This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

रजिस्ट्रीसे डी० एल०( खून ) 04/0007/2003--05

भारत काराजपत्र The Gazette of India

प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक

WEEKLY

सं. 43)

नई दिल्ली, अक्तूबर 19 अक्तूबर 25 , 2008, शनिवार/आश्विन 27-कार्तिक 3, 1930 NEW DELHI, OCTOBER 19 - OCTOBER 25, 2008, SATURDAY/ASVINA 27-KARTIKA 3, 1930 No. 431

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 Partia order that it may be filedas aseparate compilation

भाग II-खण्ड -उपखण्ड (31)

PARTI Section 3-Sub -section (il)

भारत सरकार के मंत्रालयों ( रक्षा मंत्रालय को छोड़कर ) द्वारा जारी किए गए सांविधिक आदेश और अधिसूचनाएं StatutoryOrders and Notifications Issued by the Ministries ofthe Government ofIndia (Other than theMinistry ofDefence)

कार्मिक , लोक शिकायत तथा पेंशन मंत्रालय

की शक्तियों और अधिकारिता का विस्तार सम्पूर्ण उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य पर करती है ।

(कार्मिक और प्रशिक्षण विभाग ) नई दिल्ली, 16 अक्तूबर , 2008

(सं. 228/70/2008- एपीडी-[1] मनीषा सक्सेना, उप सचिव

MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS (Department ofPersonnel and Training) New Delhi, the 16th October, 2008

S.O. 2936.-In exercise of the powers conferredby sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 5 read with Section 6 ofthe Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946), the Central Government with the consent of the State Government of Uttar Pradesh, Home (Police ) Section- 11 vide notification No. 3762/6- Pu - 11-7-797M/2007 dated 8-9-2008, hereby extends the powers and jurisidiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the State ofUttar Pradesh for investigation of Case CrimeNo. 230/07 under Section 5 ) ofthe Wild Life ProtectionAct, 1972 (Act No.53 of1972) ( for contravention of sections 9 , 39, 44, 44-A, 48 -A, 49 -B ), section 26 of the Indian ForestAct, 1927(Act No. 16 of1927), section 3(1)of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti -Social Activities (Prevention)Act, 1986 ( Uttar Pradesh Act No. 7 of 1986) का.आ. 2936 केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्द्वारा दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना अधिनियम, 1945 1946 का अधिनियम संख्या 25 ) की थारा 6 के साथ पवित धारा 5 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , उत्तर प्रदेश सरकार, गृह ( पुलिस ) खंड 2 की अधिसूचना सं. 3762/6-ईओयू- 11-7-797 एम/2007 दिनांक 8-9-2008 द्वारा प्राप्त सहमति से भारतीय दंड संहिता 1860 ( 1860 का अधिनियम संख्या 45 ) की धारा 429 और वन्य जीव संरक्षण अधिनियम, 1972 की धारा 51 ( 1972 के अधिनियम सं. 53 ) (धारा 9, 39, 44, 44-ए, 48- ए, 49 - बी के उल्लंघन के लिए) , भारतीय वन अधिनियम , 1927 की धारा 26 ( 1927 के अधिनियम सं 16) , उत्तर प्रदेश गैंगस्टर्स एंड एंटी सोशल एक्टिविटिज् (प्रिवेंशन) अधिनियम की धारा 3 ( 1 ) , 1986 ( 1986 के उत्तर प्रदेश अधिनियम सं. 7 ) के अधीन कारेली पुलिस स्टेशन , इलाहाबाद , उत्तर प्रदेश में दर्ज अपराध सं. 230/07 और उपर्युक्त अपराधों से संबंधित अथवा संसक्त प्रयत्नों, दुष्प्रेरणों और षडयंत्रों तथा उसी संव्यवहार के अनुक्रम मेंअथवा उन्हीं तथ्यों से उद्‌द्भूत किसी अन्य अपराध अथवा अपराधों का अन्वेषण करने के लिए दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना के सदस्यों

3944 G1/2008

(5861) 5862

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : (XTOHER 25, 2008/ KARTIKA 3 , 19,

:

and section 429 ofthe Indian Penal Code , 1860 (Act No. 45 of1860) registered at Kareli Police Station, Allahabad ( UP ) and any other oftence or offences , attempts , abeunes and conspiracy in relation to or in connection with abov mentioned offences and any other offence / oltenres committed in the course of same transaction arising cor of the same facts.

[No. 228/70/2008 -A11 : MANISHA SAXENA . D नई दिल्ली, 16 अक्तूबर , 2008

का.आ. 2937.- केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्‌द्वारा दिल्ली विशेष पुि स्थापना अधिनियम, 1946 1946 का अधिनियम संख्या 25 धारा 3 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियां का प्रयोग करते हुए, भारतीय त अधिनियम, 1927 ( 1927 का अधिनियम संख्या 16 ) के बा निम्नलिखित अपराधोंको दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना द्वारा अन्नंशिश किए जाने वाले अपसधों के कार में विनिर्दिष्ट करती है :

(क) भारतीय वन अधिनियम, 1927 ( 1927 का अधिनियम सं. 16 ) के अधीन दंहनीय अपराध और

(ख) उपर्युक्त अप से संबंधित अथवा संसक्त प्रयो. दुष्प्रेरणों और पहन्त्रों तथा उसी संव्यवहार के अनुक्रम में किए गए अथवा उन्हीं तथ्यों से उद्धृत कियों अन्न अपराध अथवा अवराधों को ।

[सं. 228/70/2008- नीड़ी- मनीषा सक्सेना, उप निः। NewDiku, the 16th Betober, 2008

S.O. 2937. In exercise of the powers conferred to sub - section 3 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946 ) , the Central Goverumient hereby specifies tive tollosing, offences under the Indian Forest Act, 19271Act No. 10 of 1427 ) as the offences whiche are to be investigated the Delhi Special Police Establishment name

(a) Offences punishable under The Indian Fores ! Act, 1977 ( Act No. 16 of 1927) aud

(b) Attempis abermetits and conspiracies in relation

mentions

offenres

transacti

No.208 20 नई दि

का.आ. 1938, -कं दी स्थापना अधिनियम, 1946 धारा 6 के साथ पर्तित धारा की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदन्त शनि 'का प्रयोग करते हुए, हसरकार के गृह विभाग

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii) ] अधिसूचना सं. 20-10-2005 HG-1 दिनांक 14-8-2008 द्वारा प्राप्त सहमति से प्रथम सूचना पोर्ट संख्या 151 दिनांक 5-5-2008 अंतर्गत धारा 302/397/34 ना. संहिता ( 18600 का अधिनियम सं. 45) , धारा 25/54/59 शस्त्रनयम, 1959 ( 1959 का अधिनियम सं. 54) पुलिस स्टेशन सेक्टर ? फरीदावाद तथा उपर्युक्त अपराध से संबंधित अथवा संसक्त प्रयत्नां दुष्प्रेरणों और षडयंत्रों तथा उसो संत्र्यवहार के अनुक्रम में किए म अथवा उन्हों तथ्यों से उ‌द्भूत किसी अन्य अपराध अथवा अपराधा अन्देषण करने के लिए दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना के सदस्यों को शक्तियों और अधिकारिता का विस्तार सम्पूर्ण हरियाणा राज्य करती है ।

(सं. 228/79/2008- एवीडी- II ] धनीषा सक्सेना , उप सचित्र NewDelhi, the Iron October , 2008

5.0. 2938.In exercise ofthe powers conferredby sub section ( 1 ) of Section 5 read with Section 6 of the Delli Special Police Establishniem Act, 1946 ( Act No. 25 of 1946) , the Central Governinent with the consent ofthe State Government ofHaryana , Home Department vide Notification No. 20-10-2008-3 HG- I dated 14th August , 2008 hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police Establi - lanent to the whole of the State ofHaryana for investigate ofFIR No. 151 dated 5th May, 2008 under sections 3t0 ... 397 and 34 of the Indian Panel Code, 1860 ( Act No 150m 1860 rand section 25 ofthe Αυτης Act, 1959 ( Λοι Νο . 54 0 1059 ) , registered at Police Station Sector-7 , Faridabad and attempts , abetments and consipiracies in relation to or in coincction with offence mentioned above and any other offence or offences marmitted in the course of sante transaction arising out of the same facts .

No.228 :19:2008- AVD - L1J MANINDA SAXENA, Dy . Secу .

वित्त मंत्रालय

(वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 20 2008

पडित भारा 1995

केन्द्रीय

लनाडू. 70 ) दिनांक 31.10 बाथ उनके +++++ ???????***** છછછછછછછછછછછ उनके 105

होने तक

i

वित्तीय ओर्ड बीआईएफआर) नियुक्त

[ .324 - आईएफ -111 हौगाट, अवर सचिव 5863 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

श्री अतुल खांडेराव कुलकर्णी, 302 , ' ई' विंग , तुलसी आरकेड, कनॉट प्लेस , सी आई डी सी ओ , औरंगाबाद को केंद्रीय फिल्म प्रमाणन बोर्ड के मुम्बई सलाहकार पैनल के सदस्य के रूप में नियुक्त करती है । MINISTRY OF FINANCE (Department of Financial Services) New Delhi , the 20th October , 2008

[फा सं. 809/4/2007-एफ ( सी) ] संगीता सिंह, निदेशक ( फिल्म )

MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING New Delhi , the 6th October , 2008 S.O. 2939. In exercise ofthe powers conferredby sub- section (2) of Section 4 read with sub- section (2) of Section 6 of the Sick Industrial Companies ( Special Provisions ) Act, 1985, the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Nirmal Singh, IAS (TN:70 ) (Retd. ), as Member , Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) for three years , with effect from the date of assumption of the charge ofthe post on or after 31-10-2008 or till he attains the age of 65 years or till the abolition of BIFR or until further orders, whichever event occurs the earliest,

[No. 20/ 1 /2004 - IF- ( 1 ) J.S. PHAUGAT, Under Secy.

S.O. 2941. In continuation of this Ministry's Notification of even number dated 6-8-2007 and in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 5 of the Cinematograph Act , 1952 (37 of 1952) read with rules 7 and & of the Cinematograph (Certification ) Rules , 1983 the Central Government is pleased to appoint Shri Atul Khanderao Kulkarni , 302 , ' E ' Wing, Tulsi Arcade , Connaught Place, CIDCO, Aurangabad as member of the Mumbai advisory panel of the Central Board of Film Certification with immediate effect for a period oftwo years or until further orders , whichever is earlier, विदेश मंत्रालय ( सी.पी.बी, प्रभाग )

[F. No. 809/4/2007 - F(C) ] SANGEETA SINGH, Director (Films)

नई दिल्ली, 6 अक्तूबर , 2008 नई दिल्ली, 10 अक्तूबर, 2008 का.आ. 2940, -राजनयिक कौंसली अधिकारी ( शपथ एवं शुल्क) अधिनियम, 1948 ( 1948 का 41 वां ) की धारा 2 के खंड (क ) के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्‌द्वारा भारत का राजदूतावास, ओस्लो में श्री अशोक कुमार , सहायक को 10-10-2008 से सहायक कौंसली अधिकारी का कार्य करने हेतु प्राधिकृत करती है ।

[सं टी-4330/1 /2006 ] प्रीतम लाल , अवर सचिव ( कोंसुलर ) MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS

(C. P.V. Division) New Delhi , the 10th October , 2008

का.आ. 2942 , इस मंत्रालय दिनांक 31 मई , 2007 को समसंख्यक अधिसूचना के अनुक्रम में और चलचित्र ( प्रभाणन) नियमावली , 1983 के नियम 7 और के साथ पठित चलचित्र अधिनियम, 1952 (1952 का 37 ) की धारा 5 की उपधारा ( 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 , श्री पी. बी. एस. नागेश्वर राव , मार्फत एन श्रीरामुलु प्लॉट सं. 97 , सेल्फ फाइनेन्स, वनस्थलीपुरम, हैदराबाद-500 070 को केंद्रीय फिल्म प्रमाणन बोर्ड के हैदराबाद सलाहकार पैनल के सदस्य के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[फासं. 809/ 1/2007-एफ ( सी) ] संगीता सिंह , निदेशक ( फिल्म) S.O. 2940,-In pursuance of the clause ( ii ) of the Section 2 of the Diplomatic and Consular Officers ( Oath and Fees) Act , 1948 , (41 of 1948 ) the Central Government hereby authorize Shri Ashok Kumar, Assistant to perform the duties ofAssistant Consular Officer in the Embassy of India, Oslo.

New Delhi , the 6th October , 2008 [No. T-4330/1 /2006] PRITAM LAL, Under Secy. ( Consular)

सूचना और प्रसारण मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली , 6 अक्तूबर , 2008

S.O. 2942. In continuation of this Ministry's . Notification ofeven number dated 31-5-2007 and in exercise ofthe powers conferred bysub-section ( 1 ) of Section 5 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 (37 of 1952) read with rules 7 and 8 ofthe Cinematograph ( Certification ) Rules , 1983 the Central Government is pleased to appoint Shri P.V.8 . Nageshwara Rao, C/o N. Sriramulu, Plot No. 97, SelfFinance , Vanasthalipuram , Hyderabad-500 070 as member of the Hyderabad advisory panel of the Central Board of Film Certificationwith immediate effect for a period oftwo years or unti further orders , whichever is earlier .

[F.No. 809/1/2007 -F(C)] SANGEETA SINGH, Director (Films) का.आ. 2941 , -इस मंत्रालय की दिनांक 6 अगस्त, 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 उपधारा ( 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 5864

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25 , 2008/KARTIKA 3 , 19.30

नई दिल्ली, 13 अक्तूबर , 2008

का.आ. 2943.-इस मंत्रालय की दिनांक 8 जनवरी , 2007 की तपसंख्यक अधिसूचना के अनुक्रम में और चलचित्र ( प्रमाणन ) नियमावली, 1983 के नियम 7 और 8 के साथ पठित चलचित्र अधिनियम , 1952 ( 1952 का 37 ) को धारा 5 की उपधारा ( 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, श्री बिनय कुमार श्रीवास्तव , राम नगर रोड, हजारी बात , झारखंड , जिला और डाकखाना हजारी बाग को केंद्रीय फिल्म प्रमाणन बोर्ड के कोलकाता सलाहकार पैनल के सदस्य के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[फा सं. 809/1/2006- एफ ( सी ) ] संगीता सिंह, निदेशक ( फिल्म) NewDelhi , the 13th October, 2008

S.O. 2943. In continuation of this Ministry's Notification ofeven number dated 8-1-2007 and in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 5 of theCinematograph Act, 1952 (37 of 1952 ) read with rules 7 and 8 of the Cinematograph ( Certification) Rules, 1983 the CentralGovernment is pleased to appoint Shri Binay Kumar Srivastava, Ram Nagar Road , Hazari Bagh , Jharkhand, Distt. & PO Hazari Bagh as a member of the Kolkata 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 /2006- F ( C ) ] SANGEETA SINGFI , Director ( Filins)

रेल मंत्रालय

( रेलवे बोर्ड )

नईदिल्ली, 22 अक्तूबर , 2008

फा.आ. 2944.-राष्ट्रपति, संविधान के अनुच्छेद 309 के परंतुक द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , रेल सेवा ( पेंशन ) नियम, 1993 का और संशोधन करने के लिए निम्नलिखित नियम बनाती है , अर्थात्:-

1. संक्षिप्त नाम और प्रारंभ ( 1 ) इन नियमों का संक्षिप्त नाम रेल सेवा ( पेंशन ) ( संशोधन ) नियम, 2008 है । ( 2) ये राजपत्र में प्रकाशन की तारीख से प्रवृत्त होंगे । 2. नियम 75 का संशोधन -रेल सेवा ( पेंशन) नियम , 1993 के नियम 75 में .-

(1 ) उप- नियम ( 6 ) के परंतुक में,-

( i ) शर्त ( ख ) में , " प्रभागीय चिकित्सा अधिकारी से अन्यून रैंक के चिकित्सा अधिकारी " शब्दों के स्थान पर " चिकित्सा बोर्ड" शब्द रखे जाएंगे ;

( ii ) शर्त ( ग ) में, " हर तीन वर्ष पर प्रभागीय चिकित्सा

[PART II -SEC. 3 ( ii) ] अधिकारी से अन्यून रैंक के चिकित्सा अधिकारी का इस आशय का एक प्रमाण पत्र पेश करंगा " शब्दों के स्थान पर " र्याद स्थाई रूप से अशक्त है तो केवल एक बार , यदि अस्थायी रूप से अशक्त है तां प्रत्येक पांच वर्ष में एक बार , चिकित्सा बोर्ड द्वारा एक प्रमाण पत्र पेश करेगा " शब्द रखे जाएंगे ;

(2) उप -नियम ( 15 ) में, खंड ( ii ) के पश्चात् निम्नलिखित खंड अंतःस्थापित किया जाएगा , अर्थात्:-

" ( क ) जत्र कभी उप- नियम ( 6 ) के परंतुक में निर्दिष्ट अशक्तता ऐसी ही जिसमें बालक अपनी आजीविका अर्जित करने में असमर्थ हो तो यह तथ्य विकित्सा बोर्ड के चिकित्सा प्रमाण- पत्र द्वारा सम्यक रूप से समर्थित कार्यालय के प्रधान की जानकारी में लाया जाएगा । विकित्सा प्रमाण- पत्र प्राप्त होने के पश्चात् कार्यालय का प्रधान प्ररूप में यह उपदर्शित कर सकेगा कि अशक्तता स्थाई है या अस्थायी । जब कभी कुटुम्ब पेंशन का दावा उठता है तब बालक का विधिक संरक्षक चिकित्सा बोर्ड इस आशय के नए चिकित्सा प्रमाण- पत्र कि बालक अब भी अशक्त हैं , के साथ आवंदन देगा । " ;

(3 ) उप- नियम 15 के पश्चात् निम्नलिखित स्पष्टीकरण अंतःस्थापित किया जाएगा, अर्थात्:-

" स्पष्टीकरण-इस उप- नियम और उप-नियम ( 6 ) के प्रयोजनों के लिए, " चिकित्सा बोर्ड " से ऐसा चिकित्सा बोर्ड जिसमें चिकित्सा निदेशक या एक मुख्य चिकित्सा अधीक्षक या किसी क्षेत्रीय अस्पताल या मंडल का भारसाधक या उनका कोई नामनिर्देशिती व्यक्ति अध्यक्ष होगा और दो अन्य सदस्य, जिनमें से कम से कम एक मासिक या शारीरिक अशक्तता के विशिष्ट क्षेत्र में विशेषज्ञ होगा । "

( 4) प्ररूप 6 का संशोधन-उक्त नियमों के प्ररूप 6 में, शीर्षक में की कुटुम्ब के त्र्यौरे से संबंधित मद संख्या 6 के नीचे " क्या संतान शारीरिक रूप से विकलांग है , " शब्दों के स्थान पर " क्या बालक शारीरिक रूप से या मानसिक रूप से निःशक्त है या संतान यदि असमर्थता से ग्रस्त है , तो क्या असमर्थता स्थायी है या अस्थायी " शब्द रखे जाएंगे ।

( फा. सं. एफ ( ई ) 11/2008 - पोएन 1/10 ] मैथ्यूजान, सचिव , रेलवे बोर्ड

टिप्पणी : रेल सेवा ( पेंशन ) नियम , 1993 भारत सरकारं के असाधारण राजपत्र में तारीख 3 दिसम्बर , 1993 को अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 930 द्वारा प्रकाशित किए गए थे और तत्पश्चात् निम्नलिखित द्वारा संशोधित किया गया:-

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008 /कार्तिक 3 , 1930

[भाग -खण्ड (i ) ]

हरीख

क्र. अधिसूचना सं.

सं.

भारत के राजपत्र II , खंड 3 , उप- खंड ( ii ) में प्रकाशिর का.मा.सै. प्रकाशन की तारीख

4

3

12

25-2-1995

3-2-1995 511

1. एफ (ई ) 10/94/पीएन 1/31

(1 (संशोचन)

15-4-1995

31-3-1995 1026

2. ई(जी) 94 ईएम । -6

15-7-2000

1554

23-5-2000

3. एफ ( ई ) 1/99/पोएन 1/38

(उपांतरण)

15-7-2000

1553

24-5-2000

4. एक( ई ) 111 / 97 / पीएन 1/4

(संशोधन)

30-3-2002

1081

5. एफ ( /2000/पीएल 1/23 18-10-2001

4-11-2004

13-8-2002 1214(अ)

6. इ (जी ) 2002 ईएम 1/1

31-12-2003

30-12-2003

1488( से)

7. एक ( ई ) 101/2003/पीएन 1/38

(संशोधन)

18-12-2000

7-12-2004 3191

8. एफ ( ई ) II/2004/पीएन 1/21

(संशोधन)

5-2-2005

20-1-2005 399

9. एक ( ई ) 111/2003 /पोएन 1/25

19-3-2005

10-3-2006 1001

10. एफा( ई ) 11 /2003/पीएन 1/1

8-4-2006

1306

30-3-2006

11. एफ ( ई ) LII/2003 /पीएम 1/1

13-10-2007

19-9-2007 3005

12. इ (जी) 2007/ईएम 1/1

MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS

(RailwayBoard)

NewDelhi , the 22nd October, 2008

S.O. 2944-In exercise of the powers conferredby the provisio to article 309 ofthe Constitution, the President herby makes the following rules further to amend the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993, namely:-

1. ShortTitle and Commencement ( 1 ) These rules maybe called the Rallway Services (Pension ) (Amendment) Rules,2008.

(2) They shall come into force on the date oftheir publication in the OfficialGazette.

2. Amendment of rule 75.- In the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993, in rule 75,-

(1) in sub-rule 6, in the proviso,-

(i) in condition (b ), for the words " a medical officer not below the rank of a Divisional Medical Officer " , the words , " Medical Board" shall be substituted;

(ii) in condition (c) , for the words " shall poroduce every three years a certificate from a medical officer not below the rank ofDivisional Medical Officer" , the words , shall poroduce, once, if the disability is permanent, and once in every five years , ifthe disability is temporary, a certificate from a Medical Board" shall be substituted;

(2) in sub- rule 15, after clause (ii) , the following clause shall be inserted namely,-

"(il A) As and when the disability reffered to in the provisoto sub-rule (6) manifests itself in a childwhich

5865 makes him/her unable to earn his/her living, the fact shall be brought to the notice of the Head ofOffice duly supported by a Medical Certificate from a Medical Board . After receipt of Medical Certificate, the Head of Office may indicate in Form 6 as to whether disability is permanent or temporary.As and when the claim for family pension arises , the legal guardian of the child shall make an application supported by a fresh Medical Certificate from a Medical Board that the child is still suffering from the disability.";

(3) after sub- rule ( 15 ), the following explanation shall be inserted, namely:-

"Explanation : For the purposes of this sub-rule and sub-rule (6) , "Medical Board " means a Medical Board consisting ofa Medical Director or a Chief Superintendent or Insharge of a Zonal Hospital or Division or his nominee as Chairperson and two other members , one of them at least shall be Specialist in the particular area of mental or physical disability." .

4.Amendment to Form:-In form 6 ofthe said rules, below item number 6 relating to Detalls of family as on ...in heading, for the words , "Whether the child is physically handicaped", the words, "Whether the child is physically or mentally handicaped or ifthe child is suffering fromdisability, whether it is permanent or temorary" shall be substituted.

[FileNo. F(E) 111/2008/ PN 1/10 ] MATHEW JOHN, Secy. , Railway Board Note: The Railway Services (Pension ) Rules , 1993 were published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary , vide, Notification number S.O. 930 dated the 3-12-1993 and subsequently amended as follows :-

Datc

S. Notification number No.

Publisised in the Gazetic of India Part II Section 3 Sub-Section ( it). S.O. No.

Date of Publication

5

4

3

2

3-2-1995

511 25-2-1995 1. F ( E) 111/94/PN 1/31 (Amendment)

15-4-1995

1026

31-3-1995

2. E( G)/94/EM 1-6

15-7-2000

1554

23-5-2000

3. F( E) / 99 / PN 1/38 (Modification)

15-7-2000

24-5-2000 1553 4. F ( E ) 111 /97 /PN 1/14 (Amendment )

30-3-2002

1081

18-10-2001

5. Ε ( Ε ) ΠΙ/2000/ PN 1/23

4-11-2004

1214( E )

23-8-2008

6. E(G)2002/EM 1/1 (Amendment)

1488 (E ) 30-12-2003

31-12-2003

7.F (E ) 111 /2003 / PN 1/38 (Amendment)

7-12-2004 3191 18-12-2004 8. F ( E ) 111 /2004/ PN 1/21 (Amendment)

5-2-2005

399

20-1-2005

9. F ( E) 111/2003 /PN 1/25

19-3-2005

10-3-2006 1001 10. F( E ) III /2003 / PN 1/1

$ -4-2006

1306

30-3-2006

11. F ( E) 11 / 2003 / PN 1/23

19-9-2007 3005 13-10-2007 12. E(G) 2007 / EM 1/1 5866

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25 , 2008/KARTIKA3 , 1930

= स्वास्थ्यऔर परिवार कल्याण मंत्रालय ( स्वास्थ्यऔर परिवार कल्याण विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 15 अक्तूबर , 2008

का.आ. 2945.- भारतीय आयुर्विज्ञान परिषद् अधिनियम , 1956 (1956 का 102 ) की धारा 19 की उपधारा ( 4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए और दिनांक 25 जून , 2008 की अधिसूचना तथा दिनांक 23 दिसम्बर , 2008 के शुद्धि- पत्र के अधिक्रमण में केन्द्र सरकार भारतीय आयुर्विज्ञान परिषद् से परामर्श करने और संबंधित आयुर्विज्ञान संस्थाओं द्वारा उन्हें दिए गए नोटिसों पर किए गए अभ्यावेदनों पर विचार करने के पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में एतद्द्वारा निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है , अर्थात्:-- उक्त प्रथम अनुसूची में, मणिपाल विश्वविद्यालय पहले मणिपाल उच्चतर शिक्षा अकादमी मे रूप में ज्ञात ) भम विश्वविद्यालय ) , मणिपाल कर्नाटक के सामने शीर्षक " मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता " [ कालम ( 2 ) में के अन्तर्गत तथा शीर्षक ' पंजीकरण के लिए संभेपण [ कालम ( 3 ) में के अन्तर्गत निम्नलिखित रखा जाएगा, अर्थात्:-

(2)

(3)

एम.बी.जी.एस.

" बैचलर आफ पंडिसिन एंड बैचलर आफ सर्जरी "

यह मणिपाल विश्वविद्यालय पहले र्माणपाल उच्चतर शिक्षा अकादमी के रूप में ज्ञात ) सप विश्वविद्यालय ) , गिगाल कर्नाटक द्वारा प्रदत्त मान्यताप्राप्त सिरसा अर्हता होगी यदि यह कस्तूरभ चिकित्सा महाविद्यालय, मणिपाल और कस्तुरबा चिकित्सा महाविद्या देव, मंगलौर , कर्नाटक प्रत्येक में 250 सीटों की प्रवेश क्षमता के लिए वर्ष 2013 में या उससे पहले प्रदान की गई हो । यह मणिपाल विश्वविद्यालय ( पहले मणिपाल उच्चतर शिक्षा अकादमी के रूप में ज्ञात ) ( मभ विश्वविद्यालय ) , मणिपाल कर्नाटक द्वारा प्रदत्त मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अहंता होगी यदि यह कस्तुरबा चिकित्सा महाविद्यालय , मणिपाल मं 150 सीटों और कस्तुरचा चिकित्सा महाविद्यालय , मंगलौर , कर्नाटक में 100 सीटों की प्रवेश क्षमता के लिए वर्ष 2014 से प्रदान की गई हो ।

वर्ष 2014 के बाद एम.बी.वी.एम. डिग्रियों की लगातार मान्यता और सोटों का प्रत्यावर्तन एक वर्ग की अवधि के अन्दर सभी प्रकार की कमियों में सुधार लाने के अध्यधीन होगा । [ मंख्या यू. 12012/379/2006- एमई ( नीति -11 ) एन. बारिक, अवर सचिव

[PART I-SEC . 3(ii )] MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (Department of Health and Family Welfare) New Delhi , the 15th October, 2008

S.O. 2945. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (4) of the Section 19 of the Indian Medical Council Act , 1956 ( 102 of 1956 ) and in supersession of Notification dated 25th June , 2008 and corrigendum dated 23rd September, 2008 the Central Government , afier consulting the Medical Council of India and considering the representations made by the concerned medical institutions on the notices served upon them, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the saidAct, namely

In the said First Schedule against "Manipal University ( Formerly known as Manipal Academy of Higher Education) (Deemed University ), Manipal , Kamataka under the heading ' Reconignized Medical Qualification ' [ in column ( 2) ! and under the heading Abbreviation for Registration " [ in column (311, the following shall be inserted . namely:-

Bachelor of Medicine and M.B.B.S. Bachelor of Surgery This shall be a recognized

medical qualification granted by Manipal University ( Formerly known as Manipal Academy of Higher Education) (Deemed University) Manipal. Kunataka when granted in or before the year 2013 for intake capacity of 250 seats each at Kasturba Medical College . Manipal and Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Karnataka . This shall be a recognized medical qualitication granted by Manipal University ( Formerly known as Manipal Academy of Higher Education) ( L) eemed University) Manipal . Karnataka when granted from the year 2014 for intake capacity of 150 seats at Kasturba Medical College. Manipal and ING seats at Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Karnataka . Continued recognition of MBBS degrees after the year 2014 and restoration of seuls will he subject to rectification of all the deficiencies within a period of one year.

[ NU . 12012 /379/2006- ME( P - 11 ) ] N. BARIK . Under Secy.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

5867

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

पर्यावरण एवं वन मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 3 अक्तूबर, 2008

का.आर. 2946. - सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम , 2005 की धारा 5 ( i ) /धारा 19 ( i ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए पर्यावरण एवं वन मंत्रालय के निम्नलिखित अधिकारियों को उनके नाम के सामने दर्शाए गए विर्निदिष्ट विषय - वस्तु के संदर्भ में केन्द्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारियों/अपीलीय प्राधिकारियों आदि के रूप में नामोदिष्ट किया जाता है:-

1. उपरोक्त अधिनियम की धारा 5. ( i ) के अंतर्गत केन्द्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारियों के रूप में नामोदिष्ट किए गए उप-वन महानिरीक्षक/निदेशक/ अपर निदेशक/उप सचिव/सहायक वन महानिरीक्षक संयुक्त निदेशक/उप निदेशक स्तर के अधिकारी ।

क्र.सं. पद नाम

दूरभाष सं.

3

2

1.

दूरभाष सं. 24360549 1. श्रीमती रंजना गुप्ता, उप-वन महानिरीक्षक ( एफपी )

विषय वस्तु

4

[email protected].

इंटरकॉम सं. 520

दूरभाष सं. 24362416 2. श्री अशोक पई, उप-वन महानिरीक्षक (रा.व.पा.वि. बोर्ड)

[email protected] इंटरकॉम से 705 3. श्री ए. के. जौहरी ,

दूरभाष सं. 24364624 उप-वन महानिरीक्षक ( आर टी ) [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 513

दूरभाष सं. 24362813

[email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 519 4. श्री अनमोल कुमार , उप-वन महानिरीक्षक (वन्यजीव )

दूरभाष से 24361116 5. डॉ. दिलीप कुमार, लेखा नियंत्रक

[email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 157 वन नीति, एन एफ ए पी , घन अंतर्राष्ट्रीय सहयोग (एफ आई सी ) और राष्ट्रीय वन आयोग ( एन एफ सी)

एन ए ई बी , एफ डी एन एम ए पी ( 12 राज्य) वनीकरण से संबंधित नीतिगत मामले , 20 सूत्रीय कार्यक्रम, एम एण्ड ई कम्यूनिकेशन एण्ड यूनाईटेड नेशन कन्वेंशन टू काम्बैट डैजरटिफिकेशन ( यूएन सी सी डी)

धानिकी अनुसंधान और प्रशिक्षण एशिया पेसिफिक फारेस्ट इनवेजन नेटवर्क ( ए पी एफ आई एस एन ) इन्टरनेशनल नेटवर्क फार बैम्बू एण्ड रेटन ( आई एन बी ए आर ) भारतीय धानिकी अनुसंधान और शिक्ष्य परिषद् (आई सी एफ आर ई) देहरादून , भारतीय वन सर्वेक्षण( एफ एस आई ) देहरादून , इन्दिरा गांधी राष्ट्रीय वन अकादमी ( आई जी एन एफ ए ) देहरादून, बन शिक्षा निदेशालय (डी एफ ई) देहरादून के प्रशासनिक और वित्तीय मामले तथा भारतीय प्लाईवुड उद्योग अनुसंधान और प्रशिक्षण संस्थान (आई पी आई आर टी आई ) बंगलौर तथा भारतीय वन प्रबंध संस्थान ( आई आई एफ एम) भोपाल के सभी मामले ।

वन्यजीव , बन्यजीव क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय विश्व- धरोहर कन्वेंशन , राष्ट्रीय प्राणीविज्ञान उद्यान , केन्द्रीय चिड़ियाघर प्राधिकरण; राष्ट्रीय वन्यजीव बोर्ड, अन्तर्राष्ट्रीय संरक्षण संघ, प्रवासी प्रजातियों पर कन्वेंशन , यूनेस्को से संबंधित मामले । बजट प्रस्तावों की छानबीन- बजट अनुमानों को तैयार करना - योजनागत बजट के संबंध में योजना समन्वय से विचार-विमर्श करना- पूरक अनुदान मागों में समाविष्ट करने के लिए प्रस्तावों की सर्वाक्षा। मंत्रालयों की शक्तियों के अंदर और मंत्रालयों की शक्तियों के बाहर , दोनों के संबंध 5868

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25 , 2008/KARTIKA 3, 1930

1 .

2

3

दूरभाष सं. 24360588 6. श्री ए, अंदीश्वरन , सुपरिंटेंडेंट इंजीनियर ( सीसीयू) [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 725 7. डॉ. आर हसन , निदेशक ( वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 24360734 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 740

दूरभाष से 24365218 8. श्री सतीश के. अग्रवाल , निदेशक

[email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 505 9. श्री सुरेन्द्र कुमार , निदेशक

दूरभाष सं. 24361613 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 116 10. श्री विजय कुमार, निदेशक ( सतर्कता)

दूरभाष सं. 24366841 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 535 II . श्री चंदन सिह , निदेशक

दूरभाष सं. 24360659 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 522 12. श्री सतीश के, अग्रवाल , निदेशक ( अतिरिक्त प्रभार)

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

में, प्रस्तावों की पुनर्विनियोजन प्रक्रिया आरंभ करना । अनुदान मांगें तैयार करना व मुद्रण। प्रारूप ऑडिट पैस पर की गई कार्रवाई पर टिप्पण प्रस्तुत करना । सरकारी कर्मचारियों को ऋण के अंतर्गत निधियों को संवीक्षा और आबंटन । वेतन व अन्य भत्तों का संवितरण । सहायता- अनुदान का संवितरण । आवधिक व्यय विवरण आदि प्राप्त करना ।

सिविल निर्माण एकक को सौंपे गए पर्यावरण एवं वन मंत्रालय और उसके विभागों, अधीनस्थ कार्यालयों और स्वायतशासी संस्थानों के कार्यों की योजना और निष्पादन से संबंधित मामले । वन्य जीव अनुसंधान कन्सलटेन्सीज बर्ड फ्लू ( एवियन इनफ्लूएनजॉ ) , गिद्धों का संरक्षण

पुरस्कार और फेलोशिप्स , आदि

विश्व बैंक और खाद्य कृषि संगठन ( एफ ए ओ) परियोजनाएं

वन्यजीव और पशु कल्याण के संरक्षण और प्रबंधन पर थीमेटिक ग्रुप

प्रशासन ( पी- I , पी- II , और पी- III और लोक शिकायत निपटान प्रकोष्ठ , जलवायु परिवर्तन पर विशेषज्ञ समिति

सी पी डिवीजन , वाहनीय प्रदूषण

सतर्कता मामले

वन स्थापना ( एक ई ) पर्यावरण और वन मंत्रालय के कर्मचारियों हेतु शिकायत अधिकारी ।

दूरभाष सं. 24368442 , 24362206

[email protected]

इंटरकॉम सं. 140

राष्ट्रीय नदी संरक्षण निदेशालय ( एन आर सी डी) प्रशासन , आई सी और प्रशिक्षण बजट का समन्व्य , वार्षिक योजना, संसदीय मामलों समितियों का समन्वय , एन आर सी ए की समितियां , संसद प्रश्नों सहित एन आर सी पी जी ए पी का समन्वय कार्य, सामान्य प्रकृक्ति के मामले जिनमें समन्वय कीआवश्यकता है , यमुना कार्य योजना का समन्वय , प्रचार , जन भागीदारी और मीडिया के कार्य । [भाग [[-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

5869

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

3

1.

2

दूरभाष में 24365020 13. श्री बी सिक्का, निदेशक (वैज्ञानिक)

[email protected]

इंटरकॉम सं. 122 14. श्री योगेश शर्मा, निदेशक (वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 24366008 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 141 15. डॉ. ( श्रीमती ) आर दलवानी , निदेशक (वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 24364789 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 142 16. डॉ. एस कौल, निदेशक (वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 24360492 26178917 (R) kaul 52(@yahoo.com इंटरकॉम सं. 602 17. श्री विषेक सक्सेना, निदेशक

दूरभाष सं. 24362065 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 435 18. श्री आर के सेठी, निदेशक

दूरभाष सं. 24362252 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 135

दूरभाष सं. 24367640 19. डॉ. जगराम, निर्देशक (वैज्ञानिक)

[email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 739 3944G1/08-2

4

(i ) उत्तर- प्रदेश, पंजाब, हिमाचल प्रदेश , हरियाणा और राजस्थान के एन आर सी पीकार्य ;

(ii ) जे आई सी ए अध्ययन का पूर्ण समन्वय;

(iii ) जम्मू और काश्मीर के राष्ट्रीय झील संरक्षण योजना कार्य ।

उत्तराखण्ड , केरल और गोवा से संबंधित एन आर सी ही कार्य और अन्य कार्य जो शहरी विकास मंत्रालय , जवाहर लाल नेहरू अर्बन रिन्यू मिशन (जे एन यूआर एम ) से संबंधित केबिनेट नोट्स और टिप्पणियों से संबंधित हैं ।

राष्ट्रीय झील संरक्षण योजना समन्वय और जम्मूकाश्मीर , उत्तराखण्ड और पश्चिम बंगाल सभी राज्यों के लिए राष्ट्रीय झील संरक्षण योजना कार्य;

अनुसंधान और विकास परियोजनाएं ;

-सैढीमेन्टस और विश्लेषणात्मक गुणवचा नियंत्रण सहित राष्ट्रीय नदी संरक्षण योजना के अंतर्गत नदियों की अल गुणवत्ता मानीटरिंग ;

सीवेज शोधन संयंत्रों की कार्य निष्पादन मानीटरिंग ।

-नमभूमियों का संरक्षण और प्रबंध ;

- सलीम अली पक्षी विज्ञान और प्राकृतिक विज्ञान केन्द्र ( एस ए सी ओ एन ) ;

रामसर कन्वेशन ।

-गोविन्द बल्लभ पंत हिमालयी पर्यावरण विकास संस्थान ( जी बी पी एच आई ई डी) और अन्तर्राष्ट्रीय एकीकृत पर्वत विकास केन्द्र (आईसीआईएमओडी) भारतीय वन सेवा अधिकारियों का वार्षिक भोपनीय रिपोर्ट प्रकोष्ठ और ए जी एम यू टी संवर्ग का संवर्ग प्रबंध । जलवायु परिवर्तन ( सीसी ) ( स्पेडीएम प्रभाग ) उपचारी रणनीतियों के जरिए प्रदूषण की रोकथाम ;

पारि-शहर ;

पूरेलाल प्राधिकरण

पारिस्थितिकीय प्राधिकरण का हास

- राष्ट्रीय पर्यावरणीय अपीलीय प्राधिकरण पुरस्कार

न्यायिक मामले । 5870

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25, 2008/KARTIKΑ 3.10

2

3

दूरभाष स्र. 2436.3462 20. डॉ. जे. आर. भट्ट निदेशक (वैज्ञानिक)

[email protected]

इंटरकॉम सं. २० 21. डॉ ए, दुसईस्वामी निदेशक ( वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 2464217 [email protected] 22. डॉ. ( श्रीमती) ग्जनी वारियर निर्देशक ( वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 24363964 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 530 - 23. श्री सुरेश प्रसाद चौचे , निदेशक

दूरभाष सं. 24.36153 [email protected]

इंटरकॉम सं. 625

दूरभाष सं. 24362404 24. डॉ. एस. के. अग्रवाल निदेशक ( वैज्ञानिक)

[email protected]

इंटरकॉम का. 545

दूरभाष सं. 24.36.147 25. डॉ. पी. एल. आहूजाराय निदेशक वैज्ञानिक)

plahujaraiyaiido com

इंटरकॉम सं. 134 26. श्री विदेशक

27. डॉ. बी.

मूल्यांकन

- सेन्टर ऑफ माइनिंग सावन्नएन

[PARI 11-- STA.3 ( 1 )

4

ऑन्नडिया टैक्सोनांमी क्षमता निर्माण परियोः सन्ग सरकारों को कच्छ वनस्पति और परीफस के संरक्षण के लिए वित्तीय सहायताकृतिक संसाधनों और सतत्उपयोगिता पर धारक एक्सपर्ट ग्रुप ( ख ) ( मानव और जैन मन कच्छ वनस्पति और कोरल रीफो, जैव विविधता आदि पर प्रस्तावों पर हंतु ) वर्गीकी के लिए राष्ट्रीय नम विचार पुरस्का

जोन अल और मान्ट्रियल प्रोटोकोल

-अनुशिन इंजीनियरिंग अनुमोदन समिति ( R છે 3 છે , जैसा पर कार्टिजेना प्रोटोकॉल

जैव- आ पर क्षमता निर्माण परियोजना

हिंदी (गया)

खननयाजनाएं ( गैर- कोयला)

ताप निधन परियोजनाएं ( इं . आत अधिसूचना संशोधन एवं संबंधित

उद्योग संजनाओंका पर्यावरणीय मूल्य निर्धारण

खनन ( कोयला) हेतु मूल्य निर्धारण समिति

एस ई और एस ई ए सी का गढ़न और उन पर अनुवतों कार्रवाई मानीटरी

तेल, गैस और यंट्रॉलियम और डिस्टीलरोज क्षेत्र सहित द्योगिक परियोजनाएं

के वरिष्ठ यसवरण हेतु

कोयले गीय

1

इंटरमिक सं. 172

ई; धनद

क्षेत्र वि गाइए न्यूअलदिशा-निर्देश

के विकास प्रस्ताबों की समीक्षा करना और संस्थानों को गिथा जारी करना 5871

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

[ भाग -खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

3

2

1

28. डॉ. नसीम अहमद निदेशक ( वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 24363677 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 927 29. श्री अशोक भाटिया निदेशक ( वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 24367625 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 552 30. डॉ. ( श्रीमती ) चन्दा चौधरी निदेशक (वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 24367652 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 741 31. डॉ. एम. सुब्बा राव निदेशक (वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 24361410 wowsubbarao@ yahoo coir इंटरकॉम सं. 738 4

-परिप्रणाली अनुसंधान कार्यक्रम से संबंधित परियोजनाओं के लिए वित्तीय सहायता

-पूर्वी और पश्चिम घाट कार्यक्रम से संबंधित परियोजनाओं के लिए वित्तीय सहायता

प्राकृतिक संसधानों के संरक्षण और सतत उपयोग पर धीमेटिक विशेषज्ञ ग्रुप (क ) (पारि प्रणाली और अनुसंधान पूर्वी और पश्चिम घाटों के संबंध में प्रस्तावों पर विचार करना

ई आर सी- स्कीम परियोजनाएं जो प्रदूषण निवारण, नियंत्रण और उपशमन से संबंधित सामाजिक और आर्थिक थीमेटिक ग्रुप जो लागत लाभ विश्लेषण, सामाजिक आर्थिक मुद्दों, से संबंधित हों, विधिक और नीति संबंधी मामले.

