This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

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

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

प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक

WEEKLY

सं. 42]

नई दिल्ली, अक्तूबर12 अक्तूबर 18 , 2008 , शनिवार/ आश्विन 20- आश्विन 26 , 1930

No. 421 NEW DELHI , OCTOBER 12-OCTOBER 18, 2008 , SATURDAY /ASVINA 20- ASVINA 26 , 1930

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 11- खण्ड ३-उप-खण्ड (ii) PART II Section 3 Sub- section (ii )

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

वित्त मंत्रालय

(राजस्व विभाग )

(केन्द्रीय प्रत्यक्ष कर बोर्ड )

नई दिल्ली, 1 अक्तूबर, 2008

का.आ. 2875 - सर्वसाधारण की जानकारी के लिए एत‌द्वारा यह अधिसूचित किया जाता है कि केन्द्र सरकार द्वारा आयकर नियमावली, 1962 ( उक्त नियमावली ) के नियम 5 ग और 5ङ के साथ पठित आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 ( उक्त अधिनियम ) की धारा 35 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ii ) के प्रयोजनार्थ दिनांक 1-4-2008 से संगठन नेशनल हेल्थ एण्ड एजूकेशन सोसाइयटी , ( पी. डी. हिन्दूजा नेशनल हास्पिटल एंड मेडिकल रिसर्च सेंटर ) , मुम्बई को निम्नलिखित शों के अधीन आंशिक रूप से अनुसंधान कार्यकलापों में संलग्न अन्य संस्था' की श्रेणी में अनुमोदित किया गया है , नामतः:-

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

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

3853 G1/2008

(iii ) अनुमोदित संगठन वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए इसके द्वारा प्राप्त राशि के संबंध में अलग खाता बही रखोगा जिसमें अनुसंधान करने के लिए प्रयुक्त राशि दर्शाई गई हो , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 288 की उपधारा (2 ) के स्पष्टीकरण में यथा परिभाषित किसी लेखाकार से ऐसी खाता- बही की लेखा परीक्षा कराएगा और उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 139 की उप - धारा ( 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 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

(5693) 5694

THE GAZETTE OF INDE OCTOBER 18 , 2008/ASVINA 26. 1930 -- ===

( ख ) पैराग्राफ । के उप- पैराग्राफ ( iii ) में हल्लि अपनी लेखा परीक्षा रिपोर्ट प्रस्तुत नहीं करेना; अधन्ग (ग ) पैराग्राफ । के उप- पैराग्राफ ( iv ) में उल्लिखिः। वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के जिार प्राप्त दान एवं प्रयुक्त राशि अपना वित्ररण प्रस्तुत नहीं करेगा; अथवा

( घ) अपना अनुसंधान कार्यकलाप करना बंद कर दे । अथवा इसके अनुसंधान कार्य कलाप का जायज नहीं कराएगा; अथत्रा

( ङ) उक्त निगमावनी के नियम इग और के पठिन उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3.5 की अप के खण्ड ( ii ) के उपबंधों के अनुरूप नहीं होगा पालन नहीं करेगा।

[अधिसूचना सं. 95/2008/फा. में. 203/43/2010 ----11 रेनू जौहरो, निर्देशक आर ) MUNISTRY OF FINANCE (Department ofRevenue)

(CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT JAXES ) New Delhi , the 1st October , 2008

S.O. 2875. It is hereby notified for general information that the organization National Health & Education Society . ( P.D. Hinduja National Hospital and Medical Research Centre ) , Mumbai has been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of clause fits of sub- section ( ut Section 35 of the Income - tax Act , 1961 (said Act) , read with Rutes SC and SE of the meome- tax Rules, 1962 ( said Rules ) , with effect from 1-1-2008 in the category of other la ration' , partly engaged in research activities saberowing conditions , namely...

approved organization shall be wized town.ific research;

The approvedanization shali carry out scientific restarts frough its faculty members or its enrolds

( i ) The app

sepist .

such boky ac

in the exp

288 to friend

audit julka

to thetop

of Incobie - tax having judica

by the due date of the return

under - schen ( Fint Section 1193 Act,

[ PART 11-S 3 ( 1) ] ( iv) The apprond organization shall maintain a separate stars invnt 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 ergainzation :-

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

(b) fails to furniss audit report referred to in sub- paragraph ( iii et paragraph 1 : or

(c) fails to furn. h its statement of the donations received andsins applied for scientific research referred to sub-paragraph ( iv ) of paragraph 1 : or

(d) ceases to carts on its research activities or its research activties are not found to he genuine : Ог

(e) ceases to conform to and comply with the provision of clause ( ii ) of sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 35 of the said Act read with rules 50 and SE ofthe sand Kales ,

[Notification No 05-2008 F.No. 203 / 43/2008 /TTA - II ] RENU JAUHRI , Director ( 17A - 1 ] ) ( विनीय सेवाएं विभाग ) नई दिल्नः ४ अक्टूबर , 2008

विन ऑफ इंडिकतने की तरोग्य से ???--- ઝંઝવુંછછે? ???????? ? -* * -

का.आ. 2876 राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबन्ध एवं प्रकीण उपनंध) स्कीम , 1970/1980 के खण्ड के रुप खण्ड ( 1 ) और खण्ड ४ के उप- खण्ड ( 1 ) के साथ पदित. बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम, 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप- धारा ( 3 ) के खण्ड ( कः द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकार , एतद्‌द्भाग , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक के परामर्श से, श्री एस. सी. सिन्हा ( जन्यनिधि ११--1952 ) मष्ठाप्ररंधक, नक, अर्थात् नो पहले हो , ( कार्यपालक है ।

उप सचिव Departme New Delhi, October , 2008

S.O. 2876.-Inexes ofthe pravers conkared by clause (a ) of sub-section (3 ) of S. 9 of the Banking Companies [भाग - खण्ड 3(i ) )

5695

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/ आश्विन 26, 1930

(Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings ) Act, 1970/ 1980, read with sub-clause ( 1 ) of clause 3 , sub- clause ( 1 ) of clause 8 of the Nationalized Banks ( Management and Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme , 1970/1980, the Central Government, after consultation with Reserve Bank of India, hereby appoints Shri S. C. Sinha, ( DoB: 31-7-1952) , General Manager, Union Bank of India as a whole time director (designated as Executive Director ) Oriental Bank of Commerce, from the date of his taking over charge of the post and until further orders or till the date of his superannuation i.c. upto 31st July, 2012, whichever is earlier.

[F. No. 9/18/2007-B.O- I ] G. B. SINGH , Dy. Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 8 अक्तूबर , 2008

का.आ. 2877.-राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबन्ध एवं प्रकोण उपबंध > स्कीम, 1970/1980 के खण्ड 3 के उप - खण्ड ( 1 ) और खण्ड 8 के उप- खण्ड ( 1 ) के साथ पठिप्त, बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम, 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप- धारा ( 3 ) के खण्ड ( क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार , एतद्‌द्वारा , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक के परामर्श से, श्री विनोद कुमार नागर ( जन्मतिथि : 24-7-1951 ) , महाप्रबंधक , पंजाब नेशनल बैंक को उनके पदभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से और अगला आदेश होने तक अथवा 31 जुलाई , 2011 तक, अर्थात्जिस दिन वे अधिवर्षिता की आयु पूरी करेंगे , जो भी पहले हो, सिंडिकेट बैंक के पूर्णकालिक निदेशक ( कार्यपालक निदेशक के रूप में पदनामित) के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

(फा. सं. 9/ 18/2007- बीओ -1 ]

जी.बी. सिंह , उप सचिव NewDelhi , the 8th October, 2008

S.O. 2877. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) ofsub -section (3 ) ofSection 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings ) Act, 1970/1980 , read with sub -clause ( 1 ) of clause 3 , sub- clause ( 1 ) of clause & of the Nationalized Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme, 1970/1980 the Central Government , after consultationwith the Reserve Bank of India, hereby appoints Shri Vinod Kumar Nagar, (DoB : 24-7-1951 ) General Manager, Punjab National Bank as a whole time director ( designated as Executive Director) Syndicate Bank, from the date of his taking over charge of the post and until further orders or till the date ofhis superannuation i.e. upto 31st July, 2011, whichever is earlier.

[F. No. 9/ 18/2007-B.O- IJ G. B. SINGH,Dy. Secy.

नई दिल्ली , 8 अक्तूबर , 2008

का.आ. 2878. राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबन्ध एवं प्रकीण उपबंध ) स्कीम , 1970/1980 के खण्ड 3 के उप - खण्ड ( 1 ) और खण्ड 8 के उप -खण्ड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित , बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम, 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप- धारा ( 3 ) के खण्ड ( क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार , एत‌द्वारा , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक के परामर्श से, श्री एस. सी. कालिया ( जन्मतिथि : 6-8-1951 ) , महाप्रबंधक, बैंक ऑफ बड़ौदा को उनके पदभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से और अगला आदेश होने तक अथवा 31 अगस्त , 2011 तक , अर्थात् जिस दिन वे अधिवर्षिता की आयु पूरी करेंगे , जो भी पहले हो, विजया बैंक के पूर्णकालिक निदेशक ( कार्यपालक निदेशक के रूप में पदनामित ) के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[फा. सं. 9/ 18/2007- बीओ -1 ]

जी.बी. सिंह , उप सचिव New Delhi , the 8th October, 2008

S.O. 2878.-In exercise ofthe powers conferred by clause ( a) of sub - section (3 ) ofSection 9 ofthe Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970/1980 , read with sub - clause ( 1 ) of clause 3, sub- clause ( 1 ) of clause 8 of the Nationalized Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme, 1970/1980 , the Central Government, after consultation with Reserve Bank of India , hereby appoints Shri S. C. Kalja , (DoB: 6-8-1951) , General Manager , Bank of Baroda as a whole time director ( designated as Executive Director ) Vijaya Bank, from the date of his taking over charge ofthe post and until further orders or till the date of his superannuation i.e , upto 31st August, 2011 , whichever is earlier.

[F. No. 9/18/2007 -BO- 1 ] G. B. SINGH, Dy. Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 14 अक्तूबर , 2008

का.आ. 2879, बैंककारी विनियमन अधिनियम , 1949 ( 1949 का 10 ) की धारा 53 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, भारत सरकार, भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक की सिफारिश पर, एतद्द्वारा , घोषणा करती है कि उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 100 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ग ) के उप- खण्ड ( झ ) के उपबंध यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया पर लागू नहीं होंगे , जहां तक उनका संबंध यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के अध्यक्ष एवं प्रबंध निदेशक श्री एम.वी. नायर का एआईसीटीई के राष्ट्रीय प्रत्यापन बोर्ड के निदेशक मंडल में निदेशक का पद ग्रहण करने से है ।

[फा. सं. 20/5/2005- बीओ -1 ]

जी.बी. सिंह, उप सचिव 5696

[PART 11- SEC.3 ( ii) ] THI : GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 18, 2008 /ASVINA 26, 1930

New Delhi , the 14th October , 2008

खण्ड ( क) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार , एतद्वारा , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक के परामर्श से, बैंक ऑफ बड़ौदा के महाप्रबंधक श्री बी. ए. प्रभाकर ( जन्म तिथि : 04-08-1953 ) को उनके पदभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से और 31-08-2013 तक, अर्थात् अधिवर्षिता की तारीख तक अथवा अगला आदेश होने तक, जो भी पहले हो , बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के पूर्णकालिक निदेशक ( कार्यपालक निदेशक के रूप में पदनामित । के रूप में नियुक्त करती है । S.O. 2879. -In evercise of the powers conferred by Section 53 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 ( 10 of 1949 ), the Government of India on the recommendation of the Reserve Bank of India, hereby declare that the provisions of sub - clause ( i) of clause ( c) of sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 10 of the said Act shall not apply to Union Bank of India in so far as it relates to taking up directorship of Shri M. V. Nair , Chairman & Managing Director. Union Bauk of India on the Board of National Board of Accreditationof AICTE.

[फा. सं. 9/16/2008- बोओ -1 ] जी.बी. सिंह , उप - सचिव

New Delhi , the 15th October , 2008 [F. No. 20/5-2005-13-1 ] G. B. SINGH.Dy . Secy . नई दिल्ली, 15 अक्तूबर, 2008

S.O. 2881.- 1n exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( a ) of sub- section ( 3 ) of Section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings ) Act, 1970/1980, read with sub- clause ( 1 ) of clause 3 , sub- clause ( 1 ) of clause 8 of the Nationalized Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme, 1970/1980 , the Central Government, after consultation with the Reserve Bank of India hereby appoints Shri B.A. Prabhakar (DoB: 04-08-1953 ) . General Manager , Bank of Baroda as a whole time director ( designated as Executive Director) Indian Bank from the date of his taking over charge and upto 31-08-2013 i.e. the date of his superannuation or until further orders

[F. No. 9/ 18/2008 - B.O- [ ] G. B. SINGH ,Dy. Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 15 अक्तूबर , 2008 का.आ. 2880.-राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबन्ध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपवं) स्कीम, 1970/1980 के खण्ड 3 के उप- खण्ड ( 1 ) और खण्ड के उप - खण्ड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम , 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप धारा 3 के खण्ड ( क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, कंन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्वारा , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक के परामर्श से, यूनाइटेड बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के महाप्रबंधक श्री अनूप शंकर भट्टाचार्या ( जन्म तिथि : 03-01-1952 ) को उनके पदभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से और 31-01-2012 तक, अर्थात् अधिवर्पिता की तारीख तक अथवा आगला आदेश होने तक , जो भी पहले हो , इंडियन बैंक के पूर्णकालिक निदेशक ( कार्यपालक निर्देशक के रूप में पदनामित ) के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[फा. सं. 9/16/2008- बी -11

जी.बी. सिंह , उप- सचिव

New Delhi , the 15th October , 2008

का.आ. 2882.-राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबन्ध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबं ) स्कीम, 1970/1980 के खण्ड 3 के उप खण्ड ( 1 ) और खण्ड 8 के उप-खण्ड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम, 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप - धारा 3 के खण्ड (क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, एत‌द्वारा , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक के परामर्श से , बैंक ऑफ बड़ौदा के महाप्रबंधक श्री असित पाल ( जन्म तिथि : 28-11-1950 ) को उनके पदभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से और 30-11-2010 तक , अर्थात् अधिवर्षिता को तारीख तक अथवा अगला आदेश होने तक , जो भी पहले हो , कार्पोरेशन बैंक के पूर्णकालिक निदेशक ( कार्यपालक निर्देशक के रूप में पदनामित ) के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[फा. सं. 9/16/2008- बीओ-1 ] जी.बी. सिंह , उप सविव

NewDelhi , the 15th October , 2008 S.O. 2880.-In exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( a ) of sub - section ( 3 ) of Section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings ) Act , 1970/1980 , read with sub -clause ( 1 ) of clause 3 , sub- clause ( 1 ) of clause 8 of the Nationalized Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme , 1970/1980, the Central Government , after consultation with the Reserve Bank of India hereby appoints Shri Алир Sankar Bhattacharya ( DoB : 03-01-1952 ), General Manager , United Bank of India as a whole time director (designated as Executive Director) Indian Bank from the date of his taking over charge and upto 31-01-2012 ie . the date ofhis superannuation or until further orders , whichever is earlier

[F.No. 9/ 16 / 2008 - B (0-1 )

G. B. SINGH , Dy. Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 15 अक्तूबर, 2008

का.आ. 2881.-राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रवन्ध एवं प्रकोणं उपबंध। स्कीम, 1970/1980 के खण्ड 3 के उप - खण्ड ( 1 ) और स्खण्ड ४ के उप खण्ड ( 1 ) के साथ पर्पाउत बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमां का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अर्धािनयध , 1970/1980 को धारा ८. उप धारा 3 के

S.O. 2882.-1nexercise of the powers conferred by clause ( a ) of sub- section ( 3 ) of Section 9 of the Banking Companies ( Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970/1980 , read with sub -clause ( ) ) of clause 3 , sub- clause ( 1 ) of clause & of the Nationalized Banks (Managementand Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme, 1970/1980 , the Central Government , after consultation with the Reserve Bank of India hereby appoints Shri Asit Pal (DoB:28-11-1950 ) General Manager , Bank of Baroda as a whole time director (designated as Executive Director) [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/आश्विन 26 , 1930

Corporation Bank from the date of his taking over charge and upto 30-11-2010 ie the date of his superannuation or until further orders , whichever is earliesr .

[F. No. 9/ 16/2008-B.0-1) G. B. SINGH , Dy, Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 15 अक्तूबर, 2008

का.आ. 2883.--राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबन्ध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध ) स्कीम , 1970/1980 के खण्ड 3 के उप - खण्ड ( 1 ) और खण्ड 8 के उप-खण्ड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम , 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप- धारा ( 3 ) के खण्ड ( क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्‌द्वारा , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक के परामर्श से , देना बैंक के महाप्रबंधक श्री एम. जी. संघवी ( जन्य तिथि : 12-6-1953) को उनके पदभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से और 30-6-2013 तक , अर्थात् अधिवर्षिता की तारीख तक अथवा अगला आदेश होने तक , जो भी पहले हो , बैंक ऑफ महाराष्ट्र के पूर्णकालिक निदेशक (कार्यपालक निदेशक के रूप में पदनामित ) के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[फा. सं. 9/16/2008-बीओ-11 जी.बी. सिंह , उप सचिव New Delhi , the 15th October, 2008 S.O. 2883.-1n exercise ofthe powers conferredby clause (a) of sub - section (3 ) of Section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970/1980 , read with sub- clause ( 1 ) ofclause 3 , sub- clause ( 1 ) of clause 8 of the Nationalized Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme, 1970/1980, the Central Govemment, after consultation with the Reserve Bank of India hereby appoints Shri M.G. Sanghvi (DoB : 12-6-1953 ) General Manager, Dena Bank as awhole time director (designated as Executive Director) Bank ofMaharashtra from the date ofhis taking over charge and upto 30-6-2013 i.e. the date of his superannuation or until further orders , whichever is earlier .

[F. No. 9/ 16/2008-B.C. - 1 ] G. B. SINGH , Dy. Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 15 अक्तूबर, 2008

का.आ. 2884. राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबन्ध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध ) स्कीम, 1970/1980 के खण्ड 3 के उप- खण्ड ( 1 ) और खण्ड 8 के उप- खण्ड ( 1 ) के साथ पतित बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम, 1970-1980 की धारा 9 की उप- धारा (3 ) के खण्ड ( क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकार, एत‌द्वारा , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक के परामर्श से, फेनरा बैंक के कार्यपालक निदेशक श्री जी. एस. वेदी ( जन्म तिथि: 28-6-1950 ) को उनके पदभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से और 30-6-2010 तक, अर्थात् अधिवर्षिता की तारीख तक अथवा अगला आदेश होने तक, जो भी पहले हो , पंजाब एण्ड सिंध बैंक के कार्यपालक निदेशक के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[फा. सं. 9/16/2008- बीओ-1 ]

जी.बी. सिंह , उप सचिव

5697 New Delhi , the 15th October , 2008

S.O.2884. In exercise ofthe powers conferred by clause (a) of sub- section (3 ) of Section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings ) Act, 1970/1980 , read with sub -clause ( 1 ) of clause 3, sub- clause ( 1 ) of clause 8 of the Nationalized Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme, 1970/1980, the Central Government , after consultationwith the ReserveBank of India hereby appoints Shri G. S. Vedi (DoB: 28-6-1950) Executive Director, Canara Bank as Executive Director , Punjab and Sind Bank from the date of his taking over charge and upto 30-6-20 10 i.e. the date of his superannuation or until further orders , whichever is earlier.

[F. No. 9/ 16/2008-B.O. - JJ G. B. SINGH,Dy. Secy.

नईदिल्ली, 15 अक्तूबर, 2008

का.आ. 2885 -राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबन्ध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध ) स्कीम , 1970/1980 के खण्ड 3 के उप - खण्ड ( 1 ) और खण्ड 8 के उप- खण्ड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण) अधिनियम , 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप - धारा 3 के खण्ड ( क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकार , एतद्वारा , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक के परामर्श से, बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के भहाप्रबंधक श्री सुंदरराजन रमन ( जन्म तिथि: 7-9-1952 ) को उनके पदभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से और 30-9-2012 तक, अर्थात् अधिवर्षिता की तारीख तक अथवा अगला आदेश होने तक, जो भी पहले हो, यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के पूर्णकालिक निदेशक (कार्यपालक निदेशक के रूप में पदनामित ) के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[फा. सं. 9/ 16/2008- बीओ- [ ]

जी.बी. सिंह , उप सचिव New Delhi , the 15th October, 2008

S.O.2885 .- In exercise ofthe powers conferred by clause (a) of sub-section (3 ) of Section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act , 1970/1980 , read with sub-clause ( 1 ) ofclause 3, sub- clause ( 1 ) of clause & of the Nationalized Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme , 1970/1980, the Central Government, after consultationwith theReserve Bank of India hereby appoints Shri Sunderrajan Raman (DoB: 7-9-1952 ) General Manager , Bank of India as a whole time director ( designated as Executive Director) Union Bank of India from the date ofhis taking over charge and upto 30-9-2012 i.e. the date of his superannuation or until further orders , whichever is earlier,

[F. No , 9/16/2008 - B.O- 1 ]

G. B. SINGH , Dy. Secy.

5698

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 18 , 2008 / ASVINA 26, 1930

( व्यय विभाग )

नई दिल्ली , 8 अक्तूचर , 2008

का.आ. 2886 -केन्द्रीय सरकार, सरकारी स्थान (अप्राधिकृत अधिभोगियों की बेदरवली ) अधिनियम, 1971 ( 1971 का 40 ) की धारा 3 द्वारा प्रदत र्शाक्तयों का प्रयोग करते हुए और भारत सरकार ( व्यय विभाग ) की अधिसूचना का.आ. 1467 तारीख 29 मई , 1984 कोउन बातों के सिवाय अधिक्रांत करते हुए जिन्हें ऐसे अधिक्रमण से पूर्व किया गया है या करने का लोप किया गया है , नीचे सारणी के स्तंभ ( 1 ) में उल्लिरिंजन अधिकारी को, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार के राजपत्रित अधिकारी की रैंक के समतुल्य अधिकारी हैं, उक्त अधिनियम के प्रयोजन के लिए संपदा अधिकारी नियुक्त करती हैं , जो उक्त सारणी के स्तम्भ ( 2 ) में तत्स्थानी प्रविष्टि में विनिर्दिष्ट सभी सरकारी स्थानों की बाबत अपना अधिकारिता की स्थानीय सीमाओं के भीतर उक्त अधिनियम द्वारा या उसके अधीन संपदा अधिकारी कां प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग और उस पर अधिरोपित कर्तव्यों का पालन करेगा ।

सारणी

अधिकारी का पदनाम

सरकारी स्थानों के प्रवर्ग और अधिकारिता की स्थानीय सीमाएं (2)

(1)

वरिष्ठ उप महालेखाकार

(प्रशासन ) , या उप महा-

भुवनेश्वर स्थित प्रधान महालेखाकार ( सिविल लेख्टापरीक्षा ) , उड़ीसा, लेखाकार ( प्रशासन ) प्रधान

महालेखाकार का कार्यालय

भुवनेश्वर के प्रशासनिक नियंत्रण के अनतर्गत परिसर।

(सिविल लेखापरीक्षा ),

उड़ीसा भुवनेश्वर।

टिप्पण: एक समय में कंवल

एक अधिकारी संपदा अधिकारी

के कृत्योंको निर्वहन करंगा ।

[फा. सं. ए -11013/ 1 /2001 -ईजी आर. प्रेम आनंद , अवर सचिव (Department of Expenditure)

New Delhi , the 8th ( October, 2008

S.O. 2886. -In exercise of the powers conferredby Section 3 of the Public Premises ( Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants ) Act , 1971 ( 41) of 1971 ) and in supersession of notification of the Government of India ( Department of Expenditure) bearing No. S.O. 1467 dated 29th May, 1989 except as respect of things done or omitted to have been done before such supersession , the Central Government hereby appoints the officer mentioned in Column ( 1 ) of the Table below, being the officer equivalent to the rank of Gazetted Officer of the Central Government to be the Estate Officer for the purpose of the said Act, who shall exercise the powers conferred and perform the duties imposed on EstateOfficer by or under the said Act . within the local lintits ofhisjurisdiction in respect ofall the public premises specified in corresponding entry in column ( 2 ) of the said Table.

[ PART 11-Sec. 3 ( ii ) |

TABLE

Designation of the Officer

Catergories of the public premises and local limits of jurisdiction

(1)

(2)

Premises under the Adminis- trative Control of Principal Accountant General ( Civil Audit ) , Orissa , Bhubhaneshwar at Bhubhaneshwar.

Sr. Deputy Accountant General (Administration ) orDeputy Accountant General ( Administration ) ofOffice ofthe Principal Accountant General

(Civil Audit) , Orissa ,

Bhubhaneshwar.

Note: At a given point

of time only one officer

shall discharge the

functions of Estate Officer .

[ F. No. A- 11013/ 1/2001 -EGJ

R. PREMANAND, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 8 अक्तूबर , 2008

का.आ. 2887.-केन्द्रीय सरकार , सरकारी स्थान ( अप्राधिकृत अधिभोगियों की बेदखली ) अधिनियम , 1971. ( 1971 का 40) की धारा 3 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए नीचे सारणी के स्तंभ ( 1 ) में उल्लिखित अधिकारी को. जो केन्द्रीय सरकार के राजपत्रित अधिकारी की रैंक के समतुल्य अधिकारी हैं , उक्त अधिनियम के प्रयोजन के लिए संपदा अधिकारी नियुक्त करती है , जो उक्त सारणी के स्तम्भ ( 2 ) में तत्स्थानी प्रविष्टि में विनिर्दिष्ट सभी सरकारी स्थानों की बाबत अपनी अधिकारिता की स्थानीय सीमाओं के भीतर उक्त अधिनियम द्वारा या उसके अधीन संपश अधिकारी को प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयोग और उस पर अधिरोपित कर्तव्यों का पालन करेगा ।

सारणी

अधिकारी का पदनाम

सरकारी स्थानों के प्रवर्ग और अधिकारिता की स्थानीय सीमाएं (1)

(2)

वरिष्ठ उप महालेखाकार

( प्रशासन) , या उप महा-

इटानगर स्थित महालेखाकार अरुणाचल प्रदेश , इटानगर के प्रशासनिक नियंत्रण के अन्तर्गत लेखाकार ( प्रशासन)

परिसर ।

महालेखाकार का कार्यालय अरुणाचल प्रदेश , इटानगर।

टिप्पण: एक समय में केवल एक अधिकारी संपदा अधिकारी के कृत्यों को निर्वहन करेगा ।

[फो. मं. ए-11013 /1/2001- ईजी ]

आर. प्रेम आनंद, अवर सचिव 5699 [भाग 1]- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26 , 1930

सारणी

New Delhi , the 8th October, 2008

अधिकारी का पदनाम

सरकारी स्थानों के प्रवर्ग और अधिकारिता की स्थानीय सीमाएं

(1)

(2)

ऑइजाल स्थित महालेखाकार , मिजोरम , ऑइजाल के प्रशासनिक नियंत्रण के अन्तर्गत परिसरः

वरिष्ठ उप महालेखाकार (प्रशासन ) , या उप महा- लेखाकार (प्रशासन) महालेखाकार का कार्यालय मिजोरम , ऑइजाल।

S.O. 2887. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section3 ofthe Public Premises (Eviction ofUnauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (40 of 1971 ) the Central Government hereby appoints the officer mentioned in Column ( 1 ) ofthe Table below, being the officer equivalent to the rank of GazettedOfficer ofthe Central Government , to be the Estate Officer for the purpose of the said Act, who shall exercise the powers conferred and perform the duties imposed on Estate Officer by or under the said Act, within the local limits of his respective jurisdiction in respect of all the public premises specified in corresponding entry in Column (2) ofthe said Table.

TABLE

टिप्पण: एक समय में केवल एक अधिकारी संपदा अधिकारी के कृत्यों का निर्वहन करेगा।

[फा. सं. ए-11013 /1 /2001 - ईजी] Designation of the Officer

Categories of the public premises and local limits of jurisdiction

आर. प्रेम आनंद, अवर सचिव (1)

(2)

New Delhi , the 8th October, 2008 Premises under the Adminis- trative Control of Accountant General Arunachal Pradesh , Itanagar atlianagar.

Sr. Deputy Accountant General ( Administration) or Deputy Accountant General (Administration) ofoffice ofthe Accountant General Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar.

S.O.2888 , In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act , 1971 (40 of 1971 ) the Central Government herebyappoints the officer mentioned in Column ( 1 ) ofthe Table below , being the officer equivalent to the rank of Gazetted Officer of the Central Government , to be the Estate Officer for the purpose of the said Act, who shall exercise the powers conferred and perform the duties imposed on Estate Officer by or under the said Act , within the local limits of his respective jurisdiction in respect of all the public premises specified in corresponding entry in Colunan (2) ofthe szid Table.

Note: At a given point oftime only one officer shall discharge the functions of Estate Officer .

TABLE

Designation ofthe Officer

[F. No.A- 11013 /1 /2001 -EG) R. PREM ANAND, Under Secy .

Categories of the public premises and local limits of jurisdiction

(1)

(2) नई दिल्ली, 8 अक्तूबर, 2008

Premises under the Adminis- trative Control of Accountant General Mizoram , Aizawl at Aizawl .

Sr. DeputyAccountant General (Administration ) or Deputy Accountant General (Administration ) ofoffice ofthe Accountant General Mizoram,Aizawl, Note:At a given point oftime only one officer shall discharge the functions of Estate Officer .

का.आ, 2888 -केन्द्रीय सरकार, सरकारी स्थान ( अप्राधिकृत अधिभोगियों की बेदखली ) अधिनियम , 1971 ( 1971 का 40 ) को धारा 3 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, नीचे सारणी के स्तंभ ( 1 ) में उल्लिखित अधिकारी को , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार के राजपत्रित अधिकारी की रैंक के समतुल्य अधिकारी है , उक्त अधिनियम के प्रयोजन के लिए संपदा अधिकारी नियुक्त करती है , जो उक्त सारणी के स्तम्भ ( 2 ) में तत्स्थानी प्रविष्टि में विनिर्दिष्ट सभी सरकारी स्थानों की बाबत अपनी अधिकारिता की स्थानीय सीमाओं के भीतर उक्त अधिनियम द्वारा या उसके अधीन संपदा अधिकारी को प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयोग और उस पर अधिरोपित कर्तव्यों का पालन करेगा ।

[F. No. A- 11013/1 /2001 -EG ] R. PREM ANAND. Under Secy.

5700

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18 , 2008 /ASVINA 26, 1930

विदेश मंत्रालय (सीपीवी प्रभाग)

नई दिल्ली , 1 अक्तूबर , 2008

का.आ. 2889,- राजनयिक कौसली अधिकारी ( शपथ एवं शुल्क) अधिनियम, 1948 ( 1948 का 41 वां ) व 2 के अंक ( क) के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एत‌द्वारा भारत का कौंसलावास, बैंकूवर में श्री अशित बर्मन सहायक को 1-10-2008 से सहायक कौसली अधिकारी का कार्य करने हेतु प्राधिकृत करती है।

[सं. टी -4330-01-2006] प्रीतम लाल , अवर सचिव ( कौंसुलर ) MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS (CPV Division ) New Delhi , the 1st October , 2008

S.O. 2889.-1n pursuance of the clause ( ii ) of the Section 2 of the Diplomatic and Consular Officers ( Oath: and Fees ) Act , 1948 , the Central Government hereby au thorize Shri Ashit Burman , Assistant to perform the duties ofAssistant Consular Officer in the Consulate General of India, Vancouver from 1-10-2008.

[No. 1 , 4330 /1.2006] PRITAM LAL , Under Secy. ( Consular ) सूचना और प्रसारण मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली , 30 सितम्बर , 2008

का.आ. 2890,- इस मंत्रालय की दिनांक 31 मई, 2007 की समसंख्यक अधिसूचना के अनुक्रम में और चलचित्र ( प्रमाणन ) नियमावली , 1983 के नियम 7 और 8 के साथ पठित चलचित्र अधिनियम, 1952 ( 1952 का 37 ) की धारा 5 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केंद्र सरकार तत्काल प्रभाव से दो वर्षों की अवधि के लिए या अगले आदेशों तक , जो भी पहले हो, निम्नलिखित व्यक्तियों को केंद्रीय फिल्म प्रमाणन बोर्ड के हैदराबाद सलाहकार पैनल के सदस्यों के रूप में नियुक्त करती है :

1. श्री दादी सत्य नारायण

2. श्री राजेश कुमार रेड्डी दुक्का

3. श्री गुंतोबोयना नानाजी रात्र यादव

4. श्री दादी चिन्ना राव

5. श्री मुले रामी रेड्डी

6. श्री पो . वी. जी. अप्पा राव

7. श्री जे. सन्यासी रेड्‌डी

8. श्री एन. सूर्य प्रकाश

(फा. सं. 809/1 /2007-एफ ( सी) ] संगीता सिंह , निदेशक ( फिल्म)

[PART II-SE.C. 3 ( ii ) ] MINISTRY OF INFORMATIONAND BROAD CASTING

New Delhi , the 30th September, 2008

S.O. 2890.-[ o continuation of this Ministry's Notification of even number dated 31st May, 2007 and in exercise of the powers conferredby sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 5 ofthe Cinematograph Act , 1952 (37 of 1952 ) read with rules 7 and 8 ofthe Cinematograph (Certification ) Rules . 1983 , the Central Government is pleased to appoint the following persons as members of the [ yderabad advisory panel of the Central Board of Film Certification with immediate effect for a period of two years or until further orders , whichever is earlier :

1. Shri Dadi Satya Narayana

2. Shri Rajesh Kumar Raddy Dukka

3. Shri Guntuboina Nanaji Rao Yadav

4. Shri Dadi Chinna Rao

5. Shri Moole Rami Reddy

6. Shri P.V.G. Appa Rao

7. Shri J. Sanyasi Raddy

8. Shri N. Surya Prakash

IF. No. 809/1/2007 -F( C ) ] SANGEETA SINGH, Director ( Fil ถาร ) नई दिल्ली . ।। सितम्बर , 2008

का.आ. 2891 ,-इस मंत्रालय की दिनांक 31 मई , 2007 को सपसंख्यक अधिसूचना के अनुक्रम में और चलचित्र ( प्रमाणन ) नियमावली, 1983 के नियम ? और 8 के साथ पतित चलचित्र अधिनियम , 1952 ( 1952 का 37 ) की धारा 5 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केंद्र सरकार तत्काल प्रभाव से दो वर्षों की अवधि के लिए या अगले आदेशों तक , जो भी पहले हो, श्री पी. वी. रमेश , महात्मा गांधी रोड , पहली लाइन , बूंदावन गार्डन, गुंटूर-522006 को केंद्रीय फिल्म प्रमाणन बोर्ड के हैदराबाद सलाहकार पैनल के सदस्य के रूप में नियुक्त करती है :

[फा. सं. 809/ 1/2007- एफ ( सी ) ] संगीता सिंह , निदेशक ( फिल्म) New Delhi , the 11th September , 2008 S.O. 2891 .-[ n continuation of this Ministry's Notification of even number dated 31st May, 2007 and in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 5 ofthe Cinematograph Act, 1952 (37 of 1952 ) read with rules 7 and 8 of the Cinematograph (Certification ) Rules.

570 ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

1983 the Central Government is pleased to appoint Shri P.V. Ramesh , Mahatma Gandhi Road, 1st Line, Brundavan Garden, Guntur-522006 as a member of the Hyderabad advisory panel of the Central Board of Film Certification with immediate effect for a period of two years or until further orders , whichever is earlier:

[F. No. 809/ 1/2007 -F(C) ]

SANGEETA SINGH, Director (Films) स्वास्थ्यऔर परिवार कल्याण मंत्रालय (स्वास्थ्य और परिवार कल्याण विभाग )

नई दिल्ली , 7 अक्तूबर, 2008

का.आ. 2892, भारतीय आयुर्विज्ञान परिषद अधिनियम, 1956( 1956 का 102 ) की धारा 11 की उप - धारा ( 2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार एत‌द्वारा भारतीय आयुर्विज्ञान परिषद से परामर्श करने के पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है , अर्थात्:-

उक्त अनुसूची में

(क) शीर्षक " मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता " [ इसके पश्चात् स्तंभ (2 ) के रूप में उल्लिखित ] के अंतर्गत " डॉ. एम. जी. आर. चिकित्सा विश्वविद्यालय , चेन्नई " के सामने , अंतिम प्रविष्टि तथा शीर्षक ' पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण' [ इसके अंतर्गत स्तंभ ( 3 ) के रूप में उल्लिखित ] के अंतर्गत उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद, निम्नलिखित जोड़ा आएगा, अर्थात्:

एम एस

(अस्थिरोग विज्ञान ) " मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी (अस्थिरोग विज्ञान ) "

यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह डॉ. एम.जी. आर. चिकित्सा विश्वविद्यालय , चेन्नई द्वारा तंजावुर मेडिकल कालेज , तंजावुर में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे छात्रों के संबंध में मार्च, 2007 में अथवा उसके पश्चात प्रदान की गई हो।

[सं. यू-12012/54/2008 - एमई ( पी-11 ) ]

एन. बारिक, अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (Department ofHealth and Family Welfare) New Delhi , the 7th October, 2008

S.O. 2892. In exercise ofthe powers conferredby sub- section (2) of the Section 11 of the Indian Medical 3853 G1/08-2

Council Act, 1956 ( 102 of 1956) , the Central Government, after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act , namely :-

In the said Schedule-

(a ) against " Dr. M.G.R. Medical University, Chennai" , under the heading ' Recognised Medical Qualification' (hereinafter referred to as column (2) ], after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration ' [ hereinafter referred to as column (3 ) ], the following shall be inserted, namely:-

MS (Orthopaedics)

"Master of Surgery (Orthopaedics) "

(This shall be a recognized medical qualification when granted by Dr. M.G.R. Medical University, Chennai in respect of students being trained at Thanjavur Medical College, Thanjavur on or after March, 2007)

[No. U -12012/54/2008- ME(P - II) ] N. BARIK, Under Secy.

उपभोक्ता मामले , खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय ( उपभोक्ता मामले विभाग )

भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो

नई दिल्ली, 13 अक्तूबर , 2008

का.आ. 2893.-भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एत‌द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिस भारतीय मानक का विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिया गया हैं वह स्थापित हो गया है

अनुसूची

स्थापित तिथि क्र. स्थापित्त भारतीय मानक सं की संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

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

15351: 2003 31अक्तूबर , 2008 1. आईएस 15351 : 2008 वस्त्रादि-जल अवरोधक परत चढ़ा उच्च घनत्व 5702

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18 , 2008/ASVINA 26. 1930

पालीइथाइलीन ( एच.डी.पी.ई )

का चुना हुआ कपड़ा (भू मेम्बरेन)-विशिष्टि (पहला पुनरीक्षण)

अब यह भारतीय मानक बिक्री के लिये उपलब्ध होगा । इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन ५ , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई , मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों : अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर , भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी , हैदराबाद , जयपुर , कानपुर , नागपुर, पटना, पुणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में चिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: टोएक्सडी जी-25 ] पी. भटनागर , वैज्ञानिक ई एवं प्रमुख ( टीएक्सडी) MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs) BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS New Delhi , the 13th October. 2008

S.O. 2893.-In exercise ofthe clause ( h ) ot sub - rule (1) of Rules ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules . 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standard , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each :

SCHEDULE

Sl . No Year of the No. & year of Indian Date No. Indien Standard Estalvished

Studard, if any , When superseded by the Established New Indian Standard

4 I 15 15351 :2008 15351-2003

31Gerober, Textiles-

Laminated figh

Density Polyethy-

Woven Fabric

(Goo-Momban

for Water Peo

Lining---Specification

(First Revision )

Henceforth , this standard will be available far

Copy of this Standard is available for sale with H.Q. at Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan . 4 Bahadur

[PART It Src . 3 ( it) | Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110002 and its Regional Offices at New Delhi . Kolkata. Chandigarh , Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices at Ahmedabad , Bangalore, Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati . Hyderabad , Jaipur . Kanpur . Nagpur, Pauna . Pune , Thiruvananthapuraın.

[Ref.: TXDG-251 P. BIJATANAGAR, Scientist E ' & Head (Textiles) नई दिल्ली, 13 अक्तूबर , 2008

का.आ. 2894-भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो ( प्रमाणन ) विनियम 1988 के विनियम, ( 3) 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 रह कर दिया गया है :-

रद्द करने क्र. लाइसेंस लाइसेंसधारी का नाम लाइसेस के

सं. संख्या व पना

अंतर्गत वस्तु की तिथि सीएम एल

प्रक्रम सम्बद्ध

भारतीय मानक काशीर्षक

5 1. 7219973 डुगार एंड संस प्रा.लि.

1971 लचीली

डब्ल्यू-235 , ' जे '

सामग्री से बने

ब्लॉक , एमःआवडीसी

भोसरी , जिला

हुए तीन पिन

भामा 6538 : 8-8-2008 वाले

पुणे 411020

[सं. सीएमडी/13: 13]

पी. कं. गम्भीर, उप महानिदेशक ( मुहर ) New Delhi , the 13th October, 2008

S.O. 2894. 1 pursuance of sub - regulation ( 6 ) of the regulation 5 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certification ) Regulations , 1988 , of the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the licences particulars of which are given below have been cancelled with effect from the date indicated against each ;-

1. Licerce Ni

Article /Process Date No. No.

wich relevan

When

Gidiar Standæds Established

licence canceled

8-8-2008 ! 7236973 Du

18 6538 197

Three pin plugs

PW- 7s .

nade of resclient

materi

Pan 26

[No. CMD/ 13 : 13 ] P. K. GAMBHIR , Dy. Director General (Marks) 5703 [भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

भारतका राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 13 अक्तूबर , 2008

का.आ. 2895.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो ( प्रमाणन ) विनियम , 1988 के उपनियम ( 4 ) के उपविनियम ( 5 ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एत‌द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन लाइसेंसों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं , वे स्वोकृत कर दिए गए हैं :-

अनुसूची

वर्ष लाइसेंस

लाइसेंसधारी का नाम व पता

अनुभाग क्रम

भा. मा. भाग संख्या

भारतीय मानक का शीर्षक

स्वीकृत करने कीतिथि वर्ष/माह

2004

14543

J. 7850587 7-7-2008

पैकेजबंद पेयजल (पैकेजखंद प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा)

बीएलएसएस फूड्स प्रा. लि. प्लॉट नं. 88 . बी.यू. भंडारी इंडस्ट्रियल इस्टेट , एट अनसवाडी, तालुका- शिरूर जिला पुणे -412208 , महाराष्ट्र

2004

14543

11-7-2008

7827491

पैकेजबंद पेयजल (पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा )

अमोल पैकेज्ड ड्रिंकिग वाटर गट संख्या 50 , पुणे-सोला रोड केडगांव , तालुका दौंड जिला पुणे -412203 , महाराष्ट्र

1999 3.

