , continuity of service and other attendant benefits .

(i ) Whether the action of the Respondent Management in imposing the punishment of removal from service is legal and justified?

(ii) To what relief the petitioner is entitled to?

Point No. 1

5. In this case , the learned counsel for the Petitioner argued that though two charges have been framed against the petitioner, none of the charges have been proved against the petitioner and the Enquiry Officer has come to a conclusion that the charges have been proved on the presumption and assumption and there is not even iota of evidence to establish the charges framed against the petitioner.Nodoubt, a mistake was crept into in the account of9/1605 and 1/20 but on any ground it cannot be said that the petitioner has want only done this mistake and defrauded the Respondent Bank. The first charge viz . that 4. As against this , the Respondent in his counter statement contended that the petitioner who was working as Assistant in the Respondent Bank at Ganesapuram branch committed certain misconduct for which the Respondent initiated departmental proceedings and imposed the punishment . The charges framed against the petitioner are ( i) that he had changed the credit voucher on 9-10-2002 relating to Sri R. Natarajan A/c No. 9/1605 as Sri Balasubramanian A/c 1/20 and defrauded the amount ( ii ) that the petitioner has been often in the habit of borrowing money from the customers of the branch which case, if proved would amount to gross misconduct under Para -5 (j ) of Bipartite Settlement and therefore action was taken against him . Though, the petitioner admitted the charges and has given an explanation, since the explanation was 4030

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008 / SRAVANA 4, 1930

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

disciplinary action against the petitioner and the failure to test the veracity of the complaint made against him has resulted in the deprivation of the right of the petitioner amounting to gross violation of principles of natural justice and thereby making the entire disciplinary proceedings vitiated" . In view of the above judgement and relying on thisjudgement, the counsel for the Petitioner contended since neither the complainant nor the person to whom it was addressed were not examined in the enquiry and therefore no reliance can be placed on the complaint alleged to have been made by Sri Balasubamanian and therefore the enquiry in this case is vitiated.

6. No doubt , I find some force in the contention of the learned counsel of the Petitioner but in this case the Respondent Bank has not only placed reliance on the complaint but also on its own records . In that records the corrections were made by the petitioner . Even assuming for argument sake that the petitioner has done a mistake without any intention to defraud the bank , the petitioner neednot correct the records maintained by the bank without any enquiry. On that ground alone it is admitted by the petitioner himself that he has made the corrections in the records of the bank. Further , no one can say changing the number from 9/1605 to A/ c No. 1/20 as a mistake because it cannot be said that this mistake had happened in the normal course of banking as pointed out by the Enquiry Officer and also by the Appellate Authority that the petitioner has want only done the correction and he has defrauded the bank and also defrauded the account holders . No doubt , the Respondent Bank has not examined the account holders and also the Investigating Officer but on this score it cannotbe said in this ease that the findings of the Enquiry Officer is perverse . The Enquiry Officer from the records has given a finding that the petitioner has want only done the corrections and he has defrauded the bank and also the customer . Under such circumstances , I am not inclined to accept the contention for the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the findings given by the Enquiry Officer is perverse .

7. Then again the learned counsel for the Petitioner argued with regard to the second charge viz . that he was in the habit of borrowing money from the customers of the branch . The Respondent Bank has not produced any document or satisfactory evidence to substantiate this contention . Nodoubt, the Respondent Bank has examined two witnesses to prove this allegation . Both of them have not establishad this contention . One of the witnesses who was examined on the side of the Respondent Management though has given an evidence against the petitioner in the Chief Examination , he was not subjected to Cross- Examination and therefore no reliance can be placed on this evidence . The other witness who was examined though has given an evidence that he has given various amounts to the petitioner , he has not substantiated his claim as to whenthe petitioner has borrowed the amount nor what are the amounts he has paid to the petitioner. Therefore , with the petitioner has changed the credit voucher dated 9-10-2002 relating to Natarajan's A/ c No. 9/1605 as Balasubramanian's A/ c No. 1/20 , there is no mensrea to defraud the bank or the amount . It is only a small clerical error which happened in the normal course ofbanking which is sought to be alleged as defrauding . Only when the customer Sri Natarajan , SB A/ c No. 9/1605 enquired about the cheque for Rs . 25,000/- , it came to the knowledge of the petitioner that there had been a mistake and immediately the petitioner informed the concerned person viz . Sri M. P. Balasubramanian about this mistake and the customer Sri Balasubramanian had made arrangements on the next day to remit the amount of Rs : 25,000/- in the account of Sri Natarajan and it was brought to the notice of the Branch Manager but the Branch Manager instead of appreciating the efforts taken by the petitioner to rectify the mistake done in the accounts started witch hunting and he has made false allegations against the petitioner . In the enquiry , though a charge has beerl framed against him that the petitioner had defrauded the bank, there is not even an iota of evidence to substantiate this charge of this type. The complainant has not been examined nor the person to whom itwas addressed was also not examined . Under such circumstances , no reliance can be placed on the complaint alleged to have been made by the Sri R. Natarajan and therefore the finding of the Enquiry Officer on the basis of the complaint is vitiated. It is further argued on behalf of the petitioner that there had been no financial loss arising either to the customer or to the Respondent Bank , therefore , the first charge levelled against the petitioner is in a most arbitrary manner framed against him . The Respondent Bank in the enquiry introduced an alleged complaint of Sri M. P. Balasubramanian dated 23-10-2002 which was admittedly addressed to the Investigating Officer . Even the Investigating officer was not examined. The very content of the said letter contains allegations which are beyond truth, therefore , this letter being not marked through the author or the person through whom it was addressed has no evidentiary value . Though the Respondent Bank alleged that the petitioner has changed the credit voucher relating to SB A/ c No. 9 / 1605- as SB 1/20 , the alteration was made from the challan released to the petitioner by the Branch Manager on the reference of the petitionner that the transfer scroll did not tally with the difference of Rs. 25,000/- . Only after accepting the representation made by the petitioner, the Branch Manager has permitted him to change the same, therefore, the petitioner and the Branch Manager were acting bonafidely and therefore there is no intention to defraud the bank nor the customer . Under such qircumstances , the findings given by the Enquiry Officer and the punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority is without any basis and it is perverse . Then the learned counsel for the Petitioner relied on the ruling reported in 2007, WRIT L.R. , PAGE 7 , B. PADMAIAH VS. THE UNION OF INDIA & 6 OTHERS wherein the Division Bench ofMadras High Court has held " the impugned order are liable to be set aside . The failure to examine the complainant whose complaint is the basis for the 4031 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 26, 2008/श्रावण 4 , 1930

16-6-2004

Ex. W13

Order of punishment

Ex. W14

Settlement governing service condition

Defence brief

Ex. W15 14-7-2003

Ex. W16 5-9-2003

the vague inference being drawn from the evidence ofthe above witnesses , the Enquiry Officer has come to a conclusion that the two charges has been proved but really there is no basis to substantiate this charge also and therefore, the entire enquiry is vitiated .

Statement of defence of the petitioner

9-2-2004

Ex. W17

Appeal preferred by the petitioner

On the Management's side

Ex.No.

Date Description

Nil

नई दिल्ली, 2 जुलाई, 2008

8.Here again, I find some force in the contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner but on consideration of the entire evidence in this case and on perusal of the documentary evidence produced in this case , the cumulative effect of all these will clearly establish that the petitioner has borrowed various amounts from the customers of the bank, Therefore, I am not inclined to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the finding on this charge is without any basis . As such , I find the action of the Respondent Management in imposing the punishment of removal from service to the petitioner is legal and justified and I find this point against the petitioner.

का.आ. 2014.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार लक्ष्मी विलास लि.के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , चैन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 51/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 2-7-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था । Point No. 2

[फा. सं. एल-12012/31/2000- आई. आर ( बी-1 ) ]

एन. एस. बोरा , आर्थिक अधिकारी The next point to be decided in this case is to what reliefthe petitioner is entitled ?

New Delhi , the 2nd July, 2008

9. Inview of my foregoing findings that the imposition of punishment of removal from service passed by the Respondent authority against the petitioner is legal and justified, I find the petitioner is not entitled to any relief.

10. Thus , the reference is answered accordingly.

(Dictated to the P.A. transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 24th March , 2008) .

S.O. 2014. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government here by publishes the Award (Ref. No. 51 / 2007) of Central Government Industrial Tribunal -Cum- Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Lakshmi VilasBank Ltd. , and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 2-7-2008 .

K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer

Witnesses Examined : -

[F. No. L- 12012/31 /2000- IK(B- 1 ) ] For the I Party/Petitioner None

N. S. BORA, EconomicOfficer None

For the II Party/Mgmt .

ANNEXURE

Documents Marked :-

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT Onthe Petitioner's side

Date

Ex. No.

Description

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM -LABOUR COURT CHENNAI

Ex. W1 23-10-2002 Order of Suspension

Friday, the 16th May, 2008

Ex.W2 18-11-2002 Show Cause Notice

Present : K. JAYARAMAN ,

Ex. W3 10-12-2002 Reply given by the petitioner

PresidingOfficer

Ex. W4 20-12-2002 EnquiryNotice

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 51/2007 Ex. W5 29-1-2003 Letter of the Petitioner

7-2-2003

Ex. W6

Letter of the Petitioner

Ex .W7 26-5-2003 Letter of the Enquiry Officer

Ex. W8 18-8-2003

(Inthe matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) ofsub -section ( 1 ) and sub- section 2(A) of Section 10 of theIndustrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , between the Management of Lakshmi Vilas Bank and their Workman) BETWEEN

Letter ofthe Disciplinary Authority enclosing the enquiry report

Sri V. Kannan

: I Party/Petitioner Ex. W9

Vs.

The Assistant General Manager

Exhibits marked by the Respondent Bank in the enquriy ( 17 exhibits )

Lakshmi Vilas BankLtd.

: II Party/Management Second Show Cause

Ex. W10 10-11-2003

Trichy

Ex . W11 27-11-2003

Appearance:

For the Petitioner

: Petitioner himself Representation given by the petitioner in the personal hearing

For the Management

Ex. W12 15-12-2003

: M/ s . T.S. Gopalan & Co. Order of punishment

2644 G1/08-24 4032.

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[ PART II- SEC . 3 (ii ) ] ۱۰

AWARD

The Central Government, Ministry of Labour vide Order No. L - 12012/31 //2000 - IR(B - I ) dated 05-09-2007 has referred the following Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal foradjudication.

The Schedule mentioned in that order is:

"Whether the action of the Management of Lakshmi Vilas Bank Lid . in terminating the services of Sri V. Kannan , Ex- Messenger, is justified ? If not to what relief the workman is entitled to ?

2.After the receipt of Industrial Dispute , this Tribunal has numbered it as ID 51/2007 and issued notices to both sides , Both sides entered appearance . The petitioner appears in person and filed his Claim Statement and the Respondent represented by its Advocate and filed their Counter Statement .