राष्ट्रीय प्राकृतिक संसाधन प्रबंध प्रणाली ( एन एन आर एम एस)

- धीमेटिक विशेषज्ञ, ग्रुप्स , प्रदूषण निकरण , नियंत्रण और उपशमन

-पर्यावरण ( आर प्रभाग में अनुसंधान कार्य कासमन्वय

अधिकतम दुर्घटना जोखिम ( एम ए एच ) इकाई में रसायनिक सुरक्ष, परसिसटेन्ट ऑरगॅनिक पाल्यूटेन्ट्स ( पी ओ पी ) पर स्टाकहोम कन्वेंशन राष्ट्रीय रसायनिक प्रबंध प्रोफाईल

जैव चिकित्सा अपशिष्ट प्रबंधन ( प्रबंधन और हथालन) नियमावली पोत भंजन मामले

उच्चतम न्यायालय मामले जो खतरनाक अपशिष्ट प्रबंधन से संबंधित और 1995 से लम्बित है

खतरनाक अपशिष्ट प्रबंधन पर उच्चतम न्यायालय मानीटरिंग कमेटी

वेस्ट ऑयल यूजड ऑयल और नॉनफेरस मेटालिक अपशिष्टों के रिसाइकलर्स का पंजीकरण वेस्ट ऑयल/यूजड ऑयल का पुनःचकण सुरक्षित ओर पर्यावरणीय दृष्टि से साउंड शिप पुनःचकण के अंतर्राष्ट्रीय मेरीटाईम संगठन ( आई एम ओ ) की समुद्री पर्यावरण सुरक्षा समिति एच एस एम डी का समन्वय 5872

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 25 , 2008 /KARTIKA 3 , 1930

1.

2

3

32. डॉ. ई. वी. मूले निदेशक (वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 24364593 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 558 33. डॉ. पी. बी. रस्तोगी निदेशक ( वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष से 24367668 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 550 34. डॉ. सरोज निदेशक ( वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 24364067 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 751

दूरभाष सं. 23318553 [email protected].

35. श्री अंजनी कुमार निदेशक ( पशु कल्याण )

36. डॉ. सुश्री सुनीता बी. औलक निदेशक

दूरभाष से 24367685 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 538 37. डॉ. हुसैन अहमद निदेशक

दूरभाष से 24361669 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 123

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

भारतीय वनस्पति सर्वेक्षण ( बी एस आई ) , भारतीय प्राणी सर्वेक्षण ( बेड एस आई ) , भारतीय गणतंत्र का वानस्पतिक उद्यान ( बी जी आई आर ) , ई- गवर्नेन्स

-पर्यावरण प्रभाव मूल्यांकन औद्योगिक परियोजना

पर्यावरणीय परामर्शदाता को प्राधिकृत करना और क्यू.सी. आई. के साथ समन्वय स्थापित करना। एच एस एम डी

बेसल कन्वेंशन

खतरनाक अपशिष्ट ( प्रबंधन एवं हथालन ) नियमावली , बैटरीज ( प्रबंधन एवं हथालन ) नियमावली, खतरनाक अपशिष्टों की सीमापार आवाजाही के नियंत्रण पर बेसल कन्वेंशन - डी जी एफ टी मामलों सहित खतरनाक अपशिष्ट का आयात-निर्यात

- ई वेस्ट पर टास्क फोर्स सहित ई वेस्ट -लैंड एसिड बैटरीज ( प्रबंधन और हथालन) नियम

पशु कल्याण प्रभाग और पर्यावरण एवं वन मंत्रालय की वेबसाईट का उन्नयन/ विकास क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों द्वारा प्रस्तुत की गई मानीटरी रिपोटरों का मूल्यांकन

-परियोजना प्रस्तावकों से प्राप्त द्विवार्षिक रिपोटों का तकनीकी मूल्यनिर्धारण

आई. ए, प्रभाग की आंतरिक बैठकों सहित समन्वय गतिविधियां

मंत्री मंडलीय सचिव को मासिक डी.ओ. , सूचना का अधिकार संबंधी मामले , आंतरिक समन्वय बैठक

एन आर सी डी की एम आई एस रिपोर्ट- नदियों और झीलों सहित औद्योगिक प्रदूषण कीमानीटरिंग

नदियों और झीलों में अपशिष्ट निस्तारित करने वाले अत्याधिक प्रदूषित उद्योगों की मानीटरिंग स्थिति

-एन आर सी डी की वार्षिक रिपोर्ट

-एन आर सी डी का निष्पादन बजट

एन आर सी डी का निष्कर्ष बजट [भाग -खण्ड ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008 /कार्तिक 3 , 1930

1

3

2

38. डॉ. उदय शंकर निदेशक ( आई एफ डी)

दूरभाष सं. 24362387 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं 917 39. श्री ए. के. लाल निदेशक

दूरभाष सं. 24367077 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 503 40. डॉ. आर. के. राय निदेशक (वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 24367669 (0 ) 2625098 (R) [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं 612

इंटरकॉम सं. 616 41. डॉ. एम. ए. हक निदेशक

42. सुश्री गुर प्यारी अपर सलाहकार (आर्थिक)

दूरभाष हूं 24368843 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 925 43. डॉ. आर. के. पाठक तकनीकी निदेशक

दूरभाष सं. 24360465 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 611 44. श्री ललित कपूर , अपर निदेशक ( वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 24368526 Ikapoor [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 14 45. श्री राजीव सिन्हा अपर निदेशक ( वैज्ञानिक )

दूरभाष सं. 24363869 [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 133 46. श्री बी. बी. बर्मन अपर निदेशक ( वैज्ञानिक )

दूरभाष से 24363007 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 118 47. डॉ. ( श्रीमती ) मुंजू रैना अपर निदेशक ( वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 24360270 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 117 48. श्री आर. एन. जिंदल अपर निदेशक ( वैज्ञानिक )

दूरभाष सं. 24366347 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 556

5873 4

महालेखा परीक्षक द्वारा पूछे गए एन आर सी डीकी संपरीक्षा आपत्तियों के उत्तर

एन आर सी डी की एम आई एस रिपोर्ट का संकलन

एन आर सी डी की वार्षिक कार्य योजना वन , एन . ए.ई.बी. और वन्यजीव से संबंधित समेकित वित्त प्रभाग

ए.जी.एम.यू.टी. संवर्ग के अतिरिक्त भारदीय धन सेवा ( आई.एफ.एस. ) का संवर्ग प्रबंध

वानस्पतिक उद्यानों को सहायता

सेंटर ऑफ इकोलॉजिकल साईसिज बंगलौर जैव विविधता संरक्षण

सामुदायिक सहभागिता के माध्यम से जैव -विविधता संरक्षण पर यू. एन. डी. पी. परियोजना

-पारिस्थितिकीय दृष्टि से संवेदनशील क्षेत्र -फ्लाई ऐश

आर्थिक प्रकोष्ठ के नीतिगत मामले

एन. आई.सी.

बंगाल के राष्ट्रीय नदी संरक्षण कार्य , पश्चिम बंगाल के राष्ट्रीय झील संरक्षण योजना कार्य तमिलनाडु, दिल्लीऔर पश्चिम

गुजरात , महाराष्ट्र बिहार झारखंड और आंध्रप्रदेश के राष्ट्रीय नदी संरक्षण कार्य उड़ीसा पूर्वोत्तर राज्य, मध्य प्रदेश, छत्तीसगढ़ और कर्नाटक क्षेत्रीय निदेशक यू पी/डी डी ओ , एन आर सी डी इलाहाबाद के राष्ट्रीय नदी संरक्षण कार्य

सांझा बहिस्राव शोधन संयंत्र ( सी ई टी पी एस) जल प्रदूषण

औद्योगिक प्रदूषण

स्रोत संविभाजन अध्ययन

माले घोषणा

वायु प्रदूषण , ध्वनि प्रदूषण और मानदंड निर्धारित करना , कोयला वायु अधिनियम, प्रदूधण उपशमन पर वर्किंग ग्रुप , न्यायलय के मामले । 5874

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : CKTOBER 25 , 2008 /KARTIKA 3. 1930

1 .

3

49. डॉ एस. भौमिक अपर निदेशक (वैज्ञानिक )

दूरभाष स. 24.34-2827 bhowmiksimert.dethi.nic.in इंटरकॉम सं. ९ १७ 50. डॉ. के. ररी. राठौर अपर निदेशक ( वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष में 24360 rathere27 @yalam com इंटरकॉम सं. 144

दूरभाष में. 24.36:

51. डॉ. सुजाता अरोड़ा अपर निदेशक ( वैज्ञानिक ) [email protected] इंटरकॉम में. 737 52 डॉ. एम सलाहुद्दीन अपर निदेशक ( वैचारिक )

दूरभाष सं. 24364545 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. २५.

53. डॉ. सथिल बेल अपर निदेशक ( वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 2436004 senthil , [email protected] इंटरकॉम

54. श्री ईश्वर सिंह अपर निदेशक (विधि)

दूरभाष सं. 24.362755 isingh 1010 @ yalwo.co.in इंटरकॉम सं. 614 55. श्रीमती सुजाता खापरडे अपर निदेशक ( वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 24366379 sujata_mkh.com इंटरकॉम सं. 55 %

[PART !! --SFC. 3 (ii ) ] 1

नदी की और पन विद्युत परियोजनाएं

- निर्माण परियोजनाओं को पर्यावरणीय स्वीकृत , (महाराष्ट्र, हरियाणा, गुजरात, मध्य प्रदेश . राजस्थान उतराखण्ड)

औद्यागिकी एस्टेटो, पाकों, परिसरों. क्षेत्रों एस ई जेट/ईपीजेड , चायो- टेकक पाकों, धर्म परिसरों कापर्यायांग स्वीकृति।

↓ राष्ट्रीय नेत्र विविधता प्राधिकरण ( एनवीए ) जैव विशिला पर कन्वेशन ( सी बी डी ) , राष्ट्रीय जैव विविधता रणनीति एवं कार्य योजना (एन यी सभी)

स्वच्छ औद्यागिको विकास और मध्यम लघु स्तर के उद्यानों को बढ़ावा देना न्यूनतम अपशिष्ट

देश भर में न्यूनतम अपशिष्ट सर्किलों को

-अवसंरचना और विविध परियोजनाएं, पत्तन, विदरगाह, एनरपोर्ट , मार्ग , रोपवेज , साझा हिस्राय शोधन संयंत्र ( सी ई टी पी ) त्रिपैले पदाथों के निपटान की सुविधा ( टी एस डी एक ) तटीय लिमन जीन ( सी आर जेड)

विधियः प्रकार

पर्यावरण शिक्षा केन्द्र अहमदाबाद

'सी पी आर पर्यावरणीय शिक्षा केन्द्र, चेन्नई नार काफ्टता केन्द्रों को स्थापित करना

राष्ट्रीय पर्यावरणीय जागरुकत्ता अभियान (एनईएसी)

पर्यागत्रीय कार्यक्रम (ग्लोब ) को लाभान्वित करने के लिए ग्लोबल लर्निंग और ओबजरवेशन्स एम एन आर डी , एन सी ई आर टी और राज्य शिक्षा विभागों के साथ समन्वय सहित औपचारिक पर्यावरणीय शिक्षा

व्यावसायिक पाठ्‌यक्रमों में पर्यावरण को मजबूत बनाना

- इन्नूके अध्यम से पर्यावरणीय एप्रिसिएशन पाठ्यक्रम 5875

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 25, 2008 कार्तिक 3, 1930

[भाग II खण्ड (ii)]

1 .

3

2

दूरभाष सं. 24367664 56. श्रीमती रीता खन्ना अपर निदेशक ( वैज्ञानिक ) [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 176/173

दूरभाष सं. 24360806 इंटरकॉम सं. 177 57. डॉ. ताशी वांगडी अपर निदेशक (वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 24367670 इंटरकॉम सं. 609 58. डॉ. ए. के. त्यागी अपर निदेशक ( वैज्ञानिक)

59. डॉ. आर. के. सूरी अपर निदेशक ( वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 24361668 [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 913 60. श्रीमती संचिता जिन्दल अपर निदेशक

दूरभाष सं. 24360488 [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 752 61. डॉ. एस. वी. रेड्डी अपरनिदेशक

दूरभाष सं. 24366764 [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 753 62. डॉ. एम. होता अपर निदेशक

दूरभाष सं. 24367663 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं 914 63. श्री समीर श्रीवास्तव उप सचिव ( आई सी-2 )

दूरभाष सं. 24362612 [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 603 64. सुश्री प्रतिभा राज उप सचिव (पी सी और टी एवं ई)

दूरभाष में 24366739 pratibharaj @nic.in इंटरकॉम से 745 4

सेमिनारो/परिसंवादों/कार्यशालाओं के लिए वित्तीय सहायता की मंजूरी व्यावसायिक सोयायटी /संस्थानों को सहायता अनुदान

पर्यावरण पर प्रकाशनों के लिए वित्तीय सहायता की मंजूरी

पुस्तकालय से संबंधित सभी कार्य

बाह्य सहायता प्राप्त परियोजना सात लैंडस्कंप राज्यों में जैव विविधता संरक्षण और ग्रामीण आजीविका उन्नयन परियोजना

बी.पी. पाल फैलोशिप अवार्ड जैव विविधता पर पर्यावरण पर पीताबर पंत राष्ट्रीय फैलोशिप अवार्ड

एन एन आर एम के तहत अनुसंधान प्रस्ताव अंतरर्राष्ट्रीय रसायन प्रबंध का स्ट्रेविक एप्रोच ( एस ए आई सी एम)

अंतर्राष्ट्रीय व्यापार में कतिपय परिसंकटमय रसायनिको और कीटनाशकों हेतु पूर्व सूचित कन्सेन्ट प्रोसिजर पर रौटेरडेम कन्वेशन लोक देयता बीमा अधिनियम

नगर ठेस अपशिष्ट ( प्रबंधन और हथालन ) नियमावली

- पुनः चक्रित प्लास्टिक ( प्रबंधन और हथालन ) नियमावली

-वार्षिक रिपोर्ट ( ई आई प्रभाग ) -मानद और जैव- मण्डल रिजर्व कार्यक्रम -फांउडेशन ऑफ रिवाईटलइजेशन ऑफ लोकल हेल्थ ट्रॅडिशन ( एफ. आर. एल.एच.टी ) से संबंधित मामले

औषधीय पौधों पर यू.एन. डी. पो. परियोजनाएं - मंत्रालय के अन्य प्रभागों के साथ औषधीय पौधों पर समन्वय स्थापित करना ।

अंतर्राष्ट्रीय सहयोग ( आई सी और एस डी-2 ) -राष्ट्रीय प्राकृतिक विज्ञान संग्रहालय ( एन.एम. एन एच)

क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय ( मुख्यालय ) ( आर ओ (एत्त क्यू) के प्रश्शासनिक मामलों सहित ) 5876

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25 , 2008/KARTIKA 3,1930

2

1

3

65. श्रीमती एस. घोष राय उप सचिव

दूरभाष सं. 24300772 Saheli [email protected]

इंटरकॉम से 707 66. श्रीमती राजश्री रे राय उप सचिव

दूरभाष सं. 24361233 [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 444 67. श्री नारायण दास उप सचिव

दूरभाष सं. 24367631 [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 527 68. श्री सी. एल. लांगायन

दूरभाष सं. 24360769 उप सचिव

69. श्री अग्रिम कौशन्न उप सचिव

दूरभाष सं. 24364642 [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 704 70. श्री पंकज गर्ग उप-सचित्र

दूरभाष सं. 24360686 [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 918 71. श्री एस. के. जैन उप-सचिव

[PART 11-SEC. 3 (11) 4

पर्यावरण नीति और कानून और सतत विकास ( एस.डी.- । ) तथा अंतरराष्ट्रीय सहयोग ( आई सी)

+मीडिया सैल का अतिरिक्त प्रभार

जलवायु परिवर्तन का अनुकूलन ( सी.सी. ) सामान्य समन्त्रय , सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम ( आर.टी.आई. ) तथा आंतरिक कार्य अध्ययन एकक

गैर शासकीय संगठन ( एन.जी.ओ. ) प्रकोष्ठ इंटरकॉम सं. 604 व्यापारऔर पर्यावरण , पो. सी. प्रभाग

सामान्य प्रशासन ( जी.ए. ) , संसद और प्रोटोकॉल राष्ट्रीय वनीकरण एवं पारि विकास बोर्ड प्रशासन और वन ग्रामों का विकास

दूरभाष सं. 24366837

[email protected]

इंटरकॉम से 617

72. श्री सी. डी. सिंह सहायक वन महानिरीक्षक

वन संरक्षण ( वन संरक्षण अधिनियम, 1980 ) वन सलाहकार समिति

दूरभाष सं. 24363984

casingh. [email protected]

एक्सटेंशन से 523

73. श्री बी. के. सिंह सहायक अन महानिरीक्षक

दूरभाष bksingh [email protected] इंटरकॉम में 525 74. श्री डी. जैना सहायक वन महानिरीक्षक

वन संरक्षण गोया , पंजाब , हरियाणा , दिल्ली , उत्तराखण्ड, उत्तर प्रदेश , बिहार , असम , नागालैंड , त्रिपुरा को छोड़कर महाराष्ट्र, उड़ीसा , मध्यप्रदेश , पूरा दक्षिण ( वन संरक्षण अधिनियम, 1980 ) ई ए पी पूर्वोनर रेल काम्या से संबंधित कार्य

दूरभाष सं. 24.362497

[email protected].

इंटरकॉम से 706

75. श्री राजबीर सिंह सहायक वन महानिरीक्षक

एफ डी एएन ए पी ? राज्य ) हरियाणा , पंजाब उड़ीसा, जम्मू और काश्मीर , छत्तीसगढ़. मध्यप्रदेश , हिमाचल प्रदेश , एनएपी से संबंधित नीति मामले फार्म भूमियों पर वृक्षारोपण और सी ई एम दी है , परुस्थलीयकरण

दूरभाप सं. 2436498t

[email protected]

इंटरकॉम सं 708

इंटरकॉम सं. 4.31 76. श्री एम.डी. सिन्हा ए.आई. जी. एफ.

एन ए ई बी , एफ डी ए ( 9 राज्य) पश्चिम बंगाल , झारखण्ड , बिहार , महाराष्ट्र, गोवा , तमिलनाडु , केरल , गुजरात और राजस्थान , हरित . भारत स्कीम , ग्राम वन योजना स्कीम और राष्ट्रीय वनीकरण और पारिविकास बोर्ड ( एन ए ई बो) सर्वेक्षण और उपयोगिता, आई टी टी ओ, वानिकी साख्यिको [ भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

5877

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

3

2

1.

77. श्री उमाकांत

दूरभाष सं. 24363974 सहायक वन महानिरीक्षक [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 517

दूरभाष सं. 24361795 78 श्री प्रमोद कृष्णनन संयुक्तनिदेशक

[email protected] इंटरकॉम से 717 79. श्री एस. पी . यादव संयुक्त निदेशक

दूरभाष सं. 23389883 [email protected] 80. डॉ. एस. सतपथी संयुक्त निदेशक

दूरभाष सं. 24369629 [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 601

दूरभाष सं. 24363960 इंटरकॉम सं. 750 B1 . श्रीमती मधुमिता विश्वास संयुक्त निदेशक

दूरभाष सं. 24365199 82. श्री नीरज खत्री उप-निदेशक

[email protected] इंटरकॉम से 14

दूरभाष सं. 24361669 83. डॉ. पी. एस. रावत्त उप-सचिव ( एस )

[email protected] इंटरकॉम से 502 4

वन सुरक्षा प्रभाग और संयुक्त वन प्रबंध (जे एफ एम ) सैल; जलवायु परिवर्तन पर यूनिाईटेड नेशन फ्रेम कर्क ( यू एन एफ सी सी सी) , गैर इमारती वन उत्त्पाद

वन्यजीव, संकटापन्न प्रजातियों के अन्तर्राष्ट्रीय व्यापार पर कन्वेशन ( साईटस ) , हाथी परियोजना , राष्ट्रीय उद्यान और अभयारण्य राष्ट्रीय बाघ संरक्षण प्राधिकरण ( एन टी सी ए) से संबंधित सभी मामले

जलवायु परिवर्तन और ओजन सैल

पर्यावरण सूचना प्रणाली ( एनविस ) केन्द्र - पर्यावरणीय स्वास्थ्य

इन्दिरागांधी पर्यावरण पुरुस्कार जवाहर लाल नेहरू यूनिवर्सिटी चेयर ऑन पर्यावरणीय कानून और मर्यावरण सूचना प्रणाली ( एनविस ) स्कीम के कुछ कार्य

2. उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 19 ( 1 ) के तहत अर्पीलीय प्राधिकरण के रूप में नार्माद्दिष्ट संयुक्त सचिव/वन महानिरीक्षक/ सलाहकार स्तर के अधिकारी ।

क्र.सं. पद नाम

दूरभाष सं

3

1. 2

दूरभाष सं. 24362388

[email protected] इंटरकॉम से437 1. श्री भारत भूषण संयुक्त सचिव एवं वित्तीय सलाहकार

[email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 408 2. श्री रजनी रंजन रश्मि संयुक्तसचिव

विषय सामग्री

4

- मंत्रालय के एस एफ सी/ई एफ सी सी सी ई ए प्रस्तावों की जांच करना और उन पर सहमति प्रदान करना।

विदेशों में प्रतिनियुक्ति।

सहायता अनुदान जारी करना ।

मंत्रालय के वित्तीय मामले ।

अधिकारियों और कर्मचारियों द्वारा प्रत्प्त किया गया पारिश्रमिक।

अनुदान मागें तैयार करना व मुद्रण।

प्रारूप ऑडिट पैरा पर की गई कार्रवाई टिप्पण प्रस्तुत करना।

जलवायु परिवर्तन ( सीसी ) ( सीडीएम और यूएनएफ सी सी सी सहित ) सतर्कता मीडिया 5878

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 25, 2008/ KARTIKA 3 , 1930

== 2

3

1

3. श्री आर. के. वैश संयुक्त सचिव

दूरभाष सं. 24360634 [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 415

दूरभाष सं. 24363956 इंटरकॉम सं 414 4. डॉ. रजनीश दुबे संयुक्त सचिव

5. डॉ. बी.पी. नीलरत्न संयुक्त सचित्र

दूरभाष सं . 24361712 jsbpn_mef@ nic इंटरकॉम से 422 6. श्री ए.के. गोयल संयुक्त सचिव

दूरभाष सं. 24.361774 [email protected] फैक्स सं. 24.367000 इंटरकॉम सं 440 7. श्री एसके पाण्डेय संयुक्त सचिव

दूरभाष सं. 24362551 [email protected] फैक्स सं. 24360844 * डॉ. सुत्रोध सलाहकार

इंटरकीय गं !?

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ⅱ ) ]

= 4

परिसंकटमय पदार्थ प्रबंध प्रभाग ( एचएसएमडी) राष्ट्रीय नदी संरक्षण निदेशालय ( एन आर सी डी) , राष्ट्रीय झील संरक्षण योजना ( एन एल सी पी ) स्वच्छ उत्पादन । स्वच्छ प्रौद्योगिकी पर्यावरण नीति और कानून ( विधायी प्रकोष्ठ सहित ) , प्रदूषण नियंत्रण ( सी.पी. ) केन्द्रीय प्रदूषण नियंत्रण बोर्ड ( सी पी सी बी ) के प्रशासन सहित

प्रवाल भितियां, कच्छ वनस्पति , फांउडेशन ऑफ रिवाईटेलाईजेशन ऑफ लोकल हेल्थ ट्रेडिशन ( एफ आर एल एच टी ) , ओजोन सेल और मॉन्ट्रोवल प्रोटोकॉल , सी ई एस/आई आई एस सी , चंग्लौर , हिन्दी ( राजभाषा )

सामान्य प्रशासन और संसद/प्रोटोकॉल प्रशासन और जन शिकायत निवारण प्रकोष्ठ, क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों की स्थापना , सामान्य समन्वय , सूचना का अधिकार और आंतरिक कार्य अध्ययन एकक , भारतीय वनस्पति सर्वेक्षण ( बी एस आई ) , भारतीय प्राणि सर्वेक्षण ( जेड एस आई ) , ई -गवर्नेस , मतग्म अली पक्षी विज्ञान और प्राकृतिक विज्ञान केन्द्र ( एस ए सी ओ एन ) , कार्टिजेना प्रोटोकॉल सहित जैव सुरक्षा , अनुवांशिक इंजीनियरी अनुमोदन समिति ( जी.ई.ए.सी. ) राष्ट्रीय जैव विदधता प्राधिकरण ( एन.बी.ए. ) , राष्ट्रीय जैव विविधता कार्यनीति और कार्य- योजना ( एन. बी.एस.ए.पो.। जैत्रीय विविधता पर कन्वेंशन ( सी. बी.डी. ) नम भूमियां और रामसर कन्वेंशन - भारतीय वन मंत्रा का प्रशासन, वन स्थापना, आई. यू. मी एन विश्व संरक्षण संघ, जी.बी. पंत, हिमालयी पर्यावरण एवं विकास संस्थान ( जो. वी. पी. आई. एच.ई.डी. ) , अंतर राष्ट्रीय समेकित पर्वतीय विकास केंन्द्र ( आई.सी. आई . कार्यक्रम विविधता संरक्षण , जीव- महाग ( आई सी) ( कोडकर ) विकास एक सतत

ओ एम ) पर्वतः अंतर जलवायु परिवर्तन से संबंधित सभी अन्य वैज्ञानिक तकनीकी कार्य [भाग- खण्ड ( ii) ]

5879

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

2

3

1

9. डॉ. जी.के. पांडे सलाहकार

दूरभाष सं. 24360467 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं. 531 10. श्री आर. मेहता सलाहकार

दूरभाष में 24362840 [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 543 11. श्री आर.एस. अहलावत आर्थिक सलाहकार

दूरभाष सं. 24362663 [email protected] इंटरकॉम सं 908 12. डॉ. एस. पी. शर्मा सांख्यिकीय सलाहकार

दूरभाष सं. 24363021 [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 103 13. डॉ. नलिनी मट्ट सलाहकार ( वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 24360478 [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 541 14. डॉ. आर. बी लाल वन महानिरीक्षक

दूरभाष सं. 24360740 [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 106 15. श्री के. बी. थम्पी वन महानिरीक्षक

दूरभाष सं. 24367404. [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 710 4

पर्यावरणीय स्वास्थ्य , विश्व बैंक औद्योगिकीय विकास क्षमता परियोजना , ताप विद्युत एवं भवन निर्माण क्षेत्र से संबंधित प्रभाव मूल्यांकन , कोयला खनन क्षेत्र का प्रभाव मूल्यांकन , रोटरडेम कन्वेंशन , स्ट्रेटेजिक अप्रोच टू इंटरनेशनल कैमिकल्स मेनेजमेंट ( एस.ए.आई.सी.एम. ) , राष्ट्रीय आपदा प्रबंध प्राधिकरण (एन.डी.एम.ए. ) रसायनिक आपदा ( खतरनाक रसायनिक प्रबंध , संहित ) नगर ठोस अपशिष्ट प्रबंध. एम.एस.एच.आई.सी. नियमावली , रसायन दुर्घटना नियमावली तथा रसायन सुरक्षा , स्टॉकहोम कन्वेशन ( प्रभावी मूल्यांकन और पी.ओ. पी. संवीक्षा समिति ) , प्लास्टिक विनिर्माण और उपयोगिता नियमावली , एम.एस. डब्ल्यूनियमों का कार्यान्वयन, जन दायित्व सुरक्षा और संबंधित न्यायिक मामले , पारा सहित भारी धातुएं पर्यावरणीय शिक्षा (पुस्तकालय सहित ) , ग्लोबल पब्लिक गुड्स

योजना समन्वय , आर्थिक प्रकोष्ठ, व्यापार और पर्यावरण

-बजेट प्रस्ताव और पजट अनुमान

- बजट प्रस्तावों की संवीक्षा और पूरक अनुदान हेतु बजट प्रस्ताव सन्ति बजट अनुमानों को तैयार करना।

मंत्रालय की शक्तियों के अंदर और मंत्रालय की शक्तियों के बाहर दोनों में प्रस्तावों के पुनर्विनियोजन की प्रक्रिया संबंधी कार्य। पर्यावरण एवं वन मंत्रालय की वार्षिक रिपोर्ट, पर्यावरण स्थिति ' रिपोर्ट' , पर्यावरणीय सूचना (इन्दिरा गांधी पर्यावरण पुरस्कार को छोड़कर ) , सांख्यिकीय प्रकोष्ठ, एन.जी.ओ. प्रकोष्ठ -उद्योग क्षेत्र संबंधी प्रभाव मूल्यांकन अवसंरचना , नदी घाटी, खनन क्षेत्र व तटीय विनियमन जोन (सी आर जेड ) से संबंधित प्रभाव मूल्यांकन , स्त्रोत संविभाजन अध्ययन और माले उद्‌घोषणा वन्यजीव, वन्यजीव क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय , साईटैस, राष्ट्रीय उद्यान और अभयारण्य, डब्ल्यूएच सी, राष्ट्रीय प्राणि उद्यान , केन्द्रीय चिड़ियाघर प्राधिकरण , एन बी डब्ल्यू एल एफ , सी एम एस , यूनेस्को, वन्यजीव

रा.व. पारि विकास बोर्ड, एफ डी ए/एन ए पी (28 राज्य) , वनीकरण से संबंधित नीतिगत मामले , ग्रीनिंग इंडिया स्कीम हेतु सहायता 5880

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25 , 2008/KARTIKA 3,1930

2

1

3

16. श्री अंसार अहमद वन महानिरीक्षक ( एफ सी )

दूरभाष सं. 24362698 [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 115 17. श्री अंसार अहमद वन महानिरीक्षक ( ईएपी)

दूरभाष सं. 24362698 [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 115 18 श्री ए. एन. प्रसाद वन महानिरीक्षक व निदेशक

दूरभाष सं. 24360957 [email protected] ( पीई ) इंटरकॉम से 113

दूरभाष सं. 23384428 [email protected] 19. श्री राजेश गोपाल वन महानिरीक्षक और निदेशक (पीटी)

20. श्री बी. आर. शर्मा सदस्य सचिव , सी.जेड. ए.

दूरभाष सं. 23381585 [email protected] 21. श्री ए. के. त्रिवेदी मुख्य अभियंता (सीसीयू)

दूरभाष सं. 24360643 फैक्स24363422 [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 728 22. डॉ. जी.वी. सुब्रामणियम सलाहकार ( वैज्ञानिक)

दूरभाष सं. 24364594 [email protected] इंटरकॉम से 548 23. श्री एस. एस. गहलोत वरिष्ठ तकनीकी निर्देशक

दूरभाष सं. 24305326 [email protected]

[PART II SLC. ( ii) ] 4

अनुदान , पारि-विकास स्कोमें और अन्य रा.व. पारि-त्रिकास स्कीमें, एमएण्ड ई और इन्दिरा प्रियदर्शिनी वृक्षमित्र पुरस्कार, गैर-इमारती लकड़ी वन- उत्पाद के लिए नोडल अधिकारी । यूनाइटेड नेशंस कन्वेंशन टू, कम्बैट डेजर्टीफिकेशन ( यू एन सी सी डी

वन संरक्षण ( एफ सी ) क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय ( आर. ओ.) वानिकी अनुसंधान व प्रशिक्षण और वन नीति , बाह्य सहायता प्राप्त परियोजना प्रकोष्ट और पूर्वोत्तर राज्य प्रकोष्ठ , वन संरक्षण बाह्य सहायता प्राप्त परियोजनाएं ( ईएपी ) सर्वेक्षण और उपयोगिता ( एस यू) और वन सुरक्षा प्रभाग (एफ पी डी) हाथी परियोजना , भारतीय वन्यजीव संस्थान और वन्यजीव अपराध प्रकोष्ठ

राष्ट्रीय बाघ संरक्षण प्राधिकरण ( एन टी सी ए ) से संबंधित सभी मामले

केन्द्रीय चिड़ियाघर प्राधिकरण , राष्ट्रीय प्राणि उद्यान , सर्वेक्षण और उपयोगिता, वन सुरक्षा प्रभाग और जे एफ एम प्रकोष्ठ, वन नीति, एन एफ ए पी , एफ आई सी , वन अनुसंधान और प्रशिक्षण और एन एफ सी

पर्यावरण एवं वन मंत्रालय और इसके विभागों , अधीनस्थ कार्यालयों और स्वायत्त संस्थानों के कार्यों की योजना और निष्पादन से संबंधित मामले जो कि सिविल निर्माण यूनिट को सौंपे जाते हैं

पर्यावरण में अनुसंधान ( आर.ई. ) फ्लाई एश तथा पारिस्थितिकीय संवेदनशील क्षेत्र , वार्गिकी में क्षमता निर्माण पर अखिल भारतीय समन्वित परियोजना , ( ए आई सी ओ पी टी ए एक्स ) , एनटिटिस ऑफ इनकम्पेयरेबल खेल्यूरेग्यूलेशन , एन एम एन एच एन.आई.सो.

III. ऐसे सभी अधिकारी जिनके पास जानकारी है और जो मामलों का निपटान कर रहे हों, वे वस्तुतः जन सूचना अधिकारी होंगे । IV. मंत्रालय के लिंक अधिकारियों को नामोद्दिष्ट किए जाने की व्यवस्था , सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम के तहत मामलों का निपटान कर रहे अपीलीय प्राधिकरणों केन्द्रीय जन सूचना कार्यालयों को भी लागू होंगी। V. यह अधिसूचना मंत्रालय की दिनांक 19 जून , 2008 को पूर्व अधिसूचना संख्या 1/2/2007- आर.सी. का अधिक्रांत करती है।

[सं. 1 /2/2007- आर. सी. ]

ए. के. गोयल , संयुक्त सचिव 5881

भारत काराजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

[भार्ग -खण्ड 3(ⅱ) ]

MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST

NewDelhi , the 3rd October , 2008

S.O. 2946. No. 1 /2/2007 -RC . In exercise ofthe powers conferred by Section 5 ( 1 )/Section 19( 1 ) ofthe Rightto Information Act, 2005, the following officers of the Ministry of Environment and Forests are hereby designated as Central Public Information Officers /Appellate Authorities etc , in respect of the specific subject matters mentioned against their names.

I.Officer ofthe level ofDIGF/Director Additional Director /Deputy Secretary/AIGF/It Director/DD designated as Central Public Information Officers under Section 5( 1 ) ofthe Act.

Tele.No.

S.No. Designation

3 1

2

1 Sot,RanjnaGupta, DIGF(FP)

SubjectMatter

4

T. No. 24360549 ranjnagaupta 2001

@yahoo.com Intercom No. 520

2

Forest policy, NFAP, Forest International International Cooperation (FIC ) & National Forest Commission (NFC) .

T.No. 24362416 [email protected]

Intercom No. 705 Shri Ashok Pai , DIGF(NAEB)

3

NAEB , FDA/NAP , ( 12 States ) , Policy matters related to afforestation, 20 Point Programme , M& E , Communication & United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNOCD)

T. No. [email protected]

Intercom No. 513 Shri, A. K. Johari , DIGF(RT)

4

Τ. Νο. 24362813

[email protected] Shri Anmol Kumar, DIGF(WL)

Intercom No. 519 5

Forestry Research and Training, Asia Pacific Forest Invasion Network (APFISN ), International Network for Bamboo and Rattan ( INBAR) , Administrative and Finacial matters of Indian Council Forestry Research and Education ( ICFRE) , Dehradun , Forest Survey of India (FSI ), Dehradun, Indira Gandhi National Forest Academy (IGNFA), Dehradun, Directorate ofForest Education (DFE ) , Dehradun and all matters of Indian Plywood Industries Research and Training Institute ( IPIRTI) , Bangalore and Indian Institute of Forest Mangement ( IIFM) , Bhopal .

Wildlife, Wildlife Regional Offices , World Heritage Convention, National Zoological Park, Central Zoo Authority , National Board of Wildlife, matter relating to International Conservation Union , Convention on Migratory Species , UNESCO.

T. No. 24361116 [email protected]

Dr. DilipKumar ,

Intercom No. 157 Controller of Accounts

Scrutiny ofbudget proposals Preparation ofbudget estimates- Interaction with Plan Coordination regarding Plan Budget. Scrutiny of proposals for inclusion in Supplementary Demands for grants . Processing ofRe-appropriation proposals both within the Powers of Ministry and beyond the Powers of Ministry. Preparation and Printing of demands for Grants . Submission of Action Taken Notes on Draft/Audit paras.- Scrutiny and allocation of funds under loans to Government Servants. Disbursal of salaries and other allowances . Disbursal 5882

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25 , 2008 /KARTIKA 3 , 1930

1

3 6

T. No. 24360588 Shri A. Aundceswaran , Suptd Engincer (CCU)

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

ofGrants - in -aid Taking out periodical expenditure statement etc.

[email protected] Intercom No. 725

7 Dr. Rashid Hasan , Director (Scientific)

Matters concerning /Pertaining to Planning and executiton of the works of Ministry of Environment & Forests and its Departments, Subordinate Offices and Autonomous Institutions which are entrustedto Civil Construction Unit .

T. No. 24360734

[email protected] Intercom No. 740

8

T.No.24365218 Shri . Satish K. Agarwal , Director

-Wildlife research/ Consultancies , -Bird flu (Avian Influenza ) -Vulture conservation . -Awards & fellowships , etc. -World Bank & Food Agriculture Organization ( FAO) projects - ThematicGroup on Conservation & Management of Wild Life and Animal Welfare.

satish , kaz@nic. in Intercom No. 505

9 Shri Surendra Kumar. Director

Administration ( P. 1, P. II & P. III & Public Grievance Redressal Cell , Expert Commuttee on Climate Change.

CP Division Vehicular Pollution

Tele No. 24361613

[email protected] Intercom No. 116

10

Tel No. 24366841 Shri Vijay Kumar, Director (Vig)

Vigilance malters

[email protected] Intercom No. 535

11 Shri Chandan Singh . Director

Tel. No. 24360659 chandan . [email protected] Intercom No. 522 12 Shri . Satish K. Agarwal , Director ( Addl . Charge )

T. No. 24368442/24362206 satish. [email protected] Intercom No. 140 13 Shri B. Sikka, Director ( Scientific)

T. No. 243651020 [email protected] Intercom No. 122 14 Shri Yogesh Sharma, Director (Scientific)

T. No. 24366008 [email protected] Intercorn No. 14 ] 15 Dr.( Mrs. ) R. Dalwani, Director ( Scientific)

Τ. Νο. 24364789 r [email protected] Intercom No. 142 ForestEstablishement ( FE ) Grievances Officer for employees ofthe MOEF National River Conservation Directorate (NRCD) Administration Co- ordination of IC & Training Budget , Annual Plan , Co - ordination of Parliamentary matters Committees , Committees of NRCA, Co- ordination work of NRCP / GAP including Parliament Questions , Matters ofgetteral nature requiring co - ordination , Co-ordination of YAP, Works ofpublicity, public participation and Media.

-NRCP Works of U.P. , Punjab . I. P. , Haryana & Rajasthan Complete co-ordination of JICA Study -NLCP works ofJ& K

NRCD Works related to Uttarakhand, Kerala and Goa and all other works related to cabinet notes and comments regarding Ministry of Urban Development , Jawaharlal Neliru Urban Renew Mission (JNURM)

-NLCP Co - ordination and works ofNLCP for all States other than J& K. Uttarkhand & West Bengal . -R & D Projects . -Water Quality Monitoring of Rivers under NRCP including sediments and Analytical Quality Contro-Performance Monitoring ofSTPs 5883

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/ कार्तिक 3, 1930

[भाग -खण्ड 3(ii) ]

2

3

1

16 Dr. S Kaul, Director (Scientific)

T. No. 24360492 26178917(R) [email protected] Intercom.No . 602 17 Shri Vivek Saxena, Director

Τ. Νο. 24362065 [email protected] Intercom No.435 18 Shri R. K. Sethi , Director

T. No. 24362252 [email protected] Intercom No. 135 19 Dr. Jag Ram, Director (Scientific)

Τ. Νο . 24367640 [email protected] IntercomNo.739 20

T. No. 24363962 [email protected] Intercom No.546 Dr. J. R. Bhatt, Director (Scientific)

21

T. No. 24642176 [email protected]

Dr. A Duraiswamy, Director(Scientific)

22

T. No.24363964 wartier(@nic.in Intercom No. 530 Dr.(Mrs) Ranjini Warrier, Director (Scientific)

23

T. No.24361952 [email protected] Intercom No. 625 Shri Suresh Prasad Chaubey, Director

24

T. No. 24362434 [email protected] IntercomNo.545 Dr. S. K. Agarwal , Director (Scientific)

25 Dr. P. L. Ahujarai , Director (Scientific)

Τ. Νο . 24363973 [email protected] Intercom No. 174 26. Shri BharatBhushan, Director (Scientific)

T. No. 24360795 [email protected] IntercomNo. 516 4

-Conservation and Management of Wetlands -Salim All Centre for Omithology &Natural History (SACON) -Ramsar Convention

-G. B. pant Himalayan Institute of EnvironmentDevelopment (GBPHIED) & International Centre for integrated Mountain Development ( ICIMOD) and ACR CEU of IFS Officers & Cadre Management ofAGMUT Cadre .

Climate Change (CC) (CDM Division) Abatement of Pollution through preventive strategies -Eco-cities -Bhure Lal Authority -Loss of Ecology Authority -National Environmental Appellate Authorities -Awards-Court Matters

-All India Taxonomy Capacity Building Project Financial assistance to stato, governments for conservation of mangroves and coral reefs -Thematic Expert Group (B) on conservation & Sustainable Utilization of Natural Resoureces (to consider proposals on Man andBioshphere, Mangroves & Coral Reefs, Wetlands, and Bio- diversity, etc.) -National Award for Taxonomy

Ozone Cell & Montreal Protocol

-Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) -Catragena Protocol on Biosafety -Capacity Building Project on Biosafety Hindi (Official Language)

-Mining projects (Non-Coal) -Thermal Power Projects -Amendments of EIA Notification and related matters

-Environmental appriaisal of Industry Projects -Appraisal Committee for Mining (non- coal)

-Constitution of SEIAAs and SEACS and follow up/monitoring -Industrial Projects including of Oil , Gas and Petroleum and Distilleries Sector.

-Construction Projects -Coordination of Parliament related matters, compilation of information for 5884

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25 , 2008 /KARTIKA 3 , 19311

2

3

27. Dr. T. Chandni , Director (Scientific)

Τ. Νο. 24363963 t. [email protected] Intercom No. 172 28. Dr. Naseem Ahmed , Director (Scientific)

T. No. 24363677 [email protected] IntercomNo. 927 29. Shri Ashok Bhatia, Director ( Scientific)

T. No. 24367625 [email protected] Intercom No. 552

1. No. 24367652 [email protected] Intercom No. 741 30. Dr. (Mrs) Chanda, Chaudhary, Director(Scientific)

31. Dr. M. Subba Rao, Director (Scientific)

Tel No. 24361410 [email protected] in Intercom No. 738

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

Senior Officers meeting and expenditure statement .

-Environment Impact Assessment of Coal Mining Project

-Centre of Mining Environment ( CME) , Dhanbad

-Review of proposals for development of sector specific ElA Manual / Guidelines and release of funds to Institutions .

-Financial assistance for projects relatiteg to Eco- system Research Programme -Financial assistance for projects relating to Eastern and Western Ghats Programme -Thematic Expert Group (A ) on Conservation and Sustainable Utilization of Natural Resource ( to consider proposals on Eco - System Research and Eastern & Western Ghats) .

-ERC - scheme Projects relating to Pollution Prevention , Control and Abatement

-Social and Economic ThematicGroup relating to Cost Benefit Analysis , Social Economic issues , Legal and Policy related matters

-National Natural Resources Management System ( NNRMS ) -Thematic Expert Groups Pollution Prevention , Control and Abatement -Co-ordination work of the Research in Environment RE ) Division

Chemical Safety in Maximum Accident Hazard (MAH) Stockholm Convention Unit 001 Persistent Organic Pollutants ( POP ) National chemical management profile .

-Biomedical waste management (Management & Handling) Rules

-Ship breaking matters,

-Supreme Court case regarding mangement of hazardous waste pending since 1995 .

-Supreme Court Monitoring Conunittee on management of Ilazardous Waste.

-Registration of recyclers of waste oil used oil and nonferrous metallic wastes .

-Recycling of waste oilised oil .

-Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC ) of International Maritime Organization ( IMO ) regarding International Convention on Safe and Environmentally Sound Ship Recycling . -Co- ordination of HSMD.