1-8-2008

7859912

1417

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं, आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता और चिन्हांकन

कोठारी डायमंड्स एंड ज्वैल्स 689 , सरस्वती विलास बिल्डिंग , केजल फर्निशिंग के सामने , कजरी साड़ी सेंटर के पास , कुंठे चौक , लक्ष्मी रोड, जिला पुणे-411030 , महाराष्ट्र

2003

12933 01

5-8-2008

7860893

सोलर फ्लेट प्लेट कलेक्टर भाग- । अपेक्षाएं

निल्सन । , एनर्जी सॉल्यूशंस सं. नं. 253/3, तिरुपाला इंडस्ट्रियल इस्टेट हिंजवडी, जिला पुणे- 411057, महाराष्ट्र

1999 5.

7-8-2008

7861592

1417

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं, आभूषण/शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता और चिन्हांकन

देवी ज्वैलर्स 103, भवानी पैठ, मोती चौक, जिला-सत्तारा -415002, महाराष्ट्र

14255

1995 30-7-2008

6. 7861693

एरियल केबलों के गुच्छे कार्यकारिता वोल्टता तक और 1100 वो. सहित के लिए

रविन केबल्स लिमिटेड गट संख्या 227/230 आलंदी मार्केट , मेन रोड, गांव मारकल , तालुका खेड जिला पुणे-412105 , महाराष्ट्र

1417

1999 13-8-2008

7. 7863697

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं, आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता और चिन्हांकन

रत्नात्रय ज्वैलर्स, दुकान नं. 1 , सिटी प्राइड, सं.नं. /2612/ 1 ए, कुरकुंभ रोड, दौंड, जिला पुणे-413801 , महाराष्ट्र 5704

THE GAZETI : OF INDIA OCTOBER 18 , 2008 ASVINA 26, 19310

PARI SC.300 ] 2

13 × 2008

7863596

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुः आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धन

और चिन्हांकन

चिमनलाल भाबृटमन एंड कंपनी 399 , रविवार पेठ . सोन्या मारुति चौक, जिल्ला 411002 महाराष्ट्र

9. 78516007 2008

पैकेजबंद पेयजल

20004

( पॅकेजबंद प्राकृतिक मिन्यन जल के अलावा )

श्री सिद्धगमेश्वर ट्रेडयं 131 / ए! बो , आशाराम पा आश्रम के पास अक्कलकोट रोड , जिन्ना सोलापुर 413 महराष्ट्र ।

4 ਸੰਧਸਵੀ 13 : [ ] }

भत्र उप महानिदेशक (मुहर।

New Delhi , the 13th October . 2008

8.0.2895. Je pursuance of sith - regulator ( 5 ) of Regulation 4 of the Bureaust Jacian : Standards ( Certification ) Regulations 1988 , of the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies the grant of licences part: athars of which are given in the following Schedule

SCHEDULE

Cirt

Name and Address of the

Section

Title of the Standard

IS No. Par SI . No.

Licence No.

Pariy

り 1. 7850587 7-7-2018

14543

Packaged Drinking Water (Other than Packaged Natural Mineral Watery

VISS Foods Pt 1td. Plot No. 88 13.C. Bhandari Imall listus At Sanaswadi Taluka Shirur District Punς412208

2. 7827491 11-7-2008

14543

그차

Packaged Drinking Water (Other than Packaged NaturalMineral Water )

AmolPackaged Drinking Water Gat Nu . 50 Thing - Solapur Road Kedgoan Taluka Dans hstrict Pune-4122006

3. 7859912 1-8-2008

117

Gold and Gold Alloys . Jewellery /Anelacls- Fineness and Marking

KothariDiamonds & Jewels 689. Saraswat Vilas Itlig Opp Kejal Furnishin Near Kajree Saree Centre Kunte Chowk, Last Road. District Pune 4114030

4. 780893 5-8-2008

Sohr That Plate Collect Part I Requirements

Nilsun - 11 : nergy Soleluns S.No 2533 [ urumala ted! Estate Hyawadi District Pune-4 | 105 ?

5. 7861592 7-8-2008

1417

CGoldand GoldAlloys , Tewellery Artelacts Fineness and Marking

Devi Jewellers 103. Bhawani Petin Mote Chowk DistrictSata 415012

6 7861693 30-7-2008

Aerial Bunched Cables For Working Voltages upto and includang 1100

Ravin Cables [ J. Gal No. 227 231 Alundi Markal M Road Markal Village Taluka Ki District Pune 125 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

7. 7863697 13-8-2008 Ratnatray Jewellers Shop No. 1 , City Pride S. No./2612/1A Kurkumbh Road, Daund District Pune41380 ] 8. 7863596 13-8-2008 Chimanlal Bhabutmal & Company 399, Raviwar Peth Sonya Maruti Chowk District Pune 411002 9. 7851690 8-7-2008 Shri Siddharameshwar Traders 131 / A/ 1B , Near Asarambapu Ashram Akkalkot Road District Solapur 413006

5705

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/आश्विन 26 , 1930

1417

1999 Gold and Gold Alloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

1417

1999 Gold andGold Alloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

14543

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

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

कोयला मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 13 अक्तूबर, 2008

का.आ. 2896.--- केन्द्रीय सरकार को प्रतीत होता है , कि इससे उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में उल्लिखित भूमि में कोयला अभिप्राप्त किए जाने की संभावना है ;

अतः अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) की धारा 4 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , उस भूमि में कोयले का पूर्वेक्षण करने के अपने आशय की सूचना देती है;

इस अधिसूचना के अंतर्गत आने वाले रेखांक सं. सी-1 ( ई ) III/ जेजेएनआर/763-0708 , तारीख 18 जुलाई , 2008 का निरीक्षण वेस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्‌स लिमिटेड ( राजस्व विभाग ) , कोल ईस्टेट , सिविल लाईन्स, नागपुर 440001 ( महाराष्ट्र ) के कार्यालय में या मुख्य महाप्रबंधक ( समुपयोजन प्रभाग ) , केन्द्रीय खान योजना और डिजाईन संस्थान , गोंडवाना प्लेस, काँके रोड़ , राँची ( झारखंड ) के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक , । , काऊंसिल हाऊस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता के कार्यालय में या जिला कलेक्टर, यवतमाल ( महाराष्ट्र ) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकेंगा;

इस अधिसूचना के अंतर्गत आने वाली भूमि में हितबद्ध सभी व्यक्ति उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 13 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) में निर्दिष्ट सभी नक्शों, चार्टी और अन्य दस्तावेजों को इस अधिसूचना के राजयत्र के प्रकाशन की तारीख से नब्बे दिनों के भीतर, विशेष ड्यूटी अधिकारी ( एल/आर ) , वेस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड ( राजस्व विभाग ) , कोल ईस्टेट, सिविल लाईन्स, नागपुर 440001 ( महाराष्ट्र ) को भेजेंगे । [ रेखांक सं. सी-1 ( ई ) 111/जेजेएनआर/ 763-0708 तारीख 18 जुलाई, 2008 ]

तहसील ग्राम का नाम

कप संख्या

पटवारी सर्किलसंख्या

बनी 1 .

ब्राह्मणी

2. कोना

वनी

वनी 3. कोलेरा

अनुसूची

कोलार-पिंपरी एक्सटेंशन ओपनकास्ट ब्लॉक बनी नार्थ एरिया जिला यवतमाल ( महाराष्ट्र)

"भाग - क"

जिला

टिप्पणी क्षेत्र हैक्टर में क्षेत्र एकड़ में

यवतमाल

298.00

736.39

भाग यवतमाल

125.00

308.89

भाग 130.00

यवतमाल

भाग

321.24

कुल क्षेत्र:- 553.00 हेक्टर ( लगभग )

था

1366.52 एकड़ ( लगभग ) 5706

LE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18 , 2008 ASVINA 26, 1930

तहसील

पटवारी

[PARISH.3 (

"भाग- ख

जिला

क्षेत्र हैक्टर में

क्रम ग्राम का नाम

सर्किल संख्यः संख्या

गोवारी

1 .

तहमी

क्षेत्र एकमें

भाग 3.36

क्षेत्र 3.34 हेक्टर ( लगभग )

ग्रा

8.30 एकड़ ( लगभग भाग - ग'

टिप्पणी 'जन्नः

क्षेत्र में

क्षेत्र हैक्टर में

ग्राम का नाम

क्रम संख्या

गोवारी

परवान

भाग 14.50

14.50 हेक्टर ( लगभग )

कनक्षत्र

35.83 एकड़ लगभग । भाग -घ"

टिप्पणी क्षेत्र हेक्टर में

ग्राम का नम

क्रम संख्या

1 . आगासी

2. गोवारी

ત્યછે पिंपरी

कुल क्षेत्र भाग " क "

553,00

या 136.52 !

मीया वर्णन :

भाग "क " 14

क-ख :

क्षेत्र में

५ ग

197. (

भाग 41.77

3,00

Ram

124.77 हेक्टर ( लगभग )

कुलर :

105.3.2 एकड़ ( लगभग

रान्दि " क " ग्राम कराको सांम्मलित ग्राम सीमा से आर और ब्राह्मभर बिन्दु " ५५ मिन आर ग्राम कोना में होर्न हुइ ख-ग

न्या. सामना तथा गाम सीमा से होती हुई बिन्दु पर मिल है ।

प्राथ महार्णमहथा कालरा की सम्र्मािन्दत प्राम भन्दि " ड " पर मिलनी है ।

ग्राम संगम फलंग को ग्राम मीमा के बिन्दू मिल्लती है।

ड - च - छ :

छक:

भाग "ख "

ਯ ਯ ਯ ਟ :

रा. ग्राम श्रध्धणी में नोकरी जारीएक बिन्दु " क " पर मिलने

* ग्राः। गंयागे के बिन्तीहै और ग्राम गोवारी से विन्दुतान से होकर गुजरती है और वर्गभक विन्द " है। भाग "ग"

गोगरी की ग्राम सीमा तथा वध के किनारे की सीमा से होती हुई [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

5707

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26 , 1930

भाग ' घ"

ण-त :

रेखा, बिन्दु " ण " से आरंभ होती है और ग्राम गोवारी से होकर गुजरती है और ग्राम गोवारी तथा ग्राम आगास्सी की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा पर चिन्दु " त " पर मिलती है ।

त-थ :

रेखा , ग्राम आगासी से होकर गुजरती है , और ग्राम आगासी तथा ग्राम पिंपरी की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा पर बिन्दु " थ" पर मिलती है । थ-द- ध :

रेखा , ग्राम आगासी तथा ग्राम पिंपरी की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा तथा वर्धा नदी के किनारे की सीमा के साथ जाती हुई ग्राम आगाली तथा ग्राम गोवारी की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा पर बिन्दु " ध " पर मिलती है ।

ध - ण : रेखा , प्राम गोवारी से होकर वर्धा नदी के किनारे की सीमा से गुजरती हुई आरंभिक बिन्दु " ण " पर मिलती है । [ सं. 43015/15/2008. पी. आर. आई. डब्ल्यू.- ] ] एम. शहाबुद्दीन , अवर सनिव

MINISTRY OF COAL

New Delhi , the 13th October, 2008

S.O. 2896. Whereas it appears to the Central Government that coal is likely to be obtained from the lands in the locality mentioned in the Schedule hereto annexed;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act . 1957 (20 of 1957 ) , the Central Government hereby gives notice of its intemion to prospect for coal therein;

The plan bearing number C - 1 ( E ) [11 /JJNR.763-0708 dated the 18th July, 2008 ofthe area covered by this notification can be inspected in the office of the Western Coalfields Limited (Revenue Department ), Coal Estate, Civil Lines , Nagpur- 440001 ( Maharashtra ) or at the office of the Chief General Manager ( Exploration Division ) , Central Mine Planning and Design Institute , Goridwana Place, Kanke Road, Ranchi or at the office of the Coal Controller, 1. Council House Street, Kolkata or at the office of the District Collector , Yavatınal ( Maharashtra) .

All persons interested in the lands covered by this notification shall deliver all maps , charts and other documents referred to in sub -section (7 ) of Section 13 ofthe said Act to the Officer on Special Duty ( L/R), Western Coalfields [ .imited. Revenue Department, Coal Estate, Civil Lines, Nagpur - 440 001 ( Maharashtra) within ninety days from the date of publication ofthis notification in the Official Gazette .

SCHEDULE

KOLAR PIMPRI EXTENSION OPEN CAST BLOCK

WANI NORTH AREA

DISTRICT YAVATMAL ( MAHARASHTRA)

(Plan bearing number C- 1 (E ) III/ JJNR/ 763-0708 dated the 18th July, 2008 )

"PART-A"

Tahsil S1 . No.

Name of village

Patwari circle number

1. Brahmani

Wani 2. Копа

Wani

3. Kolera

Wani

"PAR-B"

Tahsil

District

Sl . Name of No. village

Patwari circle number

1. Gowari

Wani

District

Remarks

Area in Acres

Area in Hectares

Yavatmal

298.00

736.39

Part

Yavahnal

125.00

308.89

Part

Yavatınal

130.00

Part

321.24

Tutal Area: 553.00 hectares ( approximately) Or1366.52 acres ( approximately )

Remarks

Area in Acres

Area in Hectares

3.36

Yavatmal

8.30

Part Total Area:3.36 hectares ( approximately

Or 8.30 acres (approximately) THE GAZETTE OF INDIA . O.TOBER 18. 2008 /ASVINA 26 , 19.510

5708

"PART-C

District

Tahsil

Patwari

SI . Name o

village

No.

circle number

Wani

Yavatmal

Gowari

"PART-D"

Tahsil

District SI . No.

Name of village

Patwar cirele number

Wani

Vavatural

1 Agashi

Yavatmal

Wani 2 Gowari

Yavatmal

Want 3 Pirtipri

Total Area of Turt A Part B - Part 1 ) 553.003 36 14.50 + 124.77 695.6.3 Hectares tapproximately)

OR 1366.52830135.83-308.32-1718.97 Ares ( approximately)

Boundary description :

PART 'A' :

A-B

Remarks

Area in Acres

Area t Hectares

3583

Part 14.50

Total Arca : 14.50 hectares tapproximately )

or35.83 acres ( approximately )

Remarks

Actes

Area in Hectares

197.00

80.00

41.??

3.00

Parl total area: 124.77 hectares tapproximately? Or308.32 acres ( approximately) Line starts from point A' on common village boundary of villages Kona Bralumni and passes through village Kona and meets on coinman village boundary of villages kota and Brahmni at Point'B ' .

B-C :

1.ine passes along with the commnon village boundary of villages Kenma snad Brahmni and meets at Point C-D- E:

Lime passes through village Bralmen and meets on commnon village boundary of vilages Brahmusi and Kolera at Point E.

F-F-G:

Line passes through village Kokra and meets on village boundary of village Kolera at Point"C ".

G-A:

Ime passes through village Bushma and meets at starting Point A

PART ' B ' :

H-I -J -K .

1.ine starts from Point 10 sillage Gowati and passes through point and meets at starting Point H.

PART-'C':

L-M -N .

1.me starts from Point'l along the village boundary of village Gossari and Bank of Wardha River and meels ist starting Pont ."

PART - D :

O-P:

Lime starts from Point Oual passes through village Gowari and nicdor common sillage boundary of villages Gowari and Agast at Poika "P " .

P -Q:

Line passes through village Agus and meets on common village bened my at villages Agasi zmusi l'umpri Q-R - S

Line passes along the counion yolage boundary of villages Agasani Patapri and along the Buns of Wardha River and meets от дети illage boundary of villages and Cimart at Pont S S-O .

I ine passes through village Gostan along the Bank of Wardha Rasa and sheets at starting Point O 3015 15 2008 - PRIM - 11 NM. NHATLABUDIEN. UnderS 5709

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

[ भाग - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 15 अक्टूबर, 2008

का. आ. 2897.- केन्द्रीय सरकारने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाईपलाईन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधिन जारी, भारत के राजपत्र , तारीख 07.06.2008 में प्रकाशित भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय कीअधिसूचन का. आ. संख्या 1289 तारीख 30.5.2008 व्दाराउस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूचि तालुका कलील, जिला- पंचमहाल राज्य गुजरात में कोयली से रतलाम तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादोंके परिवहन के लिए इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड , व्दारा पाईपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी । और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां ता. 16.8.2008 से जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी । और सक्षम प्राधिकारीने उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधिन केन्द्रीय सरकार को रिपोर्ट दे दी है

और केन्द्रीय सरकार का उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात यह समाधान हो गया है कि इस अधिसूचन से संलग्न अनुसूचिमें विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार अर्जित किया जाए । अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि पाईपलाइन बिछाने के लिए इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूचिमें विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाता है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह निर्देश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने के बजाय इंडियन ऑयल कोर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में सभी विल्लीगमों से मुक्त होकर प्रकाशक की इस तारीख सेनिहित होगा ।

अनुसूचि

जिला-पंचमहाल

राज्य: गुजरात तालुका (कालोल)

क्षेत्रफल गाँव का नाम सर्वेक्षण सं . खण्ड सं . उपखण्डसं.

वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टर

एयर 2

40 392

जेतपुर (जमनापुर)

392

88 393

392

410+411

[फा. सं. आर-25011 / 7/2005- ओ.आर.-1 ]

एस. के. चिटकारा , अवर सचिव 3853 G1 /08-3 5710

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18, 2008 /ASVINA 26 ,

PART 11-SC. 3 ( ii)

Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas .

New Delhi , the 15th Octobber, 2008

S. O. 2897.- Whereas , by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas S.O. number 1289 dated 30.05.2008 issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines ( .Nequisition of Right of Riser in land ) Act, 1962 ( 50 of 1962 ) , the Central Government declared its intentionto acquired the right of user in the land in Tehsil : Kalol , District : Panchmahal in the state ofGujarat for the transportation of Petroleum Product from Koyali to Ratlam in the state of Gujarat a Pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited.

And whereard , the copies of the said Gazette Notification were made available to the public on the 16.08.2008 .

And whereas, the Competent Authority in pursuance of sub - section ( 1 ) of section 6 of the said Act submitted his report to the Central Government .

And whereas the Gentral Government after considering the said report is satisfied that the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification should be acquired.

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

And further . in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1) of section 6 of the said Act . the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said lands shall instead of vesting in the Central Government vest on the date of publication of this declaration in the Indian Oil Corporation Limited free from the encimobrances .

SCHEDULE

Taluka : Karot

Dist: Panchmahal

State: Gujarat Name of Village

Survey / Block No.

Sub.Division

Hectare

Areas area

Centiare 1

Jettw janwar

IF No. R-25011 /7/2005-0.R. - 1 S. K. CHITKARA, Under Secy .

[ भाग 1]- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/ आश्विन 26, 1930

5711

नई दिल्ली, 16 अक्तूबर, 2008

का. आ. 2898. - केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 305 तारीख 12 फरवरी , 2008, जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 16 फरवरी , 2008 व संशोधित गजट अधिसूचना संख्या का . आ . 2065 (अ ) दिनांक 12 अगस्त, 2008 जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 19 अगस्त, 2008 में प्रकाशित की गई थी. द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मध्यप्रदेश राज्य में बीना संस्थापन से राजस्थान राज्य में कोटा तक पेट्रोलियम उत्त्पादों 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 19 मई 2008 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी;

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

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

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने की बजाए सभी विल्लंगम्मों से मुक्त, भारत पेट्रोलियम कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । 5712

[ PART II-Sac . 3 ( i ) | THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18, 2008/ ASVINA 26, 1930

अनुसूची

तहसील : अशोक नगर

जिला : अशोक नगर

राज्य: मध्य प्रदेश क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में 1

122

0.0260 1 खजूरिया खुर्द

123

0.2745

148

0.2470

149

0.1560

152

0.2100

150

0.0845

161

0.1300

162

0.1430

165

0.1170

166

0.1300

167

0.0050

168

0.0975

169

0.1170

173/1

0.0845

173/2

0.0260

173/3

0.0520

133/2

0.0800 2 बीरपुर

114

0.0100

113/1

0.3200

113/2

0.0020

113/3

0.2275

112

0.0020

103

0.0130

102

0.1950

101/2

0.1625

101/1

0.2275 3

सावन

0.1560

0.1365

0.0450

0.2860

0.5330

391

0.0200

392

0.2340 [भाग- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

5713

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/ आश्विन 26, 1930

क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

389 सावन

(जारी.....)

388

387

386

398

400

401

402

403

414

415

417

419

420

422

423

424

452

450

431

439

445

442

440

441

7/1 4 सागर

85/1

86/1 /क

86/7

88/1

88/2

103 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.1755

0.1000

0.0650

0.0020

0.1885

0.0585

0.0400

0.3900

0.1560

0.0200

0.0975

0.0200

0.0520

0.0200

0.0950

0.0100

0.0300

0.2665

0.0920

0.0100

0.4745

0.0100

0.3250

0.0520

0.1820

0.0325

0.0910

0.0585

0.0260

0.1820

0.0230

0.0260

0.0650

0.0500 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 18 , 2008/ASVINA 26, 1930

5714

सर्वे नंबर

ग्राम का नाम

क्र.सं.

105 सागर

(जारी....)

104

106

110/ 1/क

110/ 1 ख

110/2

109

121

124

126

128

127

208/1

133

207

160

161

162

179

184

183

182

181

187

191

300 5 सेमरा

279

299

280

281

283

285

286

284

268 [PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.0520

0.0650

0.0845

0.0460

0.1040

0.1625

0.0200

0.2405

0.0050

0.1755

0.0100

0.0730

0.0715

0.1365

0.3575

0.0130

0.2650

0.0100

0.1365

0.0020

0.0250

0.0555

0.0715

0.2600

0.1120

0.0260

0.0030

0.0100

0.1950

0 1950

0.0130

0.0195

0.0050

0.3400

0.1560 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ü ) ]

5715

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

3 सेमरा

267

(जारी...)

266

288

246

247

245

631 6 तुमेन

632

636

586

588

587

562

528

457

452

454

453

455

456

439

438 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में.

0.1100

0.0850

0.0650

0.0450

0.0130

0.0065

0.0200

0.1625

0.0050

0.0200

0.1750

0.2860

0.3055

0.0800

0.2730

0.0230

0.0910

0.0390

0.3150

0.1170

0.1235

0.0030

0.0260

0.0050

0.0950

0.0050

0.0520

0.1000

0.0195

0.0150

0.1500

0.0500

0.1430

0.0040

0.0130

0.0260 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 18 , 2008 /ASVINA 26, 1930

5716

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर क्र.सं.

435

(जारी....)

तुमेन

436

433

432

431

426

425

350

327

352

353

318

325

326

324

323

322

309

308

307

310

306

303

302

301

295/1692

178

175

180

174

179

173

1 [PART 11-SEC . 3 (ii ) ] क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.1105

0.1300

0.1040

0.1950

0.1300

0.2600

0.0225

0.0195

0.0325

0,1500

0.0200

0.0130

0.0260

0.0520

0.1235

0.0030

0.0910

0.0390

0.0600

0.0065

0.1100

0.0160

0.1235

0.0260

0.0530

0.0325

0.1040

0.0325

0.0650

0.1300

0.1900

0.1040

0.0520 5717

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

[भाग- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

सर्वे नंबर क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

630

(जारी....)

तुमेन

627

629.

628

620

613

619

612

597

589

590

591

547

560

548

549

545

551

544

534

533

532.

526

524

530

529

527

353 7 आमखेड़ा तूमेन

354

359

358

350

}

350/2

348

347 3853 GI084

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.3400

0.0040

0.0350

0.2200

0.0300

0.1150

0.1820

0,3000

0.0325

0.0250

0.3380

0.1300

0.0350

0.1105

0.1300

0.1625

0.0020

0.0360

0.1105

0.0780

0.0800

0.1755

0.1000

0.0260

0.1300

0.0130

0.0260

0.0455

0.1560

0.3315

0.1170

0.0050 5718

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA . ( XTOBER 18, 2008/ ASVINA 26, 19.300

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर क्र.स.

321 आमखेड़ा तूमेन (जारी....)

320

315

316

317

261

262

265

273

266/1

271

3/2घ/2

1/ 1 छ

1/2

440

442

439

438

445

214

729

230

227

226

238

220

225

205 (PART 11 -- Si.30 ) क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.0845

0.0650

0.1625

0.0020

0.1625

0.1950

0.3120

0.0195

0.0715

0 2340

0.0325

0.6000

0.3150

0.5720

0.0150

0.1755

0.0150

0.0910

0.6000

0.0390

0.1300

0.0450

0.1300

00845

00520

0 1820

0.0020

01200

0 1950

2600

0.0020

0.2080 {भाग 11- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

5719

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

204

(जारी....)

जलालपुर

203

199

200

192

191

189

188

195

162

255 9 डंगाही

257/1 क

254

252/1

252/2

251

259

204

205

203

207

208

201

212

214

215

216

39 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.2470

0.1820

0.0250

0.3055

0.0050

0.1300

0.0750

0.0050

0.1040

0.3000

0.2525

0.1500

0.0100

0.1000

0.1500

0.3445

0.0455

0.0050

0.1625

0.1690

0.1625

0.0455

0.0820

0.1820

0.0065

0.0975

0.0260

0.1625

0.1430

0.1495

0.0325

0.1430

0.0160 5720

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18 , 2008 /ASVINA 26, 1930

सर्वे नंबर क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

3 डंगाही

(जारी..)

41/2

1 10 भैसरवास

733

731

730

732/1

639

637

633

635

636

615

614/3

614/2

614

614/1

613

588

591

592

557

556

555

554

495

496/2

496/1 [PART II- SEK:, 3 (ii ) ] क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.0650

0.2300

0.0975

0.0195

0.0100

0.1000

0.3600

0.3445

0.3800

0.0260

0.0050

0.0350

0.0150

0.0975

0.0050

0.1625

0.0100

0.0130

0.0150

0.0455

0.0650

0.0050

0.0200

0.0325

0.0260

0.0250

0.0455

0.2045

0.1690

0.0400

0.0040

0.1365

0.1625 [भाग- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

5721

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर 1

3 भैसरवास

498

(जारी...)

497

499/3

499/2

501

476

502

475/1

475/2

475/3

474

473/2

473/1

503

505

504

76/2

215 11 बासरा

214

192

193

196

197

198

199

133/1

133/2

133/3

135

132

131/2

124

125 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.0065

0.0800

0.0455

0.1200

0.0150

0.1040

0.0300

0.0910

0.0600

0.0100

0.1430

0.0200

0.0390

0.3835

0.1400

0.0065

0.1625

0.2405

0.5200

0.5000

0.0050

0.0455

0.1365

0.0650

0.0050

0.3400

0.1000

0.3000

0.0050

0.3000

0.0325

0.0195 5722

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OСТОВЕК 18. 2008 / ASVINA 26, 1930

सर्वे नंबर

ग्राम का नाम

क्र.सं.

121 बासरा

(जारी....)

122/1

122/3

119

107/2

107/3

107/1

106

105

104

173 12 कुरवाय

117

117/2

116

576 13 ककरूआराय

574

569

308

310

307/3ख

340

302/1

304/3

304/2

304/1

281

264

263

249

251 P. 3 ( ii ) | क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.1040

0.2500

0.0150

0.0780

0.2000

0.1625

0.1040

0.0130

0.3250

0.0150

0.2275

0.5950

0.0900

0.4290

0.0130

0.2015

0.0910

0.0065

0.3510

0.1170

0.0090

0.0200

0.0100

0.0050

0.0020

0.0150

0.2600

0.1000

0 0520

0.0195

0.0325

0.0130

0.0325

0.1500 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

5723

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

247 केकरूआराय (जारी...)

252

254

256

257

258

259

244

240

243

238

237

153/582

236

147

146

145 14 बहेरी पछार

12/1

12/2

14/1

14/2

15/1 क

15/1ख

}

15/2

85 15 मथनेर

950

939

944

943

940

896

899 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.1820

0.0195

0.0260

0.0130

0.1300

0.0225

0.0425

0.0750

0.2405

0.0050

0.2015

0.1300

0.0325

0.0065

0.0520

0.1430

0.0020

0.0455

0.0390

0.1560

0.2275

0.1755

0.1430

0.2860

0.1625

0.0130

0.1495

0.0050

0.1365

0.1690

0.0100

0.2000

0.3640

0.0800 THI: GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18, 2008 / ASVINA 26 , 19.30

5724

सर्वे नंबर

ग्राम का नाम

क्र.सं.

897 मथनेर

(जारी...)

905

906

933

898

907

911

928

912

502

500

501

499

508

487

488

483

261 16 मोहरी ज्ञान

262

266

265

268

284 PART II- SEC . 3 (ii ) ] क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.0130

0.0800

0.0325

0.0020

0.1100

0.0520

0.1300

0.0050

0.0100

0.1820

0.2000

0.0600

0.1820

0.0100

0.2275

0.2340

0.2535

0.0100

0.1820

0.0200

0.2275

0.2200

0.3500

0.1430

0.1000

0.5750

0.2730

0.0050

0.1560

0.1000

0.3250

0.0250

0.0260

0.1400 5725

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ⅱ) ]

सर्वे नंबर ग्राम का नाम

क्र.सं.

287 मोहरी ज्ञान

(जारी...)

286

288

242 17 दमोह

243

244/17 244/2

245/2

248

279

280

281

282

291

19 18 मढ़ी कानूनगो

20/1

20/2

20/3

24/2

42/5

42/7

110/2 3953 G1/085

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.2150

0.0300

0.1820

0.1625

0.1400

0.1560

0.0065

0.0030

0.0390

0,2990

0.0130

0.2990

0.0195

0.1300

0.0455

0,0845

0.2200

0.0040

0.0325

0.1430

0,1625

0,1700

0.0065

0.1625

0.0780

0,0520

0.0520

0.0650

0.0020

0.0260

0.3120

0.0130

0.1235 5726

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18, 2008 /ASVINA 26, 19.30

क्र.स.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर 1

111 मढ़ीकानूनगो (जारी.....)

381

382/2

405

404/2

404/3/3

404/3/2

404मि.

403

527

528

529

564

567

566

568

578

579

581

627

626

634

630

633

635

651

637

650

638

639

647

644

642

758 [PART 11-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.1800

0.0325

0.3705

0.3185

0.0845

0.0325

0.1500

0.2275

0.1300

0.0220

0.0195

0.1500

0.2800

0 0325

0.0020

0.1430

0.2145

0.0520

0.0845

0.2600

0.2080

0.0040

0.2925

0.2860

0 0520

0.0700

0.1300

0.1560

0 1430

00100

0.1365

0.2925

0.0260 5727

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26 , 1930

[भाग -खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

सर्वे नंबर

ग्राम का नाम

क्र.सं.

3 1

1 19 विजय पुरा

54/2

54/1

67/1

95/1

101

102/1

96/1

155

201

203/2

203/3

203/4

198 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.3050

0.2308

0.2470

0.0130

0.0900

0.0200

0.0130

0.0715

0.0350

0.0910

0.0780

0.0130

0.1700

0.0520

0.1650

0.0910

0.0200

0.4700

0.1300

0.2000

0000

0040

3.1300

0.4095

0065

0.0845

0.2060

0.1135

0.0100

0.1200

0.0260 5728

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA . OCTOBER 18 , 2008/ ASVINA 26 , 1930

क्र.स.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर 1

3 20 कैथाई

78/2

78/3

85/353

130

84/352

132

131

133

127

126

134

135

136

137

121

120

141

143

146

155

147 PART 11 - Set 3 ( ii ) क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.1040

0.0100

0.1430

0.1600

0.0450

0.1200

0.2665

0.0040

0.0975

0.0150

0.0040

0.0520

0.0200

0.0150

0.2665

0.0500

0.0600

0.1500

0.2000

0.0805

0.0300

0.3510

0.0250

0.3500

0.1560

0.0400

0.0950 5729

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन26, 1930

[ भाग [ 1- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

सर्वे नंबर

ग्राम का नाम

क्र.सं.

148 कैथाई

(जारी...)

149

150

154

151

148मि.

106

180/2

181

559 21 कुन्दौरा

558

557

560

561

562

563

586

587 22 केलारस

41/1

41/2

51/1

30 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.0300

0.0325

0.1105

0.0300

0.2000

0.1040

0.0390

0.0050

0.3510

0.0230

0.0325

0.1300

0.0200

0.0040

0.0150

0.2438

0.2600

0.0715

0.0650

0.0100

0.0975

0.1105

0.1430

0.1040

0.1170

0.0040

0.1885

0.1560

0.0040 730

THE GAZETTE OF INDIATOBER 18 , 2008/ ASVINA 26. !!

[PART II - SLC 3 ( ii ) ] क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में 1

कैलारस

0.0850 (जारी...)

28/1

0.3600

0.0020

28/2

0.0050

0.0400

0.3900

0.1000

| 31015/8 /2008-ओ. आर ॥ ]

ए . गोस्वामी. अवर सचिव New De 16th October , 2008

: . 5.0 2899. Whereas by a noti of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleumia Natural Gas Sto dated the 12th Febuary , 2008 , issued under sub - section of section 3 of the Pennom and Minerals Pipelines ( Vequisition of Right of User in Act. 1962 ( 50 of Dereinafter referred to as the said Act ) published in the Gazell India dated the Iry . 2008. and amend - ment published in gazette dated 1904 2008 Vide S.O. No 2005 intemion acgatire the right of us notificace or ake purpose of laying through Bica kota Pipeline Project : Kota in ti... State of Rajasthan bhs Bharatroleum Corporation Limited : med 12-08-08 , the Central CGovernment declared its brul , specified in the Schedule appended to that sipeline for transportation et petroleum products Bira terminal in the State of Madhya Pradesh to And wheels : copies of the sand notification were made available to the public on the

And was se competent authorits I submitted report to the Centraj Cos under sub - section ( 1 ) of section 6 of the said Act .

And wines Central Governmem that the sad kend is reqmred for kayir , therein er considering the said report and on being satisfied pipeline , has decided to acquire the right of user Now. Thaches. exercise of the poise nferredby sub- section tool section 6 of the said Act , the suta! Goyernment hereby de lates that the right of user in the said land. specified in the Serai appended to this notition , is vereby acquired for laying the pipeline :

And fürther , in exercise of the power.cnlerred by sub - section ( 4) of section 6 of the said Act , the coal Government hereby is that the right of user in the said land for laying the pipeline Mall , mstead of vesting ... the Central Government ., vest on the date of the publicatter of this declaration . in Brer Petroleum Corporation limited . free from all 5731 [ भाग - खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/ आश्विन 26, 1930

SCHEDULE

TEHSIL : ASHOK NAGAR DISTRICT : ASHOK NAGAR STATE : MADHYA PRADESH

AREA IN HECTARE

SURVEY NO .

NAME OF VILLAGE

S.No.

4 2

0.0260

122

KHAJURIA KHURD

123

0.2745

0.2470

148

149

0.1560

0.2100

152

150

0.0845

0.1300

161

162

0.1430

165

0.1170

0.1300

166

167

0.0050

168

0.0975

169

0.1170

173/1

0.0845

173/2

0.0260

0.0520

173/3

133/2

0.0800 2 BIRPUR

114

0.0100

0.3200

113/1

113/2

0.0020

0.2275

113/3

0.0020

112

0.0130

103

102

0.1950

101/2

0.1625

0.2275

101/1

0.1560

3 SAVAN

0.1365

0.0450

0.2860

0.5330

0.0200

391

0.2340

392 5732

TBE GAZETTE OF INDIA OBER 18 , 2008 /ASVINA 26, 1930

P11-S3 ( ii ) ] S.No.

AREA IN HECTARE

SURVEY NO .

NAME OF VILLAGE

4 2

SAVAN

389

0.1755 Contd ....

0 1000

388

387

0.0650

0.0020

386

0.1885

398

0.0585

400

0.0400

401

402

0.3900

0.1560

403

0.0200

414

415

0.0975

417

0.0200

419

0.0520

0.0200

420

422

0.0950

0.0100

423

0.0300

424

0.2665

452

0.0920

450

0.0100

431

0.4745

439

0.0100

445

0.3250

442

0.0520

440

0.1820

441

0.0325

7/1

SAGAR

0.0910

0.0585

85/1

0.0260

86/1 /क

0.1820

86/7

0.0230

0.0260

88/1

0.0650

88/2

0.0500

103 5733 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

[भाग- खण्ड 3(i) )

AREA IN HECTARE NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO.

S.No.

4 2

105

0.0520 Contd.....

SAGAR

0.0650

104

0.0845

106

0.0460

110/1 /क

110/1 ख

0.1040

0.1625

110/2

0.0200

109

121

0.2405

0.0050

124

0.1755

126

0.0100

128

0.0730

127

0.0715

208/1

133

0.1365

207

0.3575

0.0130

160

0.2650

161

162

0.0100

0.1365

179

0.0020

184

0.0250

183

0.0555

182

0.0715

181

0.2600

187

0.1120

191

0.0260

300

5 SEMRA

0.0030

279

0.0100

299

0.1950

280

0.1950

281

0.0130

283

0.0195

285

0.0050

286

0.3400

284

0.1560

268

3853 GUOB 6 5734

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA OJOBER 18, 2008 / ASVINA 20.1

S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

3 SEMRA

Contd....

267

266

288

246

247

245

2 6 TUMEN

631

632

636

586

588

587

562

528

457

452

454

453

455

456

439 [ PAN- Sii ) ] AREA IN HECTARE

0.1100

0.0850

0.0650

0.0450

0.0130

0.0065

0.0200

0.1625

0.0050

0.0200

0.1750

0.2860

0.3055

0.0800

0.2730

0.0230

0.0910

0.0390

0.3150

0.1170

0.1235

0.0030

0.0260

0.0050

0.0950

0.0050

0.0520

0.1000

0.0195

0.0150

0.1500

0.0500

0.1430

0.0040

0.0130 [भाग II - खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/ आश्विन 26 , 1930

SURVEY NO .

S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

3 1

TUMEN

Contd....

438

435

436

433

432

431

426

425

350

327

352

353

318

325

326

324

323

322

309

308

307

310

306

303

302

301

295/1692

178

175

180

174

179

173

5735 AREA IN HECTARE

0.0260

0.1105

0.1300

0.1040

0.1950

0.1300

0.2600

0.0225

0.0195

0.0325

0.1500

0.0200

0.0130

0.0260

0.0520

0.1235

0.0030

0.0910

0.0390

0.0600

0.0065

0.1100

0.0160

0.1235

0.0200

0.05.30

0.0325

0,1040

00325

0.0650

0.1300

0.1900

0.1040

0.1040 5736

TIE . GAZETTE OF INDIA OCTOBER 18 , 2008/ASVINA 26, 1930 S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

TUMEN

Contd ....

630

627

629

628

620

613

619

612

597

589

590

591

547

560

548

549

545

551

544

534

533

532

526

524

530

529

527

353 7 AMKHEDA TUMEN

354

359

358

350

{

350/2

348

347 PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] AREA IN HECTARE

0.0520

0.3400

0.0040

0.0350

0.2200

0.0300

0.1150

0.1820

0.3000

0.0325

0.0250

0.3380

0.1300

0.0350

0.1105

0.1300

0.1625

0.0020

0.0360

0.1105

0.0780

0.0800

0.1755

0.1000

0.0260

0.1300

0.0130

0.0260

0.0455

0.1560

0.3315

0.1170

0.0050 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii ) ]

5737

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/ आश्विन 26, 1930

SURVEY NO .

S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

3 1

321 AMKHEDA TUMEN Contd ....

320

315

316

317

261

262

265

273

266/1

271

3/29/2

1/1छ

1/2

440 8 JALALPUR

442

439

438

445

214

229

230

227

226

238

220

225

205 AREA IN HECTARE

0.0845

0.0650

0.1625

0.0020

0.1625

0.1950

0.3120

0.0195

0.0715

0.2340

0.0325

0.6000

0.3150

0.5720

0.0150

0.1755

0.0150

0.0910

0.6000

0.0390

0.1300

0.0450

0.1300

0.0845

0.0520

0.1820

0.0020

0.1200

0.1950

0.2600

0.0020

0.2080 5738

FIR : GAZETTE OF INDIA OBER 18, 2008 ASVINA 26, 193 S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

3 JALALPUR

Contd....

204

203

199

200

192

191

189

188

195

162 9 DANGAHI

255

257/1 क

254

252/1

252/2

251

259

204

205

203

207

208

201

212

214

215

216

39 PS .

AREA IN HECTARE

0.2470

0.1820

0.0250

0 3055

0.0050

0.1300

0.0750

0.0050

0 1040

0.3000

0 2525

0.1500

0.0100

0.1000

0.1500

0 3445

0.0455

0.0050

0.1625

0.1690

0.1625

0.0455

0.0820

0.1820

0.0065

0.0975

0.0260

0.1625

0.1430

0.1495

0 0325

0.1430

0.0160 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26 , 1930

S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY , NO .

3 DANGAHI

Contd.....

41/2

1 10 BHAISARWAS

733

731

730

732/1

639

637

633

635

636

615

614/3

614/2

614

614/1

613

588

591

592

557

556

555

554

495

496/2

496/1

5739 AREA IN HECTARE

0.0650

0.2300

0.0975

0.0195

0.0100

0.1000

0.3600

0.3445

0.3800

0.0260

0.0050

0.0350

0.0150

0.0975

0.0050

0.1625

0.0100

0.0130

0.0150

0.0455

0.0650

0.0050

0.0200

0.0325

0.0260

0.0250

0.0455

0.2045

0.1690

0.0400

0.0040

0.1365

0.1625 5740

TUE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18 , 2008/ASVINA 26 , 1930

[PART II-SEC. (ii ) ]

AREA IN HECTARE

SURVEY NO .