3. The allegations in the Claim Statement are briefly asfollows:

The petitioner was appointed as a Messenger by the Respondent Management on 13-03-1992 at Thillainagar , Trichy. TillMay 1996, the petitioner served as a Messenger in thật branch . He was also paid bonus every year as per rules! He became entitledto the benefits like any other regular employees . The petitioner has worked more than 240 days in all these years from 1992 to 1996, under such circumstances, he is entitled to permanency of status of workman under the Respondent Management . When such is the case , the Respondent Management followed an unfair labour practice and thereby became indifferent and also failing to perform the statutory obligation of conferring obligation of conferring permanent status to this petitioner. Hence, the petitioner raised a dispute before the labour, authorities and after its failure of conciliation , the matter was referred to this Tribunal for adjudication . The petitioner therefore prays this Tribunal to confer permanent status to him and thereby regularize his services as Messenger by reinstatement and with full back wages and other benefits .

onattaining the age of 27 years would also be eligible to be considered for vacancies in permanent sub- staff, if otherwise they are qualified and have passed the interview and test . The engagement and non - engagement of temporary sub - staff is being done strictly as per the terms ofthe settlement dated 10-11-1989 . The petitioner was an empanelled temporary sub - staff of Thillainagar branch in Trichy district of the Respondent Bank . There were 3 other empanelled temporary sub - staff viz . M / s Kandaswamy, Murugappan and V. Natesan . It is not correct to say that the petitioner has worked for more than 240 days in a continuous period of 12 months . The petitioner has worked for 58 days in 1992, 132 days in 1993 , 145 days in 1994 and 117 days in the year 1995 and between January 1996 to May 1996 , the petitioner was engaged only for 58 days . Since the petitioner was born on 16-05-1969 and since he attained 27 years in 1996 , he was ceased to be engaged as temporary sub - staff from 16-05-1996 . The Dy. General Manager , Personnel Department of the Respondent Bank by his letter dated 23-06-1996 advised the Manager , Thillainagar branch that the petitioner shall not be engaged astemporary peon from 16-05-1996 as per the settlement . Thus , the engagement of the petitioner as a temporary sub - staff came to an end. The non - employment of the petitioner was pursuant to the settlement dated 10-11-1989 and, therefore, it would not amount to retrenchment and it is fully justified and valid in law and there is no scope to interference with the same . Even though , the petitioner was disengaged from 16-05-1996 , he was permitted to participate in an interview subsequent to that but unfortunately he did not come out successful . Only after a period of3 years of cessation , the petitioner has raised an Industrial Dispute and that too before the Government labour authorities of the State Govt . Subsequently, he approached the Labour Enforcement Officer of the Govt . of India and since no action was taken on the basis of conciliation failure report, the petitioner filed a Writ Petition in WP No. 3157/2002 and after the direction of the Hon'ble High Court , the Govt . of India referred the Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal . The petitioner has not worked for 240 days in any period of 12 months and there was no question ofany conferment of permanency by reason of his having been engaged as temporary attender in the leave vacancy of the regular sub- staff. The petitioner is not entitled to any protection , hence for all these reasons , the Respondent prays that the claim may be dismissed with costs .

Points to be decided in this case are :

(1) Whether the action of the , Respondent Management in terminating the services of the petitioner isjustified?

(2) To what relief the petitioner is entitled?

Point No. 1

5. The case of the petitioner is that he has worked from 1992-1996 and all of a sudden the Respondent Bank has terminated his services without any notice or compensation and therefore he raised the dispute for regularization and for reinstatement with consequential 4. As against this , the Respondent in his Counter Statement alleged that the Respondent is a banking company having registered office at Karur. The Respondent Bank has adequate number of subordinate staff and their services and their wages and other service conditions are governed by Awards and Settlements made at the Industry level . In the Respondent Bank, the leave vacancy ofregular sub -staff are filled up by temporary attenders / messengers . As and when regular vacancy of sub- staff arises and the bank decides to fill up the same , temporary sub /staffs are considered for such vacancies . This practice has been in vogue in all the banks including the nationalized banks . In the year 1989, the recognized union representing the award staff wanted a scheme to be framed for empanelment of temporary sub - staff and consider them for permanent vacancies : After its discussion dated 10-11-1989 , a settlement was concluded and one of the terms of the settlement was that the temporary sub - staff should be not less than 18 years and not more than 27 years. However, the temporary sub - staff who were ceased to be engaged 4033 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

that he had so worked but this claim was denied by the Appellant . It was then for the claimant to lead evidence to show that he had infact worked" for 240 days in the year preceding his termination . Filing an affidavit is only his own statement in his favour and that cannot be regarded as sufficient evidence for any Court or Tribunal to , come to the conclusion that a workman had infact worked for 240 days in a year . No proof of receipt or salary or wages for 240 days or order or record of appointment or engagement for that period was produced by the workman. On this ground alone the award is to liable to be set aside " . In this case, though the petitioner argued that an adverse inference is to be drawn against the Respondent ,Management, he has not taken any steps to summon the Respondent to produce any records to substantiate his claim . He wanted to take advantage that the Respondent has not produced the relevant documents which is not permissible since the initial burden is upon the petitioner to establish his contention and since he has not established his contention with any satisfactory evidence , his contention is to fail before this Tribunal .

benefits . Though, the petitioner alleged that he has worked from 1992-1996 continuously and he worked for more than 240 days in a continuous period of 12 months , he has not produced any document to show that he has worked for more than 240 days in a continuous period of 12 months preceding his disengagement . The petitioner appeared himself and argued that the Respondent Management has got a muster roll , attendance register and other records and they have not produced any documents before this Tribunal to substantiate their claim that the petitioner has worked less than 240 days . Even though , the services of the petitioner was paid to the petitioner through the SB A/c in the bank, no account copy was given to him and, therefore, he is not in a position to produce any documents to establish his case that he has worked for more than 240 days . On the other hand, the Respondent Management even though has got all the documents has purposefully not produced the same only for the reason if those documents are produced before this Court , it will prove against their contention and, therefore , this Tribunal has to taken an adverse inference against the Respondent Management.

6. The second contention of the petitioner is , though the Respondent contended that there was a settlement entered into between the Union and the Management on 10-11-1989 and one of the terms of the settlement was that the temporary sub - staff should be not less than 18 years and not more than 27 years and since the petitioner is not a member of the concerned Union , the settlement entered into between the Unidn and the Management will not bind the petitioner and, therefore , they cannot take advantage ofthe terms of the settlement and disengage the petitioner from the work and , therefore , he prays this Tribunal to regularize him in service of the Respondent Bank and also direct the Respondent Bank to reinstate hiin with all backwages and consequential benefits .

8. I find much force in the contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent . Though , the petitioner has alleged that he worked for 240 days in a continuous period of12 months preceding his termination; he has not produced any single scrap of paper or satisfactory evidence to establish his contention . In the above Supreme Court's decision, the Supreme Court has held the retrenchment compensation will be entitled to the petitioner under Section- 25(F) of the ID Act only on completion ofrequisite length of continuous service and where the workman's claim that he had worked for 240 days in the year preceding his termination was denied by the employer, it was for the claimant to lead evidence to the effect that he had worked for more than 240 days and workman's affidavit or contention was not sufficient evidence for that purpose and set aside the award of the Tribunal ..

7. The petitioner examined himself as WW1 but he has not produced any document on his side . On the other hand, the Respondent produced Ex . M1 to Ex . M11 which are the copy of the application made by the petitioner to the bank, the copy of the school certificate given by the petitioner , the copy of the employment éxchange registration card and the copy of the letters sent by the Respondent Bank and other documents . The learned counsel for the Respondent contended in this case , it is the case of the petitioner that he had worked more than 240 days and on the other hand the Respondent had denied the contention, therefore , the initial burden of proving that he has worked more than 240 days in a continuous period of 12 months is upon the petitioner. On the other hand, he has not produced any single documents to establish his contention nor produced any satisfactory evidence to prove the same and the learned counsel for the Respondent relied on the ruling reported in 2002, 3 , SCC, 25 , RANGE FOREST OFFICER VS. S.T. HADIMANI wherein the Supreme Court has held " it was the case of the claimant

9.The learned counsel for the Respondent further contended in the year 1989 , the recognized union representing the award staffs of the Respondent Bank wanted a scheme to be framed for employment of temporary sub-staff and consider them for permanent vacancy, the said issue was discussed with the Union and after taking into account the implication of the issue , a broad understanding was reached based on which a settlement wasconcluded. One of the terms of the settlement was that the temporary sub- staff should not be less than 18 years and. not more than 27 years . Further, the temporary sub- staffwho were ceased to be engaged on attaining the age of 27 years would also eligible to be considered for vacancies in permanent sub - staff, if otherwise they are qualified and have passed the interview and test and after the Respondent Bank's engagement and non - engagement of temporary sub- staff is being done strictly as per the terms of the settlement dated 10-11-1989 . Though , the petitioner alleged that he has worked for more than 240 4034

[PART 11- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4, 1930

12. Thus , the reference is answered accordingly .

(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him , corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 16th May, 2008 )

K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer

Witnesses Examined :-

Forthe I Party /Petitioner : WWI Sri V. Kannan

MW1 Sri M.V. Sundar

For the II Party /Management :

Documents Marked :---

Onthe petitioner's side

Ex. No.

Date Description

Nil

For the II Party/Management

EX.No.

Date Description

EX.MI

Copy of representation for appointment as temporary peòn post

Ex:ME

Trichy Copy ofTransfer Certificate of ERHigher Secondary School ,

EX.M3 26-09-1990

registration Copy ofEmployment Exchange

EX.M4 13-03-1992 Copy of bank's letter days in a continuous period of 12 months preceding his termination, he has worked only in leave vacancies of regular sub - staff and he has worked only 58 days in 1992 , 132days in 1993, 145 days in 1994, 117 days in 1995 and 58 days in 1996. He has not worked more than that in all these years , under such circumstances, it is false to allege that he has worked for more than 240 days in a continuous period of 12 months . Further though the petitioner alleged that the settlement entered into between the Union and the Management will not bind him as the settlement in package dealjentered into by the Union is in the best interest of those workmen and they cannot be said to be unfair or unjust from any angle . Further, settlement by direct negotiation and collective bargaining should be preferred as a best guarantee for industrial peace . Under such circumstances , the contention of the petitioner that the terms of settlement will not bind him is without any substance. I find here again some force in the contention ofthe learned counsel for the Respondent , though , the petitioner alleged that he was appointed as a Messenger subsequent to the settlement and he was not a member of the Union, the terms of settlement will not bind him , since I consider the settlement is for the best interests of the workmenand it cannot be said unjust or unfair, under such circumstances , the contention of the petitioner that the terms of the settlement will not bind him is without any force.

Ex.M5 08-07-2002 Copy of the letter sent by the Respondent Bank called for interview

Ex.M6 07-08-2002 Copy of the bio -data given to the bank.

Ex.M7 29-11-1999 Copy of the respondent's reply letter for the dispute raised before the labour authorities

Ex.M8 10-11-1989 Copy of minutes of discussion between the Lakshmi Vilas Bank Employees ' Union and the Respondent signed on 11-07-1990

Ex.M9

Copy of statement of temporary peons engaged- total days worked till Dec. 1992, Dec. , 1993 and monthwise statement from Jan. 1994 to May 1996

Ex.M10 23-04-1996

10. Since it is established that the petitioner was appointed as a temporary workman and appointed on leave vacancy of regular sub - staff , such dispensation of service engaged ondaily wages or on temporary basis cannot be said to be as a retrenchment and as such I find under such disengagement the person who have been disengaged cannot claim the benefits under Section - 25 (F ) of the ID Act. In this case , the petitioner has not claimed for reinstatement of the previous post , on the other hand, he wants to regularize his services in a permanent post which cannot bedoneby this Tribunal because such regularization canbedone only as per the sanctioned or permanent post . In this case, since the petitioner has not established the fact that he has worked for more than 240 days in a continuous period of 12 months preceding his disengagement and since the petitioner has not established that there are regular vacancies in the Respondent Bank, I am not inclined to accept his contention that he is entitled for regularization and for reinstatement in service .As such , I find this point against the petitioner .

Point No. 2

The next point to be decided in this case to what reliefthe petitioner is entitled?

Conletter from Personnel Department Thillainagar branch of the Respondent Bank advising deletion of the petitioner's name from the panel of temporary person w.e.f. 15-05-1996 on his completing 27 years of age

Ex.M11 July 1999 Copy of conciliation petition filedby the petitioner 11. In view of my findings that the action of the Respondent Management in terminating the services of the petitioner isjustified , I find the petitioner is not entitled to any relief prayed by him.

1 4035

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 4 जुलाई , 2008

का.आ. 2015.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947-(1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार साऊथ ईस्ट्रन रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण कोलकाता के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 03/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 04-07-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[फा. सं. एल-41012 /73/2006- आईआर( बी -1 ) ]

एन. एस. बोरा , आर्थिक अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 4th July, 2008

2. When the case is called out today, none appears for eithher side . It, however , appears that an application has been received in the office from the union concerned on 17-06-2008 stating that as per the order of the Railway Board , Government of India, Ministry of Railways vide Memo No. E(NG) 11/2008/RR- 3 / 1 dated 01-04-2008 most of the porters at Kharagpur have been absorbed and the proceedings is still under process to absorb the remaining porters in the Railways and, therefor, it is prayed that the present case be dropped . A copy of the order of the Railway Board as stated above has also been enclosed to the application . It is accordingly clear that the claim of the workmen has already been redressed and thus they are no longer interested in the present dispute under reference .