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008 /कार्तिक 3 , 1930

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

3

2

32 Dr. E. V. Muley, Director (Scientific)

T. No. 24364593 [email protected] Intercom No. 558 33 Dr. P. B. Rastogi, Director(Scientific)

T. No. 24367668 pb. [email protected] Intercom No. 550 34 Dr. Saroj , Director(Scientific)

T. No. 24364067 [email protected] Intercom No. 751 35 Sh . Anjani Kumar, Director (AW)

T. No. 23318553 [email protected] 36 Dr. (Ms.) Sunita V. Auluk, Director

T. No. 24367685 Intercom No. 538 [email protected] 37 Dr. Hussain Ahmed, Director

T. No. 24361669 [email protected] Intercom No. 123 38. Dr.Uday Shankar, Director(IFD)

T. No. 24362387 [email protected] Intercont No. 917 39. Sh . A. K. Lal , Director

Τ. No. 24367077 IntercomNo.503 [email protected] 3944G1/08-4

5885 4

Botanical Survey of India ( BSI ) , Zoological Survey ofIndia (ZSI), Botanic Garden of Indian Republic (BGIR ), E-Governance,

-Environment Impact Assessment Industrial Project

-Accreditation of Environmental Cosultant and co-ordination with QCI -HSMD

-Base Convention

-Hazardous Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, batteries (Management & Handling) Rules, Basel Couvention on control oftrans -boundary movement of hazardous waste

-Import Export of Hazardous Waste including DGFT matters ,

-E-waste including task force on e-waste -LeadAcid Batteries (Management & Handling)Rules.

-Animal Welfare Division and updation/development of the MOEF's websites.

-Evaluation of the monitoring reports submitted by the Regiont Offices -Technical appraisal of the biannual reparts received from project proponents

-Co-ordination activities, including the internal meetings of IA Division -Monthly D.O. to Cabinet Secretary, RTI matters and internal cord Meeting.

-MLS report on National River Conservation Directormis (NRCD), -Monitoring of Industrial Pollution along Rivers and lakes.

-Monitoring status of pollution control in Grossly Polluting Industries discharging their wastes into rivers and lakes.

-NRCD'sAnnual Report -PerformanceBudget ofNRCD -OutcomeBudget ofNRCD

-Replies to Audit Objections ofNRCD raisedbyCAG

-Compilation ofMIS Report ofNRCD -Annual Action Plan ofNRCD .

Intergated Finance Division on Forests, NAEB & Wikilife.

-Cadre Management of Indian Forest Service (IFS ), except AGMUT Cadre.

5886

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25 , 2008/KARTIKA 3 , 1930

2

3

40. Dr. R. K. Rai , Director (Scientific)

T. No. 2436766 ( 0) 2625098 (R) [email protected] Intercom No. 612

Intercoin No.616 41. Dr. M.A.Haque , Director

42. Ms. Gur Pyari , Addl . Adviser (Eco)

Τ. Νο . 24368843 Intercoin No. 925 [email protected] 43. Dr. R. K. Pathak, Tech .Director

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

-Assistance to Botanic Gardens

-Centre of Ecological Sciences , Bangalore

-Biodiversity Conservation

-UNDP Project on Biodiversity

Conservation though Community participation

Ecologically Sensitive Ares -Fly ash.

Policy inatters ofEconomic Cell , NIC

T. No. 24360465

Intercom No. 611 [email protected]

44. Shri Lalit Kapoor. Addl. Director (Scientific )

T. No. 24368526 [email protected] Intercom No. 14.3

T. No. 24363869 [email protected] Intercom No. 133 45. Shri Rajiv Sinha, Addl . Director (Scientific)

46. Shri B. B. Barma , Add ] . Director (Scientific)

T. No. 24363007 [email protected] Intercom No. 118 47. Dr. ( Mrs) Manju Raina, Add] . Director (Scientific)

T. No. 24360270 [email protected] Intercoin No. 117

T. No. 24366347 [email protected] Intercom No.556 48. Shri . R. N. Jindal , Addl . Dine Ncientific)

T. No. 24362827 49 Dr. S.souk, Addl. Direct Sitzentific)

[email protected] Intercom No. 539

1. No 201607

-NRCP works of Tamil Nadu , Delhi& West Bengal .

-NLCP works of West Bengal.

NRCT works of Gujarat , Maharashtra, Bihar , Jharkhand and Andhra Pradesh .

NRCP work of Orissa, North-East States . M.P. , Chattishgarh and Karnataka, Regional Director UP/DDO.NRCD Allahabad.

-Common Effluent Treatment Plants (CETPS)

-Water l'ollution -Industrial Pollution.

-Source Apportionment Studies -Male Declaration

-Air Pollution, noise pollution and setting of standards, coal beneficiation, appeals under air Act , working group on pollution abatement, court matters.

-River Valley and Hydro Flectric Projects

rathorn huoram No. 144

50 Dr K.OR Adul Director Scientik

Γ. Νο. 24361ib ! [email protected] it 77 St Dr. Su Add Director (Scientific)

T. No. 2433-1595 Environ to clearance to construction projets dansara,Haryana, ujrat , M. Pihen , maraksme -Ervinonelearanceto industrial estates'ncmplexes areas, SEZ EPZ, binte sarks , leather complexes .

Nation B -disersity Authority (NBA ) Conven. Biologtraf Liver's ly (CBD ) Mtional Bio - diversity Action Plan (Nis

[email protected] Intercom No. 743

52 Dr. M Sajahuddin, Addl . Darecio: (Scientifle)

-Clean Technology Developments and promotion for medium /small scale industries 5887

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

[भाग- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

2

3

1

Τ. Νο . 24360694

senthil . [email protected] Intercom No.744 53 Dr. A. Senthil Vel , Addl. Director(Scientific)

Τ. No. 24362755 54

Intercom No. 614 Shri Ishwar SinghAddl.

Director (Law)

[email protected]

Tel .No. 24360379 55

sujata [email protected].în Intercom No.557

Mrs. Sujata Khaparde,Addl . Director (Scientific)

Tel No.24367664

rita khanna [email protected]

IntercomNo. 176/173 56 Mrs. Rita Khanna, Addl . Director (Scientific)

T. No. 24360806 Intercom No. 177 57 Dr. Tashi Wangdi , Addl. Director (Scientific)

T. No. 24367670 Intercom No. 609 58 Dr. A. K. Tyagi , AddL Director (Scientific).

T. No. 24361668

rk [email protected] Intercom No.913.

59 Dr. R. K. Suri, Addl. Director (Scientific)

60 Mrs. Sanchita Jindal, Addl.Director

Τ. No. 24360488 Intercom No. 752 [email protected] 4

-Waste minimization

-Establishment ofWaste Minimization circles throughout the country.

-Infrastructure and miscellaneous projects Ports, harbors , airports, roads , ropeways , common effluent treatment plants (CETP), toxic substances disposal facility(TSDF)

-Coastal Regulation Zones (CRZ) LegalCell

Centre for Environment Education, Ahmedabad

CPR Environmental Education Centre, Chennai

Setting up new Centres of Excellence National Environment Awareness Campaign (NEAC)

Global Learning and Observation to Benefit the Environment (Globe) Programme

-Formal Envirorunent Education including Coordination with MHRD, NCERT and State Education Departments

Strengthening ofEnvironment in Professional courses

Environmental Appreciation cousres through IGNOU.

Grant of financial assistance for Seminars/ Symposia/Works hops Grant- in- aid to Professional Societies/ Institutions

Grants of financial assistane for publications on Environment

All work related to library.

Externally Aided project (Biodiversity Conservation & Rural Livelihood Improvement Project ) in seven Landscapes states .

-B. P. Pal Fellowship Award on Bio- diversity

Pitamber Pant Fellowship Award of Environment

Research proposals under National Natural Resource Mangement (NNRM) Strategic approach to International Chemicals Management ( SAICM) -Rotterdam Convention on prior informed consent Procedure for 5888

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25, 2008/ KARTIKA 3 , 1930

2

1

3

T.No. 24366764 61 Dr. S. V. Reddy Addl . Director

Intercom No. 753

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

certain Hazardous Chemicals and pesticides in International Trade - Public Liability Insurance Act

-Municipal Solid Wastes ( Management & Handling ) Rutes Recycled Plastic ( Management & Handling ) Rules.

Annual Report ( El Division)

svreddy 1950 [email protected]

62 Dr. M. Hota, Addl . Director

Man and Bioshphere Reserves Programme

Intercom No. 914

[email protected] Tele No. 24367663

63 Shri Sameer Srivastava, DS (IC- II)

-Matter relating to Foundation of Revitalization of Local Health Tradition (FRLHT)

UNDP Projects on medicinal plants Coordination on medicinal plants other Divisions of the Ministry

T. No. 24362612

[email protected] Intercom No. 603

International Cooperation ( IC & SD II ) National Museum of Natural History (ΝΜΝΗ)

T. No. 24366739

[email protected] Intercom No. 745

64 Ms. Pratibha Raj , Dy.Secretary (PC and T& E)

Smt . S. Ghosh Roy, Dy.Secretary

Regional Offices (HQs ) ( including administrative matters of RO (HQ )

T. No. 24360772

Intercom No.707 [email protected]

66 Smt , Rajsree Ray, Dy. Secretary

Environment Policy and Law & Sustainable Development ( SD ) -1 & International Cooperation ( IC ) additional charge of Media Cell Adaptation to Climate Change (CC )

T. No. 24361233

Intercom No.444 [email protected]

67 Sh . Narain Dass Dy. Secretary

T. No. 24367631 Intercom No. 527 [email protected]

Τ. Νο . 24360769 Intercom No.604 68 Sh . C. L. langain, Dy. Secretary

69 Sh . Agrim Kaushal , Dy. Secretary

General Coordination , Rightto information act ( RTI) & Internal Wrok Study Unit

Non Governmental Organizations (NGO) Cell

Trade and Environment , PC Division

T. No. 21364642

Intercom No 704 [email protected]

T. No. 24360686 70 Shri Pankaj Garg, Dy. Secretary

Genera Adıministration ( GA) , Parliament and Prowcol

[email protected] Intercom No. 918

T. No. 24366837 7t Shri S. K. Jain , Dy. Secretary

[email protected]

Intercom No.617 72 Shri C. D. Singh , AIGF

NAEB Administration and Development of Forest Villages

T No. 24363984

[email protected] Ext . No. 523

73 SH . B. K. Singh, AIGF

Forser Conservation l'orest (Comervation ) Act, 1980] Forest advison Committee

T. No. 24361316

Intercom No. 525 bksingh [email protected]

74 Shri D. Jana , AIGF

Forest Conservation Maha, Orissa , MI , entire South except Goad, Punjab , Haryana. Delhi , Uttarakhand, U.P. , Bihar . Assam , Nagatand . Tripura [Forest Conservation ) Act, 1980] Work slated to EAP /NE Cell CAMPA

1. No. 24362497

[email protected]

Intercony No. 700

FDA NAP ( 7 States ) Haryana, Punjai . Orrisa . J. K. Chattishgarh , M. P.. Himachal Pradesh , Policy matters relat [भाग Ⅱ- खण्ड 3(ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25 , 2008/ कार्तिक 3 , 1930

3 2

1

T.No. 24364981 75 Shri Rajbir Singh, AIGF

rajbir singh [email protected]

Intercom No. 708

IntercomNo. 431 76 Shri M. D. Sinha, AIGF

T.No. 24363974 77 Shri Umakant, AIGF

[email protected]

Intercom No. 717

T. No. 24361795 78 Shir Pramod Krishnan , It. Director

[email protected] Intercom No.717

5889 to NAP, tree planting on farm lands and CEMDE , Desertification

NAEB, FDA, (9 States) West Bangal , Jharkhand, Bihar, Maharashtra, Goa, Tamil Nadu , Kerala, Gujrat and Rajasthan, Greening India Scheme,Gram Van Yojana Scheme and National Afforestation and Eco- Development Board (NAEB)

Survey& Utilization , ITTO, Forestry Statistics

Forest Protection Division & Joint Forest Mangement ( JFM ) Cell, LULUCF under United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) , Non - timber Forest Produce Wildlife, Convention on International Trade on.Endangered Species (CITES) , Project Elephant , National Parks & Sanctuaries

T. No. 23389883 [email protected]

79 Shir S. P. Yadav, Jt.Director

T.No.24369629 80 Dr. S. Satapathy, Jt .Director

ssatapathy- [email protected] IntercomNo.601

Τ.Νο.24363960

Intercom No. 750 81 Ms. Madhumita Biswas, It. Director

Τ.Νο24365199

Intercorn No. 146 82 Shri Neeraj Khatri, Dy.Director

neeraj [email protected]

Τ.Νο.24361669

Psrawat-

[email protected]

13 Dr. P.S. Rawat, Dy.Director (S)

Intercom No.502 All matters relating to National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) Climate Change& Ozone Cell

Environmem Information System (ENVIS) Centers

-Environmental Health

Indira Gandhi Paryavaran Pursaskar Jawaharlal Nehru University ( JUN ) Chair on environmental law and some work of Environment Information System (ENVIS) Scheme

11. Officers ofthe level of Joint Secretary/ IGF/Adviser designated as Appellate Authorities under Section 19( 1 ) ofthe aboveAct.

Tele. No.

Designatioa

S.No.

2

3

Τ.Νο.24362388 1

Intercom No. 437 bharatbhushan @ ) mit.gov.in Shi Bharat Bhushan, Joint Secretary& FA

Subject Matter

4

Examination and Concurrence ofSFC /EFC/ CCLA proposals of the Ministry .

-Deputation abroad .

Release ofGrants - in-aid Financial matters ofthe Ministry Remuneration received by Officers and employees.

5890

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25 , 2008/KARTIKA 3 , 1930

1

2

3 2

Intercom No. 408

[email protected] ShirRajani RanjanRashmi , Joint Secretary

3

T.No.24360634 [email protected]

Intercom No 415 ShriRK Vaish , Joint Secretary

[PART: N-Sec.3 (ii ) ]

:

4

Preparation and Printing of Demands forGrants .

- Submission of Action Taken Notes on Dratf/Auditpars

Climate Change ( CC) ( including CIDM & UNFCCC ) Vigilance .Media

Hazardous Substances Management Division ( HSMD) , National River Conservation Directorate ( NRCD ). National Lake Conservation Plan (NLCP ) . Clean Production/ Clean Technology

Τ.Νο.24363956, Intercom No. 414

4. Dr. Rajneesh Dube , Joint Secretary

5

Environment Policy and Law ( including Legal Cell ) , Control of Pollution (CP) including administration of Central Pollution Control Board ( CPCB)

Tel . No. [email protected]

DrB. P. Nilaraina, Joint Secretary

Intercom No. 422 Coral Reefs . Mangroves , Foundation of Revitalization of Local Health Tradition ( FRLHT ) , ( zone Cell & Montreal Protocol , CES IISc , Bangalore, Hindi (Official language )

Tel .No. 24361774 [email protected]

FaxNo. 24367009 [ ntercon No. 440

6 Shri A.K. Goyal , Joint Secretary

Tel No.24362551

[email protected]

Fax No. 24360894 7. Shri H.K. Pande, Joint Secretary

General Administration & Parliament/ Protocol , Administration & Public Grievance Redressal Cell , Establishment of Regional Offices , General Coordination , RTI & Internal Work Study Unit , Botanical Survey of India (BSI ) , Zoological Survey of India (ZSI ), E-Governance , Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History (SACON) . Biosafety including Cartagena Protool , Genetic Engineering Approval Committe (GEAC) , NationBio- diversity authority ( NBA ) , National Bio- diversity Strategy & Action Plan (NBSAP) , Convention on Biological Diversity ( CBD) , Wetlands and Ramsar Convention

Administration of Indian Forest Service , Forest Establishment , IUCN The World Conservation Union ,G.B. Pant Institute of Himalayan Environment and Development (GBPILIED ), International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development ( ICIMOD ) , Man and Biophere Reserve Programme ( MABP ) , Bio - diversity Conservation , Animal Welfare International Cooperation ( IC ) (excluding State of Environment ' reports ) , Global Environment Facility (GEF), Sustainable Development 5891 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/ कार्तिक 3 , 1930

[ भाग II- खण्फ 3(ii) ]

4

3

1

2

T. No. 24360861

[email protected] Intercom No. 112

8 Dr. Subodh Kumar Sharma, Adviser

National Communications (NATCOM) IPCC ( Inter -Governmental Pane on Climate Change ) & all other Scientific/ Technical works related to Climate Change

9 Dr.G. K. Pandey, Adviser

Τ. No. 24360467

[email protected]

Intercom No. 531

Environmental Health , World Bank Industrial , Development Capacity Project, Impact Assessment relating to Thermal Power&Building Construction Sectors, Impact Assessment ofCoal Mining Sector Rotterdam Convention , Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM ), National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) , Chemical Disaster (including Hazardous ChemicalsManagement), Municipal Solid Waste Management , MSHIC Rules , Chemical Accident Rules and Chemical Safety, Stockholm Convention (Effective Evaluation & POPs Review Committee) , Plastic Manufacture & Usage Rules, Implementation of MSW Rules , Public Liability Insurance and related court matters,Heavy metals including Mercury, 10 Shrt R. Mehta, Adviser

T. No. 24362840 [email protected]

Intercom No. 543

Environmental Education ( including Library), Global PublicGoods

Plan Coordination, Economic Cell , Trade & Environment

11 Shri R. S. Ahlawat, Economic adviser

T. No. 24362663

[email protected] Intercom No. 908

-Budget proposals & Budget Estimates -Scrutiny of budget proposals & Preparation ofbudget estimates , including budget proposals for supplementary grants,

Processing of Re -appropriation proposals both within the Powers of Ministry and beyond the Powers of Ministry.

12 Dr. S. P. Sharma, Statistical Adviser

T. No. 24363021 [email protected]

Intercom No.103

Annual Report of the MoEF, ' State of Environment ' Reports , Environmental Information (excluding Indira Gandhi Paryavaran Puraskar) , Statistical Cell , NGOCell

Т. No. 24360478 nalini [email protected]

Intercom No. 541

Dr. Nalini Bhatt, Adviser(Scientifc)

Impact Assessment relating to Industry sector, Infrastructure , River Valley, Mining Sectors and Coastal Regulation Zones ( CRZ ) , Source Apportionment Studies and Male Declaration

14 Dr. R. B. Lal IGF

T. No. [email protected]

Intercom No. 106

Wildlife, WLR Os, CITES, National Parks & Sanctuaries, WHC NZP , CZA, NBWLF, CMS UNESCO, Wikilife 5892

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25,2008/KARTIKA 3, 1930

1

2

3 15 Shri K. B. Thampi , IGF

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

T. No. 24367404 [email protected]

Intercom No. 710

16 Shir Ansar Ahmed, IGF(EAP)

T. No. 24362698 [email protected] Intercom No. 115 17 Shri Ansar Ahmed, IGF(FC)

Τ. Νο. 24362698 [email protected] Intercom No. 1TS 18 Shir A. N. Prasad, IGF& Director (PE)

NAEB, FDAS /NAP (28 states), Policy matters related to afforestation, grants - in -aid for Greening India Scheme . Ecodevelopments Schemes and other NAEB Schemes , M& E and IPVM Awards . Nodal Officer for Nontimber Forest produce. United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD)

Forest Conservation ( FC ) , Regional Officers (ROS ), Forestry Research and Training& Forest Policy . EAP Cell & NE Cell , ForestConservation

Externally Aided Projects ( EAP ) , Survey and Utilization ( SU ) & Forest Protection Division ( FP () )

Τ. Νο.24360957

[email protected] Intercom No. 113

T. No. 23384428 [email protected] 19 Shri Rajesh Gopal , IGF & Director (PI)

T. No. 23381585 [email protected] 20 Shri B. R. Sharma, Member Secretary, CZA

ProjectElephant , Wildlife Institure of India andWildlife Crime Cell

All matters relating to National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) Central Zoo Authority , Nacional Zoological Park , Survey & Utilization . Forest Protection Division & JFM Cell , Forest Paticy , NFAP , FIC , Forests Research & Training & NFC

Τ. Νο. 24360643 Fax 24363422

Email [email protected] Intercom No. 728

21 Shri A. K. Trivedi , ChiefEngineer (CCU)

22 Dr. G. V. Subrahmaniam Adviser (Scientific)

T. No. 24364594 gvs moef2005 @yahoo.co.in Intercom No. 548

T. No. 24305326 [email protected] 23 Sh . S. S. Gahlot, Senior Tech. Director

Matters concerning pertaining to Planning and execution of the works of Ministry of Environment & Forests and its Departments . Subordinate Offices and Autonomous Institutions which are entrusted to Civil Construction Unil Research in Environment ( RE ) , Fly Ash , Ecologically sensitive areas , Assistance to Botanical Gardens , All India Coordinated Project on Capacity Building in Taxonomy (ALCOPTAX) , Entities of Incomparable Value Regulations, National Museum of Natural History (NMΝΗ) NIC

III .All Officers in possession of information and dealing with the matters above will be de- facto PIOs.

IV. The arrangement of designating Link Officers in the Ministry will also be applicable to the Appellate Authorities/ CPIOS fordealing with matters under the RTI Act .

V. This supersedes the earlier notification No. 1 / 2/2007 - RC dated 19th June , 2008 ofthis Ministry .

[No. 1/2/2007-RCJ

A. K. GOYAL , Jt. Secy.

5893 [ भाग - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

पोत परिवहन, सड़क परिवहन एवं राजमार्ग मंत्रालय

(सड़क परिवहन और राजमार्ग विभाग )

(सौमा सड़क विकास मंडल )

नई दिल्ली, 21 अक्तूबर, 2007

का.आ. 2947.--बद्यापि केन्द्र सरकार सीमा सड़क संगठन में निम्नलिखित सेवारत/ सेवानिवृत ' क ' श्रेणी के सिविलियन अधिकारियों श्री ई मणिक्कम , सहायक कार्यपालक अभियंता ( सिविल ) ( सेवानिवृत्त ) तथा श्री के आर सी राव प्रबंधक, राइट्स लिमिटेड, सेलम ( तमिलनाडु) को विभागीय जांच के उद्देश्य से गवाह के रूप में प्रस्तुत करमा आवश्यक मानती है:-

(क) श्री के धूल होगरा , अधीक्षक अभियंता ( सिविल ) ( जी ओ सं. 1585 एल )

(ख) श्री सी पी गुप्ता , कार्यपालक अभियंता ( सिविल ) एन एफ एस जी ( जी ओ सं. 1981 एफ )

(ग) श्री ई मणिक्कम , सहायक कार्यपालक अभियंता ( सिविल ) ( सेवानिवृत ) ( पूर्व जी ओ सं. 2697 एक्स )

2. अत: विभागीय जांच ( इनफोर्समेंट ऑफ एटनडेंस आफ विटनैस एण्ड प्रोडक्शन आफ ढाक्यूमेंट ) अधिनियम, 1972 ( 1972 के 18 ) खण्ड 4 के उपखण्ड ( i ) में प्रदत्त शक्तियों का उपयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार एत‌द्वारा श्री घासीराम , मुख्य अभियंता ( जी ओ सं. 1460 एन ) को सीमा सड़क संगठन में सेवारछ सेषा निवृत ' क ' श्रेणी अधिकारियों की जांच के संबंध में बतौर जांच अधिकारी उक्त अधिनियम के खण्ड 5 में वर्णित शक्तियों का प्रयोग करने हेतु अधिकृत करती है ।

[सं. बीआरडीधी/02 (169 ) /2005/जोई-11 ]

मनमोहन पिपिल , अवर सच्चिक MINISTRY OF SHIPPING, ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS

(Department ofRoadTransport andHighways)

(BorderRoadsDevelopment Board)

NewDelhi, the 21st October , 2008

S.O. 2947. Whereas the Central Government is of opinion that for the purpose of the departmental enquiry relating to the following serving/retired Group-A Officers ofBorder Roads Organisation it is necessary to summon Shri E. Manickam, AEE (Civ ) (Retired) and Shri KRC Rao , Manager , RITES Limited, Salem (Tamil Nadu ) as witnesses/ call for any document from these two civilian witnesses:

a. Shri K. L. Dogra, SE (Civ), (GO No. 1585L)

b. Shri C. P.Gupta, EE ( Civ ) NFSG (GO No. 1981F)

c. Shrt E. Manickam, AEE (Civ) (Retd ) (EX -GO No.2697X)

2.NOW, THEREFORE, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 4 ofthe Departmental Inquiries (Enforcement of Attendance of Witnesses and Production of Documents ) Act, 1972 ( 18 of 1972 ), the Central Government hereby authorizes Shri Ghasi Ram , Chief Engineer (GO No. 1460N) being the Inquiring Authority to exercise the power specified in Section 5 of the said Act in relation to the inquiry in respect of above serving/retiredGroup-A Officers ofBorder Roads Organisation,

[No. BRDBA02(169)/2005/GE- II]

MANMOHAN PIPIL, Under Secy. 3944GL/08-5 5894

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA.25.2008 / KARTIKA ...

[ PART II --SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] उपभोक्ता मामले , भाटी और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रा

चना पावने विभाग )

वर्ड भी 1 अक्तूबर , 2008

फण्ड, डेनमार्क द्वारा जारी मॉडल

पोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडन्त ( नीचे दी

धात् यह समाधान हो गया है :: तथा चाट और माप "ङ्गलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987

प्रभाग की अवधि में भी उक्तथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न का.आ. 2948.--केन्द्रीय सरकारका विनिश पक्रिडेएशन एंड ग अनुमोदन प्रमाण - पत्र के साथ उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर गई आकृति देखें ; बार और पाप मानक अधिनियम के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस चात की संभान्नानः परिस्थितियों में उभयुक्का सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अव केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियउपधारा ( 7 ) और उप- दाग प्रदन्न शक्त्रियों को प्रयोग करत हुए पैसर्स कोसन क्रिसलांट ए/ एस, पी ओ पेडरसेंजन एन, इंनमाकं द्वारा विनिर्थता वर्ग बाई ( ए ) और XIII ( 1 ) वाले " ईसीएस " शृश्खला के रखनालित कंच वेरंग इंवे

नेक स्वेल ) के पॉडल का इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और भारत में विक्री से पूर्व अथवा बाद के मैसर्स कोसन क्रिप्राइवेट लिमिटिड , " मस्कान " 6-3-655/3 , सिविल सप्लाइज भवन होन, सोम्मा जी समनुदेशित किया गया है. अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी क 082 द्वारा विषणीत और जिन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09 / 13 : 235 उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का वेडंग इंस्ट्रूमेंट ( डायनेमिक बैंक

अकक सूचन्न सहित , स्वधानि

है और न्यूनतम क्षमता

स्केल ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. से > 0.01 कि. ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति

प्रधान है । लिक्विड क्रिसटल

प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित

डिस्पले ( एल सी डी ) प्रदर्श तोलभ परिणाम उपवर्णित 4-264 वोल्ट्स , 50 यर लगानी धारा विद्युत प्रदान पर कार्य करता है । संवाहक गति 30 मी मिग है । इसके ल्याएन मापमान अंतराल (ई)

* आई एम एल विशिष्ट के आगया है ।

हांगा ।

करती है

जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित पां

* भी होंगे जिनकी अधिकतम

" मान 1×10,21051 3942MSS-46-79

5895 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3, 1930

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs )

New Delhi , the 21st October , 2008

S.O. 2948.-Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority along with the Model approval certificate issued by the Danish Accrediation and Metrology Fund, Denmark, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) , is in conformity with the provisions ofthe Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government bereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of Automatic Catch Weighing Instrument (Dynamic Check Scale) belonging to accuracy class- Y(a) and XIII ( 1 ) of' ECS ' series with brand name " KOSAN" (herein referred to as the said Model) , manufactured by M/s . Kosan Crisplant A.S, P./O. Pedersensvej 22, 8200 Aarhus N. Denmark and marketed in India without any alteration before or after sale in India by M/s . Kosan Crisplant India Private Limited, "Maskan" , 6-3-655/3 , Civil Supplies Bhavan Lane , Somajiguda , Hyderabad- 500 082 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/ 13/235;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based Automatic Catch Weighing Instrument (Dynamic Check Scale) with digital indicator. Its maximum capacity in the range of 30kg. to 600kg . and minimum capacity is >_20e. The verification scale interval is (e) > _0.01 kg. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 84-264Volts, 50 or 60Hertz alternative current power supply. Its conveyer speed is <30m/minute . The test has been conducted as per OIML specification .

مض

Bellwithandnalingr

Two bolts are provided at the top and at the bottom ofthe controller with a hole for sealing through lead and wire . Atypical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise ofthe power conferred by sub -section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval ofthe said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance ofsame series with maximum capacity in the range of 30 kg . to 600kg . with maximum number of verification scale interval (n ) is 3000 with ' e ' value of Ix10k, 2x10k or 5X10k where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 ( 187)/2007)

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 25 , 2008/ KARTIKA 3 , 1930

[PART , II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 196

पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 22 अक्तूबर , 2008

का. आ. 2949.- यतः मैसर्स गैस अथॉरिटी ऑफ इण्डिया लिमिटेड (वर्तमान में गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड) द्वारा उपभोक्ताओं तक प्राकृतिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए दहेज - हजीरा - उरान पाइपलाइन तथा हाजीमलंगवाडी-ट्रॉम्बे पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए भारत सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962का 50 ) (जिसे इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचनाओं का.आ.सं ० 696 तारीख 11 फरवरी , 2002 , का.आ.सं० 2060 तारीख 22 जुलाई , 2003 , का.आ. सं 0 2461 तारीख , 19 अगस्त 2003 , का.आ. सं0 2462 तारीख 19 अगस्त, 2003, का.आ. सं 0 813 (अ) तारीख 10 जून , 2005 और का.आ.सं 0 814 (अ) तारीख 10 जून. 2005 द्वारा भारत सरकार ने उक्त अधिसूचनाओं से सलंग्न अधिसूचियों में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमियों के उपयोग में अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय कीघोषणा की थी;

और , यतः, भारत सरकार ने उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (1 ) के अन्तर्गत सम्बद्ध सक्षम प्राधिकारियों द्वारा प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् और संतुष्ट हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइन बिछाने हेतु चाहिए, उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किए जाने का निर्णय किया था;

और , यतः, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , भारत सरकार ने पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना का.आ.स ० 3241 तारीख 6 नवम्बर , 2003 , का.आ.सं ० 739 तारीख 25 जून, 2004, का.आ. सं ० 861 (अ) तारीख 29 जुलाई 2004 , का.आ.सं 0. 153 तारीख 13 जनवरी , 2006 और का.आ. सं 01048 तारीख 8 मार्च 2006 के द्वारा उनसे संलग्न अधिसूचियों में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमियों में उपयोग का अधिकार अर्जित किया था :

5897 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

[ भान - खब्द 3 ( ) ]

और, यतः, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , भारत सरकार ने उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार उक्त अधिसूचनाओं के प्रकाशन की तारीख से, भारत सरकार में निहित होने की बजाए , सभी बाधाओं से मुक्तः मैसर्स गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड में , निहित किया था;

और , यतः , मैसर्स रिलायन्स गैस ट्रान्सपोर्टेशन इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर लिमिटेड (आर ०जी०टी ०आई ०एल०) , उनकी काकीनाडा- हैदराबाद-उरान-अहमदाबाद पाइपलाइन के नवी मुम्बई स्थित प्रधान नियन्त्रण केन्द्र (मास्टर कन्ट्रोल सेंटर) के साथ कनैक्शन स्थापित करने के लिए एच.डी.पी.ई. डक्ट व ऑप्टीकल फाइबर केबल (ओ.एफ.सी. ) बिछा रही है ;

और , यतः , उक्त एच.डी.पी.ई. डक्ट व ओ.एफ.सी. महाराष्ट्र राज्य के ठाणे व रायगढ़ जिलों में गेल की दहेज- हजीरा - उरान पाइपलाइन के साथ- साथ म्हस्कल ( एस ०वी० 18) से हाजीमलंगवाड़ी ( एस ०वी० 20) तक तथा गेल की ट्राम्बे - हाजीमलंगवाड़ी स्पर लाइन के साथ- साथ हाजीमलंगवाड़ी से म्हापे तक बिछाई जानी है;

और यतः , मै मैसर्स आर.जी.टी.आई.एल. ने इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार, जो मैसर्स गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड में निहित है , को मैसर्स गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड के साथ बाँटने की इच्छा जताई है ;

और यतः , एच.डी.पी.ई. डक्ट व ओ.एफ.सी. बिछाने हेतु मैसर्स गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड ने संलग्न नियमों तथा शर्तों के आधार पर उक्त भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार को मैसर्स आर ०जी० टी०आई ० एल ० के साथ बाँटने के लिए अपनी सहमति दे दी है ;

अतः अब, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) के द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , भारत सरकार यह निर्देश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार , जौ मैसर्स गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड में निहित किया गया था. इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख से मैसर्स रिलायन्स गैस ट्रान्सपोर्टेशन इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर लिमिटेड के द्वारा भी, संलग्न नियमों तथा शर्तों के आधार पर प्रयोग किया जायेगा । THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25, 2008/KARTIKA 3, 1930

[ PART I- SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

अनुसूची

जिला: ठाणे

मंडळ/ तहसील/ तालुका: कल्याण

राज्यः महाराष्ट्र गाँव का नाम सर्वे नं/गट नं आर.मो.यू.अर्जित करने के लिए क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर

एयर

सी- एयर 1

2

3

4

5 124

1 ) म्हसकल

00

03

00 125

31

05

00

123

00

40

00 122

00

22

118

19

00

50 117

00

32

03 114

00

27

00 113

80

00

00

95

00

28

03 106

00

03

08 108

01

38

00 134

00

00

30

34

00

72

2) घोटसई

00 31

00

10

05 32

00

02

03 30

DO

02

03 33

00

45

00 25

00

15

05 36

61

00

08

00

37

38

00 20

00

18

00 42

00

19

01 41

00

96

03 50

00

03

00 49

00

02

03 51

00

08

18

53

00

07

02

00

57

12

00 56

34

05

00

55

00

12

00 69

00

24

00 70

00

04

09 85

00

26

05 86

00

11

09 87

00

00

13

84

00

06

03 भारत का राजपंत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008 /फार्तिक 3 , 1930

[ I- खण्ड ( ii) ]

3

2

1

00

95

2) घोटसई निरंतर

00

167

00

94

00

3

00

56P

00

42/7

00

51/2P

00

28

00

56

00

68

3) राये

00

87

DO

44

00

58

00

67

00

57

00

48

00

49

00

52

00

51

00

81

00

91

00

92

00

96

00

9

00

98

00

121

00

120

00

119

00

122

00

123

00

132

01

131

00

135

00

80/5

00

00

53

00

90/P

00

70

4) वाहोली

00

68

00

74

00

75

00

138

5899 4

5

05

81

22

05

09

19

05

04

00

12

00

01

00

01

00

28

00

47

06

00

05

25

05

57

00

50

05

63

06

00

23

09

05

11

04

65

05

15

06

23

02

02

03

02

05

48

05

16

00

30

05

41

01.

00

02

00

05

28

04

19

05

35

09

09

00

03

00

01

00

00

03

00

17

05

22

63

05 05 8888

07

05

13

00

77 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25 , 2008/KARTIKA 3 , 1930

1

3

1

61

00 4) वाहोली निरंतर

49

00

60

00

59

00

00

58

136

00

54

00

55

00

56

00

191P

00

00

72

5) आपटी

71

00

70

00

00

69

77

00

00

78

67

00

00

79

65

00

31

00

40

00

00

42

00

38

00

34

00

80

00

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

5

28

05

20

08

58

08

13

08

31

05

75

08

02

21

05

00

39

00

38

00

20

03

44

03

11

03

05

37

11

03

05

DB

00

36

00

15

21

00

05

01

57

05

08

03

00

39

85

05

24

00

30

00

78/3 P

00

66P

00

302P

82P

00

00

00

83

00 6) वसंत शेलवली

00

114

00

118

00

115

01

00

00

03

15

00

00

51

15

00

00

60

41

03

05

00

08

18 भारत का रराजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25 , 2008 /कार्तिक 3, 1930

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

2

3

00

116

6) वसंत शेलवली निरंतर

00

00

44

00

43

00

45

00

59

00

58

00

53

00

57

00

55

00

54

00

52

00

51

00

50

00

114/11P

00

114/13/1P

00

114/12/2P

00

114/14P

00

116/1P

00

116/4P

00

116/3P

00

116/2P

00

खाडी

00

45/OP

00

53/DP

00

54/0P

00

51/10P

00

57P

00

24

7) आंबीवली

00

25

00

26

00

21

34

00

00

38

00

33

00

39

00

41

00

40

00

26P

38P

00

41P

394461/08-6

5901

5

4

05

37

05

22

08

14

45

04

00

02

00

27

00

39

05

01

05

07

28

05

23

05

18

05

40

05

37

00

03

00

05

00

05

00

01

00

07

00

06

00

03

00

27

47

00

00

15

00

06

00

33

00

45

00

08

05

07

05

222

05

13

05

37

05

46

03

05

03

05

08

06

03

07

03

85

00

17

00

07

00

65 5902

THE GAZETIE OF DIA. OCTOBER 25 , 2008/KARTIKA 3 , 19

[PART IJ-SEC. 3 (ii) )

4

3

5

55

00

43

8) जांभर गोहली

05

57

00

58

05

00

04

05

00

25

05

53

00

85

02

5

00

15

00

50

00

02

05

37

00

05

3

01

28

00

362 P

05

00

00

3611

00

17

00

58P

00

40

00

जिला: ठाणे

मंडळ/ तहसील/ तालुका अंबरनाथ

राज्यः महाराष्ट्र गाँव का नाम

रार्वे नंगनं आर.ओ.यू अर्जित करने के लिए क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर

एसर

सी-एयर

2

3

4

5 1) चिखलोनी

00

132

21

00

00

13:

34

05

128

00

05

126

00

02

03

127

00

15

00

129

00

73

05

00

07

05

143

00

04

05

112

00

00

02

111

00

04

09

5

00

40

05

00

2

00

05

3

00

24

00

00

15

05

13

00

43

05

12

00

22

02

00

15

15

00

25

00

00

39

28

00

18

08

00

24

04

05

29

00

18

08

00

44

05

57

00

05

30 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25 , 2008 /कार्तिक 3 , 1930

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2

00

56

1) चिखलोली निरंतर

00

55

00

54P

00

32/30

32/1P

00

00

1 /1P

00

162P

00

163/3P

00

163/1P

00

163/2P

00

157/P

00

147

00

142/BP

00

142/7P

00

टी-लाइन

00

140P

00

130/P

00

52P

01

28

2) जांभीवली.

01

17

00

21

00

25

00

23

00

40

00

43

01

42

00

38

00

37

01 3)काकलेय

00

20

00

21

00

22

00

26

00

11

4) बोहोनोली

00

10

5903 4

5

05

55

00

57

00

10

00

27

00

27

00

15

00

02

00

03

32

00

00

04

00

12

10

00

00

02

00

07

00

08

00

23

00

10

00

72

05

15

05

15

05

16

08

08

00

30

00

75

00

48

00

20

05

69

08

88

00

25

05

10

00

36

03

35

03

02

25

59

75

06.

5904

ΤΙ ΘΑ ΓΙΕ ΟΙOBER 25, 2008/ KARTIKA :::

3 コ

00

00

00

00

00

CO

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

01

00

00

00

[ PAR --Si

5 01

05

05

01

05 9

05

00

05

05

09

05

05

06

90

05 ८..

60

05

08

05

09

06

07

03

03 い

90 RR

00

07

05

05

CO

::

02

05

05

00

00

00

05

05

02

00

''

00

00 5905

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008 /कार्तिक 3, 1930

[भाग -खण्ड 3 ( ⅱ) ]

2

3

00

79/1

8)कुशीवली निरंतर

00

81/3

00

91

00

93/1

00

90/1P

00

90/2

00

90/4

00

87/1

00

87/2

00

88/5

00

86/6

00

86/3

00

86/1

00

85/2

00

85/1

00

80/3

00

81/4

00

19

9) साखरोली

00

18

00

15

00

14

00

10

00

36

01

39

00

37

00

38

00

43

00

45

00

47

00

23/2

00

21/0

00

25/0

23/1

00

27/0

00

29/0

00

32/4

00

30/1

00

नदी

00

27

10) वाडी

00

192

00

191

00

190

4

5

00

56

00

53

00

29

00

26

00

16

00

13

00

06

16

00

00

09

22

00

00

10

00

12

00

09

00

35

00

13

00

13

00

23

05

55

05

79

03

50

05

10

03

41

00

90

00

05

00

12

08

15

00

24

45

00

05

37

00

05

00

17

00

01

00

38

00

17

00

77

00

16

00

09

00

19

00

09

00

08

00

33

04

22 5906

THE GAZETTE O

BER 25,2008/ KARTIKA 10 निस्तर

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00 1.

00

00

00

00

00 12...

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

5

02

01

03

05 00 03 00 03 00 00

00

00

00 00

00

90

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00 5907 II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008 / कार्तिक 3, 1930

5

4

00

00

49/09

05

12) नान्हेन निरंतर

00

00

45/1P

10

45/2P

00

00

03

00

44/ 1P

23

00

00

44/3P

21

00

00

00

14

34/4P

34/5P

00

01

00

37/1P

48

00

00

00

36/1P

00

32

22/4P

00

32

एम.आय.डी.सी.

13) मोरीवली

जिला: रायगढ़

राज्यः महाराष्ट्र

मंबक/ तहसील / तालुका: मनवेल

गाँव कা সাদ

सर्व नं/गट नं

आर.ओ.यू. अर्जित करने के लिए क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर

एयर

सी-एवर

2

3

4

5 1

00

00

235P

35

1) नितलस

00

04

238/P

01

60

00

235/1P

01

83

00

237/P

00

04

240P

00

00

23

00

245P

236/2P

00

26

00

00

31

247/P

00

00

31

250P

00

00

35

252P

00

00

35

00

248/2P

00

00

30

269P

00

00

258P

03

00

00

257P

20

DD

261P

13

00

00

12

255P

00

262

00

03

00

00

00

21

260

257

20

00

DO

00

37

201

00

263

00

07

00

00

00

24

284

00

00

01

269

00

20

271

00 5908

THE GAZETTE OF INDIABER 25,2008/KARTIKA 3,1

3

00 1) नितृत्वस निरंतर

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

350

00

00

200

00

00

00

00

00

00

77/%

00

00

00

00

50.5

00

50/7

00

00

00

00

00

71

00

00

00

00

170

00

00

00

00

1602

00

00

1633

00 PARI 11 S 3001 5

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

20

00

00

90

00

UG

00

00

00

0ט

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

CO

00

00 5909 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र; अक्तूबर 25, 2008 /कार्तिक 3 , 1930

4

3

5

00

00

03

182/0

1 ) मितलस निरंतर

04

00

DO

157/1

00

00

09

92P

01

18

00

138

01

00

00

103

05

87

10

00

00

85

18

00

00

00

84

00

12

4F

00

22

00

2P

00

जिला: ठाणे

राज्यः महाराष्ट्र

मंडल/तहसील / तालुका : ठाणे

गाँव का नाम

सर्वे नं/गट नं

आर.ओ.यू. अर्जित करने के लिए क्षेत्रफल

एयर

सी-एयर

हेक्टेयर

5

4

3

2

1

09

00

00

114/1P

1) नागांव

00

04

00

114/2P

00

02

00

114/3P

00

00

01

110/2P

21

00

00

110/3P

14

00

00

110/4P

00

00

10

84/1P

00

00

84/2P

22

00

00

84/3P

60

07

84/4

00

00

01

00

66/4P

00

13

00

65/1P

00

02

00

62/2P

00

14

00

47/9P

02

47/10P

00

00

48/P

01

88 00

00

00

09

31/19

00

00

01

31/2P

00

00

09

29/2P

02

00

00

29/4P

00

20

00

28/5P

30

00

03

28/6P

00

00

05

28/7P

00

07

00

8/2P

00

02

00

8/3P

00

16

00

10/1P

00

00

02

10/2P

00

02

00

11/29

00

00

17

11/3P

00

15

00

11/4P

00

00

11/SP

90

3944G1/08-7 $910

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25, 2008/ KARTIKA3 , 1930

2

1

3

नाला

00 1) नागाव निरব্বই

00

209P

265/P

00

00

264/P

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

5

10

00

03

00

17

00

01

00

263/P

00

268/P

00

14/P

00 2)माले

25/3P

00

00

25/5P

25/6P

00

26/1P

00

00

26/2P

26/3P

00

27/2P

00

00

28/7P

00

28/8P

40/1P

00

40/2P

00

00

40/4P

00

41/2P

00

39/P

00

34/1P

37P

00

00

24/1P

3) भंडारली

00

117P

4) उत्तरशिव

00

122/4P

122/5P

00

00 5) नारीवली

00

154/1P

00

164/2P

140/3/1/1P

00

00

140/3/1/2P

00

141/4/1P

136/8P

00

00

138/7P

136/6P

00

00

136/10P

00

136/4P

00

130 /9P

00

135/4P

01

00

08

00

03

00

14

00

02

00

02

00

01

50

08

00

03

00

17

00

05

00

20

00

30

00

09

00

01

00

01

00

05

00

13

00

23

00

17

00

68

00

11

00

02

00

22

00

07

00

56

00

00

35

00

01

30

00

02

00

01

00

01

00

01

00

03

00

08

00

00

04.