NAME OF VILLAGE

S.No.

0.0065

498

BHAISARWAS

Contd .....

0.0800

497

0.0455

499/3

0.1200

499/2

501

0.0150

0.1040

476

502

0.0300

0.0910

475/1

0.0600

475/2

0.0100

475/3

474

0.1430

473/2

0.0200

0.0390

473/1

0.3835

503

0.1400

505

0.0065

504

0.1625

76/2

0.2405

215

11 BASRA

0.5200

214

0.5000

192

0.0050

193

0.0455

196

0.0455

197

0.1365

198

0.0650

199

0.0050

133/1

0.3400

133/2

0.1000

133/3

0.3000

135

0.0050

132

0.3000

131/2

0.0325

124

0.0195

125 5741 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्टूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

[ भाग - खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

AREA IN HECTARE

SURVEY NO.

NAME OF VILLAGE

S.No.

4 1

121

0.1040 BASRA

Contd....

0.2500

122/1

0.0150

122/3

0.0780

119

0.2000

107/2

0.1625

107/3

0.1040

107/1

106

0.0130

0.3250

105

0.0150

104

173

0.2275 12 KURVAY

117

0.5950

0.0900

117/2

0.4290

116

0.0130

0.2015

0.0910

0.0065

0.3510

0.1170

576

13 KAKRUARAY

0.0090

574

0.0200

569

0.0100

308

0.0050

310

0.0050

307/3ख

0.0020

340

0.0150

302/1

0.2600

304/3

0.1000

304/2

0.0520

304/1

0.0195

281

0.0325

264

0.0130

263

0.0325

249

0.1500

251

3853 G1 /08-7 5742

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA OCTOBER 18, 2008 / ASVINA 26, 195

S.No.

SURVEY NO .

NAME OF VILLAGE

AREA IN HECTARE 1

4 Contd.....

247

KAKRUARAY

0.1820

252

0.0195

0.0260

254

256

0.0130

257

0.1300

0.0225

258

259

0.0425

244

0.0750

0.2405

240

0.0050

243

0.2015

238

237

0.1300

0.0325

153/582

236

0.0065

147

0.0520

0.1430

146

0.0020

145

14 BAHERI PACHHAR

12/1

0.0455

12/2

0.0390

14/1

0.1560

14/2

0.2275

15/1 क

0.1755

}

15/ 1 ख

15/2

0.1430

0.2860

0.1625

0.0130

0.1495

950

15 MATHNER

0.0050

0.1365

939

944

0.1690

0.0100

943

940

0.2000

0.3640

0.0800

899 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

5743

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

SURVEY NO. NAME OF VILLAGE

S.No.

897

Contd....

MATHNER

905

906

898

933

907

911

928

912

502

500

501

499

508

487

488

483

261 16 MOHRI GYAN

262

266

265

268

284 AREA IN HECTARE

0.0130

0.0800

0.0325

0.1100

0.0020

0.0520

0.1300

0.0050

0.0100

0.1820

0.2000

0.0600

0.1820

0.0100

0.2275

0.2340

0.2535

0.0100

0.1820

0.0200

0.2275

0.2200

0.3500

0.1430

0.1000

0.5750

0.2730

0.0050

0.1560

0.1000

0.3250

0.02

0.026

0.140* 5744

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA OCTOBER 18, 2008/ ASVINA 26, 1930

PART II- SE 3 ( ii ) ] 1.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

AREA IN HECTARE 1

MOHRI GYAN

Contd .....

287

0.2150

286

0.0300

0.1820

288

17 DAMOH

242

0.1625

243

0.1625

0.1400

244/17

244/2

245/2

0.1560

248

0.0065

279

0.0030

280

0.0390

281

0.2990

282

0.0130

291

0.2990 18 MADHI KANUNGO

0.0195

20/1

0.1300

20/2

0.0455

20/3

0.0845

0.2200

24/2

0.0040

0.0325

0.1430

0.1625

0.1700

42/5

0.0065

42/7

0.1625

0.0780

0.0520

0.0650

0.0020

0.0260

0.3120 [ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

5745

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26 , 1930

S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

3 1

MADHI KANUNGO Contd...

110/2

111

381

382/2

405

404/2

404/3/3

404/3/2

404 M

403

527

528

529

564

567

566

568

578

579

581

627

626

634

630

633

635

651

637

650

638 AREA IN HECTARE

0.0130

0.1235

0.1800

0.0325

0.3705

0.3185

0.0845

0.0325

0.1500

0.2275

0.1300

0.0220

0.0195

0.1500

0.2800

0.0325

0.0020

0.1430

0.2145

0.0520

0.0845

0.2600

0.2080

0.0040

0.2925

0.2860

0.0520

0.0700

0.1300

0.1560 5746

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA TOBER 18 , 2008/ASVINA 26.1

PAKJ 11 St. 3 ( 1 )

SURVEY NO.

S.No.

AREA IN HECTARE NAME OF VILLAGE

4 MADHI KANUNGO

639

0.1430

Contrt...

0.0100

647

0.1365

644

642

0.2925

758

0.0260

0.3050 19 VIJAYPURA

0.2308

0.2470

0.0130

0.0900

0.0200

54/2

0.0130

54/1

0.0715

0.0350

0.0910

67/1

0.0780

0.0130

0 1700

0 0520

0.1650

0.0910

0.0200

0.4700

0.1300

0.2000

95/1

0.0900

101

0.0040

102/1

0.1300

96/1

0.4095

0.0065

0.0845

155 [ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

5747

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/ आश्विन 26, 1930

S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

3 VIJAYPURA Contd ....

201

203/2

203/3

203/4

198 20 KAITHAI

78/2

78/3

85/353

130

84/352

132

131

133

127

126

134

135

136

137

121

120

141

143 AREA IN HECTARE

0.2860

0.1135

0.0100

0.1200

0.0260

0.1040

0.0100

0.1430

0.1600

0.0450

0.1200

0.2665

0.0040

0.0975

0.0150

0.0040

0.0520

0.0200

0.0150.

0.2665

0.0600

0.1500

0.2000

0.0805

0.0300

0.3510

0.0250

0.3500

0.3500 5748

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA OCTOBER 18. 2008/ASVINA 26. 195

PR 11- S 3 (8 ) ] NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

AREA IN HECTARE S.No.

4 1

0.1560 KAITHAI

146

Contd.....

0.0400

155

147

0.0950

148

0.0300

0.0325

149

0.1105

150

154

0.0300

0.2000

151

0.1040

148

0.0390

106

0.0050

180/2

181

0.3510

0.0230

559

21 KUNDAURA

0.0325

558

0.1300

557

560

0.0200

561

0.0040

0.0150

562

0.2438

563

0.2600

586

0.0715

587

0.0650

22 KELARAS

0.0100

0.0975

0.1105

0.1430

41/1

0.1040

0.1170

41/2

0.0040

0.1885

51/1

0.1560

0.0040

30 5749 [भाग - खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

S.No.

SURVEY NO .

NAME OF VILLAGE

AREA IN HECTARE 2

4 KELARAS

Contd.....

0.0850

28/1

0.3600

28/2

0.0020

0.0050

0.0400

0.3900

0.1000

No. R-31015/8/2008-0.R - III A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 16 अक्तूबर, 2008

का.-आ. 2899.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 372 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 मध्यप्रदेश 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 27 जून, 2008 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी;

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

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

अत्तः 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 हैं ;

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

3853 G/08-8 5750

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18 , 2008 /ASVINA 26 、リ

PART I -SE . 3 ( ii ) ]

अनुसूची

राज्य : मध्य प्रदेश तहसील: गुना

जिला: गुना

क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

सर्वे नंबर

4 1

माहर

0.0390

0.2340

0.0910

0.0020

0.1463

0.0300

0.0585

81/1

0.1235

81/2

0.0455

80/1

0.0650

80/4

0.0845

80/3

0.0020

95/2

0.0500

95/1

0.1000

0.1600

0.0060

0.0040

0.0585

0.0220

0 1105

106

0.1105

107

0.0520

109

0.0195

110

0.1560

111

0.0800

116

0.0050

112

0.2300

114

0.0100 [भाग - खण्ड 3 ( ⅱ) ]

5751

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

सर्वे नंबर क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

113 माहर (जारी....)

122

416

417

414

413

407

408

406

404/2

405

402/1

593

596

597

599

592

714

713

712/1

711

718

708

703/2

703/1

702

701/1

701/2

700 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में 0.2100

0.0455

0.3100

0.0100

0.1170

0.2535

0.1430

0.0020

0.1203

0.1900

0.0715

0.0750

0.0130

0.2100

0.2275

0.1625

0.0100

0.0390

0.0585

0.2275

0.1625

0.1200

0.0520

0.0080

0.2200

0.3200

0.1300

9.0455

0.2450

0.0350 5752

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA . OCTOBER 18 , 2008/ ASVINA 26 , 1930

क.स.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर 1

719 माहर (जारी... )

689

697/1

706

696

696/ 1ख

677

794

816

815

819

683

821

831

850

848

849

847/3

847/2

847/4

847/ 1 ग

845

970/2

970/1

971/1

972

973

984 ( PART II-S , 3 ( ii ) ) क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.2795

0.0228

0.0065

0.0130

0.4500

0.0040

0.0390

0.2665

0.2925

0.0130

0.4500

0.0325

0.0080

0.0040

0.1000

0.3200

0.0130

0.0260

0.2000

0.0650

0.0020

0.0520

0.1918

0.0813

0.0748

0.0130

0.4550

0.1170 [भाग - खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008 / आश्विन 26, 1930

सर्वे नंबर क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

3 1

983 माहर (जारी....)

981

979

995

978

8 2 कींदर

47/1

44/2

108

107/2/4

107/1/3

107/2/2

107/2/3

106

105/ 1 /2क

105/1/1

105/1 /2ख

104/1/25

104/2

104/ 1./ 2 ग

104/1/ 2ख

104/ 1/ 2क

5753 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.0715

0.2925

0.3120

0.0020

0.0910

0.1040

0.1200

0.1950

0.3380

0.0040

0.3120

0.0585

0.0260

0.1755

0.4225

0.2275

0.0950

0.1820

0.1300

0.0080

0.0195

0.1235

0.3055

0.0195

0.0358

0.0020

0.0065

0.1690

0.0715 5754

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA OCTOBER 18 , 2008 / ASVINA 26, 1930

क्र.सं.

सर्वे नंबर ग्राम का नाम

182/1 कींदर (जारी...)

182/5

198/1/2

195

197

211/1

210

208

207

204

205

86 3 सरखड़ी

85/3/3

85/2/2

85/3/2

85/1 टोरिया

253/2

252

250

251

248

245

247/1

247/2

232/3 क

232/2

232

232/1

246 PA -S30 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.0130

0.0650

0.6200

0.0700

0.2405

0.0390

0.1040

0.1500

0.0975

0.1500

0.1300

0.0600

0.0300

0.0065

0.2405

0.0100

0.0520

0.3450

0.0325

0.1528

0.3770

0.0020

0.1200

0.0800

0.0020

0.0250

0.2000

0.0195 [ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

5755

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

क्र.सं.

सर्वे नंबर

ग्राम का नाम

3 5 मावन

869

844

845

843

842

841

830

831

824

823

678

269

274

271

263 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.0195

0.1853

0.0050

0.2015

0.1690

0.0975

0.4095

0.3350

0.0200

0.2730

0.1600

0.0422

0.1625

0.0195

0.2500

277/2

276

277/1

279

295

297

298

299

300

301

304

303

308

320

147 0.2000

0.0040

0.1700

0.1105

0.2405

0.0455

0.0910

0.1550

0.0020

0.1560

0.2925

0.6100

0.0020

0.0325 5756

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18, 2008/ ASVINA 26, 19.30

क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

321 मावन (जारी....)

146

145

140

139

114

141

100

105

106

2 6 सिंगबासा

202

200

201 [PART 11- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.3900

0.1170

0.3900

0.2340

0.0050

0.0228

0.0455

0.2925

0.0650

0.0845

0.0250

0.3100

0.0520

0.3835

0.0325

0.3100

0.0260

0.0020

0.1820

0.0910

0.1200

0.2000

0.0195

0.0975

0.1723

0.0910

0.4700

0.1200

0.0130 5757 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ü ) )

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

सर्वे नंबर

ग्राम का नाम

क्र.सं.

0.1700

129/2

सिंगबासा (जारी...)

0.1365

129/1

0.1040

130

0.0130

131

0.0600

132

0.1300

133

0.0100

156

0.1040

134

0.1300

135

0.0700

106

0.1700

136

0.0130

137

0.0800

144

0.7150

0.9100

1.7550

872

7 गुना छावनी

1.0010

876

0.0325

875

1.1505

873

0.0400

874

0.0195

8 पिपरोदा खुर्द

0.1170

69/17/3/1

0.3000

69/19ख

0.1690

69/17/2/4

0.0040

69/18/1 क

0.0800

69/18/2ख

3853 G1/08-9 5758

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA. OCTOBER 18, 2008 / ASVINA 26, 195

क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर 1

87 पिपरोदा खुर्द (जारी...)

88/382

139

150

146

144

145

160

164

171

2/2

4 [ P 11 S... 3mm क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.2600

0.1625

0.0325

0.2275

00150

0.0230

0.1000

0.3300

0.1820

0.0020

0.2210

0.0195

0.3575

0.0195

0.0585

0.0800

0.1430

0.0910

0.1885

0.2275

0.0020

0.1430

0.1625

0.1170

0.8800

0.2145

0.3100

0.0200 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

5759

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18 , 2008 /आश्विन 26, 1930

सर्वे नंबर क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

13 9 सकतपुर

14/1

14/2

114

11/216

149 10 चकसकतपुर

62/5

47 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.0200

0.0520

0.0020

0.1820

0.0195

0.1170

0.1430

0.0150

0.0585

0.0130

0.0260

0.0130

0.1755

0.0500

0.0680

0.0040

0.1560

0.3515

0.1235

0.0325

0.0260

0.3575

0.0300

0.1300

0.1430

0.1885

0.0050

0 0650

0.0650

0.0325 5760

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 18 , 2008/ ASVINA 26. 1930 PART IF- S 3 ( ii ) ] क्र.स.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में 1

0.0650 तकसकतपुर (जारी....)

0.0780

0.0520

0.0130

0.2340

8/1

9/1

0.1528

0.2340

0.1200

0.3600

0.0650

2/2

0.0200

122

0.0200 गनेशपुरा

121

0.1235

120

0.1430

118/1

0.4745

118/2

0.0300

117/3

0.1528

117/2

0.2925

117/1

0.0650

119

0.0260

4/2

0.1105 12

0.4420 महाराजपुरा

43/1

0.0650 13

521

0.0100 पुरापोसर

520

0.3770

526/2

0.0150

0.2350

526/1

527/1

0.0150

518

0.1040

517

0.0020 [भाग [ [ -खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/ आश्विन 26, 1930 क्र.सं.

सर्वे नंबर ग्राम का नाम

532 पुरापोसर (जारी...)

535

533

536

539/2

537

502

506

499

500/1/1

500/2

500/5

500/6

500/8

498

465

178/1

230

231

227

226

212

235

236

114/1

130

129

5761 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.0020

0.0100

0.3100

0.0100

0.1100

0.0520

0.0455

0.1560

0.0455

0.3100

0.1105

0.2405

0.0813

0.2700

0.0390

0.1560

0.0390

0.2665

0.0910

0.1105

0.0780

0.0520

0.0130

0.0845

0.0200

0.0325

0.0130

0.0800 5762

CORR 18.2008 / ASVINA 26. 19

MIE GAZETTE OF INDA

PA. H- S क्र.स.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में 1

115/2

0.0260 पुरापासर (जारी..... )

128

0.0040

116

0.1300

119

0.0020

113

0.0130

111

0.9800

00080

111/1 क20

111/1 क 9

0 2900

111/2

0 2665

111/15 16

0.1365 14

121/2

0.4100 विनरख्याई

121/1

0.0650

122

0.0200

0.5600

115/3

110

0.0700

111

0.0520

114

0.0200

112

0.0910

0 0500

113

100

0.0585

0.0350

0.0500

0.1105

83/1

0.0600

83/3

0.0900

0 0850

79/301

0.0100

0.0500 [ भाग II खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

5763

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26 , 1930

क्र.स.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर 1

73 विनख्याई (जारी....)

13/26 15 विशोनिया

17/1/10/2

17मि.

17/1/15

19/229/3

21/2

21/3/1

21/3/2

21/3/3

33/1

33/2

36/1

38/1

39/4

39/3

39/2

38/3/1 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.1650

0.0100

0.0520

0.1300.

0.1100

0.0325

0.0130

0.0390

0.0585

0.1560

0.3510

0.3100

0.2015

0.0325

0.1885

0.1040

0.2300

0.2730

0.4700

0.0650

0.0300

0.0040

0.1105

0.0455

0.1000

0.2600

0.0020

0.0040

0.0065

0.0325 5704

TOL GAZETTE OF INDIN 3TR 18, 2008/ASVINA 26. 1950

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

सर्वे नंबर

क्र.स.

ग्राम का नाम

0.1400

38/3/3

विशोनिय! (जारी....)

0.0400

0.0650

104

0 0293

105/1/1

0 0520

105/5

0.0260

103

0 1430

105/4

0 0500

105/1/2

0.1000

105/6

0.0195

65/1

0 0390

0.0160

156

16 किशनगढ़

0.2300

132/1

0.0050

132/2

0.3055

91/1

0.0455

0.0325

0.1300

0.5200

0.0020

0.2275

0.2500

65/3

0.1100

65/2/1

0.0500

65/1

0.0325

0.3800

0.0845

0,1500

0.1300

3/13/4

2.0736

1 5765 [ भाग [[- खण्ड़ 3 ( ⅱ ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/ आश्विन26, 1930

क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

4 2

90मि

1.6500 रिहाना

0.0400

0.3800

90/1/2

91/2/4

0.1500

91/2/3

0.1900

19/4

0.0845

91/2/2

0.0200

0.3705

63/2/1

0.3510

63/1

0.2300

0.0200

0.2145

0.1700

24/1/2

0.1000

24/1/3

0.0910

11/1/2

0.2145

10/1

0.1105

10/2

0.1600

0.0080

0.0040

0.2210

0.0020

0.0650

0.2860

0.2340

0.0650 18 वींदाखेड़ी

0.0650

1.0075

0.1885 3853 G1/08-10 5766

DIE GAZETTE OF INDIA OCTOBER 18 , 2008/ ASVINA 26. 143

IP . Sii क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में 1

0.4615 वींदाखेड़ी (जारी....)

0.0020

0.0260

0.1690

0.2275 19 धनोरिया

0.0260

00100

37/2/1

0.0350

0 1400

45/1

0.0520

45/2

0.0455

47/5

0.1700

0.3000

47/4

0.1820

47/3

0.0300

47/2

0.3800

47/6

0.0050

47/1: 1 ख

0.0050

0.0130

34/2

0.2200

25/32/1

0.0800

0.2210

1.4300

28/8

0.1300

28/10

0.1300

27/1

0.3200

0.0845 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

5767 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18 , 2008 /आश्विन 26 , 1930

क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में 1

0.0520 धनोरिया (जारी...)

12/1

0.1040

0.2470

0.0020

8/2

0.0715 20 सावशमोदी

141

0.1430

}

298

144

0.5400

0.0100

148

147/18

0.5100

147/15

0.0040

147/5

0.0650

147/16

0.2600

132

0.0400

146

0.5000

126/ 1ख

0.1430

129

0.3300

0.6110

128

66मि.

पोरूखेड़ी

0.5500

0.0260

0.0900

141/26

0.2145

141/1

0.2800

141/36

0.1500

141/35

0.1170

0 0390

0.0845

141/12

0.0080

0.2275

140

0.0260 5768

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 18, 2008 / ASVINA 26, 19.30

सर्वे नंबर ग्राम का नाम

क्र.सं.

132/5/5 पोरूखेड़ी (जारी....)

132/5/2

130/5/3

130/5/1

132/2ख

132 /2 क

132/ 1ख

132/1 क

131/1 क

131/2

131/6/2

131/9

15 22 सुहाया

16/393

307/1/7

307/1/6

297

298/1

296

295

294/1

294/2

291

292

274

273 [PART 11- SEC . 3 ( 1 ) ] क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.2650

0.1690

0.1950

0.1560

0.0845

0.3000

0.1625

0.1690

0.2405

0.1040

0.0325

0.3310

0.0260

0.4500

0.0130

0.0845

0.0650

0.1900

0.0065

0.3000

0.1040

0.0975

0.0845

0.0576

0.1365

0.0200

0.2210

0.2405 5769 [ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में 1

272

0.0065 सुहाया (जारी...)

270

0.0455

271

0.0600

269/1/5

0.2000

269मि.

0.0130

268

0.1300

267

0.1430

266

0.0520

265

0.0130

0.0520

390

264

0.0325

262

0.2080

263

0.1560

258

0.7800

258/9/2

0.2800 23

15/3

0.0390 बृजाबमोरी

0.0845 24 पथरिया

0.0130

0,1430

0.1040

69/2

69/1

0.0715

0.2700

0.0260

0.1820

0.0780

65/1

0.1280

65/2

0.0040

0.0800

141

0.2100

138

0.0040 5770

TRE GAZETTE OF INTOBER 18,200UR/ ASVINA 26 , 10

क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाग

सर्वे नंबर 1

140 पथरिया (जारी...)

156

157

183 25 भूराखेड़ी

182/2/3

182/2/4

72/1

182/2/3

72/2

182

97/2

97/1

108/2

111

104

114

120/1/3

121

122

120/1/1

118

81 26 चुरेला

80/1

95/4

100 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

00450

0.4100

0 0050

0 0450

0.1885

0.1235

0.0130

0 1040

0.0030

0.0845

0.0030

0.1560

0.0650

0 0390

0.2145

0.3835

0.0325

0.1700

0.2535

0.1040

0.1235

0.1000

0.0100

0.0200

0.0110

0 1200

0.3200

0.0550

0.0325 [ भाग 1]- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) )

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18 , 2008 / आश्विन 26, 1930

क्र.सं.

सर्वे नंबर ग्राम का नाम

103 चुरेला (जारी....)

117

118/2

118/1

116

120

124

122/2

123/1

134

135

136

21/2

62/3ख 27 सेमराखेड़ा

62/1

62/3 क

60/5

60/3

77/1

76/1

76/2

5771 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.0325.

0.0200

0.0920

0.0200

0.0600

0.0150

0.1300

0.0195

0.2500

0.0325

0.0585

0.1170

0.0130

0.1625

0.1560

0.2405

0.0715

0.1700

0.2200

0.0100

0.0020

0.1300

0.3900

0.0390

0.1300

0.2000

0.1755

0.0260 5772

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA OCTOBER 18. 2008 / ASVINA 26 , 1950

सर्वे नंबर ग्राम का नाम

क्र.सं.

3 1

123/2 28 रामनगर

123/1

124/2

124/1

125/1

129

127/1

128

131

132

133

135/1

120/1

101

102

103/8

103/1 ग

103/1 क

44/1

79/2

79/4ख

79/4क

79 / 1 घ

77/2क

84/2

84/1

79 / 1 ग P : 11 --Sa: 3 ( i ) ) क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.0845

0.0650

0.0780

0.0325

0.0130

0.1430

0.0910

0.0030

0.2080

0.2275

0.0650

0.0845

0.0050

0.0520

0.3500

0.1200

0.0200

0.0163

0.2145

0.1100

0.0165

0.0520

0.9425

0.1040

0.0650

0.1100

0.2100

0.0715

0.0325 5773 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/ आश्विन 26, 1930

[ भाग- खण्ड 3(ii) )

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

सर्वे नंबर

ग्राम का नाम

क्र.सं.

0.0130

रामनगर (जारी...)

0.0845

0.0715

0.0050

82/1

0.0195

0.2800

43/2

29 टकोदिया

0.0780

43/3

0.2800

0.0130

0.0910

45/1

0.0130

0.3400

69/1

0.3800

69/2

0.1885

185

30 किशनपुरा

0.0200

174

0.0200

177

172

0.1800

0.0845

176

180

0.0520

0.5330

175/2

0.0325

76/1

31 भूमराखेड़ी

76/2

0.0150

0.0845

0.1690

0.1430

32 चकपारसीखेड़ा

0.0100

0.4600

0.0200

0.5200

0.4100 3853 G1108-11 5774

PART 11- S1 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18, 2008/ ASVINA 26, 19 :0

सर्वे नंबर क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

3 1

38 चक्कपारसीखेड़ा (जारी...)

14/3/3

14/3/1

14/2क

14/2ख

176 33 अजरोड़ा

179/201

180

181

191

182/1/2

182/2/2

182/2/3

182/2/4

183/1

133/2/2

145

187

135

186 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर

0.1900 0.0350 0.2500 0.3700 0.0050 0.0130 0.0845 0.4745 0.0325 ง . 1950 0.1755 0.1440 0.0250 0.0040 0.0800 0.3445 0 2470 0.1300 0 1755 0.0390 0.1300 0.1800 0.1820 0.1105

0.2275

1950

20650

010020

0.3738

6.2906 [ भाग 1 ] - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

5775

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर 1

186 बनियानी

187

188

190

178

179

182

180

175

173

170

171

161

172

130

128

131

129

132

37 क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

0.0910

0.2600

0.1658

0.0390

0.1820

0.0650

0.0100

0.1400

0.4200

0.0293

0.1105

0.2080

0.0400

0.0020

0.1000

0.1170

0.0300

3.1430

0.0163

0.1300

0.5915

0.0195

0.5200

0.3400

0.0450

0.0250

0.0325 [PART 11- SEC . 3 (ii ) | 5776

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18, 2008/ ASVINA 26, 19.30

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

सर्वे नंबर

क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

4 2

0.0910

बनियानी

(जारी...)

0.1700

0.1950

0.3000

0.1900

0.0520

0.0195

0.0130

0.4000

पाखर

0.1680

59/1

0.0130

0.1900

58/2

0.6240

58/1

0.0500

60/2

0.0130

0.2800

0.4355

0.4225

27/4

0.0943

0.0195

0.3000

27/7

0.1625

27/8

0.0325 36 आनापुरा

0.1500

34/2

0.1175

0.0360

38 5777 [ भाग 11- खण्ड 3 ( i ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008 /आश्विन 26 , 1930

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

सर्वे नंबर

ग्राम का नाम

क्र.सं.

4 2

0.1755

34/2/1

आनापुरा (जारी....)

0.1625

35/2/4

35/2/5

0.4160

0.1625

35/2/3

0.1755

35/1/3

0.0195

0.0020 37

19/2

वींदाराड़ा

0.1300

18/4

0.1625

0.2925

0.3775

18/1

0.3250

0.0325

0.0275

11/2

0.0050

0.1820

38 सेमरा

0.2600

71/2

71/1

0.0020

0.2275 39 पाठी

0.1105

0.0130

0.3445

0.0050

23/3

16/2

0.3600

0.0400

0.0195

0.2535

0.2275

12 5778

TUBE : GAZETTE OF INDIA OCTOBER 18, 2008/ASVINA 26, 1930

( PA 11- S 3 ( iu ) | क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में 2

4 पाठी

0.2275 (जारी...)

0.5395

0.2925

0 2990 40

0 4270 हमीरपुर

11/2

0.0390

0.0200

0.0920

0.1300

0.2200

0.2800

0.5000

0 0325

0.0010

0.0520

0.0100

0.2470

0.3445

1.2700

0.8125

0.0325

130

1.1400

0.0300

0.2900

0.2275

0.2925

0.0200

0.5850

0.0020 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

5779 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/ आश्विन 26, 1930

क्र.स.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में 1

0.0050 हमीरपुर (जारी...)

0.1350

0.0600

0.0900

0.5200

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

ए. गांग्वामी, अवर मचिन्न

New Delhi , the 16th October , 2008

S. O. 2899.-Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas S.O. No.372 . dated the 21 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 23rd 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 27th 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 :

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 therçin:

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

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

PART 11-SL ( 10 ) 5780

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA. OCTOBER 18 , 2008/ ASVINA 26, 1930

SCHEDULE

DISTRICT : GUNA

STATE : MADHYA PRADESH TEHSIL : GUNA

AREA IN HECTARE

SURVEY NO .

S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

4 2

0.0390 MAHAR

0.2340

0.0910

0.0020

0.1463

0.0300

0.0585

0.1235

81/1

0.0455

81/2

0.0650

80/1

0.0845

80/4

0.0020

80/3

0.0500

95/2

0.0500

0.1000

95/1

0.1600

0.0060

0.0040

0.0585

0.0220

0.1105

106

107

0.0520

109

0.0195

0.1560

110

0.0800

111

116

0.0050

0.2300

112

0.0100

114 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) )

5781

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबा 18, 2003/आश्विन 26, 1930

SURVEY NO .

NAME OF VILLAGE

S.No.

113

Contd....

MAHAR

122

416

417

414

413-

407

408

406

404/2

405

402/1

593

596

597

599

592

714

713

712/1

711

718

708

703/2

703/1

702

701/1

701/2

700 3853 G1/08-12

AREA IN HECTARE

0.2100

0.0455

0.3100

0.0100-

0.1170

0.2535

0.1430

0.0020

0.1203

0.1900

0.0715

0.0750

0.0130

0.2100

0.2275

0.1625

0.0100

0.0390

0.0585

0.2275

0.1625

0.1200

0.0520

0.0080

0.2200

0.3200

0.1300

0 0455

0.2450

0.0350 5782

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA . OLCTOBER 18 , 2008 / ASVINA 26. 19.30

S.No.

SURVEY NO .

NAME OF VILLAGE

3 MAHAR

Contd ....

719

689

697/1

706

696

696/ 1ख

677

794

816

815

819

683

821

B31

850

848

849

047/3

847/2

847/4

847/ 1 ग

845

970/2

970/1

971/1

972

973 [ PART I- S

AREA IN HECTARE

0.2795

0.0228

0.0065

0.0130

0.4500

0.0040

0.0390

0.2665

0.2925

0.0130

0.4500

0.0325

0.0080

0.0040

0.1000

0.3200

0.0130

0.0260

0.2000

0.0650

0.0020

0.0520

0.1918

0.0813

0.0748

0.0130

0.4550 [ भाग 1 ]- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008 /आश्विन 26 , 1930 NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

S.No.

3 1

984

Contd....

MAHAR

983

981

979

995

978

8 2 KEENDAR

47/1

44/2

108

107/2/4

107/1/3

107/2/2

107/2/3

106

105/1 / 2क

105/1/1

105/1 / 2ख

104/1/25

104/2

104/1 / 2ग

104/ 1 / 2ख

5783 AREA IN HECTARE

0.1170

0.0715

0.2925

0.3120

0.0020

0.0910

0.1040

0.1200

0.1950

0.3380

0.0040

0.3120

0.0585

0.0260

0.1755

0.4225

0.2275

0.0950

0.1820

0.1300

0.0080

0.0195

0.1235

0.3055

0.0195

0.0358

0.0020

0.0065

0.1690 5784

OCTOBER 18 , 2008/ ASVINA 26, 1930

IPART 11- S3 ( ii ) ) THE GAZETTE OF INDIA

AREA IN HECTARE

SURVEY NO .

NAME OF VILLAGE

S.No.

0.0715 KEENDAR

Contd ....

104/1 /2क

0.0130

182/1

0.0650

182/5

0.6200

198/1/2

0.0700

195

0.2405

197

0.0390

211/1

0.1040

210

0.1500

208

0.0975

207

0.1500

204

205

0.1300

0.0600

SARKHADI

0.0300

85/3/3

0.0065

85/2/2

85/3/2

0.2405

0.0100

85/1

0.0520

253/2

TORIYA

252

0.3450

0.0325

250

0.1528

251

0.3770

248

0.0020

245

0.1200

247/1

0.0800

247/2

0.0020

232/3 क

0.0250

232/2

0.0250

232

0.2000

232/1

0.0195

246 [ भाग 1 ]- खण्ड 3 ( in ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/ आश्विन 26, 1930

S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

3 5 MAVAN

869

844

845

843

842

841

830

831

824

823

678

269

274

271

263

277/2

276

277/1

279

295

297

298

299

300

301

304

303

308

320

147

5785 AREA IN HECTARE

0.0195

0.1853

0.0050

0.2015

0.1690

0.0975

0.4095

0.3350

0.0200

0.2730

0.1600

0.0422

0.1625

0.0195

0.2500

0.2000

0.0040

0.1700

0.1105

0.2405

0.0455

0.0910

0.1550

0.0020

0.1560

0.2925

0.6100

0.0020

0.0325 5786

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18 , 2008 /ASVINA 26 , 1930

SURVEY NO .

NAME OF VILLAGE

S. No.

321

Contd ....

MAVAN

146

145

140

139

1147

141

100

105

106

202 6 SINGBASA

200

201 PART II-SC300 ) ] AREA IN HECTARE

0,3900

0.1170

0.3900

0.2340

0.0050

0.0228

0.0455

0.2925

0.0650

0 0845

0.0250

0.3100

0.0520

0.3835

0.0325

0.3100

0.0260

0.0020

0.1820

0.0910

0.1200

0.2000

0.0195

0.0975

0.1723

0.0910

0.4700

0.1200

0.0130 5787 [ भाग-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/ आश्विन 26, 1930

SURVEY NO .

AREA IN HECTARE NAME OF VILLAGE

S.No.

4 1

0.1700 Contd .....

129/2

SINGBASA

129/1

0.1365

130

0.1040

0.0130

131

132

0.0600

0.1300

133.

156

0.0100

134

0.1040

135

0.1300

106

0.0700

0.1700

136

137

0.0130

144

0.0800

0.7150

0.9100

1.7550

872

GUNA CHHAWANI

1.0010

876

0.0325

875

1.1505

873

0.0400

874

0.0195 8 PIPRODA KHURD

69/17/3/1

0.1170

0.3000

69/19ख

69/17/2/4

0.1690

0.0040

69/18/1 क

0.0800

69/18/2ख THE GAZETTE OF INDIA OCTOBER IX, 2008 ASVINA 26, 193

:..

SURVEY NO .

NAME OF VILLAGE

S.No.

87 PIPRODA KHURD Contd ...

88/382

139

150

146

144

145

160

164

171

2/2

4 AREA IN HECTARE

0.2600

0.1625

0.0325

0.2275

0.0150

0.0230

0 1000

0 3300

0 1820

0.0020

0.2210

0.0195

0.3575

0.0195

0.0585

0.0800

0.1430

0.0910

0.1885

0.2275

00020

0.1430

0.1625

0.1170

0.8800

0.2145

0.3100

0.0200 [भाग ६- खण्ड ( ⅱ ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र अनबर 18, 2008: गश्विम 26 , 1930

S.No.

AREA IN HECTARE NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO.

9 SAKATPUR

0.0200

14/1

0.0520

0 0020

14/2

0.1820

0.0195

0.1170

0.1430

0.0150

0.0585

0.0130

0.0260

0.0130

0.1755

0.0500

0.0680

0.0040

0.1560

0.3515

114

0.1235

0.0325

11/216

0.0260

149

10 CHAKSAKATPUR

0.3575

0.0300

62/5

0.1300

0.1430

0.1885

0.0650

0.0325

3853 01 /09-13 S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGS.

SURVEY NO .

AREA IN HECTARE

4 ΚΔΑΚΑΤFUR CO

0.0650

0.0780

0.0520

0.0130

8/1

0 2340

9/1

0.1528

0.2340

0.1200

0 3500

0.0650

2/2

0.0200 11 GANESHPURA

122

0.0200

121

0.1235

120

0.1430

118/1

0.4745

118/2

0 0300

117/3

0.1528

17/2

0 2925

117/1

00650

119

0.0260

4/2

0.1105 MAHARAJPURA

0.4420

43/1

0.0650 13 PURAPOSAR

521

0.0100

520

0.3770

0.0150

526/2

0.2350

526/1

527/1

0.0150

518

0.1040

517

0.0020 [ भाग- खण्ड 3 ( i) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008 / आस्थिन 26, 1930 S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

3 PURAPOSAR Contd....

532

535

533

536

539/2

537

502

506

499

500/1/1

500/2

500/5

500/6

500/8

498

465

178/1

230

231

227

226

212

235

236

114/1

130

129

5791 AREA IN HECTARE

0.0020

0.0100

0.3100

0.0100

0.1100

0.0520

0.0455

0.1560

0.0455

0.3100

0.1105

0.2405

0.0813

0.2700

0.0390

0.1560

0.0390

0.2665

0.0910

0.1105

0.0780

0.0520

0.0130

0.0845

0.0200

0.0325

0.0130

0.0800 R18、200WASVINA 26, 1930 SURVEY NO .

115/2

128

116

119

113

111

111/1520 111/1 क9 111/2

111/1516 121/2

121/13

122

115/3

110

111

114

112

113

100

83/1

83/3

79/301

AREA IN HECTARE 0.0260

0.0040

0.1300

0.0020

0.0130

0.9800

0.0080

0.2900

0.2665

0.1305

0.4100

0.0650

0.0200

0.5600

0.0700

0.0520

0.0200

0.0910

0.0500

0.0580

0 0350

0.0500

01105

00600

0.0900

0.0850

0.0100

0.0500 3703 [ भाग- खण्ड 3 ( 11) ]

भारत की राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/ आश्विन 26 , 1930

---

NAME OF VILLAGE

AREA IN HECTARE S.No.

SURVEY NO .

Contd....

0.1650

VINKHYAI

0.0100

0.0520

0.1300

0.1100

0.0325

0.0130

0.0390

0.0585

0.1560

0.3510

13/26

0.3100 15 VISHONIA

17/1/10/2

0.2015

0.0325

17मि.

0.1885

17/1/15

19/229/3

0.1040

0.2300

0.2730

21/2

0.4700

21/3/1

0.0650

21/3/2

0.0300

21/3/3

0.0040

33/1

0.1105

33/2

0.0455

36/1

0.1000

0.2600

38/1

39/4

0.0020

0.0040

39/3

39/2

0.0065 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: उम्क्तूबर 18 , 2008 / आश्विन 26 , 1930 S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

7 KISHANGARH Contd .....

3/13/4

1 17 RIHANA

90নি,

90/1/2

91/2/4

91/2/3

19/4

91/2/2

63/2/1

63/1

24/1/2

24/1/3

11/1/2

10/1

10/2

5795 AREA IN HECTARE

0.0845

0.1500

0.1300

2.0736

1.6500

0.0400

0.3800

0.1500

0.1900

0.0845

0.0200

0.3705

0.3510

0.2300

0.0200

0.2145

0.1700

0.1000

0.0910

0 2145

0.1105

0.1600

0.0080

0.0040

0.2210

0.0020

0.0650

0.2860

0.2340 GOBER 18 2008 /ASVINA 26, 19

[ PAT 11-3 ( ii )

! AREA IN HECTARE

SURVEY NO.

AME DE VILLAGE

0.0650

1.0075

0.1885

0.4615

0.0020

0.0260

0.1690

0.2275

0.0260

0.0100

0.0350

37/2/1

0.1400

0.0520

45/1

0.0455

45/2

0.1700

47/5

0.3000

0.1820

47/4

0.0300

47/3

0.3800

47/2

0.0050

47/6

0.0050

47:1/1 ख

0.0130

0.2200

34/2

0.0800

25/32/1

0 2210

1.4300

28 5797 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

AREA IN HECTARE

SURVEY NO .

NAME OF VILLAGE

S.No.

0.1300

28/8

Contd....

DHANORIYA

0.1300

28/10

0.3200

27/1

0.0845

0.0520

0.1040

12/1

0.2470

0.0020

0.0715

8/2

141

20 SAWRAMODI

0.1430

}

298

0.5400

144

0,0100

148

0.5100

147/18

0.0040

147/15

147/5

0.0650

0.2500

147/16

0.0400

132

146

0.5000

0.1430

126/ 1ख

0.3300

129

0.6110

128

0.5500

66मि.

21 PORUKHEDI

0.0260

0.0900

0.2145

141/26

0.2600

141/1

0.1500

141/36

0.1170

141/35

0.0390

0.0845

0.0080

141/12

3853 G1/06-14 5798

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18 , 2008 /ASVINA 26, 1930

S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO. 1

3 PORUKHEDI Contd ....

140

132/5/5

132/5/2

130/5/3

130/5/1

132/2ख

132/2क

132/ 1 ख

132/1 क

131/1 क

131/2

131/6/2

131/9 22 SUHAYA

16/393

307/1/7

307/1/6

297

298/1

296

295

294/1

294/2

291

292

274 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ] AREA IN HECTARE

0.2275

0.0260

0.2650

0.1690

0.1950

0.1560

0.0845

0.3000

0.1625

0.1690

0.2405

0.1040

0.0325

0.3310

0.0260

0.4500

0.0130

0.0845

0.0650

0.1900

0.0065

0.3000

0.1040

0.0975

0.0845

0.0576

0.1365

0.0200

0.2210 $799 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008 / आश्विन 26 , 1930

[भग 11- खण्ड ( B ) ]

AREA IN HECTARE

SURVEY NO.

NAME OF VILLAGE

S.No.

4 2

0.2405

273

Contd.....

SUHAYA

272

0.0065

270

0.0455

0.0600

271

0.2000

269/1/5

0.0130

269मि.

268

0.1300

0.1430

267

0.0520

266

265

0.0130

390

0.0520

0.0325

264

0.2080

262

0.1560

263

258

0.7800

0.2800

258/9/2

0.0390

15/3

23 BRIJABAMORI

0.0845

0.0130

24 PATHARIYA

0.1430

0.1040

69/2

0.0715

69/1

0,2700

0.0260

0.1820

0.0780

0.1280

65/1

0.0040

65/2

0.0800

0.2100

141

0.0040

138 5800

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA OCTOBER 18. 2008/ ASVINA 26 , 1950

S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

3 PATHARIYA

Contd ....