3. In such view of the matter this Tribunal has no other alternative but to dispose of the present reference by passing a "No Dispute" Award . A "No Dispute " Award is accordingly passed and the reference is disposed of.

C. P. MISHRA, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 4 जुलाई , 2008

S.O. 2015 -In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 03/ 2007) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , Kolkata as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of South Eastern Railway, and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 04-07-2008 .

[F. No. L-41012/73/2006- IR(B-I) ] N. S. BORA , Economic Officer

ANNEXURE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT KOLKAΑΤΑ

का.आ. 2016 औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार टीएएनएमएजी , सालेम के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई.डी.- 62/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 04-07-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

Reference No. 03 of2007

[फा. सं. एल-29011/96/2002 - आईआर ( एम. ) ] कमल बाखरू , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 4th July, 2008

Parties : Employers in relation to the management of South Eastern Railway AND Their workmen .

Present : Mr. Justice C. P. Mishra , Presiding Officer

Appearance:

None

Onbehalf ofthe Management :

: None

S.O. 2016. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. I.D.- 62/2003) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court Chennai now as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of TANMAG , Salem and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 04-07-2008.

Onbehalf of the Workmen

Industry: Railway.

State :West Bengal .

[F. No. L-29011/96/2002-1R(M ) ] KAMAL BAKHRU, Desk Officer Dated: 25th June , 2008

ANNEXURE

AWARD

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM -LABOUR COURT CHENNAI

Thursday , the 31st January , 2008 By Order No. L- 41012 /73 / 2006 IR( B - II ) dated 11-04-2007 the Government of India, Ministry of Labour in exercise of its powers under Section 10 ( 1 ) (d) and (2A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

Present : K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 62/2003 "Whether the acttion of the management of South Eastern Railway , Garden Reach, Kolkata in not regularizing the services of 275 porters of Kharagpur Division is justified ? Ifnot, what relief the concerned workmen are entitled to ? "

(Inthe matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of sub -section ( 1) and sub - section 2( A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , between the 4036

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

Management of Tamil Nadu Magnesite Ltd. and their Workmen)

BETWEEN

1. The General Secretary,

Salem Mavatta Anna Thozhir Sangam Arisipalayam

Salem-636009

2. The General Secretary,

Magnesite Thozhilalar Munnetra Sangam Vellakkalpatty P.O.

Salein-636012

3. The General Secretary, Magnesite Workers Union 3/138 , Mamangam Salem-636002

4. The General Secretary, Pattali Thozhir Sangam Arabic College Building Vellakalpatti Post

Salem-12

5. The General Secretary, Magnesite National Labour Union

1 52, Dr. Subbarayan Road

Salem-636001

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

: I Party/Petitioners

Vs.

The Managing Director

TANMAG

5/53 , Omalur Road Jagirammapalayam Salem-636012

: II Party/Respondent

Appearance :

For the Petitioners I to 3 & 5 :

S. Vaidyabathan

For the Petitioner No.4

3. The Ist , 2nd , 3rd and 5th Petitioner Unions have filed a common Claim Statement in which they alleged that they are the workmen of TANMAG and the Respondent/ Management have been paid ex - gratia payment in cash and pongal gift in kind each year in addition to minimum bonus of 8.33% even in the absence of available surplus under the Payment of Bonus Act in the every concerned year as a customary and it is constituted ( condition of service) as a concession in usage . While the payment of ex- gratia has been made customary, the Respondent/ Management has denied the existing customary payment to workman for the year 2000-01 . The Petitioner Union and other unions raised demands for payment of bonus and usual customary ex - gratia payment and Pongal gift , but it was denied by the Respondent/Management . Being the payment of ex-gratia amounts to effecting a change in the service condition of workmen , without giving notice under Section - 9A of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , the Respondent/Management violated the provisions of IndustrialDisputes Act, 1947. The 4th Schedule to Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 enumerated 11 items as falling under ' conditions of service ' for change of which notice has to be given. Item 8 of 4th Schedule attracts this dispute namely "withdrawal of any customary concession or privilege or change in usage" . For over a decade , this practice of customary concession as a gesture of goodwill was given to the workers and it was made in order to maintain higher productivity, industrial peace and harmony . Therefore , the denial of this ex- gratia payment and Pongal bonus clearly amounts to change in conditions of service under Section- 9A of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. This practice was in vogue from 1989-90 . Even in the year 1999-2000 minimum bonus of 8.33% , ex- gratia of 11 % and Pongal gift of Rs . 300/- was paid . Hence , it is prayed that this Tribunal may be pleased to pass an award in their favour.

:

A. Nagarathinam

:

SriM. R. F.aghavan

For the Management

AWARD

The Central Government, Ministry of Labour vide its OrderNo. L-29011 / 96/2002- IR (M) dated 31-03-2003 has referred the following Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal foradjudication.

The schedule mentioned in that order is :

"Whether the action of the management of TANMAG in denying ex- gratiato their employees for the accounting year 2000-01 amount to violation ofSection - 9A of the Industrial Disputes Act ? If so , to what relief the concerned workmen are entitled ? " 2.After the receipt of the reference , it was taken on the file by this Tribunal as I.D. No. 62/2003 and notices were issued to both the parties . At the 1st instance , the Respondent remained absent and set ex- parte and ex -parte award was passed . Subsequently as per the directions of High Court , the Industrial Dispute was restored to file and both parties filed their Claim Statements and Counter statements respectively.

4. The 4th Petitioner Union in their Claim Statement has alleged that in the year 2000-01 the management has allotted Rs . 27,71,875/ - for payment of bonus in Schedule 13 ofAnnual Report . Even in spite of this the Respondent/ Management refused to provide bonus to workmen . The StateGovt . by an order in G.O. MS No. 442 dated 9-11-2001 directed to pay bonus as per the Payment of Bonus Act . It is alleged by the II Party/ Management that the said G.O. does not state anything as to the payment of ex - gratia amount to workmen and therefore, workers were denied the payment ofex - gratia by the Respondent/ Management . The Petitioner Union states the order of Govt . of Tamil Nadu dated 9-11-2001 is not binding on the 2nd Party/ Management and therefore , the Respondent/ Management should not deny the payment of ex - gratia to workmen on this reason .Hence , the Petitioner Union prays that an award may be passed in their favour to pay ex - gratia amount to workmen for the year 2000-01 .

5. As against this , the Respondent in its Counter Statement alleged that the Respondent/Management is a Govt . company, formed in accordance with Section - 617 of Companies Act and it is bound by various circulars and [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

notifications issued by the Govt . The employees of the Respondent Company are members in those unions . When the members of the trade union have raised demands for the accounting year 2001-02 the matter was pending before the Conciliation Officer and the Govt . issued a G.O. that payment of Bonus Act alone would govern the matters of payment of bonus to its employees and it was made clear that Respondent Company has no alternative but to follow the Govt . directions and make payment only in accordance with the same . Therefore , there is very little scope for the Respondent to effect payment contrary to the express directions issued by State Govt . Therefore , the claim of the workmen is not maintainable. Further, ex- gratia is not an accrued right . The workman would have any right to demand ex-gratia. The payment of ex- gratia is not authorized by statute . When such is the position, the claim for ex -gratia payment is not tenable and therefore, it is liable to be rejected . When the workman would not have any right to claim anybenefit merely because the management concedes certain benefits as ex-gratia, it would not automatically become a customary concession or a condition of service . Once it is not a condition of service , the union is not entitled to any notice under Section- 9A of I.D. Act . In this case , there is no proper espousal of the case and there is , no proper authority granted to raise demand or dispute . The allegation that ex -gratia payment may be regarded as annual concessional payment beyond the provisions of Payment ofBonus Act for higher productivity and industrial peace and harmony is misconceived . Therefore , the Petitioner is not entitled to ex- gratia as alleged by them and herice, their claim is liable to be rejected with costs .

Points for determination are :

(i) Whether the action of the Respondent/ Management in denying ex - gratia to their employees for the accounting year 2000-01 amounts to violation of Section - 9A of the Industrial Disputes Act?

(ii) To what relief the concerned workmen are entitled ?

PointNo.1 .

6. The case of the Petitioner in this case is the workmen ofthe Tamil Nadu Magnesite Ltd. have been paid ex-gratia payment in cash and Pongal gift in kind each year inaddition ofminimum bonus of 8.33 % even in the absence of available surplus under the Payment of Bonus Act in the every concerned year as customary and it constituted condition of service as a concession in usage . The Petitioner further contended that payment of ex- gratia in addition to bonus payable under Payment of Bonus Act for over a decade was in practice as customary concession and as a gesture of goodwill in order to maintain higher productivity , industrial peace and harmony . Certain percentage of money on annual gross wages varying year to year and this payment is in custom , usage and practice and became a condition of service of workmen and therefore , denial of the same for the year 2001-02 clearly

4037

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

amounts to change in condition of service . Further , the Secretary of the 5th Petitioner Union one Mr. V. K. Nallamuthu was examined as WW1 and through him five documents namely copy of the conciliation failure report Ex. W5 copy of the G.O. No. 442 dated 09-11-20001 , Ex . W1 , copy of notice of Petitioner Union to Respondent dated 23-11-2001 Ex . W2 , copy of minutes of conciliation proceedings dated 12-12-2001 Ex. W3 and copy of G.O. Ms. No. 1558 dated 13-05-2002 Ex . W4 were marked . The first witness ofthe Petitioner says for the year 1989-90 the Respondent/Management paid bonus of 8.33% and ex- gratia amount @ 9.67% besides a Pongal gift in kind in order to maintain higher productivity . Similarly, in the year 1990-91 ex-gratia payment @ 10.67% besides a Pongal gift inkind worth Rs . 160 was paid and for the year 1991-92 the Respondent/Management paid ex - gratia @ 11.42% besides a Pongal gift in kind , worth Rs . 160 was paid . Similarly, for the years 1992-93 and 1993-94 ex -gratia [email protected]% and 8.33% respectively and Pongal gift in kind worth Rs . 200 and Rs . 175 respectively were paid and for the year 1994-95 ex -gratia payment @ 8 % besides Pongal gift was given. For the year 1995-96 ex- gratia payment @ 9% besides a Pongal gift in kind worth Rs . 300 was paid and for the year 1996-97 ex -gratia totalling 18.33 % and Pongal gift in kindworth Rs .300 was paid. For the year 1997-98, ex -gratia payment of 10% and Pongal gift in kind worth Rs . 300 was paid. Similarly in 1998-99 ex- gratia payment of 11 % was paid and for the year 1999-2000 ex- gratia payment of 11 % and Pongal gift of Rs . 300 was paid . For the year 2000-01 the management refused to pay ex - gratia and Pongal gift to the workmen . Thus , from the years 1989-90 to 1999-2000 payment ofex-gratia and Pongal gift was made as customary practice and it constituted a condition of service .

7. On the side of the Petitioner , it is argued that ex- gratia is not out of gratis nor out of sweetwill of the management but a product of bargaining between the workmen and the management and regarded as legitimate annual concessional payment beyond the provisions of Payment ofBonus Act for the reason of higher productivity and industrial peace and harmony and, therefore , this payment cannot be denied to workmen who were enjoying for over a decade by custom , usage and practice which has become condition of service which cannot be altered by denial ofthe same to the detriment of the workmen without giving any notice under Section -9A of the I.D. Act and therefore, it is unjust and unfair and unlawful .