[ भाग - खण्ड ( ⅱ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008 /कार्तिक 3 , 1930

1

1

3

00

135/5P

5) नारीवली निरन्तर

00

135/12/P

00

155/13P

00

52/2P

60

52/5P

00

52/4P

00

53/2P

00

53/3P

00

93/4

00

53/5P

00

73/2P

00

73/3P

00

80/1P

80/2P

00

00

82P

83/2P

00

00

69/P

67P

00

68/4P

00

68/3P

00

25/3

6) वाखळन

00

300

00

29P

00

57P

00

100/2P

7) घोटेघर

00

100/3P

00

122P

00

130/P

00

131/4P

00

131/OP

00

131/5P

00

129P

127/1P

00

00

128/1P

00

125/2P

138/P

00

136/P

00

135/P

00

146P

00

145/P

00

144/P

00

154/P

00

155/P

00

96/5P

00

94/2P

5911 4

5

07

00

07

00

00

22.

00

32

00

04

00

08

20

00

00

01

00

01

00

18

28

00

15

70

03

00

01

00

00

10

01

00

00

10

01

00

24

00

00

12

00

38

12

00

00

32

13

00

00

19

50

01

00

22

00

11

00

04

00

01

01

00

10

00

00

02

00

20

00

17

00

20

00

13

00

02

00

14

22

00

00

44

20

00

00

33

00

01

00

08 5912

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA OCTOBER 25, 2008/KARTIKA 3. 1930

1.

00

94/3P

१) घोटेघर निरन्तर

00

94/4P

00

92/3P

00

92/ 1P

00

92/2P

00

53/P

00

95

66

00

00

51

52

00

00

54

00

58

00

57

रास्ता

00

00

41

40

00

00

42

00

29/1

8)करवेळे खुर्द

00

31/0

00

40/0

[PART I-SEC . 3( ) ] 4

6

09

00

02

00

01

00

15

00

21

00

01

00

35

00

05

00

11

00

00

20

16

00

00

33

07

00

03

00

02

00

00

06

20

00

00

65

72

00

55

00

[ फा, सं. जब 14014/25/ 2008- जी.पी. ] के.के. शर्मा, अवर सचिव रिलायंस गैरा ट्रांसपोर्टेशन इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर लिमिटेड द्वारा एच.डी.पी.ई. डक्ट और ओ.एफ.सी. बिछाने हेतु गेल के प्रयोक्ता के अधिकार (आर.ओ.यू. ) के उपयोग की शर्तें और निबंधन

1. एच डी.पी.ई. डक्ट और ओ.एफ सी. बिछाने का कार्य ओ.आई.एस.डी मानक 226 थ आतर्राष्ट्रीय मानक ए.एस.एम.ई बी. 31.8 के अनुसार हो । बाहिए ।

2. मौजूदा आर.ओ.यू. गेल के आर.ओ.यू. गलियारे में एचसीपी.ई. डक्ट और ओ. एफसी. विछाने के लिए खोला जायेगा। सभी संभारतंत्र सहायताएं अनिवार्यतः मेसरी रिलायंस गैस ट्रारापोर्टशन इन्फ्रस्ट्रक्चर लिमिटेड ( आर.जी.टी.आई.एल.) द्वारा उपलब्ध कराई जायेगी ।

3. एच.ओ.पी ई. डक्ट और ओ.एफ.सी. बिछाने के दौरान अधिकार मार्ग में फसलों को हुई क्षति को मैसर्स आरजी.टी.आई.एल. द्वारा वहण किया जाना अनिवार्य होगा। आर.ओ.यू. से बाहर फरालों / वृक्षों / अन्य की क्षतिका ध्यान रखना मैसर्स आर.जी.टी.आई.एल. के लिए अनिवार्य होगा । 4. मैसरी आर.जी.टी.आई.एल. की एव.डी.पी.ई. डक्ट और ओ.एफ.सी. बिछाने का कार्य पूरा होने के बाद गेल का आर.ओ.यू. पूर्ववत सामान्य बना रहना चाहिए । और मैसर्स आर.जी.टी.आई.एल द्वारा आर.ओ.यू. के रागी किशानों से एक अनापत्ति प्रमाण- पत्र प्राप्त दिया जायेगा । 5913 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

[भाग - खण्फ 3(ü)]

5. आर.ओ.यू. गलियारे में एच.डी.पी.ई. डक्ट और ओ.एफ.सी. बिछाने के लिए सम्बन्धित प्राधिकारियों से आपेक्षित सांविधिक अनुमतियां मैसर्स आर.जी.टी.आई. एल. द्वारा प्राप्त की जायेगी ।

6. आर.ओ.यू. में क्षतिग्रस्त हुए चारदीवारी चिन्हों को / आर.ओ.यू. चिन्हों को / हवाई चिन्हो को/ सी.पी. परीक्षण केन्द्रों/ पाइपलाइन से सम्बन्धित किसी अन्य सहबद्ध उपस्कर का प्रतिस्थापन अनिर्वातः मैसर्स आर.जी.टी.आई.एल. द्वारा अपनी स्वयं की लागत पर कराया जायेगा ।

7. मैसर्स आर.जी.टी.आई.एल. अपनी एच.डी.पी.ई. डक्ट और ओ.एफ.सी. अनिवार्यतः खाई हाथ से खोदकर बिछायेगी, ताकि मौजूदा पाइपलाइन को क्षति न पहुँचे । आर.ओ.यू. में . कार्य करते समय उत्पाद सहित मौजूदा पाइप लाइन को हुई कोई भी क्षति/ उत्पादन क्षति मैसर्स आर.जी.टी.आई.एल. द्वारा वहन की जायेगी । 8. उक्त कार्य करने के लिए मैसर्स आर.जी.टी.आई.एल. द्वारा गेल के संबंधित अधिकारी से आवश्यक अनुमतियां प्राप्त की जायेंगी। अनुमति-पत्र का नवीनीकरण गेल के स्थल कार्यालय द्वारा यथानिर्देशित अनिवार्यतः किया जाएगा । 9. कार्य , गेल के इंजीनियर और गेल के नामनिर्दिष्ट सुरक्षा अधिकारी की उपस्थिति में किया जाना चाहिए जिसके लिए यथा लागू पर्यवेक्षण प्रभार अनिवार्यतः गेल द्वारा संसूचितं किए जाएंगे और मैसर्स आर.जी.टी.आई.एल. द्वारा संदेय होंगे । 10. मैसर्स आर.जी.टी.आई.एल. द्वारा एच.डी.पी.ई. डक्ट और ओ.एफ.सी. बिछाए जाते समय सुरक्षा परमिट के साथ आर.ओ.यू. में भारी उपस्करों की आवाजाही प्रतिबंधित है ।

11. मैसर्स आर.जी.टी.आई.एल. आर.ओ.यू. के रखरखाव में होने वाली लागत और गेल के आर.ओ.यू. का उपयोग करने हेतु लागत के रूप में गेल को वार्षिक आधार पर वार्षिक पट्टा धनराशि का भुगतान करेगी, जिसकी संसूचना गेल द्वारा मैसर्स आर. जी.टी.आई.एल. को वार्षिक आधार पर दी जाएगी ।

12. क्षेत्र में कर्य के आरम्भ होने से पहले मैसर्स आर.जी.टी.आई.एल. द्वारा अपेक्षित आर.ओ.यू. के समकक्षों (को-आर्डीनेट्स) का सत्यापन गेल के स्थल कार्यालय द्वारा किया जायेगा ।

13. मैसर्स आर.जी.टी.आई.एल. अपनी एच.डी.पी.ई. डक्ट और ओ.एफ.सी. गेल की पाइपलाइन से ओ.आई.एस.डी. मानकों के अनुरूप उचित दूरी पर कराई जायेगी । 14. भविष्य में यदि मैसर्स आर.जी.टी.आई.एल. गेल के आर.ओ.यू. गलियारे के भीतर अपने ओ.एफ.सी. डक्ट तन्त्र में कोई अनुरक्षण कार्य करने के लिए आर.ओ.यू. को पुनः खोलना चाहती हो, तो वे अनुमति के लिए गेल से औपचारिक रूप से सम्पर्क करेंगे तथा गेल द्वारा मैसर्स आर.जी.टी.आई.एल. को सभी लागू प्रक्रियाओं, लागत विपक्षाओं (इम्प्लिकेशन्स) अनुमति और अन्य शर्तों एवं निबंधनों की संसूचना दी जाएगी, जो मैसर्स आर.जी.टी.आई.एल. के लिए अनिवार्यतः बाध्यकर होगी । 15. आर.जी.टी.आई.एल. अपनी ओ.एफ.सी. के अनुरेखण के लिए पर्याप्त उपयुक्त रूट चिन्हक, अधिक आकांक्षित इलेक्ट्रॉनिक चिन्हक स्थापित करेगी । [PART II-SEC.3 ( ii ) ] 5914

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA. OCTOBER 25 , 2008 /KARTIKA3 , 1930

Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas

New Delhi , the 22nd October, 2008

S. O. 2949- Whereas by notifications of Government of India in Ministry of Petroleum Natural Gas SO No.696 dated 11th February , 2002 , SO No.2060 dated 22nd July, 2003 , SO No.2461 dated 19th August , 2003 , SO No. 2462 dated 19th August, 2003 SO No.813 ( E ) dated 10th June , 2005 and SO No. 814 ( E ) dated 10th June , 2005, issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines ( Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act , 1962 ( 50 of 1962 ) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act ) , Government of India declared its intention to acquire the Right of User in the land, specified in the Schedules appended to those notifications for the purpose of laying the Dahaj -Hazira-Uran Pipeline and Hazimalangwadi - Trombay Pipeline by M/ s GasAuthority of India Limited ( now GAIL ( India) Limited ) for transportation of natural gas to consumers in various parts of the country:

And whereas , Government of India , after considering the reports submitted by the respective Competent Authorities under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 6 of the said Act , and on being satisfied that the said land was required for laying the pipelines , decided to acquire the Right of User therein;

And whereas , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 6 of the said Act , Government of India declared acquisition of the Right of User in the land , specified in the Schedules appended to those notifications , for laying the pipeline , vide notifications of Government of India in Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas SO No. 3241 dated 6th November , 2003 , SO No. 739 dated 25th June , 2004 , SO No.861 ( E ) dated 29th July , 2004, SO No.153 dated 13th January, 2006 and SO No.1048 dated 8th March, 2006;

And whereas, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section (4 ) of Section 6 of the said Act, Government of India declared vesting the Right of User in the said lands for laying the pipelines in M/ s GAIL ( India) Limited, instead of Government of India , free from all encumbrances on the date of publication of that declaration ;

And whereas , M/s Reliance Gas Transportation Infrastructure Limited (RGTIL) is laying HDPE Duct and Optic Fibre Cable (OFC ) for establishing connection with Navi Mumbai based - Master Control Centre of its Kakinada- Hyderabad- Uran-Ahmedabad pipeline ;

And whereas , the HDPE Duct and OFC is to be laid along GAIL's Dahej- Hazira- Uran gas pipeline from Mhaskal ( SV18 ) to Hazimalangwadi ( SV20 ) and along GAIL's Trombay- Hazimalangwadi spur line from Hazimalangwadi to Mahape under Districts Thane and Raigad in Maharashtra State;

[ भाग - राज्य 3 ( ii) ]

5915

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 25, 2008 /कार्तिक 3, 1930

And whereas , M/s RGTIL intends to share with M/s GAIL ( India ) Limited the Right of User in land, described in the schedule appended to this notification, which has been earlier vested in M/ s GAIL ( India) Limited as mentioned above;

And whereas , M/ s GAIL (India) Limited have consented to the sharing of the Right of User in the said lands with M/ s RGTIL for laying HDPE Duct and OFC on terms and conditions annexed herewith;

Now, therefore , in exercise of powers conferred under sub - section (4) of Section 6 of the said Act, the Government of India directs that the Right of User in the said lands , vested earlier in M/s GAIL ( India) Limited, would also be used by M/s Reliance Gas Transportation Infrastructure Limited, from the date of publication of this declaration, on the terms and conditions annexed herewith .

Schedule

Mandal/Tehsil Taluka: Kalyan

Surveyi Sub-division No.

Village

1

2

124 1)Mhaskal

125

123

122

118

117

114

113

95

106

106

134

34 2)Ghaotasai

31

32

30

33

25

36

37

20

42

41

50

49

51

53

57

56

55

69

70

District: Thane

State: Maharashtra

Area to be acquired for Rou

Are

C-Are Hectare

4

5 3

00

00

03

00

31

05 00

40

00 00

22

05 00

19

50 00

32

03 00

00

27

00

00

60

00

28

03 00

03

08 01

00

38

00 00

30

00

72

00

10

00

05 00

02

03

02

00

03

00 00

45

00

05

16

01

61

08 00

00

38

18

00

00 00

18

01 00

30

96

00 00

03

02

03 00

08 00

16

02 00

07

00

12

00

05

34

00

00

12

00

00

00

24

09 00

04 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25 , 2008 /KARTIKA 3 , 1930

5916

1

2 2) Ghastasai (Contal ) 86 87

84

95

167

94

3

56P

42/7

51/2P

28

56

68 3) Rayte

67

44

58

67

57

48

49

52

51

81

91

92

96

9

98

121

120

119

122

123

132

131

135

80/5

86/6

53

99 / P

70 4) Vaholi

68

74

75

138

61

49

50

59

58

136

54

55

56

191P

[PART 11-SEC .3 (ii ) ]

A

5

3

09

11

00

00

13

00

03

06

00

00

05

81

05

00

22

09

19

00

04

05

00

00

12

00

00

00

01

00

00

01

00

00

28

47

00

00

00

00

06

05

00

25

57

05

00

00

00

50

05

63

00

00

06

00

09

23

00

05

11

00

04

65

00

05

15

00

06

00

23

02

02

00

03

02

00

05

48

00

05

00

16

00

30

00

05

41

00

01

00

00

02

00

00

28

05

00

04

00

19

05

35

00

09

09

01

00

03

00

01

00

00

00

06

00

00

03

00

00

17

00

05

22

DO

05

63

00

05

07

00

05

13

00

00

77

00

05

28

00

08

20

00

08

58

00

08

13

00

05

31

00

06

75

00

02

21

00

00

05

00

00

39

00

CO

38

00 II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/ कार्तिक 3, 1930

2

72 5)Aapli

71

70

69

77

76

67 5)Aapti Cont..

79

65

31

40

42

38

34

80

78/3 P

66 P

302P

82P

River

83

River 6) Vasant Shelol

114

118

115

116

Crick

44

43

45

59

58

53

57

55

54

52

51

50

114/11P

114/13/1P

114/12/2P

114/14P

116/1P

116/4P

116/3P

116/2P

Crick

45/0P

53/0P

54/0P

51/10P

57P 3944G1/08-8

5917

6

3.

00

03

20

44

03 00

00

11

03

05

00

37

03

00

11

00

06

08

00

36

00

15

00

00

00

21

00

05

01

00

57

05

00

06

03

00

00

00

39

05

00

86

24

00

00

00

30

00

00

01

00

03

00

00

15.

00

51

00

15

888 00 00

00

00

60

00

03

41

00

05

00

00

00

08

18

00

37

05

00

05

22

06

14

00

04

00

45

00

00

02

00

00

27

00

00

39

05

01

00

05

07

00

00

05

28

00

23

05

05

00

16

40

05

00

00

05

37

00

00

03

00

05

00

05

00

00

00

00

01

00

07

00

06

00

00

00

03

00

00

27

00

47

00

00

00

15

00

00

00

06

00

33

00

00

00

45

00

08

00 5918

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25 , 2008/ KARTIKA 3 , 1930

1

2

24 7) Ambivali

25

26

21

34

38

33

39

41

40

26P

38P

41P 8) Jambhul Mohali

55

57

Road

58

53

51

50

37

38

362P

361P

58P Mandal Tehsil /Taluka : Ambernath Village

Survey/ Sub-division No.

1

2 1) Chikhloli

132

131

128

126

127

129

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

5

07

05

00

00

222

05

00

13

05

00

05

37

46

05

00

DO

05

03

00

05

03

00

06

08

00

07

03

65

00

03

00

17

00

00

07

00

00

65

00

00

43

05

00

58

05

00

04

05

00

25

05

00

85

02

00

15

00

02

00

05

48

00

05

01

28

00

00

05

00

00

17

00

00

40

00

State : Maharashtra

District: Thane

Area to be acquired for Re-U

C-Are

Are

Hectare

3

4

5

00

21

00

00

34

05

00

86

05

00

02

03

00

15

00

00

73

05

Road

143

112

.:

i.

29

58

57

56

55

07

05

00

05

00

04

00

06

02

04

09

05

00

95

24

00

00

10

00

OS

00

05

13

00

22

02

45

00

00

00

00

08

00

M

05

00

18

08

00

44

05

00

30

05

00

55

05

00

57

UU भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25 , 2008 / कार्तिक 3 , 1930

[ भाग - वष्ण ( ii) ]

2

54P 1) Chikhloli Contd.

32/3p

32/1P

1/1P

162P

183/3P

163/1P

163/2P

157/ P

147

142/8P

142/7P

TLine

140P

130/P

52P

28 2) Jambhivali

17

21

25

23

40

43

42

38

37

Lake 3)Kakley

20

21

22

26

11 4)Bohonoli

10

28 5) Shiravali

31

20

29

36

52

53

51

49

48

41

5919

5

4

3

10

00

00

00

27

00

00 00

27

00

15

00

00 00

02

00

03

00

00

32

00

00

04

00

12

00 00

00

10

00

00

02

00

00

07

00

00 00

08

00

23

00

00

10

00

72

00

00 .

15

05 01

15

05 01

16

05 00

08

06

00

00 00

30

00

75

00

48

00 00

00

20

01

05

6

00

08 00

88

25

00 01

05

10

00

00

36

00

03

35

00

02

03 00

59

25 00

75

06

00

05

01

00

05

46

00

01

02

00

05

01

00

05 00

29

00

03

00

10

05 00

05

22

00

48

09 00

01

05 00

00

20

05 5920

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25 , 2008/ KARTIKA 3 , 1930

2

28 6)Ambhe

27

26

25

34

23

21

16

17

19

12

2

3

4

1

PART 11-SEC. 3 ( i ) ] 3

4

5

06

06

00.

06

00

04

00

05

33

09

00

04

00

33

05

00

03

08

00

05

26

00

09

21

00

27

06

00

07

10

00

05

03

00

03

14

00

06

31

00

26

00

00

07

08

05

00

G-P -L

71

80

78

75

22 7) Kharad

23

24

25

26

27

82 8) Kushivali

80/2

103

68

79/1

81/3

91

93/1

90/1P

90/2

90/4

87/1

87/2

86/5

86/6

86/3

86/1

85/2

85/1

80/3

81/4

19 9) Sakhroli

18

18

00

05

38

00

00

14

00

11

02

71

00

06

00

37

05

00

00

03

00

21

00

00

00

39

00

05

28

00

05

93

01

02

01

00

DO

13

00

00

05

00

00

01

00

00

56

00

00

53

00

00

29

00

00

26

00

00

16

13

00

00

00

00

06

00

16

00

00

00

09

00

00

22

00

00

10

00

00

12

00

00

09

00

00

35

00

00

13

00

DO

13

00

00

23

00

05

55

05

00

79 भारत कर राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25 , 2008 /कार्तिक 3, 1930

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

2

15 9) Sakhroli Cont..

14

10

36

39

37

38

43

45

47

23/2

21/0

25/0

23/1

27/0

29/0

32/4

30/1

River

27 10) Wadi

192

191

190

188

187

186

211

210

185

Road

144

21/1P

Nala

187 P

22/ 1P

23/P

193/P

18/3P

194/P

197

25/P

26/P

21/1P

21/4P

41P 11 ) Usatne

42P

195P

45

46P

67P

5921

5

3

4

03

00

50

10

05

00

03

41

00

00

00

06

00

05

01

00

12

00

08

15

00

00

00

24

00

45

00

37

05

00

00

00

05

00

17

00

00

00

01

00

36

00

17

00

00

77

DO

00

00

00

16

09

00

00

19

00

00

09

00

08

00

33

00 00

00

04

22

00

22

00

02

01

04

00

03

53

00

05

05

00

00

21

00

03

02

00

00

06

00

03

11

00

DO

45

00

00

00

10

00

00

10

00

00

20

00

04

00

33

00

00

31

00

00

00

15

00

00

00

26

00

02

00

00

00

05

00

00

15

00

00

02

05

00

00

00

23

00

00

00

02

00

49

00

06

00

00

00

00

12 5922

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25 , 2008/ KARTIKA 3 , 19.30

2

[ PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

4

3

5

92/1P

12) Narhen

91/ 1P

87/5

86/3P 00

22

00

00

42

00

00

04

00

86/4P

78 / 1P 00

47

00

00

05

00

78/2P

78/4P

77 /3P 00

00

18

.00

04

00

00

13

00

48/1P

48/2P 00

01

00

00

11

00

48/3P

00

10

00

00

48/4P

49/0P

61

DU

00

05

00

00

45/1P

45/2P

44/1P

44/ 3P

10

00

00

03

00

00

23

00

00

21

00

34/4P

34/5P

37 /1P

36 / 1P

22/4P 13) Morivali

00

14

00

00

01

00

00

46

00

00

32

00

32

00

00

MIDC

Land

Mandal /Tehsil /Taluka : Panvel District: Raigad

Village

Survey/ Sub -division No.

1

2 1) Nitalas

235P

236 / P State: Maharashtra

Area to be acquired for RU

Are

C-Are

Hectare

3

4

5

00

35

00

00

04

00

235/ 1P

237 / P

240P

245P

236/2P 01

60

00

00

01

83

04

00

00

00

23

00

00

26

00

247 / P

250P

252P

248 / 2P

269P

258P

257P

261P

255P

262

260 00

31

00

00

00

31

00

00

35

00

35

00

00

30

00

00

00

03

00

20

00

00

13

00

00

12

00

00

03

00

21

00

00 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 25 , 2008 / कार्तिक 3, 1930 II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

3

2

00

257

1) Nitalas Cont..

00

261

00

263

00

264

00

269

00

271

00

273

00

272

00

274

DO

275

00

36

00

38

00

39/5

00

39/4

00

43

00

40

00

35/10

00

35/11

00

39/4

00

39/5

00

43

00

40

00

35/10

00

35/11

00

48

00

206

00

58

00

55

00

53/5

00

54

00

77/1

00

78

455

00

00

59/5

00

59/6

00

59/7

00

59/4

00

74/1

72/1

00

69/1

00

00

69/2

00

71

00

70

00

171

00

170

00

169

00

163/6

00

163/7

00

163/5

00

153/2

00

163/3

163/4

00

00

162/0

4

5

00 20

00 37

DO 07

00 24

00 01

00 20

00 09

00 01

00 02

00 12

00 06

00 01

00 04

00 14

00 18

00 38

00 10

00 09

00 14

00 04

00 18

00 38

10

00

00 09

22

00

00 08

00 34

00 07

00 14

00 27

00 06

00 29

00 02

00 05

00 03

00 08

00 02

00 02

00 06

00 08

00 02

00 21

16

00 11

00

00 21

09

00 07

00

00 01

00 01

27

00

00 23

00 23

00 03 5924

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA

2 1) Nitalas Cont..

157/1

92P

138

103

87

85

84

4P

2P

OCTOBER 25, 2008/ KARTIKA 3 , 1934 )

PART 11-S , 3 ( ii ) ] 3

4

5

00

04

00

00

09

00

01

18

00

00

01

00

00

10

05

18

00

00

00

11

00

00

12

00

00

22

00

Ditict: Thane

Mandal /Tehsil/Taluka : Thane

Survey/ Sub -division No.

Village

1

2

114/1P 1) Nagaon

114/2P

114/3P

110/2P

110/3P

110/4P

84/1P

84/2P

84/3P

24/4

66/4P

65/1P

62/2P

47/9P

47/10P

48/P

31 / 1P

31/2P

29/2P

29/4P

28/5P

28/6P

28/ 7P

8 /2P

8/3P

10/1P

10/2P

11/2P

11/ 3P

11/4P

11/5P

Nala

269P

265 / P

264/P

263 /P

268 /P State : Maharashtra

Area to be acquired for RJ

Are

Hectare

C-Are 3

4

5

00

09

00

00

04

00

00

02

00

00

01

00

00

21

00

00

14

00

00

10

00

00

06

00

00

22

00

00

07

60

00

01

00

00

13

00

02

00

00

14

00

00

00

02

00

01

00

00

00

00

09

01

00

00

00

09

00

02

00

00

00

20

00

03

00

30

00

05

00

00

07

00

00

02

00

00

16

00

02

00

00

02

00

00

00

17

00

00

15

00

00

00

08

00

10

00

03

00

00

00

17

00

00

01

00

00

01

00

00

08

00 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25 , 2008/ कार्तिक 3 , 1930

[ भाग - खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

14/P 2) Balhe

25/3P

25/5P

25/6P

26/1P

28/2P

26/3P

27/2P

28/7P

28/8P

40/1P

40/2P

40/4P

41/2P

39/P

34/1P

37P

24/1P 3) Bhandarli

117P 4) Uttarshiv

122/4P

122/5P

Crick 5)Narivali

164/1P

164/2P

140/3/1 /1P

140/3/1/2P

5925

4

5

3

00

03

00

14

00

00

00

02

00

02

00

00

01

50

00

00

08

00

00

03

00

00

00

17

00

05

00

26

00

00

00

30

00

00

09

00

01

00

00

00

00

01

00

00

05

00

13

00

00

00

23

17

00

00

00

68

00

00

11

00

00

02

00

00

22

00

00

07

00

00

56

00

00

35

00

00

01

00

00

30

00

141/4/ 1P

136/8P

136/7P

136/6P

136/10P

136/4P

136/9P

135/4P

135/5P

135/12/ P

135/13P

52/2P

52/5P

52/4P

53/2P

53/3P

53/4

53/5P

73/2P

73/3P

80/1P

80/2P 394461/08-9

00

02

00

00

01

00

00

01

00

01

00

00

00

03

00

00

00

08

00

00

04

00

07

00

00

07

00

00

00

22

00

32

00

00

04

00

00

00

08

00

20

00

00

01

00

00

01

00

16

00

00

00

28

00

70

00

15

00

03

00

01

00

00 5926

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA 5) Narivali Cont..

632P 6) Vaklan

253 7) Goteghar

100/3P

130/P

131/4P

131/GP

131/5P

P

128/18

125/2P

136

135

145P

145/5

154/

1550

960P

94/2P

94/4P

97 /3P

92/110

92:9P

51

52

54

F

Road

43

40

42 8) Karavale Khurd

29:1

31/0

40/0

TOBER 25 , 2008/ KARTIKA 3. 19 :

[PART IJ- SEC , 3 (ii ) ) 3

4

5

00

16

00

00

01

00

00

10

00

00

01

00

00

24

00

00

12

00

00

38

00

00

12

00

00

32

00

00

13

00

00

19

00

00

01

50

00

22

00

00

11

00

00

04

00

00

01

00

00

01

00

10

00

00

00

02

00

00

20

00

00

17

00

00

20

00

00

13

00

00

02

00

00

14

00

00

22

00

00

44

00

00

26

00

00

23

00

00

01

00

00

08

00

00

09

00

00

102

00

00

01

00

00

15

00

00

21

00

00

01

00

00

35

00

00

05

00

00

11

00

00

20

00

00

16

00

00

39

00

00

07

00

00

03

00

00

02

00

00

00

06

00

20

00

00

55

00

72

00

00

00

00

65

[F. No. L-14014/25/2008-G.P.] K.K. SHARMA, Under Secy.

5927 [भाग II- खण्ड 3(il) )

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/ कार्तिक 3 , 1930

Terms and Conditions for utilization of GAIL's RoU by M/ s RGTIL for laying HDPE Duct and Optice Fiber Cable (OFC)

1. Laying of HDPE Duct and OFC should conform to OISD Standards 226 and International Standard ASME B -31.8

2. The existing Rou will be opened for laying HDPE.Duct and OFC in GAIL'S ROU corridor wherever required . All logistic support will be provided by M/s RGTIL,

3. Crop damaged in the Right of Way during the laying of HDPE Duct and OFC must be borne by M/ s RGTIL. Crop /tree /other damages occurred outside Rou shall be taken care of by M/ S RGTIL .

4. After completing the laying work of RGTIL's HDPE Duct and OFC , GAIL'S ROU should be returned to normalcy and No Objection Certificate would be obtained from all the farmers along the RoU by M / s RGTIL

5. Statutory permission required from the concerned authority wouldbe obtained by M/s RGTIL for laying their HDPE Duct and OFC along the common RoU corridor.

6. Boundary markers /RoU markers /Aerial markers /CP test stations /any other associated equipment related to pipeline damaged along the Rou shall be replaced by M/ s RGTIL at their own cost .

7. M/ s RGTIL shall lay their HDPE Duct and OFC by carrying out trenching manually so as to protect the existing pipeline . Any damages to the existing pipeline including the product/ production loss would be borne by M/ S RGTIL while carrying out work in RoU section of pipeline .

8. Necessary permits would be obtained by M /s RGTIL from the concerned officer of GAIL for carrying out the work . Permit would be renewed as directed by GAIL site without failure .

9. The job should be carried out in the presence of GAIL engineer and GAIL's designated Safety Officer , for which supervision charges , as applicable. shall be intimated by GAIL and would be payable by M/ s RGTIL.

10. Heavy equipment movement with Safety Permit, is restricted along the ROU . while laying HDPE Duct and OFC by M/ s RGTIL .

11.M/ s RGTIL would pay an annual lease amount to GAIL on yearly basis towards cost involved in RoU maintenance as well as for utilizing GAIL's ROU , which will be intimated by GAIL to M/ s RGTIL on annual basis .

12. The coordinates of RoU required by M / s RGTIL will be verified by GAIL's site Officer before commencement of job at field.

5928

GAZETTE OFINDIA

25.2008/ KARTIKA 3,1

13.M

[PART 11- SEC. 3

I will lay their RO Cuct and OFC at safe distance from GAIL's as Der OISD strnews 14,1

MS ROTH

reopen the Rob

i.

1.

jobs in

carrying out any

Duct and OFC sy

they will formuryouch GAll for permass

cost im

within GAIL'S ROU und all applicable

mission and other

nveyed to M arms and conditions

GAIL which shall be

ding M/ s RGTIL.

ostalouteerably electroni.arkers . in adequate

13 अक्तूबर, 2008

:.

अधि

सियम और खनिज पाइन (भूमि में उपयोग क ; (1962 का 50) (जिसे

अधि...

इसके पश्चात उक्त

की उपधारा (1) के

स

5

भारत क

जारी की गई भारत

मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना का.आ. 1293 तारीख की गई थी , द्वारा उस

7 जून, 2008 में अक

भूमि में मध्यप्रदेश

राज

गं बीना संस्थापन से

त्यानो के परिवहन के

तीन कोटा पाइपलाइन

पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वार

का

पाइपलाइन बिछाने वः के अपने आशय कोया की थी ;

को तारीख 2 फिर 2008 को उपलब्ध क

कारीन कुमारा 6 की उपधारा ( नवीन कंन्द्रीय सरकार देवी है

और

समाधान हो जीने

यार करने के पश्चातह

पर

पादानवेशित है , उसमें लपक

GRI

अधिकार का अर्चन

अस 6 की

उपधारात शक्तियों का

में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि

नधिसूचना से संल

गं

६ को उपधारा (4) द्वारा

क

लती है

प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयाग

घोषणा के प्रकाशन की

* उपयोग का अधिकार

तास

बजाए सभी विल्लंगमः

कामा

मुक्त भारत पेट्रालियन 5929

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्षिक 3 , 1930

[ भाग 1]-खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

अनुसूची

तहसील : मुंगादली

ग्राम का नाम क्र.सं.

2 1

1 महाराज खेड़ी

2 पिपरिया मल्हारगण

3 किरमिचीखेड़ी

4 मढ़ावल

5 नरखेड़ा

6 मिर्जापुर

सोपरा

7

8 सुमेर

9 आगर बमूरिया

अमोदा

10

राज्य : मध्य प्रदेश जिला: अशोक नगर

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में सर्वे नंबर

4

3

12

0.3986 129

0.0150 37

0.2340

0.4615 7

40

0.6565

0.6825. 76

0.6240 82

0.6800 359

106

0.1750

1.0700 7

12

0.5200

0.4220 81

61

0.8290 41

0.2900 42

0.4450 52

0.2200 51

0.6815

0.4745 58 5930

THE GAZETTE OF INDAHER 25,2008/KARTIKA 3.1

PART II-STS ( 1 ) क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में 1

2

3

4 11

120

1.3800 12

175

0.3705 बेलई

54

15

1.2300

[ फ०. स. आर-31015/5/2008-ओ.आर ॥ ]

ए. गोस्वामी , अवर सचिव

Nes Deihi , the 23rd October , 2008

S.O. 1950-Whereas by a notification of the Government of dis in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas S.O. No. 1293 , dated the 5th June , 2008 , issued under sub - section ( 1 ) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of liser in Land) Act , 1962 ( 50 of 1962 ) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act ) published in the Gazette of India dated the 7th June , 2008 , the Central Government Jeclared its intention το 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 temiraal 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 Ciazene notification were made an ailable to the public on the 2th Sept , 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 , aner considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline , has decided to acquire the right of user therein:

Now, therefore , in exercise of the pe seconferred by sub - section ( section 6 of the said Act, the Central Govemment hereby declares that the right of user in the said land , specified in the Schedule , appended to this nottisesion , is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline ;

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

[ भाग - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

TEHSIL : MUNGAWALI

5931

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3, 1930

SCHEDULE

DISTRICT : ASHOK NAGAR STATE : MADHYA PRADESH

NAME OF VILLAGE S.No.

2

1

1 MAHARAJKHEDHI

PIPARIYA MALHARGAN 2

3 KIRMICHIKHEDI

4 MADHHAWAL

5 NARKHEDA

6 MIRJAPUR

7 SOPRA

8 SUMER

9 JHAGAR BAMURIYA 10 AMODA

11 MATHANA

42 PHULEDI

13 BELAI

AREA IN HECTARE SURVEY NO .

4

3

12

0.3986

0.0150 129

0.2340 37

0.4615 7

0.6565 40

0.6825 76

0.6240 82

0.6800 359

0.1750 106

1.0700 7

0.5200 12

0.4220 81

0.8290 61

0.2900 41

0.4450 42

0.2200 52

0.6815 51

0.4745 58

120

1.3800 175

0.3705 54

1.2300

[No. R-31015/5/2008 -O.R. -IIJ A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy.

5932

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA OCTOBER 25, 2008 /KARTIKA 3 .

दिल्ली , 23 अक्तूबर, 2008

उपयोग का. आ. 2951.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेलियम और खनिज पाइपलममि में अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) (जिसे इइग

अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) के अई

202 सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैः मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना सं . 05

ग जून 2008. जो भारत के राजपत्र 7 जून 2008 में

मारा

प्रकाशिदीपी अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में दिलेर भूमि में मध्यप्रदेश रा

राजस्थान राज्य में कोटा तक पेट्रोलियम सापादों के परिवहन के नि परियोजना के भाध्यम से भारत पेट्रोलियम कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा

की

प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार कर्जन के अपने आशय की

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतिशः जनता को तारीख 27 अगस दी गई थी:

और सक्षम पाधिकारी ने, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (1 )

को अपनी रिपार्ट दे दी है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने, उक्त रिपोर्ट पर दिनार करने के पश्चात

पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइन बिछाने के अस अपेक्षित है , उसमें उपयो

करने का विनिश्चिय किया है

अतः अब. केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिधारा 6 की उपधारा (1 ........

प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है अधिसूचना से संलग्न

में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए तपस्येगविकार का अर्जन किया ज

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की की उपधारा (4) द्वारा

करते हुए, यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त भूमि उपयोग का अधिकार इ

तारीख को केन्द्रीय सरकार में निलिए सभी विल्लंगगों

कारपोरेशन लिमिवड में निहित होगा !

अनुसूची

एहसील: बीना

राज्य :

सागर

क्र.सं.

ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

सेक्टर में 1

2

3

1 आगाशौद

1222/1348

522

523

527

125

528

529

532

371

2 पुरैना

[पत्र. में क

****??? દ્ધિિ 5933 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्टूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3, 1930

[भाग -खण्फ 3( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 23rd October, 2005

S. O. 2951. Whereas by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas S.O. No.1292, dated the 5th June, 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 7th June, 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 Aug, 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 ofuser therein;

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

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

SCHEDULE

STATE : MADHYA PRADESH DISTRICT : SAGAR

BINA

TEHSIL :

AREA IN HECTARE

SURVEY NO .

S.No.

NAME OF VILLAGE

4

3

2

1

0.0216

1222/1348

1 AAGASAUD

522

0.9700

523

0.0540.

527

0.0250

528

0.3240

529

0.0600

532

0.2520

0.2376

371

PURAINA

2

[No.R-31015/6/2008-0.R. - III A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy. 3944G008-10 5934

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA1BER 25 , 2008 /KARTIKA

[PART 11-- St . 3 ) श्रम एवं रोजगार गं

नई दिल्ली. 26 सितम्बर, 2005

का.अ. 2452.औद्योगिक विवाद

का (4 ) की भाग । हेर

ऑफ इण्डिया

के बीच अनुतः

औद्योगिक

न्यायालय , कानपुरको

297/98 ) को

2. At the out he futile exercise to instant case the unjo hpointed out that it would details of the case as in the been debarred from adducng ris evidence in so the claim whereas the management has beetle sadduce its witness who jas proved the case of ti the management has and in this way the uncontroverted . Henc the case setup by the uncontroverted evider agement . Even the witness o concross examined by the unior ! of the management res see ne reason to disbelieve the venient on the basis of thein कोप्राप्त हुभा

3. It is therefore any relief as claimes Accordingly the chan:: reference is decided . against the union . the Utuon is not entitled to is in its statement of claim . the union is rejected and the one of the management and MINISTERS OLABOUR AND FAW Ne Delhi , the 26th Septembe

GSHUKLA, Presiding Officer S.O. 2952. In pursuance of Sector Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1917 , al

नई शिकसितम्बर , 2008

Government hereby publishes the Award 98) of the Central Goverment Industrial cuin Labour Cour, Kampur, as shown in the Ame

industrial dispute between the management of an of India and their workcaen , received Government on 269-2008

No.1-120187

::

RAINDIK K

का.आ. 2953 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 केन्द्रीय सरकार यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इण्डिया के प्रबंधतंत्र नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबन्ध में निक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम कानपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 177/98 ) को प्रकाशित केन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-19 ( को प्राप्त हुआ था।

ANNEXCRE

[ 01/ 1997- आईआर( वः ॥

जिन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , Semember, 2008 BEFORE SRIR GSHUKLA , PRESTING OFF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL This CLAD LABOUR COURT KAINDER

S.O. 2953.nce of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute No. 207 of FOUN

Industrial Disputes A 14 of 1947 ), the Central

Government hereby ples the Award ( Ref. No. 17748 ) da metter of dispute hetss : Lai Book Stall Associatko

of the Central Governs Industrial Tribunal- cum - Jabour

Court Kanpur, as shost Annexure in the industrial Secretary, UB Staff Associa

dispute between the gensent of Union Bank of India Co Chuon Bank of India , 25.3 . Ra

Kund Leonur .

and their workmen, rechy the Central Government op 26-9-2008.

ANID

The Assistant Corneral Manager,

Union Bank ofndu Panda Sagar,

1..12012-261/ 1997 - IK113-111 | ENDER KUMAR , Desk Officer ANNEXURE

Kanpur.

AWARD

BEFORE SRIRGSE SLA, PRESIDING OFFICER . CENTRALGOVERNM INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABO ROCOURT, KANPUR

Industrial Dispute No. 1 of 1008

1. Central Government . Njol New De notification No. L - 12011 3699 referred the fofto dispute for

Inthe matter of disputeen :

tribunal :.

"Whethertheselection made by ly ne

Union B.Employees Union .

The Stai hesident,

Union Burk at india, Luckimw

Union : ployces Union, Compute! Operator was in preg

Circular No 1917 and 103821

120452 Nagar ,

worked

Kanpur MSS 301-324

[भाग 11- खण्ड 3 (i) ]

AND

Pandu Nagar,

TheAssistant General Manager, Union Bank of India , RegionalOffice, Kanpur.

AWARD

1. Central Government vide notification No. L- 12012/ 261/97-IR (B- II) dated 20-10-98 has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this tribunal:-

"Whether the action of the management of Union Bank of India, Kanpur , to deny computer operator allowance to Sh . O.P. Mishra is justified? If not relief is the said workman is entitled?"

2. It is needless to give full details of the case as on the date of arguments at camp Varanasi , it was brought to the notice of the tribunal that the representative for the workman on 17-12-07 , has moved an application in the case with request that the union is not interested in prosecuting the case, therefore, now there remains hardly any need to adjudicate the issue referred by the Ministry. Moreover, when the case was taken up for hearing on 5-3-08 at camp Varanasi, none appeared from the side of the workman.

3. In view ofabove , the tribunal is left with no other option to hold that the action of the management justified and accordingly it is held that the workman is not entitled for any relief as claimed in the statement of claim .

4. Reference is therefore answered accordingly against the union and in favour of the opposite party management.

R.G SHUKLA , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 26 सितम्बर , 2008

का.आ. 2954. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , कानपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 70/98 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-9-08 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-12012/50/ 1997- आईआर ( बी- II ) ] राजिन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi, the 26th September, 2008 S.O. 2954. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 70/98 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court, Kanpur as shown in the Annexure in the industrial

5935

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930.

dispute between the management of Union Bank of India and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 26-9-2008.

[No. L-12012/50/ 1997- IR (B-1) ] RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE SRIRG SHUKLA , PRESIDINGOFFICER, CENTRALGOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT, KANPUR ndustrial Dispute No. 70 of 1998

In the matter of dispute between: Union Bank StaffAssociation ,

Secretary, UB StaffAssociation,

C/oUnion Bank of India , 24/53 , Birhana Road, Kanpur .

AND

The Assistant General Manager, Union Bank of India Pandu Nagar , Kanpur .

AWARD

1. Central Government , MOL, New Delhi vide notification No. L- 12012/50/97-1R ( B- II ) dated 12-4-98 has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this tribunal: -

Whether the action of the Union Bank of India in not allowing Sri . V.K. Tandon to perform duties as computerfrom 28-03-96 to 08-12-96 is legal and justified ? If not to whether Sri V.K. Tandon was allowed to any allowance for the above period.

2.Briefly stated facts as set up by the union on behalf of the workman is that there is an agreement between the union and the management to perform duties by the award staff on higher assignment against any post. The union without referring the number and date of circular has pleaded that as per settlement it is provided that in the event of regular and permanent selection is made at the post ofComputer Operator, management in case ofarising out of any vacancy at any of its branches can make an arrangement to man the post taking into station wise seniority. It is pleaded that a post of Computer Operator was lying vacant at its specialized Branch at Sarvodaya Nagar , on28-03-96, but the management ignoring the claim of the workman who was much senior in the seniority list of Kanpur, posted one Sri O.P. Mishra as Computer Operator at the branch . The management smelling their mistake before the ALC( C) Kanpur posted Sri Tandon as Computer Operator on 09-12-96 after removing Sri O.P. Mishra. In this way ignoring the seniority of the workman the management in an illegal manner caused financial loss 10theworkman in the from ofComputer Operator Allowance 5936

during the periu 35 το 3-12-96, which ad

head to be in are managenient

sudo cules of the agreemen

s clemet a toas thisway inoil...