140

156

157

95 25 BHOORAKHEDI

183

182/2/3

182/2/4

72/1

182/2/3

72/2

182

97/2

97/1

108/2

111

104

114

120/1/3

121

122

120/1/1

118 26 CHURELA

80/1

95/4

10 PART II- SF ( ii ) ] AREA IN HECTARE

0.0450

0.4100

0.0050

0.0450

0,1885

0.1235

0.0130

0.1040

0.0030

0.0845

0.0030

0.1560

0.0650

0.0390

0.2145

0.3835

0.0325

0.1700

0.2535

0.1040

0.1235

0.1000

0.0100

0.0200

0.0110

0.1200

0.3200

0.0550

0.0325 5801 भारत की राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/ आश्विन26, 1930

[भाग- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

AREA IN HECTARE

SURVEY NO .

NAME OF VILLAGE

S.No.

0.0325

103

Contd...

CHURELA

0.0200

0.0920

0.0200

117

0.0600

118/2

0.0150

118/1

0.1300

116

0.0195

120

0.2500

124

0.0325

122/2

0.0585

123/1

0.1170

134

0.0130

135

0.1625

136

0.1550

0.2405

0.0715

21/2

0.1700

62/3ख

27 SEMRAKHEDA

0.2200

62/1

0.0100

62/3क

0.0020

60/5

0.1300

60/3

0.1300

0.3900

0.0390

77/1

0.1300

76/1

0.1300

76/2

0.2000

0.1755

0.0260

74 5802

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 18, 2008 / ASVINA 26 , 1930

S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

3 28 RAMNAGAR

123/2

123/1

124/2

124/1

125/1

129

127/1

128

131

132

133

135/1

120/1

101

102

103/8

103/ 1 ग

103/ 1क

441

79/2

794ख

74:45

791터

77: 2

84-2

70/14 [PART II- Sec . 3 ( ii ) ] AREA IN HECTARE

0.0845

0.0650

0.0780

0.0325

0.0130

0.1430

0.0910

0.0030

0.2080

0.2275

0.0650

0.0845

0.0050

0.0520

0.3500

0.1200

0.0200

0.0163

0.2145

0.1100

0.0165

0.0520

0.9425

0.1040

0.0650

0.1100

02100

0.0715 5803 [ भाग - खण्ड ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008 /आश्विन 26, 1930

S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

AREA IN HECTARE

4 2

RAMNAGAR Contd.....

0.0130

0.0845

0.0715

82/1

0.0050

0.0195

43/2

29 TAKODIYA

0.2800

43/3

0.0780

0.2800

0.0130

45/1

0.0910

0.0130

0.3400

69/1

0.3800

69/2

185

0.1885 30 KISHANPURA

174

0.0200

177

0.0200

172

0.1800

0.0845

176

180

0.0520

175/2

0.5330 31

76/1

0.0325 BHUMRAKHEDI

0.0150

76/2

0.0845

0.1690

32 CHAKPARSIKHEDA

0.1430

0.0100

0.4600

0.0200

0.52

0.4100

39 5804

PAR ) [ I- SE ( ⅱ ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18, 2008/ ASVINA 26, 1930

AREA IN HECTARE S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

4 2

0.1900 CHAKPARSIKHEDA Contd ....

0.0350

0.2500

0.3700

0.0050

0.0130

0.0845

0.4745

0.0325

14/3/3

14/3/1

0.1950

14/2क

0.1755

14/2ख

0.1440

0.0250

0.0040

0.0800 AJRODA

176

0.3445

179/201

0.2470

180

0.1300

181

0.1755

191

0.0390

182/1/2

0.1300

182/2/2

0.1800

182/2/3

0.1820

182/2/4

0.1105

0.2275

183/1

0.1950

183/2/2

148

0.0650

184

0.0040

187

0.0020

0.3738

185

186

0.2925 5805 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्टूबर 15, 200B/आश्विन 26, 1930

AREA IN HECTARE S.No.

SURVEY NO .

NAME OF VILLAGE

4 1

0.0910

186

BANIYANI

0.2600

187

0.1658

188

0.0390

190

0.1820

178

0.0650

179

0.0100

182

0.1400

180

0.4200

175

0.0293

173

0.1105

170

0.2080

171

0.0400

161

0.0020

172

0.1000

130

0.1170

128

0.0300

131

0.1430

129

0.0163

132

0.1300

0.5915

0.0195

0.5200

0.3400

0.0450

0.0250

0.0325

3853 G1 /08-16 THE GAZETE OF INDA OCTOBER 18 20018 ASVINA 26.

FPJ - Sui .No . :

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

AREA IN HECTARE 1

4 BANIYANI

Contd ...

0.0910

0 1700

0.1950

0.3000

0.1900

0.0520

0.0195

0.0130 35 PAKHAR

0.4000

59/1

0.1680

00130

0.1900

58/2

58/1

0.6240

60/2

0 0500

0.0130

0.2800

0.4355

27/4

0.4225

0.0943

0.0195

27/7

0.3000

0.1625

27/8

36 AANAPURA

0.0325

0.1500

34/2

0.1175

0.0360

38 5807 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत कर राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/ आश्विन 26 , 1930

S.No.

AREA IN HECTARE NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

4 2

0.1755

34/2/1

AANAPURA

Contd ....

35/2/4

0.1625

35/2/5

0.4160

35/2/3

0.1625

35/1/3

0.1755

0.0195

19/2

0.0020 37 VINDARADA

18/4

0.1300

0.1625

0.2925

18/1

0.3775

0.3250

0.0325

0.0275

0.0050

11/2

0.1820 SEMRA

71/2

0.2600

71/1

0.0020

0.2275 PATHI

0.1105

0.0130

0.3445

0.0050

23/3

0.3600

16/2

0.0400

0.0195

0.2535

0.2275

0.5395

0.2925

0.2990 40 HAMIRPUR

0.4270

11/2

0.0390 אתא

THI . GAZETTE OF INDIA OCTOBER 18.2008 / ASVINA 26, 1971

'0.

NAME OF VILLAGE

SURVEY NO .

130

P - S3 AREA IN HECTARE

0.0200

0.0920

0 1300

0.2200

0.2800

0.5000

0.0325

0.0010

0.0520

0.0100

0.2470

0.3445

1.2700

0.8125

0 0325

1.1400

0.0300

0.2900

0.2275

0.2925

0.0200

0.5850

0.0020

0.0050

0.1350

0.0600

0.0900

0.5200

No. R-31015 / 11 /2008- O.R. - II A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy .

[ भाग 11-खण्ड 3(ii) }

श्रम एवं रोजगार मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली , 19 सितम्बर , 2008

का.आ. 2900.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मैं केरल इंडस्ट्रीयल पोलीमर्स लिमिटेड , के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद मेंकेन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , इर्नाकुलम के पंचाट (संदर्भ सं. आई. डी. 146/2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-29011 /21/2003- आई. आर ( एम) ] कपल बाखरू , डेस्क अधिकारी MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT New Delhi , the 19th September, 2008 S.O. 2900.-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. 146/2006) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court , Ernakulam now as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation tothe management ofM/ s . Kerala Industrial Polymers Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 19-9-2008 .

[No. L-29011 /21 /2003 -IR (M)] KAMAL BAKHRU , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM PRESENT

Shri P. L. Norbert , B. A. , LL, B. , Presiding Officer Industrial Dispute No. 146 of 2006 (1.D. 59/2003 of Industrial Tribunal, Kollam) Union : The General Secretary,

Trivandrum District Clay Workers Union "Gayathri" , Ambalamukku , Trivandrum-695 005.

ByAdv. SriMurukkumpuzha R.Vijayakumaran Nair.

Management : Sri Manoj S.Nair , Managing Director, M/ s. Kerala Industrial Polymers Ltd., A-441 , Vijayoda, Sankar Road, Sasthamangalam Thiruvananthapuram-695010.

By Adv . Sri . Anil Narayanan .

Thiscase coming up for hearing on 26-5-2008 , this Tribunal- cum -Labour Court on 29-05-2008 passed the following:

AWARD

This is a reference made under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d) of Industrial Disputes Act . The reference is:

5809

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/ आश्विन26, 1930

"Whether the action of the management of M/ s . Kerala Industrial Polymers Ltd. , Trivandrum in denying employment to Shri M. Anandan , Mining worker employed in their Clay Mines of Sasthavattom, Thiruvananthapuram Distt . w.e.f. 27-8-2000 onward is justified ? If not, to what relief the workman concerned is entitled ?"

2. Facts of the case in brief are as follows:

Shri Anandan was a Mining worker in M/s . Kerala Industrial Polymers Limited, Thiruvananthapuram since 18-2-1986. He was terminated from service w.e.f 27-11-2000. The management at the time of termination of the service offered compensation to retrenched workmen, which was received by 32 employees . But the workman in this case and another person did not accept it . They raised dispute. The case of the workman Sri Anandan is espoused by the union.

3.Accordingto the union there is no closure ofthe factory as alleged by the management. The denial of employment on the guise of closure of the factory is incorrect. The factory continues to operate in a clandestine manner . The contention of the management that all employees were dismissed from service due to closure of the factory is with a motive todeny employment to workers . The management has not offered proper retrenchment compensation. The workman is entitled to be reinstated with back wages from the date of dismissal .

4. According to the managernent the workers started creating indiscipline , obstructive tactics , strike , threatening the officers of the company etc. which brought down the production and consequently the company suffered loss year after year . In the year 1997 December the comраnу was closed down . Thereafter in pursuance to conciliation and assurance of union leadera the company was re-opened and operation restarted in 1998. But after sometime the workers went back in their assurance and resorted to the same old method of indiscipline , strike , dis- obedience, gheraos etc. The situation of the company went from bad to,worse and came to a complete stand still . Hence the company had to resort to closure of mining operations from 26-8-2000 onwards . Before that , service ofworkmen were terminated offering them compensation and notice pay.All except 2 workers accepted the compensation and left the service. Two workers raised the dispute and they were referred by the Government for adjudication . But pending the dispute the other workman (Sri Biju) accepted compensation and the reference was settled. The closure ofthe company was inevitable due to non co -operation of workers and consequent reduction in production and financial loss . But workman was once dismissed from service for serious misconduct . But on the assurance of good conduct in future he was reinstated . The management has not denied employment deliberately. Following closure ofthe factory and dis-continuance of mining operations the mining lease of the management company was transferred to another person . The management factory is not continuing its operation of mining. The workman is gainfully employed and he is not entitled for any relief.

5810

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18 , 2008 /ASVINA 26, 1930

[ PART 11-Sec . 3 ( ii) ] 5. In the light of the above contentions the only point that arises for consideration is :-

notice board of the factory as well as Mines . The reasons stated in Exts M3 and M 4 are the same as hercin before mentioned,

Is the termination legal ?

The evidence consists of the documentary evidence ofExts . WI to W5 on the side of the union and Ext . M 1 to Ext . M 6 on the side of the management.

6. The Point The termination of service of the workman Sri M. Anandan w.e.f. 27-8-2000 is challengedby the union on two counts . According to the union the management factory was never closed down and hence termination was unwarranted . Assuming that terinination was inevitable then they should have complied with S. 25 - FFA and 25 - FFF of Industrial Disputes Act.

8. S 25 - FFA says that when an employer intends to close down an undertaking 60 days notice has to be given to the appropriate Government stating the reasons for the intended closure of the undertaking. The proviso to the Section says that the provision does not apply to an undertaking in which less than 50 workmen are employed. So far as the factory in question is concerned, there were more than 50 workers ( Ext . M1 ) . Therefore 60 days' notice was necessary before clusing down the factory . No such notice is seen issued to the Governmentby the management . The closure notices Exts . M3 and M4 are dated 26-08-2000 and the closure became effective on the same day. Then the question is whether a breach of the provision of 25FFA will make the cloure illegal . Want of notice 10 Government will only attract penalty as procided in Section 30 -A of 1. D. Act . It is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bombay union of Journalists V. State of Bombay 1964-1LLJ 351 at 356 that a notice under Section 25F@ is not a condition precedent to valid retrenchment . On a parity of reasoning. the breach of the provision of Section 25 - FFA ( 1 ) would not make the closure illegal but only entail the penalty contemplated under Section 30-4 of the Act. Hence the contention ofthe union , that for non compliance with Section 25- FFA the closure becomes illegal . cannot stand.

9. Section 25 -FFF requires that the employer shall give notice and compensation to the workman retrenched who has been in continuous service for not less than one year in the undertaking . Proviso to the Section says that when the undertaking is closed down on account of unavoidable circumstances beyond the control of the employer , compensation to be paid can be limited to average pay for three months . The explanation to proviso makes it clear that financial loss is not an unavoidable circumstance beyond the control of the employer to limit the payment of compensation contemplated under Section 25 - F of the Act to average pay for three months . Relevant portion reads as Follows :-

"25- FFF . Compensation to workmen in case of closingdown of undertakings .-( 1 ) Where an undertaking is closed down for any reason whatsoever , every workman who has been in continuous service for not less than one year in that undertaking immediately before such closure shall , subject to the provisions of sub- section (2 ), be entitled to notice and compensation in accordance with the provisions ofSection 25- F, as if the workman had been retrenched :

7. It is the case of the management that due to continuous non co - operation of workers the factory was running at a loss since a long time . Ultimately when a became impossible to operate the factory any more . the workmen had to be retrenched and the establishment had tobe closeddown . Exts . M3 and M 4 are closure notices of factory and mincs . The closure notices are dated 26-8-2000 and the closure was effected on the same day . The workman in question like other workers were offered compensation . However he did not accept it . Hence Ext . WI notice dated 16-3-2002 was issued to him offering compensation and forwarding, along with the notice , a cheque for Rs . 12642/ Though the union has a contention that the factory is nol closed down but run under a different name there is no evidence to support the contention . Ext M5 is a runs ut the sale deed transferring the lease hold right of ming h the management to one . Ahmed Tharish on 3-4-2001 . Sanction to transfer the mining right was accordedbe State government by Ext . M6 order dated 21-4-2003. In the light of Ext . M5 and M6 the case of the union that the factory continues to run, cannot stand. Hence the case of the management that the factory was closed down un 26-8-2000 has tu be accepted. The reason for closung down the factory is said to be financial loss due to the non co operation ofmining workers . The factory had more than 50 workers as can be seen from Ext . MI closure notice sent to Government and Labour Commissioner in 1997. st. ME reveals that 62 workers were dismissed in 1997 atter enquin: on the charge of, misconduct ofillegal strike and gheraong of the officers of the company . The reason stated are that the workers were not co - operating and production had come down and the company had sustained heavy loss Thereafter at the intervention of Labour Commissioner and in pursuance to conciliation with the union and management and on the assurance of the union the company restarted its function on 19-1-1998 . But before long agairi the management had to face the same difficulty of nou co-operation of workers and consequent financial loss . Hence Ext . M 2 letter was sent to Assistant Distric Industries Officer , Thiruvananthapuratu on 27 2-1498 stating that state of affairs of the company was patletic and secking Government assistance for revival of the unit. But things did not improve and hence Exts . M 3 and M -1

closure notices dated 26-8-2000 were put up on the

Provided that where the undertaking is closed down on account of unavoidable circumstances beyond the control of the employer, the compensation to be paid 10 the workman under clause ( b ) of Section 25-1 , shall not exceed his average pay for three months .

[ भाग II-खण्ड ( ii) ]

5811 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

APPENDIX

(Explanation. An undertaking which is closed down by reason merely of-

Exhibits for the Umon

( 1 ) financial difficulties ( including financial losses) ; or

(i) accumulation of undisposed of stocks ; or

WI 16-03-2002 Photostate copy of letter issuedby Kerala Industrial Polymers to Sri M. Anandan,

(ii) the expiry ofthe period ofthe lease or licence granted to it; or

W2 12-02-2001 Photostate copy of letter issued by Kerala Industrial Polymers Ltd. , to Sri M. Anandan.

W3 Photostate copy of statement regarding period of break in service in respect of Sri . M. Anandan issued bymanagement.

(iv) In casewhere the undertaking is engaged in mining operations, exhaustion of the minerals in the area in which operations are carried on , shall not be deemed to be closed down on account of unavoidable circumstances beyond the control of the employer within the meaning of the provisoto this sub-section .) "

W4 29-03-2001 Photostate copy of letter issued by Sri R. S. Najr to Sri M. Anandan.

W5 07-02-2000 Photostate copy of wage slip of Sri M. Anandan .

Exhibits for the Management

MI 17-12-1997 Copy of closure notice issued w/ s. 25- FFA of 1.D. Act .

M2 27-02-1998 Copy of letter issued by the Management to the Assistant District Industries Officer, Chirayinkeezhu .

M3 26-08-2000 Photostate copy of closure notice of factory.

M4 Mines. 26-08-2000 Photostate copy of closure notice of

M5 03-04-2001 Photostate copy of Sale Deed No. 727/01 of Sub Registrar Office , Murukkumpuzha.

W6 21-04-2003 Copy of Government Order No. GO (MS) /No . 45/2003 /AD transferring mining lease.

नई दिल्ली,19 सितम्बर , 2008

10. As per S-25- F the retrenched workman is entitled to one month's notice or pay in lieu of notice and compensation equivalent to 15 days average pay for every completed year of continuous service . No notice as per Section 25- F is seen given to the workman. By Ext . W I Rs . 12,642 was offered as compensation for retrenchment. Ext . WS iswage slip ofthe workman dated 07-02-2000 . The gross wage per month was Rs . 3,040 ps . 65. The workman was in service as regular Mining worker since 1988. Ext. W3 is the statement of break in service issued by the management to the worker. It shows that he was in service since 1988 till he was terminated from service in 2000. He is entitled to get compensation of 15 days ' average pay for every completed year of service . That is not seen properly calculated and included in the amount of compensation offered to him as per Ext . WI letter . Though the compensation amount offered is not adequate it does not mean that the employer did not give compensation as per Section 25 - F . What is to be done by the employer is to calculate compensation in accordance with Section 25 -F ( a) and (b) together with whatever other amounts due to him. But for want of proper calculation and payment it cannot be said that the retrenchment is illegal, It is for the management to recalculate the compensation amount and pay the worker the difference failing which, it is for the worker to claim the amount under the provisions of 1.D. Act . Butfor that reason the termination ofthe service cannot be said to be illegal .

का.आ. 2901.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरव ( 1 ) नरायणी कैरिज एवं कन्ट्रेक्टर प्रा.लि. ( 2 ) राऊरकेला स्टील प्लान्ट, सेल के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , चुवनेश्वर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 73/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

In the result , an award is passed finding that the action of the management in denying employment to workman Sri Anandan is legal andjustified. However he is entitled to claim difference in compensation through appropriate action under the provisions of the I.D. Act,

[सं. एल-29011 /63/ 1999- आई आर ( एम) ] कमल बाखरू , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 19th September , 2008 The award will conte into force one month after its publication in the Official Gazette.

Dictatedto the Personal Assistant , transcribed and typed byher, corrected and passed by me on this the 29th day ofMay, 2008.

P. L. NORBERT, PresidingOfficer

S.O. 2901.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Govemment hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 73/2001 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal Labour Court, Bhubaneswar now as shown in the Annexure , in the [PART 11-- St . 3 ( i) ] 5812

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: X100FR 18,2008 / ASVINA 26, 1970

Industrial Dispute between the employers in relatia D the management of ( 1 ) Narayani Carriers & Contrattore Pvt.Ltd. (2 ) Rourkela Steel Plant . SAll . and their worktuan, which was received by the Central Govern 19-9-2008.

[No. L- 29011-6319991111

KAMAL BAKHRU sklicer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRI TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COUR BHUBANESWAR

Present : Shri N.K.R. Mohapatra,

Presiding Officer . C.G.1 T. - cum- boar Bhubaneswar .

Tr. Industrial Dispute Case No. 73/2007 Date of Passing Award 24th July, 2008

Between : The Management of ( 1 ) Narayani Carriers & Contractor Pvt. Ltd .. Shakti Nagar, Rourl.els .

The Management of ( 2 ) Rourkela Stee . Firti. SAIL, Romkela.

Ist Party-Managsinents

AND

Their Workinen Shri N. G. Behera & Otherь, 6, Tapaswani Market , Extension Block, Ud tragia. Rourkela, Distt . Sundargarh .

2nd Party-Wohnen

Mis. H.S.C.L. , for Rebuilding and Capital Repairs ( Hot and cold) ofcoke oven batteries of the Rourkela Steel Plant (Management No. 2 ) who has been added subsequently as a party on the prayer of the disputants. It is stated that, to avoid exploitation of contract workers and to give them minimum protection scocial settlements were made on behalf of such contract mers and the principal employer (Managerment No Zhani tording to one of its conditions the said Management i was required to impress upon the incoming contractors to employ the retrenched workers of the outgoing contractor . Accordingly the disputants in question were employed by Managernent No. 1 from 6th July , 19 to the work stated earlier . It is alleged that after the reomization of Rourkela Shramika Saugha thesedisputinn who were then belonging 10 Rourkela Mazdoor Sahh were forcedby the Contractor- Management No. I and Pamerpal Employer Management No. 2) to join the news tecognized Union and on their refusal the Management No I by engaging fresh workers stopped issuing gate passes to them resulting their termination with effect fram 1-1-1999 . Finding no other alternative they made several representations through their Union to differera amborities and ultimately raised an Industrial Dispute in their personal capacity before the Assit . Labour Commisioner ( Central ) , when the Dy. Labour Commissioner being influenced by the newly recognized Union did not like to entertain the complaint . During conciliation perseeding before the Asstt . Labour Cominissioner (Central ) both the Managements appeared but denied to take back the disputants resulting in a failure report . Thus the reference .

APPEARANCES

None

For the 1st Part-

Management

For the 1st Par

Management i

Slu : A. Bhuvan Sr. Manager ( Law )

Shri Sarbeswar Sahoo For the 2nd Party- Workmen

AWARD

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 ladusirkal DisputesAct , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) have referred the following dispute for adjudication vide their Order No. 1.2901 & TR (M) , dated 16-03-2000.

"Whether the action of the Managem M/ s , Narayani Carriers and Contractors ( P ) Ltd. In terminating the services of S/Shri N G. Bebera, Madhu Patnaik, Sarveswar Satus , D.K. Balvarma. S S. Biswal and Aabaji Swain from 1-1-1999 on the grutind oftheir involvement in trade Linion activities is justi fied? If not , to what relief the workmen are entitled ?"

3. It is admitted by all parties that the work against which thedisputants and others were engaged was awarded to H.S.C.I. hs the Rourkela Steel Plant (Management No. and as a Sub-Contractor. Management No. 1 ind undertaken the said work . According to the Mangement No. 1 , as per the letter of intent dated 1-6-1998 of the Principal Contractor ( H.S.C.L. ) these disputants along with others were engaged for a specific period of 6 to months excluding one month for maintenance and theretore on the completion of the work on 1-6-1998 they were terminated after payment of their statutory dues as certisied by the H.S.C.L. , MECON and the Central Labour ( ell of Rourkela Steel Plant (Management No. 21. as there was no other work available with it or with the Pricinal Contractor ( H.S.C.L. ) . The disputants were also instied with Service Certificates at the time of termination for benefit of securing employment cise-where and theretive their terinination was legal and justified . As regards the other allegations that these disputants were terminated on their refused to leave Rourkela Mazdoor Sabha and join Rourkela Shramika Sangha, it is contended by the Management No. I that during conciliation presveding Rourkela Mazdoor Sabha (Union) had never participated nor catered the grievances 2. The disputants named in the reference were engaged by Management No.1 , a sub - coumring of 5813 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (U) ]

भारत काराजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/ आश्विन 26, 1930

of the disputants and therefore the termination of the disputants cannot be said to be the outcome of their trade Union activities .

4. Management No. 2 has alleged that the Rourkela Steel Plant beingthe principal employer it had limited roil to play in regard to engagement and retrenchment of workers engaged by the Principal . Contractor H.S.C.L. or itssub-contractor-Management No. 1. It is contended that thework ofrebuilding and capital repair of coke oven was entrusted toH.S.C.L. for a limited period ofsix months and after completion of the said work on 6.1.1999 all the dues payable to the said contractor was released and that the reference notbeing in regard to non-payment ofwagesto the workers, it is in no way answerable to the cause oftheir termination.

5. On the basis ofthe above pleadings ofthe parties the following issues were framed.

ISSUES

1. Whether the reference is maintainable ?

2. Whether the disputant comes under the definition ofIndustrial Disputes Act?

jobs are only available for 8 to 9 months in ayear and that , in view ofabove nature ofjobs, the workers engagedby a contractor are terminated on completion of such job . These averments of the disputants clearly show that they were aware of the fact that their services were terminable with thecompletion ofthejobs against which they were engaged. In their evidence three of the disputants (W.W. -I , 2 and 3) have deposed that they were engaged by the Management No. 1 on the above work sometimes in July 1998. The evidence ofM.W. - I examined by the Principal Employer (Management No. 2) shows that the contract for the above jobs was given as per Ext. -A to H.S.C.L. and as per Ext . -C, the letter of intent of H. S. C.L. , the said work was undertaken by the Management No.1 as'e sub -contractor ofH.S.C.L. , Ext. -D shows that on completion of the work, the H.S.C.L. was issued with ajob completion certificate by Management No.2 indicating that the work was completed in all respect on 10-2-1999 (including one month maintenance period) . The evidence of the Management Witness No. 1 further indicates that after completion ofthe above work the H.S.C.L. , the Principal Contractor has already been paid his dues.

3. Whether the action of the Management of M/ s. Narayani Carriers and Contractors (P) Ltd. , in terminating the services of S/ Shri N.G. Behera, Madhu Patnaik, Sarveswar Sahu, D.K. Balverma, S.S.Biswal and Babaji Swain from 1-1-1999 on the ground of their involvement in trade union activities is justified ?

4. If not, to what relief the workmen are entitled?

6. During trial three ofthe disputants adducedtheir evidence while Management No. 2 examined one of its officers as M.W. - I, besides producing four documents marked Ext .-Ato D. As Management No. I did not participate in the hearing after filing its counter , it has been set exparte.

FINDINGS

ISSUE Nos . 1 & 2

7. These issues are taken up together jointly for esay disposal.

9. Thus the above evidence of both disputants and Management No. 2 shows that the disputants were engaged for six months from July 1998 on ajob which was to be completed by 10-1-1999 (excluding maintenance period ofone month from 10-1-1999). Therefore, when the disputants claim that they were refused employment from 1-1-1999 it shows that their above termination was the resultant outcome of completion of the assigned job and therefore under Section 2 (00 )(bb) it can not be termed as acase of retrenchment so as to attract the provisions of Section 25- F ofthe Industrial Disputes Act. It is statedby thedisputants in their evidence that they were terminated from31-12-1998 as they refused to change their Union , but such a stand does not inspire any confidence as the disputants could not have continued beyond December 1998whenthe work against which they were engaged was seeminglynot available after December 1998 .

It is admittedby all parties that the work in question was awarded to H. S. C. L. by Management No. 2 and in turn Management No.I was engaged as sub -contractor by said H. S. C. L. to undertake the saidwork.

ISSUE Nos. 1 & 3

8. These issues being inter-dependant are taken up

jointly.

It is pleaded in the claim statement that in orderto provide employment to the retrenched workers of a out- going contractor, several settlements had been reached on behalf of such contract -workers and the Management asking the later to impress upon the subsequent contractor to engage the retrenched workers of the previous contractor as per their need. It is also pleaded in the claim statement bythe disputants that the jobs of re-building and capital repair of coke oven batteries against which they were engaged are not of permanent nature and therefore these

10. It is further claimed by the disputants that they were refused employment without any notice от compensation with effect from 1-1-1999 . In this regard it wouldbe suffice to repeat here that the engagement of a worker against a fixed tenure job is liable to come to a close on completion ofsuch work and for this no advance notice is required to be given before termination . However the evidence of W. W. -1 shows that in fact the Management No.1had displayed a termination notice in the Time Office with a request to the disputants to collect their dues. But the disputants had refused to collect the same on protest. While advancing an explanation for not accepting their dues the witness says that they had refused to receive as because they were not communicated individually the manner ofcalculation and on which count their dues were calculated. But such of the explanation can not be accepted, like their otherplea that they have been terminated for their 3859 GI-08-16 5814

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 18 , 2008/ASVINA 26, 1930

Union activities , as because their main intention behind raising the dispute , as gathered from their claim statement, being just to prevent workers of another Unions being engaged by Management No. 1 .

11. Thus in view of the above discussion I find that the termination of the workmen is not on account of thelr Union activities but it was the resultant outcome of the session ofthe work against which they were engaged.

12. The reference is answered accordingly exparte against Management No.1 and on contest against Management No. 2 with no relief to the disputants .

sd N.K.R. MOHAPATRA, Presiding Officer List of Witnesses Examined on Behalf of the 2nd Party-Workmen.

W. W.-1

Shri Sarbeswar Sahoo W. W.-2

Debendra Kumar Balverma

Babaji Swain W. W.-3

List of Documents Exhibited on Behalf of the 2nd Party-Workmen.

The2nd Party-Workmen have not exhibited a single document.

List of Witnesses on Behalf of the 1st Party- Management No. 2

M. W.- 1 -Shri Binod BihariNayak

List of Documents Exhibited on Behalf of the 1st Party-ManagementNo.-2

Ext. -A-Agreement

Ext.--Letter dated 1-8-1998

Ext. -C- Letter dated 2-2-1999

Ext.-D-Certificate, dated 8-12-2001

नई दिल्ली, 19 सितम्बर , 2008

का.आ. 2902.-औद्योगिक विषाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मुम्बई पोर्ट ट्रस्ट के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबंद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुवन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय सं. - 2 . मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. सीजीआईटी-2/ 27 /2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती हैं , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-31011 /27/2000- आई आर ( एम ) ] कमल बाखरू , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 19th September , 2008 5.O. 2902.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. CGIT- 2/27/2001 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court , No. 2 , Mumbai now as shown in the

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Mumbai Port Trust and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 19-9-2008 .

[No. L-31011/27/2000 - IR ( M) ] KAMAL BAKHRU , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL No. 2 , MUMBAI Present : A. A. LAD, PresidingOfficer Reference No. CGIT- 2/27 of2001

Employers in Relation to the Management of Mumbai Port Trust

The Chairman Mumbai Port Trust PortBhawan Shoorji Villabhdas Marg . Mumbai -400 038

And Their Workmen

The Secretary Mumbai Port Trust Dock & General EmployeesUnion KamgarSadan Mazagaon, Mumbai-400010

APPEARANCES :

FortheEmployer

: Mr. M.B. Anchan Advocate .

For the Workmen

: Mr. J.H. Sawant Advocate.

Mumbai , dated 4th July, 2008 AWARD PART- I

TheGovernment of India , Ministry of Labour by its Order No. L- 31011 / 27 /2000/ 1R ( M ) dated 02-02-2001 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub. section ( 1 ) and sub- section 2 (A ) of Section 10 af the Industrial Disputes Act . 1947 have referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management ofMumbai Port Trust, Mumbai in terminating the service of Promod Gangaram Khot , Tally Clerk by way of removal from service w.e.f. 8-3-99 is legal and justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?"

2. Claim statement is filed at Ex- 7 by the concerned workman stating that , he joined first party as a Tally Clerk in the Docks Department . He remained absent for 271 days from 26-10-1996 το 3-5-1998 on account of genuine disabilities which he faced during that period. He submitted leave application time and again for the said absence and (भाग II- खण्ड 3( il) ]

on many occasions produced medical certificate in suppor of leave.However he was chargeshected by charge shoot dated08-07-1998 for remaining absent between 26-10-1996 till 3-5-1998 of271 days on 28 occasions . He repliod said chargesheet and explained his conduct and Justified his absentesian. However sald was ignored. Then enquiry war Initiated against him . Enquiry commenced on 16-10-1998. During the enquiry, he was assured that no severe punishment will be imposed on him if he accepted the charges of absenteeism. Relying on the said assurance, he permitted first party to complete the formalities ofonquiry. Proceedingswere not explained to second party workman. Even he was not permitted to take help of co- workerto assist him in the enquiry. So he pray that, the order of removal paased on the basis on this enquiry cannot be treated as just and proper. Decision taken ofremoval from the employment by order dated 08-03-1999 [ ε πο maintainable . So he prayed that , so called enquiry contructedbe declared void and indings perverse. He also prayto direct first party to reinstate him with full backwagos and consequential benefits.

3. This is disputed by the firat party by flling reply Ex -8 making out case that , concerned workman was having habit to remain absent . He remained absent frequently unauthorised on number ofoccasions . He remained absent unauthorisedly for 271 days between 26-10-1996 to 03-05- 1998 which is not meager one.He was appointed as' Tally Clerk . He was doing important work. His absence affected onwork offirst party. Charge shoot was served. Enquiry was conducted. Full opportunity was given. The reason given by second party of absenteelam about his own sickness then on the grounds of sickness of wife and then on the ground ofmother is not supported by any evidence , It is denied that, assurance was given by inquiryOfficer or PresentingOfficer assuring that leniency will be taken ifhe accept the guilt of absenteeism . It is denied that evidence ofsecond party is not challenged in the enquiry. Since he remained absent unauthorised on number of occasions and since he has not given any reason for absenteeism it is submitted that, action taken of termination relying on the findings of Inquiry Officer is just and proper and findings not perverso .

4.Second party filed rejoinder Ex-9 denying case of first party and reiterating his own case .

5. In view of above pleadings my learned predecessor framed issues at Ex - 10 . Out ofwhich , issue of enquiry and perversity of findings are treated as preliminary issues which are answered as follows:

ISSUES

FINDINGS

Yes (1 ) Whether the domestic Inquiry conducted against the workman was as per the Principles ofNatural Justice?

No (il) Whether the findings of the inquiry officer are perverse?

5815

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/ 26, 1930

REASONS

Issue Nos. 1 & 2 :

6. Case of socond party is that, domestic enquiry conducted about absenteeism was not conducted by following Principles ofNatural Justice. According to him, no opportunity was given and his evidence was not considered.Whereas case of first party is that, chargesheet was served. Full opportunity was given. Second party participated in the enquiry. He unable tojustify about his absenteeism and so finding was givenby Inquiry Officer holding him guilty of misconduct of absenteeism . Concerned workman filed his affidavit at Ex - 16 in lieu of Examination - in- chief where he narrated about his absenteeism. In the cross he admitted that, the was served with charge sheat . He admits that, he has admitted the absence in the enquiry. He states that he explained the absenteeism . He mates that, he has no evidence to show that evidence given by him were not accepted bythe Inquiry Officer. He admits that, previously he was punishedby stopping Increment . Against that first party examined Arvind Singh Sengar Ex- 18. In the cross this witness states that,he did not participate in the enquiry. He states that he has no idea about enquiry . However he deny that enquiry was conducted without following Principles of Natural Justice.

7. Second Party filed written arguments at Ex-20 whereas first party atEx-21.

8. Here charge against second party workınan was ofabsenteeism . It is pertinent to note that, in the cross- examination he admits absenteeism. Even copies ofenquiry proceedings filed at Ex- 13 by the management and more precisely, page 19 ofit reveals that, while answering to question no. 4, this second party has stated that " my absence on two occasion was cause due to wife's sickness and four occasiona was due to own sickness and rest for other reasons" . That means , he admits absenteeism. He has notdisputed the period of absence i.e. 271 days during 26-10-1996 το 03-05-1998. Charge ofmisconduct was leveled against second party which covers absenteeism and when that charge was accepted by second party workman, in my considered view, question arise why detailed enquiry is required? At the most explanation has to be southt for remaining absent without permission . He states that medical certificate was not considered by Inquiry Officer. It is pertinent to note that , no such medical certificate is brought on record by the second party to consider at least before this Court to justify his absenteeism . The allegation is that he has habit to remain absent and to disprove it burden lies on second partyto show that , he had reason to remain absent . But here though second party workman admits absenteeism , appeared before Inquiry Officer, record and proceeding reveals that , he has not filed those documents before Inquiry Officer. Besides , though he appeared before this Tribunal ,he did not produce any document about his sickness ofwife, mother or his own. If 5816

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18, 2008/ASVINA 26, 1930

at all there was reason form him , one may consider it . But without any evidence, how one can presume that, hewas sickor hewas absent for sickness ofwife , and for sickness ofhis mother ? Besides, this is not an isolated incident for which he was punished. Even previously he was punished by stopping one increment and that is not disputed by him. So when there is no evidence of any type of second party about absenteeism , question of ignoring it by the InquiryOfficer does not arise. Even no evidence is placed before this Tribunal to justify absenteeism .When he admits absenteeism and when he has not justified it, in my considered view, findings given by InquiryOfficer on such said absenteeism cannot be taken lightly and ignoredjust tohelp the second party only because he belongs to weaker section. No doubt, employer and employee must get equal oportunity. No doubt employee must get protection . No doubt without following due process of law the employer cannot take any action . At the same time it is expected tht , employee also should act properly. He should follow the procedure. He should follow the guidelines . He should take proper precaution by not remaining absent. Here, it is pertinent to note tht not a single incident is mentioned of evidence or any effort made by him which was ignored by first party. The allegation of first party is that, without intimation and permission he has habit to remain absent and that is why it is treated misconduct . In the inquiry he accept the charge , and when he accepted charge and pleaded guilty of charge then, only question remains of justification of that . Here opportunity is not utilised by second party tojustify his absenteeism by giving evidence ofany type. Even he has not produced any evidence before thisTribunal to observe findings of Inquiry Officer perverse. When there was no evidence before Inquiry Officer how second party can say that , it was ignored by Inquiry Officer in observing that there was no justification for absenteeism?

9. So, if we consider all these coupled by case madeout by both , I conclude that , enquiry was fair and proper and findings not perverse. Accordingly , 1 answer above issues and pass the following order :

ORDER

1. Enquiry is fair and proper .

2. Findings not perverse.

3. Both parties to appear on quantum of punishment.

Date:04-07-2008

A. A. LAD , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 19 सितम्बर , 2008

का. आ. 2903, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) को धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार उड़ीसा माईनिंग कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय

(PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ] सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, भुवनेश्वर के पंचाट (संदर्भ सं. 399/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-29011/45/2001 - आई आर ( एम ) ] कमल बाखरू, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 19th September , 2008 S.O. 2903.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 399/ 2001 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court , Bhubaneswar now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Orissa Mining Corporation Ltd. and their workman , which was received bythe Central Government on 19-9-2008 .

[No. L-29011/45/2001 - IR ( M)]

KAMAL BAKHRU , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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. 399/2001 Date ofPassing Award 4th August, 2008 Between: The Management the General Manager, Orissa Mining Corporation Limited, Keonjhar -769035

1st Party Managerment

And

Their Workman , Smt . Madhabi Pradhan , Represented through the General Secretary. Keonjhar Mines Mazdoor Union , P.O. Guruda, Keonjhar

.. 2nd Party Union

APPEARANCES

M/s, S.L.. Pattnaik, Advocate

For the 1st Party- Management

For the 2nd Party-Union Shri Maheswar Rout, General Secretary

AWARD

The Government of India in the Ministry of Labour , in exercise ofPowers conferredby Clause (d ) ofsub -section ( 1 ) and sub -section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) have referred the following dispute for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 29011/45/ 2001 [ IR (M) ] , dated 11-06-2001 .

5817 [ भाग - खण्ड ( ⅱ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन26, 1930

"Whether the demand of the Keonjhar Mines MazdoorUnion At. Po . Guruda, Dist. Keonjhar, to regularize Smt . Madhabi Pradhan in the CadrePost ofCreche Aya from her date of appointment i.e. 23-1-1990 and payment of differential wages from Pickerto Creche Aya by the Management ofOrissa Mining Corporation Ltd. , Barbil is justified? Ifsowhat reliefthe workman is entitled for"?

the conciliationproceeding before Asstt. Labour Commis- sioner (Central) the workman was again attached to the Creche ofSiljoda Mine to assist the Creche Aya and the burse and therefore she is neither entitled to claim the salary ofa Creche Aya nor eligible tobe regularized against, that cadre post. As regards the regularization of Hafiza Khatun in the post of Creche Aya it is further contended by the Management that the said employee was earlier working as aMazdoor under Sirajjuddin & Co. and after its merger with the Management the said Khatun and many others filed OJC . 1994/93 before the High Court ofOrissa claiming parity of treatment in respect of their pay and service conditions with similarly placed workman in the regular establishment. As per the direction given by the Hon'ble Court the said Hafiza Khatum and few others were given fitment against appropriate posts in the regular service of the Management- Company. The disputant not being a party to that proceeding and her case not being comparablewith the case ofHafiza Khatun , she can not be regularized by bypassing the Recruitment Rules.

4. On the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed.

ISSUES

1. Whether the dispute comes under the Industrial DisputesAct?

2. Whether Smt. Madhabi Pradhan was performing the duty ofCreche Aya from the date of appointment i.e. 23-+-1990?

Aya? 3. Whether she is entitled to be regularized as Creche 2. From the claim statement filed by the Union it appears that the disputant- workman Smt. Madhabi Pradhan was appointed as a Picker on daily rated basis in the S.G.B.K. mines ofthe Management - Company on 23-1-1990. As aPicker she would have worked under sun and rain to separate different grades of ore. Instead, she was attached to&Creche ofThakurani Mines where one Hafiza Khatun was working as a Creche Aya . After closure of the said mine she was transferred to another mine called Siljoda Mine and attached to the Creche of that mine in August 1998,where she is still continuing. It is alleged by the Union that as an outcome of unfair Labour practice the Management posted the disputant in the Creche of Thakurani Mines to discharge the duties ofa CrecheAya After closure of the said mine she was again attached to the Creche of Siljoda Mine to render the duties of a regular Creche Aya . Even though she satisfactorily managed the post ofCreche. Aya at Thakurani Mines and later in Siljoda Mines she was not paid the salary of that post. Under the above back ground the Union raised an Industrial Disputes before theAsstt. Labour Commissioner (Central ) cleming his differential pay as also for her regularization against vacant cadre poet of CrecheAya. According to the Union one Hafiza Khatun who had initiallyjoined as a Mazdoor was subsequently regularized as a Creche Aya as per the decision in O.J.C. 1994/93 of Hon'bleHigh Court and therefore the disputant shouldbe extended with similar benefits.

4. Whether the demand of payment of differential wages from Picker to Creche Aya by the Management of OrissaMining Corporation Ltd., Barbil is justifled?,

5. To what relief the workman is entitled?

5. Two witnesses from the side of the Union and equal number of witnesses from the side of the Manage ment have even examined . From the side of the Union 5 documents have been marked as Ext. - 1 to 5 while no docu- ment has been produced by the Management .