8. But, as against this , on the side of the Respondent/ Management one Mr. Shanmugasundaram , Dy. Manager (Accounts) in -charge of Finance and Accounts Department was examined as MW1 and through him the copy of G.O.Ms. No. 462 dated 26-10-1999 marked as Ex.M1 , the copy of the settlement under Section 18 (i ) for the year 1998-99 was marked as Ex.M2 , the copy ofG.O.Ms No. 431 dated 19-10-2000 was marked as Ex.M3 , the copy of the settlement under Section 18 ( i) for the year 1999-2000 is marked as Ex.M4 , the copy of the G.O.Ms No. 442 dated 09-11-2001 for the year 2000-01 was marked as Ex.M5 and 4038

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

Section-617 of Companies Act and it is bound by circulars and notifications issued by the Govt . from time to time and therefore, the Respondent/ Management is bound by G.O. No. 349. But, I find since the payment ofex -gratia has become a custom and this custom cannot be withdrawn without giving notice under Section -9A ofthe I.D. Act, the Petitioner is entitled to the relief. Though the Petitioner has claimed payment ofex-gratia @ 11 % , I find 8.33% of ex - gratia isjust and reasonable besides Pongal gift in kind worth of Rs . 300 . Therefore, I find the Respondent's refusal to pay ex - gratia for the accounting year 2000-01 is not justified and the members ofthe Petitioner Union are entitled to the payment ofex -gratia@ 8.33 % and Pongal gift ofRs . 300. Point No.2

the copy of the Article of Association of the Respondent Management dated 19-01-1979 was marked as Ex.M6 . On behalf of the Respondent , it is contended that the Respondent Management is wholly owned by Tamil Nadu Govt and since the Govt . has not passed any orders with regard to ex-gratia, payment of ex -gratia for the accounting year 2000-01 was not paid. According to the G.O. under Ex.M5 , the Respondent has to pay only bonus according to Payment of Bonus Act. Therefore, they have not paid ex-gratia during that period. It is further argued that the Respondent Management is bound by the orders of Tamil NaduGovt. and Articles of Association . Article 22 clearly says that Respondent/Management is bound by the orders/ instructions of Govt. of Tamil Nadu and therefore, this claim of the Petitioner is not valid and maintainable .

The next point to be decided in this case is to what relief the members of the Petitioner Union are entitled ?

11. In view of my foregoing findings , I find the members of the Petitioner Union are entitled to ex- gratia @ 8.33% and Pongal bonus in kind worth of Rs . 300 for the accounting year 2001-02 . No Costs .

12. Thus , the reference is answered accordingly .

(Dictated to the PA, transcribed and typed by him , corrected and prononuced by me in the open court on this day the 31st January , 2008 )

K. JAYARAMAN, Presiding Officer

Witnesses Examined : ---

For the I Party/Petitioner : WW1 Sri V.K. Naliamuthu

For the II Party/Management : MW1 Sri A.

Shanmughasundaram.

Documents Marked :-

On the petitioner's side

Date

Ex. No.

Description

Ex.W1 09-11-2001

G.O. No. 442

Ex. W2 23-11-2001

9. On behalf of the Petitioner it is contended that though it is stated that the Respondent/Management is bound by instructions , it is admitted by MWI that the Govt. has sanctioned some amount as bonus even when the Respondent/Management was in financial difficulty. It is further admitted by MWI that even while the RespondentManagement was running into loss , they have entered into settlement with regard to wage revision . Further, it is established by the Petitioner that even while the Respondent/Management was in financial crisis , they have paid ex-gratia to the employees and this payment of ex-gratia which was paid over a decade has become a customary practice and therefore , the denial of this customary practice is unlawful . Further , as per Item 9 of IV Schedule withdrawal of any customary concession or privilege of change in usage amounts to condition of service for change in which notice is to be given under Section-9A ofthe I. D. Act . In this case it is clear case ofthe Petitioner that no notice under Section - 9A was given to the Petitioner Union and therefore , unilateral withdrawal of ex- gratia payment is not lawful . Therefore , the Petitioner Union is entitled to get relief in this case.

Notice of the Union to the Respondent Management with Annexure

12-12-2001

Ex.W3

Minutes of conciliation proceedings

EX.W4 13-05-2001

G.O.Ms. No. 158

Ex.W5 07-10-2002

Conciliation failure report.

From the Management side :--

Ex. No. Date

Description

Ex.M1 26-10-1999

G.O. Ms. No. 462

Ex.M2 03-12-1999

Settlement under section

18(i ) for the year 1998-99

Ex.M3 19-10-2000

G.O. Ms. No. 431

Ex.M4 20-10-2000

Settlement under Section 18(i) for the year 1999-2000

Ex.M5 09-11-2001

Government Order No. 442 for the year 2000-01

Ex.M6 19-01-1979

10. 1 find some force in the contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner because , though the claim of ex- gratia is not an accrued right, the claim of the Petitioner namely payment of ex - gratia in addition to bonus under Payment of Bonus Act for over a decade as practice and customary concession and as a gesture of goodwill and in order tomaintain higher productivity, industrial peace and harmony , this was given to the workmen , thus , it is varying from year to year . This payment of ex- gratia is in custom, usage and practice and thus , it has become condition of service ofworkmen and denial of the same clearly amounts to change in condition of service under Section - 9A of the 1.D. Act . Though , the claim of the Petitioner @ 11 % as ex- gratia and Pongal gift for worth of Rs . 300 as a custom is not established before this Tribunal , total withdrawal of ex-gratiawhich amounts to withdrawal of service conditions and therefore , necessarily requires notice under Section- 9A of the Act . But, in this case , it is alleged by the Respondent/Management that since the Respondent/ Management is a Government company formed under

Article of Association of the Respondent.

3939

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/श्रावण 4 , 1930

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

(3)

(1) (2)

(1)

(4)

(4) (2)

349/2

0.2088

0.0020

2. Puraina (Contd.)

1111

1. Aagasaud (Contd.)

348

0.0504

0.0100

1120

1112

330/1

0.1100

0.0504

330/2

0.0800 1113

0.0468

331

0.0420 1105

0.0288

332

0.0040

0.0504

1104

0.0504

329

0.0216

1103

0.2520

0.2268

328

1068

327

0.2088 1069

0.0720

337

0.0020

0.1656

1070/2-4-5

0.5472

239

0.0576

1070/3

238

0.0144

0.0648

1070/1

0.2304 1053

0.1440

0.0050 1081

0.0050

1079

0.0360

0.0576 1052

0.0504

0.2664

0.1152

1050

43/2

0.1584 1045

0.1224

43/1

0.1440 1046

0.2088

39/2

0.1224

0.0144

1042

39/1

0.1296 1036

0.2664

0.0432.

64/2

0.1512

1037

64/5

0.2232

0.0216

1035

64/4

0.0936 516/1

0.2376

2. Puraina

64/6

0.3024 516/4

0.0576

0.2736 515

0.0040

386

0.2684

3. Besarakasoi

0.0020

514

385

0.1512

0.2664

513

384

0.0200 512

0.0876

389

0.0286

0.1296

373

0.0200

392

360

0.0144

391

0.2952 375

0.0504

398

0.3168 377/1

0.2376

0.2736

399

374

0.1080

397

0.0720

0.0576

377/3

499

0.0144

0.2000

378/1

412

0.4320 379

0.1250

413

0.3600 378/2

0.0020

110/2

0.1440

0.0650

356

110/1

0.1512 355

0.2520

109

0.4104

0.2376

352

108

0.0144

0.0216

351/2

2644 G1/08-25 3940

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

(1) (2)

(3)

(4)

0.0144 Bagharupa

42/1

0.1080

0.2592

0.0432

44/1

0.0020

0.3384

0.0144

0.0040

38/3

0.2160

38/2

0.1296

38/1

0.0648

0.1152

34/1

0.2304

34/3

0.0936 5 Dhhana

0.1440

0.0020

0.3384

-13

0.0144

0.1008

0.0288

10/3

0.1008

10/4

0.0396

10/9

0.0180

10/7

0.1584

10/5

0.1008

10/6

0.0576

0.1728

[F. No. R- 31015/6/2008 OR- II ]

A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली, 21 जुलाई , 2008

का. आ. 1989. केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 304 तारीख 12 फरवरी , 2008 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 16 फरवरी , 2008 में प्रकाशित की गई थी द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मध्य प्रदेश राज्य में बीना संस्थापन से राजस्थान राज्य में कोटा तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए बीना- कोटा पाइपलाइन परियोजना के माध्यम से भारत पेट्रोलियम कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 13 मई , 2008 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं;

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

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

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

अनुसूची जिला बारां

राज्य : राजस्थान

सर्वे नंबर

क्र. सं. ग्राम का नाम

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

(4) (1) (2)

(3)

233

0.0558 1. बामला

257

0.2736

256

0.2268

259

0.2000

261/1643

0.1640

261

0.0055

262

0.2030

263

0.0060

0.0830

359

358

0.0144

356

0.1640

355

0.0660

357

0.1350

354

0.0020

376

0.0590

395

0.1190

396

0.0920

397

0.0920

405

0.0020

406

0.2645

407

0.0640 4041 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

subsidiary of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. That pursuant to strike notice dated 24-12-2001 and 28-01-2002, conciliation proceedings were held before RLC afid ALC on 4-1-2002, 16-01-2002 and 31-01-2002 . Therefore , the Management was bound to maintain the same conditions of service as before , otherwise it would be contrary to Section-33 ofthe ID Act. In all other respects , this petitioner union has raised the same issue as that of first petitioner union.

5. The third petitioner union adopts the claim statement of the second petitioner union .

the same unilaterally. The HRA and SLS forms inbuilt service condition of the employees and therefore the same cannot be altered, modified without giving a notice of change under Section 9-A of the ID Act and since the same was not followed, the entire action is void ab- initio . The allegation that SLS is a welfare measure with recognized union under code of conduct came to be known to the petitioner union only recently. It is false to allege that SLS is a welfare measure . It is one of the allowances which is being paid in lieu of HRA and is considered to be a part of the wages as defined under Section 2(rr) of the ID Act . From the Memorandum of Settlement signed on 11-09-2001 , it can be seen that SLS was part of settlement, it is therefore an afterthought of the Management that the SLS was a welfare measure. All the unions in the Marketing Division has included one of the demand on the "common charter ofdemands " that SLS amount should be increased from 40 to 60% in the metropolitan cities . During the discussions, the Management had never claimed that this demand was not negotiable, on the contrary the notional basis by mutual discussion for the limited purpose of SLS . At present, SLS is prevalent in all the Oil Companies and the amount is paid at 40% . About 48% employees have so far availed benefit ofthis scheme . Hence , for all these reasons the first party prays to pass an award not to change the SLS formula w.e.f. 1-6-1998 .