75 paisa as d

...wages for the a period on:

peter allowance 3. Tr

contested b

te party bank grounds ve

present fispete is nie dispute ast

workman

gerol and prerogative

suitable for a:

intended !

The clai

vej: not senable in 1 and not

settlement a.

Ang any preven favour . EL

amais has beer consideratiu :

at the post :

poker The S

יו

his favou are ...

been prayed ! ..

claimed by! : .

rejected.

4.

inthat nothi

ofthe facts ..

5. Al

both partie:

led docunte

claim and ...

representata

Ading part

carefullythr file.

7.

dated 30-10

No. 4058 die..

nt whi

Candidate

provides tha!

as Compute

hitake their app

teach the ......

prescribed

managemex !

: 44-6

2,3 25, 2008 /KARTIKA 3 ,

[PART II S :

common knowledge ..

jurisprudence that c management can not

the whims in the matter !

appointment and postu hine , assignment. For such kind ofposting requeaske side of the workman or the anployee as the case

the same no employ

injust and in the absence of Bottered higher assignment suo motto by his emjs!

position I find force in ..

tu view of the settled legal argements advanced by the opposite party and hold

apply for the post on ni prime requirement is first try dasignment and it only after that the management is red to consider station - wise senirority in the matter ting ad -hoc higher assignmen rill process of regular setion is completed.

8. There is yet

contesting parties have ther pleaded on the point mat not applied in terms of the Sri O. P. Mishra , had

agreement for the posier amputer Operator nor there is any evidence on the pei .. must be presumed that Mishra might have applied for the post of Computer Optor in tons of settlement and that is why his seni appointment could be dole providing officiating taken into consideration.

is quite distinguishable from Thus the case of the

the facts and circumstand the case of Sri O.P Mishra while offering the pos: ca-hoc basis and there appears no illegality in the achenianagement as indicated in the reference orde . that the action of the nanagentent is legal an cifici and as a result ofwhich ettlement dated 3rd M ... within the closing date applied tor the post of

er aspect of the matter. Both inder these circumstances it the claim of the union tordingly the workmans Citimed by him as he never putter (Operator in terants al of the circular. Had beach his case would have helu entitled to no relic

certainly been on differ wang bat not otherwise 9. Reference a .ce accordingly in the above rms.

SKLA . Presiding Olliver नई दि सिम्बर 200%

का. , 2955-

अधिनियम , 1947 1947 ৩।৩ ) की गारा 17 के 31 में केन्द्रीय सरकार सेंट्रल बैंक संफ इंडिया के

pleadings no

single word :

operator asn

for the opp

only ainon

required

Operator :

had alre.id

:!

otherwise .

ets2 dis representa

Computer

wise seniorit

: oherwise प्रबंधतंत्राजन्का और उनके कर्मकार्य के बीच अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट

में केन्द्रीय सरकार औधगिक अधिकरणः श्रप व्यायालय

पंचार संदेश संख्या

2008 को प्राण प्रकाशित करती है,

था।

i-

15101351984-

नन्द्र कुमार, डेस्क प्रति New Delhi 1mber , 2008 5.0 . 2955.

et Section 17 of the Cardustrial Disputes At

1 of 1947 ) , the Cearreal MSS 301-324

5937 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25 , 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

[ भाग - खण्ड 3 (1) ]

Governmenthereby publishes the Award ( Reference No. 57/ 88) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Bank of India and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 26-9-2008.

[No. L-12012/ 135/1984-D- 1 (A) ]

RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM -LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR

No. CGIT/T/LC/R/57/88

PresidingOfficer : Shri C. M. SINGH

Shri Dragendra Singh Jadon,

S/o Ram Singh Jadon,

R/oVillage Bamsoli,

Tehsil Sabalgarh ,

Workman/Union

Distt.Morena

Versus

TheDivisional Manager, Central Bank of India ,

Gwalior

.........Management

AWARD

Passed on this 10th day ofSeptember, 2008

1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide itsNotification No. L- 12012/ 135/84- D.II (A) dated 7-4-88 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal:

enquiry was initiated against him. That the workman appearedbefore the Enquiry Officer on the date fixed in the Enquiry. In the meantime , he was transferred from Ambah Branch to District Bhind at Gohad Branch. This Gobad Branch was under the supervision and control ofDivisional OfficerGwalior. That a preliminary enquirywas conducted by the Bank, but the workman was not at all informed of the said preliminary enquiry . Therefore the departmental enquiry is liable to be vitiated on this ground alone. That the departmental enquiry was conducted not according to rules and without following the priciples fo natural justice . That the departmental enquiry was conducted against the workman neither properly nor legally. The workman was not supplied with the findings/report of enquiry. That on asking for the copy of Enquiry Report, the Assistant General Manager, Bhopal informed him vide his letter dated 24-3-82 that it was not permissible to supply copy of the findings of theEnquiry Officer. The Disciplinary authority imposed the punishment of dismissal from service on workman. The dismissal order mentioned the date of termination of service as 18-11-1981 . The Divisional Manager, Gwalior made it effective from 27-11-1981 and theBranchManager, Godah made it effective on 4-11-1981 while it was served on the workman on 29-1-1982. That the workman remained in service of the Bank till 29-11-1982 andhis services could not be terminated with retrospective effect. On this ground alone, the order of dismissal is illegal and void. The workman was forced to prefer an appeal without the copy of findings of Enquiry Officer to the Assistant General Manager, Bhopal on 23-2-1982, but the appeal was dismissed without going into the facts and circumstances submitted by the workman. Meanwhile a copy of findings was sent by the Disciplinary Authorityto him on 12-3-1982 after dismissal ofappeal . It is prayedby the workman that the action of the management ofCentral Bank of India, Gwalior in dismissing his service be held void- ab - initio . Therefore he is entitled to full back wages from 29-1-1982 with consequential benefits including seniority and other benefits.

"Whether the action of the management of Central Bank of India, Gwalior , in dismissing from service Shri D.S. Jadon , Agricultural Assistant , w.e.f. 29-1- 82 isjustified? If not , to what relief is the workman entitled?"

3.The case ofmanagement in brief is as follows. That workman Shri D. S. Jadon was rightly served with the memo as averred in the staternent of claim . It has been deniedby the management that the charges were baseless , false or amounted to a conspiracy . It has been pleaded by the management that workman Shri D.S. Jadon by impersonation did appear for his brother in the examination. It has also been denied by the management that the workman did not appear in the interview. It is pleaded on behalfofthe management that before submitting the reply, theworkman came to Gwalior in connection with theBank's work and met the then Divisional Manager of the Bank and accepted the fact of impersonation , Not only this , he apologized and appealed for mercy, but he submitted reply contrary to his personal meeting with the Divisional Manager .The Branch Manager did serve memo dated. 7-10-1979 but it is denied by the management that it was 2.The case ofworkman Shri Dragendra Singh Jadon in brief is as follows . That he was appointed as Agricultura) Assistant in the Central Bank of India on 23-4-1975 . He was a confirmed Bank employee , While he was working at Ambah Branch of the Bank in Morena District (MP), he was served with memo dated 18-9-79 by the Branch Manager alleging that he appeared in written test conducted by the Banking Seryice Recruitment Board, Lucknow by impersonating his brother . That the workman submitted the reply of the said memo denying the false allegations made there in against him . Without considering the said reply, a second memo on 5-10-1979 repeating the same charge in forming him that the Divisional Office ofthe Bank at Gwalior was surprised to note the denial of allegations by him . That the workman was not afforded full opportunity to reply the chargesheet and a departmental 5938

2008 /KARTIKA J

the chargeslivenam

10. I have

L

from the work the chargeshuet dabuit.

retre very carefully gone to the workreinform

submitted by bots through the entire e

n the che

be held ag

11.1

was cond

The enquiry...

whether the Bank has luct of the workman .

properly and He was giv

defend hiracy Th

1.2 . The misco .... iged to be committed by

L:

any reply i

worlanar D.S.Jadon ,

das Agricultural Assistant submitteil

Central Bank of Arubah Branch is that he enquiry repor ry , the d

appeared in written betrical cadre in place of his

.:

the workinar: armed th

younger brother Slw fadon by affixing his own Authority ander satied a shu

him and altuvat hearing tahan

photograph on the apji forrn and the call letter for interview which wasd by the Banking Services The workman before Disciplinary t 16-11-1981 . did not submit anything Art

Recruitment Board Gre 5-1979. That he also inade an attempt to appear in the in place of his younger challenged the findings of the EnquiryOffice:

11-1981 , the Discipy Authority.confimsun

of Enquiry Oilicct and awarded punishunent the workman . The order was served on the wa

29-1-1982. 1 the appcal filed by the workmat.

by theAppellair Authority. It is not the case of the w

that the photograph affixed on the applications because of genetics resemblance and is net de

of the workman, he workinan alse podice des handwriting . The workman is not entitled to

.....

as the onus of puning gainful employment

FINDINGS

j

4. My leotard prs Jecessor in eftice ad

Shri A.K. Shoshi , late for workrmoni

16-3-92 held the Dh is vitiated as it is ...

nor legal . He quasired the enquiry . The al

recorded by muy katmed predecessor in uftis

the part of the

5. My learned en decessor in office

fixed the date is that referetice case foreskr

for leading evelens to proving the miscond

and rebutial .

6.The k

misconduct ofthe word filed alidait of Shai 1.6 Kanitkar . But the laulest to produce their ofthe workmansamed Shri

Manager Central Bank of India, Sur

brother Shri V.S. Jada: et . August, 1979. Thus the workman has con . impersonation of ju mot guss misconduct of VS. Jadon. As pur esaid misconduct alleged D.S Jadon , first of all, management's versjoni to be committed by ... came to the notice of Sr.Karitkar, then posted as Dy. ChiefOfficer (Personesonal Onice, Gwalior white he was one amongst Gi on 26-8-1979 for com Gwalior. He was askes!. oceating BSRB , Lucknow interview at Alankar Hotel , dre Board in verifying and scrutinize the testimaciidates appearing for interview. It is during 1 . of the above scrutiny and verifications of the testis of candidates , it cameto the notice of Shri L... What worktuan Shri DS Gzdon , Agricultural Ass Amba Branch has manag : to attend the written cu 6-5-79 by affixing his photograph in spite ofins on the original application which was actually ... i's brother Shri VS. Jadina and the workman Sho Bon had come with an intent to appear in the inters ! alas of his brother and was caught red- handed The Kanitkar and other representatives . The in neer to prove tha workman . Thers ..

witness Shri L.B. Kamus examination on behalf flidavit which is actually Handwriting 2012 Print Exped Me

then posied as Ronen Manager al Manrd

xamination - in- chief 1. B. Kanitkar cardiot be management's witness Stiri evidence . This witness than Durgapur, Cential instia. Slir K.SD

Senior Manageral Bank of india and Son b

sctually made the commamet the workman on the basis of which the entirs Jiny action was initiated then postedalianisional Manager al Gesi

against the workman as

Bank of India

10 prove the complaintdress Shri L.B. Kanitkar he management has failed

which the disciplinary against the workmans

kman .

action was initiated a

7.Words ندی defend himsen himself as a witagss

8.The pores have fited Photostat cepis

13. i he other witie

mined by the magenesi

...

documents sit diall be referred in the insi

for proving the miscon.darkan are Shri Vinayak award at approprie places

Bodas , then posted as

drager at Manrabazar .

9. I have and Sini C. Kohi bo

Durgapur, Shri R SPA seti.ed Sr. Manager & Shiri B. Shukla , then work , and Divisional Manager management and Shri A.K. Shashi , Ai

Gwalior. It has been stile the learned counsel for workman . Boule dre prenestrave also filed with 5939 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 25, 2008 /कार्तिक 3 , 1930

[ भाग- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

that the original application has notbeenbrought on record perhaps for the reason that the same has been lost . Considering the entire deposition made by Shri R.S.D. Arora, I am of the opinion that even the Photostat copyof the aforesaid application has not been proved according to the principle of law of evidence by the shaky evidence ofwitness Shri R. S. D. Arora .

the management that the misconduct committed by the workman is fully established and proved from the testimony of Shri Vinayak Bodas , Shri R.S.D. Arora and Shri R.B.Shukla. Against the above, the learned counsel for the workman submitted that the testimony ofthe above named witnesses falls short in proving the misconduct of the workman. Ithas come in the evidence ofShri VinayakBodas that he was appointed Presenting Officer for conducting theDepartmental Enquiry against workman Shri D.S. Jadon. Thiswitness deposed during his evidence of examination- in-chief that during the course of DE , he had gone through the documents, papers listed in a schedule annexed with his affidavit and deposed that they are true copies of the originals . This evidence of the witness is insufficient to prove that theworkman appeared in the written test for his brother Shri V.S.Jadon playing impersonation for him . On being cross -examined, this witness deposed that he has no personal knowledge ofthe charges leveled against the workman by the management.

15. The next witness Shri R.B. Shukla, then posted as Lead District Manager at office ofCentral Bank of India has been examined by the managerment for proving that workman Shri D.S.Jadon had appear 1 in written test in place ofhis brother Shri V.S.Jadon and also the fact that theworkman attempted to appear in the interview in place ofhis brother Shri V.S. Jadon and disappeared when the name ofhis brother Shri V.S.Jadon was called for interview. According to evidence of examination- in - chief of this witness, hewas working as Agricultural Assistant at Lahar Branch in District Bhind in the year 1979-80 . He deposed that he personally knows workman Shri D.S.Johon. Accordingto his deposition , during the aforesaid period, the workman was working as Agricultural Assistant at Amba Branch. He further added that a written test of clerical grade was conducted by Banking Service Recruitment Board in or about upto April/ May 1979. That Shri V.S. Jadon had applied for the post of clerical grade . That workman Shri D.S.Jadon had appeared in the written test in place of his brother Sh.i V. S.Jadon and was declared succsseful in the written test. The witness further stated that personal interview of successful candicates in the above written test was conducted by the BSRB Lucknow on 26-8-1979 at Alankar Hotel, Gwalior. That Shri L.B. Kanitkar was Dy. ChiefOfficer (Personnel) at Gwalior. He was deputed to assist the Board in verifying and in scrutinizing the testimonials of the candidates appearing for the interview. The witness deposed that on the call of name of Shri V. S. Jadon for interview, no body appeared and by that time , Shri D. S. Jadon has disappeared after being spotted by Shri Kanitkar . On being cross-examined , this witness deposed that he has no knowledge of the dates on which the written tests were held. The witness during his evidence of cross-examination deposted that Shri L.B.Kanitkar , the then DCO Personnel at Divisional Office had brought to his knowledge that Shri V. S. Jadon had applied for the post of clerical grade . The evidence given by this witness regarding the above fact is nothing buthearsay and is not admissible as evidence . On being further cross- examined, this witness deposed that he had cometo know that workman Shri D. S. Jadon had appeared for Shri V. S. Jadon in the written test for clerical grade from the memo and chargesheet which was given to the workman . Thus the evidence of this witness is not direct evidence. The witness did not see the workman appearing inthe written test for his brother Shri V. S. Jadon . Besides the above, the witness has deposed that the written test had takenplace in or about April/May 1979 meaning thereby 14. Management's witness Shri R.S.D. Arora doposed in evidence of his examination - in -chief that during September 1978 to June 1980, he was posted as Branch Manager of Branch Office, Ambah (MP) . He added that workman Shri D.S. Jadon had worked with him as Agricultural Assistant at the Branch Ambah. He further deposed that he is acquainted with the handwriting of workman Shri D.S. Jadon . According to testimony ofthis witness, workman Shri D.S.Jadon submitted an application for availing LFC w.e.f. 14-5-79 to 9-6-79. This witness stated that the said application is in the handwriting of workman Shri D.S.Jadon. He further deposed that Annexure- I of this affidavit is the photocopy of the aforesaid application . Thus this witness has tried his best to prove that application for LFC from 14-5-79 to 9-6-79 was in the handwriting of workman Shri D.S.Jadon and Annexure - 1 is the plotocopy thereof. On being cross- examined , regarding the aforesaid application, the witness deposed that the said application was written by workman Shri D.S.Jadon in his presence and after writing he had handed over the said application to him . On being further corss-examined, the witness deposed that if the Bank employee gives application written in the Bank itself, in that case, seal of the Bank is not affixed on the said application. According to testimony of this witness , the copy ofapplication given by the workman to him is Exhibit M-8 . The witness admitted that it bears the seal ofRegional Office, Bhopal . On being further cross - examined , the witness deposed that the application for leave is allowed by theBranch Manager and is not sent to the Regional Office. The witness failed to give any reason as to why application Exhibit M-8 was sent to the Regional Office. The evidence of this witness is very shaky. In the ending lines ofhis cross -examination , the witness stated that his affidavit was prepared at Roorki and at that time, he had no official document in his possession . It is to be notedhere 5940

THE GAZETTE OF INDUA TONER 25.2008 / KARTIKAS

thiswitness does not know as to when the st clerical grade tock place. It is not the direct evince of thiswitness that on the call of the name of S

for interview, none appeared and by that tra .. Jadon has disappeared which was noted b

Kanitkar. This witness has admitted dining th

cross -examination that he was not concerned personal interview of the candidates مبل managemens has riled the affidavit of Shri Sand management Paried to produce him for cross- len Therefore his affidavit cannot be read in evidence of as the evidence of witness Shri R.B. Shukla isme it is only hearsay evidence which is noi sdner : bla according to principles of law of Evidence

16. Thus it is clear from the above at the management witnesses Shri Vinayak Bodas , Sor Arora and Shri R.B. Shukla are not eye witnesses of the alleged misconduct committed by workman Shri Jadon ofimpersonating his brother Shri V.S. Jadon isatte Aritter test held for the clerical grade and the alleged ahengitta tric by workman Shri D.S. Jadou to appear in m impersonating his brother V.S. Jadon .

17. Workman Shri D.S. Jadon specifically depesed in para 8 of his affuiavit that he did not commen misconduct nor he appeared for any test or inter lew hr his brother as alleged. He further deposed thai he does not know as 10 when the examination was conduced by has been cross-caamined at length by the permi Nothing has coine in his evidence of cross-

the Bank and the Service Recruitment Board which may support the case of the manage

the 18. The management in order to prove

the application foon is the post in the clerical grade nationalized banis operating in MP were site handwriting of the workman Shri D.S. Jader and brother exantined Shri C.T. Sarvalte, Handwri Finger Prints Expert . If it is proved that the afures m were filled in the handwriting of workman Shri DS. ladon, it will naturally indicate his intention to impere o tre his brother in the examination for the clerical port but shai !

not be suficient proof of the fact that the work did appear in the examination impersonifying his b attempted to appear in the interview on beint his brother . Shri C.T. Sarvatte. Handwriting and finrint Expert depered in bis affidavit thathe had the questioned writing on test formEC- 1679 ( Code N Exibibit A ! and compared it with writing addssbe Branch Mage Canal Bank of lodia . Amich 2. The witness further deposed that he ey examined the culire writing on test Foren EC

yellow coloured paper ) which was in 1 pagesked by him A to B to B. C to C and D to

compared the writing on F. Foron marked At

to C and D 12 weth the standard writing !

S/ 1 , Ex. A witness further deposed

examined the questendard writing vader magnification . That he enlargement ofthe ancie writing and the stunting and brouetit the enlargement of questo standards tu dose-Justa- position , to facilitats pares the witness further deposed that the stunsthir was sufficient to the purpose of comparis capial leiters , small letters as well as soine figuresble for comparison The witness has filed histonette having compued the disputed writus standard Bandwriting According to his opinn . he came to the conclusion that questionedwriting me te . 810 8. C to C and D10 D and the standard we maked S- 1 to S- 1 have hear written by one and the person Tous the opinion of the witness is that the sispuduwening is written by theworkman Shribding cross examined by the counsel for the fre witness has specnically stated that he has very carefully examined the entire writing on Test Form EC- ling yellow coloured paper ) 'The record reveals sock document has been filed before this Trik alergwith the report of the Handwriting Expert . Esperi has faited to file specifie details of docитень ! name of the examinee and other various details necessary to know from which document he has examined the clevant durarents Fe the evidence of the witness , it is clear that he made enlargements of the disputed as well as died handwritings hut the thuas ha noi filed sergative of the photographs positive therent sad the enlargements mai1 is very clear tron: the evidence of the Expert did not examine the ewest important generalsch spacing, Pen position , Speed Seird rangeraents et letters . l.ne quality. The Expert we did not state in his ent (opinion) and the all above factors . The expen witness has failedea what are the individuality in the capital letterers and figures . Without disclosing the same. !! pinson of the Expert witness is not sufficient to be the questioned and dispured handwritings are of .. the sante person or not .

Thus the opinion ofte mess is incomplete and

asepanion . And in this manner. cannot be considered

the expen witness cannot be the evidence of Slit

placed reliance wige the managemet, has not succeeded in provirexamination forens were tilled by Shri D.S.dwriting impersonifying his brother,

19. It has com the affidavit of woman Shri D.S. Jadon the Aussal order mentioning the date of terminati as 18-11-81 . That tาะ Divisional Manage si nade it effective from 27-11-1981 and the tager made it eflective fron! 4-12-1981 while in s. mod him or 29-1-1982 . He deposed that he in service of the bank all 29-1-1982 and his old not be terminated with retrospective effec wirl woend alone, the order of MSS 301,324

5941

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

[भाग 11- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

dismissal is illegal and void. Against it, the learned counsel for the management submitted that the workman was served with the dismissal order on 29-1-1982 . Naturally his services came to an end by termination on 29-1-1982when the order was served on him. Regarding order dated 18-11- 87,27-11-1981 and-4-12-1981 , he submitted that it were the proceedings adopted by the management in terminating hisservices and the final order of termination was served on him on 29-1-1982 . Therefore it cannot be said that his serviceswere terminated with retrospective effect . I have gone through memo dated 18-11-1981 signed by the DisciplinaryAuthority, memo dated 27-11-1981 signed by the ChiefManager etc. on record which clearly reveals as to how the proceedings of terminating the services of the workman were reduced into writing and finally the termination order was served on the workman on 29-1- 1982 till then , he was in service ofthe Bank. Therefore it cannot be held that the termination order was passed with retrospective effect.

20. Ithas notbeen averred in the statement of claim filed by the workman that after his termination from services, he has never been gainfully employed . There is a Photostat copy of a certificate issued by the Major S.C. Khanna (Retd.) Principal, Rabbali School , Susera Kothi, Gwalior This certificate is dated 12-9-1990 . It indicates that workman Shri Dragendra Singh Jadon has been working in the said school since 1984 and was placed in the grade of Rs . 740-10-960 and at that time his total emoluments were Rs . 1230/-. In view of the above , I find myselfunable to hold that the workman shall be entitled to backwages.

21. In view of my findings recorded above, the reference is decided in favour ofthe workman and against the management with costs holding that the action of the management ofCentral Bank of India. , Gwalior in dismissing from service Shri D.S. Jadon, Agricultural Assistant w.e.f. 29-1-1982 is notjustified. Consequently he is entitled to be reinstated.

22. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Govemment of India , Ministry of Labour & Employment asper rules.

C. M. SINGH, PresidingOfficer नई दिल्ली, 29 सितम्बर , 2008

का.आ. 2956.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एस.सी.सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विषाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार 3944GI/08-11

औद्योगिक अधिकरण , श्रम न्यायालय , हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 27/2004) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं एल -22012/ 118/2003-आईआर ( सीएम- IL ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , देस्क अधिकारी New Delhi, the 29th September,2008 S.O. 2956. In pursuance of Section 17 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 27/2004) of the Central Government Industrial TribunalLabour Court, Hyderabad, as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd. and their workman, receivedby the Central Government on 29-9-2008 .

[No. L-22012/118/2003- IR(CM- II )] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

PRESENT: Shri Ved Prakash Gaur, PresidingOfficer Dated the 10thday ofSeptember , 2008 Industrial Dispute No. 27/2004

BETWEEN

TheBranch Secretary, (Sri N. Kistaiah)

Singareni Collieries Workers

Petitioner Union (AITUC), Mandamarri- 504231

AND

The General Manager,

M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Mandamarti Division ,

Mandamarri -504231

..... Respondent

APPEARANCES

For the Petitioner : M/s . A. Sarojana and K. Vasudeva Reddy, Advocates

Forthe Respondent : Sri P.A.V.V.S. Sarma, Advocate

AWARD

Thisis a reference made by the Government of India,. Ministry of Labour and Employment by its order No. L-22012/ 118/2003 - IR(CM - II) dated 23-4-2004 in exercise ofpowers conferred by clause (d ) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub -section (2A ) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with the following schedule:

5942

THE GAZETI : OF POACHER 25.2008 /KARTIKA 3 , 19

SCHEDULE

Esther the action of General Ma M.Sareni Collieries Conerљуд landmurri in denying to iccity the dove of ininal appointment as 25-7-8 idol 13-14 respect of Sh . Gaing Palmat Saamling, Mazdoor , KR - 1 . CSP Meani Dn taking into consider his ser ive at singarent Colliery Schorscal and sofied ? If not , to what entified "

2. The count has filed clam state th Singareni Colhere: High School , Kalyankara: Aghad allegations that he was mittatly appointed as Assistant on this , 1980 and was posted district and heard the service as kere

Kalyanikhan

3. He het avets the Managem

Collicries Comited has established war 1.

to cater the netike children las emplo

: the teaching and ang stolt of thes being appojastanagement одлеч Company inder the teaching and teaching starschoals are the empleot 4 Collienes Cited fle hastatudtren 12-7-1980.

4. He tated immage

Collieries Coopery Lipated has issued chargi 2-6-1989 applications from the capi

already in Sili up the sang Mazdoors. Ampa Prakashon was feeding qualifications tons stipulated fo

Sampling Marve , he has applied for the sare Wer written and wald Prakasham was dechred to the post of scaping, Mazdoor vide olie

15-3-1990 and law appointed as Samping Mark being refiend post of Record Art reported 10 nel faalny Control dad Kothagudenti plecam on 13-4-1990 Since has been workim Sampling Mazdoor.

5. It has mother been stated thatat the ne was appointcu . Sampling Mazdoor be has

10 years of we as Recond Assistant in Stor Collieries Corpur Entet, his appовнэнени тери Sampling Memes not a fresh appeared appointment by treatlar date 2-6-148takor je .

it clear that the of Sampling Mazdoor wassour be filled in als die enployees alreadyin erva said circular de titulate any conditor theirs selected for the posto sampling Mazdoor wacki forego , theergevice. As such, smok applicant has do wish da Sumping Mazdach .

[PART 11- SEC. 3 ( ii) ) stated that had the rendent stipulated this condition . no workman would has applied for the post of Sampling Mazdoor by foregoing previous services .

6. It is further beer alleged by Petitioner that in the service record of the applicant, his date of appointment was mentioned as 25-7080 and his appointment to the post ofSampling Mazda hy transfer. This service register was verified in 1995 by the Authorities ofSingarens Collieries Company Limited and body could find fault with the entries made therein .

7. It is father been slieged that to the utter shock and disappointment daming the year 2001 the applicant workman came to knowinal caries made in service register were modified by the amics suo - moto showing his date of appointment as 13th Apr , 1990. That is the date of bis appointment as Samplarie Mazdoor Thereby modity ing lais date of initial appointmerr before making such an alteration in the service register. Opportunity was given to the workman neither a nice was given to him nor any explanation was sough har . As a result of the above alteration of his date of nicot , the workinen wcould lose 10 years of ser dered from 25-7-1980 চক 13-4-1990. After the widge of change in his date of appointinent , workman can submitted representation to collieries authorities is imtial date of appointnient 325-7-1980 but nol . Hereafter he made several oral requests . His init date of appointment was 101 entered . Then , he appie, ched the Singarem Collieries Worker's Linion. to whis is a member and requested to take up the issue for all settlement.

8. On the request representation 3-6-2002 conciliation proceedings present reference. workman , union submitted the Conciliation Officer , the der in failure which resulted in 9. It has been fan aleged that the employees of Singareni Collieries Company Limited are governed by separate standing order are not applicable to the employres of the schou sen then the services rendered by the workman as Red Assistant in the Singarem Collieries High School be treated to be service of any ather employer .Bra service of the company which has to be reckoned. Theary view that the services of the Record Assistant be reated as service et the company and such serviced not be reckoned is illegal .

arbitrary and unmenable .

10. The employees, the school and employees of the Singareni Colheries many limited are governed by ihe management of the singareni Collieries Company tatuted only . The applic: at workinan was appointed by the Singareni Collieries Cerpany Limited . Therefore. he cannot be deprived of as precious service rendered as Record Assistant subsecut his joining to the post of [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

11. He has further mentioned that various circulars issued by the management ofSingareni Collieries Company Limited amply makes it clear that the service conditions such as scales of pay, leave and other allowances of the employees of Singareni Collieries High School are made applicable on par with the employees of the State Government . As a result ofthe modification , at the date of theappointment ofthe workman, as 30-4-1990 he would be less than 10 years of service for the purpose of reckoning Provident Fund, Gratuity and other service benefits . As a matter of fact as a Record Assistant and also Sampling Mazdoor, Provident Fund is deducted on the same number evenas on today. Therefore , at any stretch of imagination the workman cannot be deprived of the service rendered by him as Record Assistant and his date of initial appointment cannot be treated as 13th April , 1990 instead of25thJuly,1990.

12. He further alleges that book verification committee has nojurisdiction to alter the date of appointment of the workman from 25-7-80 to 13-4-90. It is further submitted that several other employees , earlier worked in the schools established by the Singareni Collieries Company Limited were subsequently appointed in various posts in the company .Allthose employees were paid terminal benefits treating their initial appointment in the school and treating their services as continuous subsequent their joining in the company by way of appointment by transfer . Though the applicant is similarly situated like that of other workmen he is not being given similar treatment , thereby depriving him of 10 years of service rendered by him in Singareni Collieries High School . He has further stated that as a matter offact the workman has requested the Respondent to cancel his appointment as Sampling Mazdoor and post him back as Record Assistant but his request was rejected by the Respondent vide proceedings dated 26/29-6-1990. Having rejected his request, it is not open to the Respondents to deprive the applicant of 10 years of service as Record Assistant. Thus, he has requested that the action of the Respondent treating the date of initial appointment of the workman as 13-4-1990 instead of25-7-1980 , be declared as illegal and arbitrary and Singareni Collieries Company Limited be directed to treat the date of initial appointment ofworkman as 25-7-1980 and any other direction this Court maydooms fit .

13. The Singareni Collieries Company Limited has filed counter and has alleged that Respondent management as a part of welfare measure decided to run educational institutions under the Singareni Collieries Educational Societyby following A.P. Educational Act and rules thereby for the benefit of children of its employees working in various coal fields . The pay scales, service conditions , fringe benefits , etc. of teaching and non -teaching staff working in the High School are regulated by the A.P. Educational Act and Rules thereon and as per orders issued bythe Government ofA.P. from time to time.

$943

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008 /कार्तिक 3 , 1930

14. They have further submitted that Singareni Collieries Company Limited is an industry under Sec.2 (j ) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 engaged in extraction and winning of coal in the four districts ofKhammam, Adilabad, Karimnagar and Warangal in the State of Andhra Pradesh . Theemployees engaged in mining operations are governed by the Coal Mines Regulations , Mines Act, Mines Rules, Standing Orders etc .. Their pay scales and service conditions are as per the National Coal wage Agreement arrived at between the managements of coal industry and the National Trade Unions . Whereas the pay scales and service conditions of the employees of the Singareni Collieries High Schools run by the Singareni Collieries Educational Society and the Singareni Collieries Company Limited are different and distinct in nature . They are regulated by a separate set of Acts , Rules , Regulation , Agreements and standing orders etc..

15. The Respondent has submitted that workman G. Prakashanı was appointed as Record Assistant in the non-teaching cadre of S.C. High School , Mandamarri on 25-7-1980. His pay scales and service conditions are regulatedby A.P. Educational Act and Rules and not as per the service conditions applicable to the employees of Singareni Collieries Company Limited . They have categorically stated that in the initial appointment order dated 12-7-1980 it has been mentioned that , "The service conditions in respect of confirmation , grant of annual increment, leave, sick leave , travelling allowance and dearness allowance etc., are all governed by the rules and regulations from time to time by Government of Andhra Pradesh for the Record Assistants of recognized High Schools or as stipulated by the Singareni Collieries Company Limited ." The contention of the Petitioner that he was employee of the Singareni Collieries High School are the employees of the Singareni Collieries Company Limited is not correct .

16. The management has submitted that while working as Record Assistant in Singareni Collieries High School , the workman G. Prakasham under the fold of Singareni Collieries Educational Society applied for the post of Sampling Mazdoor, Cat . I ( unskilled) in the Singareni Collieries Company Limited in response to the circular dated 2-6-89 issued by the General Manager (Personnel ) calling applications from the eligible workmen and in the process ofthe selection he came out successfully . He was appointed as Sampling Mazdoor vide office order dated 15-3-1990 in the services of the Singareni Collieries Company Limited and put on probation for a period of3 months from the date of his reporting for the duty. He reported for duty on 13-4-1990 to the Chief(Quality Control) i.e. , the date on which he entered into the service of the company.

17. Thus , appointment to the post ofskilled mazdoor in the Singareni Collieries Company Limited, which was not appointmentby way of transfer as alleged by the Petitioner union . The Peritioner has not opted to work as 5944

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 25, 2008 /KARTIKA 3 , 1930

PART 11 SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]

the workman will lose the benefit of Provident Fund, Gratuity and other service binefits by denying the earlier dare of appointment as the due of his entry to the service of the company. They have requested this court to reject the claim being devoid of ineits

Sampling Mazdoor in the Singareni Collieries Company Limited, but in response to the circular issued by the General Manager ( Personnel ) , the Petitioner workman applied fur the post he was called for test and interview and so finally selected for the post of Sampling Mazdoor .As such hi date of appointment in Singareni Collieries Compa Limited is 13-4-1990 as Sampling Mazdoor .

18.It is further been stated that the allegations ot the workman that management has not stipulated any condition as to forego previous service put in by him in the school in the circular dated 2-6-1989 while calling applications from the eligible candidates for the post of Sampling Mazdoor As such his appointment is by rtan -fer and to treat his appointment as 25-7-1980 is tot teneble because his services under A.P. Educational Act . Rulu.. in theHigh School of the company has nothing to do wa bis appointment of 12-4-1990 as Sampling Mazdoor in La company .

19. The company has alleged that Petitioner's selection to the post of Sampling Mazdoor and his reporting for duty on 13-4-1990 is the date of his appointment in the service and the same has been entered in his service record which is correct Earher erroneously his date of emry w recorded as 25-7-1980 which has been corrected . The allegation of the Petitioner workman that in the year 1965 his service record was inspected and no fault was fouzul has no bearing became a wrong entry can be corrected u any time . Since the appointment of the Petitioner is not by wayof transfer but his appointment as Sampling Mardous was afresh appointment , reported for duty as a Samplin Mazdoor on 13-4-1990 in Singareni Collieries Company Limited , his date of appointment was correctly entered as 13-4-1990 . They have rebuned the allegations of the Petitioner that the date of his appointment has been su motto modified by the company without giving on opportunity to the Pediones and Petitiorier has heen put to strict proof thereof . They have further demed the averments of the Petitioner that as a result of the alteratis of his date of appointment he has lost 10 years of the service rendered trom 2-7-1980 to 1.3-4-1990 and they hav denied it . They have ünther stated that the representaiia made by the workman was devoid on merit and as sucit his request was not allowed by the management .

21. The Petitioners his lifed the list of documents and the Petitioner has examined hunself as WWI whereas the Respondent's side has filed their documents and has examined Sri Y. Kanaka Swang as Respondent management witness No. 1. The Xerox copies of the following documents were marked by the Petitioner: EX.WF is the Office order appointing the Petitioner as record assistant dated 12-7-80 . Ex. W2 is the officer der dated 1-8-80 . Ex. W3 is the circular regarding vacancies : Sampling Mazdoors dated 2-6-89. Ex: W4 is the office wrist appriming the Petitioner as Sampling Mazdoor dated 15.3-90 FX.WS is the proceedings posting the Petitioner at KK dated 20-3-90 EX .W6 is the relieving order dated 12-4-00 1X W7 is the posting orders as Sampling Mazdoor dated 14-1-1990. Ex . W8 is the proceedings dated 26/29-6-91W is the representation 10 reckon the service of WWI Jnted 23-6-2001 . EX.WED s the proceedingsdated 4-5-2002 Ex. W11 is the representation dated3-6-2002. The Xerox copies of the following documents were markedby the Respondeni EX.MI is the Office order appointing the Petitioner as record assistant dated 12-7-80. EX.M2 is the Office order appointing the Petitioner as SamplingMazoor dated 15-306 . EX.M3 is the proceedings posting the Petitioner at KK- Jated 20-3-90 EX M4 is the service conditions of staff on SC High Seltool dated 8-6-78 . FX.MS is the circular regarding vacancies of Sampling Mazdoors dated 2-6-89 . Ex AM6 is the representation to reckon the service of WWI dat 23-6-2001 . EX . M7 is the grievance procedure dated 2002. 1 : X. MMX is the letter No. EEMMR/ KK - ICSP/1902 123 N. M9 is the proceedings dated 4-5-2002. EX.M10 isthe conciliation proceedings dated 10-4-2003.EX.MII is the view the amarragement . EX.M12 is the letterNo.CRP/ PER/PM 0-1 605 dated 25-4-2002. IX M13 is the service record of 44 ! EX ME4 is the service particulars of WWI . EX.MS1 , the service book ofW'W'las RecordAssistant in S.C. High School . EX.MUb is the posting orders as Sampling Mazdoor 1-1-1-1990 . EX.M17 is the identity and Service card of Sre Kallepalli Krishna Swanpy dated 16-10-1986 . EX.M18 is the Identity and Service card of Sri Gogula Rajesham . date !! 5-10-1996 . LX M19 is the Jaliormation pertains to Sampla Mazdoory dated 27-6-2005. EX.X120 is the Extract ofMendun of Societies. Singaren Collieries Education Society Vindobjects EX.M21 is the Singareni Collieries 2nation Society- Rules and regulations of the society.

22.1 have beard counse! For bonds the parties artıd have gone through the file . Ti Comt has to consider the tacts in the reference .

20. Маnаgеmеt has alleged that in the sersice buck of the Petitioner his date of appointment in the coenран has been mentioned as the date on which he has joined a: Sampling Mazdoor in the company . The enny is legali tenable. As against this, contention of the Petitioner m the entry is illegal , suburary and untenable is not соатест The Petitioner was sworking under the A.P. Educatiere ! Act and Rules , as such the service rendered under it Education Act can not be reckoned for the services of t company, as the service of the school was not service t the company. Further , the company has challengesi thar

23. The Petitioner workman has filed documents . EX.W'T is the copy of office order dated 12-7-80 , letter of 5945 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 25, 2008 /कार्तिक 3 , 1930

appointment in favour ofPetitioner workman to the post of Record Assistant by the Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Mandamarri , under the signature of A.G.M. , Mandamarri and Ramakrishnapur Area. Wherein in para 6 ofthis appointment order it has been mentioned that the services are liable to be transferred to any of the educational institutions managed by the company in any of the coal fields . In para 10 of this appointment letter it has been mentioned "that residential accommodation will be provided as and when available on rental basis as decided by the company from time to time. " In para 11 of this appointment letter it has been mentioned " that free medical aid is allowed in company's hospital as per rules. " In para 12 of the appointment letter it has been mentioned that " if the candidate desires to leave the services he has to give one month notice to the management. " On the basis of this sppointment letter the contention of the Learned counsel for the workman is that the conditions laid down in para 6,10 and 11 of the appointment letter dated 12-7-80 amply proves that the workman G. Prakashan was appointed as an employee of the company in the S.C. High School by the management of the company. Because this appointment letter has been signed by Add General Manager . Mandamarri in Ramakrishnapuram area of the Singareni Collieries Company Limited.

Company Limited is also stipulated to frame rules. Had it not been so. Then in para 5 of the appointment letter it would not have been written that the service condition etc. be regulated and governed by Andhra Pradesh Government's rules or as stipulated by the Singareni Collieries Company Limited. Secondly, in the appointment letter itselfthe management has written that the services of the employee are liable to be transferred by the management company from one educational institution to another educational institution , in any other coal field. This also proves that the employer was coal company. Further in para 10 of this appointment letter , the company has undertaken to allot a residential accommodation on rental basis as decided by the company from time to time . Apart from that, free medical aid was also allowed to thisworkman in company's hospitał as per rules. Had the workman not been an employee of the company, the company would not have opted to allot residential accommodation to the workman or allowed him free medical aid in company's hospital . Thus , the contention of the Learned Counsel for the workman that the workman was initially appointed on the post of record assistant by the Singareni Collieries Company Limited is correct and to my mind this contention is liable to be accepted . Apart from the appointment letter there was more strong fact which goes to prove that the workman G. Prakasham was initially appointed by Singareni Collieries Company Limited as its workman because in para 15 ofthe claim statement the workman has mentioned that in so far as " medical aid , provident fund, gratuity etc. are being extended to the employees of the Singareni Collieries Schools on par with the workmen of the Singareni Collieries Company Limited" , This contention of para 15 of claim statement has not been denied by the company management in its counter statement . Thus a statement which has not been denied nor challenged by way of reply is supposed to be correct and has to be accepted. Since the above contention raised in the claim statement has not been denied by the company management in their counter statement nor denied in their oral submissions or statement , this averment made in para 15 of the claim statement is to be accepted by this court and in that case , workman G. Prakasham was kept at par with the workmen of the Singareni Collieries Company Limited in the matter of medical aid, Provident Fund and Gratuity etc. , while working in the S.C. High School , it is clearly meant that the company treated the workman the time of initial appointment to the postof record assistant at par with other workmen of the company appear to be correct. Thus , the contention ofthe Learned Counsel for the workman that the workman G. Prakasham was the workman of the Singareni Collieries Company Limited is correct. The third contention in support ofthe claim that workman G. Prakasham was a workman of the company finds support from the document Ex. W3 that a circular dated 2-6-89 of the Kothagudem Colliery to effect inviting applications from the employees of the company 24. The learned Counsel for the Respondent relied on condition five ofthis appointment letter wherein it has been mentioned that the service condition in respect of "confirmation grant ofannual increment, leave , sick leave, T.A. D.A. , are governed by the rules and regulations framed from time to time by Government of Andhra Pradesh for Record Assistant of recognized high Schools or as stipulated by the Singareni Collieries Company Limited. " This Court has to consider a very relevant and material question, whether the initial appointment of the Petitioner workman was under collieries or it was under the A.P. Educational Department . This material question can be decided by the appointment letter issued to the workman G. Prakasham at his initial appointment to the post of Record Assistant in S.C. High School , Mandarmarri . The letterhas been issued by the Add. General Manager of Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Mandamarri in R.K. Puram Area.Had theworkman not been employee of the company, the appointment letter would not have been issued by the Singareni Collieries Company Limited and that tooby it's "Addl . General Manager of Manadamarri, R.K. Puram Area." Thus the first test to ascertain the employer of the workman stand in favour of the workman that the appointment letter was issued by Singareni Collieries Company Limited. No doubt, the service condition was in respect ofthe confirmation grant ofannual increment, leave and sick leave and T.A. and D.A. to be governed by the rules and regulations framed by the Government ofAndhra Pradesh from time to time but it is further been stipulated in this appointment letter that the Singareni Collieries 5946

GAZETIN

for the app the post of Sal wherein it haberentioned that

vacancies of Gas ! Mardeur po

is proposed ro

employees alre. ::

... of this crul is given. On b

G.Prakasthariotipes

This fact is

accepted UK ,

postof Samp

selected 16 .

stipulated thr :

from among

thereby that

candidates wody m the ske

working under dis Since G. Prits

administratieigh School, heako arr...

post of samps der appeared to the te

office order dated finally selected

EX.W4 he was appoisatment ,

has been mentioned B appointment kit

and conduct are 1 .

work, attend

unsatisfactory in the probationary period to be revertedbstantive post.n goes to show

the workman G. ras already in the::

the company d control of the

nerve , the comitare..

that if his wist to the pos ייןי Mazdoor are no

be salistache 1 :

to be reverted

the post . ilad ine in control of

have written ihr dider that oti the st Mazdoor it the

workman wou أ

reverted to the stit ...

satisfactory

EX.W5 is post

which is div EX .W6 1s relevo S. High School, Ka dated 12-4-19workinar Frata..

relieved of his school we

and was religi

Control and

post of record

administrativeme would not haseng order in th or the record port R Control and Ciron

to show that th

gh School is ta

Singareni Colli ... smpany i imaodat rendered in S.C.any prowa of the Singareni

Campany Limited been corrobolkman

way ofan attid -12-2004

fac as medica 12, he has state

Fund. Gratuity

S.C. High Schican

with wurizmeni :

Collieries Conipod This Didicitaifa

S 25.2008 ΚΑΚΤΙΚΑ

Dy. Personal Mana ...

efidavit . In his was examination , Mr. Y

::

fact that as per Ex.w.

to has stated that it is a Flong of the vacancies o !