FINDINGS

LSSUE No. 1

3. TheManagement on the other hand contends that thedisputant workman was appointed as a Picker on com- passionate ground after her mother took V.R.C. in 1990. Thejob ofa Picker being to separate different grades ofore under sun and rain , the workman requested the Manage- ment for her adjustment in some otherjob and accordingly sho was attached to the Creche of Thakurani Mine with effect from 23-1-1990 to assist the Creche Aya, Hafiza Khatun and the nurse . Under the rules, during the absence period of Creche Aya the nurse is to place requi- sitions for supply of different articles . The concerned CrecheAyn Hafiza Khatun (W.W. - 1 ) being an illiterate lady the workmanhad requisitioned for certain articles during the absence of the nurse and therefore the said requisi- tions shall notbe made the sole basis to say that the work- man was discharging the duties of a Creche Aya till she was transferred to the Creche of Siljoda Mine in August 1998. According to the Management on the closure of Thakurani Mine all those who were working there were transferredto other mines but in view of the pendency of

6.When admittedly the disputant was appointed as aPicker and as she still continues till date under the same designation, there is no question ofholding that her claims do not come under the definition of Industrial Disputes. In the written statement the Management no doubt alleged that the Union in question has got no locus standi to raise the dispute but in the absence of evidence to that effect it cannot be said so . Hence this issue is answered affirmatively.

5818

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 18 , 2008/ASVINA 26, 1930

ISSUE NOS . 2,3,485

7. These issues being inter- linked are taken up together.

It is not under dispute that the workman , though was appointed as a Picker, was attached to the creche of Thakurani Mines from 23-1-1990.

It is also not disputed that on the closure of the Thakurani Mine she was transferred to a creche of another mine called Siljoda Mine from 1-8-1998 . Therefore, looking at the claim of the Union it is only to be seen whether by attaching the disputant to different creches the Management had ever wanted to extract from her the duties ofaCrecheAya and whether she is entitled to be regularized against such post .

8. The evidence of the Management shows that creches are ofdifferent grade and therefore they are being manageddifferently.

9. It is no record that by the time the workman was attached to the creche of the Thakurani Mine one Hafiza Khatun (W.W. - 1 ) was the Creche Aya . This witness ( W. W.-1) says that prior to the joining of the disputant she used to take the assistance of the nurse attached to the creche to write out her leave application and other correspondence as she was illiterate and unable to do herself. Coming to the duties performed by her and the disputant she deposed that as a Creche Aya she used to take all cares of the children by dressing their beds , supplying food materials and putting them in bed whenever required. She also used to cook food for the children and all these she used to do as a matter of her duty . As regards the duty performed by the disputant she said that she being illiterate the disputant used to take the attendances ofthe children and assist her in looking after the children . According to her , on the retirement of the creche nurse she faced various difficulties for which the disputant was provided to her and that after joining of the disputant she used to make all official correspondence through her. But while narrating all these she did not whisper that like her the disputant was also cooking food for the children preparing theirbed or supplying food to the children. Thus from an over all assessment of her evidence it embargoes that the disputant was posted there to assist the Creche Aya and in that process she used to place requisitions occasionally to the authority for supply of materiats as evident from Ext . - 1 to 4 , the in charge Creche Aya (W.W.- 1 ) being admittedly an illiterate lady. During cross examination the disputant herself has admitted that she was helping the Aya ( W. W. - 1 ) during absence of the nurse in placing the requisitions on behalfofAya, the later being illiterate. Therefore, in these circumstances. It is hard to believe that the disputant was discharging the duties ofan Aya during her tenure in the creche ofThakurani Mine . As I find except placing requisitions during the absence period

[PART 11-SEC. 3 ( ii)] ofthe nurse she was doing no other work which an Aya is required to do. Therefore basing on such requisitions Ext.- 1 to 5 it wouldbe wrong to hold that she was rendering the duties of an Aya in the Thakuani Mine creche .

10. As regards the duties performed by the disputant in the Siljoda creche to which she was transferred in 1998 vide Ext. -5 , she herself has admitted during cross- examination that, in Siljoda creche she was simply assisting the creche Aya but not issuing any requisitions or doing any part of the duties of an Aya.

11. Thus in the above circumstanced there appears nojustification for the Union to claim regularization ofthe disputant nor for her differential pay.

12. 11 is no doubt on record that Hafiza Khatun (W.W.- 1 ) joined the Management as a Mazdoor but subsequently without any test or recruitment process she was regularized subsequently as Creche Aya. But from the pleadings and the judgement in O.J.C.. 1994/93 which is available on record it appears that, the said Khatun and many others had joined the Management as ex -employees ofa merger company known as Sirajjuddin & Co. Ltd. and on their preferring the above O.J.C. the Management had regularized the said W. W. - l and others as per the direction of the Hon'ble Court and as such the disputant being outside the purview of the said findings, her case can not be welghed equal ; with that of Hafiza Khatun.

13. In view of the above discussions 1 find no merit in the claim of the Union and as such the reference is answered in negation.

N. K. R. MOHAPATRA , Presiding Officer List ofWitnesses Examined on behalf of the 2nd Party-Union:

W. W.1 . Hafiza Khatun . W. W.2 - Madhabi Pradhan .

List of Documents Exhibited on Behalf of the 2nd Party-Workman: Ext. 1 - Requisition , dated 24-3-1991 . Ext. -2-Requisition , dated 20-6-1990. Ext. -3-Requisition , dated 22-7-1990. Ext.-4- Requisition, dated 25-11-1990 .

Ext. -5-Copy of Transfer Order No. 1534-98 , dated 1-8-1998.

Management: List of Witnesses on Behalf of the 1st Party- M.W.- 1 -Shri Sapan Kumar Bhatta Mishra. M.W.-2- Shri Dillip Kumar Choudhury.

List ofDocuments Exhibited on Behalf of the 1st Party-Management :

The Management have not exhibited any documents .

5819 [ भाग II- खग्य 3 (i) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18, 2008/ आश्विन 26, 1930

नई दिल्ली , 19 सितम्बर , 2008

Ministry ofLabour by its Order No. L-30012/ 6/2002/ IR (M) dated 13th November, 2002 in exercise of the powers conferredby clause (d) of sub-section ( 1 ) and sub- section (2A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to decide:

का.आ. 2904.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 बहे अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एच. पी. सी. एल. , मुम्बई के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों को बीच , अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिकः श्रम न्यायालय सं. 11 , मुम्बई को पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. सीजीआईटी -2/ 89/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

"Whether the claim ofthe action of the management ofHindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Mahul Refinery, Mumbai in terminating the services ofShri M. J. Rathod, Bulk Operator, w.e.f. 18-5-2001 is legal and justified? If not, what relief the workman concerned is entitled to?

[सं. एल-30012/6/2002-आई आर ( एम ) ] कमल बाखरू , डेस्क अधिकारी

NewDelhi , the 19th September, 2008

S.O. 2904.In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Centrai Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. CGIT- 2/89/2002) ofthe Central Goverment Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court, No. 11 , Mumbal now as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in ralation to the management ofHPCL, Mumbai and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 19-9-2008 .

[No. L-30012/6/2002-IR(M)] KAMAL BAKHRU , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO, II AT MUMBAI PRESENT : A. A. LAD , PRESIDING OFFICER

ReferenceNo. CGIT- 1/89 of 2002

Employers in relation to the Management of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.

TheGeneral Manager, HindustanPetroleum Corporation Ltd., Hindustan Bhavan, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400038.

..... FirstParty

AND

Theirworkznan,

M. J. Rathod,

TypeB3 , Bldg . No. 2, Sector 4, 4thfloor, Room No. 3 &4, Vashi Navi Mumbai -400703,

......SecondParty

APPEARANCE

For the employer : Ms. Nandini Memon , Advocate Forthe workman : Mr. J. S. Sawant, Advocate

DateofReserving Award I: 17th March , 2008

dute ofPassing of Award !: 6th August,2008.

AWARD PART- I

The reference is sent to this Tribunal by the Under Secretary ofCentral Government , the Government of India,

2.To support the subject- matter in the reference the statement of claim is filed by the 2nd Party at exhibit 7 stating that,he was employed by the lat Party as a general workman with effect from Ist November, 1977 and was promoted to the post of Filler In the year 1980 and was subsequently promoted to the post ofBulk Operator with effect from 16th May, 1981. 2nd Party further contended that, he was attending his duties with sense of devotion and integrity. He was posted to the Mahul Terminal of marketing division ofthe Ist Party and was working as a Bulk Operator for the second shift commencing from 3 p . m. to 11 p . m . on 23rd July, 1996, where In the course of his duties, he was required to measure the temperature of the product i.e. Mineral Turpentine Oil (MTO) which was Icaded in the Tank Truck (T. T. ) No. MCU 588 2nd Party further submitted that, when he measured the temperature oftheproduct it was showing 26 degree C but Mr. Rajkumar, the then operation officer and his Immediate superior ordered himto note down the temperature in the Challan Invoice as 27 degree C, instead of actual temperature of26 degree C. 2nd Party submitted that , he refused to follow the illegal orders of said Shri Rajkumar since it was detrimental tothe interest ofthe Ist Party and said Rajkumar vanted to do it just to favour the Transporter. However, he, the2nd Party noted the correct temperature as 26 degree Cin the challan but said Shri Rajkumar eut the word 26 degree C and noted, by his own hand, the temperature as 27 degree C. 2nd Party further submitted that , as a result thereof saidShri Rajkumar became angry with the workman, and threatened the workman ofdismissal from service by abusing his power and unscrupulous methods and said Shri Rajkumar used abusive and indecent words and decided to teach the 2nd Party workman a lesson and on the false complaint of said Shri Rajkumar the 2nd Partywas placed suspension by an order dated 24-7-1996 by the Chief Installation Manager of the 1st Party. 2nd Party further submitted that, he was issued a charge sheet dated 1-8-1996 and he replied it vide his reply dated 2-9-1996. It is further submitted by the 2nd Party that , the Ist Party appointed Enquiry Officer to conduct an enquiry. 2nd Party submitted that , he could not attend the enquiry proceedings for the reasons conveyed to the Ist Party from time to time and therafter the Ist Party set aside the ex- parte enquiry proceedings and decided to conduct the enquiry afresh. It 5820

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18, 2008 /ASVINA 26, 1930

(PART 11-SEC. 3 (ii ) ] is further submitted by the 2nd Party that , his financial , physical and mental conditions was so worsened that he could not attend the enquiry proceedings . It is further submitted by the 2nd Party that, again the enquiry proceedings were conducted by the Management in violation of principles of natural justice and the Enquiry Officer gave perverse findings and the punishment imposed upon him is very harsh , severe and disproportionate punishment of discharge from the services by order dated 18th May, 2001. 2nd Party submitted that , he preferred an appeal dated 14th June , 2001 to the Appellate Authority who confirmed the punishment ofdischarge from service by order dated 2-11-2001 . 2nd Party submitted that, the action of the Management in discharging his services is not legal and justified since the enquiry conducted was in violation of the principles ofnatural justice , the findings of the Enquiry Officer are perverse and the punishment of termination imposed upon the concerned workman is harsh, severe and disproportionate to the alleged misconduct. 2nd party therefore prayed that , the action of the management in terminating his services be held as illegal and unjustified and ist Party be directed to reinstate the concerned workman in service with full back wages and consequential reliefs.

concerned workman. Ist Party further contended that , in the event this Hon'ble Tribunal comes to the conclusion that , the departmental enquiry held against the concerned workman was not fair and proper, it should be permitted to leadevidence before to justify the action taken against the concerned workman. Ist Party further submitted that , the concerned workman was employed on 1-11-1977 as Bulk Operator , Grade M- 08. Concerned workman was on duty in the second shift on 23-7-1996 at Mahul Terminal ofthe Ist Party when concerned workman recorded on the trans- shipment order and advice ( TOA ) No. 605363 dated 23-7-1996 covering a delivery of 16KL . Mineral Turpentine Oil 2445 forAswarwa Depot the temperature of26 degree C instead of recording the correct temperature of27 degree C. Shri Rajkumar , the then Operations Officer advised the concerned workman to correct the temperature recorded by him. However the concerned workman disobeyed the instructions given by his superior and deliberately without any reason or justification refused to change the temperature record and correct the temperature as directed. It isfurther contended by the 1st Party that , in view ofthe deliberate defiance of reasonable orders of the supervisor Shri Rajkumar by the concerned workman, said Shri Rajkumar himself corrected the record and put the temperature of 27 degree C. It is further contended by the 1st Party that , noticing the said corrections made by Mr. Rajkumar, concerned workman rushed to his table and without any provocation or justification whatsoever, banged his intercom and slapped him on his face . The said incident was witnessed by another Officer Shri A. Surendra Nath, who was present in the vicinity and rushed to the table of Rajkumar's table and took him aside . Ist party contended that, thereafter the concerned workman was placed under suspension by its order dated 24th July, 1996 and on 1-8-1996 charge sheet was issued to the concerned workman for his misconduct which was replied by the concernedworkman vide his reply dated 2-9-1996 . Mr. S. S. Prasad, the then Sr. Manager (LPG ) ( West Zone) , was appointed as Enquiry Officer to conduct the enquiry proceedings and the Enquiry Officer submitted his report and findings to the Disciplinary Authority/ 1st Party vide his letter dated 26-10-1998 . Ist Party further submitted that, a copy of the said report and findings were sent to the concernedworkman vide its letter dated 25-1-1999 calling upon him to submit his say to the said report and findings. The concerned workman by his reply dated 15-2-1999 contended inter alia thar , the enquiry was not conducted in accordance with the principles of natural justice and he also pointed out infirmities in the enquiry proceedings and the Enquiry Officer's report . It is further contended bythe Ist Party that , though it did not accept the said allegations ofthe 2nd party, in order to provide the concerned workman further opportunity to defend his case properly, it was decided to conduct the enquiry ' de-novo ' and it was communicated to the concerned workman vide its order dated 18thNovember , 1999. Mr. S. Cousik, the then Senior 3. This prayer is disputed by the 1st Party, by filing reply at Exhibit 9 , denying the allegations of the 2nd Party and case made out by the concerned wsorkman stating that , proper opportunity was given to the concerned workman and that the present reference is misconceived and untenable and beyond the jurisdiction of this Tribunal . It is contended by the 1st Party that before terminating the services of the concerned workman fullfledged departmental enquiry was conducted in consonance with the principles ofnaturaljustice and the concerned workinan was given every opportunity to defend himself but the concerned workman chose deliberately to remain absent himselffrom the enquiry proceedings though intimation of each date was given to the concerned workman . Hence , the Enquiry Officer proceeded with the enquiry, ' ex parte and found the concerned workman guilty of all the charges levelled against him . Ist Party further contended that , the report and finding of the Enquiry Officer was sent to the concerned workman by letter dated 14th March, 2001 . However, the concerned workman by his letter dated 30th March, 2001 took up technical pleas in conduct of the enquiry and did not submit his explanation to the report and the findings of the Enquiry Officer. 1st Party further contended that, taking into consideration the seriousness ofthe misconduct proved against the concerned workman , aswell as the report and findings of the Enquiry Officer , it decided to award the punishment of ' discharge ' upon the concerned workman and the same was communicated to him by its letter dated 14th June, 2001. The said punishment was also upheld by the Appellate Authority by its order dated2-11-2001 while disposing off the appeal filed bythe 5821 [ भाग II-खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

bythe concerned workman in the statement of claim. Ist Party reiterated that while he was on duty on 15-1-85 , the concerned workman was assigned to the TCL department and it was duty and responsibility to load Tank Wagons loading including handling of track switch over level, alongwith other bulk operators . The concerned workman caused the derailment of 2 tank wagons by changing the trackbyoperating track switch over levers. In this regard a show-cause notice dated 18-1-1985 was issued to the concerned workman calling for his explanation . In the meeting held on 25-1-1985 the concerned workman accepted his fault and in view of his pleas not to repeat the mistake on further action was taken against the concerned workman. Ist Party further contended that , the concerned workman was on duty in the Product Transfer Section al theMahul Terminal in the 3rd shift on 1-3-1986 when Mr. S. C.Marandi , Officer - in - charge of the department directed the concerned workman to line up tank 603 for receipt of 7001 tonnes of MTO 2445 Ex- HPFR and watch the transfer but the concerned workman was found sleeping and he was woke up by said Shri Mirandi and instructed him once again to watch the transfer of MTO . Again after about 20 minutes later Shri Mirandi again found the concerned workman sleeping, in the meantime, MTO product from Tank603 overflowed to the extent of 16,944 KL leadingto aloss ofRs .44,092.35. The tank had continued to overflow till the receipt valve was closed by other workman . By letter dated 5-8-86 explanation was called for from the concerned workman and he by his reply dated 20-8-1986. However, the concerned workman was warned by letter dated 16-12-1986 and was also informed that , any repetition of such misconduct would warrant severe action against him. Ist Party reiterated that, the concerned workman incorrectly recorded the temperature of Mineral Turpentine Oil which was loaded in the tank truck as 26 degree C instead of the normal and correct temperature of 27 degree C and the concerned workman refused to obey the reasonable order of his immediate superior Shri Rajkumar. Ist Party denied that , the orders of said Shri Rajkumarwere illegal or that the orders ofRajkumar to note down the higher temperature in the challan was detrimental tothe interest ofmanagement and denied that said Rajkumar wanted to favour Transport Operator at the cost of the Management as alleged. In fact the material was a trans- shipment of product within the Corporation , hence the allegation of the concerned workman is totally unfounded and baseless. 1st Party also denied that said Rajkumar became angry with the workman and threatened him with dismissal from his service by abusing his powers and unscrupulous manner and used indecent words and made false complaint against the concerned workman and that without any investigation into the conduct of Rajkumar the concerned workman was placed under suspension w.e.f. 24-7-1996. 1st Party further submitted that it is not aware and does not admit that the concerned workman could not attend the enquiry proceedings for reasons as Manager , Finance ( Western Zone) was appointed as the EnquiryOfficer . However , the concerned workman did not attend the new enquiry proceedings in spite of intimation ofthe enquiry sittings having received by him. The concerned workman by his letter dated 21-3-2000 informed the said Enquiry Officer that, he is not in a position to present himselfbefore the Enquiry Officer to cooperate in conducting the ' de- novo' enquiry and did not give any tenable reasons for the same. Since the concerned workman did not attend the enquiry sittings in spite of receipt of Intimations by him the Enquiry Officer decided to conduct the enquiry ex- parte on 13-4-2000. The concerned workman was very clearly informed by the said Enquiry Officer that, in case he failed to attend the enquiry, the enquiry proceedings against him would be conducted ex-parte. In spite of that, the concerned workman did not attendthe enquiry proceedings and the Enquiry Officer proceeded with the enquiry ex-parte and submitted his report and findings vide his letter dated 2-3-2001 . Ist Party further contended that, a copy of the said report and findings of the enquiry was sent to the concerned workman by its Jetter 14-3-2001 , In reply to it the concerned workman vide his letter dated 30th March, 2001 submitted that, there was no need for conducting fresh ' de-novo ' enquiry once the earlier enquiry was declared ' not held in accordancewith the principles of natural justice and did not reply to the material evidence on record against him and he also did not make any submissions in respect of the report and findings ofthe Enquiry Officer . 1st Party further contended that, after taking into consideration all the relevant aspects ofthe material evidence the Disciplinary Authority came to the conclusion that the concerned workman was guilty ofthe charges levelled against him and that the disciplinary proceedings had conclusively proved those charges and by order dated 18th May, 2001 awarded the punishment of "discharge" from the services on the concerned workinan by order dated 28-5-2001 . It is further submitted that, the concerned workman thereafter preferred an appeal dated 14-6-2001 against the said order of discharge dated 18-5-2001 and the Appellate Authority after considering the appeal ofthe work, report and findings ofthe Enquiry Officer as also the findings of the Disciplinary Authority by its order dated 2-11-2001 upheld the order of the Disciplinary Authority in discharging the services ofthe concerned workman , 1st Party further contended that, the charges levelled against the 2nd Party concerned workman were of a serious nature i.e. willful insubordination , disobedience, riottous , disorderly or indecent behaviour and assaulting his superior officer while on duty the Disciplinary Authority had come to the conclusion and imposed the punishment of discharge from services on the concernedworkman after considering the relevant material on record in the light of the gravity and seriousness of the misconduct proved against him and that the 1st Partywas perfectly justified in discharging the services of the concerned workman. 1st Party denied the allegations made

3863 01/08-17 5822

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OOPER 18,2008 /ASVINA 26, 1930

[PART [ I- SEC. 3( ii ) ] informed to the Ranagement from time as alleged or at ali , Il further submitted that , it was only with a chance to give the workman another opportunity of mucting serious allegations of misconduct against him , that a decision was taken to conduct the enquiry proceedings ' de novo' against the concerned workman . Ist Party further contended 11:14 . it is not aware and does not admit that , the financial position and mental condimen el'the workinan was so worsened 1 the extent that he could not attend the proceedings of the enquiry commites is alleged . The concerned workmanwas being paid subscher allowance at 100 % of his basic salary. 1st Party denied that, the enquiry proceedings were conducted by it in violation of the principles of oral justice or that the enquiry officer gave perverse in linga and that the puristimem imposed upon the concerned workman was very harsh , severe and dispropor Party further reiterated and contended that the copy proceedings held agamst the concerned warkuna w inn fair, proper and legal manner by following the principle of natural justice . Though the concerned workman was intimated abot cach date of the enquiry he chose 10 deliberately remain shsent and therefore the Enquiry inter was left with no other alternative, but to proceed with the enquiry ex -parte Ist Parny further contended that thie degree ofproot which is required in a departmental emmong is one of preponderance of probabilities and p beyond all reasonable doubts and that the wumsligieut imposed upon the concerned workman is one of the punishments which is prescribed in the Standing Oders applicable said workenan . li further contended dat the gravity of the charges proved against the workeran necessitated the imposition of punishment of discharge from the services and that no lesser punishmerit could have been imposed upon him. On earlier two occasions of misconduct the concerned workman was shown letency and any lesser punishment on the third occasion where the misconduct was extremely serious and established in the enquiry proceedings would lead to frustrang the dedicated sincere and honest workmer ist Party therefore prayed that , the reference be decided gains the concerned workman.

4. In view of the above pleadings issues were framed at Exhibit 16. Out of thuse Issue No. 1 and 2 tia ! are treated preliminary issues which are on the point of and finding. Those are answered as follows :

ISSUES

FINDINGS

( 1 ) Is enquiry fair and preper?

5. 2nd Party claims that , enquiry conducted against him was not conducted by following principles of natural justice.He did not participate in the enquiry . He did not get opportunity to lead evidence Finding given by the Enquiry Officer is a finding on es isdence of the Ist party only. No evidence of 2nd party was in the enquiry and as such it is not a tinding on merits . Whereas ease of the 1st Party is that opportunity- was given to the 2nd Party concerned workman but he did not utilize it. He purposely remained absent from the enquiry . Now, he cannot blame enquiry and 1st Party for ex-parte enquiry and finding given by the Enquiry Officer . To establish that 2nd Party lead evidence by filing afridavit in lieu of examination -in -chief at Exhibit 18, where he reiterated his case of not attending enquiry. The allegations levelked agabist the concerned workman were that , he was required to measure temperature of the product i.e. Mineral Turpenune Oil ( MTO ) which was loaded in the Tank Truckí [ T ] No MCU 588. Accordingto 2nd Party temperature of the product when measured by the concerned workman was 26 degree C. There was operation officer who is hus immediate supervisor ordered the concerned workman to note down the temperature in the Challan as 27 degree though it was 26 degree (C' . The concerned workman refused to record wrong temperature at the instance of said Rajkomar, his immediate superior , Operation Officer. It was not liked by the said officer and so on his complaint , enquiry was conducted hy issuing charge sheet and levelling charges of misconduct . In the cross this witness states il: ut further charge sheet was served on him. He admits that . he replied it. He admits that , second enquiry was initumed 'de- novo ' against him . He was served with the letter dated 18-1-1989 and he replied the said letter . He admus that , he did not attend the 2nd enquiry because it was de - novo. He admits that , copy of finding was served upon him and he replied the same . He admits that he was served with the copy of the report and the findings of the enquiry officer and he replied it He admits that , he had filed appeal on receipt of the termination order. After that the concerned workman closed his evidence by filing pursis at Exhibit 19. There is no evidence from Ist party's side . 2nd Party , concerned workinan , filed written arguments al Exhibit 2t maintaining that, he was required to measure the temperature of the product i. c . Mineral Turpentine Oil (MIO ) which was loaded in the Tank Truck ( T.T. ) No. MCL. 588 and which was 26 degrees C when measured by him but at the instance of his immediate superior Mr Rajkumar , Operation Manager , he did not record 27 degree (", which was not liked by his said immediate superior Mi Rajkumar. According to the

Vi Ves

(2) is finding perverse:

concerned workman report of the said Rajkumar is the main Reasons:

ground for service of charge sheet and to proceed against Issue Nos . 1 & 2 :

[ भाग- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

6. Enquiry proceedings are filed at Exhibit 17. It reveals that 2nd Party did not participate in the enquiry. Even 1st Party has not led evidence by examining Enquiry Officerto show that, enquiry was fair and proper and it was conductedby following principles ofnatural justice. Again for conducting ' de-novo ' enquiry the reason given by the 1st Party is that 2nd Party purposely remained absent. But that is not proved by leading any evidence. In the absence ofthe evidence from 1st Party and looking to the evidence ledby the 2nd Party which is not refuted by leading other evidence by examining the Enquiry Officer or any other witnesses , 1 conclude that , enquiry is not fair and proper.

7. If the enquiry is not fair and proper the finding given by the Enquiry Officer which is not on the evidence ofthe 2nd Party cannot be treated as finding on merits . So I answer this Issue to that effect and conclude that the enquiry is not fair and proper and finding perverse .Hence, the order:

ORDER

I conclude that the enquiry is not fair and proper with its finding perverse; vis-a-vis 1st Party to justify its action oftermination.

Bombay, 6th August, 2008

A. A. LAD, PresidingOfficer नई दिल्ली , 19 सितम्बर , 2008

का.आ. 2905.-ओद्योगिक विषाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार बी, पी. सी. एल. , मुम्बई के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय सं. 2 मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. सीजीआईटी-2/42/2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-30012/13/2006 -आईआर ( एम ) ] कमल बाखरू , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 19th September , 2008 S.O. 2905. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT- 2/42/2006) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunals Labour Court , No. 2 , Mumbai now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BPCL, Mumbai and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 19-9-2008 .

[No. L-30012/ 13/2006-1R( M ) ] KAMAL BAKHRU , Desk Officer

5823

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008 /आश्विन 26 , 1930

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2, MUMBAI PRESENT : A.A. LAD, PRESIDING OFFICER ReferenceNo. CGIT -2/42 of 2006 Employers in Relation to the Management of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.

The Sr. Manager (HRS- West) Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. , Bharat Bhavan , 4 & 6 Currimbhoy Road Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400038 . And

Theirworkman,

Shri Sanjeev P. Desai C/oMrs. Surekha p . Bhosale Flat No. 501 , PoonamNagar Off Mahakali Caves Road Andheri (E)

Mumbai-400 093

APPEARANCES

FortheEmployer : Mr. R. S. Pai , Advocate

No appearance Forthe Workmen

Mumbai , dated 4th July, 2008

AWARD

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour by its Order No. L-30012/ 13 /2006/IR ( M ) dated 14-7-2006 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 have referred the following disputeto this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of BPCL , Mumbai in terminating the services of Sh . Sanjeev Desai Emp . No. 37957 , by way ofdismissal from the service ofBPCL w.e.f. 5-5-2005 is proper, justified and proportionate? If not , then what relief the workman is entitled to?"

2.Bynotice Ex-4 , it appears served on second party workman but he remained absent. Even lateron , notice Ex- 7 sent on same address of the workmen returned back by postal authorities with remark not claimed . So the reference is disposed of for want of prosecution. Hence the order:

ORDER

Reference is disposed of for want of prosecution .

Date:4-7-2008

A.A. LAD , Presiding Officer THE GAZETTE OF INDIA OCTOBER 18 , 2008 /ASVINA 26. 1930

5824

..::

नई दिल्ली , 22 सितम्बर, 2008

का. आ, 2906, ओद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) को धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार दूर संचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र को संवद्ध नियोजकों और उनकः कर्मकारों के बीच अनुवन्भ में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण श्रम न्यायालय नं.। चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 233/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो कंन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

सं. एल 40012/233/ 2003- भाई आडो यू अजय कुमार गौड़, संस्क अधिकारों New Delhi , the 22nd September . 2008 5.0. 2900... In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Cemral Government lierwny publishes the award (Ref. No 23.3/ 2004) of the Coumal Government hndustrial Trilumalabour Court, Ne.I. Chandigarh , as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation 10 the management ol' Department of Telecom , and their workman, which was received by the Central toνετητικήί on22-9-2008 .

No 1-406122332R( DU ) AJAY KUMARGAUR . De Oflicer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SURI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING, OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-COM- LACHREINERT, -1, CHANDIGARH

Catsu No. 1. D. 23.3/20814

Sh . Jaswnder Singh S'o Sh . Jarnad Sangh, Corale Union Courne il Panak

Applicants

Versus

( 1 ) The District Manager. Telecom Геггеры

(2 ) The Sun Dission Otticer ( Group ) , Telecom . Telephone Exchange , Mukalsa ( Punjab )

(3) Sh. Harinder Singh Govt. Contracloth Nagar Opp . Industrial Area Malwal Rodd . Ferozepur City . Invepur- 152002.

(4) The Sub Division Officer. Teleton , I Acharne .

APPEARANCES

None

For theworken

G. Babb

For the management

[ PART II --- SUC. 3 ( 1 ) ]

AWARD

Passed on 20-8-2008

Central Gov! videnotitication No. 1. -40012/ 233 /2003 IR ( DU) , dated 21-6001 has referred the following dispute tothis Tribunal for asdjidication:

"Whether the 190 of the management of District Manger. Teka Ferozepur in terminating the service of Jaswander Singh Sto Sh . Jarnail Singh w.e.f. 1-11-1998 wabout any notice and without any paytment of retrenchment is illegal and unjustified? It so, to what reher the concerned workitian is entitled and from which done?"

2.No one is putent , on behalf of workman . Icarned representative of the management Shri G. C. Babbar is present . Since morning this reference has been called number of times . Al 1045 AM, it was order to be placed before this Tribunal once agam at 2 pin, It is 2 30 now and on repeated calls none is presnet, in spite of having of full knowledge of the proceedings of this reference . The reference is as old as referred to this Tribunal in the year 2004. On repeated calls since morning no one is present Accordingly, the reference is dismissed in default for non- prosecution. Central davemment be informed accordingly. File to be consigned.

Chandigarh

LK. SHARMA , Presiding Officer Date: 9-9-08

12 सितम्बर , 2008

का. आ.2907. ओगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार दूर संचार विभाग के प्रबद्ध नियांजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुचन्ध में निदिए औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरयन्यायालय नं । चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 55/2006 ) को रकाशन करती है , जो कंन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2008 को प्रदुआ था ।

5. जूस 20012 /119/2005 - आईआर( डी चू) अजय कुमार गौड, डेस्क अधिकारी New the 22nd September . 2008 S.O. 2907. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 114 of 1947 ) , the Centual Government herel, publishes the award ( Rel No. 55.2006 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Labour Court, No.l. Chanagarh, as shown in the Annexare , in the Industrial disyne between the employers in relation to the management of Department of Telecom , and their workman, which received by the Central Government on22-9-2008 .

[No. 1-40012319/ 2005-1801 ) ALAV KUMAR GAUR . Desk Officet [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (il ) ]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT-1, CHANDIGARH

Case No. I. D. 55/2006

Sh . Baidev Singh S/o Sh . Santokh Singh, Rio Nawan Mohalla, Nanakpura, Ward No. 15 , Nangal Raod, Ropar.

....Applicant

Versus

The General Manager, Telecom District Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd, Ropar 140001

Respondents

APPEARANCES

For the workman

: None

For the management

AWARD

Passed on 4-9-08

Central Government vide notification No. L -40012/ 119/2005 - IR (DU), dated 15-9-2006 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of General Manager, Telecom BSNL, Ropar in terminating the services of Shri Baldev Singh , Lorry Driver, w.e.f. 28-8-2001 is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to?"

2.No. one is present, on behalf of workman . Learned representative of the management is not present . Since morming this reference has been called number oftimes . At 10.45 a.m. , it was order to be placed before this Tribunal once again at 2 p.m. It is 2.30 now and on repeated calls no one is present, in spite of having of full knowledge ofthe proceedings of this reference . The reference is as old as referred to this Tribunal in the years 2006. On repeated calls since morning no one is present. Accordingly, the reference is dismissed in default for non -prosecution. Central Government be informed accordingly. File to be consigned.

Chandigarh

Date:4-9-08

GK. SHARMA , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 22 सितम्बर , 2008

का. आ. 2908. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार सेन्ट्रल इंस्टिटयूट् ऑफ कॉटन रिसर्च के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में

5825

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/ आश्विन 26, 1930

केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. I , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 83/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42012/215/98- आईआर ( डी यू) ] अजय कुमार गौड़, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 22nd September ,2008 S.O. 2908.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Govemment hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 83/99) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court , No.1 , Chandigarh , now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial dispute between the employers in ralation to the management of Central Institute of Cotton Research, and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 22-9-2008.

[No. L-42012/215/98- IR(DU )] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT - 1 , CHANDIGARH

CaseNo. 1. D. 83/99

Smt . Kala C/ o Sh . Darshan Singh , 371/9, Jawahar Nagar , Hissar- 125001

Applicant

Versus

The Head ofthe station , Central Instt. Of Cotton Research, Regional Station , Sirsa ( Haryana) 125055

Respondents APPEARANCES

For the Workman

: None

: Shri S. K. Sidana

For the Management

AWARD

Passed on 4th March , 1999

Central Government vide Notification No. L -42012/ 215/98-1R ( DU), dated 4-3-1999 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of Central Instt . of Cotton Research in terminating the services of Smt. Kala W/o Sh. munshi Ram is legal &justified? Ifnot, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to? " 2.No one is present, on behalf ofworkman. Learned representative ofthe management is present. Since morning this reference has been called number of times . At 5826

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18 , 2008/ASVINA 26. 1930

...

10.45 a.m. , it was order to be placed before this Tribunal once again at 2 p.m. It is 2.30 now and on repeated calls no one is present , in spite of having of full knowledge of the proceedings of this reference. The reference is as old as referred to this Tribunal in the years 1999. On repeated calls since morning no one is present . Accordingly , the reference is dismissed in default for non -prosecution. Central Government be informed accordingly . File to be consigned.

Chandigarh

Date: 10-9-08

G.K. SHARMA , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 22 सितम्बर , 2008

का. आ. 2909,- औद्यागिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 143 की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , कंन्द्रीय सरकार सेन्ट्रल इंस्टिट्यूट ऑफ कॉटन रिसर्च के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरणः श्रम न्यायालय नं. नाण्डोगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 81/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जा केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[ सं. एल-42012/205/98- आईआर( डीयू) ) अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 22nd September , 2008 S.O. 2909.-- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government herchy publishes the award ( Ref. No. 81.99 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Labour Court, No.1 , Chandigarh, now as shown in the Annexure . in the Industrial dispute between the employers in ralation to the management of Central Institute of Cotton Research , and ther workman , which was received by the Central Govemment on 22-9-2008.

[No. 1-42012/205: 98 - TRIDL ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER , CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIALTRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, -1 , CHANDIGARH

Case No. 1. D. 81/99

Smt . Darshna Co Sh Darshan Singh, 171/9 , Jawahar nagar , Hissar- 125000Д

Applicant

Versus

The Head of the Station . Central Inst . Of Cotton Research, Regional Station , Sirsa ( Haryana ) 125055

Respondents

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

For the Workman

: None

Shri S. K. Sidana

For the Management

AWARD

Passed on 10-9-08

Central Govertiment vide Notification No. L-42012 205/98 ( IR ( DU ) , dated 1-3-1999 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal tor adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of Central Instt. of Cotton Research in terminating the services ofSmt . Darshna Wo Sh . Bir Singh is legal & justified? Ifnot , to what relief the workman is entitled to?" 2. No one is present , on behalfof workman. Learned representative of the management is present. Since morning this reference has been called number of times . At 10.45 a.m. , it was order to be placed before this Tribunal once again at 2 p.m. It is 2.30 now and on repeated calls no one is present, in spite of having of full knowledge of the proceedings of this reference. The reference is as old as referred to this Tribunal in the years 1999. On repeated calls since morning no one is present . Accordingly. the reference is dismissed in default for non- prosecution . Central Government be informed accordingly. File to be consigned.

Chandigarh Date: 10-9-08

GK . SHARMA , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 22 सितम्बर , 2008

का.आ. 2910. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, कंन्द्रीय सरकार बी. बी. एम. बी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संवद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केंन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं.। चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 187/90) को प्रकाशित करती हैं . जां कंन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

| सं. पुत्र -42012/55/ 90- आईआर ( डीयू) ] अजय कुमार गौड़, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi . the 22nd September , 2008 S.O. 2910. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref . No. 187-90 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Labour Court, No.1 , Chandigarh , now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation [ भाग 11- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

5827

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

to the management of B. B. M. B. , and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 22-9- 2008.

the workman. The denial by management to provide rainy season work in 1989 onward is arbitrary and unjust . On the basis of the above averment , the workman has prayed for an order of re -employment for the rainy seasons 1989-90 and so on with back wages .

[No. L-42012 /55/90- IR( DU) ] AJAYKUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM -LABOUR COURT - 1 , CHANDIGARH

Case No. I. D. 187/90

The General Secretary , Nangal Bhakra Mazdoor Sangh , Kolan Area, Nangal Township , Distt . Ropar- 140124

....Applicant

Versus

It isnot disputed by the management of respondent that from 1975 to 1987 the workman was employed regularly during the rainy season after having been sponsored by the employment exchange as per the terms and conditions of the appointment . The services of the petitioner came to an end after the expiry of each specified period . Upto 29-7-88 the petitioner was engaged with the management but on30-7-88 he absented himself from duty and another man was employed in his place in the exigency of work. Theworkman is already gainfully employed working as a contractor for extraction of sand , bajri and stone on Sakarkhand , since long period by concealing this fact with the management of BBMB that he was working as contractor and simultaneously employed in the BBMB as Daryai-man.

The Chief Engineer , Bhakra Dam , Nangal Township, Distt . Ropar(Pb.)

Respondents

In his rejoinder the petitioner challenges the averments of management of BBMB made in written statement.

APPEARANCES

Forthe Workman

: Sri R.K. Singh

: Sri Bhagat Singh

For the Management

AWARD

Passed on 8-9-08

Both of the parties were afforded the opportunity to adduce evidence oral and documentary. Apart from the oral evidence, the following documents has been filedby the petitioner .Annexure I is the medical certificate provided bythe workman regarding his admission to the hospital on 30-7-88 and discharged on 1-8-88 . Annexure Il is the letter ofBBMB regarding the extraction ofsand , bajri etc.All the appointment letters from 1975-1988 are also on record containing the terms and conditions of appointment.

Government of India vide Notification No. L-42012/ 55/90- IR (DU), dated 27-11-90 referred the following Industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

I have heard learned counsels for the parties and pursued the entire materials on record.

"Whether the action of the management of Bhakra Beas Management Board , rep. Through the ChiefEngineer, BhakraDam, Nangal Township in terminating the services of Shri Krishan Ram regulation Belder/Daryai - man w.e.f 30-7-88 isjustified? If not, to what other relief the workman is entitled to and with what effect? "

Undoubtedly, the workman was working from 1975 to 1987 , regularly with the management ofBBMB for rainy seasons as Daryai - man / regulation Beldar as unskilled majdoor. He was also provided the work for 1988 and he reported to his duty on 2-7-88 . The dispute is that the workman absented for two days i.e.30-7-88 and 31-7-88 . As per the statement of workman , he had to proceed to Shimla which is about two hundred kilometers from the place of his duty on account of the death of his relative, thereafter, he fall ill and was admitted to hospiral on 31-7-88 and was discharged on 1-8-88 . He has stated that an application was moved for two days . On the other hand the management has denied that any application for leave was moved by the workman . He absented from duty without information and at his place considering the exigency ofwork another person was engaged.

There are two questions to be answered by this Tribunal . In this reference:-

As per the averment made by the workman in his statement ofclaims , he has been in employment with the B.B.M.B. since 1975 in all the rainy seasons as Daryai man/ regulation Beldar, as unskilled majdoor on work charged basis. He was engaged on rainy seasons only and was employed till 29-7-88 . Due to the death of his relative, he had to proceed to nearby Shimla about 200 kilometers from the site ofwork. He presented an application to his Incharge for two days for 30-7-88 and 31-7-88 and reported for duty as usual on 1-8-88 . He was not allowed to join duty and was put on road. For the said cause another case is also pending adjudication in reference No. 174190 and in the present reference, the workman has claimed re- employment in the rainy season of 1989 and so on which is denied to PARIS 3ţiil THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTER IB.2008 / ASVINA 26, 1930

5828

" Firstly, whether the workman can be renenched as per the terms and conditions of the employment w management under ordinary circumstances?

Secondly, whether the workman under the facts and circumstances ot the case is entitled for any reliet"

rainy seasons the flow of water is tobe watched and reported at every point of arte. Thus , on the absent of the workman the site cannot be left without a man and considering the nature of the work . on account of absen from his duty without any information , another person was engaged at his place . It is nimitted to the workman that at his place another person was engaged

In my view the appointeront of workmart wr temporary for a particular period and that was for Lam seasons only . On perusal of the appuintiments letters , it is also evident that workman was provided the work for definite period oftime andas soon as the time was ove thư employment provided to the workman ceased automatically and the workman cannot claim to be the retrenche as per the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act. Hon'ble Apex Court in Marinda Corporation Sugar Mili Led Vs. Ran! Kishan and Another FJR ( 1988 ) Supreme Court 4. has hek! that since it was only seasonally work, the respondent cannot be said to have been retrenched on their employine ceasing on the closure of the season in view of the clause (bb) of Section 2 (00 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. Hon'ble the Apex Court in the above mentioned judgrien has also directed to maintain a register for all workmen the had been engaged during the season and when a new season is started , the management should make 1 publication in the neighbourhood in which the responden normally lived and if they could report for duty, eng them in accordance with their seniority and exigency of work.