4.The second petitioner union in their claim statement alleged:

The Respondent Management unsuccessfully filed aWrit Petition 3280 of 2002 in the Madras High Court for a mandamus restraining the petitioner union from going en strike . Further , on 11-02-2002, the High Court refused to grant injunction restraining the members of the petitioner union from going on strike . Even before the present settlement dated 11-09-2001 , the All India Unions including the petitioner union gave a common charter of demands dated 7-4-2000, Clause-9 related to SLS and they demanded that the rate ofceiling in SLS should be 60 % of the maximum basisof the relevant grade . Discussions were held in Goa andDelhi and the notional maximum for Grade - I and II will be considered only for the purpose of payment under SLS. When the L TS dated 11-09-2001 was signed , revision of wages for calculation of rent was mentioned in Annexure- III of the settlement and thereby making it clear that the existing SLS was modified only to that extent . Though , persons drawing HRA were given arrears from 1-6-1998 but those who covered by SLS were not paid arrears of SLS based on the revised notional maximum basic of the relevant grade . Only by the circular dated 14-12-2001 , the Respondent Management unilaterally reduced the rates by 10% that too w.e.f. 1-6-1998 . Two other PSUs i.e. the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd and Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. , the same percentage as was in vogue earlier is being followed: The same percentage is also being given in Cochin Refineries Ltd. which is a

6. In the counter statement the Respondent alleged that the Respondent Corporation is a Govt . of India undertaking incorporated as a Company under the Companies Act . The employees of the Respondent are classified as those in the Management cadre and those in theNon-Management cadre i.e. workmen category . In the year 1985-86, it was decided that the wages, allowances and other service conditions of the employees falling under the workmancategory might be negotiated at all India level and such LTS be uniformly made , applicable to all the workmen throughout the country and LTSs were made on 22-08-1986, 25-03-1991 and 07-04-1995 and these settlements coveredthe period from 1-6-1985 to 31-05-1998 . There are 11 grades in the Non-Management cadre and the employee at the entry level i.e. Grade- I are required to possess an educational qualification of the class pass . In order to improve the standard of living of all the employees , Respondent Management used to voluntarily introduce welfare measures and it was introduced and extended at the discretion of the Respondent Management and they are not to be part of service conditions, they are never made subject matter of negotiations with unions representing the workmen . Such welfare measure includes (i ) Housing loan (ii ) Vehicle loan ( iii ) Medical benefits for selfand dependent family members (iv) Computer loan (v) Educational assistance ( vi ) Furniture loan (vii ) Family planning incentive (vii ) Long service awards ( viii ) Scholarship and (ix ) Festival advance. The Officers and Managers of the Respondent Management prior to 1991 were paid HRA , which was certain percentage of basic salary and in case of Officers to whom accommodation was provided , standard rent was recovered with no payment of HRA . As it was increasingly difficult for Corporation to provide accommodation to its Management staff, it was felt that the introduction of SLS would go a long way in reducing the dependency on the Company & therefore it was mooted where in case of such employees , their premises would be taken on lease and paid a monthly rent coupled with maintenance allowance which would be beneficial toboth individual and Company . Thus , SLS was introduced for Managers and above in the year 1991 and for Officers in the year 1992. In the year 1995 by a circular dated 16-8-1995 , the SLS for Officers was amended providing for a rental ceiling ranging from 25 % to 40% of 2644 GI/08-26 4042

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 /SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] the maximumbasic pay of the relevant grade . Pursuant to that scheme, all the then existing leases between the Management staff and the Respondent Corporation were terminated and such of those who want to avail the benefits ofthe revised SLS executed a fresh lease deed incorporating the terms of SLS . In other words , the terms of lease deed executed pursuant to 1991-1992 were strictly adhered to till they were terminated and a fresh lease was executed . The salient features of SLS are ( i) rental ceiling as percentage of maximum basic of the relevant grade as against the HRA which is fixed as percentage of the actual basic pay of the employees . Thus. while the SLS payment would remain constant as against HRA which varies every year according to every change in the Basic Pay . (ii) Another feature of the SLS is that it will be extended to employees whose performance is satisfactory. It will be withdrawn/ not been extended to employees who remains absent without leave for more than 30 days at any point of time in the preceding 12 months . The facility will also be withdrawn whendisciplinary proceedings is initiated against any employee who is covered by this scheme . Thus , it will be evident that the SLS is not a part of conditions of employment of Officers or the conditions of service of workmen . It is purely tenancy arrangement covered by mutual agreement . In the year 2000 vide circular dated 11-04-2000 the salaries of Officers were revised w.e.f. 01-01-1997. With the introduction of new pay -scales for Management staff the Corporation felt the rental ceiling under SLS need tobe rationalized keeping in view the imbalances between HRA and rental ceiling under the SLS . Accordinglyby a circular dated 7-9-2000, the rental ceiling was revised to 15% to 30% of the maximum basic pay ofthe relevant salary scale plus Standard Rent Recovery . Accordingly, letters were issued to Officers availing self lease facility advising them about revised rental ceilings and changes in SLS agreement . They also advised to execute fresh lease deed as per the revised scheme . While soj in the year 1995 , the Respondent voluntarily decided to extend the SLS as applicable to Officers even to the employees under workmen category. Accordingly from 01-01-1995 , it was exended to the employees of workmen category, which provides for a rental ceiling between 25 % to 40% of the maximum basic pay in the relevant grade . In the year 2000 , when the SLS for Officers was revised from the then existing rental ceilings of 25% to 40% to 15% to 30% and Corporation decided to implement it to the employees of the workmen category as and when their scales of wages come up for revision . The next settlement was made on 11-09-2001 revising the scales of pay from 01-06-1998 . After the settlement dated 11-09-2001 , the revis d formula of SLS viz . 15 to 30 % had to be implemented. Accordingly, circular dated 14-12-2001 was issued to the workmen advising them in detail about the lease rental and maintenance charges under the SLS . The SLS is only optional in lieu of payment of HRA and therefore no employees in any category can compel the Corporation to

extend the SLS and if anyone wants to avail the SLS , he should execute a lease deed . It is only by mutual agreement . It is not open to any employee to accept one part of the SLS which is convenient to him and refuse the other terms thereof. The benefits of SLS which an employee may be enjoying, would cease to exist if he/ she is transferred to location outside the city/town where his/her home is located. If really , the SLS is projected as a condition of service , then the employee is availing SLS should really be recipient of SLS benefits regardless of his posting and for his entire tenure of his employment but it is not the case whenthe employee gets transferred. No doubt, in the charter ofdemands dated 7-4-2000, the petitioner union demanded the SLS be revised upward to 60% of the maximum basic paybut Clause - I of the settlement dated 11-09-2001 , it is stipulated that in consideration of the unions ( a ) dropping all demands contained in the individual union's charters & common charter of demands not specifically covered under the terms of settlement (b) withdrawing as settled, all proceeding pertaining to items covered by this settlement pending either in conciliation or before any Court (c) agreeing not to raise or pursue during the period of settlement any demands involving directly or indirectly ahy additional financial commitment in respect of items covered under this settlement . If the demand of the petitioner union is to be accepted then it will create an Anamolous situation whereby an employee in the Officer category and the employee falling under the workman category receiving the same basic pay , the workmen will get a higher rental than the Officers . Therefore , the demand for revising the rental ceiling of SLS was dropped as per Clause-I ( a) of the settlement dated 11-09-2001 and therefore, the said demand is not maintainable in law and the same should be not be countenanced . The SLS is optional to both parties and any revision of rent can take place only be replacing the existing lease agreement by new lease agreement and it is not open to either of the parties to seek substitution of terms of lease during the currency of the lease agreement and therefore the demand of the petitioner unions , the lease agreement entered into bythe employees in the workmen category in terms of SLS 1995 will have to be continued unless it is mutually substituted by another agreement . Therefore , putting forward the demand covered by the order of reference, the petitioner union cannot compel the Respondent Corporation to enter into fresh lease deed altering the terms of lease which is inconsistent with the circular dated 14-12-2001 . Even during the discussion which preceded the settlement dated 11-09-2001 , the Respondent clearly informed the union that the Management would not discuss the issue of SLS as it was voluntarily introduced as a welfare measure . Since SLS is a welfare measure the Respondent is entitled to review the same for future application . The SLS agreement is only contractual and not a service condition . Since SLS was not a part of service conditions , there was no need to give any notice under 4043 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

Section 9 -A of the ID Act. The reference to practices in IndianOil Corporation , Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and Cochin Refineries Ltd. has no relevance . There are other variations in service conditions' and welfare measures applicable to workmen of the Respondent Corporation and those working in other Public Sector Undertakings . SLS was introduced voluntarily by the Respondent and not pursuant to any demand made by the workmen. Hence for all these reasons the Respondent prays that the claim may be dismissed.

7. In the reply statement the First Petitioner union alleged that though the SLS was introduced voluntarily w.ef.01-09-1995 , it became a service condition since 1995 and is coveredby Clause 3 & 8 of the 4th schedule of I.D. Act. For those drawing self leave, 10% of the total salary drawn is treated as additional income and liable for IT . Hence the contention ofthe Respondent that self lease does not form part of service condition is incorrect. The contention ofthe Respondent that workmen will get higher rental than Officers is incorrect and baseless . Moreover, both the categories are incomparable as the Officers are getting innumerable monetary benefits in the name of perks in addition to their monthly salary . The workmen have not sought for substitution of terms of the lease . It is only the Respondent which is trying to alter the SLS by reducing the rate of self lease unilaterally. If the Respondent fails to comply with Section- 9A of the I. D. Act , the change becomes illegal and therefore , in the name of contract the einployer cannot deprive the workers of the benefits of SLS . SLS being an additional benefit for satisfactory performance, introduced by the Respondent in 1995, the same cannot be compared with HRA . Hence , for all these reasons, the First Petitioner union prays that an award may be passed in their favour .

8. The second and third petitioner union filed reply statement and raised the same allegations as that of first petitioner union. Points for determination are:

(i ) Whether the demand raised by the Petitioner unions against the management of BPCL over the demand for continuing the self- lease formula without any change w.e.f. 01-06-1995 is justified?

(ii) If so, to what relief the concerned workmen are entitled to?

Point No. 1

Company and in the year 1995 by the circular dated -09-1995 (Ex.W2) the SLS for Officers was also extended to the employees in the workmen category. It provided for rental ceiling between 25% to 40% of the maximum basic pay in the relevant grade . On behalf of the the petitioner it is contended the terms of SLS are very important because the main contention of the Management is that SLS is not a service conditions and only HRA is a service condition and that SLS is purely in the nature of contract viz . landlord- tenant relationship but on perusal of Ex . W2 , it is clear that it was given only to the serving employees of the Respondent Management and it was also given to those whose performance rating were good and if the ratings come down the SLS will be terminated and therefore it was given only as an incentive to an employee for his better performance . It was not as if it was a case where an employee had a vacant house / flat and the Respondent took it on lease in which case it could be said that is not a service condition but in this case Ex .W5 and Ex. W2 circulars clearly stated that the property is taken from the employee on lease and it was based on his/her performance and if his/her performance falls , SLS will be terminated and if an employee is continuously absent for 30 days in a year , the lease will be terminated . Further , if any departmental proceedings are initiated against an employee , who is under SLS , the lease will be terminated . Lastly, it is stated the lease is based on pay drawn amount and not on the value of the property owned by the employee . From all these facts, it is clear SLS is another benefit given to an employee and is related to his performance unlike HRA which is a normal benefit . It is further argued that Ex .W2 - circular shows that the rental ceiling under SLS is for maximum 40% in metropolitan cities . Therefore , if really it is a rental agreement , the rent would be based on the locality and value' of the property . It is not the case in the SLS scheme since it cannot be said SLS is not a service condition runs which is directly contrary to Ex . W2 and Ex. W5 circulars . But as against this , on behalf of the Respondent it is contended the Respondent Management with a view to improve the standard of living of the employee at all levels, it used to voluntarily introduce welfare measures . Such welfare measures are introduced or extended at the discretion of the Respondent Management and as they are not to be part of the service conditions , they are never subject matter of negotiations with the unions representing the workmen. In the year 2000 , when the SLS forOfficers were revised from the then existing rental ceiling of25% to 40% to 15% to 30% , the Respondent Corporatión decided to implement it in the workmen category as and when their scales of wages come up for revision . The LTS applicable to the employees ofthe workmen category expired on 31-05-1998 and the next settlement was made on 11-09-2001 revising the scales ofpay from 01-06-1998 and following the settlement 11-09-2001 revising the scales of pay of workmen, the revised formula of SLS viz . 15% to 9. The admitted case of both sides is from the year 1991. The Respondent Management has introduced SLS for Officers as it was increasingly difficult for the Respondent Corporation to provide accommodation to its Management staff. The Management mooted in case of such employees , their premises should be taken on lease and paid a monthly rent coupled with some maintenance allowance should be beneficial to both individual and 4044

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 30% had to be implemented . Accordingly, the Respondent Management issued a circular dated 14-12-2001 to the workmen advising them in detail about the lease rent and maintenance charges under the SLS and they were given the option either to continue to avail the existing terms and conditions of the SLS or opt for revised SLS or for payment ofHRA. It is only optional in lieu of HRA and no employee in any category can compel the corporation to extend the SLS and if anyone wants to avail the SLS, he should execute a lease deed and any variation in the payment of rent to the premises given to the Corporation by lease can only be by mutual agreement . Therefore , it is not open to any employee to accept one part of the SLS which convenient to him and refuse the other terms thereof. It is further argued on behalf of the Respondent it is not in consideration of good performance or attendance, the concession is extended to anemployee . Ifgood performance or attendance is lacking , the concession may not be available but that does not mean that the concession will automatically be extended based on good performance and attendance . The rent will have to be fixed on certain uniform basis so that there is no arbitrariness in fixing the quantum of rent . It was for this reason alone the SLS provided for fixation of rent as a percentage ofbasic pay . From Ex.W2 & W5 ; there is no warrant to conclude that SLS was a condition of service. Further, under Ex. W2, it is mentioned under condition 5 ( ii) the Management has right to review the rental ceiling in terms ofthe condition .