Sampling Mazdoorare:

service, there is now on Ex . W3 that a selected candidate has to liers :

statement trade in t

Mr Kanaka Swamy p

the workman that at ti ...

tilling of the post of Si

prescribed or laid dow:

the post of Sampling Vi .

previous years of serv..

:

concerned workman ... Kanaka Suny las and was directed to repe:

M16 He has admittedtitioner was appointed as Sampling Mazdoor by

:"

anthority of the committee, nilthe conimntee has made effect in eve of law anderation cau be made on the basis of recommendation : ..

caployees who are already condition at the time of cit previous service. The examination of the witness show that the contention aving appliention for Mazdoor, no condition was workonan is selected fos he will have to lovego his Men there is no such appbeatons Then, 151113 mind , the employer came the service conditione sto - moto without givuortuning of hearmy 13 the Curther admitted that nat Petitioner was relieved Sampling Mazddoras per Ex appointment by " transler " sentention of the l'etition Sampling Mazdoor was- Waen the sewices of the on selection. This pros that his appointments , made by transfer of lis Petitioner were transfereme soncem of the cотркну 10 other concern o Rapang as per serstee Jurisprudence the servirrendered by the workenan casinot be foregone as in her done in this case . The Respondent's witnessed that identity and service record are opened aftestection and appomtrem Sampling Mazdoor s A.MP3 . He is accepted that while preparing FA The date of appointment was 25-7-1980 which was rodhandwring as 13-4-191 hus alteration was d which was attested Mr. Elasan Abbas . Dy. Geger (Personal) , but this witness has shown gabeat the fact whether notice was given to the ... ran betone making alteration or not. He has stated tiltation was made on the amade by verification een producedby Responderi 10mut coltatitution of th 4.Thus , the Learned 42med that in absenes ot basis of the recomms cominuttee. But no recurd iranagement before this committee and powers of Counsel for the applicat written order or regng the formation ot the the General Manager. coromittee.commutec.c ... by oral order . has go: .. agreement of the conten:: . the Petitioner that since 1 . dsametits and I am in the li ! cumed Counsel lis Respetusdeon has not produce! any written order of the Munger or the power an any recommendation . simendation has 2010 such committee There is written order or rule

y management to show absence of committee's the power of committee

power to make recomm... for change in the mitgl [भाग II-खण्ड 3(ii) ]

5947 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

made by committee has no bearing and no change could have been made.

25. Thus, from the above discussion , I have come to the conclusion that the workmanG. Prakasham was initially appointed as employee of the company's High School as recordassistant and while working in that company's High School on the basis of the circular dated 2-6-89 he has applied for the post of Sampling Mazdoor, appeared for the test and was finally selected by the management for appointment to the post of Sampling Mazdoor and he was appointed to the post on 15-4-1990 . Thus he remained the employee of the company from the date of his initial appointment to the post of record assistant , till the date that i.e. , 15-4-1990 when he was appointed to the post of Sampling Mazdoor under administrative control of the Singareni Collieries Company Limited and he remain the company's employee during all this period. No doubt, he was appointed to the post of Sampling Mazdoor by way of fresh selection. Thus his date of appointment to the post of Sampling Mazdoor will be 15-4-1990 and for the purpose of seniority to the post of Sampling Mazdoor his date of appointment shall be 15-4-1990 but for the purpose of counting his entire length of service , the initial date of appointment is 12-7-1980 as entered in Ex.M13 . The management has changed the initial date of appointment from 12-7-1980 to 15-4-1990 without giving any opportunity ofhearing to the Petitioner workman and thus the action of the management while changing the date of initial appointment of the Petitioner for the purpose of payment ofProvident Fund, Gratuity and retrial benefits shall be 12-7-1980. The Petitioner shall not be entitled to claim seniority in the post of Sampling Mazdoor from the date of initial appointmenti.e. , 12-7-1980.

because the facts of this case are entirely different from that of the case of Yogendra Prasad Mandal, because in this case Workman G. Prakasham was appointed by the Singareni Collieries Company Limited in its own High School though the service conditions were governed by theA.P. Educational Rules but the workman was under the direct administrative control of the management of Singareni Collieries Company Limited. For which the test has been mentioned in the foregoing paragraphs of this judgment being in the services of the company, the workman of this case applied for the post of Sampling Mazdoor as was stipulated in the advertisement for the filling of the post. The workman applied for the post, he appeared for the test and got selected and then he was relieved by the company's school for the purpose ofjoining to the post of Sampling Mazdoor. Thus the case of present workınan is entirelydifferent from the case of Yogendra Prasad Mandal . Secondly, in this case the workman has not claimed seniority from 1980. He has simply claimed that his previous service rendered in the school be counted for payment of provident fund, gratuity and other retrial benefits from the date ofhis first entry in the company's services i.e. , from 25-7-1980. Thus the case law cited by the Respondent's counsel is not applicable in this case. The Respondent's counsel had not challenged the Petitioner's contention that Petitioner was governed by the company's rules of Provident Fund , Gratuity and medical aid and he claims only that relief from the company by way of his initial entry to the post of record assistant in company's services and this should have been done as the Petitioner was appointed in the company's services in the company's High School . So his date of initial appointment cannot be changed because at the time of calling for applications for appointment for the post of Sampling Mazdoor no condition was laid down that if a workman is selected to the post of Sampling Mazdoor he will have to forego his previous years of service . In absence of such a condition , the management cannot forego the previous years of services of the workman and that too without giving any opportunity to workman. The management cannot change the initial date of appointment.

26. The Learned Counsel for the Respondent has argued that the appointment in the High School was not appointment in the company because the company is engaged in work of mining , erection and winning of coal and its employees are governed by the Coal Mines Regulations , Mines Act and Mine Rules and Standing Orders and pay scales are governed by National Coal Wage Agreement whereas that of Petitioner's initial post of the record assistant are governed by A.P. Educational Act . Thus these are two different departments and service rendered in the department of education cannot be reckoned in the coal Mines Services. He has relied upon the case law of Hon'ble Supreme Court reiterated in AIR 1998 SC 2590 between Yogendra Prasad Mandal and State ofBihar and others . I have gone through the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court which was for the purpose of the seniority of Yogendra Prasad Mandal who was a retrenched employee of Bihar State, Forest Development Corporation and he was taken into services of Bihar State Forest Department after being declared surplus in the ForestDevelopment Corporation . This case law of Hon'ble Supreme Court is not applicable in the present matter

27. Thus, to the mind of this court , the action of the management is wholly illegal and unconstitutional and untenable . The management is directed to change the date ofappointment ofthe workman to 25-7-1980 as was earlier written in his service book . However , the Petitioner shall not be entitled to claim seniority in the post of Sampling Mazdoor on the basis ofhis earlier services rendered in the company's school . Thus , this court has come to the conclusion that, Mis . Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Mandamarri is notjustified in denying to rectify the date of initial appointment as 25-7-1980 instead of 13-4-1990. The action of the company is illegal , untenable and unconstitutional . The company is directed to rectify the mistake and enter the date of appointment as 25-7-1980.

5948

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25, 2008/ KARTIKA 3 , 1930

[PART 11-SEC. 3( ii) ] Award passed accordingly. Transmit.

ExM9: Copy of proceedings dated 4-5-2002

Ex.M 10: Copy of Conciliation proceedings dated 10-4-20K13

Dictatedto Smt . P. Phani Gowri, Personal Assistant transcribed by her and corrected by me on this the 10thday ofSeptember , 2008.

ExM11 : Copy of views of the management VED PRAKASH GAUR, Presichng Officer

Ex.M12: Copy of Ir . No. CRP / PER/PM/ 04/ 663 dated 25-4-2002

Appendix ofevidence

Ex.M13 : Copyof service record ofWW1 Witnesses examined for the Petitioner:

Witnesses examined for the Respondent:

Ex.M14: Copy of service particulars ofWW1 MWI: Sri Y. Kanaka Swamy

WWI: Sri Gampa Prakasham

Ex.M15: Copy of service book of WW1 as Record Assistant in SC High School Documents marked for the Petitioner

Ex.W1 :

Ex.M16: Copy ofposting orders as Sampling Mazdoor dated 14-4-1990

Copy of 0.0 . appointing the Petitioner as record assistant dated 12-7-80

Ex.W 2: Copy ofoffice order dated 1-8-80

Ex.M 17 : Copy of Identity and Service card of Sri Kallepalli Krishna Swamy dated 16-10-1986 Ex.W3 : Copy of circular reg. vacancies of Sampling Mazdoors dated 2-6-89

Ex.M18: Copy of Identity and Service card of Sri Gogula Rajesham , dated 15-10-1996 Ex.W4: Copy ofoffice order appointing the Petitioner as Sampling Mazdoor dated 15-3-90

Ex,M 19: Information pertains to Sampling Mazdoors Ir . No.RG4/ MGR.OCI /G 004/2097 dated 27-6-2005

Ex.W 5: Copy of proceedings posting the Petitioner at KK- 1 dated20-3-90

Ex.W6: Copyofrelieving orde90

Ex.M20: Extract of Memorandum of Societies . Singareni Collieries Education Society- Aims and objects

Ex.W7:

Ex.M21:

Copy of posting orders as Sampling Mazdoor dated 14-4-1990

Copy of Singareni Collieries Education Society Rules and Regulations of the Society.

Ex.W 8: Copy ofproceedings dated 26 /29-6-91 )

नई दिल्ली , 29 सितम्बर , 2008 Ex.W9: Copy of representation to reckon the service ofWW | dated 23-6-2001

Ex.W 10: Copy ofproceedings dated 4-5-2012

۶۹

ExW 1 : Copy of representation dared 3-6-2002

Documents marked for the Respondent

Ex.M1 ; Copy of O.O. appointing the Pentioneras record assistant dated 12-7-80

हुआ था । का.आ. 2957 , औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) को धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एस.सी.सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में कंन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक/अधिकरण , हैद्राबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 19/2(107 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-9-2008 को प्राप्त ExM2:

[सं. एल-22012/27/2006 - आईआर( सीएफ-11 ) ] Copy of 0.0. appointing the Pettioner as SamplingMazdoor dated 15-3-00

अजय कुमार गौड़, डेस्क अधिकारी Ex.M3: Copy ofproceedings posting the Petitioner atKK - I dared 20-3-90

New Delhi , the 24th September, 2008 Ex.M4: Copy of service conditions of staff in SC High School dated 8-6-78

Ex.MS: Copyofcircular reg . vacancies of Sampling Mazdoors dated 2-6-89

Ex.M6: Copy ofrepresentation to reckon the service ofWW1 dated 23-6-2001

S.O. 2957. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 19/2004 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - labour Court, Hyderabad, as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s. Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd. and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 29-9-2008.

Ex.M7 : Copy of grievance procedure dated 27-3-2002

Ex.M8:

[No. L -22012/27/2006 -IR( CM- II ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR , Desk Officer Copy of Ir No. EEJMMR KK- ICSP / 19:02/473 5949 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

ANNEXURE

Dictated to Smt . P. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her , corrected and pronounced byme on this the 4th day of September,2008.

VED PRAKASH GAUR, PresidingOfficer BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

Appendix ofevidence PRESENT: SHRI VED PRAKASH GAUR, Presiding Officer

Dated the 4th day of September , 2008

Witnesses examined Witnesses examined for the for the Petitioner Nil Respondent Ni

IndustrialDispute No. I. D. 19/2007

BETWEEN

TheGeneral Secretary,

Documents marked for thePetitioner Nil Documents marked for the Respondent Nil

नई दिल्ली , 29 सितम्बर , 2008

Petitioner

(SriN.Kistaiah) Singareni Collieries Workers Union (AITUC) Mandamarri -504231

AND

TheGeneral Manager,

M/s. Singareni Colleries Company Limited, MandamarriDivision, Mandamani -504231

Respondent

APPEARANCES

का.आ. 2958,-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एस.सी.सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 20/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-9-2008 : को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

ForthePetitioner : NIL

For the Respondent : Sri Anjaneyulu , Law Assistant

[सं. एल -22012/43/2006- आईआर ( सी एम- II ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़, डेस्क अधिकारी

NewDelhi, the 29th September , 2008 AWARD

TheGovernment of India, Ministry of Labour by its order No. L- 22012/27/2006- IR (CM- II ) dated 22-2-2007 referredthe following dispute between the management of Singareni Collieries Company Limited and their workmen , under Section 10( 1 )( d ) of the ID Act, 1947 for adjudication to this Tribunal The reference is:-

SCHEDULE

S.O. 2958. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 20/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Labour Court , Hyderabad, as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s. Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd and their workmen , řecelvedbythe Central Government on 29-9-2008.

[No. L- 22012/43/2006 -IR (CM- II) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

"Whether the action of the management of M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Limited , Mandamarti Division , Mandamarri in not granting additional SPRA (Special Piece Rate Allowance ) w.e.f. 17-9-89 Sri Makara Gattaiah is legal and justified? If not, to what relief is the workmanentitled? "

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

PRESENT: SHRI VED PRAKASH GAUR, Presiding Officer

Dated the 4th day ofSeptember , 2008

Industrial Dispute No. 20/2007 BETWEEN

TheGeneral Secretary,

2. The case is called out several times after repreated intervals . None appeared for Petitioner Respondent's representative present . Petitioner has not submitted his claim statement although several opportunities has been given to him . The case is pending since March, 2007. He is absent today also .No application for adjournment has been filed. As such , it appears that the Petitioner is not interested to pursue this case.

Petitioner

Singareni Collieries Employees Union Kothagudem Branch , CITU Office, Ramatalkies Road, Kothagudem- 507101

3. Accordingly, this case is being closed and this Court is of view that the Petitioner deserves no relief in respect ofthe matter in reference . Hence, ' Nil' Award is passed.

3944G1/08-12 5950

THE GAZETTE TOOBER 25 , 2008 KARTIKA

..

ANU

TheGeneral Manager,

M/ s Singareni Collieries Company Limit

Kothagudern area ,

Kothagudem P.O.

Re..ient

APPEARANCES

For the Petitioner NIL

For the Respondent: Sri Anjarevistant

AWARD

the following dispute between the managennaгені The Government of India , Mintsteyen by its order No. 1. -22012-43/2006-AR ( C1.II ) dated 2-3 terred Collieries Curapany Limited and their work.nction 1001 ) ( d) of the 1 ) Act , 1947 for adjudicatel The reference re

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action die managen Set Ms Singareni Collieries Company Limited , in venial of promotion as Chargehand ( Mechanicals in 'C' w.e.f. 1-9. 100 % to Sri G. Venkateswarlu. Filler VI , HCP Mine , Kothayuden is legal and jusoties what relief is the workman entitled and from whil dr degery not , 10 2. The case is called out several es after repeated intervals. None appeared for Ptioner. Respondent's representative present . l'estants not submitted his claim statement alitoned , swveral opportunities has been given to him. The can is pendug since March , 2007. He is absent today also . No applicthon for adjournment has been filed. As such ,itsthat the Petitioner is not interested to pursue: rj , ca 3. Accordingly, this case is being else this Court is of view that the Petitioner deserves er in respect of the mattet in reference . Hence , Nil Avedis passed.

Dictatedto Smt . P. Phani Gow usonal Assistant transcribed by her, corrected sud by me on this the 4th day of September , 2003 ,

VED PRAKASH GAUR, Predu , liver

Appendix of evidence

Winesses ex :onined Witnesses oxatmin tie for the Petitioner

Respondent

Nil

Nit

Documents marked for the Pedic

Nit

Documerus marked for the Respondezi

Nil

(PART - Saar. 3rii) ]

सितम्बर , 2008

का.आ. २०

( 1947 का 14) एम.ई.सी.एल. के प्रबंध औद्यागिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 17 के अनुसरण में , कंन्द्रीय सरकार संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबन्ध में निर्दल औद्योगिक विषाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण. अव न्यायालय, जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 124/2002 ) को प्रक् करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-9-2008 को प्रा

[सं. 22: 348/2001 - आईआर ( सीएम-( 1 ) ]

अजय कुमार गौड़, डेस्क अधिकारी New the 29th September . 2008 S.O. 2954 . pursuance of Section 17 the Industrial Dispuие 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby potes the award ( Ref. No. 124: 2002) ofthe Central Goverment industrial Tribunal - cum -t.abour Court , Jabalpur, assim the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between theagement of Johilla Area of SECL and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 29.9.8

0.1.-22013/348 /20101 - IR ( CM - IT ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE.

BEFORE THE CENTRALGOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALCUM- LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR

No.1 LC / R/ 124/2002

Presiding Officer : REC. M. SINGH

The Secretary,

R.C.W.F. , Branch -Nerabad ,

Distt .. Umaria (MIP )

Workınan Union Umaria(MP).

sus

The General Manager.

Johilla Area of SECI..

P.O.: Nowrozabad .

Distt. Urmaria ( MPP )

Management

AWARD

Passed on this End Day ofSeptember ,2008 I. The Government India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No 1-22012 / 348 /2001 - IR ( CM- 11 ) dated 20-8-2002 as referred the following dispute for adjudication this tribunal :-

"Whether the demand of the RCWF from the management of SECI .. Johilla Area that Sh. R.C. Tripathi, Electrician Category V. may be promoted to [ भाग- खण्ड ( ii) ]

Category VI is just, fair and proper? If so to what relief is the workman entitled and from what date?" 2. Vide order dated 27-9-2005 passed on the ordersheet ofthis reference proceeding, the reference proceeded exparte against the workman/Union .

3. The case of the management in brief is as follows . That the workman was initially appointed as General Mazdoor. Subsequently he was promoted toElectrical HelperCat- II . That again he was given promotionto the post ofElectrical Category - lird, IVth and Vth. Whilehewas working as Electrician Category-V, he claimed next promotion .The promotion ofElectrician Cat-Vto Cat -VI is considered in accordance with I.I. No. 30 ofNCWA which provides policy ofpromotion from Electrician Cat -V to Cat-VI . The promotion is given on the recommendation of DPC , availability of sanctioned post and administrative requirement. The case of the work man along with other eligible Departmental candidates was considered by DPC which was held on 1-11-2000. The DPC did not recommend the promotion of the workman. It seems that workman has compared his case with other employees namely Shri P.K. Mazumdar and Shri Md. Salim. That the workman cannot compare his case with Shri Mazumdar and Shri Md . Salim. The DPC conducted the trade test and Shri P.K. Mazumdar and.Shri Md. Salim obtained more marks than Shri Tripathi , hence the committee recommend their names for promotion to the post of Electrician Cat-VI and Shri R.C. Tripathi could not be promoted as there was no vacancy. The terms ofreference are whether thedemand of RCWF from the management of SECL , Johilla Area that Shri R.C. Tripathi , Electrician Cat-V be promoted to Cat - VI. That Shri R.C. Tripathi has been given promotion vide office order dated 10-5-2002 therefore the order ofreference has become infructuous .

4. The management in order to prove their case filed affidavitoftheir witness Shri A. V. Bhingardive then working as Dy . Personnel Manager in Johilla Area.

5. I have heard Shri A.K. Shashi , Advocate for the management and considered the evidence on record.

6. The case ofthe management is fully established and proved from the uncontroverted and unchallenged affidavit of their witness Shri A.V. Bhingardive. Therefore the reference deserves to be decided in favour ofthe management and against the workman/ Union without any orders as to costs.

7. In view of the above, the reference is answered in favour ofthe management and against the workman/ Union without any orders as to costs holding that the demand ofRCWF from the management ofSECL, Johilla Area that Shri R.C. Tripathi Electrician

5951

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25 , 2008 कार्तिक 3 , 1930

CategoryV may be promoted to Category Vi is not just, fair and proper. Consequently the workman is not entitled to any further relief.

8. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour and Employment as per rules.

C. M. SINGH, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 29 सितम्बर , 2008

का.आ. 2960.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एस.ई.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , जबल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 46/1997 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-22012/34/1996-आईआर (सी-II ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 29th September, 2008 $.0 . 2960.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.46/1997) of the Central Government Industrial TribunalLabour Court, Jabalpur , as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in ralation to the management of SECL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 29-9-2008.

[No. L-22012/34/ 1996- IR(C -II ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRALGOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR No. CGIT/LC/R/46/97

PresidingOfficer : SHRI C. M. SINGH

The General Secretary/President,

R.K.K.M.S. , SohagpurArea,

Post Dhanpuri ,

...Workman/ Union Distt. Shahdol (MP) .

Versus

The General Manager, Sohagpur Area of SECL, Post Dhanpuri , Distt. Shahdol (MP )

..........Management 5952

HE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25 , 2008/KARTIKA 3 , 1930

AWARD

Passed on his 28th day of August . 2018 1. The Government of india , Ministry of Laboni calc its Notificacic No. L- 22012 / 34/ 96-1R ( C - 11 ) 24-2-97ferred the following dispute adjudication by tribunal

"Whether

of the Sub Arca Manage Chachai , Gr : Mines of Sohagpure Area el SECT in revertinggi Pujapati Hom the post of C Grade - il .

Grade - III and in transfe him from Seirea to Hasdeo Aredo SFUL legal and

not to what rele workman cak

2. The case

Shri Esikai Prajapa brief is as to Tha Sara Bikai Prajapati wa working as lead in Chachai Ciroapot Ales

Land was Executive memise ofSohagpur Are

ofRKKMS S

Ares. The General Man of Sohagpuran unlawlptly planemy to cle down one of's Laits , the Kungtu Mines . The work of Rungiam tinugh Unton legally agitate !

against the alute alustaland uncalled terakis of closure omd all the linibus resetest a "Dharma "

Mine and a group of wors over the mat tape thereby stoppong th production workinan Shre Bikai Prajapatı , active traded worker on the reponn li management as foto custody by the police and later rej . He was charged vole letter SECL/ MOR : 03 1760 Dated 14:15 hampering tinction . Aiter enquiry .

workmanded of duty on 14-1-4 pursuanceride Jated 8-10-0414 :

he was revete post off' lerk Grade - !!!

Trammer

confirmingesheer and laterun he :

transferred ... hagpur Arcato 1fasdeo Area managemsilul in its action for unres ...

punishment wait workman and the stud ords !!

void- abiniti

wid action of the annagenam was with a

terror antoit geno ! 30 !

themselves . Le trade cio

prayed passed by tise Manag needs 10 6

3. The case.nl in bricias The worka erted by way of purist

PART II - SEC 3000 at a settlement . There ad part of the referenc has become infructuor the workman was initiall appointed as PR Laode was selected to the pos:

of Trammer Category -1 . That the workman selecte.i to the post of Clerk leill and accordingly his cadre was changed . W working as Clerk Grade III at Vivek Nagare . Sohagpur Area , he wa issued with a chargesien dated 13/ 17-8-92 for theft .

fraud or dishonesty innection with the employers business or property also of willful neglect of work . A departmental enquiry was conducted against him into the charges properly and legally . The charges stood proved gainst him and the Competent Authority after having considered the enquiry repo :

and relevant paper imposed punishment of damotion to the press post is . Trammer , Cat - lif on the workman . Ehris Dot entitled to the retief clauned .

4. Vide order dated 27-2-17 passed on the ordersheit of this reference , the rence proceeded exparic against workman

5. The management to prove their case files! affidavit of their war Sho V.V. Mahajan , thaca : working as Dy. Pers . Manager at Amlai and Bangwar Sub Area inNi Nohagpur Area .

6. t have heard Shri A Esim . Advocate the learned have very carefully record . counsel for the man gone through the evid

tully established and 7. The case of the managent

proved from the untried and unchallenged affidavit of their lui V.V. Mahajan .

Therefore the reference leserves to be answered !

favour ofthe managemend against the workin Union .

8. In view of the aboss clerence is answered in favour of the manageme and against the worktuan Union without any costs holding th the action of the Subta Manager , Chachai Group of Mines of Sohagper ea di SECI , in revertin :

Sh Bikai Prajapati fremst of Clerk Grade - III Les Frummer Grade - ill and transferring hun fro Sohagpur Area to Hassist SCL is legal and justitied and cons is the workmanis in entitled to any relie !

sent to the Govелитель 9 Let the copies of the of India, Ministry of t... or and mploy nient as per rules .

[भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

5953

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008 /कार्तिक 3, 1930

नई दिल्ली, 29 सितम्बर , 2008

का. आ. 2961 , औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार सीनियर सुपरिन्टडेन्ट ऑफ पोस्ट ऑफिस के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबंद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण / श्रम न्यायालय , चेन्नई के पंचाट ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को (संदर्भ सं. 29-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-40012/181 /92- आईआर( डीयू) ] अजय कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 29th September, 2008 S.O. 2961. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Industrial Tribunal Labour Court , Chennai as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation 10 the management of Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 29-9-2008.

[No. L-40012/ 181 /92 - IR(DU) ] AJAY KUMAR , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI -600104

Monday, the 23rd day of June , 2008 Present: Thiru A. Arumugasamy, B.A. , M.L. , Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal Industrial Dispute No. 6 of1994

(In the matter ofdispute for adjudication under Sec. 10 ( 1 )( d ) ofthe Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 between the Workman and the Management of Sr. Supt . of Post Offices , Kanyakumari Division, Nagercoil , Tamil Nadu ) .

BETWEEN

Thiru D. Devanesan ,

...Petitioner Union Extra Departmental Delivery Agent , Rannumamoodu Branch Office, Kanyakumari, Distt -629001

AND

The Sr. Supt. ofPost Offices , Kanyakumari Division ,

Nagercoil , Tamil Nadu -629001 ...Respondent/ Mgt .

Reference : Order No. L -40012/ 181 /92 - IR(DU ) dated 21-1-1994 , Ministry of Labour, Govt . of India , NewDelhi .

This dispute coming on this day for final disposal, upon perusing the Reference and other connected papers on record, Claimant Petitioner is died on 5-9-2004 . The claim itself for reinstatement became infructuous. Hence Claim is abated and this Tribunal made the following.

AWARD

TheGovernment of India have referred the following issue for adjudication by this Tribunai :

"Whether the action of the Senior Superintendent of PostOffices,Kanyakumari in terminating the services ofShri D. Devanesan w.e.f. 20-9-1990 is justified ? If not, to what relief is the workman is entitled ?" Claimant/Petitioner died on 5-9-2004. The claim itself for reinstatement became infructuous . Hence the Claim is abated . Death CertificateEx. MI is marked. Hence Reference is closed as abated . Award passed. No. costs.

Dated at Chennai , this 23rd day of June, 2008

THIRU A. ARUMUGASAMY, PresidingOfficer नई दिल्ली , 29 सितम्बर, 2008

का. आ. 2962, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार बेतवा रिवर बोर्ड 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 से 88/98 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42011/13/97 - आंईआर(डीयू) ] अजय कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 29th September , 2008 S.O. 2962.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 88/98) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Labour Court , Kanpur as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Betwa River Board, and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 29-9-2008.

[No. L-42011 / 13/97 - IR(DU)] AJAY KUMAR , Desk Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE SRI R. G SHUKLA , PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRALGOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT, SHRAM BHAWAN, ATI CAMPUS, UDYOG NAGAR, KANPUR Industrial Dispute No. 88 of 1998

In the matter ofdispute between :

Sri Siya Ram Verma General Secretary Workcharge Karamchari Sangh Betwa RiverBoard Rajghat Bandh Pariyojna , Rajghat, Lalitpur.

AND

The ChiefEngineer Betwa River Board Rajghat Bandh Pariyojna, Jhansi 5954

THE GAZETTE OF INDIAK 25 , 2008/ KARTIKA3 , 1930

::.

AWARD

1. The Central Government MOL New Delh notification No. L- 42011: 13/97 IR ( TU ) dated 01-104.08 i- referred the following dispute for adjudication for th tribunal .

"Whetherias an Rajghat inuent regulanuvcesor Ski and ten others is legal a fied ? last wh relief the concUTP is entitled tor 2. It is va mterestingto note in the mus union would go to sins that it has not at all be them !

should be directed to be regularized in the services of thi post . Thus virtually in is cicar that the workers a إذاكان the know of the fact as to against which post th working under the opposite parties and from what di theyare claiming thest regularization of services which post they shomird be given regular salary, fois settle d legal position of law that evidence of a party can be d only in context of the pleading and not beyond tinata discuss the evidence of the parties as in that event to th that a bare perusal . the satire statement of clans of th as against which post the workers involved in the refaene order are working and against which post they are calisi wages equal to regular employee of the opposite paris . it is also not clear either from the reference order or from the pleadings of the workers that as to from which date the court oflaw. Therefore , from this point ofview there remains hardly any need to duaid other facts of the cat claim will be decided against the union for the c indicated above.

3. In view of what has been discussed held that the claims the union in respect of the involved in the case appeurs 10 vaguegue and and therefore , the utom cannot be held satitled fa relief claimed by hirm Thi- reference , therefore , is bouis! be answered against the union and in favour of ... opposite party.

R.G SHUKLA, Presidugiha नई दिल्ली, 20 सितम्बर, 2008

का. आ. 296.3. आंद्यागिक विवाद धनयम 1 (1947 का ( 4 ) की धारा ? क अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार हिरया गर्वनमेंट पिन्ट के प्रबंधक संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्म के बीच , अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट द्यांगिक विवाद में केंद्रीय सरक औद्योगिक अधिकरण, श्रथ व्यायालय , हैदराबाद के पंचाल । एलसीआईडी-128/2 ) को प्रकाशित करता है , जो केन्द्रीय सरक को 29-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

सिं. एन-16025-1/2008- आई हो !

अजय कुमार, ८रक नी में

[PART 11-- SFC. 3 ( ii) ] New Delhi , the , vi september, 2008 .

S.O. 2963. In pomance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publisk the award ( Ref. No. LCID- 128/2006) of the Central fios ernment Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court , Hyderabad , as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial dispute ber the ertmployers in relation to the management of India Government Mint , and their workman , which was receis by the Central Government on29-9-2008 .

11-16025 /1 /2008 - IR(DUI) ]

TAKUMAR , Desk Officer APLAURE

BEFORE THE CENAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL ELM LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

Present: Shri Ved Prak Gaur , Presiding Officer Dated the 11th das September, 2008 Industrial Dispute PLC.I.D. 128/2006 BETWEEN

...Peutioner Sri A. Venkataramana , So A Ratnulu , Ro No. 18-6-1021 , Laidarwaza, Hyderabad- 5011-

AD

1 The Secretary, Government of India. Mio Finance, Dio Economic Affairs . New Delhi - 110011

2. TheGeneral Manager. India Government Mira IDA Phase II , Cherlapalı Hyderabad

...Respondents APPB4 ;

raine Potitioner

Vijaya Sekhar Reddy, aRuddy, Y. Ranjeeth Bidy and 5. Vijaya Venkatesh, Adurates.

For the Respondent : :: F. Raveender Reddy , ucate for K2

This is a case taken de 2A ( 2 ) of the D. Act . 1947 in view of thejudgmem of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in Ajo 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8.1995between Sri L. tonappa and Mis . Cotton Corporation of India and thers and numbered in this Court as L.C.I.D. No. 12:21 and notices were issued to the parties.

5955 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008 / कार्तिक 3 , 1930

में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय , हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ सं. 38/2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-14012/2/2006- आईआर(डीयू) ]

अजय कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 29th September, 2008 2. Petitioner submitted in his petition that he was sponsored by employment exchange in response to the notification issued by the Respondent calling for the post ofQuality Control Assistant. After undergoingthe selection procedure the Petitioner was appointed as Quality Control Assistant in Group " C" vide proceedings No. 1-240/Per/ 03/761 dated 17/21-5-2003. Later, he was terminated vide DiaryOrder No. 8 dated 1-6-2004 by the 2nd Respondent without notice. He prays this Court to set aside the above DiaryOrder No. 8 and direct the Respondents to reinstate him into service with all other benefits.

S.O. 2964.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 38/2006) ofthe Central Goverment Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Hyderabad, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited , and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 29-9-2008.

[No. L-14012/2/2006- IR(DU)] 3. In the counter the Respondent subinitted that the Petitioner's appointment is on ad -hoc basis in the scale of Rs.4000-100-6000 for a period of one year videDiaryOrder No. 12, dated 31-5-2003 on his acceptance of his offer of appointment duly accepting the terms and conditions stipulated to the said letter and he was terminated along with others w.e.f. 1-6-2004 vide Diary Order No. 8 dated 1-6-2004.

AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD 4. At this stage, the R2 has to file counter in this case, the Petitioner filed memo on 10-9-2008 to advance the date of adjournment to 11-9-2008 instead of22-10-2008 , which was allowed . On 11-9-2008 , i.e.today the Petitioner filed memoto withdraw his claim petition due to family and financial problems.

Present: Shri Ved Prakash Gaur, PresidingOfficer

Dated the 17th day ofSeptember , 2008

Industrial Dispute No. 38/2006 5.Heard since, workman is not interested to proceed with this case on his own accord, workman is permitted to withdraw his petition as desired by him . Hence , this petition isdismissed .

BETWEEN

Award passed accordingly , Transmit .

TheGeneral Secretary,

HAL Karmik Sangh,

[Dictatedto Smt. P. Phaní Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 11th day ofSeptember , 2008.]

FlatNo. 4, Umanagar , OldAirport Road , Bowenpaili, Secunderabad.

.... Petitioner VED PRAKASH GAUR, PresidingOfficer

AND

Appendix of evidence

TheGeneral Manager,

Witnesses examined for the Petitioner

M/s. Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, Balanagar, Hyderabad

....Respondents Witnesses examined for theRespondent

APPEARANCES

NIL

NIL

For the Petitioner

Documents marked for the Petitioner NIL

M/s. P.B. Vijay Kumar , A.V.S. Laxmi and P. L. Bhanu Prakash, Advocates .

For the Respondent

Documents marked for the Respondent

: M/ s . K. Srinivasa Murthy and V. Umadevi , Advocates, NIL

AWARD

नई दिल्ली , 29 सितम्बर, 2008

TheGovernment of India, Ministry ofLabour by its order No. L- 14012/2 /2006- IR( DU ) dated 30-6-2006 referred the following dispute under section 10 ( 1 ) ( d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 for adjudication to this Tribunal between the management of M/ s . Hindustan Aeronautics Limited and their workman . The reference is :

का. आ. 2964.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार हिन्दुस्तान ऐयरोनॉटिक्स लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद 5956

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA OCTOBER 25 , 2008 / KARTIKA

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Mis Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, Hyderabad (AP) in denying semi - skilled category and wages Sri B. Sluva Shanker , Casual Worker, Hyderaba 15 legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the workman concerned is entitled and from what dal "" The reference is numbered in this Tribura ! 1.D. No. 38/2006 and notices were issued to the par!.

2. The Petitioner filed claim statement staring that he was appointed as plumber in the year 108 : Later the Respondent fixed his wages in the category of semi -skilled and thereafter fixed his daily - wage as R 110 18 Subsequently, the Respondent management his entered into an agreement dated 23-7-2003 with HALwket surtion in respect of casual workers and it was agreedte enhance the daily wages to unskilled casual workers and the said clause applies to the Petitioner workman also he was denied. Aggrieved by this , he approached the Assistant Labour Commissioner( C ) , lyderabad , who seen a failure report of conciliation to the Ministry of Labour and Employment, hence , this industrial dispute . He prays this Courtto direct the Respondent to allow him semi - skilled category and pay wages of semi -skilled category.

3. The casehas been posted for filing of cementer and documents by the Respondent on today is 17-1-2008 , but the counsel for the Petitioner filed mene viny, i.e .. 17-9-2008 stating that the case is settled out of The management came up with a settlement to solarize Sri B. Shiva Shankar and 45 other similarly plane ! workers and to that effect he filed letter No. HALF10 422 18/08 dated 3-6-2008 by the Respondent to the comase! for the Petitioner for withdrawal of the industrial dispate as the matter was settled out of court . Hence , the 10 losed as withdrawn as requested.

Accordingly an Award is passed, Trans Dictated to Smt . P. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected by me on this the Iith day of September,2008.

VED PRAKASH GAUR , PresudingOfficer Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for

thePetitoner

Witnesses examined for the Responden !

NIL

NIL

Documents marked for the Petitioner

NIL

Documents marked for the Respondent NIL

नई दिल्ली , 29 सितम्बर , 2008

का. आ. 2965. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार क्षेत्रीष किसान ग्रामीण बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजनकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , किदिन्दी सरकार औद्योगिक आंद सं. 139/1999 ) हा को 29-9-2008 को प्रा

NewDel 4th Septenther .2008 S.O. 2965 pursuance of Souther Industrial Disput . 114 si 1917 ) the entr Government hereby shes Parare K

1999) of the Cetelemandsca

Labour Court , Kakout to the ned ad Industrial dispulerandecent other ...

Kisan Gramin Baowersnan , which w by the Central Cou120-9-2108

PAL:29 :29 1099-1إ JAY KUMAR ANTENURE

BEFORE SRIR. SHEKLA, PRETIDI OFFICER.ENTRAL GIVERNMEN INDUSTRIA TRIBUNAL UN LABO COURT SERNATICAN Industrie po 1392

In the matter of dis

Sri Ram Naresh .

Village Jaisal. Posi District Firozabail

AND

The Chairmaมเ .

Kshetriya Kisan Ba

Kuchehari Road

Mainpuri.

MARED

1. Central copment Mal. New Deshi , vide Notification No. [ 199 ] R ! B -1134G 21-18, 199 referred the following dispute for adjudication to th ribunal:-..

"Whether tiecoew of the managenser 1 - heziya Kisan Gramin sub Mainpri in terminating the vicesof Sri R. Nate his legal and just to what relictment

2. The casetastasite party opened its be at Belialer in Distrus Manpuri in December. The woman was apponted by the Chingan ofthe bank as messer and posted at Retaharters he reported for duty for... It has also been pleaded In the workman Champar of the Baal is the appointing authors the gulf ofthe bank kan [भाग II- खण्ड 3(i) )

was required to perform his duties during business hours like other workers but the opposite party instead of making wages to the workman like regular employee paid Rs.10/- per dayexcluding Sundays and Holidays. The action of theopposite party bank is an act of unfair labour practice. It has also been pleaded by the workman that he was the only person working at the said branch of the bank at the post of messenger and that in this way he had worked continuously from 3-12-94 to 3-11-95, when his services were brought to an end orally by the branch manager of theopposite party bank. At the time of dispensation of his services, he was neither paid notice pay, notice or retrenchment compensation thereby the opposite party have breached the provisions of the Act which action of the bank is liable to be set aside . On the basis of above pleadings it has been prayed by the workman that he be reinstated in the services of the opposite party at the post with full back wages , continuity of service and all other consequential benefits be also awarded to him .

3. The claim of the workonan has been vehemently opposed by the opposite parties on a number of grounds; interalia, that no officer ofthe bank is competent to appoint any person against any regular or permanent post de-horing theprovisions of recruitment rules, that the workman has never been underwent to any such regular selection process; that no appointment letter was ever issued by the opposite party in favour of the workman ; that the workman had never been paid regular wages against any post; that the workman had been engaged on daily rate basis by the opposite party bank as per need of casual basis; that the workman never performed the regular and permanent work of the bank; that the workman being a daily rated casual employee has no legal right or claim for appointment in the bank and lastly that bank have never indulged itself in unfair labour practice in the case ofthe workman. Lastly it has been pleaded that the claim of the workman is devoid ofmerit and is liable to be rejected.

4. Workman has also filed rejoinder but therein nothing new has been pleaded in it except reiterating the facts already pleaded by him in his statement of claim.

5. The workman apart from filing of documentary evidence has also examined himself as W. W.I and on the other hand the management also besides filing of documentary evidence has examined its witness as W. W.1 6. 1 have heard the arguments advanced by the contesting parties at length and have also perused the record ofthe case carefully.

7. From the own pleadings of the workman and evidence led by him it is quite obvious that the workman was engaged by the opposite party bank on daily rate basis and there is also no denying fact that the workman performed the work on need basis,

8. Therefore in view of the above admission of the workman it is established that he was a daily rated casual 3944G1/08-13

5957

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

employee ofthe opposite party . There is also no dispute about the fact that he was never subjected for any regular selection process against any regular or permanent post. The controversy as to whether a daily rated casual employee, temporary employee or ad-hoc employee has any legal right to claim employment has now finally set at restby the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in leading case of Smt . Uma Devi, wherein it has been held that a temporary, ad-hoc or daily rated casual employee has no right to claim public employment without facing due selection process prescribed under recruitment rules . In any view of the matter if according to the own case that he was a daily rated employee of the opposite party, the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India apply with full swing to the case of the workman and therefore , he cannot claim appointment against any post under the opposite party.

9. There is yet another aspect of the matter that is there is no mention regarding date of termination of the workman in the reference order itself. In any case if the tribunal is of the opinion that the action of the opposite party bank is neither legal nor just then normal question arises before the tribunal to consider as to from which date theworkman's termination be held illegal and unjust . From this point of view also the workman cannot be granted any reliefas claimed by him.

10. For the reasons disclosed above, the claim ofthe workman appears to be devoid of merit and is liable to be rejected. Accordingly it is held that the action of the management in terminating the services ofthe workman is neither illegal nor unjust. Consequently the workman is heid not entitled for any relief as claimed by him and the reference is answered in negative and in affirmative in favour of the opposite party.

R. G SHUKLA , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 29 सितम्बर , 2008

का, आ. 2966. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार फेडरल बैंक लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबंद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय हरनाकूप्लम के पंचाट (संदर्भ सं. 275/2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/249/ 1994-आईआर ( बी-1 ) ]

अजय कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 29th September , 2008 S.O. 2966. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central . Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 275/ 2006) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court , Ernakulam, as shown in the Annexure, in 5958

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 25, 2008/ KARTIKA 3 , 1930

the Industrial dispute between the managemem of Federal Bank Ltd. , and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 29-9-2008.

[No. L-12012/249/ 1994 - IR(13-1 ) ]

AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM PRESENT: Shri . P. L. Norbert , B. A. , LL.B. , Presiding Officer

(Wednesday the 9th day of July 2008 / 18th Ashada 1930 )

I.D. No. 275/2006

( IL. D. 8/1996 of Labour Court , Ernakulam ) Union

: The General Secretary, Federal Bank Staff Union , Champion Building , bank Junction, Aluva -683 101 .

By Adv. Srí . Ashok B. Shenoy.

Management : The Chairman ,

Federal Bank Limited, Head Office, Aluva- 683 101 .

By advs . Mis. B. S. Krishnan Associates .

This case conving up tor final hearing on 25-06-2008 , this Tribunal - cum -Labour Court on 09-07-2008 passed the following.

AWARD

This is a reference made under Section 10: 1 ) ( d ( ان Industrial Disputes Act 1947. The reference is:-- "Whether the action of the management o M/ s.Federal Bank Limited , Always in imposing punishment of postponentient of increment by a further period of 75 days with cumulative effect as perOrder No.1 . -411012244.94- IR ( B- [ ) of Govt ofIndia dated 23-07-96. and imposition of stoppage o أ increment for a period of 6 months on Sri C.C.Dinesh , Clerk, Girmagar branch is justified or not? I not t what relief the workman is entitled?"

2. The Facts of the case in brief are as follows: Sri C.C.Dinesh , a Clurk of Federal Bank, Emakulam , Girinagar branch was assued with memo duted 24-04-1991 which was modified by mema dated 19-06-1991 alleging unauthorised absence and breach of instructions for running any department . Subsequently another memo dated 16-09-199 ] was also issued to him alleging the same misconduct . A joint chuttery was ordered . The enquiry officer found the workman guilty of the charges . The disciplinary authority concurred with the findings of Enquiry officer and imposed the punishinent of stoppage

[PART 11- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] of increment for a period of 6 months without cumulative effect and postponement of increment by a further period of75 days with cumulative effect . It is under challenge in the reference.