Thus, ifthe work provided to the workman has ceased on completion of work after the rainy seasons he had nu say before this tribunal that he was retrenched . But in this case the situation is otherwise . He absented himselt fa twodays on 30-7-88 and 31-7-88 . The causes which he has shown for his absent is that he moved to Shinla on acecunt of the death of his relative and thereafter, when he was returning, he fall ill and was admitted to hospital on 30-7-88 and was discharged on 1-8-88 . He has filed a medical certificate ofP 11.C. Bhertia that he was admitted to hospital on 30-7-88 and was discharged on 1-8-88 . 11 is une that in statement of chaims he has asserted that he moved application for two days to the work - in - charge of the management of BBMB , before moving to Shimla , but in bus affidavit Ex . MI he has not narrated a single sentence shoul moving of any application before moving from the ditly . Thus , there is no evidence to believe the contention of the workman that he moved from the duty on 29-7-88 atte: his duty after moving an application for two days is. fin 20.7 . 88 and 31-7-88 On the other hand, the managemento ! B had specifically mentioned that no such applicati دناین moved and he absented from the duty without infin

If there was some energeticy to the workman , which every man is supposed to have in the ordinary course of nature, he should have appis for leave to the appropriate authority of the management of BBMU . Considering the nature of work. moving five the duty without information was not proper and legal on part of the workman and he was rightly considered as absented without information from the duty and the Roulagement has tightly engaged another man at his place on account of exigency of work . As their were latches on part of the workman hintself, it cannot be said that he was removed by the management but his removal from the work was on account of his owTI misconduct that he absentel tron duty without information to theOfficer concern of the muragement of BEMB . Hence. it cannot be said that he was retrenched by the management. It is true that as per the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, the workeru : had a claim of priority to the work in next rainy season appointments . It has also been held by the Hon'ble the Apex Court in Ram Kishan's case ( supra) that preference shall be given to the workman in the next season as per le procedure laid down by the Hon'ble the Apex Court . Bir a new fact has been emerged in this case that the workman was lawfully employed and was working as a contractor tor caning his livelihood In his cross- examination , le workman Shri Krishan as W.W. I has admitted the attenticity of Ex , M1 and Ex . M2 regarding his working as contructor for the purpose of extraction of sand , bajri od stone trom Sukarkhand since a long period . The documents which have been tiled by the management as Fx . M 1d Ex . 12 also shows that this work was carried on by the workmatt even at the time when he was engaged with de management of 13BMB during rainy seasons as Daryai un As the workman was lawfully employed and was earning his livelihood , the management was right in his approach to provide the work to another needy person of Indian Society and there is no violationof any rule of Industria ! Disputes Act and of the law laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Ram Krishan's case ( supra) as he was lewally employed and earning his livelihood as contra ot the management of BAMB for extraction of sand bajri and stone ete. Accordingly. neither the workmanwas a retrenche , nor is entitled for any relief in the instant relictose under the provisions ot Industrial Disputes Act this referrence is accordingly answered. Let the Central Government be informed File be consigned.

G & SHARMA, Presiding Officer The workman along with the other persons wa5 engaged for tainy seasons . It was really an exigency of work to which the workman was appointed , as Mas! by the representative in the management that the site cipnot be left without a prin even for a minute because dure the [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 22 सितम्बर , 2008

का.आ. 2911 , औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बी.बी. एम.बी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय सं. 1 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं 69/91) कोप्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -42012/181 /90 - आईआर(डीयू) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi, the 22nd September , 2008 S.O. 2911. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 69/91) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court No. I , Chandigarh , as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management ofB.B.M.B. , and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 22-9-2008 .

[No. L-42012/ 181/90-1R(DU) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT NO.1 , CHANDIGARH Case I.D. No. 69/91

Sh. Ram Pal S/ o Sh . Sandhya Lal ,

5829

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

"Whether the action of the Chief Engineer , Bhakra Beas Management Board , Nangal Township , in terminating the services of Shri Ram Pal , S/o Sh . Sandhya Lal , Mazdoor w.e.f. 1-9-89 is justified? If not, what reliefthe concerned workman is entitled to and from what date ?"

As per the averments made by the workman in the statement of claim, he was employed in the Nangal Division w.e.f. 24-7-89, as unskilled Mazdoor and was continuously employed till 6-8-89. While on duty , he met with an accident on6-8-89 and suffered an injury in his left eye. He became unconscious and was taken to B.B.M.B. Hospital where he was given the First-Aid treatment and was referred toPGI , Chandigarh , where he remained admitted from 7-8-87 to 21-8-89 . He was advised to visit PGI on 28-9-89 and was fmally discharged on 31-8-89 . He reported for duty on 1-9-89 , but was not allowed tojoin duty by the JE and SDO in charge. He was refused to join the duty on account of being a daily waged employee and the daily waged employee has no claim for the re - employment. The management has been recruiting the new hands whereas , he was denied the work . Accordingly, he has prayed for reinstaternent in the services with full back wages with cost and damages .

.... Applicant

C/ o General Secretary, Nangal , Bhakra Mazdoor Sangh, Nangal Township- 140124

Versus

ChiefEngineer, В.В.М.В. , Nangal Township,

DistrictRopar-140061

The management of B.B.M.B. admitted the fact of accident on duty. It is denied that after accident , no informationwas given to the management but it is admitted the previously, he was treated in the hospital of B.B.M.B. and then was referred to PGI . He has not reported for duty on1-9-89 but for the first time, he reported the matter to SDO on 14-9-89 . As per the management of B.B.M.B. , it was obligatory on his part to inform the JE/SDO about the accident immumediatly on the occurrence of the accident which was not done. He was a daily wager appointed for the monsoon seasons and as the season was over no question for taking him to rolls arise. He was provided the full compensation under the Workman Compensation Act, admissible to him on account of his accident on duty.

....Respondent

APPEARANCES

For the workman : Shri R. K. Singh For the Management : Shri Bhagat Singh

AWARD

Passed on 10-9-2008

Govertunent ofIndia , vide Notification No. 1-42012/ 181/90 /1R ( DU ) dated 13-6-9 treferred the following Industrial Dispute for judicial adjudication :

3853 G1/08-18

Bothofthe parties were afforded the opportunity for adducing evidence. In his cross -examination , the workman hasjust repeated the contents of the statement of claim. He has admitted that he has got compensation of Rs . 11,885.87 on account of his accident on duty.

Heard learned counsels for both of the parties. Leamed Legal Advisor has argued that the workman is entitled to reinstatement in the service because he was prevented to work with the management on account of the accident while he was on duty and this situation was out ofhiscontrol. He should be provided the full back wages and the seniority in the service. Learned Legal Advisor for the management of B.B.M.B. has admitted that whenever the management will engage any person for the work, the workman was carried on , he will be given priority. He has also argued that seniority benefit can be given subject to 5830

! HE GAZETTE OF INDIA ORTOBER 18 , 2008 / ASVINA 26.1

.. :

the rules and regulations and the policy decisions of managerment of В.В.М.В.

Considering the argument of learned Legal Advisor of the management and the facts and evidence of the case , I am of the view that the workman has not completed 240 days of work proceeding to the date of his disengagement from the service . Ilowever, as per the provis Industrial Disputes Act , he has a right to priority for the work to which he was working at the tinte of his disengagement .It is undisputed that the workman met with an accident and because of the injuries sustained in the accident , he was unable to work and it was the duty of the manageinent to provide him the work in the next which was not given Thus , on the basis of the pleadings, evidence and other materials on record and the corrention made by learned legai Advisor of the management , I am of the view that the workman was wrongfully disengaged from the worl . and he is entitled to get the work as per the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act on priority , Accordingly , the management of B.B.M.B. is directed to provide the work to the workman on priority whenever any person is engured for the same work on winich the workman was working at the time of his disengagement As the workınan has not worked for a long time , it will not be proper to order in the back wages On seniorit as admitted by the teamed Legal Representative at the management, it is metered that the seniority of the worapan shall be mamamed and protected as per the rales and regulations aplietole to the management of B.B.MM.13 . and as per te pela decision of the management of B.B.M.Β. This reference is disposed of accordingly. Central Government by itunned . File be consigned .

GK SHARMA, Presiding ( Jicer सह दिल्ली, 22 सितम्बर , 2008

का.आ. 212 औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 194 (1947 का 14 की ॥ग 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरः संवाहर नवोदय विद्यालन के प्रबं के संवद्ध नियोजकों और उनमें कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुयध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय कार औद्योगिक अधिकार । चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ को प्रकाशित की जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2000 का प्रान्न हुआ था ।

[ 1-42012: 218/2001 आईआर स्ने

अजय कुमार गंह, इंम्क जांधकारों NewDelhi the 22nd September , 2008 8.0. 2412. in pursuance of Section 17 the Industrial Espates Act. 1947 ( 11 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref No. 173 2002 ) of the Central Govermanent Industrial Tebun - cum- Labour Court No 1. Chandigarh , as shown in the Arнемаге . in the Industrial Dispute between the management of

[PART [ I - St . 3 (ii ) !

Jawahar Navodaya Vidya, and their workmen , which was received by the Cemal Government on 22-9-2008、

2012/218/2001 - IR(CM- ] ] ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR . Desk Officer

VANEXURE

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER , CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT NO. L. HANDIGARH Case 1.D. No. 173/2002

Sh, Bhushan Kumar S Sh Baluk Ram.

Rio Bagla (Thandaparim tensil - Sunderbanı

ถ น

Distt . Rajouri ( J & K

....Applicant

Versus

The Principal, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya , Nud ( Samba) , Distt . Jama , Jarminu

..Respondent

APPEARANCES

For the Workman Workman in person For the Management Shri D. R. Sharma

SAWARD

Pass112-9-2008

Central Govern . vide Notification No. 1-42012 218/ 2001 /1R (CM - 11) dated 2-8-2002 has referred the following Dispute totim. Fribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the at of the inanagement of Jawahar Navodaya Vidalra . Nud , represented by Principal JawaharNavody Vilainya. Nud , merminalng the services of Shri Bu: Kumar w.e.f. 1-12-97 is legal and justified ? what relief the workm15מו entitled to and which idite

2. The presentence was made by the Central Government on the Eile of conciliation proceedings for adjudication of the m : rieterred m the schedule referred above and the workmed far declaring the action of the management as ille i sad invalid And the management may be directed tu Tel: 1. the workman with fall bank wages and continuity

3. The manac turned up and opposes this reference.

4. As per office semoranduan dated 30--1-08 , this case was fived in predelat meeting on 5-9-08 1un its disposal by adopting mediation and conciliation mechanism. The prese : d anthony Mrs. Sukliraj Kaur .

Principal made the statent in Lek Adalar on 22-8-08 , ht the management agrees pride to the workman on the saltne terms and condition which he was working earker [ भाग 1 ]- खण्ड 3 ( ) ]

at the time of removal/left the job by the workman. Today workman appeared in Lok Adalat and made a statement that he accept the offer made by the principal and he will not claim any back wages and other benefits and he withdraws the present reference in Lok Adalat. Accordingly the reference is returned to the Central Government as settled in Lok Adalat . Central Government be informed. File be consigned to record.

Chandigarh 12-9-2008

GK . SHARMA , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 22 सितम्बर, 2008

का.आ. 2913,-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार बी.बी. एम.बी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं 1 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 185/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

: [सं. एल-23012/25/2002-आईआर ( सीएम-II ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi , the 22nd September , 2008 S.O. 2913.In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 185/2003) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court No. 1, Chandigarh , as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of B.B.M.B. , and their workman , received by the Central Government on 22-9-2008 .

[No. L-23012/25/2002- IR( CM -II )] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT NO. 1 , CHANDIGARH

Case No. 1.D. 185/2003

Applicant Sh. Tarlochan Dass C/o Sh . R.K. Singh Parmar , 211 -L, Brari , P.O. Partap Nagar, Nangal Dam , Distt . Ropar

Versus

Respondent TheChiefEngineer, BBMB, Nangal Township , Distt . Ropar

5831

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/आश्विन 26 , 1930

APPEARANCES

For the Workman : Shri R.K.Singh

For the Management : Shri Bhagat Singh with Shri V.K. Sharma

AWARD

Passed on 5-9-2008

Central Govemment, vide Notification No. L- 23012/ 25/2002 /IR ( CM- II) dated 4-11-2003 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of BBMB Nangal Dam, Nangal in terminating the services of Shri Tarlochan Dass S/ o Sh. Pohlo Ram w.e.f. 30-9-96 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled ? "

2. The present reference was made by the Central Government on the failure of conciliation proceedings for adjudication of the matter referred in the schedule referred above and the workman prayed for declaring the action of the management as illegal and invalid and for reinstatement in service with full back wages and all consequential benefits in the interest ofjustice, equity and fair play.

3. The management turned up and opposes this application.

4. As per office memorandum dated 30-1-08 this casewas fixed in pre tok adalat meeting on 5-9-08 for its disposal by adopting the mediation and conciliation mechanisin. Withthe efforts ofthe Tribunal , Sh . R.K. Singh representative of workman and representative of the management made the statement that it has been agreed upon between the workman and tits maasgement of Bвма that as per circular letter No. 36-441- KR4099 /Vot R-5, dated 21-3-0! and the policy of the CRMR and the case ofthe workstar will be considend within a reusatu b time and the worlananhdraws event refermoa LokAdalat ,low aftosove, the revert referez disposed off in tak daint send a Governet be informed.

Chandigark

5-9-2008

CKARMA, Presiding Offi , છ --*****???????

का. , नियम , 17 भारसाको सरकार ची. बी. एक और उनके कर्मका (1947 का एम.बी. के बीच, अनुबन्ध में निद०२ के विवाद केन्द्राय सरकार अधोगक अधिकरण नं. 1 , चष्के पंचाट (संदर्भ सं. 193/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती , कान्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-23012 /7 /2002- आईए सीएम अजय कुमार गोड, डेस्का 5832

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18 , 2008 / ASVINA 26. 1930

New Delhi , the 22nd September , 2008 S.O. 2914. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 193/2003 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - labour Court No. 1. Chandigarh , as shown in the Annexаrе , in the industrial dispute between the management of B.B.M.B. , and their workınan , received by the Central Government on 22-9-2008 .

[No. L -23012/19/2002 - IR( CM - II ) ] AJAYKUMAR GAUR , Desk Oricer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT NO. 1 , CHANDIGARH

Case No. I.D. 193/2003

[PART 11 SEC. 3 ( (i ) ) 4. As per office memorandum dated 30-4-08. this case was fixed in pre lok adalat meeting on 5-9-08 for its disposal by adopting the mediation and conciliation mechanism . With the eltorts of the Tribunal, Sh . R.K. Singh representative of workman and representative of the management made the statement that it has been agreed upon between the workman and the management of BEMB that as per circular letter No. 3624-43 / R & R 466 / 99 /Vol.1 / R-5, dated 21-3-01 and the policy of the BBMB and the case ofthe workman will be considered within a reasonable time and the workman withdraws the present reference in Lok Adalat . In view of the above, the present reference is disposed off in Lok Adalat as settled. Central Government be informed.

Chandigarh 5-9-2008

G. K. SHARMA , Presiding Ofticer नई दिल्ली 22 सितम्बर , 2008

.... Applicant

Sh . Kuldeep Cho Sh . R.K. Singh Parmar, 211 - L, Brari , P.O. Partap Nagar, Nangal Darn , Disit Ropar

Versus

....Respondent

TheChief Engineer , BBMB, Nangal Township. Distt . Ropar

APPEARANCES

For the Workman : Shri R.K. Singh

Shri Bhagat Singh with For the Management

Shri V.K. Sharma

AWARD

Passed on 5-9-2008

CentralGovernment , vide Notification No. 1.-23012/ 19/2002/ IR ( CM - 11 ) dated 4-11-2003 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the managementgement of BBMB Nangal Dam, Nangal itu terminating the services of Shri Kuldeep Sto Sh . Madan Lal w.e.f. 30-9-96 is legat aud justifica? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled ?"

2. The present reference was made by the Cemral Government on the failure of conciliation proceedings for adjudication ofthe matter referred in the schedule referred above and the workman prayed for declaring the action of the management as illegal and invalid and for reinatalement in service with full back wages and all consequential benefits in the interest ofjustice , equity and fair play.

3. The management turned up and opposes this application.

का.आ. 2915.-औद्योगिक विषाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा । ? के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार वी.बी. एम.बो. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संचद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्यागिक विवाद में कंन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं. । , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 189/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-23012/22/2002- आईआर( सीएम -1 ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi . the 22nd September, 2008 S.O. 2915.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 189.2003) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum-Labour Court No. I , Chandigarh , as shown in the Annexure . in the industrial dispute between the management of B.B.M.B. , and their workman, receivedby the Central Government on 22-9-2008 .

[No. 1. -23012/22/ 2002-1R( CM - II ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT NO. 1 , CHANDIGARH

Case No. I.D. 189/2003

Applicant Sh . Parkash Chand C Sh . R.K. Singh Parmar. 211 - L , Brari , P.O. Partap Nagar, Nangal Dam , Distt . Ropar [ भाग 11- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

Versus

The ChiefEngineer, BBMB, Nangal Township, Distt . Ropar, Ropar ...Respondent

APPEARANCES

For the Workman : Shri R.K. Singh

For theManagement: Shri Bhagat Singh with Shri V.K. Sharma

AWARD

Passed on5-9-2008

Central Govement, vide Notification No. L-23012/ 22/2002 - IR (CM - II) dated 30-10-2003 has referred the following Dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of BBMB, Nangal Dam in terminating the services of Shri Parkash Chand Sto Sh . Batna Ram w.e.f. 30-9-96 is legal andjustified ? Ifnot , to what relief the workman is entitled ?"

2. The present reference was made by the Central Government on the failure ofconciliation proceedings for adjudication of the matter referred in the schedule referred above and the workman prayed for declaring the action of the management as illegal and invalid and for reinstatement in service with full backwages and all consequential benefits in the interest ofjustice , equity and fair play.

3. The management turned up and opposes this application.

4. As per office memorandum dated 30-4-08 , this casewas fixed in pre Lok Adalat meeting on 5-9-08 for its disposal by adopting the mediation and conciliation mechanism . With the efforts of the Tribunal , the Sh . R.K. Singh representative of workman and representative of the management made the statement that it has been agreed uponbetween the workman and the management of BBMB that as per circular letter No. 3624-43 /R & R/466/99 /Vol.III / R-5 , dated 21-3-01 and the policy of the BBMB and the case ofthe workman will be considered within a reasonable time and the workman withdraws the present reference in LokAdalat. In view of the above, the present reference is disposed of in Lok Adalat as settled. Central Government beinformed .

Chandigarh

5-9-2008

G. K. SHARMA, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 22 सितम्बर , 2008

का.आ. 2916.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एफ.सी.आई. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं । , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ से 243/2001 )

5833

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/आश्विन 26 , 1930

को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-22012/217/2000- आईआर ( सी-1 ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi, the 22nd September, 2008 S.O. 2916. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 243/ 2001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court No. 1 , Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial dispute between the employe. in relation to the management of FCI and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 22-9-2008 .

(No. L-22012/217/2000 - IR( C -II ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA , PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT NO. 1 , CHANDIGARH

Case No. I.D. 243/2001

Sh. Jagir Singh S/ o Sh. Arjun Singh, Mohalla Sandhu , Kanda Dharamkot ...Applicant

Versus

( 1) The Senior Regional Manager, Food Corporation of India , Sector-34, Chandigarh

( 2) TheAsstt . Manager (D) ,

Food Corporation of India , Dharamkot ... Respondent APPEARANCES

: None

Shri N.K. Zakhmi , Advocate For the Workman For the Management :

AWARD

Passed on 9-9-2008

Central Government , vide Notification No. L-22012 217/2000- IR (C- II) dated 14-6-2001 has referred the following Dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of FC ! in terminating the services of Sh . Jagir Singh Sto Sh . Arjun Singh is legal and justified? If not, ro. what relief Sh . Jagir is entitled to ? "

2. No one persent , on behalf of workman . Learned representative of the management Shri N.K. Zakhmi is present. Since morning this reference has been called number oftimes . At 10.45 a.m. , it was ordered to be placed 5834

GAZETITE OF INDIA

again or 2 p.m. 11152 1 before this Trit.

on repeated calise is present . in spote ne hos full knowledge of the proc cames of this retet reference is as corredathis Triben 2001. On repeated cruls since morning no on Accordingly.

he is demissed in detai prosecution. Cendment be informe

File to be consigned

Chandigarh

9-9-2008

K.SHARMA, Prest

মরনের 2008

का.आ. 2917. औद्योगिक विनादन (1947 का 14:

सी.आई. के वंनकों प

बीच, अनुबन्ध में विवाद में केन्द्रीय

अधिकरण नं. ।

प्रकाशित करती को 22 हुआ था ।

221012/ 228-200

अजय कुमार गांड दे New Dell F 22nd September . 2tars

PART II . S. 3 ( si )

OCR 18, 2008/ASVINA 26. 19

APEARANCES

For the Workman :

N.K. Zakhmi , Advocate For the Management

WARD

P -2008

Central Governme Nontication No. 1.-220012 228.2000 - IR ( C - II ) dated 1-2001 hasreterred the following dispute to this Tribunal dhewion:

Sh . Lachhmat Silaland justified not 10 "Whether the acide aanagement of FCC ] terminating the sees of Sh. Dara Singho what relief the sentitled to

2. No one i

representative of

morning this teterer 10.45 a.m .. it was Faber of Jhetore this Tribunal once again at 2 μ. , one is present , in spite wandan repeated cialis ro vil knowledge of the proceedings of this rere . The reference is as old as referred to this Tribunali year 2001. On repeated calls sitice morning no one scordingly , the reference is dismissed in deta :: !! vot -prosecution. C'entral .1

Government be inform.dingly. File to be consigned.

Chandigarh

S.O. 291. In parstance el Sect Industrial Dist . 194714 of 47 :

9-9-2008

Government ce prislistes the award kei N 2001 ) of the Comrad Grovement Industrial Irbei Labour Court Sundigarh is showniet . Me

pewell the campa in the Industriali pa

to the managerще в received by thes entra Land their workin it. Wha

A MARGAUR

ANNEY RE

BEFORE STAR WARS PRESIDING RIKAT GON INDUSTRIAL TRIBU NAL -COM-LABOUREOLRE NGCHANDIGARH

N10 . 185/21801

Sh . Dara Singis

calman Sungch .

Village and

Tehsil Zira . D

Apr

Versus

( 1 ) The Seni Regard Maratger . Food Corpora i budis

Sector- 31

(2) The Asstt . Maagse D

LA NEARMA . Presking Officer नई दि

का. आ. 2918

1947 का 14 की धारा ! एन.बी. के प्रभवतंत्र विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 केन्द्रीय सरकार योगी. और उन कर्मकान के शेच, अनुबन्ध में निर्दिन्द्रीय सरकार अधिकरण नं. । चार एकशित करती है, जो जा था ।

[सं. एलआईआरसीएम :। मार गौड़ डेस्क अधिका Ness Delin . , 2008 S.O. 2918.-

Industrial Disputes

Government hereby theteatral Gover.... Court No. 1 , Cha the Industrial disp B.B.M B., and jaci Central Goveranst ... trce of Sechon 17 of the 19. the Cemral Ret No 187 2HJ3 unal - cum - l abou in the Annexure , in ser the inanagement of singh was received by the

1223-2002 -JKCM - llil [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) )

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT NO. 1 , CHANDIGARH Case No. 1.D. 187/2003

....Applicant Sh . Nanak Chand C / o Sh . R.K. Singh Parmar, 211 - L , Brari, P.O. Partap Nagar , Nangal Dam , Distt . Ropar

Versus

....Respondent The Chief Engineer, BBMB, Nangal Township, Distt . Ropar

APPEARANCES

For the Workman : Shri R.K. Singh

For the Management : Shri Bhagat Singh with Shri V.K. Sharma

AWARD

Passed on 5-9-2008

Central Government , vide Notification No. L-23012/ 23/2002 / IR ( CM - 11 ) dated 4-11-2003 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management ofBBMB , Nangal Dam in terminating the services of Shri Nanak Chand Sto Sh . Pohlo Ram w.e.f. 30-9-96 is legal andjustified ? Ifnot, to what relief the workman is entitled ?"

2. The present reference was made by the Central Government on the failure of conciliation proceedings for adjudication of the matter referred in the schedule referred above and the workman prayed for declaring the action of the management as illegal and invalid and for reinstatement in service with full backwages and all consequential benefits in the interest ofjustice , equity and fair play.

3. The management turned up and opposes this application .

4. As per office memorandum dated 30-4-08 , this case was fixed in pre lok adalat meeting on 5-9-08 for its disposal by adopting the mediation and conciliation mechanism. With the efforts of the Tribunal , Sh , R.K. Singh representative of workman and representative of the management made the statement that it has been agreed upon between the workman and the management of BBMB that as per circular letter No. 3624-43 /R & R/ 466/ 99/Vol.III / R-5, dated 21-3-01 and the policy of the BBMB and the case ofthe workman will be considered within a reasonable time and the workman withdraws the present reference in Lok Adalat, In view of the above , the I resent reference is disposed of in Lok Adalat as settled . Central Government be informed.

Chandigarh: 5-9-2008

GK . SHARMA , Presiding Officer

5835 नई दिल्ली, 22 सितम्बर , 2008

का.आ. 2919 , औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एफ. सी.आई. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबंद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं. 1 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 295/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-22012/1 /2000- आईआर( सी-11 ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 22nd September, 2008 S.O. 2919. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 295 2000) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court No. 1 , Chandigarh , as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute berween the employers in relation to the inanagement of FCI and their workman , which was receivedby the Central Government on 22-9-2008 .

[No. L-22012/1 /2000- IR ( C - 11 )] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT NO. 1 , CHANDIGARH Case No. I.D. 295/2000

TheDistrictChairman, Food Corporation of India , Executive Staff Union ,

.... Applícanı Distt. Committee, Hoshiarpur . (Pb . )

Versus

TheDistrict Manger , FCI , Distt . Office , Hoshiarpur, ( Pb. )

...Respondent APPEARANCES

: For the Workman Workman in person Rajesh Kumar

For the Management :

AWARD

Passed on 5-9-2008

Central Government , vide Notification No. L-22012/ 1/2000 /IR ( CM - II) dated 4-8-2000 has referred the following disputeto this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of Zonal Manager ( N) , FCI , New Delhi and Distt . Manager , FCI , Hoshiarpur in not promoting Sh . Gurnam Singh, AG III ( D) w.e.f. 26-12-92 when hisjuniors were promoted isjust and legal ? Ifnot, to what relief the workman Sh . Gurnanı Singh is entitled and from which date ?" 5836

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 18 , 2008/ASVINA 26, 1930

[ PART II- SEC. 3 (ii)]

Versus

The ChiefEngineer, BBMB、

....Respondent

Nangal Township , Distt . Ropar

APPEARANCES

3. The management turned up and opposes this reference.

For the Workman

Shri K.K. Singh

For the Management : Shri Bhagat Singh with Shri V.K. Sharma

AWARD

Passed on 5-9-2008

4. As per office memorandum dated 30-4-08 , thus case was fixed in pre lok adalat meeting on 5-9-08 for its disposal by adopting the mediation and conciliation mechanism. 'The workman Shri Gurnam Singh made a statement that he does not want to press the reference and withdraw the same in Lok Adalat . Accordingly the reference is returned to the Central Government as withdrawn in Lok Adalat Central Government be informed File be consigned to record.

Chandigarh: 5-9-2008

Central Govemment , vide Notification No. 1-23012/ 17/2002 / IR ( CM - 11 ) dated 4-11-2003 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

GK. SHARMA. Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 22 सितम्बर, 2008

"Whether the action of the management of BBMB , Nangal Dam in terminating the services of Shri Mohinder Singh So Sh . Ram Asra w.e.f. 30-9-96 is legal andjustified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled ?"

का.आ. 2920 , औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बी. बी. एम.बी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबंद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक त्रिवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं. 1 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 191/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है . जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

सं. गल--230012/ 17/2002- आईआर स.एम-11 ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी

2. The present reference was made by the Central Government on the failure ol' conciliation proceedings for adjudication of the matter referred in the schedule referred above and the workman prayed for declaring the action of the management as illegal and invalid and for reinstatement in service with full backwages and all consequential benefits in the interest of justice , equity and fair play.

New Delhi , the 22nd September , 2008

3. The management turned up and opposes this application.

S.O. 1910. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act . 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref . No.191. 2003) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Coun No. 1. Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure . in the Industrial dispute between the management of B.B.M.B. , and their workman, receivedby the Central Government on 22-9-2008 .

No. L- 23012/ 17 :2002- ( R( CM - 113 ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR. PRESIDING OFFICER , CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOURCOURT NO.1, CHANDIGARHI

4. As per oftice memorandum dated 30-4-08 . this case was fixed in pre lok adalat meeting on 5-9-08 for its disposal by adopting the mediation and conciliation mechanism . With the ellorts of the Tribunal . Sh . R.K. Singh representative of workman and representative of the management made the statement that it has been agreed upon between the workman and the management of BBMB that as per circular letter No. 3624-43 /R & R/466 / 99/ Vol.III / R-5 , dated 21-3-01 and the policy of the BBMB and the case of the workman will be considered within a reasonable time and the workman withdraws the present reference in Lok Adalat . In view of the above , the present reference is disposed of in Lok Adalat as settled Central Governmen be informed.

Case No. 1.D) . 191/2003

Chandigarh: 5-9-2008

211 - L , Brari , O Parup Nagar.

GK . SHARMA , Presiding Officer

Applicant

Sh .Mohinder Singh CoSh R.K. Singh Parmar , ..

Nangal Dant, Dist Rupar [ भाग [[-खण्ड 3( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 22 सितम्बर, 2008

का.आ. 2921.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एफ.सी. आई. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं.- । , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 195/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-22012/260/2000- आई.आर. ( सी-1 ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 22nd September , 2008 S.O. 2921. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 195/ 2001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court No. - 1 , Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of FCI and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 22-9-2008 ,

[No. L-22012/260/2000 - IR( C- 11 ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM -LABOUR COURT-1 , CHANDIGARH

Case No. ID 195/2001

Sh. YusafMohammad S/o Shri Saraj Mohammad , Village Vahblwal, Tehsil Zira , Dharamkot. ...Applicant

Versus

( 1 ) The Senior Regional Manager, Food Corporation of India, Sector-34, Chandigarh

(2) The Asstt . Manager (D) , Food Corporation of India, Dharamkot. ...Respondent APPEARANCES

: None

For the workman .

For the management Shri N.K. Zakhmi

AWARD

Passed on 9-9-2008

The Central Government vide Notification No. L- 22012/260/2000-1R( C -II ) dated 25-4-2001 , has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the Management of FCI in terminating the services ofSri Yusaf Mohammad S/o Shri Saraj Mohammad is legal and justified? If not, to 3853 G1/08-19

5837

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/ आश्विन 26 , 1930

what relief Sh . Jagir Singh is entitled to?" 2.No one is present , on behalf of workman . Leamed representative of the management Shri N.K. Zakhimi is present . Since morning this reference has been called number of times . At 10.45 a.m. , it was ordered to be placed before this Tribunal once again at 2 p.m. it is 2.30 now and on repeated calls no one is present , in spite of having of full knowledge of the proceedings of this reference. The reference is as old as referred to this Tribunal in the year 2001.On repeated calls since morning no one is present . Accordingly, the reference is dismissed in default for non- prosecution. Central Government be informed accordingly. File to be consigned.

Chandigarh 9-9-2008

GK. SHARMA, Presiding Officer (नई दिल्ली , 23 सितम्बर , 2008

का.आ. 2922, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार बी.बी. एम.बी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं. 1 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 53/1999 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं एल -23012/48 / 1998- आई. आर. ( सी -11 ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi, the23rd September , 2008 S.O. 2922.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Governmenthereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 53/1999) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court No. I , Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BBMB and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 23-9-2008.

[No. L-23012/48 / 1998 - IR(C- II ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER , CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT- 1 , CHANDIGARH

CaseNo. ID 53/1999

Sh . Basan Rant son of Shri Phanno Ram C/o Shri R.K. Singh Parmer, Vice President Punjab , INTUC , 211 -L Brari . Post Office Partapnagar , Nangal Dam, District Ropar ...Applicant 5838

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18,2008/ASVINA 26, 1931 :

Versus

(1) The Chief Engineer System Operation BBM1B, Sector 19-B, Chandigarh

(2) The Resident Engineer, Dehar Power House Division, BBMB (PowerWing) Slapper ( H. Р.) ...Respondent APPEARANCES

For the workman : None

For the management Rajinder Singh AWARD Passed on 19-6-2008

The Central Government vide Notification No L- 23012/48/ 1998 - IR ( CM - II ) dated 17-2-1999 . has reterred the following dispute to this Tribunal tor adjudication :

"Whether the action of the Chief Engineer . System Operation Bhakra Beas Management Board , Chandigarh and Resident Engineer, Dehar Power House Division , Bhakra Beas Management Board (Power Wing) Salaper Township (HP ) in terminalung the services of Shri Besan Ram Sio Shri Phanna Ru w.e.f. 28-2-1993 and 31-5-1995 and not re - engaging him while retrenches of Beas construction Board were given employment is just and legal? If nel . to what relief is the workinan entitled?"

2.No one is present, on behalf of the workman even after notice by this Tribunal and workman also fails to ensure his presence . Accordingly, the reference is rotanied to the Central Government for want of prosecution by the workman.Central Government be informed . File be consigned to record.

Announced.

19-6-2008

GK . SHARMA , Presiding Unicer नई दिल्ली, 24 सितम्बर, 2008

का.आ. 2923.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में कंन्द्रीय सरकार सिण्डीकेट बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संचद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरणःश्रम न्यायालय नं.। , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 77/1997 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार कां 24-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/434/ 1995 आई. आर. बो- [ 1 राजिन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 24th September , 2008 S.O. 2923. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act . 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 77 1997 ) ofthe Contral Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - labour Court, No. 1. Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure , in the

PAR : -S5001 Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation 10 the management of Syndicate Bank and their workmea . which was received by the Central Government on 24-9-2008.

No.1-120124341995-1R( 13-11) RAUENDER KUMAR. Desh Officer

ANNLAURE

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER.CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT- 1 , CHANDIGARII Case No. 10 27/1997

Sh. Mangu Ram , Sp Sh . Pala Ram. Vadvindra Colony. Kothi No. 53 , Malva Cinema. Pauaka. Penjais ...Applicant Vethils

Regional Manager , Syndicate Bank . Bank Square , Sector 17, Chandigarh ...Respondent APPEARANCES

For the workman : Sini R.P. Rama For the management : None AWARD Passed a 10-9-2008

Government of Indi vide Notification No. L-12012 434/ 1995 /IR (B.II ) dated 30-12-1996. has referred the following Industrial Dispute for judicial adjudication.

"Whether the action of the Management of Symicame Bank in terminating the services of Shri Mangu R S'o Shri Pali Ransse 1. 15-6-1995 is legal and justified? Ifnot to what relict reconcerned workman is entitled and from what das

As per the averneement ofclan , it is clear that workman has approushed 10 this tribunal to this reference with the facts that he was entplayed as Safisi Sewak by the management of respondent bank on 20-8-1992 in Putiala Brand his services were retrenched 27-9-1996נוס . The services of the workman were earlier terminated on 15-6-1995 during the praceedings of the reference, he was provaded the employment with full back wages. Thereafter , he wagata retrenched . The saune facts have been admitted by line mansucment of bank in its written statement that Sla . Manga Ram worked as Salai Karamchari between 24-8-1992 to 11-6-1945 on different dates as and when he was entrusted to work no temporary basis. Vide branch letter dated 20-4-1996 . Sh Mangu Ramm was re- emploved as part time Spend the joined the branch : in the forenoon on the 27-8- 996. He was retrenched from the service of the bank on 26 1996 with effect from 27-9-1 after giving one monton 27-8-1996 against his acknowledgement as restored under Clause ca ) of Section 25-Faf the Industrial Detes 147. Hewits retrenched [भाग- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

5839 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

as hehas become surplus and there was no sufficient work for the 2 part time Sweepers in the branch .

1. Jaipur Development Authority vs. Ram and another , 2006( 111 ), FLR 1178 , SC,

2.Madhya Pradesh Administration vs. Tribunal, 2007 ( 113 ) FLR886, Supreme Court 3 ,

3. Uttaranchal Forest Development Corporation vs. M.C. Joshi 2007 ( 113 ) FLR 191 Supreme Court.

Both of the parties were afforded the opportunity for adducing evidence . Sh. Mangu Ram vide his affidavit stated that the act ofproviding job on 27-8-1996 was just to escape from the legal consequences on account of his illegal termination on 15-6-1995, which amounts to unlawful labour practices. On the point of unlawful labour practices, he was not cross -examined at all. In his cross-examination , only one question was asked by the learned representative of the management of bank that affidavit of workman is wrongtowhich the workman denied.

All the above mentioned case laws have been discussed by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Sita Ram and Another vs. Motilal Nehru Farmers Training Institute, 2008(117) FLR 1191 in which the Hon'ble Apex Court has also awarded the compensation instead of reinstatement of the workman into the service .

The main question for determination before this Tribunal is whether the retrenchment compensation given by the bank under the circumstances prevailing in this reference is justified?

Thus , considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering that some amount of retrenchment.compensation has been given to the workman whichhe has not received but was transferred to his saving bank account, I am of the view that Rs . 25,000 will be an appropriate amount of compensation to be given to the workman . Accordingly, the management of the bank is directed to deposit Rs . 25000 in the Tribunal as the compensation to be given to Sh . Mangu Ram , the workman . If the management of the bank fails to deposit the amount within one month from the date of the publication of the Award, the workman will be entitled for the interest at the.. rate of 7% per annum from the date of the passing of this award till the final payment .

Accordingly, the reference is answered. Central Governmentbe informed. File be consigned.

G. K. SHARMA , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली , 24 सितम्बर , 2008 For the purpose of answering this reference that whether action of the management in terminating the services of the workman for 15-6-1995 is justified? The answer has been put into the month of this Tribunal by way of the conduct of the management by offering him the re -employment . Thus , the conduct by offering re- employment itself shows that the termination of the workman from 15-6-1995 was not legal and justified. The Management of the bank , on the very day , the workman joined the bank on re -employment gave him one month notice and after retrenchment compensation his services were terminated . Thus , act of management certainly amounts to unlawful labour practices because it was hot done with intention to provide the job to the workman but to escape from the legal liability which the managementbe directed by this Tribunal to undertake under the provision of Industrial Disputes Act. Thus , the retrenchment compensation has no legs to stand under these circumstances in which it was paid in the present case on account of being unlawful labour practices . The termination ofthe workman remains unlawful and notjustified.

का.आ. 2924.--औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में कंन्द्रीय सरकार यूको बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बोत्र , अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में कंन्द्रीय सरकार भौद्योगि अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. । वण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ 11/2003 ) को प्रकसँगत करती है, जः कोन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

Now the Tribunal has to decide as to what relief the workman is entitled? Under such circumstances the two possible relief are possible,

[सं. एल-120/ 1.175/2002- आईआर ( बो -1 ) ] राजिन्द्र कुनार, हेस्क अधिकारी 1. Direction by the Tribunal to provide thejob ofthe workman on the same terms and conditions on which he was retrenched , and

New Delhi , the 24th Septen ber . 2008 2.A reasonable compensation to be awarded to the workman.

S.O. 2924.--In prasuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947( 14 of 194 , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref . No. il 2003) ofthe Central Govt . Industrial Tribunal-cum - Labour Court , No. I , Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of UCO Bank and their workmen , received by the Central Government on24-9-2008,

[No. L- 1201 1 / 175 /2002- ER( B-11 RAJINDER KUMAR , Desk Offier In this case, it has come to the notice ofthis Tribunal that 2 permanent and one part-time Sweeper are already working with the bank and there is no sufficient work for the second part - time Sweeper. So in such type of cases a reasonable compensation maybe an appropriate remedy, Thus Tribunal has got the powers to provde the reasonable compensation in appropriate cases as held by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the following cases ;-- 5840

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18,2008/ASVINA 26 , 1930

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SERI GAYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALCUM- LABOUR COURT- 1 , CHANDIGARH

Case No.11 ) 11/2003

The State Secretly 1000 Bank Employees Association , Haryane State Committee . C/o UCO Bank Extension: Counter Saini Sr See School Rohtak ... Applicant

Versus

The Zonal Manager, UCO Bank . Zonal Office, Sector 17 -B , Chandish160017

.. Respondent APPEARANCES

: Werkman with Shri A.N. Verna For the work

For the manas Shri K.K. Kaushik

AWARD

Passed on 5-9-2008

URIGER Couvertument vide Notification No.1-12011/ 175/2002001) dated 29-11-2002, has referred the following spate 10 this tribunal for adjudication Whether the action of the Asstt. General Manager , UCO Band . Reginal Office , Chandigarh in transferring Shri R. K. Taluga Clerk from Rohtak Branch Office to Chhara Branch Oltice within a period of 3 weeks is bona fide and just? Whether this action of the management is "Linfair Labour Practice" as per Clause 7 of Schedule Vih of the Act? If not , what relief the workman is entitled 10?" 2 Jic present reference was made by the Central Government on the failure of conciliation proceedings for adjudication of the matter referred in the schedule referred above and no workman proyed for declaring the action of the management as illegal and invalid.

The management tuned up and opposes this retirence.

As per the ottice memorandum dared 30-4-2008 , this casewas tied in pre Lok Adalat anecting on 5-9-2008 for its disposai by adopting the neediation and conciliation mechanism . The workman and Shri K.K. Kaushik for the management made a statement that workman and the managem . UCO Bank has agreed that at present Shri R.K. Tada temain in Rohtak but in exigencies ofwork, his transte administrative ground is required, he will be transferred sustly as per guidelines relating to the physically nominapped la view of the above , seulenient, theworkmmunion withdraws this reference in Lek Adalar, Accordingly the reference is returned to the Centrai Government as settled in Lok Adalat . Central Clovertunent be informed. bile be consigned to record ,

Chandigarh 5-9-2008

GK. SHARMA, Presiding Officer

[PART II-- SEC. 3 ( ii) ] नई दिल्ली, 24 सितम्बर , 2008

का. आ. 2925. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार सैन्ट्रल बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुयन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण श्रम न्यायालय , ईरनाकुलम के पंचाट (संदर्भ सं. 134/2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[ सं. एन्न 12011 /24/2004- आई.आर.। बी- राजिन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 24th September , 2008 S.O. 2925... n pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ret. No. 134 2006) of the Central Govt . Industrial Tribunal- cum - Labour Court , Ernakulam as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Central Bank of India and their workman , received by the Central Government on 24-9-2008.