10. I find some force in the contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent though the learned counsel for the petitioner argued that SLS though given as an incentive to an employee for his better performance which is clear from EX.W2 , it is only a condition and not an incentive given to the employee . Then again , the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that when the earlier LTS expired on 31-05-1998 , the petitioner unions placed a fresh charter ofdemands dated 07-04-2000 under Ex. W9 . In that they have demanded an increase in the percentage of SLS and in metro cities they have demanded an increase from 40% to 60% , but the Management did not agree for any increase, the unions left it at that and there was only a revision ofwages and the LTS dated 11-09-2001 viz . Ex. W15 was signed and it was to come into effect from 01-06-1998 . In the L TS under Clause -24 , it is clearly mentioned that unless the existing terms were specifically modified , only earlier terms will continue . In the L TS ( Ex. 15) , it has been specifically mentioned that the notional maximum will be considered only for the purpose of payment under SLS . Therefore, iflaccording to the Management , only HRA is a service condition and not the SLS , the notional maximum for SLS would have not have found place in the LTS . Therefore, this circumstance is clinching as to show that SLS is a service condition and therefore the contention of the Respondent Management is without any substance .

iscontended that when the L TS was made under the one ofEx. 15, there was a subsisting tenancy agreement which cannot be unilaterally altered by either of the parties revising the rent and any change in the SLS would automatically bring about a change in the tenancy agreement .Any change of the SLS would not automatically bring about a change in the tenancy agreement . Similarly , any change in the settlement would not automatically bring about a change in the tenancy agreement . Therefore , unless the existing tenancy agreement is replaced by mutual agreement, the lessor cannot demand a variation in the rent. It is very important to note that the L TS , SLS and rental agreement are separate and distinct and any change in anyone of them would not automatically change in the result of another. In the LTS , the notional maximum was fixed because the existing scale ofpay were replaced by an open ended scale . It is meant for any subsequent tenancy agreement to be made between the Corporation and the employees . The tenancy agreement can continue only the employee accepts the pre- revised SLS . Though the petitioner. alleged that nowhere it is stated under EX.W2 that the Respondent Management reserved any right to change the quantum of rent nor there is any provision for unilaterally reducing the amount received by an enıployee . But this statement overlooks condition 5( ii) in Ex.W2 , therefore the Management right to review the rental ceiling in terms of condition 5 ( ii) in EX.W2 is part of a service condition which the workmen has accepted. It is further contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent that it is settled that any concession granted voluntarily would not conform part of service condition and he relied on the ruling reported in 1970 (2) LLJ 413 INDIAN OXYGEN LTD. VS. UDAY NATH SINGH & OTHERS AND 1983 ( 1 ) LLJ 429 WORKMEN OF HINDUSTAN TELEPRINTERS & HINDUSTAN TELEPRINTERS LTD. In the Indian Oxygen case, the Supreme Court has held when a request made by the workmen of the company that empty carbide drums should be sold at concessional rates , it was considered by the Management and when a complaint was filed under Section - 33A by some of the workmen before the Tribunal on the allegation that the company was guilty of provisions ofSection - 9A and 33 of the I.D. Act , the Supreme Court has held "the sale of carbide drums to the workmen was really a matter of concession and further held that the Tribunal has committed grave error in construing what is contained in the minutes and the Exhibits C2& B2 as constituting an agreement between the Management and the union. It has also further erred in holding that the matters mentioned in the above Ex .. C2 has become part of the service conditions of the workmen " . In the Hindustan Teleprinter case , the division bench of the High Court has held " the payment of conveyance allowance is at the discretion of the Management and subject to the availability of funds , the workmen cannot treat it as functional allowance as a right : " . Even in this argument , I find much

force in the learned counsel for the Respondent. Then again 11.But as against this on behalf ofthe Respondent it 4045 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4, 1930

the learned counsel for the Respondent contended even assuming without conceding for argument sake that EX.W2 created a service condition , a question would arise whether in terms of Ex . W2 , the Respondent was entitled to revise rental ceiling. There is a provision in Clause5( ii) ofEx . W2 that the Management will have the right to review the rental ceiling and Standard Rent Recovery from time to time. Hence the arguments of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Respondent Management has, no right to review the rental ceiling is without any substance . Here again, I find much force in the contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent .

CASE but in that case the bank invited offers from willing 'employees to go on VRS but they did not choose to accept the offer made by all the employees . Under those circumstances, the Supreme Court has held that in that case no right had accrued to the employees and it was mere invitation to offer but in this case on hand the Management put up a circular dated 01-09-1995 under Ex.W2 for SLS and the eligible employees offered their property and it was accepted by the Respondent and , therefore, once it is clear that there is an offer and acceptance and the contract is complete , therefore the decision relied on the learned counsel for the Respondent is not applicable to this case on hand .

12. Again, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the contention of the Management under Ex . W2 that the Manageınent reserved its right to review "the rate ofrental ceiling and SRR from time to time does not mean that once the workers have opted for the scheme , the Management can unilaterally reduce the percentage ofSLS . Further , under the LTS dated 11-09-2001 which was settled under Section 12(3) of the I. D. Act , the parties have specifically agreed as to how the SLS has got to be arrived at. When such is the case , it is not open to the Management to contend that it is their prerogative to modify the SLS . Once the employees have accepted the terms of SLS , it has become a service condition , the Management cannot unilaterally alter it to the prejudice of the workmen and it can be only done by means of an award or another settlement. Therefore, reducing the percentage of SLS from 40% to 30% would be in violation of Section 9A of the I. D. Act read with Item- 8 to the 4th Schedule of the I.D. Act . Admittedly, no notice of change was given by the Management in this case before issuing the circular dated 14-12-2001 , therefore it is in violation ofthe I. D. Act.

15. But as against this , the learned counsel for the Respondent contended Ex . W2 circular is only invitation to. offer. Accepting the conditions of Ex . W2 including the power of the Corporation to revise the rental ceiling under condition 5( ii ) , the workman in this case made an offer to make his premises available for lease and accepting that offer, the tenancy agreement is made . Therefore , condition 5(ii) in Ex.W2 circular is part of the tenancy agreement. It is for that reason even the tenancy agreement says that the rent will be fixed or modified by the Corporation and, therefore, the decision is applicable to the facts of this case.The learned counsel for the Petitioner again contended that with regard to judgment 1970 (2) LLJ 413 INDIAN OXYGEN LTD. is concerned , the sale of carbide drums at concessional rate was subject to availability and it did not refer to the performance of an employee whereas in this case, SLS is not granted to all those who possessed the home but only to those employees who performed well and did not have any disciplinary proceedings and who did not continuously absent themselves for 30 days in a year. Hence, the criteria for grant of SLS makes it a service condition and it is only a service condition and the Respondent Management cannot alter it unilaterally without anynotice.

13. As against this , the learned counsel for the Respondent contended the LTS , Ex. W15 dated 11-09-2001 does not deal with any SLS . The mere mention ofthe maximum notional basic pay for the purpose of SLS would not mean that the settlement governed the subject of SLS . What it meant was that if any tenancy agreement was tobe made after the settlement based on the SLS , then the rental to be fixed on the notional basic pay. Therefore, the revision of the rental ceiling in terms of condition 5(ii) ofthe Ex. W2 circular would not amount to violation of the terms of settlement dated 11-09-2001 . Therefore , the arguments of Section -9A of the I.D. Act is without any substance .

16. But as against this , the Respondent advocate again contended that it is incorrect to say that good performance and attendance and absence of disciplinary action are the conditions for granting SLS . It is only an information to workman that SLS would not be made available to the employee if there is no regular attendance or lack ofperformance of ifthey were put to any disciplinary actionbut the converse is not true . Here again , I find much force in the contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent because there is no condition for granting SLS.

14.Here again, I am inclined to accept the arguments of the learned counsel for the Respondent because the LTS does not deal with the SLS, under Ex.W15 , it is only a mere mention that if any agreement was to be made after the settlement , it should be based on notional basic pay. Again the learned counsel for the Petitioner contended, no doubt, the learned counsel for the Respondent has relied onthe ruling reported in 2003 , ( 1 ) LLJ 819 SWARNKAR

17. The learned counsel for the Petitioner again contended, that the judgment reported in 1983 1 LLJ 429 VIZ . HINDUSTAN TELEPRINTER LTD , case will not be applicable to petitioner's case because in this case SLS is itself granted based on the performance and not subject to availability of funds and it is not based on value ofproperty 2644 G1 /08-27 4046

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008/SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[PART IISEC. 3(ii) ]

for the petitioner and I am not inclined to accept what is referred to this Tribunal is only a demand for SLS. Further , it is not stated whether demand of the employee is for SLS. However , the SLS formula without any change isjustified.

18.Then again the learned counsel for the petitioner contended the HPCL , IOCL & ONGC etc. which are all petroleum companies and PSUs , there is no reduction in the percentage of SLS given to the employees but the Respondent Management alone tried to reduce the percentage ofSLS and it will be in violation ofArts 14 & 16 of Constitution of India. Being an instrumentality ofthe State, the Respondent cannot discriminate and act arbitrarily and in the circular , the Respondent Management has not given any reason as to why they want to reduce the SLS particularly when they are earning profits based on the performance of all the employees and, therefore , the ruling in AIR 1988 SC 1407 and 1990 (Supp) SCC 688 will apply to this case . Further he argued in the NORTH BROOKE JUTE CO: AIR 1960 879 , it was held " that any unilateral change in respect ofservice conditions enumerated in 4th Schedule of I.D. Act is illegal " and in the case of 1981 ( 1) SCC 31 and AIR 1972 SC 1917 , it was held that " there cannot be any change in service condition without compliance with Section- 9A of the I.D. Act" . In this case, SLS is a privilege given to an employee and it is higher than HRA. SLS is only given to an employee who performs well andnot to all and such a privilege cannot be unilaterally reduced after having identified the worker and extended the same to him and therefore the concession conferred necessarily attracts Section -9A of the L.D. Act . In the IOCL CASE REPORTED IN 1975 (2 ) LLJ 319 when the Assam CompensatoryAllowance was withdrawn , it was held "that even though it was a concession/perquisite , it cannot be unilaterally withdrawn and was declared to be illegal ' . The facts and decisions in these cases cited above clearly show that SLS in this case is a service condition. The attempt of the Respondent Management to unilaterally reduce it to the prejudice of the workmen is illegal and arbitrary as no notice under Section -9A was given . Further the learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the Management cannot take away the vested rights of the employees . Further , SLS is treated as a perquisite and tax is deducted for the said amount . Therefore, it is clear that it is treated as a service condition.