3.According to the union the findings of the Enquiry Officer are perverse . The charges are vague . The charge sheets were not accompanied by list of documents or witnesses relied on by the management . No proper enquiry was conducted by the Enquiry Officer . Material witnesses and evidence were suppressed in the enquiry . Proceedings have not been fully recorded . The Enquiry Officer himself has amended the charges in the midst of enquiry . The Enquiry Officer has not properly adverted to the evidence on record. The enquiry Officer conducted the enquiry with a biased mind . The leave applications were not disposed ofby the sanctioning authority. Hence the absence cannot be treated as unauthorized. The workman had submitted leave applications on time . The direction of the bank to produce medical certificates from a goverment doctor not below the rank of D.M.O. , was impractical . The punishment imposed is illegal and in violation of the Bipartite Settlement . The punishrpent at any rate is excessive and disproportionate. The workman was not heard by the DisciplinaryAuthority. The findings and punishments are liable tobe set aside.

4.Accordingto the management the claimant union is a minority union and incompetent to espouse the cause oftheworker. The workman was in the habit of remaining absent un- authorisedly .It has affected the smooth functioning of the bank. He was not in the habit of submitting leave applications on time or obtaining prior permission for availing lease . He was subjected to medical examination at the instance of the management and the medical information was that he was not suffering from any illness which required rest. Hence by letter dated 21-11-1989 he was directed to produce medical certificates from a government doctor not below the rank of D.M.O. whenever he required leave on medical grounds. But he never complied with that direction . For the absence he was proceeded against on earlier vecasions also and was punished twice with censure . Despite he continued to be absent un - authorisedly . Hence two charge sheets were issued and ajoint enquiry was ordered. The linquiry Officer found on the basis of the records that his absence was u authorised . The disciplinery authority considering the nature of the misconduc ! imposed the punishment ot stoppage of increment without cumulative effect for 6 months after hearing the workman on punishment. 'I here is no illegality in the order of punishment . When the enquiry was pending the workman was again absent from 03-03-1992 to 03-06-1992 on various occasions . He was subjected to further medical examinationby the bank . The report ofthe doctor was that he was not suffering from any major illness and he was fit to work . He was directed by memorandum dated 24-04-1991 and 19-06-1991 to explain [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

5959 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/ कार्तिक 3 , 1930

why his absence for 75 days shall not be treated as unauthorised . There was no reply. Hence his absence for 75days was treated as unauthorised . When his absence was ordered to be treated as unauthorised the postponement of the date of increment is automatic and it is not a punishment imposed by the bank. There is no illegality in the action of the management . Therefore , there isnoneed to interfere with the findings of Enquiry Officer or the order of punishment of Disciplinary Authority.

5. In view of the above contentions the following points arise for consideration:

1. Are the findings of Enquiry Officer sustainable?

2. Is the punishment of stoppage of increment for a period of 6 months without cumulative effect legal?

3. Is the order ofpostponement of increment for a period of 75 days a punishment . If not, is the procedure proper ?

The evidence consists of the oral testimony of MW l'and documentary evidence of Exts . M- 1 to M -9 on the side of the management and no evidence on the side of the union.

6. Points No. 1& 2:-The workman Sri.C.C.Dinesh admittedly remained absent for 12 days intermittently between 19-02-1991 and 04-04-1991 . Though he submitted leave application , on the ground that it was not submitted on time and was not accompanied by a medical certificate from a doctor not below the rank ofD.M.O. , the managerment proposed to initiate disciplinary action and issued a memo dated 24-04-1991 which was subsequently amended by memo dated 19-06-1991 alleging absence without leave and breach of Instruction for running any department .

submits that he has never complied with the leave rules or submitted leave applications on time or obeyed the direction ofthemanagement . Ext . MEX-6 to 8 and 13 to 30 are leave applications, medical certificates and certificates of fitness submitted by the workman on various occasions for availing leave. They were application's for sick leave. They were submitted only whenever he resumed duty after his leave. There is no evidence to show that he was in the habit of intimating the bank prior to his leave. Ext . MEX- 12 is a circular dated 31-03-1987 which stipulates that sick leave shall be granted only on production of medicat certificate acceptable to the bank . It is further stipulated that whenever an employee absents from duty on health ground and applies for sick leave, medical certificate should be forwarded without delay indicating the probable period of absence. Assuming that the workman fell sick alt on a sudden and had no time to apply in advance still he could have forwarded the medical certificate at least during the period ofleave. He was residing very near to the branch where he was working . But consistently he was applying for leave whenever he resumed duty. This is against the circular Ext . ME- 12 . Chapter XIII offirstBipartite Settlement of1966 deals with leave rules . As per clause 13.2 one has to apply for leave one month in advance, except in urgent cases or unforeseen circumstances like illness . Clause 13.6 says that leave of all kinds cannot be claimed as of right. The management has the discretion to refuse of revoke leave depending upon the exigency of service . Clause 13.33 says that all sick leave shall be granted on production of a medical certificate acceptable to the bank. It is the discretion ofthe bank to require an employee to produce a medical certificate from a particular doctor. The employee is bound to comply with the direction and is not enough to produce a certificate from a doctor of his choice . However the workman had not complied with the leave rules and the direction of the management to get a certificate from a doctor, not below the rank of a D.M.O. The absence and the reason for absence are admitted by the workman, I is on the basis of the records that the Enquiry Officer found the workman guilty of unauthorised absence and breach of instructions of the management . They are minor misconduct ( 19.7 (a) and ( d)) I find no reasos: to hold tisat the findings of enquiry officer are perverse.

8. The disciplinary authority considered the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer and concurred with the findings. The workman was afforded opportunity of hearing regarding proposed punishment. Thereafter a final order was passed imposing the punishment of stoppage of increment for a period of 6 more widmut cumulative effect . The punishment imposed is in accordance with clause 19.8 of the settlement. There is no illegality in the order of punishment and there is no reason to interfere with the order of punishment either . Found accordingly.

W

Point No.3: It is to be noted that even after enquiry dered in pursuance to Ext . EX- 1 and 3 charge sheis 7.Ext . EX- 1 is the charge sheet dated 24-04-1991 and EX.2 is the amended charge sheet dated 19-06-1991 . Не had submitted a reply which is Ext.MEX- 4. Subsequently another charge sheet was issued on 16-09-1991 alleging the same nature ofmisconduct for being absent for 8days intermittently between 30-05-1991 and 10-08-1991 . Ext . EX3 is the charge sheet . This absence was also treated as unauthorized on the same ground and proposed to initiate enquiry. Both charges were considered together in ajoint enquiry. The workman was defended by the union Secretary.At the time of hearing the leamed counsel for the union laid stress on the perversity of findings . According to the learned counsel the workman had submitted leave applications with medical certificates whenever he took leave . It was impossible for an ordinary person to approach D.M.O. , to get himself examined andto get amedical certificate.Hence he was submitting medical certificates of his family doctor whenever he applied for sick leave. This contention of the union is refuted by the management . The learned counsel for the management 5960

THE GAZETTE O INDIAN TOBER 25 , 2008 /KARTIKA3 , 1030

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

Witness for the Management

MWI- 22-01-2002 Sri Cyriac Joseph ,

Exhibits for Union NIL

Exhibits for Management

WI Enquiry file against Sri Dinesh

M2 24-04-92 Copy of letter No.PIR/ S -9/ 6127 /92 of the Management to Sri Dinesh .

M3 19-05-92 Copy of fetter No.PIR/ S - 9 : 777 92 of the management to Sri Dinesh .

14 08-01-93 Copy of letter No.PIR S-9735893 1 theon:anagement to Sri Dinesh .

M5 15-01-93 Copy ofOrder No.PIR: S -9 /741093 of the Disciplinary Authority Issuedto StrDmesh .

M6 16-02-93 Copy of letter No.PIR/S -97468-93 of the management to Sri Dinesh

M7 Extract of Bipartite Settlement contrining Chapter XIII Leave Rules .

M8 01-08-79 Extract of Bipartite Settlernent pages 163 10 170.

M9 Extract of Chapter V -Scale of Pity - from the book containing service condtions of Bank Employees page 1010 10.

नई दिल्ली, 29 सितम्बर , 2008 the workman comised to remain absent from 03-03-1992 to03-06-1992 for long and short spells for a total period of 75 days.According to the management memoranda ciated 24-04-1992, 19-05-1992 and 08-01-1993 ( Lxts.MLX-24 ) were issued to the workman regarding his absence . Bet therewas no reply. The enquity concluded on 17-01-1992. It is therealer that the three memos were issued regarding the subsequent absence. Thus it was not part of domestic enquiry and the hinquiry Officer had not consiered the absence during a period 03-03-1992 to 03-00-192 No findings are also recorded regarding the absence from 03-03-1992 03-06-1992. However the disciplinary authority before passing the final order regarding punishment , besides the findings in enquiry, took imo consideration the absence from 03-03-1992 1003-06-1992 and recorded that the workman had remained absent during that period even after the enquiry. He was then given a memo to show cause why disciplinary action shall not be taken . He did not reply. Hence the disciplinary authority treated that absence as unauthorized on loss of pay . Therefore it was ordered that the increment has to be postponed for days. According to the learned counsel for the management postponement of increment by 75 days is not a punishment but only un automatic consequence of absence without leave on loss ofpay. The service coalition stipulates that an employee on loss of pay shall not car salary for the period of absence and his increment will fall due only after sucit period of absence. It has to be noved that an employee who has exhausted his leave at credit , if avails extra ordinary leave on loss of pay naturally incтста will be postponed for such period of absence Absence without leave is a minor misconduct under Clause 19.7( a ) ofBipartiteSettlement Therefore the Disciplinary Authority was competent to order postponemem of increment as per Clause 19.8 ( C ) of the Settlement , even if it is a punishment Assuming it is not it penalty , then when absence without leave is treated as unauthorised and on loss of pas , as per service condition the next increment will fall due on'y atter that period of absence on loss of pay . There is no illegality inthe order .

का.आ. 2967.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का ( 4 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार फेडरल बैंक लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में कंन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, इरनाकूलम के पंचट ( संदर्भ संख्या 178/2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो कंन्द्रय सरकार को 29-9-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल 12012:547/1998- आईआर( बी -1 ) ] अजय कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 29th September, 2008 In the result an award is passed finding that the action of the management in imposing the punishment of stoppage of increment for a period of ti mouhs and postponement of increment by a further period uf 75 days with cumulative for is legal and justified and the wo is not entitled for any relief.

The award will take effect one montit der ats publication in the Official Gazette .

Dictared to the Personal Assistant , transcribed and typed byher. corrected and passed by me on this the 9th day ofJuly. 2008 .

... 2967 - la pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 114 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 178:2006) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court , Ernakulam, now shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute benseen the management of Federal Bank Ltd. , and their workman , received by the Central Government on 29-9-20008 .

P. L. NORBERT, Presiding Oilierr

APPENDIX

Witness for Unicor Nil .

No. L-12012 /547/ 1998-1R( B -1 ) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25 , 2008/ कार्तिक 3 , 1930

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM -LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM Present: Shri P. L. Norbert, B. A. , LL.B. , PresidingOfficer

(Friday the 6th day of June, 2008/ 16th Jaishta , 1930) LD. No. 178/2006

(L. D. 10/1999 of Labour Court, Ernakulam) Workman : Shri . M. K. Pradeepkumar, Ozhakkanthe House, YMCA Road, Muvattupuzha .

ByAdv. Sri . Ashok B. Shenoy .

Management : The Sr. Deputy General Manager (P& HIRD), M/s, Federal Bank Limited, HeadOffice, Federal Tower, Aluva-683 101 .

By Adv . Sri . M. Pathros Mathai, This case coming up for hearing on 23-05-2008, this Tribunal - cum -Labour Court on 6-6-2008 passed the following..

AWARD

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

"Whether the action of the management of Federal Bank Limited in dismissing the service ofthe workman Sri .M. K. Pradeepkumar w.e. f. 3-1-98 is justified? If not, what relief to the workman is entitled to?" 2. The facts ofthe case in brief are as follows : Shri . M.K. Pradeepkumar was a bankman of Federal Bank at Moovattupuzha branch . He was charge sheeted for misconduct ofdrunkenness , riotous, disorderly or indecent behaviour, willful insubordination or disobedience of superior officers, absence without leave, failing to show proper consideration, courtsey etc. to officers of the bank and theft of articles of the bank. An enquiry was ordered and he was suspended from service . He was found guilty ofall the charges except one by the Enquiry Officer. This finding was accepted by the disciplinary authority and he was dismissed from service without notice . Though an appeal was filed he did not succeed . The workman challenges the enquiry and the findings . According to him the charges were vague, which prevented him from properly defending the case . The Enquiry Officer did not comply with the principles of natural justice. He was not given reasonable opportunity of defence. He was not allowed to inspect several crucial documents . Management witnesses and documents were introduced in peacemeal. Several

5961 objections raised by the workman were not recorded by the Enquiry Officer. The findings are perverse and not based on evidence . No major misconduct have been proved. Therefore no major punishment should have been imposed on the workman . The punishment is highly disproportionate and harsh . The past service of the workman was not taken into consideration by the disciplinary authority . The workman is the sole bread winner of his family consisting of his wife and 2 school going children . The workman is without any job and his family is starving . He is entitled to be re - instated in service with consequential benefits .

3. According to the management the workman was an addict to alcohol . He used to attend duty in a drunken condition . He remained absent un - authorisedly on various occasions. He was not in the habit of wearing uniform . He abused officers of the bank, refused to obey the orders and directions of superiors . Alleging these misconduct two charge sheets were issued to him and an enquiry was conducted. The findings ofthe Enquiry Officer was that he was guilty ofall but one charge . Considering the gravity of the misconduct he was dismissed from service. The charges levelled against him were specific and he understood the charges fully. The enquiry was conducted adheringto the rutes and principles of natural justice . Sufficient opportunity was given to the workman to defend himself in the enquiry and an Advocate was allowed to represent the workman. Copies of all documents produced by the management were supplied to the workman . He was given sufficient opportunity to produce documents and bring witnesses. However he did not furnish any evidence. The workman had participated in the enquiry through out and all the management witnesses were cross - examined. Findings are based on evidence on record. The punishment is proportionate to the gravity of the misconduct and there is no reason to lighten the penalty.

4.In view of the above contentions the following points arise for consideration

1. Is the enquiry valid?

2.Are the findings sustainable?

3. Is the punishment proportionate?

The evidence consists of Exts . M 1 Enquiry file alone .

5. Point No. 1:- At the time of dismissal of the workman he was working as bankman at Moovattupuzha branch of Federal Bank . The validity of enquiry is questioned on the ground that ( 1 ) there is violation of principles of natural justice , (2 ) copies of all relevant documents were not given to the workman , and (3 ) the evidence was adduced in peacemeal .

6. Though on the aforementioned grounds the enquiry is challenged by the workman at the time ofhearing thisissue was not seriously pursued , but preferred to argue 5962

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 25 , 2008 /KARTIKA 3. 1930

[PART 1- SFC. 3 (ii ) ] the matter on merits . That apart on going through the records I find that the workman was represented by an Advocate . He was supplied with copies of management documents. All the management witnesses were cross examined by the defence. Four adjournments were given to adduce defence evidence . Thus the Enquiry Officer bad acted fairly and complied with the principles ofnatural justice .Hence I find that the enquiry is valid.

General Manager P & IR on 17-02-1995 reporting that the workman was not obeying the directions of the Manager regarding wearing of uniform . Ext. M E- 14 is a report regarding, among other things , the same issue by the branch manager to DGM , P & IR Department , Head Office on 20-03-1995. Ext . ME- 17 is a similar report sent by the Manager to the Head Oftice on 29-03-1995 . Ext.M -19 is copy of Federal Bank Bulletin ( relevant page ). Clause 10 requires the members of the staff, who were supplied with uniforms to wear them in clean condition while on duty both inside and outside the office. Non wearing ofuniforms during the whole day or part of a day , will disentitle them forwages, besides being liable for disciplinary action. These instructions ofthe bank were not followed by the workman. It was argued by the learned counsel for the workman that non wearing of uniform for a few hours of the day is not a serious misconduct and the management is trying to multiply the charges by including it in the charge sheet . But considering the presious conduct of the workman I don't think that the management has tried to surmount charges or the Enquiry Officer has found the workman guilty of charge No. 5 without anything on record.

7. Point No. 2:-Two charge sheets were issued 10 the workman . They are Ext. El dated 06-04-1995 und Est. E dated 11-11-1995 in Ext . Ml (enquiry file ) . Ext .El contains 8 charges and E4 one charge .The workman subunitted Ext F2 and E6 explanations to the charges . That was not satisfactory to the disciplinary authority and hence an enquiry was ordered. The Enquiry Officer found the workman guilty for all charges except charge No. 6 of the first charge sheet concurring with the findings of Enquiry Officer, the disciplinary authority dismissed the workman on 03-01-1998 . The appeal filed by the workinan was dismissed by the appellate authority on 11-05-1998. The learned counsel for the workman attacks the findings as well as the punishment .The major challenge is with respect to charge No. 5 of Ext. 1 : 1 as well as the charge in Ext.5.4 . Those charges relate to non wearing of uniforms and attempted thell of fans . With respect to the remaining charges there is a general challenge that the tindings are perverse. I will first deal with the charges which are seriously challenged by the learned counsel for the workman .

8. As per Ext . E 1 , charge No.5 is with regard to non wearing of uniform on 20-03-1995 in the A.N. It is alleged thathe was repeatedly advised on early occasions against the habit ofnot wearing wuform while on duty . The Enquiry Officer found that the workman had disobeyed the instructions of superior officers and continued to attend duty without wearing uniform and thus committed misconduct of disobedience of lawful and reasonable orders ofsuperiors , falling within clause 19.5 of the first Bipanine Settlement . Ou a previous occasion the workman was . issued with EAT.MI: - letter advising him to wear unidionen Ext . ME - 21 is copy of Ext . MEI which contains acknowledgment of receipt of Ext. MEI . Ext.ME- 3 is a memo dated 20-02-1995 issued to the workmanby P & IR department instructing himto follow the rules of the bank regarding wearing of uniform According to the management despite such instructions , advice and memo the workman did that make any improvement , Hence for the lapse on 20-03-1995 he was charge sheeted.

9. MW 1 Sr. Manager , MW2 Deputy Manager and MW 4 officer ofthe same branch have supported the case of the management that on 20-03-1995 in the A.N. the workman was not wearing uniform while on duty . They also stated that the workman was not in the habit of following the instructions of the bank regarding uniform. Ext.ME- 2 is a letter sent by the Manager to the Deputy

10. But the learned counsel for the workman contended that the misconduct alleged is only a minor misconduct if at all the tindings of the Enquiry Officer is accepted and therefore only a minor punishment can be imposed. The Enquiry (Officer has opined that it is a misconduct ofdisobedience oflawtul and reasonable orders of the management or of a superior officer , falling within clause 19.5 (e) of first Biparnte Settlement . The Disciplinary Authority accepted this tinding of the Enquiry Officer and imposed punishment of stoppage of increments for 2 years with cumulative effect . That is a penalty for gross misconduct within clause 19.6 ( d) of first Bipartite Settlement . As per clause 7(p ) of supplementary settlement dated 10-04-2002 to 7th Bipartite Settlement , non wearing of uniform while on doty is treated as minor misconduct (Page 568 of " Bipartite Settlements ", M/s. HP ) Kapoor Publication, 12th Edition, The punishments for minor misconduct are mentioned in clause 8 of the saine settlement . As per that provision incremenr can be stopped only for a maximum period of 6 months . But the present disciplinary action relates to the year 1998 and the above Bipartite Settlement is ofthe year 2002 and hence has no application . So far as Ist Bipartite Seitiement is concerned there is no specific provision in Clause 19.7 regarding non - wearing of uniforms . Therefore the submission of the learned counsel for the workman that it is only a minor misconduct , cannot stand .It is a misconduct of disobedience of lawful and reasonable orders of management falling within clause 19,5 ( e) of first Bipartite Seltiernent and the punishment for gross-misconduct is provided in clause 19.6 which permits stoppage of increment for any period. Therefore the punishment with respect to charge No.5 is beyond challenge.

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 25 , 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

[ भाग- साण्ड 3 (i) )

11. The next major challenge is in respect of charge in the 2nd chargesheet, Ext .E4 . The allegation against the workman is that on 16-10-1995 around 3 pam , he sought permission of Manager Administration , (MW3 ) to take emptyjute bags for the purpose of some use at home. The manager permitted him . But the workman under the guise, of taking the waste jute bags took an exhaust fan and a ceiling fan (without leaves ) by concealing them in a jute bag. The fans were lying in the stationery room . MW3 went to the stationery room to see what was being taken by the workman. When the jute bag was lifted by the workman the bag seemed to contain something heavy. So itwas examined by MW3 and he found the fans . Ext.ME- 20(b) is a report sent by MW3 to the Sr. Manager MW 1 . Ext.ME-20 is a report of MW 1 sent to the Head Office . Sri B.Vinod Kumar , a clerk of the bank had also witnessed the incident and he gave a statement to the management which is Ext.ME-20(a). But he was not examined . But the statement was marked through MW 1. It is contendedby the learned counsel for the workman that since Sri Vinod Kumar the author of Ext . ME- 20(a ) was not examined the workman did not get an opportunity to challenge the statement. But it is to be noted that MW3 had detected the attempt to take away the fans and he had sent Ext.ME - 20 (b ) report to the Sr. Manager MW- 1 . Therefore even if Ext.ME- 20(a ) is disregarded as having not properly proved, ME-20 (b) and the oral testimony of MW3 should stand . Nothing is pointed out by the defence to disbelieveMW-3 . Therefore the incident had takenplace as found by the Enquiry Officer. However the learned counsel for the workman submitted that there is no theft as the fans were not taken away by the workman. Therefore according to him the misconduct can at the most be one under Clause 19.5(d) offirst Bipartite Settlement i.e. "willful damage or attempt to cause damage to the property of the bank or any of its customers " . Hence it is argued that maximum punishment is not warranted in the circumstances.

12. It is in evidence that the workman under the guise oftaking jute bags for his personal use had tried to remove 2 fans of the bank. According to the Enquiry Officer it amounts to theft which is an act prejudicial to the interest ofthe bank falling within Clause 19.5 (j ) ofthe first Bipartite Settlement. The punishment awarded by the disciplinary authority is dismissal without notice . The learned counsel for the workman contends that there is no theft and the workman had not taken away the fans from the premises of the bank. The offence of theft is defined in Section 378 I.P.C. Illustration ( h ) to the Section is that a ring belonging to Zwas found lying on a table by 'A' , ' A' hides the ring in aplace where it is highly improbable for Z to find it, with the intention of taking away the ring later . Here 'A ' at the time of first moving the ring from the table commits theft. Drawing the same analogy when the workman took the fans and hid them in a jute bag he had already committed the theft . It was not taken out of the premises of the bank

5963 because before that the offence was detected. So there is no merit in the contention that the workman had not committed the offence of theft and at the most he had attempted to cause damages to the property of the bank. Themisconduct falls within Clause 19.5 (j ) of first Bipartite Settlement as rightly found by the Enquiry Officer and concurred by the disciplinary authority.

13.The remaining charges are 1 to 4, 6, 7 and 8. The EnquiryOfficer has found that charge No.6 is not proved. Thesubmission of the learned counsel for the workman with respect to the remaining charges and the findings of the Enquiry Officer is that the findings are perverse and not based on evidence on record. But I don't think that the learned counsel is correct in his submission .

14. Charge No.1 is that on 01-03-1995 the workman was on leave. But he came to bank sometime in the noon and went to the branch Manager's cabin with a bill ofthe purchase ofuniform clothes . The Manager told him after seeing the bill that it was defective . The workman got it back after sometime be brought back the bill after curing thedefects. The Manager perused the bill and said that the rate of articles mentioned in the bill was high and so he would forward it to the Head Office for sanction . The workman did not like it . He stared at the Branch Manager. Acustomer. was sitting in the cabin of Manager . The workman asked the customer to go out of the cabin. But the Manager asked the customer to remain there . The workman was asked to leave the cabin. But he did not obey. He was in a drunken state . The Manager then called a clerk and asked him to take away the workman from the cabin.

15.TheEnquiry Officer in his report at paragraphs & to 12 (pages 8 and 9 ) has considered the charge. MW- I is the Sr. Manager . MW-2 is Deputy Manager. Both of them have stated that the workman had misbehaved to the Manager andhe was in a state of drunkenness at that time . Ext.ME-4 is the report of Manager to the Head Office regarding the incident. Ext. ME- 2 is the reply to the charge bythe workman. His reply was that there was shortage of bankmen in the bank at the relevant time and so he was overburdened. Regarding the allegation of drunkenness his case was that no medical examination was conducted. The Enquiry Officer no doubt agreed with the workman that there was shortage of bankmen . But according to the EnquiryOfficerthat has nothing to do with the misconduct. He also was of the opinion that even without medical examination , from the abnormal behaviour, gestures and smell one can make out whether a person is drunk or not. On the basis of the evidence aforementioned the Enquiry Officer found the workman guilty ofindecent and disorderly behaviour. I find no reason to express a different opinion .

16. Charge No.2 is that on 14-03-1995 the workman was lateto arrive in the bank . The Deputy Manager (MW2) did not allow him to mark the attendance . However the 5964

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 25 , 2008 /KARTIΚΑ 3 , 19.30

workman remained in the office. At 4.45 p.m. he went to Manager's cabin with the leave register and a vehicle loan application for getting sanction ofthe loan from the office. The Manager enquired whether the workman was on duty. On coming to know that he was not on duty he was not allowed to hatidle the office records while on leave . Upon this the workman got wild and shouted at the Manager.At that time the Deputy Manager ( MW2 ) happened to step into the cabin of the Manager. With him also the workman got angry. He threatened the Manager and tore the loan application and threw it at the Manager .

17. The discussion is contained at para 11 and 12 (page 9 and 10 of the enquiry report). The duty time of the workman was 9.45 a.tn. But he reached the office on 14-03-1995 al 10. 10. a.m. Thus he was late by 25 minutes . As per the rule ofthe bank a person who reaches the office late bymore than lit minutes will not be allowed to mark the attendance . MW-2 Deputy Manager did not allow the workman to mark the attendance . MW- 1 has supported this case of MW2 and spoken about the misbehaviour of the workman towards him . Ext . ME - 5 is a report sent to HeadOffice regarding the incident by MW - 1 . Ext . MI: -13 isattendance register for the month of March 1995 which shows that on 14-03-1995 the workman had not marked the attendance. Nothing was brought out in cross - examination ofMWI and MW2 to discredit them . On the basis of this evidence the Enquiry Officer found the workman guilty of misconduct of riotous and disorderly behaviour . I tind nu ground to interfere with the findings.

18. Charge No.3 is that on 15.03-1995 at 4.1 tip.m. the Manager had asked the workman as to why he had drawn red lines in the attendance register against the name of the Manager on the dates , 14-03-1995 and 15-03-1995 . The workman then gut angry , shouted at him and threatened him . On the same day the workman was asked by Sri.T.K.Mathew, an officer of the bank to arrange the stationery items kept in a box, in order in the stationery room. The workman refused. The Manager then asked him to carry out the work. But the workman refused and abused the Manager . He was then under the influence of liquor .

19. The enquiry report para 13 10 16 ( page 10 to 12 ) contain the discussion regarding this charge. MW ! hus narrated the incident . Two clerks of the bank Sri . Agustune Thomas and Mrs. Mercy John stated that they saw the workman opening the attendance register which was on the table of MWI When MW- texamined the attendance register he found the red line markings against his name in the relevant column of 14th and 15th March . 1995. 11W4 (Sri.T.K.Mathew ) stated that he had asked the workman on 15-03-1995 to arrange the stationary items in the stationary room in order . But the workman bad refused . As per Ext.ME9 duty allotment order the workman was asked to arrange stationery items . The workman was called to the cabin of MWI for the purpose of issuing Ext. 11: 9 erder

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( i ) ] and entrusting the work . But he did not go to the cabin to receive the order . On the other hand he shouted, at MW- 1 from outside the cabin. MW - 1 then sent Ext .ME - 6 report aboutthe incident to the head office . MW - 1 narrated these facts before the Enquiry Officer. The evidence of MW - 1 and MW -4 and Ext .ME - 6 report were relied on by the EnquiryOfficer to find the guilt of workman . The finding is beyond challenge.

20. Charges 4 and 7 are similar . Charge No.4 is that on 16-03-1995 and 17-03-1995 the workman was absent from the office . He applied for sick leave with a medical certificate on 18-03-1995 when he cameto resume duty. However the workman had been to the bank at some hour on both days . The medical certificate was not acceptable to the bank as he had not comptied with the direction of the bank to produce a medical certificate trom D.M.O. Because of these reasons the absence of the workman on 16th and 171h March, 1995 was treated as un - authorised . Similarly charge No.7 is that on 27-03-1995 and 28-03-1995 he was absent and applied for leave only on 29-03-1995 with a medical certificate. This was also not accepted by the bank as he had not applied for leave in accordance with leave rules and the medical certificate was not from a doctor directed by thebank.

21. Ext.ME - 12 is bank circular dated 24-04-1987 regarding sick leave . Exts . ME - 11 ( a ) and 11 (b ) are medical certificates and fitness certificates from an ayurvedic doctor regarding absence of 16th and 17th March , 1995 and fituess to resume duty on 18-03-1995 . In a similar manner he had applied for leave on 29-03-1995 for the absence of27th and 28th March, 1995 and produced a medical certificate and a fitness certificate from the same ayurvedic doctor . Ext.ME- 16 is leave application and Ext. ME- 16 ( a ) & ( b ) are medical certificate and fitness certificate . The medical certificate was not accepted by the bank as the workman had not complied with the instruction to produce a medical certificate from a doctor acceptable 10 the bank . Ext . ME - 13 is attendance register of March 1995. It shows that on the respective dates aforetticandoned the workman was abseru . He had neither infornied annat his sickness nor submitted the application on time tistihout deras ) . He has also m obtained proper medical comicate from a doctor acceptable 10 the bank. For these rm the Etiquiry Officer found theworkman guilty of arms sinct of unutuhorised absence . The finding is only to be upheld .

22. Charge No.8 is that 30-153-1995 at 5 p.m. the workman entered manager's cabin . closed the door . threatened the manager , demanded sanction of leave and wages on the days of leave . At that time the Deputy Manager tried to go into e cabin of the manager. Hut the workman prevented the Deputy Manager from opening the cabin door. The Deputy manager imanaged to open the door. The workman thietshed the Manager once again and went out of the cabir :

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 25, 2008 /कार्तिक 3 , 1930

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

23. The matter is dealt with by the EnquiryOfficer at paras 18 and 19-(page 12 ofhis report ) . MW- 1, 2 and 4 have supported the charge . Ext.ME- 18 is a report sent by the ManagertotheHead office regarding the incident. Exts.ME- 4, 5, 6, 14, 15 and 17 are similar reports ofthe Manager to the Head Office regarding the drunken and disorderly behaviour ofthe workman in the bank . In the light of the oral testimony ofMW -1 , 2 and 4 and considering the various reports of similar mis- behaviour in the past as well as the report, Ext,ME- 18 regarding the incident, the Enquiry Officer found theworkman guilty of misconduct of drunkenness , riotous , disorderly and indecent behaviour . It is not a solitary instance of misbehaviour of the workman . The workman has not been able to point out anything inconsistent in the testimony ofMWs 1,2 and 4 to discredit them.Thereforethe finding ofthe Enquiry Officer regarding charge No.8 is only to be accepted.

24. In the light of the reasons stated above I find no reason to deviate from the findings ofthe Enquiry Officer regarding charges levelled against the workman as per charge sheets , Ext. I and EA-4.

25. Point No. 3: The learned counsel for the workman submitted that the workman hails from a poor family. He has wife and 2 school going daughters to be looked after . He is the sole bread winner of the family. He has been in the service of the bank for a long time and he is jobless after his suspension from service. The punishment ofdismissal is too harsh and excessive . But considering the conduct of the workman of disorderly and indecent behaviour , threatening and abusing Bank Manager and officers ofthe bank and theft, the bank cannot be expected to show leniency in the matter of punishment . The instances of misbehaviour to officers of the bank are not isolated incidents. He had created a lot of mischief in the bank due to his addiction to alcohol . Repeated instructions ofthe officers of the bank fell on deaf ears of the workman and he did not improve , which necessitated disciplinary action . Even though he was dismissed from service hewas given P.F. and gratuity which is not normally done by a bank. Considering these circumstances I find that the punishment is proportionate and commensurate with the gravity ofmisconduct .

In the result an award is passed finding that the action of the management in dismissing the workman Shri.M.K.Pradeep Kumar from service is legal and justified and he is not entitled for any relief.

The award will take effect one month after its publication in theOfficialGazette.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and passed by me on this the 6th day, June,2008.

P. L. NORBERT, PresidingOfficer 3944G1/08-14

5965

APPENDIX

Exhibit for theManagement Enquiry file. Ext. M1- नई दिल्ली, । अक्तूबर, 2008

का.आ. 2968, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरणं में , केन्द्रीय सरकार फेडरल बैंक लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय इरनाकुलम के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 226/2006 ) को प्रकाशित क.रैती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 01-10-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-12012/03/1996-आईआर ( बो-1 ) ]

अजय कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 1st October, 2008

S.O. 2968 -In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No.226/2006) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Labour Court , Ernakulam , as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management ofFederal Bank Ltd. , and their workmen received by the Central Government on 01-10-2008.

[No. L- 12012/03/ 1996- IR(B-1 )] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM -LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM Present: Shri P. L. Norbert, B. A. , LL.B. , Presiding Officer (Friday the 11th day of July 2008/20th Ashada 1930 ) 1.D. No. 226/2006 ( I. D. 15/1997 of Labour Court, Ernakulam) Union : TheGeneral Secretary, FederalBank StaffUnion, Champion Building, Bank Junction Alwaye-683 101 . By Adv. Sri . Ashok B. Shenoy.

Management: The Chairman , Federal Bank Limited, HeadOffice, Alwaye, Emakulam District

ByAdvs. M/s . B. S. Krishnan Associates.

Thiscase coming up for hearing on 04-07-2008 , this Tribunal- cum- Labour Court on 11-07-2008 passed the following.

5966

GAZETTE OF INDIA O KOBER 25 , 2008 /KARTIKA 3 , 193

[ PART 11-Sec. Stijl AWARD

This is fere made under Section 10 ) いか Industrial Dispines Act The reference is:

"Whether action of the management of Mis Fisouk Limited in imposing the punishments withholding four annual meternens out of'n aamual incretients with curiose effect in rerpest of the workman Sri.P.A.Jose certain gesi misconduct is justified not , to whatnoir , de workinan is entitled to "

equity were not followed by the Enquiry Officer. 'The documents on the side of time management were not properly proved. Competent witnesses were not examined to prove the documents . The workman was denied opportunity to adduce defence evidence ! he defence representative was not able to attend the enque as he was not granted leave. Thedocuments on the side of the workman was not allowed to be marked . The Enquirs Orlicer had a biased mind . The punishment at any rate is excessive . The mitigating circumstances of the workman was not considered by the disciplinary authority. The findings and punishment are liable to be set aside .

2.The the case in brict are os Taliwa

Sri.P.A.Jose Office of Fes with a meme... cheating , in prejudicial erk in IEK Departmen of the Head Limited. While so , he was served 17-3-1986 alleging misconduct of debts beyond his means and its interest of the bank. The basis for there allegations was the workman had issued two chegas after closin ! Account in Chirayink!! branch, Subsequently another nemo dated 04-04-1986 was also issued to him aling anisconduct of engaging in trade outside the soon et tus duties and without the peri וסובלות of the bank. Anquity was ordered . The workmen was found guilty of the changes . The disciplinary authority imposed the purishment of stoppage of increment for 2 years with melative effeci. An appeal filed by the workmaned. After the conclusion of the enquiry procvelines mother meme dated 11-11-1986 issued licgiriduct of ' engaging in any trade without the pof the bank , inetarring debts which the managenessed as excessive and doing acis prejudicial the bank, The basis for tais allegation was the workman had borrowed Rs.30,000 from a custom , at she bank . The same Enquiry Offker conducted the The workman was again focad guilty of the chat . The Disciplinary Authority mposed the punishment or stuppage of increment for a period of two years with anive effect . The workman preferird an appeal . The apperkine authority did not interfere with the findings y Officer , but reduced the push to stoppage echt for a period of 2 years without cumulative ef

given an opportunity of hearing on the proposed The Appellateubens to did not sift the evidence to find out when dea gre enough materials to eaten a finding of الن rkman . The allegations in the

3. Accorτion the Enquiry Otlicat hao not properly the evidence . The Disciplinary Authority secting the worth of the materiais on record cousin the indings ofthe Enquiry Onicer . charge are near and properly Louched . Sufficient opportunity to dend was denied to the workman . FHe was not allowed to take assistance of a lawyer. Lie

management representative was a legally trained mind and the workinan was putted against an experienced officerin

the field of engi i principies of natural jusuce and

4. According to the management the ution which has espoused the cause of time workman is a minority union and not a recognized one and hence it is incompetent raise the dispute . Therefore the reference is not maintainable. The workman was proceeded against for disciplinary action due to his indiscriminate borrowing . He had issued two cheques for Rs.20.000 /- each and a promissory note for Rs 10.000 after closing his 5.B. account. He was also engaging in trade without the permission of the bank . fie borrowed another sum of Rs.30,000/-from a customes of the bank and did not repay the same . Creditors had complained to the bank . Hence memos of charges were issued and an enquiry was ordered. TheEnquiry Officer conducted the enquiry in accordance with the rules and procedure of enquiry . The workman was given every opportunity to detend the charges . He was represented by an office bearer of the union. The management witnesses were cross examined . Sufficient opportunity was given to adduce delence evidence. Based on the materials on record the Enquiry Officer submitted his report finding the work : nan guilty of the charges . The disciplinary authority accepted the findings , heard the workman on proposed punishment and considering the nature of the misconduct imposed the punishment of stoppage of increment for yours with cumulative effect and another punishment of stoppage of increment for two years with cumulative effect . the workman had filed appeal inboth enquiries . However , he did not succeed with regard to the findings , but the punishment in respect of 2nd enquiry proceedings was reduced to stoppage of increment for 2 years without cumajatve effect The workman was given copy of the report an opportunity of hearing on the findings of Enquiry Officer . Thereafter he was also punishtnent. The disciplinary authority as well as the appellate authority have properly considered the records of enquiry . The request of the workman for appointment of a lawyer came very late after lapse of 4 months of order in domestic enquiry . At any rate permission for appointment ofa lawyer was to be granted by the disciplinary authority as per the Bipartite Settlement , The workman has no case at the time of enquiry that the management representative was a legally trained persam However the workman had participated in both enquires and cross examination the management witnesses . He had not raised any complaint 5967 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) )

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25 , 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

9. Iwill deal with these preliminary objections ofthe union one by one.

regarding the conduct of enquiry .The workman was given ample opportunity to produce witnesses and documents . The workman was trying to protract the enquiry proceedings . The punishment are in no way disproportionate or harsh . There is no ground for interferingwith the findings or the punishment.

5. In the light of the above contentions the following points arise for consideration:

1. Are the findings perverse?

2. Is the punishment legal and proper?

The evidence consists of the oral testimony of MW I and documentary evidence of Exts .M I and M2 on the side ofthe management and no evidence on the side of union .

(1) Ext.MI enquiry concluded on 10-11-86 . On that day the workman was present but not his representative. The workman made a request to adjourn the enquiry on the ground that the defence representative was not granted leaveby the Management , He had also requested to accept two documents produced by him . The Enquiry Officer was not inclined to grant an adjournment and the reasons are stated at pages 22 to 24 ofExt.M 1 file. The reasons stated by theEnquiryOfficer are that no special leave was required to attend the enquiry . Instead he should have attended the enquiry, obtained a certificate of attendance from the Enquiry Officer and produced it before the managerment who would have granted him duty leave. Another reason to refuse adjournment is that the workman was trying to protract the enquiry proceedings However it is not necessary for me to go into that aspect but suffice to know whether the defence representative was able to attend the enquiry orwhether management should have granted leave for that purpose. The learned counsci for the union referred to Clause 19.12( d ) of the First Bipartite Settiement a contend that special leave should have been granted by the management even without a request by the CSE or the defence representative for the purpose ofattending enquiry. The provision reads:-

"If the representative deferkling the employee is an employee ofthe same bank at an cutstation bracc within the sameState, he shall be relieved on special leave (on full pay and allowances) to represem. the employee and be paid one return fare..............

6. Point No.1 : Exts . ME-8 and 9 are the charge sheets issued on04-04-1986 and 17-03-1986 . Ext . ME9 is the first charge sheet. The basis for this charge sheet is the complaint ofone Sadasivan of Chirayinkil who had lent Rs . 50,000 to the workman, Sri . P.A. Jose while he was working in Chirayinkil branch. He had issued 2 cheques both dated 14-12-85 for Rs.20,000 each to Sadasivan . However, this was after closing the S.B. account of the workman at Chirayinkil branch on 21-11-85 . When the cheques were presented for payment they were returned due to ' closure ofthe account' .Hence on the charges ofcheating, incurring debts to an extent considered by the management as excessive and engaging in trade or business outside the scope of his duty without permission of the bank , a domestic enquiry was ordered . Ext . M 1 is the Enquiry file containing enquiry proceedings , documents , report and orders ofdisciplinary authority and appellate authority.

7. Ext .M8 is the second charge sheet . The allegation is that he had engaged in trade or business outside the scope of his duties without permission of the bank. The reason for the allegation is that Smt . Ida Gomez, a customer ofthe Chirayinkil branch had complained to the bank that the workman had borrowed Rs . 30,000 but failed to tepay it . Ext.M2 is the Enquiry file containing Enquiry proceedings , documents , report and orders of disciplinary authority and appellate authority.

8.The learned counsel for the union had raised certain preliminary objections regarding the validity of enquiry. Theobjections are: ( 1 ) the workman was denied opportunity to adduce defence evidence as the Enquiry Officer had abruptly concluded the Enquiry proceedings in the absence ofthe defence representative . The defence representative could not attend the enquiry on 10-11-86 as he did not get leave to attend the enquiry. (2) The documents produced by the workman were not admitted in evidence. (3) No opportunity todefend was provided to the workman . (4) No copy of the report was given to the workman before proposing the punishment and he was not heard regarding the findings of the Enquiry Officer by the disciplinary authority.

The provision requiring the management to relieve an employee on special leave to attend an entury as defence representative refers to a situation when teat employee has to attend an outstation branch within the same state.But the defence representative , Sri . A.A.Fosca was working as clerk in the stationery department of le Head Office at Atwaye at the relevant time This is or from the veryletter of the worlar to the Enquiry Offi ... dated 27-10-1987 which is part Me . The Hend Office ofthe bank is at Alwave The enquiry was held at Staff Training College of the bank at Alwaye isulf 10-11-86. This can be seen from the Enquiry proceedings at page 20. The workman himself was dag in IBR. department , Head Office , Alwaye. Tans the detence representative had to attend the enquiry which was iseid in the same place within the town of Alwaya in the Staft Training College. It is not un outstation so to , as the defunce representative is concerned and hences 19.12( 1 ) the first Bipartite Settlement is not attracted in this case Therewas no need to get soucial leave to attend the enquiry . Mere intimation to the office was sufficient, followed by subsequent production of a sertificate of attendance froin the EnquiryOfficer. Hence there is no merit in the casent the workman that the defence representative was ma to attend the enquiry for wam of special leave D.GAZESTE OF INDACOBER 25 , 2008/KARTIKA 3 , 193

5968

(2) contention is that the

produced weerats en 10-11-86 15over the Enquiry Off... rethis to mark the documents at fis-v . Page 2 ( moniry Proceedings ( Ft.M grounds

the submissinterkar and reasons of Freier Officer for the doctimecis

Officer recreorkman was

and oppostos e documents, bet tillthe inand their evidence . A

stated by hit τα documents were develo

unn is that these deemere the issue . Yes ....

workinan and is AL in the poss

witnesses এ and weak cheat the docurtenis whose documents ongiead we examined side and cross exte

was put to then: regarding time defence

documents the wackman wasananc protrac Besargs The scaments produced by re workmanere ( a) A sanction order dated 19-08-1655kmat for standeech in akuri to the workm -19-85 from the static querics reg

ofpossible bilty wellasany other leans of thewort.rian

The

workman is the ad borrowed m

one Sadastan and

noke to him after

cheques and

Account inci Thu: Pr two documens pealed

do with the hees by the worki ..!

the charge she

documents are a evidence thatCpEraudman .