[No. L- 12011 /24/ 2004-1R( B - [ [ ) ] RAJINDER KUMAR , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM PRESENT : Shri P.I. Norbert . B.A. , L.J..B . , Presiding Officer

1. D. 134/2006

(I. D. 35/2004 of Industrial Tribunal , Kollam) :

Linion

The General Secretary , Central Bank of India Employees Union . Cio. Central Bank of India, Main Branch , M.G. Road , Thiruvananthapuram- 695001 리스트는 이다. Bu Ady . Sri Manoj R. Nair.

Management : The Regional Manager , Central Bank of India , Regional Office . P.B. No. 98. Gopal Building, Tayvila Road, Thiruvananthapuram- 695001. ByAdv. St V.V. Siddarthan .

This case coming up for hearing on 26-6-2008 , this Tribunal- cum- Labour Court on 30-6-2008 passed the following.

AWARD

Thisis reference a made under Section 10( 1 ) ( d ) of Industrial Disputes Act . The reference is :-

"Whether the action of the managciment of the Central Bank of India in imposing punishment ofcompulsory retirement with superannuation benefits ofShri P.M.

[ भाग [I- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

5841 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/आश्विन26, 1930

Unnichekkan , Teller ofKalanjoor Branch ofthe Bank w.e.f. 5-8-2002 is justified ? If not, what relief Sh. Unnichekkan is entitled to?

2, 5, 9 and 10. The remiaining witnesses in the list were not examined . Exts . ME- 1 to ME- 57 documents were also marked. On defence side workman was examined as DW I and documents Exts . DE- 1 to 5 were marked.

2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows :-

Sri P.M. Unnichekkan was a Teller ofKalanjoor Branch of Central Bank of India. On 12-4-2001 he was given a meno alleging that he had withdrawn an amount of Rs . 34,000 from the S. B. Accounts of4 customers on different dates without the knowledge of customersby forging their signatures on different dates and without entering the withdrawal in their pass books . A charge sheet was issued to him which was followed by domestic enquiry. In the enquiry he was found guilty of the charge of fraudulent withdrawal of money from customers'account and misappropriating it . There was another charge regarding making false statements in documents connected with his employment . That charge was found not proved.

7. The main argument of the learned counset for the union is that the Disciplinary Authority had deviated from the findings of the Enquiry Officer with regard to charge No. I without hearing the workman . This vitiates the enquiry . What prompted the leamed counsel for the union to submit so is because of the observation of the Enquiry Officer that arnong the management witnesses only MW9 had identified the signatures in the disputed withdrawal forms as that of the workman , But the same witness failed to identify the signature of workman in another withdrawal slip. Hence the enquiry officer did not find the witness reliable. Yet the workman was found guilty . Relying on the same set ofevidence the Disciplinary Authority found the workman guilty. It is selfevident from the submission that the Disciplinary Authority has not made any deviation from the findings of the Enquiry Officer . It is to be noted that apart from MW9 , there are other witnesses and a number of documents , besides circumstances to prove the charge .The finding is not based on the testimony of MW9 . The other objection that investigation report is not produced, cannot affect the enquiry as the management has not relied on that report .

8. The complaints were not examined as they were not interested to appear in the enquiry as they had already received the money. Charge No.2 was found not proved and it was accepted by the Disciplinary Authority . The finding regarding charge No. 1 was confirmed by the Discliponary Authority . Thus there is no deviation from the findings of EnquiryOfficer.

3. Accordingto the workman he had not done the alleged acts . But he had borrowed some money from customers for the purpose of the treatment of his wife . He was not able to repay the amounts within time. That could be reason why the customers complained. He would challengd the findings of Enquiry Officer as well as the verdict ofthedisciplinary authority and appellate authority. The disciplinary authority deviated from the findings of theEnquiryOfficer . But the workman was not heardbythe disciplinary authority before recording a different finding . There is no evidence to substantiate the case of the management regarding fraudulent withdrawal . A preliminary investigation was conducted by an officer of the bank. However it was not produced in the enquiry . Had it been produced it would have brought out the truth . At any rate the punishment imposed is illegal and disporoportionate. The workman is entitled to be re-instated,

4. According the management there is clinching evidence in the enquiry to prove that the workman has committed the misconduct. The workman did not enter the withdrawal in the pass book of the customers with the intention of misappropriating money. The Disciplinary Authority as well as the Appellate Authority have properly analysed the evidence before recording their conclusions. The prerliminary investigation report was not relied on by the management and hence its non- production cannot affect the enquiry. The punishment was imposed in proportionto the gravity of the misconduct . The story of borrowing money from customers for the treatment ofwife of the workman is not substantiated by the workman and it is an unbelievable story. The Enquiry Officer conducted the enquiry fully complying with principles of natural justice and the workman was given full opportunity to defend. There is no ground for interfering with the findings or punishment .

5. The points that arise for consideration are:-

1. Whether the findings are sustainable ?

2. Is the punishment proportionate ?

The evidence consists of the Enquiry File Ext . MI alone on the side of Management .

6. Point No. 1 :-In the enquiry 5 witnesses were examined on the side of the management and they are MWI ,

9. The next contention is that in view of the observation of the Enquiry Officer that none of the witnesses have identified the signature in the withdrawal slips as that of the workman , cuts at the very root of the case of the management and hence the entire findings regarding charge No. 1 should crumble down. The argument appears to be sound at first blush , but there is something beneath the gloss . The case ofthe management is that the workman had withdrawn amounts from the SB Accounts of 4 account holders on various occasions to the tune of Rs . 34,000 . The account holders are Smt. Ponnamma Gopi , from whose account Rs . 19,000 was. withdrawn on 12 different occasions . From the account of Smt. Ponnamma S. Nair Rs . 2,000 was withdrawn. From the account ofSmt . Pankajakshy Amma and Shri P. Narayanan Nair an amount of Rs. 2,000 was withdrawn . From the account of Smt. Sheeja Beevi Rs . 8,000 was withdrawn on 5 occasions . From the account of Smt . P.G. Ramadevi and Sathyapalan Nair an amount of Rs . 3,000 was withdrawn on 2 different occasions . Thus withdrawis were made without entering them in the pass books of the account holders . However they are accounted in the ledger folios and Teller Daily Cash Payment Register. The withdrawal slips contain fordged signatures of customers . This was doneby the workman .Withdrawal slips are ME9 to 20 , 23 , 28 and 32 to 36, 40 and 41. The withdrawal slips are apparently signed by the account holders . But according [PART IT St

18,2008 ASVINA 26

5842

GAZES OF INDI

withdrawals . There w

intrepaying the amounts and to the manager sproutes were fragedt3.

emplamed to the bank the

that is the reason wi

As pointea outtenquiry Officerswept

.:.

the story at least one of the

case ofborrowing w

else has identice steratures in the withdra

come been examined by the

account holders

that of the workman. The Enquiry Officer han

workman . The mar ant was not very pomucular to the version of Mw to identity the signat

there is documentary evtkice

examined the complic

signatures in at sathdrewar slips are not alone..

sides the Branch Manager that of the worn stil he is not free from

to support their case

the aquiry Officer that duogh doubt because there as other circumsta

MW - 10 had deposed

by the customers twice they

pass books were prows

him. On varios de Los amounts were

grassals were made during th

were not updated. In .

the accountsustenters . The withdraws

period when the wa was the teller . All these in the ledger totes Exto.ME - 0.21.25.29.1

circumstances point t : srit of the workman that: the Daily Cash Payment Register LAL ME- 41 1

withdrawals were modently . There we no engent recorded in 11e vegister of withdrawals !!

other hot the tindings of the

and convincing reass

recording sur passats in the register of w

Enquiry Officer tea Suree No. 1 .

without pass tanks de sancton of sity ittgs at ..

is necessary . Ihat rees be the reason why the we

are not record in the Register ofwithdrascal..

11. Charge No statement conneeled : : wrkman Jha made taise emplesment Tharge itsell are made reganttg deputed withdrawdis in th

is very vague and is the management is ofcustomers . theme the worke

not known in which at the workman ad

... by the learned counsel for for the treatmasasafe he had borrow .

false statement . It

the union that utiles : ""

these customers and the withdrawels v

Pud charge is provesi. the East

chorge cannot stand... ventis silly. charge and 2

ected . Hence finding in one the lears with the stipulated time

are independent and

knowledge the regeaners . However he repay

cannot affect the other Ending is that the workinan is he was transed putationto Puthea

2 liss was accepted by the

not guilty of char

The delay ungalmers to compians

Disciplinary Auther "

that he has susiting fraudulentis

Rs. 35,000 was created in his account in A

the management requested to adjust th

Grove. I food that the sinding > For the reaso are sustainable and ca

towards the accounts of S customers to

12. Point No. : Dispunishment imposed is shortfall in their accounts .

superasinuation benefits and 10. Гое scan rade un m

future employment falling compulsory retiremci withour disqualifica

under Clause 21

wifewas ail ne be prodir ang sonne medicalc

o Bipartite Settlement dated the same time humers had code c

crion the punishment is liarsh

14-2-1995 . Accorder

1. he noted that the misco bank which - 10057 statingt at .. !

and disproportionate:

of the workman is t

in question erhem and th

nd fraudulently walthdrawn

Banders on various occasions .

make goodtered by them Submen

is by a banking institution. R

amounts of differen This cannot be treate

enquiry the preseitig ellier has sent t

bank and the customers will

affects the reputatur

account hold upear as witnesses it this.j

lose confidence in the

in the notices they made an endorsement sun.

Hence die Management cannot

struget punishment . It is work.man had green them the amount withdraw

be found fault for i

accounts and hence they have no compiaal 1

neither illegal nor date

containing the cadorsements are Exts MP - 18

is passed finding that the

In the result

true that the coroplints were not examined bes

of the C'entral Bank of India in

action of the manages

did not wan !! appear in the enquiry since

compulsory retirement of the satisfied as tise amounts were repada 12 .

Teiler is legal and justilied

imposing the punisa workmo Sri P.M.

However Id . W 19 10 57 compчить

and ise is not entitles rehel.

endorsements in the notices was good !

that the custod no ! weihdrawn tic

The award wil make effect one month after its publication in the On : Cede

respective dak tmey had in fact , Coca

newal Assistant , transcribed and bank regarding thdrawals without their kn

workman hitiselt had abnitted during the

Dictated to typed by her , correcte 1 passed by me of this the 30th day of June, 2008 .

DW1 that he sad borrowed money fruits

NORBERT. Presiding Ollicer various dates . Those amounts were given

customers by bundling over withdrawals

PENDIN

them . The entries regarding withdrawals won

Exhibit for the Manage aren

the pass books on the request of account hold

NP.M. Unnichekkan.

M1 - Enquiry File

the knowledge of their family members is [भाग 11-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

5843 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26 ,1930

नई दिल्ली, 24 सितम्बर , 2008

" क्या प्रबन्धन , उत्तर रेलवे लखनऊ द्वारा कर्मकार स्व. ईश्वरलाल कुरील को जनवरी 1996 से मई 1996 तक के अन्तर का भुगतान उसकी पत्नी श्रीमती रानी को न दिया जाना न्यायोचित एवं वैद्य है ? यदि नहीं तो वह किस राहत को पाने की अधिकारी है ?

का. आ. 2926 , औद्योगिक विषाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार उत्तर रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , लखनऊ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 20/2008 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-41011 /43/2007-आईआर ( बी-1 ) ] बी. के. मनचन्दा, अनुभाग अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 24th September, 2008

Thisindustrial dispute has been raised by the wife of deceased worker Ishwar Lal Kuril through representative Mandal Sanghatan Mantri , Uttar Railway Karmchari Union, lucknow alleging that said worker has not been paid difference of salary for the period Jan. 1996 toMay 1996 for which he was legally entitled and claimed amount ofdifference of the salary for the aforesaid period.

5.O. 2926. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 20/2008 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court, Lucknow as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial dispute between the management of Uttar Railway, and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 24-9-2008.

[No. L-41011 /43/2007-IR(B - I) ] B. K. MANCHANDA , Section Officer

The statement ofclaim for Rs.31,795 was presented bythe representative of the wife of deceased worker and during the course of proceedings at the stage of filing written statement an application has been moved on behalf of the union along with certifled copy of the memorandum of settlement between Northern Railway Lucknow and Uttar Railway Karmchari Union, Lucknow dated 21st July, 2008 with the request to pass an award on the basis of settlement. The representative of the opposite party has not opposed the above application and admitted the contents of the settlement.

ANNEXURE

The terms of the above settlement are as follows;

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL

CUM-LABOUR COURT, LUCKNOW

Present: N.K. Purohit, PresidingOfficer

I.D. No. 20/2008

Ref. No. L-41011 /43 /2007- IR( B- 1 ) dated : 28-02-2008

1.The managentent of Northern Railway, Lucknow is agreed to make the payment ofdifference of wages from Jan. 1996 to May 1996 in respect of Late Ishwar Lal Kuril, Ex CT ! amounting to Rs.5611.00 to Smt . Rani wife of late Ishwar Lal Kuril.

BETWEEN

Mandal Sangthatan Mantri

Uttar Railway Karmchari Union , 283/63 B, Garhi Kannoгa , PremwatiNagar PO: Manak Nagar Lucknow

2. The Uttar Railway Karmchari Union , lucknow is agreed not to press the case before the CGIT. Lucknow in reference no . L- 41011 /43 /2007 - IR (B- I) dated 20-12-2007 as per settlement made by railway management mentioned in para no . I of terms of settlement.

And

3.Both the parties will submit implementation report within30 days from the date of settlement .

Vatishth Mandal Karmik Adhikari , Uttar Railway, DRM Karyalya Hazratganj , Lucknow

AWARD

In view of the aforesaid settlement and stared position by both the parties it is no longer necessary to go into the merit of the claim. Award is given in the light of the settlement dated 21st July , 2008 directing the management to pay amount of Rs . 5611 to Sint . Rani wife of deceased Ishwar Lal Kuril within 30 days .

In case of default in making payment as aforesaid wife ofdeceased Ishwar Lal Kuril is entitled for interest 12% tilt date of actual payment .

Award as above .

By Order No.L-41011/43/2007-1R(B- 1 ) dated 28-2-2008 the Central Government in the Ministry ofLabour, NewDelhi in exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub-section ( 2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) referred this industrial dispute between Smt . Rani wife of the deceased worker Ishwar Lal Kuril and Uttar Railway , DRM Karyalya , Lucknow for adjudication .

N. K. PUROHIT, Presiding Officer

Lucknow 11-09-2008

The issue of reference for adjudication is as under;

THI GAZEITE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18 , 2008/ASVINA 26, 1930

5844

---

नई दिल्ली, 24 सितम्बर , 2008

का. आ. 2927. औद्यागिक त्रिवाद अधिनियम, 1447 (1947 का 14 ) को धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार न्य बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अन्य में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, चण्डीगढ नं. - 1 के पंचाट संदर्भ 247/1999 ) कां प्रकाशिद करती है , तो कंन्द्रीय सरकार कां 24-9-2008 को प्राप्त भी था !

(नं. एल-2012:293/ 1999 - आईआर बी ।।। बी. कं. ननधन्दा, अनुभाग अधिकारी New Dein , the 24th September , 2008 S.O. 2927. in pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act . 1947( 14 of 1947 ) , the Centralأ Govemment hereby prhiishes the award ( Ref. No. 247-1949) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - curn- Labom Court- 1 , Chandigch as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of State Bank of India , and their workanen which was received by the Central Government on 21-4-2008.

No 1-12012293 1999- [ R( 13 - is U. K. MANCHANDA. Section Oilieer

ANNEXURE

BEFORESHRIGNANEDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT-I.

CHANDIGARH

Case No I.D 247/99

Shri Om Prakasht. So Naro Naib Chond , Ro VPO : lägen.d .

The Kistwat. Disit Body & Ki

..Applicant ( 1 ) The Chief General Manager . State Bank ofindia, La HeadOffice , Sector- 1 B Chandigartı

(2) The Asstt General Manager . State Bank of Ind a 122- A/ D Gandmuse & K) . Jaarniu - 180404

.. Respondan

APPEARANCES

For the worknun Workibat in person

For the management

AWARD

Fedor 5.0.08

Central Govinde notification No. 1-12012 זילאי IR ( CM - 1 ) , dared 15-11-1994 , as referred the followers dispute to this Trad ki adindication :

"Whether the management of F... representest by AGM..S B.1 , Landlunagar Jar ( J & K ) adel General Morager, State Beers, ot Iodia. Chandiosa. inmust inculding the name

[PART II-Sec. 3 ( ii ) ] eligible candidates for appointments as Class IV staff and denying appointment as per settlement dated 17-11-97 and subsequently terminating his services w.e.f. 28-10-98 isjust and legal . It not to what relief the workman is entitled to ? "

2. The present reference was made by the Central Govt, on the failure of conciliation proceedings for adjudication of the matter referred in the schedule referred above and the workman prayed for declaring the action of the management as illegal and invalid and for reinstatement in service with full backswages and all consequential benefits in the interest of justice , equity and lair play .

The management turned up and opposes this reference .

As per office memorandum dated 30-4-08, thís case was fixed in pre Lok adalat meeting on 5-9-08 for its disposal by adopting the mediation and conciliation mechanism The workman and Shri 1. B. Sharma Chief Manager State Bank 01'India jointly made a statement that it is agreed between the workman and the management that workman will join in the bank on the same capacity on the same terms and conditions on which he was disengaged from the bank. 11 was also requested by the workman that he should be considered for future apponuments in the bank regarding retaxation of age because of the long litigation before this Tribunal . It has been agreed upon. The representative of The management also requested that he will seek approval from the higher authorities that the workman will be considered for future appomuments . It is also agreed that no backwages and no senurity will be given to the workman . In view of the settlemem the workman withdraws the present reference in Lok Adalat Accordingly the reference is returned to the Central Govt. as settled in Lok Adalat . Central Govt .he informed . 1 ile be consigned to record .

G & SHARMA. Presiding Office Chandigarh 5-9-08

नई दिल्ली सितम्बर 2008

का. आ. 2928. 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 बैंक ऑफ पटियाला के प्रबंध विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 अनुमण में कंन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट संग्द्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबन्ध में निरंगष्ट औद्योगिक त्रिवाद में कंन्द्रीय मरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं. 1 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 131/1991 ) को प्रकाशिन है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-4-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ य

[सं. एल-223199 आईअसरः यी 111 ) . वो, मनचन्दा, अनुभाग अधिकागे New Dellu . the 27th September . 2008 S.O. 2928. In pursuance of Section 17 at the Industrial Disputes Act. 1917114 of 1947 ) , the Cenical LGovernment hereby pubeshe Award ( Ref No 13t 99rofthe Central Govenant Indusmal Tribunal - cum- [ भाग ][- खण्ड 3(ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26 , 1930

5845 in the industrial dispute between the management of State Bank ofPatiala, and their workman , received by the Central Government on 24-9-2008.

3. That, you are alleged to have misplaced two credit vouchers dated 19-3-83 for Rs. 740 and 520 relating to SB A/ c No.323 (Sh. Sandeep) and SB A/ c No. 185 Register of the branch and thus did act prejudicial to the interests of the Bank.

[No. L- 12012/234/ 1991 - IR(B- III)] B. K. MANCHANDA , Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI GAYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM -LABOUR COURT-1 , CHANDIGARH

Case No L.D 131/91

4. That you were delivered letter No.6042 dated the 20th December, 1982 by the clerk concerned which was addressed to you, you instead of acknowledging the letter, tore away the letter into pieces in the presence ofSh . Vinod Kumar Bhatia Dispatch Clerk . You thus, created disorderly scene in the premises of the Bank and failed to obey the lawful orders of the Manager.

General Secretary, State Bank ofPatiala, Employees ' Union (Haryana) Central Office , 261 , Subhash Nagar , Rohtak- 124001

...Applicant

Versus

5. That you on 2-5-83 misbehaved with Sh . Ramesh Ojha representative of M/ s . Bharat Cotton Industries who visited the branch for transacting certain business . You thus showed indecent behaviour in the premises of the Bank to the constituents of the Bank.

General Manager , State Bank of Patiala , Head Office, The Mall , Patiala -147001

...Respondent

APPEARANCES

6. That on 21-9-83 you abused Sh . Ram Kumar , watchman -cum - peon of the branch and tried to slap him and thus , committed breach of the discipline .

For the workman : Sh . D.R. Sharma

Sh. N.K. Zakhmi

For the management :

AWARD

Passed on 15-9-08

Central Govt . vide notification No. L- 12012/234/91 / IR(B- III), dated 23-9-91 , has referred the following industrial dispute forjudicial adjudication:

"Whether the action of management of State Bank ofPatiala in awarding the punishment ofwith -holding offour annual grade increments with future effect of Sh . Lyak Singh, Peon- cum-Frash, is just , fair and legal? Ifnot , to what relief the workman is entitled ? "

Hewas given an opportunity for replying the, charge sheet. Dissatisfying with the reply, a departmental enquiry was ordered , enquiry officer was appointed, and the enquiry officer gave his report to the effect that charge No. 1 , 5 and 6 are proved against the workman whereas , charge No. 2, 3 and 4 are not proved . Accordingly, while answering this reference, I will discuss the matter relating to the charge No.1, 5 and 6 which have been held to be well proved by the enquiry officer. The workman has challenged the enquiry proceedings enquiry report and other proceedings on the ground of violation of principle of natural justice stating that no opportunity was given to him . This Tribunal has not framed any preliminary issue on genuineness of enquiry, accordingly, the main question for determination for this Tribunal, while answering this reference are as follows:-

On perusal of the statement of claim and written statement, it evident that on 20-2-84 , the workman was charge sheeted for 6 causes which are as under :

1. Whether a fair and reasonable enquiry was conducted by the enquiry officer in compliance of the principle of natural justice .

2. Whether the enquiry officer was justified to hold the charge No. 1 , 5 and 6 well proved against the workman .

1. That on the 26th November , 1982 , at about 5.10 p.m. you, unauthorisedly took away gunny bags used by the branch for packing of stationery. Shri Ravi Chand, Guard on duty advised you not to do so but you did not accede to his request and took away gunny bags from the branch. You thus , did act prejudicial to the interest of the bank .

3. Whether the disciplinary authority and the appellate authority have followed the principles of natural justice while awarding punishment to the workman and in disposal of the appeal against the punishment order.

2. That you do not wear the official uniform supplied to you . You were advised to the Manager vide office order No. 12 dated 7-3-83 to wear the uniform but you did not comply with his lawful orders . Vide office order No.17 dated 17-3-83 , you were again advised by the Manager to wear the uniform but you are attending the office, without , any uniform in utter disregard of instructions issued by the Bank.

Parties were afforded the opportunity ofbeing heard. Entire enquiry proceedings and the enquiry report are also on record . I have gone through the entire enquiry proceedings and the evidence adduced by the parties . WWI , Sh . Lyak Singh in his cross -examination has admitted 3853 01:08-20 5846

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18 , 2008/ASVINA 26. 1930

that he received charge sheet and filed the reply. In the enquiry he was represented by Sh. D.L. Sikka . He has also admitted that he has cross - examined all the witnesses of the managenient and every proceedings bears his signature. I have also gone through the enquiry proceedings from. which it is clear that the enquiry officer adopted a fair and reasonable procedure while conducting the enquiry . He also ensured to aflord all possible opportunity of being heard to the workman on every stage of enquiry and there seems no violation of any rules ofprinciple of natural justice . Accordingly, on genuineness of enquiry , I am of the view that the enquiry officer has conducted the enquiry in a fair and reasonable manner and there has been no violation of principles of natural justice.

As stated earlier that charge No. 1. 5 and 6 are held 10 be well proved against the workman in the enquiry teport . Charge No.l is relating to taking away gunny bags unauthorizedly by workınan , used by the branch for packing ofstationery. Sh . Raiv Chand , Guard on duty advised him not to do so but he did not accede to his request and took away gummy bags from the branch. Sh . Ravi Chand was examined as PW2 whereas , Sit. M.C. Sharma the then Branch Manager was examined as PWI . Both of the witnesses have categorically stated how the workman took away the gunny bags which were the property of the bank and was used for packing of stationery . The letters regarding the information l'inciden for taking away of gunny bags are also on record . tirne gone through all these letters which proved that Sh . [ yak Singh on 26-11-92 at about 5.1 5 p was advised hy the Guard, Ravi Chand not to carry the gunny bags. When asked by the Manager . PWT. the answered " TO KYA BO GAYA " . Thus , the enquiry officer was abesitirely justified in hokting the charge N for taking the game bags unauthorizedly on of the barik premises which was the property of the bank and used for packing the stationery

The second chuge , charge No.5 , proved against the workman is that on 2-5-83 , he misbehaved with Sh . Runesh Ojha representative of Mis . Bharat Cotton Industries who visited the branci: for transacting certain business A written complaint was filed by Sh Ojha which tiled as Annexure 1-15 in the enquiry file . Sh . Ramesh Udha was examined by the enquiry atliver in which he proved about the incident of msbehavior by Lyak Singh. The work cross - examined Sh . Ramesh Ojha but nothing ad erse conid Irace out . No evidence on this charge was adduced by the workman in his detience Accordingly , enquiry allice was also justified in his finding on Charge No.5 regard ng the misbehavior of Sh . Lyak Singh with Sh . Ramesh Fili representative of M's Bharat Cotton Industries , The charge No. 6 which was also held to be proved by the enquiry officer against the workman is the 1-9-93באור . Lak Singh abused Sh . Ram Kumar, Wathman Peon of the branch and tried to slap him While disang

[PART 11-SR3 (0 ) ] this charge, the enquiry atlicerat Page No. 15 , Para No.2 has given a general opinion as follows:--

" It all appears that the behavior of Sh . Lyak Singh was not appropriate towards his colleagues."

This observation of the enquiry officer , being a general one cannot be et any help while attempting te prove the charge Ne & aganist the workman for misbehaving with Sh . Ram Kumar and tried to slap him . During the enquiry proceedings , the enquiry officer is supposed to conduct the enquiry only for adjudication for which workman is charge sheeted and not other wise . For his general behavior with the colleagues , Sh . Lyak Singh was not charge sheeted accordingly, on the basis of this inference alone, it cannot be said that the charge No.o against the workınan is proved . I have gone through the other part of the enquity proceedings and enquiry report on charge No. 6 Sh . Ram Kumar made a written complaint to the Manager concerned aml this complaint was proved by Sh . Raj Kumar as mangement warness before the enquiry officer . No doubt , the workman adduced the evidence in defence on this charge int on collective perusal of the entire materials on record . I am of the view that the complaint and statement of compluniunt, Rain Kumar is well proved and enquiry officer was further justified in holding the charge No to well proved against the workman .

bun the mental behaviornman which is 10 be considered. On the sun . Mr Ojha was unsbeltaved The question lett a determination is that for taking away gunny bags unamrizedly, unshehaviour with Sh. Ramesh Ojha , a rep senative of M/ s . Bltarat Conon Industries have a buisare with the bank and misbehar kur with Sh. Ramesh Kutnah anempt for slapping him is such a misconduct for much stoppage of 4 ineretnents with cumulative effect is proportionate punishment . On perusal of the evidenceliced by the workman before this Tribunal , it is evde han fall opportunity was given by the disciplinary anbrity and appellate authorny of being heard . He was the show cause notice and also ensured the personal bears bar tithing away the grans bags unauthorizedly, it not the value of the guney bags which is against the interest of the bank. The ngain working of the bank will be at stake, it the customers dealing with the bank and having busness with the bank . are not properly treated by us weepees. Likewise, misbekasior with the colleague Mr Ram Kramar and tried to slap funtis such a miscondut which would be dealt with severels to maintain the discipline in an organization , particularis in the financial institutions . lhus , to an opinion , with-hubing of 4 increments of St. Lock Singh was the proportional ponishment to his useduci nad the workman Isl entitled to any relief this reference is answered accordingly . Tile he comagnes.

SHARMA . Presiding Offic [ भाग [ I-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 26 सितम्बर , 2008

का. आ. 2929, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार उत्तर मध्य रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , कानपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 22/2004) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-41012/ 304/2003- आईआर ( बी -1 ) ] बी. के. पनचन्दा, अनुभाग अधिकारी New Delhi, the 26th September , 2008 S.O. 2929.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 22/2004) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Kanpur as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Uttar Madhya Railway, and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 26-9-2008 .

[No. L-41012/304/2003 - IR(B- 1) ] B. K. MANCHANDA, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI R.G SHUKLA , PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, SHRAM BHAWAN ,KANPUR

Industrial Dispute Case No. 21 of 2004

BETWEEN

Krishna Pal Singh Son of Rahmali , C/ o Chhidu Singh Yadav, Vill. Michki & Post Haswa, District Fatehpur

And

Assistant Engineer(HQ)/ Appellate Authority, NCR, Allahabad

Industrial Dispute Case No. 22 of04 Sri Sarvan Kumar Son ofRoop Lal Bungalow No. 17 -C , Out HouseNo. A at Railway Hospital NCR Govind Nagar, Kanpur

And

Assistant Divisional Engineer/ DisciplinaryOfficer, NCR, Allahabad.

5847

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26 , 1930

AWARD

1. As in both the above Industrial Dispute cases a common question offact and law are involved, therefore, it is proposed to decide the same by means of this common award.

2.The Central Government , Ministry of Labour, in Industrial Dispute Case No. 21 of2004, vide its notification No. L-41012/303/2003 - IR(B - 1 ) dated 8-4-04, has referredthe following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal- KYA SAHAYAK MANDAL ABHIYANTA NCR FATEHPUR KEADESH DINΑΝΚ 9-1-2003 ГАТНА APPELLATE AUTHORITY KE ADESH DINANK 20-6-2003 KE DWARA SHRI KRISHNAPAL SINGH PUTRA RAHMALI KO RAIL SEWA SE HATAYA JANA ( REMOVE FROM SERVICE) NYAYOCHIT HAI?

3. The Central Government , Ministry of Labour, in Industrial Dispute Case No. 22 of2004 , vide its notification No. L-41012/304/2003 - IR( B - I ) dated 8-4-04, has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Triburial- KYA SAHAYAK MANDALABHIYANTA UTTAR MADHYA RAILWAY FATEHPUR KEADESH DINANK 09-01-2003 TATHA APPELLATE AUTHORITY KE ADESH DINANK 20-06-2003 KE DWARA SRI SHRAWAN KUMAR ATMAJ ROOP LAL KO RAIL SEWA SE HATAYA JANA ( REMOVE FROM SERVICE) NYAYOCHIT HAI ? YADI NAHI TO KARAMKAR KIS ANUTOSH KA HAQDAR HA !?

4. The undisputed facts of the case in both the cases are that theworkmen were regular and permanent employees ofthe opposite party and they were given the status ofat the post ofGang Man by the opposite party. Both of them were served with major penalty charge sheet daxed 28-10-83, for numhandling with Gang Mate Sri Ram Krini misbehaving with him and the ground that he left the place of duty unauthorized mother without permission which act was of serious natur ses holding depagmental enquiry against both of the Enquiry Otlücer submitted his report dated 2-11-88 ami aing upon the said inquiry report the disciplinary authey by means of its order dated 30-12-1993 removed the services both the delinquent employee from the service of rait . Both delinquent employees prefered sem appeais before the appellate authority and the appeits authority after considering the nature of misenedut vide its order datert 26-04-1994 rejected the appeal of the employees . Thereafter both them approached before the Central Administrative Tribunal , Allahabad, by filing O.A.No.1043 of 1994 and O. A. No. 1043 of 1994, whereby the order ofthe disciplinary authority and the appellate authority were challenged by than Administrative Tribunal allowed the application vi le it . der dated 12-04-02 by setting aside the on te's THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 18,2008 / ASVINA 26 , 1930

5848

Impugned with direction that the petitioner shall remai under deemed suspension with further direction that de novo inquiry from the stage of 06-11-87 be held in the matter and the opposite party are free to proceed against the delinquem employee relying on the settled taw that where there is procedural irregularity in holding of enquiry. the inquiry report and consequential orders mas be quashed and set aside but the matter should be remanded back to the authorities to start inquiry from the stage where the said irregularity has taken place . The order dated 12-04-02 is quite indicative of the fact that the perasal of the inquiry report shows that apart from the evidence of three officers as mentioned above , there were other evidence available on the tile to show that the incident had taken place and that the applicants had abused , insulted and slapped the said P.W.l and there is no requirement to rely on the statement made by these ofticers as even without their statemerns the charge would still be proved against the applicants .

5. In view ofin Tribunal has no hesitation in examing the enquiry conducted by the department from the stage of 6-11-87 under the orders of the Industrial Tribunal .

6. Before appreciating the facts pleaded by the contesting parties and evidence adduced by the parties both the delinquent employees have not denied their presence at the place of incident on 15-10-83 and also it is not in dispute that bf.R was lodged against both the cinployees by the officers of the Railway regarding the incident of manhandling , abusing and slapping the officers of the opposite parties by these delinquent employee . It is also not in dispute that both of them have left the place oftheir duties without prior information of their higher authorities and participated in demonstration along with their . colleagues and became part of manhandling with their superior officers .

7. Now the case as set up by both the delinquent employees are that Assistant Divisional Engineer, Fatehpur appointed Sri GN Mishra , vide Standard Form No.7 dated 6-8-2002 , as Enquiry Officer started inquiry do- novo . The delinquent employces requested vide their letter dated 19-8-2002 dated certain doruments . The delinquent employces again on 13-9-02 and 14-09-02 again demanded but the documents were never provided to the delinquent employees . Tiey requested before the disciplmary authority for providing the documents called for by them. It is further pleaded by them that the star witnesses such as Ram Kripal and JK Rai who were mentioned in the charge sheet have not been examined as witnesses nor theywere produced for their cross - examination at the hands ofdefence representative during the course of conduct of inquiry by the Enquiry Officer . Thus the inquiry conducted in their case is against the rules and natural justice , and rules governing the service conditions. The disciplinary authority based on inquiry removed the services of the delinquent employees by means of its order dated 9-1-03

[ PART 11-Stiil which is illegal, arbitrary and against the principles ol' natural justice which is liable to be set aside . Likewise appeal preferredby both of them against the order oftheir removal were qssailed by them hy liking appeal which 100 could not find favour and the appellate authority vide its order dated 20-6-06 rejected their appeals Lastly it is pleaded that the report of Enquiry Officer is perverse and the same caики be made basis for inflicting of any punishment . On the basis of above pleadings it has been prayed that the punishment order dated 9-1-13 aud appellate order dated 20-6-03 be set aside and the worlimen be reinstated in the service of the railway with full back wages, continuits of service and with other consequential benefits .

B. The claim of the workers have been contested by the opposite parties or variety of grounds . in as much as the delinquently employees have rightly been charge sheeted for their serious nature of musconduct committed on 15-10-83 , against their senior officers publicly by slapping him , abusing him and creating indecent scene . They were given proper and adequate opportunity of their defence by the Enquiry Otticer during the course of conduct of inquiry. Rules of natural justice have been followed by the Inquiry Officer and he had submitted very reasoned findings in the case of both the delinquent employees. The disciplinary authority after giving anxious considerations to the proceedings of inquity . material available on inquity and inquiry finding was of the opinion that ends of justice would be met if these delinquent employees be awarded punishment of removal from railway service and accordingly they were removed from the railway service . There is no illegality either in the action of the Inquiry Officer or disciplinary authority or the appellate authority It has, therefore been prayed that the punishment awarded to the employees does not all for any interference at the hands ofthisTribunal and ther claim is liable to be rejected.

9. In Industrial Dispute Case No. 21 of 2004 , whereas workman has adduced oral as well as docuntemary evidence , opposite party have filed certaindocuments by way of evidence and has given any oral evidence not have cross- examined the worker witness , In 22 of 200-1 both contestingparties have adhreed oral as well as documentary evidence.

10. It may be pointed out that for appreciating the action of the managentient based on disciplinary action the evidence led before the Tribunal is being ignored and they will be examined on 11 basis of evidence of parties betore the enquiry officer .

11. The Tribunal has examined carefully the evidence adduced by the parties vefore the Inquiry Officer and have also gone through the materials available on record. As pointed out above the Tribunal is confining its findings to the departmental proceedings held after the order passed by the Central Adounistrative fribunal directing the management to hold enquiry de novo.

[भाग ॥- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18 , 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

12. Tribunal bas also heard the arguments of the contesting parties at length.

13. The representative for the workmen have vehemently argued that in proceedings de-novo held against the workers the inquiry officer did not provide the workers documents summoned by them nor the material witnesses such as Sri Ram Kripal and Sri J K Rai were ever examined or cross -examined before the inqiry , therefore , in the absence of their evidence charge cannot be held to be proved against them.

14. On the contrary it has been argued by the authorized representative for the workers that as both delinquent employees have not denied their presence either in their pleadings or in their evidence at the place of incident on 15-10-83 , nor have stated in their evidence that no such incident ever took place as has been mentioned in the chargesheet and even in paragraph No. 3 of their statement ofclaim they have categorically admitted the fact that FIR/ NCR was lodged against them at P.S. Rail Bazar , Kanpur, on 15-10-83 , therefore , on the basis of clear cut admission as above, there was no need for providing any documents as called for by them during the course of inquiry as the charges automatically stood proved against them .

15. The tribunal is unable to agree with the arguments advanced by the authorized representative for the workers for the reasons that it has come in the pleadings and evidence ofthe parties that some agitation of workers were going on regarding certain issues and both of them have also admitted their presence at the place agitation . It has also been admitted by them that they have come to the place ofthe incident with due permission of his mate and also in view ofadmitted fact that FIR/NCR were lodgedby the officers ofthe railway against on 15-10-83 at P.S. Rail Bazar, Kanpur. Taking into consideration the overall aspect ofthe matter it clinches to the mind ofthe tribunal that how these two persons reached at the place of incident leaving the place of their duties and mere their presence at the place of incident is sufficient to hold that incident took place in the manner in which it is stated in the chargesheet. It can also be easily presumed that when the fact ofagitation ofworkers is admitted to both the contesting parties what provoked in the mind ofthe officers of the opposite parties to have lodged FIR against both the employees leaving several others who are also alleged to be the participants of the agitation. Therefore the arguments advanced bythe representative for the opposite party appears on sound footings and it is very difficult to disbelieve the case of the opposite party under the facts and circumstances of the case. The arguments advanced by the representative of the worker is wholly devoid of merit in view of finding of the Central Administrative Tribunal , Allahabad , in its order dated 12-04-02 , that there were other evidence available on the file to show that incident had taken place and that the

5849 applicants had abused, insulted and slapped the said PW1 and there is no requirement to rely on the statements made by these offices as even without their statements the charge would still be proved against the applicants . This findings ofthe Administrative Tribunal , Allahabad , is based on facts and therefore, the tribunal has no hesitation to hold that for the reasons given above , charge against these delinquent employees stands proved even without the help ofother evidence, therefore , there appears to be no illegality when the delinquent employees were not provided with the documents called by them from the inquiry officer or when the witnesses named in the charge sheet were not examinedby the opposite party in domestic inquiry. Even they have been able to establish the fact as to what prejudice had been caused to them if the documents called for have not been given to them or the management did not examined the persons named as witness in the chargesheet . Itwas the legal obligation of the workers to have established the fact that they have neither took part in the alleged agitation nor have ever abused, insulted or slapped the officer ofthe railway. Instead they appears to be very much inclined to establish evidence against themselves when they of their own accord proved that they were verymuch present on the place of incident and that FIR had been lodged against them by the officer of the opposite party on 15-10-83 . Therefore , in view of their own admission , there remains hardly any need for the opposite party to establish the charges as the charges stands proved from the pleadings and evidence of the workers.

16. No other points have been pressed by the representatives for the contesting parties . Accordingly it is held that the charges against both the delinquent employees stands fully established and there is no illegality in the action of the opposite party when they passed removal order against both of them by way ofpunishment.

17. For the reasons explained above, it is held that the action of the management in removing both the delinquent employee from service vide order dated 9-1-03 passed by the disciplinary authority and upheld by the appellate authority vide order dated 20-6-03 , is neither illegal nor unjustified. The result is that the reference is answered in negative against the workers holding that they are not entitled for any relief as claimed by them in their statement ofclaim . And accordingly their claim stands rejected .

R. G SHUKLA, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 26 सितम्बर , 2008

का. आ. 2930,-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार नाधर्न रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , कानपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 13/1999 ) 5850

COF NE को प्रकाशित करती কার हुआ था ।

हो.क. मनचन्दा

New September、Subs 5.Ο. 2931)

joistance of Section Industrial Dispщо А. 1947(

Government hereby pur.rtes the award Rer N of the Central Governen industrial Tribunad

Court, Kanpur , as shosen the Annexure in the im .

dispute between the management of Noritem ... and their workmen sus received by ... Government on

No. L -til 1.2 27 BA. MANCHANDA S

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHIRE R. SHUKLA PRESIDING . OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTR TRIBUNAL - UM LABOURCOURT, SHRAM BHAWAN, A.T.LLCAMPUS , UDYOG NAGAR , KANPUR

Industrial Dispute No. 13 of 140 In the matter of dispute between

Sri Dinanath Tiwari, Uttar Railway Karern Union, Divisional Organizing serretary 1974 No 1 Naseemabad, Kanpur

The Divisional Rasimage Northern Railwily Allahabad

AWARD

1. Central CA MOL , New Dele Notification No. 122798 - IR (B - 11 dated 13.01 has referred the foll wing dispute for adjudication tribunal :--

"Whether the action the management of Noul Railway in thoi gis in eamployment and pre to Munna's wife in place of S. Munias is legai . justified? It not to what relief the worl entitled ?""