but on the basis of performance of an employee with a condition that it will be discontinued in case the performance goes down . Further , the rent is fixed on the paydrawn by the employee and the notional maximum has been negotiated in the LTS talks and, accordingly, entered into LTS. Hence , it forms part of service conditions and any change to the prejudice of an employee has to be made only in accordance with Section - 9A of the I.D. Act . For this , the learned counsel for the Respondent contended the decision reported in 1983 , 1 , LLJ, Page 429 was cited in support for the proposition that when a discretion is retained by theManagement on any issue , then it cannot be called as a service condition . In this case , Ex .W2 condition was imposed by the Management and it is only the discretion oftheManagement whether to accept the SLS or not. Under such circumstances , it cannot be said SLS is a service condition. Then again , the learned counsel for the Respondent contended the issue referred for adjudication is a demand consequent to the revision of rental ceiling and that demand having been made during the currency of Ex.W15 , the reference is bad . Only to support this proposition, he relied on the decision 1973 (2) LLJ Page 283 Employees of Tungabhadra Industries Vs. their Workman &Others . Even the order of reference has been made at the direction ofthe High Court, it does not take away the right ofthe Respondent to challenge the reference on the ground that the demand referred was in violation of subsisting settlement. In2000 (1 ) LLJ 247 NATIONAL ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & OTHERS , the Supreme Court has held " when the writ petition was filed challenging the reference and when a dispute is made irrespective of its validity, the High Court cannot take away the right of the Management to question the validity ofthe dispute in the light of subsisting settlement" and, therefore, in this case the Respondent Management is questioning the right with regard to the reference . But as against this , the learned counsel for the petitioner contended, in the judgment reported in 2000 ( 1 ) LLJ 247 NATIONAL ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & OTHERS , it was held that the High Court canquash ifthere is no I.D. , it was also held that a settlement will encompass all the disputes at the time of settlement . The present dispute has been referred to this Tribunal only pursuant to the orders of Hon'ble High Court . The LTS did notprovide for reduction of SLS on the contrary the unions demanded for higher percentage of SLS at viz . 60 % and the same was not agreed to, therefore, the Management had to maintain the existing percentage of SLS at 40%. It is the Management's unilateral action for reducing the percentage of the SLS to the prejudice of the workmen that has been referred for adjudication to this Tribunal . If the Hon'ble High Court had opined there was no dispute in view of the settlement then the reference itself would not have been ordered . Therefore , it is futile to contend that the Respondent is entitled to question the order ofreference . I find much force in the contention of the learned counsel

19. As against this , the learned counsel for the Respondent contended that what is referred to Ex . W3 is that in accordance with I.T. Rules , the extension of self lease to the residential units of workmen is to be classified as perquisite for which I.T. is to be levied . This has nothing to do with the understanding between the parties as to the nature ofthe SLS . Ex. W2 is only an invitation to offer , the workmen made the offer for tendering his premises for lease and scorpting the offer and as such a tenancy agreement wasmade. Therefore , the condition No. 5( ii) of Ex . W2 is 4047 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

22. Thus, the reference is answered accordingly.

(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him , corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this daythe 5th December , 2007)

K. JAYARAMAN , Presiding Officer

Witnesses Examined :

WWI Sri G. Saravanan

For the I Party/Petitioner

WW2 Sri P. S. Janardhanan

WW3 Sri B. Balagopal

MW1 Sri Ramakrishnan

For the II Party/Mgmt .

Documents Marked :--

On the Petitioner's side

Ex. No. Date

Description

Ex.WI

Long Term Settlement

09-03-1995

Ex.W2 01-09-1995 SelfLease Scheme

Ex.W3 25-03-1996 Notice to workmen regarding Self- Lease Scheme- Recovery ofIncome Tax

Ex. W4 09-04-1996 Circular No. GA/ 116/SL/STAFF

issued by the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd Self Lease Scheme

Ex.W5 10-04-1996 Notice to workmen regarding Self- Lease Scheme Effect of Absenteeism

Ex. W6 24-10-1997 Circular No. IR& S: PCR issuedby

the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Self Lease Scheme

partandparcel of the rental agreement. Thus, the workmen has accepted the power of the Corporation to revise the rental ceiling. It is only a concession given to the employee and the Corporation has retained the power to revise it . Therefore, it isnot necessary to give any reason for revising the SLS. In any event, in the present case , SLS was revised for Officers . What was extended to the workmen in the year 1995 was the SLS which was available for the Officers . Whenthe SLS for Officers was revised , it was revised for the workmen also . There is nothing secret in revising the same . Therefore , at no stretch of imagination , it can be said that SLS is a service condition . Since SLS was a condition granted voluntarily to the employees of the Respondent, it would not amount to be a part of service condition . Though the unions made an allegation that during the discussion of LTS , a promise was made by the Management to maintain the existing rate ofrental ceiling, they have not established this fact by any satisfactory evidence . When it was contended by the Management and when WW3 viz . the representative of the 3rd petitioner union has admitted in the cross - examination that SLS did not figure in the discussion which precedes the LTS, it is clear no discussion was made during the LTS , it is only a false claim by the 1st petitioner union in their claim statement . No doubt, the petitioner unions compared the other PSUs in their claim statement and also in the evidence but when they have admitted the allowance and wages and other service conditions of the IOCL, HPCL, ONGC and CPCL are not the same , there is no question of maintaining parity with regard to SLS alone , therefore, by referring the SLS prevailing in other PSUs , theRespondent cannot be directed to maintain the SLS at 40% of the basic pay. Here again , I find much force in the contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent. Further , there is no evidence on record to show that the above PSUs have retained their right to revise the rental ceiling as in the case of Respondent Corporation in the condition ofEx .W2.

04-02-1999

Ex.W7

Circular No. 3/7/ 1999 - EH issued by Oil and Natural Gas Commission Self Lease Scheme

Ex.W8 16-02-1999 Memorandum of Settlement - Cochin Refineries Ltd. Self Lease Scheme

20. Considering the entire facts and circumstances in this case and the arguments of the learned counsels for the Petitioners and Respondent , I am inclined to hold that the SL.S extended by the Respondent Management is not a service condition and the Respondent Management has every right to revise the rental ceiling in the lease agreement and therefore , I find this point against the petitioners .

Common Charter of Demands

07-04-2000

Ex.W9

PointNo. 2

04-05-2000

Ex.W10

The next point to be decided in this case is to what relief the petitioners are entitled?

Circular No. 3 /7/99 - EH issued by Oil and Natural Gas Commission Self Lease Scheme

Ex.W11 March 2001 Management's proposal in Goa

Ex.W12 March 2001 Management's proposal in Goa 21. In view ofmy foregoing findings that the demand raised by the petitioner unions for continuing the self- lease formula without any change is not justified. I find the members of the petitioner unions are not entitled to any relief.

Ex.W13 28-06-2001 Memorandum of Understanding 4048

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26, 2008/ SRAVANA 4 , 1930

between Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and its workmen- Self Lease Scheme -ItemNo. 13 ofWage Revision June 2001

Ex.W14

Management's proposal in New Delhi

Ex.W15 11-09-2001 Long Term Settlement 11-10-2001

Ex.W16

Orderterminating the Self Lease Scheme

Ex.W17 14-12-2001 Management's circular changing SelfLease w.e.f. 01-06-1998

StrikeNotice

Ex. W18 24-12-2001

Ex.W19 02-01-2002 Letter of Regional Labour. Commissioner (C)

Ex.W20 04-01-2002 Letter of Regional Labour Commissioner ( C)

Ex.W21 04-01-2002 Management's reply to Regional Labour Commissioner ( C) Ex.W22 07-01-2002 Minutes of the Conciliation Proceedings

Ex.W23 09-01-2002 Union's replyto the Regional Labour Commissioner ( C) Ex.W24 25-01-2002 Strike Notice

Ex. W25 06-02-2002 Letter of Regional Labour Commissioner ( C)

07-02-2002

Ex.W26

Management's reply to Regional Labour Commissioner ( C) Ex.W27 08-02-2002 Minutes of the Conciliation Proceedings

Ex.W28 09-02-2002 Union's reply to the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) Ex.W29 09-04-2002 Minutes of Meeting between Management of Cochin Refineries (Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. ) and its Union Representatives - Self Lease Scheme . Item No. 3 of the Minutes

Ex.W30 09-08-2002 Memorandum of Settlement Kochi Refineries Ltd. Ex.W31 09-09-2002 Order in WP No. 6523/2002 Ex. W32 07-11-2002 Order in WA No. 3285/2002 Ex. W33

Benefits available for employees withHR-Comparison with Self Lease Scheme

[PART II SEC . 3 ( ii )] Ex. W34

Comparative% revision ofBasic/ HRA/SLS as granted now Ex.W35

Comparative % revision ofBasic/ HRA/ SLS as per Union's Demand

Ex.W36

Chart showing employees on SelfLease Scheme drawing Self Lease Scheme less than the Applicable HRA

Ex.W37

Copy of the 1978 settlement at Regional Level regarding raising of demands with regard to medical facilities for self and dependent members

Ex.W38 09-03-1995 Long Term Settlement Ex.W39 01-09-1995 Self- Lease Scheme

Ex. W40 25-03-1996 Noticeto workmen regarding Self Lease Scheme-Recovery of IncomeTax

Ex. w41 09-04-1996 Circular No. GA/ 116 / SL / STAFF issued by the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. - Self Lease Scheme

10-04-1996

Ex.W42

Notice to workmen regarding Self-Lease Scheme Effect of Absenteeism

Ex. W43 24-10-1997 Circular No. IR & S : PCR issued by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. - Self Lease Scheme

Ex.W44 04-02-1999 Circular No. 3/7 / 99-EH issued by Oil and Natural Gas Commission - SelfLease Scheme Ex.W45 16-02-1999 Memorandum of Settlement Cochin Refineries Ltd. - Self Lease Scheme

Ex.W46 07-04-2000 Common Charter of Demands Ex.W47 04-05-2000 Circular No. 3/7/99 - EH issued by Oil and Natural Gas Commission Self Lease Scheme

Ex.W48 March2001 Management's proposal in Goa Ex.W49 March 2001 Management's proposal in Goa Ex.W50 28-06-2001 Memorandum of Understanding between Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and its workmen - Self Lease Scheme - Item No. 13 of Wage Revision ExW51 June 2001 Management's proposal in New Delhi [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

11-09-2001

Ex.W52

Long Term Settlement Ex.W53 11-10-2001 Orderterminating the Self- Lease Ex.W54 14-12-2001 Management's circular changing Self- Lease w.e.f. 01-06-1998 24-12-2001 Strike Notice

Ex.W55

Ex.W56

Strike Notice ofPEA , Cochin 24-12-2001

03-01-2002

Ex.W57

Letter of Regional Labour Commissioner (C)

Ex.W58 04-01-2002 Management's reply to Regional Labour Commissioner (C) Ex.W59 04-01-2002 Minutes of the Conciliation Proceedings

Ex. W60 24-01-2002 Union's reply to the Regional Labour Commissioner (C) Ex. W61

Strike Notice of PEA, Cochin 25-01-2002

StrikeNotice

Ex. W62 28-01-2002

Ex. W63 09-04-2002 Minutes of Meeting between Management of Cochin Refineries (Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. ) and its Union Representatives Self- Lease Scheme. Item No. 3 of the Minutes

Ex.W64 09-08-2002 Memorandum of Settlement- Kochi Refineries Ltd. Ex.W65

Benefits available for Employees with HRAComparison with Self- Lease

Ex.W66

Comparative% revision ofBasic/ HRA/ SLS-as granted now Ex.W67

Comparative% revision ofBasic/ HRA/SLS as per union's demand Ex.W68

Chart showing Employees on Self-Lease Scheme drawing Self- Lease less than the Applicable HRA

Ex.W69

Salary slip ofEmployees drawing Self- Lease less than the applicable HRA

Ex.W70

Form- 16 of Employees drawing Self-Lease

Ex.W71

Details of Taxable Income of Employeesdrawing Self-Dease Ex.W72

Particulars of value of perquisites of Employees drawing Self- Lease

Ex.W73

Chart showing Employees under HRA drawing more than Self- Lease

4049

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26, 2008/ श्रावण 4 , 1930

Ex.W74

Salary slip of Employees drawing HRA more than the Self- Lease Ex.W75

Form- 16 of employee drawing HRA

Ex.W76

Details of Taxable Income of Employee drawing HRA

Strike Notice

Ex.W77 24-12-2001

03-01-2002

Ex.W78

Letter of Regional Labour Commissioner (C)

04-01-2002

Ex. W79

Management's reply to Regional Labour Commissioner ( C) 04-01-2002

Ex.W80

Minutes of the Conciliation Proceedings

24-01-2002

Ex.W81

Union's reply to the Regional Labour Commissioner (C) 28-01-2002 Strike Notice

Ex.W82

Ex.W83 11-02-2002 Order passed in WP No. 3280/ . 02, Madras High Court 26-02-2002