2. A bare pensad the statement of cizma zde.i the union would go to reveal the fact that the clam union is vague and meaningless for the reasons that trad union can raise industrial dispute only in relation bes member and not otherwise . From the claon stateme also clear that it is neither a case of Section 2-4 of industri Disputes Act, 1947 , nor the same is a vaike industrial diapuss existing between the parues . Likewise rae raterence ord.: is also not clear us to gensi wilom the reference lits 8.2008 ASVINA 26.1995-

and previous pay tobri Sannot be termed tube i place of Sh Moons Ciastuial dispune under lis made for adjudicating A provisions of the Act . denot givmgcomponent Tilen emerges out than the union has filed cercirofonder dated 20-08-97 -0-2 of the Act in passed by this court un ... LCA No. 252 of 1996 . sariDevi versus Northern Railway, wherein this C egorically held that if het inusband is incapa Because of insanity , the application can be mo m. tarough his nest friend grandian. The court has served that third person cannot maintain applicansection 33 - C-2 of the Act and accordingly the the applicant . The orde 1 : st W- 19 . Applying the view that union is nes . claim on behalfof the wi:: chected the application el 1. sort has been marked as leathe tribunal is ofthe teaterauntain the present Mamma who iss : 1 alive .

3. In view slabos the lists of the case and ... the reterence is going to : the rensons discussed romanes no need to deti ! evidence of the cases redanst the union for provisions of mustrial D 1917he clain of line union of outside the al store af the sera si Industrial Dispute as detines 2-4 2 -Ki 4. Accordingly it . devoid of any auerit ine Industrial Disputes A explained above, union claimed by it. Che claim of the Grass Bramble under the Therefore Bor thereasons be græned ang selielas

SUKLA. Presiding Officer नई दि

का. आ. 2931

श्री'त अनुग्रन्थ में निर्दिष्ट औद्यागिन्द्रीय सरकार आंशिक अधिकरणःश्रम न्यायालय का

147 का 14 ) की भाग मध्य रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र में केन्द्रीय सरकार उना और उनके कर्मत्रात चं 262 को प्राप्न प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्र हुआ था ।

[सं. एल . 2003-आईआर- : नाचन्दा, अनुभान अधिकारी New Delhi , the , Septen her . 2008 S.O. 2931.tance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1 of 1947 ) . The Central Government hereby pubasl be award Ref. No. 213001 ) ofthe Central Government grial Tribunal - com - Labour Court , Kanpur as shown in Annexure in the industrial dispute between the mangement of Uttar Madhya

received by the Central Railway , and their work

Government on 26-9-200S

1012303-2003 -IR ( 8-11 ) B.K.MHANDA , Section Officer [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

5851 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26, 1930

ANNEXURE

HAQDAR HAI?

BEFORE SHRI R.G SHUKLA , PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, SHRAM BHAWAN, KANPUR

Industrial Dispute Case No 21/2004

Between

Krishna Pal Singh Son of Rahmali , C/o Chhidu Singh Yadav, Vill Michki & Post Haswa. District Fatehpur

And

Assistant Engineer ( HQ ) / Appellate Authority, NCR Allahabad.

Industrial Dispute Case No 22/04

Sri Sarvan Kumar son of Roop Lal Bungalow No. 17 -C, Out house No. A at Railway Hospital NCR Govind Nagar, Kanpur

And

Assistant Divisional Engineeri Disciplinary Officer NCR Allahabad .

AWARD

1. As in both the above Industrial Dispute cases a common question of fact and law are involved , therefore, it isproposed to decide the same by means of this common award.

2. Central Government, Ministry of labour, in Industrial Dispute Case No. 21 of2004 , vide its notification No. L-41012/303/2003 - IR(B - I ) dated 8-4-04, has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this tribunal-

4. The undisputed facts ofthe case in both the cases arethat the workmen were regular and permanent employee of the opposite party and they were given the status of at the post of gang man by the opposite party . Both of them were served with major penalty charge sheet dated 28-10-83, for manhandling with Gang Mate Sri Ram Kripal misbehaving with him and on the ground that he left the place of duty unauthorized manner without permission which act was ofserious nature . After holding departmental enquiry againstboth of them the Enquiry Officer submitted his report dated 2-11-88 and acting upon the said inquiry report the disciplinary authority by means of its order dated 30-12-1993 removed the services of both the delinquent employee from the service of railway. Both delinquent employees preferred separate appleats before the appellate authority and the appellate authority after considering the nature of misconduct vide its order dated 26-04-1994 rejected the appeal of the employees . Thereafter both of them approached before the Central Administrative Tribunal , Allahabad, by filing O.A.No. 1043 of 1994 andO. A. No. 1043 of 1994 , whereby the order of the disciplinary authority and the appellate authority were challenged by them. Administrative Tribunal allowed the applicant vide its order dated 12-04-02 by setting aside the impugned orders with direction that the petitioner shall remain under deerned suspension with further direction that de novo inquiry from the stage of06-11-87 be held in the matter and the opposite party are free to proceed against the delinquent employee relying on the settled law that where there is procedural irregularity in holding of enquiry , the enquiry report and consequential orders may be quashed and set aside but the matter should be remanded back to the authorities to start inquiry from the stage where the said irregularity has taken place. The order 12-04-02 is quite indicative ofthe fact that the perusal of the enquiry report, shows that apart from the evidence of three officers as mentioned above , there were other evidence available on the file to show that the incident had taken place and that the applicants had abused, insulted and slapped the said P.W.1 and there is no requirement to rely on the statement made by these officers as even without their statements the charge would still be proved against the applicants.

KYA SAHAYAK MANDAL ABHIYANTA NCR FATEHPUR KEADESH DINANK 9-1-2003 TATHA APPELLATEAUTHORITY KEADESI DINANK20- 6-2003 KE DWARA SHRI KRISHNAPAL SINGH PUTRA RAHMALI KO RAIL SEWA SE HATAYA JANA ( REMOVE FROM SERVICE) NYAYOCHI HAI?

5. In view ofit tribunal has no hesitation in examining the enquiry conducted by the department from the stage of06-11-87 under the orders ofthe Industrial Tribunal .

3. Central Government , Ministry of Labour, in Industrial Dispute Case No. 22 of2004, vide its notification No. L -41012 /304/2003 -IR( B -I ) dated 8-4-04 , has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this tribunal:-

KYA SAHAYAK MANDAL ABHIYANTA UTTAR MADHYA RAILWAY FATEHPUR KEADESH DINANK 09-01-2003 ΤΑTHA APPELLATEAUTHORITY KEADESH DINANK 20-06-2003 KE DWARA SRI SHRAWAN KUMAR ATMAJ ROOP LAL KO RAIL SEWA SE HATAYAJANA ( REMOVE FROM SERVICE) NYAYOCHIT HAI ? YADINAHI TO KARAMKAR KISANUTOSH KA

6. Before appreciating the facts pleaded by the contesting parties and evidence adduced by the parties both the delinquent employee have not denied their presence at the place of incident on 15-10-83 and also it is not in dispute that F.I.R was lodged against both the employees by the officers of the Railway regarding the incident ofmanhandling , abusing and slapping the officers of the opposite parties by these delinquent employees . It is also not in dispute that both of them have left the place [PART I SER 3 ( 1ⅱ ) THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18.2008 / ASVINA 26, 1930

5852

disciplinary authority or the appellate authority. 11 has therefore been prayed than the punishment awarded to the employees does not call for any interference at the hand's ofthis Tribunal and their claim is liable to be rejected .

of their duties without prior information of their higher authorities and participated in demonstration along with their colleagues und became part of manhandling with their superiorofficers.

9. In Industrial Dispute Case 21 of 2004, whereas workman has adduced oral as well as documentary evidence , opposite party have tiled certain documents by wayof evidence and has given any wal evidence nor have cross -examined the worker witness. In 22 of 2004 both contesting parties have adduced oral as well as documentary evidence .

10. It maybe pointed out that for appreciating the action of the management based on disciplinary action the evidence led before the tribunal is being ignored and will be examined on the basisof evidence of parties before the enquiry officer.

11. The tribunal horsexamined carefully the evidence adduced by the parties beture the inquiry officer and have also gone through the materials available on record. As pointed out above the tribunal is confining its findings ta the departmental proccesings beld after the erder passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal directing the management to hold enquiry de -nova .

12. Tribunal has also heard the arguments of the contesting parties at lemnin

13. The representative for the workmen have vchemently argued that in proceedings de novo held against the workers the inquiry officer did not provide the workers documents summoned by thens nor the material witnesses such as Sri Ram Kripaj and Sri JK Raj were ever examined or cross -examined before the inquiry , therefore , in the absence of their evidence charge cannot be held to be proved against them .

7. Now the case as set up by both the delinquent employees are that Assistant Divisional Engineer Fatehpur appointed Sri ( IN Mislira . vide Standard Form No.7 dated 6-08-2002 , as Enquiry Officer started inquiry de -novo. The delinquent employees requested vide their letter dated 19-8-2002 dated certain decuments . The delinquent employees again 13-9-02 and 14-09-02 again demanded but the documents were never provided to the delinquent employees . They requested before the disciplinary authority for providing the documents called for by thein. It is further pleaded by them that the star witnesses such as Ram Kripal and 1. K. Rai who were mentioned in the charge sheet have not been examined as witnesses nor theywere produced for their cross - examination at the hands of defence representative during the course of conduct of inquiry by the enquiry officer . Thus the inquiry conducted in their case is against the rules and natural justice.und rules governing the service conditions The discipl.nary authority based on inquiry removed the services of the delinquent employees by means of its order dated 09-111-03 which is illegal arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice which is liable to be set aside . Likewise appeal preferred by built of them against the order of their remoναί were assailed by them by tiling appeal which too could not find favour and the appellate authority side its verder dated 20-06-06 rejected their appeals. Lastly it is plentied that the report of inquiry otliece is perverse and the same cannel be made basis for infricting of any punishunent . On the basis ofabove pleadings it has been prayed that the punislument order dated 09-01-03 and appellate order dated 20-06-03be set aside and the workmen be reinstated in the service of the railway will fult back wages . continuity of service and with other consequential benetits.

14. On the contrary it has been argued by the authorized representative for the workers that as both delinquent employees have not denied their presenee either in their pleadings or in their evidence at the place of incident on 15-10-83 , nor have stated in their evidence that no such incident ever took place as has been mentioned in the charge sheet and even in paragraph no. 3 of their statement of claim they have categorically admitted the fact that FIR NCR was lodged against them at P.S. Rail Bazar , Kanpur, on 15-10-83 , therefore , on the basis of clear cut admission as above , there was no need for providing any documents as called for by them during the course of inquiry as the charges automatically stood proved against them .

15. The tribunal is unable to agree with the arguments advanced by the authorized representative for the workers for the reasons that it has come in the pleadings and evidence of the parties that some agitation of workers were going on regarding certam issues and both of them have also admitted their presence at the place agitation . It has also been admitted by them that they have come to the 8. The claim of the workers have been contested by the opposite parties an variety of grounds . m as aurch as the delinquently comployees have rightly been charge sheeted for their serious nature ofmisconduct canensted on 15-10-83 ة gainst their senior officers pubie slapping him . abusing him and creating indecent scene . They were given proper and adequate opportunity of their defence by the inquiry olleer during the course of conduct of inquiry . Rules of natural justice have been followed by the inquiry officer and he had submitted very reasoned findings in the case of both the delinquent emplaree.. The disciplinary authority after giving anxious consideanthons to the procee.Imgs nf'inquiry ,Tinquiry , materialavailable on mquiry and inquiry finding was of the upintion that ends ofjustice would be met if Bhese delinquent employees be awarded punishment of removat leom railway serviceandcordingly they were reised from the railway service. There is no illegality either in the action of the inquiry oficer or [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii))

5853 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18, 2008/ आश्विन 26, 1930

passed removal order against both of them by way of punishment .

17. For the reasons explained above, it is held that the action of the management in removing both the delinquent employees from service vide order dated 9-1-03 passed by the disciplinary authority and upheld by the appellate authority vide order dated 20-6-03 , is neither illegal nor unjustified. The result is that the reference is answered in negative against the workers holding that they are not entitled for any relief as claimed by them in their statement ofclaim. And accordingly their claim stands rejected.

R. G. SHUKLA , PresidingOfficer नई दिल्ली, 26 सितम्बर , 2008

का. आ. 2932.-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 अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , कानपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 05/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/352/ 2001 - आईआर ( बी-1 ) ] बी. के. मनचन्दा, अनुभाग अधिकारी

NewDelhi , the 26th September, 2008

S.O. 2932.In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947( 14 of 1947) , the Central Governmenthereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 05/2002) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum - Labour Court, Kanpur as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the management of State Bank of India , and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 26-9-2008 .

[No. L- 12012/352/2001 - IR(B- 1 ) ] B. K. MANCHANDA, Section Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI R. G SHUKLA, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT, SHRAM BHAWAN , A.T.L CAMPUS , UDYOG NAGAR, KANPUR

Industrial Dispute Case No.05/2002

In the matter of dispute between

Smt . Usha Devi

place of the incident with due permission of his mate and also in view of admitted fact that FIR/NCR were lodgedby the officers ofthe railway against them on 15-10-83 at P.S. Rail Bazar , Kanpur. Taking into consideration the overall aspect of the matter it clinches to the mind of the tribunal thathow these two persons reached at the place of incident leaving the place of their duties and mere their presence at the place of incident is sufficient to hold that incident took place in the manner in which it is stated in the charge sheet , It can alsobe easily presumed that when the fact ofagitation ofworkers is admitted to both the contesting parties what provoked in the mind of the officers of the opposite parties to have lodged FIR against both the employees leaving several others who are also alleged to be the participants of the agitation. Therefore the arguments advanced by the representative for the opposite party appears on sound footings and it is very difficult to disbelieve the case ofthe opposite party under the facts and circumstances of the case. The arguments advanced by the representative of the worker is wholly devoid of merit in view of finding of the Cetral Administrative Tribunal , Allahabad, in its order dated 12-04-02, that there were other evidence available on the file to show that incident had taken place and that the applicants had abused, insulted and slapped the said PWI and there is no requirement to rely on the statements made bythese offices as even without their statements the charge would stillbe proved against the applicants . This findings ofthe Administrative Tribunal , Allahabad , is based on facts and therefore , the tribunal has no hesitation to hold that for the reasons given above , charge against these delinquent employees stands proved even without thehelp of other evidence, therefore, there appears to be no illegalitywhen the delinquent employees were not provided with thedocuments called by them from the inquiry officer orwhen the witnesses named in the charge sheet were not examined by the opposite party in domestic inquiry. Even they have been able to establish the fact as to what prejudice hadbeen caused to them if the documents called for have not been given to them or the management did not examined the persons named as witness in the charge sheet. Itwas the legal obligation ofthe workers to have established the fact that they have neither took part in the alleged agitation nor have ever abused, insulted or slapped the officer ofthe railway. Instead they appears to be very much inclined to establish evidence against themselves when they of their own accord proved that they were very much present on the place of incident and that FIR had been lodged against them by the officer of the opposite party on 15-10-83. Therefore , in view of their own admission , there remains hardly any need for the opposite party to establish the charges as the charges stands proved from the pleadings and evidence of the workers.

And

C/o Chandra Shekhar Srivastava 89/75, New Baihrana, Allahabad 211606 The DeputyGeneral Manager State Bank of India, ZonalOffice, Varanasi

16. No other points have been pressed by the répresentatives for the contesting parties . Accordingly it is held that the charges against both the delinquent employees stands fully established and there is no illegality in the action of the opposite party when they

3853 GIJOB-21 5854

THE GAZETTE OF INDLAR 18 , 2008 ASVINA 26 , 1

AWARD

1.The Central Government , MOL . New Deiku , sile their notification No. 1. - 12012-352 /2001 - IR (B- Jated 17-1-2002. has referred the following dispose for adjudication to this tribunal :

Whether the action of the management of St Bank of India un terrninating the services of Smt . Usha Devi with effect trom 22-06-2000 is justified? I'not what relief the workman entitled !

2. The case in shot as set by the workinkan her statement of claim is that her mother was a regular and permanent employee of the opposite party as Sweeper at bank's Obra branch of the opposite party . Conse upon her death she was taken into employment by the opposite party compassionate ground on 1-5-1406 and in this way the workman started performing the work of sweeper in the said branch of the opposite party . She was appointed without any appointment order m writing by the opposite party . The opposite party was under obligation to regularize the services of the workman having regard an her regular and permanen ! wurking as sweeper as regular and permanent post weeper was lying vacant the branch where the workman was performing her duties inis the further case of the workman that the opposite party with a view to protect themselves from legal obligans as provided under the provisions of the 1.0 . Act. 1947 , nede payment of he wages through vouchers in differer so that the woticonman may not be able to establish herann ofcontinuous working which is nothing but an act Labour Practice The workman raised her demand for fall wages orally and in writing as we! l vide her represents dated 24-04-02 which annoyed the opposite party as a result of die bare they terminated her service in an manner with clict rum 22-06-02 , in breach at the provisions of S. chon 25 F of the Act as it the tinter termination the opposite party nether gave notice. nor notice pay and nor the retrenchment compensation On the basis of the above pleadings it has beett prayed that she be reinstated on the service of the bank with light tak wages, continuity of service and all consequential tenetirs, 3. The claim of the workman has been re litted by the opposite pariy on a number of grounds inter alp the services of the workinat do not fall within de arii of section 25-13 which delines Continuous Service" : & at the provisions of section 25 - F of the Act are not applicatul her case: that it is adaaned by the opposite party titi the mother of the workmar , expired on 27-12-9-1 : that al deathof Phooimati . the mother of the appplicant Sint . sha Devi , regular and permanent post of Sweeper becansati in the branch; that it is adnatted that the claittigt a engaged as sweeper on daily wages in the north of February 1996; 1tivat this much is admitted the theclamant was paid her daily wages for the days when she setked with the opposle party bank and rest of the allegations are denied, that so far allegation of the workanan to the effect that she was paid her wages in the name of others she

[PART 11 - S 30 could have made com selere the higher authorities in this regard but she fasl Lezetore , the allegations are not admitted by the opposants: there is a set and recognized recruitment rules in posite party and the claimant had never underwen: gh it and no officer of the person against reguta permanent post ignoring the opposite party agains! ular and permanent post and she has been denied hetmuvization against that post is after thought ; that theees of the workman as daily wager stood automat: teammated when regular and permanent employce me Roop Chand reported for they at any point of tim . ne remenched the services of applicability of the pros stotis of bidustrial Disputes Ael , 1947 and on the bastante same it has been prayed that the claim of the appli is absolutely devoid of merit. misleading, misconceiss , ma misplaced , therefore , is hable opposite party is empo engage and appoint any mandatory provisions le recruitment rules , therefore, the claim of the app that she was engaged by the absolutely devoid of being baseless, itnaginary and duties at the branch : ti opposite party has denied that the claimant ; and lastly opposite party have also denied to be rejected.

4. That after exci . adduced oral as well as pleadings both parties have muentary evidence in support of their respective ci . Whereas the claimant has examined herself as opposite party examined its witness Sri R. R. Tiwarich Manager .

5. The tribunal through the records and materials available onde carefully and has also heard the argurnents of the rive authorized representatives ofthe parties atlength

6. First of all it . several material con .:: pointed out that there are ns between the pleadings raised by the workm... ndence given by her in the light of reference ord De reference order is quite indicative ofthe fact prices of the workman have been terminated with: 22-9-2000 whereas in paragraph No. 13 of hetent ofclaim , the applicant has claimed that she w ved from service with effect from 22-6-2002 . In l ::: non in paragraph No.4 of her statement of claim picam has claimed that sthe was appointed by the site potty on 1-5-95 , but in her statement on oath mas theiribunal on 1-9-05 11 was stated by her that she Ling from 1-1-95 , therefore, from evidence and plot at all clear as to exactly from which date the etwas appointed by the opposite party and from which du he was removed by the opposite party . It is settled le . provisions that for making applicability of the phen of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , claim and ević. a workman must be in consonance to the date termination mentioned in the reference order as accons to the provisions of Section 10(4) of theAct, Industri riual must confine its finding within the ambit and of the schedule of reference order. Thus making the artisability of the above provisions [ भाग It- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

5855

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन 26 , 1930

of law to the case of applicant it is quite evident that the services of the applicant had never been terminated by the opposite party from 22-6-2000 as mentioned in the reference order.Being so it would be absolutely futile to examine the case of the parties on other grounds raised by them as neither party is going to get any kind ofbenefit claimed by them as the present claim of the workman is beyond the scope of Section 10 (4 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, therefore is not legally maintainable under the provisions of the Act . When the claim of the workman is not maintainable question of applicability of other provisions of the Act as claimed by the claimant does not arise, therefore, the claim of the claimant is liable to be rejected and is hereby rejected.

7. For the reasons disclosed above , it is held that the workman is not entitled for the relief as claimed by her and her claim is hereby rejected being not maintainable under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947, 8. Reference is therefore answered accordingly . R.G SHUKLA , Presiding Officer रोजगार एवं प्रशिक्षण महानिदेशालय नई दिल्ली 7 अक्तूबर , 2008

का. आ. 2933.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम, 1976 यथा संशोधित 1987 के नियम 10 के उप नियम ( 2 ) एवं ( 4 ) के अनुसरण में एत‌द्वारा रोजगार एवं प्रशिक्षण महानिदेशालय ( श्रम और रोजगार मंत्रालय ) के निम्नलिखित अधीनस्थ कार्यालयों को जिनके कर्मचारियों ने हिंदी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है , अधिसूचित करती है :

(क ) अनुसूचित जाति/अनुसूचित जनजात्ति हेतु अध्यापन-सह- मार्गदर्शन केन्द्र, बंगलौर ।

( ख ) विकलांग व्यावसायिक पुनर्वास केन्द्र , ऊना ( हिमालय प्रदेश ) । ( ग ) अनुसूचित जाति/ अनुसूचित जनजाति हेतु अध्यापन-सह- मार्गदर्शन केन्द्र, नागपुर ।

( घ) क्षेत्रीय महिला व्यावसायिक प्रशिक्षण संस्थान, तिरूवनन्तपुरम । [ सं. डीजीईटी-11017/2/2005- हिंदी]

तरसेम लाल , उप सचिव DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING New Delhi , the 7th October , 2008

S.O. 2933.- In pursuance ofsub -rule (2) and (4) of rule 10 of the Official Languages (Use for Official Purposes of the Union ) Rules , 1976 ( As Amended 1987 ) the Central Government hereby notifies the following Subordinate Offices of the Directorate General of Employment and Training ( Ministry of Labour and Employment) , the staff whereof have acquired the working knowledge ofHindi ;

A. Coaching -cum - Guidance Centre for SC/ST, Bangalore .

B. Vocational Rehabilitation Centre for Handicapped , Una (H. P.).

C Coaching- cum-Guidance Centre for SC/ST, Nagpur .

D. Regional Vocational Training Institute for Women, Thiruvananthapuram.

[No. DGET- 11017/2/2005-Hindi ) TARSEM LAL ,Dy. Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 13 अक्तूबर , 2008

का. आ. 2934. कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम, 1948 ( 1948 का 34 ) की धारा 10 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्र सरकार एत‌द्वारा दिनांक 31 मार्च, 2006 के भारत के राजपत्र, असाधारण , भाग II , खपड 3 ( ii ) में प्रकाशित दिनांक 31 मार्च , 2006 की श्रम और रोजगार मंत्रालय , भारत सरकार को अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 471 ( अ) में निम्नलिखित संशोधन करती है । उक्त अधिसूचना में " धारा 10 के उप- खण्ड ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( च ) के अन्तर्गत केन्द्र सरकार द्वारा नियुक्त " शीर्षक के अन्तर्गत क्रम संख्या 28 के सामने निम्नलिखित प्रविष्टि प्रतिस्थापित की जाएगी अर्थात्:-

" श्री गोकुलानन्दा जेना, राज्य उपाध्यक्ष , बीएमएस , उड़ीसा , टीबी-56, नाल्को नगर , जिला अंगुल ( उड़ीसा ) फोन 09437103395 "

[सं. यू-16012/2/2004- एस एस-1 ] एस. डी. जेवियर , अवर अधिन New Delhi , the 13th October, 2008

S.O. 2934, in excrcise of the powers conferred by Section 1001 the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1919 (34 of 1948), the Coniral Government hereby makes t following amendments notification of the Government of India in tin. Ministry of Labour and Employment No. S. 0. 47100 died 31st March , 2006 published in the Gazene of the Extraordinary, Pan 1. Section 3 ( ii ) dated 31st March 1905 .

In the said notificarton modes the heading "Appointed by the Central Government unaat clause ( 1) of sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 10 g S. No. 28 , the following entries shall be substituted amely

Shri Gorular

State Vice-President, BMS, Orissa, TB -56, Nai : Nga, Distt. Angul ( Orissa ) Ph. 09437103395

[No. U- 16012/2/ 2004-55-1 S.D XAVIER, Under Stev 5856

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 18 , 2008/ASVINA 26 , 1930

[PART 11- Src. 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली , 13 अक्तूबर, 2008

का.आ. 2935.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि और प्रकीर्ण उपबंध अधिनियम , 1952 ( 1952 का 19 ) की धारा 13 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए और दिनांक 28 सितम्बर , 1985 की भारत सरकार के पूर्ववर्ती श्रम मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना सा.आ. 4651 का अधिक्रमण करते हुए , ऐसे अधिक्रमण से पहले हुई कार्रवाई अथवा हटाए जाने के संबंध में होने वाली कार्रवाई के अलावा केन्द्रीय सरकार या उसके नियंत्रण के अधीन किसी स्थापन के संबंध में या किसी रेल कम्पनी , महापत्तन, खान या तेल क्षेत्र या नियंत्रित उद्योग से संबंधित किसी स्थापन के संबंध में या किसी ऐसे स्थापन के संबंध में जिसकी एक से अधिक राज्यों में विभाग या शाखाएं हैं, केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्‌द्वारा उक्त अधिनियम और इसके अंतर्गत निर्मित स्कीम के प्रयोजनों के लिए निम्न सारणी के स्तंभ ( 2 ) में विनिर्दिष्ट पदों के धारक अधिकारियों कोउसके स्तंभ ( 3 ) में विनिर्दिष्ट कार्यालयों एवं तत्स्थानी प्रविष्ट में स्तंभ (4 ) में विनिर्दिष्ट क्षेत्रों के लिए निरीक्षक नियुक्त करती है । अधिकारी

क्षेत्र

क्र. सं.

कार्यालय

( 1)

(3)

(2)

(4)

कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन,

1. ( i ) कंन्द्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

( ii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

जम्मू एवं कश्मीर राज्य को छोड़कर सम्पूर्ण भारत

मुख्य कार्यालय , नई दिल्ली

2. ( ⅰ ) अतिरिक्त केन्द्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

(ii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन का जोनल कार्यालय , दक्षिण जोन, हैदराबाद

आन्ध्र प्रदेश , कर्नाटक , केरल, तमिलनाडु राज्य और पुडुचेरी और लक्षद्वीप संघ शासित क्षेत्र

कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन का

3. ( i ) अतिरिक्त केन्द्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

( ii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

जोनल कार्यालय , उत्तरी जोन , नई दिल्ली

कर्मचारी विष्य निधि संगठन का

4. ( i ) अतिरिक्त केन्द्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

(ii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

जोनल कार्यालय , पूर्वी जोन , कोलकाता

राष्ट्रीय राजधानी क्षेत्र दिल्ली, हरिलाणा , हिमाचल प्रदेश , पंजाब , उत्तराखंड, उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य तथा संघ शासित क्षेत्र चंडीगढ़ असम, अरूणाचल प्रदेश , बिहार, झारखंड , नागालैंड , मणिपुर, मेघालय , मिजोरम, उड़ीसा , सिक्किम , त्रिपुरा , पश्चिम बंगाल तथा अंडमान एवं निकोबार द्वीप समूह संघ शासित क्षेत्र

5. ( 1 ) अतिरिक्त केन्द्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन का

( ii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

जोनल कार्यालय , पश्चिम जोन , मुंबई

छत्तीसगढ़ , गोवा, गुजरात, मध्य प्रदेश , महाराष्ट्र, राजस्थान और दमन दीव और दादरा एवं नागर हवेली संघ शासित क्षेत्र राष्ट्रीय राजधानी क्षेत्र दिल्ली

क्षेत्रीय/उप- क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय ,

6. ( 1 ) क्षेत्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

( ii ) सहायक भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन,

(iii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

रराष्ट्रीय राजधानी क्षेत्र दिल्ली

क्षेत्रीय उप- क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय ,

7. ( 1 ) क्षेत्रीय कंन्द्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

( ii ) सहायक भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन ,

आन्ध्र प्रदेश राज्य एवं यमन क्षेत्र संघ शासित क्षेत्र पुड्डुचेरी

आन्ध्र प्रदेश राज्य और यमन क्षेत्र

(iii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

और पुडुचेरी संघ शासित क्षेत्र

असम, अरूणाचल प्रदेश . नागालैंड , 8. ( i ) क्षेत्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

( ii ) सहायक भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

मणिपुर , मेघालय , मिजोरम और त्रिपुरा गज्य

(iii ) प्रत्रर्तन अधिकारी

क्षेत्रीय/ उप - क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय , कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन , अमम, अरूणाचल प्रदेश , नागालैंड , मणिपुर , मेघालय, मिजोरम और त्रिपुस राज्य

विहार राज्य

9. ( i ) क्षेत्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

(ii ) सहायक भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

क्षेत्रीय उप- क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय,

कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन,

बिहार राज्य

( iii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

छतीसगढ़ राज्य

10. ( 1 ) क्षेत्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

( ii ) सहायक भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

क्षेत्रीय उप- क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय , कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन,

( iii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

छनीसगढ़ राज्य

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 18, 2008/ आश्विन 26, 1930

(1)

(2)

(3) 11. ( i ) क्षेत्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

क्षेत्रीय/उप- क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय , ( ii ) सहायक भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन ,

( iii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

गोवा राज्य 12. ( i ) क्षेत्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

क्षेत्रीय/उप- क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय , ( ii ) सहायक भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगवन ,

(ii) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

5857

(4)

गोवा राज्य

गुजरात राज्य एवं दमन एवं द्वीप तथा दादरा एवं नागर हवेली

गुजरात राज्य एवं दमन एवं दीव

और दादरा एवं नागर हवेली संघ

शासित क्षेत्र

क्षेत्रीय/उप- क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय , 13. ( 1 ) क्षेत्रीय भविष्य निधिआयुक्त

( ii ) सहायक भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन ,

( iii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

हरियाणा राज्य

14. ( 1 ) क्षेत्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

क्षेत्रीय/उप- क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय , ( ii ) सहायक भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन,

( iii) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

हिमाचल प्रदेश राज्य

15. ( i ) क्षेत्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

क्षेत्रीय/ उप- क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय , ( ii ) सहायक भविष्य निधिआयुक्त

कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन ,

( iii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

झारखण्ड राज्य

16. ( 1 ) क्षेत्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

क्षेत्रीय/उप- क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय , ( ii ) सहायक भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन ,

( iii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

कर्नाटक राज्य 17. ( 1 ) क्षेत्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

क्षेत्रीय /उप- क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय , ( ii ) सहायक भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन ,

( iii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

केरल राज्य, लक्षद्वीप और संघ शासित क्षेत्र पुडुचेरी का माहे क्षेत्र

18. ( i ) क्षेत्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

( ii ) सहायक भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

क्षेत्रीय/उप- क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय , कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन ,

( iii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

कर्नाटक राज्य

केरल राज्य , लक्षद्वीप और संघ शासित क्षेत्र पुडुचेरी का माहे क्षेत्र

मध्य प्रदेश राज्य

19. ( i ) क्षेत्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

क्षेत्रीय/उप- क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय , ( ii ) सहायक भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

कर्मधारी भविष्य निधि संगठन,

( iii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

महाराष्ट्र राज्य 20. ( i ) क्षेत्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

क्षेत्रीय /उप - क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय ,

कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन,

( ii ) सहायक भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

( iii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

उड़ीसा राज्य 21. ( i ) क्षेत्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

क्षेत्रीय/उप- क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय , ( ii ) सहायक भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन ,

( iii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

महाराष्ट्र राज्य

उड़ीसा राज्य

पंजाब राज्य एवं संघ शासित क्षेत्र चंडीगढ़

पंजाब राज्य एवं संघ शासित क्षेत्र

चंडीगढ़

22. (i ) क्षेत्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

क्षेत्रीय/उप-क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय , कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन ,

( ii ) सहायक भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

( iii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

राजस्थान राज्य 23. ( 1 ) क्षेत्रीय भविश्य निधि आयुक्त

क्षेत्रीय/उप-क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय , ( ii ) सहायक भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि संगठन ,

( iii ) प्रवर्तन अधिकारी

राजस्थान राज्य

तमिलनाडु राज्य तथा माहे और यमन क्षेत्रों को छोड़कर संघ शासित क्षेत्र पुडुचेरी

तमिलनाडु राज्य तथा माहे और

यमन क्षेत्रों को छोड़कर संघ शासित

क्षेत्र पुडुचेरी 24. ( i ) क्षेत्रीय भविष्य निधि आयुक्त

क्षेत्रीय/उप - क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय, उत्तराखंड राज्य 118 LAVETTE OF NIAN !

5858

( 1)

निधि संगठन ,

(iii ) प्रकांन

कार्यालय ,

25. (3 ) क्षेत्रीय आयुक्त

निधि संगठन,

(ii ) सहायक अधुक्त

(iii ) प्रभोक

भाय कार्यालय ,

26. ( 1) क्षेत्रीयांनদশ সর

निधि संगठन,

(ii ) सहायक आयुक्त

به

18,2008: ASVINA 26 :

[PAR : 1 S3 +!

गन एवं निकोधार द्वीप

यम भंगाल राज्य तथा

(iii) प्रकःनि अधिना

मंत्र अण्डमान एवं

Ne 2012-03-2008 - एसएम ।।

October , 2008

$.O. 2935. it evercise of the powe Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act , 19:20 India in the erstdale Munstty oi'l abeun macie

.....

or omitted to be same belore such supersss

sub - section ( 1 ) of Sectio .

mployees ' Provident cion of the Government of

nd in supersession of the

eps as respects thimes done

:cated the 28th September.

wers holding the posis

... Government hereby app: ...

aspectors for the arca

red in colunin ( 3 ) ofthe s

specified in colt the table below in mader in relation to aly

id Act and the Schemes tha

specified in column 1-4, thereof, for the purpose establishinent connected

untral Government or in relal

establishment belonging to , or under the conti wan establishment hasung

Kontrolled industry or i

with a railway compas , a majorport , a mitie departments or branches in more than one state

Olice

S.No.

( 1)

1. (1) Centmi President Fud

Delhi (ii ) Enforcemen : Oficers

Area

Pros ident Fund Organisation .

India except the ... มา ทวย and Kashmir Ses or Andhra Pradesh

mployees' Provident

2. ( 1) Additional Central Provident

LOD. South Zone ,

Fund Consissioner

(i) Ente.eceren : Officers

a. Kerala. Tamil Nadıs Linion Territories of

and Lakshadweep lunai Captial Territory

Examployees Provident

3. (1 ) Addmoaientral Providem

Fund Commissioner

tien , North Zone ,

(it) Endreasenlicers

in the States of Haryana ,

Praulesh , Punjab, hand , Litar Pradesh and Lerritory of Chandigarh states of Assam , Arunachal

Fitmployees ' Provident

4. (1) Adfiimut ! entral Provident

Fast Zone ,

101ssioner

(ii ) kanorcement Officers

5. (1) kim! Central Providem / La Bibar , Jharkhand , and . Manipur , Meghalaya .

rum , Orissa, Sikkin ,

a. West Bengal and Ferritory of Andante

bar Istands

Mates of Chattisgarh . Goa.

Employees Provident

Fund Centontisslaner

Funds West Zone ,

Madhya Pradesh.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) )

(1)

(2)

Mumbai .

(ii) Enforcement Officers

6. (i ) Regional Provident Fund Commissioners

(i) Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners

( iii) Enforcement Officers

7. (i ) Regional Provident Fund Commissioners

(ii) Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners

( ii) Enforcement Officers

8. ( 1 ) Regional Provident Fund Commissioners

( 1) Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners

(iii) Enforcement Officers

9. ( i) Regional Provident Fund Commissioners

(ii ) Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners

(iii) Enforcement Officers

10. ( 1) Regional Provident Fund Commissioners

( ii) Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners

( iii) Enforcement Officers

11. ( 1) Regional Provident Fund Commissioners

(ii) Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners

(iii) Enforcement Officers

12. ( i) Regional Provident Fund Commissioners

( ii) Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners

( iii) Enforcement Officers

13. ( i) Regional Provident Fund Commissioners

( ii) Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners

(iii) Enforcement Officers

14. (1 ) Regional Provident Fund Commissioners

(ii) Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners

(iii) Enforcement Officer's

15. ( 1) Regional Provident Fund Commissioners

(ii) Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners

( iii) Enforcement Officers

16. (1) Regional Providem Fund Commissioners

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 18, 2008/आश्विन26 , 1930

5859 (3)

(4)

Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Union Territories ofDaman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Haveli .

The National Capital Territory ofDelhi .

Regional / Sub -Regional Offices ofthe Employees' Provident Fund Organisation in the State ofthe National Capital Territory of Delhi.

The State of Andhra Pradesh and the Yanam area of the Union Territory of Puducherry.

Regional /Sub - Regional Offices ofthe Employees ' Provident Fund Organisation in the State of Andhra Pradesh and the Yanam area of the Union Territory of Puducherry.

The States of Assatn , Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Manipur , Meghalaya, Mizoram and Tripura.

Regional / Sub - Regional Offices ofthe Employees ' Provident Fund Organisation in the States of Assam , Arunachal Pradesh , Nagaland , Manipur, Meghalaya , Mizoram and Tripura,

The State ofBihar .

Regional / Sub -Regional Offices ofthe Employees' Provident Fund Organisation in the State ofBihar .

The State of Chattisgarh.

Regional Sub -Regional Offices ofthe Employees' Provident Fund Organisation in the State of Chattisgarh .

The State ofGoa.

Regional/Sub -Regional Offices ofthe Employees' Provident Fund Organisation in the State ofGoa .

The State ofGujarat and Union Territories of Daman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Haveli .

Regional /Sub - Regional Offices ofthe Employees ' Provident Fund Organisation in the State ofGujarat and Union Territories of Daman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Haveli .

The State ofHarayana.

Regional /Sub - Regional Offices ofthe Employees' Provident Fund Organisation in the State of Harayana.

The State of Himachal Pradesh,

Regional/ Sub-Regional Offices ofthe Employees Provident Fund Organisation in the State of Himachal Pradesh .

The State of Jharkhand..

Regional /Sub -Regional Offices ofthe Employees' Provident Fund Organisation in the State of Jharkhand.

The State of Karnataka .

Regional Sub -Regional Offices ofthe Employees' Provident Fund Organisation 5860

(2)

(1)

(ii) Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners

(iii) Enforcement Officers

17. (1) Regional Provident Fund Commissioners

(ü) Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners

(ii) Enforcemem (Officers 18. (1) Regional Provident Fund Commissioners

(ii) Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners

(iii) Enforcement Officers 19. (1) Regional Provident Fund Commissioners

(ii) Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners

(iii) Enforcement Officers 20. (1) Regional Provident Fund Commissjoners

(ii) Assistam Provident Fund Cominissioners

( iii) Enforcement Officers 21. ( 1 ) Regional Provident Fund Comtrissioners

(ii) Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners

(iii) Enforcement Officers 22. (1 ) Regional Provident Fund Commissioners

(ii) Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners

(iii) Enforcement Officers 23. (1 ) Regional Provident Fund Commissioners

[PART 11- SEC. 3 (ii ) )

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 18 , 2008 / ASVINA 26, 1930

(4)

(3)

in the State of Karnataka ,

The State of Kerala , the Union Territory ofLakshadweep and in The Mahe area of the Union

Regional / Sub- Regional Offices of the Employces Provident Fund Organisation in the State of Kerala , the Union Territory

Territory ofPuducherry.

of Lakshadweep and in the Mahe area of the Union Territory of Puducherту.

The State of Madhya Pradesh.

Regional/ Sub -Regional Offices ofthe Employees Provident Fund Organisation in the State of Madhya Pradesh.

The Stateof Maharashtra.

Regional/ Sub - Regional Offices of the Employees itovident Fund Organisation in the State of Maharashtra .

The State of Orissa .

Regional Sub - Regional Offices of the Employees Provident Fund Organisation in the State of Orissa .

The State of Punjab and Union Territory of Chandigarh .

Regional Sub -Regional Offices of the Employees ' Provident Fund Organisation

in the State of Punjab and Union Territory ofChandigarh.

The State of Rajasthan .

Regional Sub -Regional Offices ofthe Employees ' Provident Fund Organisation in the State of Rajasthan .

The State ofTamil Nadu and the Union Territory of

Regional Sub-Regional Offices of the

Employees Provident Fund Organisation

(ii) Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners

(iii) Enforcement Officers 24. (1) Regional Provident Fund Commissioners

(ii) Assistant Provident Fund Commission's

(iii ) Enforcement Officers 25. (1) Regional Provident Fund Commissioners

(ii) Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners

(iii ) Enforcemem Officers

Puducherry except the Mahe and Yanum areas .

in the State of Tamil Nadu and the Union Territory of Puducherry except the Mahe and Yanam areas .

The State of Uttarakhand .

Regional Sub- Regional Offices of the Employees Provident Fund Organisation in the State of Uttarakhand .

The State of Uuar Pradesh.

Regional/Sub - Regional Offices of the Employees Provident Fund Organisation in the State of Whuar Pradesh .

Regional Sub-Regional Offices of the

26. ( 1) Regional Provident Fund Commissioners

(ii) Assistant Provident Fund CommissionETS

(ii ) Enforcement Officers

The State of Sikkim , West Bengal and Union Territory of Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

Employees' Provident Fund Organisation in the Staw of Sikkim, West Bengal and Union Territory of Andaman and Nicobar lalands.

[No. S-35012/ 03 /2008 -SS- 111

S.D. XAVIER. Under Secy.

Printed by the Manager trust of Indra Press , Ring Road , Mayapuri , New Dlhi- 110064 and Tublished be the Chanceller sof Publications , Delhi - 110051 .