Ex.W84

Affidavit filed in support of WP 6523/2002

Memorandum of WP 6523/2002 Ex.W85 26-02-2002

Ex.W86 28-02-2002 Interim Order granted in W.P.M.P. No. 901/2002 Ex.W87 26-03-2002 Reply filed in WP 6523/2002 Ex.W88 17-04-2002 Order in WA No. 1053/02 , Madras High Court

08-06-2002

Ex.W89

Additional Reply filed in WP 6523/2002

-22-10-2002 Order in WA No. 3118/2002 Ex. W90

27-12-1973

Ex.W91

Charter ofDemands of Petroleum Employees Union

01-09-1978 Memorandum of Settlement ExW92

Ex.W93 29-06-1981 Charter ofDemands of Petroleum EmployeesUnion

Ex.W94

Bharat Petroleum Workmen's Medical Benefit Scheme Ex.W95 14-05-1985 Exemption from the provisions ofthe E.S.I Act, 1948 14-06-1995

Ex.W96

Circular No. PD.M.GEN.CON on Festival Advance

Ex.W97

Charter ofDemands ofPetroleum Employees Union towards Wage Settlement Due w.e.f. 01-06-1998

03-07-1999

Ex.W98

Memorandum of Settlement on Introduction/Upgradation of Computers System and Technology 4050

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008/ SRAVANA 4, 1930

Ex.W99 11-09-2001 Memorandum of Settlement on Wages01-06-1998 to 31-05-2008 Ex.W100 01-10-2001 Circular HRS . S. Welfare . Con on Computer Loan Scheme 12-07-2004

Ex. W101

Circular HRS.3.2 on Vehicle Loan Ex. W102

Option format for HRA as per Circular (a)

From the Management's side

Ex.M1 07-04-1995 Long Term Settlement Ex.M2 04-09-1995 Circular introducing SLS to workmen category

Ex.M3 29-11-1995

Non Management Staff Lease agreement 07-04-2000

Ex.M4

Consolidated charter of demands

Ex.M5 11-09-2001 Long Term Settlement Ex.M6

Circular- Self Lease Scheme 14-12-2001

Ex.M7 31-12-2001 Letter regarding - Lease term leased to the Corporation Ex.M8 03-10-1991 Circulars introducing of SLS to Managers and above 10-07-1991

Ex.M9

Salary revision - Management staff

Ex.M10 28-02-1992 Circular extending SLS to Officers

Ex.MII

Specimen lease agreement ( old one)Officers .

Ex.M12 10-07-1992 Lease agreement - Management staff

Ex.M13 20-10-1994 SLS Scheme raising the ceiling from 25% to 40%

Ex.M14 13-07-1995 Lease agreement - Management staff

Ex.M15

Revision in SLS scheme 16-08-1995

Ex.M16 29-01-1996 Revision of pay scale and allowance - Management staff Ex.M17 01-03-1996 Consent letter for changes in lease agreement given by Officers

Ex.M18 06-03-1996 Sample of Self Lease Scheme Agreement , executed by Officers- Fresh agreement as perCircular dated 16-08-1995 Ex.M19 08-06-1995 Sample copy of Self Lease Scheme agreement - before the circular dated 16-08-1995 Ex.M20 07-09-2000 Notice issuedto Management staff regarding revision in SLS renewal

[ PART II- SEC . 3( ii ) ] Ex.M21 20-09-2000 Specimen letter issued to Officers advising about the change.

नई दिल्ली , 4 जुलाई , 2008

का.आ. 2018-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार खदान श्रमिक सहकारी समिति 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, सीजीआईटी/एलसी/ आर/ 272/97 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 04-07-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[फा. सं. एल-26012/20/97 - आईआर ( एम ) ] कमल बाखरू , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 4th July , 2008

S.O. 2018.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/272/97) of the Central Government Tribunal /Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Khadan Shramik Sahakari Samiti and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 04-07- 2008.

[ F. No. L- 26012/20/97 - IR (M ) ]

KAMAL BAKHRU, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR

No. CGIT/LC/R/272/ 97

PresidingOfficer : Shri C. M. SINGH Shri Bide Ram, C/ o Shri Sahadeb Sahu , At& PO: Dallirajhara,

Distt. Durg (MP) Workman/Union

Versus

The Chairman ,

Khadan Shramik Sahakari Samiti , Mahamaya Mines , Post . Mahaınaya , Teh. Balod, Distt.Durg (MP) Management AWARD Passed on this 16th day of June , 2008 1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No.L-26012/20/ 97 - IR( Misc ) dated 17-09-97 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal :-

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

"Whether the action of the management of Khadan Shramik Sahakari Samity, Mahamaya, in terminating the services of Shri Bide Ram , w.e.f. 25-05-1996 is justified? If not, whether the workman is justified in claiming departmentalisation by the management of Bhilai Steel Plant in accordance with the settlement dated 14-11-95 along with back wages and benefits ?"

2. In the present reference no bodyput in appearance for the parties inspite of sufficient service of notice on them. Under the aforesaid circumstances this Tribunal was left with no option but to close the reference for award. And in this manner the reference was closed for award .

3. Neither there is any Statement of Claim filed on behalf of workman on record nor there is any Written Statement filed on behalf of the management on record . It is a no evidence case .

4. It appears from the above that the parties have no interest in this reference proceeding and perhaps no Industrial Disputs exits between them . Therefore it shall be just and proper to pass no dispute award in this case. Therefore no dispute award is passed without any orders as to costs .

5. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment as per rules .

C. M. SINGH, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 4 जुलाई , 2008

का.आ. 2019.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार ओ.एन.जी.सी. , देहरादून के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई. डी.सं. 70/1991 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 04-07-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[फा. सं. एल-30012/2/89- आईआर ( एम ) ]

कमल बाखरू , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi, the 4th July, 2008

S.O. 2019. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. I.D. No. 70/1991 , of the Central Government Tribunal/Labour Court 11 , New Delhi as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the emmployers in relation to the management of ONGE and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 04-07-2008.

[F. No. L-30012/2/ 89 - IR(M) ]

KAMAL BAKHRU , Desk Officer

4051

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 26; 2008/श्रावण 4 , .1930

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT- II

PRESIDING OFFICER : R.N. RAI. I.D. No.70/1991 IN THE MATTER OF :

SheNiranjan Pandit,

C/o . K.K. Anand, 53, Aakash Deep Colony, Ballu Pur Road, Dehradun (Uttrakhand) .

Versus

The Chairman,

ONGC, Tel Bhawan, Dehradun (Uttrakhand) .

AWARD

TheMinistry ofLabour by its letter No. L- 30012/2 / 899- IR (Vivid ) Central Government dt . 28-04-1989 has referred the following point for adjudication .

The point runs as hereunder :--

"Whether the removal of Sh . Niranjan Pandit, S/o . Sh . Siva Nand Pandit, Pump Cleaner dated 01-01-1988 by the management of Natural Gas Commission is justified ? If not, what releif the workman is entitled to . "

The case of the claimant is that he was initially appointed on 3rd August , 1983 and worked continuously up to 30-09-1986. That after 30-09-1986 the employer illegally deprived the workman of work and wages . That the illegality of depriving the workman of work and wages during- 01-10-1986 to 31-10-1986 was brought to the notice of the employer as such he was re - engaged on 01-09-1987. He worked up to 31-12-1987 . He worked up to 31-12-1987 that less wages have been paid to him . He has not been paid wages from 01-10-1987 to 31-12-1987.

Thatthe management went to the extent of adopting unfair labour practice inasmuch as taking advantage of the poor condition and helplessness of the workman coerced him to work under fictitious name for various periods .

Thatdue to financial hardship and helplessness and prevailing accute unemployment the claimant/ workman has nowayout except to submit to the above coercieve methods and signed the muster rolls and payment receipts in fictitious names and assumed names . The management introduced fictitious to curtail the period of240 days of the workman.

The workman was working throughout and continuously from 03-08-1983 to 30-09-1986 , so the workman was entitled to retrenchment compensation and one 4052

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 26 , 2008 / SRAVANA 4 , 1930

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ] month's pay in lieu of notice under section 25- F of the ID Act, 1947.

being made in the name of fictitious persons . The case before the ALC was settled . The workman was given engagement for one month on daily wages basis and when the work was not available his services were terminated .

The case of the management is that the workman wasgivenfixed term appointment . He was a Plumber and whenever there was requirement of Plumber he was engaged for a particular day and payment to him was made for that particular day . ONGC Karamchari Union moved an application on 09-06-1987 after almost 10 months from the . removal of the workman before the ALC, Dehradun raising the ID and wrongly alleging termination of employment of Sh .Niranjan pandit w.e.f. 1st September , 1986.

From perusal of the records it transpires that the workman raised the dispute before the Conciliation Officer , Dehradun . The settlement was reached before the Conciliation Officer and the Conciliation Officer has mentioned that the workman has worked only for 180 days . The workman agreed to be re - engaged in view of section 25 H of the ID Act, 1947.

Theonly casewhich the workman can take at present iswhether there is breach of section 25 H of the ID Act , 1947 and some juniors to the workman have been retained and the workman has been removed .

There is no such pleading either in the claim or in the rejoinder or even in evidence of the workman . He has not named any junior casual labours retained by the management in breach of section 25 H of the ID Act , 1947 .

That the settlement was arrived at between the ONGC Karamchari Union and the management before the ALC, Dehradun . It has been held in the settlement that the workman has not worked for 240 days continuously in 12 calender months. He has worked for 180 days from November , 1985 to July, 1986. It has also been mentioned that the management has agreed to make payment of wages of 7 days , notice pay and he would be given preference in view of section 25- H of the ID Act, 1947. The union accepted the proposal andthe case before the ALC was concluded.

He has filed affidavit and he has asserted that he has worked for more than 240 days . He is estopped from raising this issue in view of the settlement before the ALC. The only plea open to workman is whether some junior to the workmen have been retained in breach of section 25 H of the ID Act, 1947. The workman has failed to establish that the management removed the workman and retainedjunior casual labourers .

That the workman was given engagement and he waspaid 7 days wages . That the matter was amicably settled betweenboth the parties and it shall be deemed admitted by the workman that he has not performed 240 days work in any of the years of his employment . The workman accepted the offer of appointment u/s 25 -H of the ID Act, 1947 along with 7 days wages and he was engaged but subsequently his services were terminated for lack ofwork with the management . That the workman was engaged @20.15 for 30 working days and payment ofthe same was made to the workman .

The workman was engaged on day to day basis . Even the working days mentioned by the workman indicate that his services were required when there was work of Plumber and payment to him was made on daily wages basis . There is list of other Plumbers also and they have been engaged on daily wages basis . It is not established that the post of Plumber in the management is a regular work. There is no evidence on the record regarding regular employment of casual labourers for plumbering work .

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 of the claim statement . Evidence of both the parties has been taken . Heard argument from both the sides and perused the papers on the record.

The workınan has not completed 240 days work in any of the years of his employment . There is no cessation of his services and there is no retrenchment in view of section 2( oo) of the ID Act, 1947. The workman is not entitled to get any relief.

The reference is replied thus :-

Itwas submitted from the side of the workman that he has completed 240 days in each year of his employment . Work was assigned to him whereas he was compelled to sign in the name of other workers in order to ensure that the workman does not complete 240 days work. The management has not paid him retrenchment compensation and one month's pay in lieu of notice while terminating his services .

The removal of Sh . Niranjan Pandit , S/ o . Sh . Siva Nand Pandit , Pump Cleaner dated 01-01-1988 by the management of Natural Gas Commission isjustified . The workman applicant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.

The award is given accordingly .

R. N. RAI , Presiding Officer It was submitted from the side of the management that the workman got all his claims compromised before the ALC and it shall be deemed that the workman has admitted that he has not completed 240 days in any of the years of his employment . He did not take the case of 240 days employment before the ALC and the case of payment Date : 11-06-2008

Prinled by the Manager , Govl. of India Press , Ring Road , Mayapuri , New Delhi - 110064 and Published by the Controller of Publications , Delhi - 110054 .