(3 ) The cat pinance ofthe workmanis .

not given stopportunity to delete the The enged the reperi d workmandala crion ollista enquiry code 15-85 at de

corread on din. Thereal

that sy

was adjoint

adduced con

day alsumawati. Th Jefence cros

airy icer o tand

was asked

!

J

witnesses ar

managementative

today tea adjourned

representat

foradjemar

aas adornel

and defeer.

However

representat

or witnesses

gement reputacia

copy given

Officer adjoutthe precedings to 31-10-20 the workmaretter to the Lingar Oleer ...

N read ting the d Pencere adjournment

was sick. drowned Se the defence.wrdsen sandar wh

pery Offer

gave a letter

[PART 11- SEr. 3 (ii )] adjournment on the grou inat the defence representative was not able to get specisi leave for attending the enquiry .

This was rejected by Enquiry Officer. Thus the proceedings show that the workman had atnple opportunity to produce documents aiamine defence witnesses.He did not furnish the docteurs cntil the last date . Even on that da he did not withamine anyone on the side.

but remained content sail , tie production of two documents . Therefore pere is no substance in the contention of the union dit no opportunity was given tu the defence to adduce evice.

(4) It was then conded by the learned counsel for the union that he wa .. heard by the disciplinary authority before conting the findings of the Enquiry Officer. It is in violatione principles ofnatural justice.

The learned counsel

port for his submission in ManagingDirector, ECIT . il derabad v . B Karunakar 1994- 1 -LLJ 162. It is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that when the Enquiry Office the discipimary authority the delinquent employs as a right to see the enquiry report before the disy Tuthority arrives at his conclusion regarding cuir nocence of the employce .

Ifhe is not given a coust the report and hears! it amounts to denial of a reasonab portunity to the employee to provehis innocence and reach of the principles of natural justice. The relevant dission is contained in para 27 to 29. But it is to be noted the charge sheeted employee in the reported decision . Senior Technical Officer of Electronic Corporatiina Limited and hence a government employee.ivil services ( classification, control and appeal ) well as Article 311 of the consilution were applist him. The Hon'ble Supreme Court on the basis of gr . 3112 and the proviso of the constitution held that the charge sheeted employee should be heardby the disc plin dy authority regarding the lindings before proposity, the penalty .

However in these the workman is a bank employee and not a gorament employee and hence the decision has no applic . Thus none of the prelivanary objections can be sestave

10. Coming to the the case I will first deal with the first enquirsile ) . As per Ext.M9 charge

1st charge is that the workman sheer dated 17-03-186

had cheated by issuing ra cheques after closing his

workman was closed on account . The accountine

21-11-85. Two cheque it 20 000 each were issued to

FC Dlisa letter of workman to one Sadasivan on 14-10

Chirayich requesting him to close the Manager,

his SB Account and pesmance outstandin.z . He also

which are remaining un- surrendered 13 cheques

setter that it any other cheque used. He also stated in

med so far, were to be treated issued by him , was noi

-185 Ex.ML ) is a sttement as lost. This letter is dau

14-12-85 it shows that ' wo cheques of staff cheques as on

even dated 14-12-85 draw by the workinan for Rs.20,000 cach, were presented it for pay ment . However they were dis -honoured by bek on the ground that the workmchisee. 1x1.MIL - 2 is copy of account of the [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) )

=

the complaint of Sadasivan to the Branch Manager dated 18-02-86 complaining that the workman had borrowed Rs.50,000 and had issued two cheques and a promissory note on 14-12-185 and the cheques had returned . Ext.ME3 is a copy of the letter sent by the workman to Sadasivan on 06-12-85 wherein he admits the liability to Sadasivan and had promised to repay the amount as early as possible. Ext.ME -4 is another letter ofworkman to Sri . Sadasivan dated 01-12-'85 . There also he admits that he owes money to Sadasivan. These documents prove that the workman had issued two cheques after closing his S.B. account and surrendering the balance cheque leaves to the bank . But instead of surrendering all remaining cheque leaves, he retained two of them which were utilised for drawing the disputed cheques in favour of creditor Sadasivan . Naturally the cheques were dis - honoured by the bank as there was no subsisting account in the name ofthe workman . The workinan bas no case that he had lost any cheque leaves. He has also no case that the lost cheque leaves were utilised by some one to draw two cheques . At the same time he owes money to Sadasivan as can be seen from workman's letters , Ext.ME- 3 and 4. They show that he had also executed a promissory note, copy ofwhich is Ext.ME - 5. Thus as per the records two chequeswere issued in favour ofthe creditor after closing his account in the bank. It is an act of cheating the creditor. The conduct of the workman affects the reputation of the bank and is an act prejudicial to the interest of the bank.

11. Ext. ME- 6 is a copy of the bulletin dated 19-1-1983 of the bank which requires a bank employee to get prior permission for availing loan or any other credit facility from banks , companies, institutions , societies , firms etc. and for standing as guarantor in any transaction. However the bulletin is silent about borrowing from individuals . It refers only to loans to be availed from institutions or firms . Hence Ext.ME- 6 has no relevance in the instant case . The bank manager MW1 has given evidence that the creditor Sadasivan had given complaint to the bank and Ext . ME- 2 is his complaint . Ext , ME-3 and 4 letters sent by workman to Sadasivan, were handed over by Sadasivan to MW 1. Besides a Promissory note Ext.M- 5(copy) was also handed over by Sadasivan to MW - I . In the light of this evidence the Enquiry Officer found that the workmanwas guilty of cheating and acts prejudicial to the interest of the bank. There is no reason to deviate from the findings ofEnquiryOfficer.

12. The next charge is that the workman had incurred debts which the bank considered to be excessive. Exts . ME-1 , 2, 3, 4 and 5 prove that the worker had borrowed money to the tune ofRs. 50,000/- from Sri Sadasivan who appears to be a money lender. The borrowing is admitted by the workman in his letters sentto Sadasivan , Ext.M -3 andM-4. The admitted signature of the workman in the letters sent to the Enquiry Officer tallies with the signature in Ext.ME- 3 and 4. The cheques issued by the workman were dis-honoured and that is disclosed by statement of staff cheques dated 14-12-85 Ext.ME - I. The complaint of Sadasivan Ext .MEA mentions two cheques and a promissory note said to have been issued by worker. The signature in the promissory note is that ofthe workman and perfectly tallies with the

5969

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

admitted signatures . He was not able to repay the amount , which is clear from Ext.ME- 3 letter. Therefore the creditor complained to bank. Thus the charge that he had incurred debts beyond his means to repay stands proved.

13. The next charge is that the workman had engaged in trade or business outside the scope ofhis duties without the permission of the bank . The very letter of the worker Ext.ME- 3 (in Ext.M2) speaks by itselfthat he was rumning a saw-mill andhe had borrowed money for the mill . However the mill was running at a loss . The worker in his letter promises to repay the amount to Sadasivan out of the income from thebusiness itself. The complaint of Sadasivan Ext.ME- 2(in Ext.M1 ) mentions that workman had borrowedmoney for thepurpose ofhis mill by name " Sherly Jose SawMill", Kadakkavoor. Though the mill is named after his wife business is run by the workman. That is clear from Ext.ME- 3. To the charge sheet Ext . ME- 8 no reply was sent . MW- 1 Manager ofthe bank deposed that the workman was running a saw-mill where he was carrying on the business of timber, firewood and furniture . During cross- examination no question is seen put to MW- 1 regarding this aspect . The workman has no explanation for what purpose he had borrowed money. The evidence shows that he was running a business and he had borrowed money for that purpose . This was done without the permission of bank and is a misconduct .

14. In the 2nd enquiry the misconduct alleged was that the workman was engaged in trade without the permission of the bank, had incurred debts considered by thebank tobe excessive and had committed acts prejudicial tothe interest of the bank . Ext, M2 is the Enquiry File. The basis for this allegation was that the workman had borrowed Rs.30,000 from Smt . Ida Gomez and failed to repay it on time. She made a complaint to the Branch Manager . She was a customer of the bank . Ext.ME - J is the complaint dated 30-08-86 . Ext.ME -3 is a promissory note for Rs.30,000 executed by the workman to Smt.lda Gomez . Ext.ME-2 is a letter sent by the workman to Smt . Ida Gomez acknowledging the debt and promising to repay the amount . The letter reveals that the amount was borrowed for the purpose of saw- mill . He reiterates in the letter that he is fully involved in the saw - mill business. The letter was sent on 6-12-85 . MWI (the Bank Manager ) stated before the Enquiry Officer that the workman was running a saw - mill . The handwriting and signature in Ext.ME- 2 letter and ME3 promissory note are identified by MW - J . The witness was cross examined . But no question was put to him regarding the saw- mill business . The version ofMW- I in the chiefexamination remains un -challenged . Thus the evidence on record prove that the workman was running a mill and for the purpose of the business he had borrowed Rs.30,000 from Smt. Ida Gomez, but was not able to repay the same. Smt . Ida Gomez was a customer ofthe bank. The worker had thus committed the misconduct of engaging in trade without permission of the bank and incurring debts beyond his means to repay and these acts are prejudicial to the interest of the bank.

15. However the leamed counsel for the workman argued that the refusal to engage a lawyer has put him in 5970

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA OCTOBER 25 , 2008/KARTIKA 3 , 1950

[ PART 11 - S Ztii ) ]

Ext.Ml Enquiry file relates tothe first enquiry . In that enquiry the workman did not request for assistance of a lawyer. but took the assistance of a umion office bearer ( treasurer). The charges and the nature of evidence in both enquiries are not complex requiring the assistance of an expert . When Enquiry Officer was examined he admitted that the management representative was a law graduate at the time of enquiry . But nothing prevented the workman in making a request to the management for permission to appoint a lawyer. Ite did not do so in the first enquiry and in the 2nd enquiry he took his own time to make a request and that too to the Enquiry Officer and not to the management. As per Clause 19.12 (a)( iii) of first Bipartite Settlement permission has to be granted by the management and not by the Enquiry Officer. In the above circumstances and contest the request of the workman was rejected by the Enquiry Officer and 1 find no infirmity in the decision ofEnquiry Officer .

18. The workman did not adduce any evidence . O the other hand there are enough materials on recurd to prove the guilt of the worker. The Enquiry Officer has rightly found him guity of all the charges . I find no reason to interfere with that finding.

disadvantage in defending the charge effectively The management representative was a legally trained person and as per Bipartite Settlement the workman is entitled to be defended by an Advocate. The denial of assistance of a lawyer vitiates the enquiry. The proceedings of 20-02-1987、 page 3 shows that on that day the workman had made an oral request for permission to engage an Advocate for him , TheEnquiryOfficer recorded his reasons for not acceding to his request. According to the Enquiry Ollicer the enquiry was posted on 21-01-1987 and the workman was given notice of enquiry sufficiently early . He was also informed that he could take the assistance of a co - worker . On 21-01-1987 neither was he present for the enquiry nor did he make a request for engaging a lawyer . Thereafter he sent a letter to the Enquiry Officer requesting to adjourn the enquiry on the ground that due to strike organised by the union on 21-101-87 he was not able to attend the enquiry . Even then he had not made a request for appointmem of an Advocate . The enquiry was adjourned to 20-02-1987 ! hat day the workman was present and he made a request for appointment of an Advocate. According to the Enquiry Officer this was not a prompt request and the workman was not earnest in seeking the assistance of an Advocate. Moreover the permission to engage an Advocate has to be sanctioned by the management and not by the Enquiry Officer. Hence the request of the employee was reiected Thereafter one management witness was examined and he was cross examined by the workman. After closing management evidence on 20-02-1987 the enquiry was adjourned to 09-03-1987 for defence evidence . That day the workman remained absent and no list of winesses or documents was submitted. Hence , Enquiry proceeding were closed on 09-03-1987 . Ext.M - 2 enquiry file discloses the above facts.

16. The learned counsel for the union relied on the following decisions to contend that the denial of services of a lawyer is denial of natural justice to the delinquent. The decisions referred are:

19. Point No. 2 :--- The punishment imposed in respect of the first enquiry ( Ext M1 ) is stoppage of increment for a period of 2 years with cumulative effect ant in the 2nd enquiry ( Exr.M- 2 ) stoppage of increment for a period of2 years without cumulative effect . The charge of incurring debts beyond one's means alone is the minor misconduct. The other charges are gross misconduct for which any of the punishments made mention in Clause 19.6 of Ist Bipartite Settlement and substituted by clause 6 of Supplementary Settlement dated 10-04-2002 ( see page 565 to 567 of ' Bipartite Settlements 12th Edinan , M / s. H.P.J.Kapoor Publication ) can be imposed. There is no violation of any provision of settlement . Moreover the penalty imposed being one not falling within S - 11A of 1.D.Act , there is no power to reduce or alter the punishment except for violation of any provision .

Union of India Karunakaran Nau 1985 KLT 680 .

J.K. Aggarwal i' Haryana Seeds Development Corporation Limited and Others 1991-11-111-112 und Board of Trustees , Port of Bombay . Dilipkumar AIR 1983 SC 109 .

In the result an award is passed finding that the action of the management in imposing the punishment of stoppage of annual incredicots for a period of 2 years with cumulative effect and stoppage of increments for a period of another 2 years without cumulative effect is legal and justified and the workinan is not entitled for any relief.

The award will take effect one month after its publication in the Official Gazette .

Dictated to the Personal Assistant , transcribed and typed by her , corrected and passed by me on this the 11 th day , July , 2008

P.I .. NORBERT , Presiding Officer APPENDIX

Witness for the Management

MWI - 26-06-2007

Sri.Sebastian ,

Exhibits for Manageanent

Ext. M 1 Enquiry Jile in respect of Sri.P A. Jose .

FxtM2 Enquiry Fikmespect of Sri.P.A. Jose.

17. However in the facts and circumstances at the present case, the decisions are not applicable. In the instant case the workman had enough time and occasion 10 make a request for engaging a lawyer. The Enquiry Officer had given him notice of enquiry and allowed him to take the assistance of a co - worker or union office bearer The workman remained silent. On the first day of enquiry he remained absent Thereafter though he sunt a Jener requesting for adjournment of the enquiry he did not make a request for appointment of a lawyer. On the second sitting he attended the enquiry and requested for engaging an Advocate. Since that request was rejected he cruss examined the sole management witness . Then he had no case that the management representative was a legally trained person. It is to be noted that the same Enquiry Officer conducted two enquiries against the workntan [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 1 अक्तूबर, 2008

का.आ. 2969. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार फेडरल बैंक लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , इरनाकुलम के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 339/2006) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 01-10-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[र्स. एल-12012/54/1995- आईआर( बी -1 ) ] अजय कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi, the 1st October , 2008

S.O. 2969. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 339/2006) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court, Ernakulam , now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the Federal Bank Ltd., and their workman received by the Central Government on01-10-2008.

[No. L- 12012/54/ 1995 - IR(B- 1) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM Present: Shri. P. L. Norbert , B. A. , LL.B. , Presiding Officer

(Wednesday the 9th day ofJuly, 2008/ 18th Ashada 1930 ) I.D. No. 339/2006

LD. 17/1996 of Labour Court, Ernakulam) Workman : The General Secretary,

Federal Bank Staff Union , Champion Building , bank Junction , Aluya-683 101 . By Adv . Sri . Ashok B. Shenoy.

Management : Tur Chairman ,

Federal Bank Limited, HeadOffice, Aluva-683 101 By adv. M/ s . B. S. Krishnan Associates .

This case coming up for final hearing on 25-06-2008, thisTribunal- cum-Labour Court on 09-07-2008 passed the following..

AWARD

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

5971

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

" Whether the action of the management of M/s.Federal Bank Limited in imposing the penalty of censure and stoppage of increment for a period of 6 months without cumulative effect on Shri C.C.Dinesh is legal and justifed? If not, to what relief is the concerned worman entitled? "

2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows:- Sri.C.P.Dinesh was working as Clerk at Girinagar Branch, Emakulam of Federal Bank Limited. While so, he was charge sheeted for irregular attendance and absence without leave. He was issued with 3 memos for similar misconduct and was proceeded against without enquiry under clause 3 of the Bipartite Settlement dated 31-10-79 and imposed punishment of censure and stoppage of increment for a period of 6 months without cumulative effect. The latter punishment is subject matter of adjudication in another case (ID 275/2006 ) . The union therefore challenges the disciplinary action resulting in imposition of penalty of censure .

3.Accordingtothe union the punishment of censure is illegal . The charges are vague . A domestic enquiry was necessary when a third show cause notice was issued. Once a memo of charge is issued an enquiry is mandatory as per clause 19.12 of the First Bipartite Settlement . That was not followed by the management. The procedure under clause 3 of Bipartite Settlement of 3.1-10-79 is also not followed. The documents relied on for charge sheeting the workman was not given to the workman . He was also not heardby the disciplinary authority .As per Clause 3 of the settlement when an employee is charged with a minor misconduct on two previous occasions an enquiry is necessary on the third occasion , Hence a domestic enquiry was necessary in respect of the charge in meno dated 16-02-1991 . However on all the 3 occasions no enquiry was conducted. This is illegal and violative ofthe provisions of 1979 settlement . The workman had complied with the leave rules. He had submitted leave applications with medical certificates whenever necessary on time . The leave sanctioning authority has not disposed of the leave applications before initiating disciplinary action . The management put unnecessary restrictions on the workman by requiring him to produce medical certificates from a doctor not below the rank of DMO . It was practically impossible to get medical attendance of DMO as well as obtain certificates from him . The workman had given prior intimation of his absence . The Order of the disciplinary authority that the workman had violated leave rules and had not complied with the directions ofthe management is not based on records. Hence the disciplinary action and the penalty imposed are to be quashed.

4. According to the management the dispute is to be confined to penalty of censure alone as the 2nd lap of reference regarding stoppage of increment for a period or 6 months is the subject matter of another reference ( ID 275/2006).

5972

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA TOBER 25 , 2008 /KARTIKAJ .

[PART I- SEC. 3 )

2. Is the absence borised ?

The union e posing the cause of workman is a sanority

union and is 21. Lognized one . Hence the refer

not maintainable The workman had exhausted es his

eligible leave 1950. Thereafter he has beering

The evidence ceul Ems . 41-1 10 M - 18 alone on the side of the Man and no evidence on the side of the union .

absent on seural orcasions without sultentang wave

applicationsdvance. lie used to schat leave

6. Point Nos. The question that falls for applications after resumption of ouiv. Roes lough consideration is wheriesne enquiry was necessary

when the workman wied with a meno dated 16-402-41 he was residaear to Girinagar branch be twver

10 show cause whyon shall not be taken under cared to subot applications on time or obtam priur

permission tocmaining absent. Due to the liquet clause-3 of Bipartite Stement dated 31-10-1979 for absence on dicat ground he was asked by 10 unauthorised absence

get in future dal certificate from a Guverneur doctor

7. Ext.M- l is a zer dated 31-07-1900 issued to the not below D.M.0 . But he never complied with

workman to show care the disciplinary action shall not thedirection . He dei mot foliow the leave rates. He applied

be taken for unamheried absence for the period from for extraordings when he had engagi prisleysine

21-03-1990 το 06-07-1 mtermittently for 11 days . The and sick leaveda. He was given three led

workman submitted reply dated 09-08-1990 31-07-90.39610201-10-90 calling uperher

Thereafter Ext. M - J modified by EM.M4 mem his explanate . 2nd meno is a modilicia . Gest

dated 29-08-1990s the management proposed to memo . Thparacions submitted by

proceed under ( law : Bipartite Settlement dated satisfactory leave he was proceeded under tis at

31-10-1979 . Thercatirabsequent period of absence Bipartite Setlerdert of 1974 and imposed a peachy of

from 11-07-19901031 -Canolbernetnu dated 04-10-1990 censure. Idel peter un appeal . Atotherwear ted

(Ext.M2) was issue was no reply to this meme For

the charges in mer..... A: S. MI ( Mti and M2 the

disciplinary authority dene poaishment of censare

by Ext.M- 5 arder d -02-1991 . The worker again

remained absent draeriod from 12-09-1990 remain absen , ashorisedly for which t

disciplinarngs were initiated. Tal

20-12-1990 intermitt's nenumgement issued 1.xt.M-6 show cause notice art - 02-1971 proposing to preceed absence of firman alliected the somain sung

under Clause 3 or Biper Settlement dated 31-10-5979.

of the bank he is to needto hold a domesti

The workman submirecast M71. After considering fer Clause - 3 ofBipartine st case action

the reply thedisciplinarity issued Ext . 18 urder dated 31-10 is workinsan was given

dated 27-04-1991 ng penalty of censure. The offer his explain by isstting show raise m .. זל

workman tiled appensas rejected by the appellate unauthorised absence The explanation of the

authority. Thus in repeot be charges in show cause was consid. !! the Disciplinary Authors the the

notices Ext.MI (M4 one punishment on consule punishmens intrused. The

and in respect of ale Ext. Mo show case notice.

the documen proposed to be relied onry

action . The workman did not reddes the

another punishment are were imposed . The learned counsel for the unitals that a domestic enquiry 16-02-1991 issued concerning subsequent since and the penes of veusure was ordered preferred anel Gited. But even aier of penalty twice the worker ए documents . I did not reques! Kora come

should have been coni parsineet

the disciplinary artery smgle renats

cause motive dated t do per Clause -3 imposed on 4. in respect of the chees

Ripartile Settlemen 1979 the relevas pauruest memos da 、 29-08-1998 .

of Clause - 3 of Bipal ::

Another pents Came was imposed

22-04-1991 ( ra ing sithsequesi period of for

which shows spotice dated 16-03-12

Since altogetheroth more penalty ofcersarise!

there was d 1. Conduct an

"3 ( iii ) ( a) An ... employee is charge.l punishment proром . However, set also be held Tot miscendaci cand s gave is waching or wasure .

charge in n.441 . All

submitted arkan were For

disciplmarshatity for appropriate

( i ) the employed a shors cause totice advising Lin . on which w dictad the silence ed: and

disciplinary taken and

are legal am! !...i

5. The perse than arise of casiderati

( ii) the emplu ... subunit his w this purpos documents based. ereatSence. Pse le to have access to th dren wirch the chage 1st adopted by the discream, legal and propr 5973 भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 25, 2008/ कार्तिक 3 , 1930

(ii) if the employee requests a hearing such a hearing shall be given and in such a hearing he may be permitted to be represented by a representative authorized to defend him in an enquiry had such an enquiry been held.

evidence and challenge the charge on a third occasion in an enquiry. A wise disciplinary authority can defeat this right of the employee by imposing one penalty for many charges . Therefore disciplinary action in pursuance to Ext.M-6 show cause notice which culminated in Ext.M-8 order is illegal and unsustainable.

(b) Where an employee is charged with a minor misconduct and an enquiry is not held on two previous occasions, an enquiry shall be held in respect of the third occasion .

8.As per that provision when an employee is charged with minor misconduct an enquiry need not be held on the first and second occasions , but on the third occasion an enquiry is required. However the learned counsel for the management argued that Sub -Clause (b ) ofClause -3 (iii ) is attracted only when in pursuance to show cause notices, further action is taken and penalty is imposed on the initial two occasions . But if the disciplinary authority does not impose penalty in pursuance to a notice , that cannot be counted as an occasion where an employee is charged with a minor misconduct as envisaged in Clause-3 (iii) (b). Therefore it is contended that though Exts . M- 1 (M-4 ) and M-2 show cause notices were issued, the management imposed only one punishment ofcensure by Ext.M - 5 order. Thereforethe charges made mention in Ext.M 1 (M -4 ) and M-2 are to be treated as misconduct on the first occasion. A second occasion for taking disciplinary action arose only when Ext. M-6 show cause notice was issued on 16-02-1991 . This was followed by Ex1.M- 8 punishment order. Therefore it was not necessary to hold an enquiry with regard to Ext.M -6 charge.

9. On the other hand the learned counsel for the union submitted that as per Clause-3 (iii ) (b) a mere issuance of a show cause notice is sufficient to treat it as a minor misconduct and it need not be followed by imposition of penalty.

11. Regarding the merits of the charges it was submitted by the learned counsel for the union that there is no misconduct on the part of the worker. According to the learned counsel the workman had submitted leave applications with medical certificates whenever he was absent . The requirement of the management to produce medical certificate from a government doctor not below the rank of D.M.O. was practically impossible and it was unnecessary restriction clamped on the workman . Ext.M - 16 series are leave applications and medical certificates. They show that he had applied for leave only after the expiry ofthe period of leave. Ext. M- 17 is an extract ofBipartite settlement. Clause 13.2 of the leave rules says that an employee who decides to get leave other than casual leave has to apply in writing to the manager not less than one month before the date except in urgent cases or unforeseen circumstances including illness . Clause 13 6 says that leave of all kinds cannot be claimed as of ri'it. Dependingupon the exigencies of service the management may refuse leave or revoke leave of any description . There are restrictions regarding privilege leave as per Clause- 13.20. Clause- 13.34 says that extra ordinary leave can be granted to an employee when no ordinary leave is due to him . Ext.M - 15 is circular regarding authority to grant leave. The circular says that the sanctioning of Casual Leave, Privilege Leave and Sick Leave ofall staffofa branch department will be the function ofthe management. However no leave other than causal leave shall be rejected at the branch/departmental level . Such cases has to be forwarded to the head office . Leave such as special leave , maternity leave, leave under L. P.C. , extraordinary leave on loss of pay of all staff is to be sanctioned by Head Office. Ext.M- 16 series leave applications are for extraordinary leave on loss of pay on the ground of sickness as well as home affairs.There are 22 such applications. At no time he applied for leave either before the commencement of leave or during the leave period but only on resumption of duty after expiry of teave periods , At least with regard to the ground of' home affairs ' he could have applied on time , It is against the leave rules as already mentioned. Regarding medical ground the workman did not produce medical certificates required by the management . He did not intimate the office before going on leave. He also did not apply for leave on time. For these reasons the management proceeded against him for disciplinary action. The contention of the union that the workman had not violated the leave rules and applied for leave on time is not correct. Therefore the 10. It is relevant to note the wording of sub-clause (b) : " . ..where an employee is charged with aminor misconduct . ..." . Hence it is enough that an employee is served with a show cause notice alleging a minor misconduct without further action to treat it as a charge under Clause - 3 ( iii ) (b) . The management may choose to impose just one penalty or more, for one or more charges in respect of one or more instances. But penalty is not the criterion to decide the number of occasions one is charged for minor misconduct. By virtue of Ex1 . - 1 ( M -4) and M-2 memos the workman was charged twice for absence in respect oftwo different periods . Hence they are two charges separate and distinct . If the management prefers to impose only one penalty for both charges it is within their discretion . But the protection of a charge sheeted employee under Clause-3 (iii ) (b ) cannot be taken away. The provision affords him an opportunity to adduce

39446/08-15 5974

1. GAZETTE OF INDIA: CA 1081: R 25, 2008/ KARTIKA3 , 1930

action of the man vetem in proceeding agamist the workman for ashorised absence is legal and propet . However I have already observed the penalty of Leisure imposed on a tud me in pursuance to Ext , M - 6 Slow cause notice mente sanaut be sustained

12. I have already mentioned that the issue in the reference regarding stoppage of increments for a period of six months is a subject matter of consideration in 1.1 275/2006 and tik sameis admitted by both parties Hence no adjudication in respect of that issue is made in this case,

In the result an award is passed finding that 11 action of the management in imposing the penalty Hi censure by 1 : x! -8 order dated 22-04-1991 is illegal a violation of Clause- ( in ) ( b ) of Bipartite Settlement darcad 31-10-1979 اكان s set aside . However the punistineer of censure as per 1. M- order dated 05-02-1991 iste justilied and sh... seaman.

The award will take effect one month atter its publication in the Official Ciazette .

[PART 11- SFC . 3 ( ii ) ]

authority.

M-9

24-02-91 Charge Sheet No. PIR/ S-90/ 1399/91 of management to S31 C.C. Dinesh.

M-10

03-06-91 Explanation to M -9 by Sri C.C. Dinesh

M- IL

22-06-91 Reply letter Na . PIR S -94533/ 91 of management to Sri . C.C. Dinesh .

M-12

05-07-91 Appeal memorandum filed by Sri C.C. Dinesh.

M-13

01-09-91 Appellate Order No. PIR S - 9 50-10: 91 ofAppellate authority .

M-14

24-04-87 Copy ofCircular No.31 /PIR/ Leave 1/87 dated 31-03-87 of the Bank .

M-15

Circular No. 149 /Staff leave/ 1 / 8-1 dated 9-7-84 of the Bank.

M- 16 serics (22 nos .)

Dictated the Personal Assistant, transcribed and typed by her corrected and passed by me on this the 9th day July, 2008 .

PL. NORBERT Presiding Officer APPENDIX

Exhibits for Manegement

M- 1 the Show cause notice No. אוי ( S -9 ) 3059.90 41: Management to Srt . Dies M-2 Show cause notice No. PIR/ S - 9 /3420.00 of the Management 10 St Dmeh M-3 باز Reply to M- 1 noticeby SuC .. Dinesh to the Management .

M-1 Show Cause すぐ し PIR S -9.324140 Managerment to Sri C C. Dizel .

M-5 ! Pornshment order No PIR S -9 1986-91 of the Disciplinary Authorits.

M-6 Show cause notice No. PIR S - 4-4052.91 of the Managettieni 10 NO CC mesh .

M-7

28-

Reply to M -Gbys Dinsh to the Management .

M-8

Tunislament order No. PIR N 4383 91 of the Disciplinary

Leave applications of Sri C.C. Dresh

M-17

Extract ofBipartite Settlement (Chapter XIII -Leave Rules ) .

M- 18

01-08-79 1.stract of Ripartite Settlemen Lot 01-08-1979,

नई दिल्ली । अक्टूबर , 2008

का.आ. 2970.-आंध्रां का 14 ) को धारा 17 के ईम्पोर्ट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में अधिकरण , चेन्नई के पंचार करती है, जो कंन्द्रीय सरकार विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय मरकार एक्सपोर्ट तंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके र्दिष्ट द्यागिक विवाद में औद्योगिक संख्या 66/1988 ) को प्रकाशित 01-10-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-12012.105 -डी. ( ए). आई आर ( बी -1 ) ] अजय कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi . Jest October . 2008

S.O. 2970. fu pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act. 154 ? 114 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 06/1988 ) of Industr !! Tribunal . Chennai , as shown m the Annexure in the lindustrial Dispute between the Tuanagement of Exporn Hapert Bank of ludia and their workmen which was received by the Central Government on 01-10-2008.

[No.1-1201205 1988-10.IV( A) IR( R - 1 ) ΔΙΑΥ ΚΟΜAR , Desk Officer [ भाग- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI- 104 .

Monday, the 16th day of June, 2008 Present : Thiru A. Arumugasamy, B.A. M.L , Presiding Officer

LD. No. 66 of1988

[In the matter ofdispute for adjudication under Sec . 10( 1 ) ( d ) ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 between the workman and the Management of Export Import Bank of India, Madras-1.]

BETWEEN

Thiru R. Jambulingam,

...Petitioner C/ o S. Swaminathan, Plot No. 22, I Main Road, Srinivasa Nagar, Kolathur , Madras-600099

And

The Deputy General Manager, Export- Import Bank of India,.

233, NSC Bose Road, Madras.600001

...Respondent ReferenceOrder No. L- 120122/05/88 - Div(A )/D.IV, dated 29-9-1988 of the Ministry ofLabour , Government of India, NewDelhi .

This dispute coming on this day for finat disposal in the presence of Mis K.V. Ananthakrishnan , V. Chandraseker & K.P. Muralidharan , Advocates, appearing for the petitioner and Thiru S. Jayaraman , Advocate, appearing for the Respondent/Management , and upon perusing the Reference and other connected papers on records , and this dispute having stood aver till this day for consideration , this Tribunal made the following :

AWARD

TheGovernment of India have referred the following issue of adjudication by this Tribunal :

"Whether the action of the Mangement of Export- Import Bank of India, Madras is justified in terminating the services of Shri R. Jambulingam , Driver-cum-Messenger w.e.f. 8-11-86? Ifnot , to what reliefis the concerned workman entitled?" In view ofthe Order passed in W.A. No. 1672/2000 dated 9-10-2007 and the award of this Tribunal in I.D. 66/88 was confirmedby the High Court in W.A. No. 1672/2000 dated 9-10-07 , Hence the industrial dispute is closed at present.

Dated at Chennai, this 16th day ofJune ,2008.

A. ARUMUGASAMY, Presiding Officer

5975

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25, 2008 /कार्तिक 3 , 1930

नई दिल्ली, 1 अक्तूबर , 2008

का.आ. 2971, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार लक्ष्मी विलास बैंक लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 33/1986 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 01-10-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-12011 /24/1985 -डी. JV ( ए) /आई आर ( बी-1 ) ]

अजय कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 1st October, 2008

S.O. 2971. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 33/1986 ) of the Industrial Tribunal Labour Court , Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Laksmi Vilas Bank Ltd. , and their workman which was received by the Central Government on01-10-2008 .

[No. L- 12011/24/ 1985- D.IV( AYIR( B - 1 ) ]

AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, CHENNAL- 600104

Wednesday the 2nd day of July 2008 Present: Thiru A. Arumugasamy, B.A. M.L , Presiding Officer

1.D. No. 33 of1986

[Inthe matter ofdispute for adjudication under Sec.10( 1 ) (d) ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 between the workman and theManagement of Lakshmi Vilas Bank Limited. Karur }

BETWEEN

The workmen represented by

Lakshmi Vilas Bank Employees' Union , represented by its Secretary. No.12, Station View Road, Gokul Apartments , Kodambakkan,

Chennai -600024

..Petitioner

And

Lakshmi Vilas Bank Limited,

represented by its Chairman, Salem Road, Kathaparai . Karur -639006.

...Rendent Management Reference Order No. L - i2011 / 24/ 85 - D.IV. (A) dated 19-5-1986 of the Ministry of Labour , Government of India , NewDelhi,

Thisdispute coming on this day for final disposal in . the presence of Thiru D. Hariparanthaman, Advocate, appearing for the petitioner and M / s T.S. Gopalan & to..

5976

CAVEITE OF INDIA. OBER 25.2008 KARTIKAS.....

Advocate , appearing for the Respondem Managarent , and upon crusing the reference and other connected papers on records , aur this dispute having stood aset till this day for consider tion , this Tribunai made the twilowing

AWARD

The Gorneal of India have refered the tollowing issue النار dion by this tribunal .

"Whether the managerment of Lakshmi Vilas Pal Kanari justified in withdrawing the special allowance from waters of staft , whose names are gissa de the annex without notice If not, what rehet are the workaer concerned entitled to? "

As per Dider in W A. No. 2704 :2002 date: 2-1-2008, this Wrt appeal is dismissed allowing the claim made by the worknien betore thus Tribunal . Award Pussed Necosts. Dated at nanrai , this 2nd day of July, 2008 THIBEA AR MUGASAMY, Presidiner licer नई दिल्ली , । अक्तूबर , 2008

का.सा, 272, औद्योगिक विवाद आंधनियम, 194947 का 14 ) को ? में अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकत बैंक ऑफ बड़ौदा के प्रबंधन में सचद्ध नियोजकां और उनके कमकारों भोग , अनुबंध में निरिए औद्योगिक विवाद में केंन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण श्रमलय, लखनऊ के पंचाट ( पंदर्भ मंग को प्रकाशित कन्है, जो केंद्रीय सरकार को 11 प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[ सं. एल 12011067:2001 आई अ ] राजिन्द्र कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारों New Delhi , the 1st October , 2008

S.O 2972, in pursuance of Section of the Industriai Disputes Act , 1947 ( 4 of 1947 the Central Government hereby publishes the award iket . No. 114/2001 ) he Central Government Industrial Tul Labour Councknow as shown in the Ance the Industria ! Uspute hetween the management si kana n Baroda and their workomen which was received by the Central Goverment 01-11 ) -2008 .

[No.1120116701-81-40 RAJINDER KUMAR Dekh Micer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIS TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT, ACKNOW

Shri N.K. Purohit . Presiding Offwer

39. No. 114.2001

Ref. No, L- 17011/ 67/2001-12 ( B - 11) dated : 20-07-2001

BETWEEN

The General Secretary

Hark ! Baroda Stati Association 15:22 . Madras Bhawan . Civil Line- Sanpur ( UP ) -2012

( In the matter of Shri Rai Kumar Singh Gawamond 13

PARI E S. The By Feneral Manager 13 : nest Baroda Zoul Ottice. Baratyani . Lucknow

AWARD

By orderNo. L - 1000RR - ned 30-7-2001 、 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour , sow Delhi in exercise of the powers conferred by cluased of sub section ( 1 ) and 24 of Sechen ! of the Indusrial Disputes Acc. 1414 of 1947 ) referred this industrial dispute des the General Secretary . Bank of Baroda Staff Assoc . Kampar and the Dy . General Manager. Bank of Bo . Larknow for adjudiaction The issue ofrer adjudication is as under:

"Whether the scelten of the management of the Bunk of Baroda in larizing the services ut & Shar Raj Kumar Sirestar and 13 others as per list enclosed at Arine working at various branches of the banken UP Zone ... the daic mentioned agnis justitied ? Unot to whar relief the cone women sre entitled to !"" On receipt of recrthe notices were sce ! to the parties calling on the file them statement: Accordingly the work anion tiled their statement ডা claim on 20-11-01dents along with list Jated 26-3-02 and 04-04-03.management filed their written statement on 26-02-02 documents along with list dated 11-06-02. The union Sed the rejomder on 26-03-02. Ор behalf of the unions . Gupta. General Secretary of the Bank of Baroda Ma Asociation has been ex and in rebuttal the morrectnom izas examines Se R. Gupta, Sr. Manager Airne Alter conclusion of the evidence both the sides Lave thed their written arguments , At this stage 2 appication has been moved son behalfof the workmet long with aflidavits of the General Secretary of the Bank ni Baroda Stati Association and the workmen with the er to heal the present case is withdrawn The reput the opposite paris has not opposed the applika

The representatoth the sides have submined that regarding regulate the workmen a settlement has been arrived between the lining of the workers and te Bank and no dispute been left over in viess of the above stated position the representatives of both the parties there is no treef decide the reference onder en merit and the same is posed of as there is an grievance left with the workmen . The union's case for relief clanned stands withdrawn . Norelict is required to be given to the workmen concerned . atter is resolved accordingly and the reference is uiso answered accordingly .

Award as above .

SK.PUROHIT, Presiding Wheer Lucknow 18-09-2008 [भाग १ -खण्ड 3(ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, । अक्तूबर , 2008

का.आ. 2973, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बैंक ऑफ बड़ौदा के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , लखनऊ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 30/2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार का 1-10-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-12011 /53/2006-आई आर ( बी- II ) ] राजिन्द्र कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi , the 1st October, 2008

S.O. 2973. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 30/2006) ofthe Central Governinent Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court, Lucknow as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the management of Bank of Baroda , and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 1-10-2008 .

[No. 1-1201 1/53/2006- IR ( B - 11 ) ] RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM - LABOUR COURT LUCKNOW

PRESENT

SHRI N.K. PUROHIT, Presiding Officer I. D. No. 30/2006

Ref. No. L- 12011 /53/2006-1R ( B- II) dated: 11-10-2006

BETWEEN

TheGeneral Secretary

Bank ofBaroda Stat Association Madhav Bhawan , 15 /222 -A, Civil Lines Kanpur(U.P .)- 208001 (In the matter of Shri Anurag Kumar Agarwal )

AND

The Assistant General Manager,

Bank of Baroda 129 -D , Civil Lines Bareilly(UP)

AWARD

By order No. L - 12011 / 53/ 2006- IR (B- II) dated 11-10-2006, the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour, New Delhi in exercise ofthe powers conferred by clause (d) ofsub -section ( 1) and sub -section (2A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) referred

5977

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 25 , 2008/कार्तिक 3 , 1930

this industrial dispute between the General Secretary, Bank of Baroda Staff Association , Kanpur and the Assistant General Manager, Bank ofBaroda, Bareilly for adjudication.

The issue of reference for adjudication is as under:

"Whether the action of the management of Assistant General ManagerofBank ofBaroda, RegionalOffice, Bareilly not to regularize the services w.e.f.29-5-1989 of Shri Anurag Kumar Agarwal , workman is legal andjustified? If not , to what reliefhe is entitled to? " After receiving the above reference order notices to the parties were sent . The workman filed the statement of claim on 6-12-06 and the management filed its written statement on 9-2-07. The workman has alleged in his statement of claim that he was appointed in the bank as temporary peon on 29-5-89. Since then he is working in the bank without any break. He is fully qualified for the post of peon or sub - staff and he is working against clear substantive post . The management has deprived him of privilege of the permanent workman which is unfair labour practice . Therefore, the management be directed to regularize him on the post ofpeon or daftary w.e.f. 29-5-89 with all consequential benefits .

The management in their statement has stated that mainly because a temporary employee continued for a time beyond his term of appointment he would not be entitled to be absorbed in regular service or made permanent . The workman Anurag Kumar has never been sponsored by Employment Exchange and has never been subjected to selection process and no appointment letter was issued to him. He is not entitled to any relief and his claim is liable to berejected.

At the stage of workman's evidence an application has been moved on behalf of the workman along with affidavits ofthe General Secretary of the Bank of Baroda Staff Association and the workman , Shri Anurag Kumar with the prayer to treat the present case as withdrawn . The representative of the opposite party has not opposed the application .

The representatives ofboth the sides have submitted that regarding regularization of the workman Anurag Kurmar a settlement has been arrived between the Union of the worker and the Bank and no dispute has been left over. In view of the above stated position by the representatives ofboth the parites there is no need to decide the reference order on merit and the same is disposed of as there is no grievance left with the workman . His case for relief claimed stands withdrawn . The workman is not entitled to anyrelief. The matter is resolved accordingly and the reference is also answered accordingly.

Award as above.

Lucknow. 18-9-2008

N. K. PUROHIT, Presiding Officer [PART 11. St. 3 ( ii ) ) THE GAZETTE OF INDIATOBER 25 , 2008/ KARTIKAS, 1930

5978

नई दिल्ली, । अक्टूबर , 200008

2. " Whether the action of the Regional Manager. Union Bank of India . Rauper ( i ) ternumating the services of Shri Yugal Kishore Yadav . S o Shri Kesh Kumar Yadav is legal andjustified 14, 10 what relief the workman is entitled for?"

का. आ. 2974.-औद्यागिक विवाद अधिनियम, ५८ का ।4 ) की भाग । के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार निभ ऑफ इंडिया के पश्धतंत्र के संबद्ध नियाजकों और उनक के बीच अनुबन्ध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में कंन्द्रीय भरकार औद्योगिक अधिकन्याश्रम न्यायालय, नागपुर के पंचाटया 210/03 ) को धकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार का 1-10 2008 को प्राप्त हुआथाः

प्रा. एल 12012/85/2003 आई 11 ز [

राजिन्द्र कुमार, अनकारी

New Delhi , the 1st October 2008

S.O. 2974. In pursuance of Section of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Cural Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. Ne 216 (03) ofthe Central Cacinment Industrial Tribunal - cua - i abur Court , Nagpurs shown in the Annexure imtite industrial dispute between the managemen of Linien Bank ludia and their workmen , received by the Central Gesermenent on 1-10-2008

3. The workman Party No 1 bas claimed that his termination is illegal , ilis contentions are that he was appointed by the Regional Manager . Party No. 2. Union Bank of India in the year 1996 as a Messenger on temporary basis and posted at Dhamtari . He was werking continuously without aty gap for more than 240 days . However, the Party No. 2 played mischief showing his engagement in the dirieren names . Accordingly to him. though the orders were rested in the name of other per solts still he worked on that post under the fake name . The management was dong it with the sole intension to avoid any permanency and the states ot permanent employee on him. In short , he claints tha as he has worked continuously for more than 240 days , the nequired permanenes and it was obligatory on the past otragement to follow the provision of Section 25(B ) . 2511 1.D. Act . Since the above provisions are not followed .las termination w.e.f. 1-2-2002 is illegal and he is entitled for remstatement alongwith full back wages.

[No. 1-12012: 8 ) 2003-08 (10-10 RAJINDER KUMAR DR Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI A. N. YADAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CGIT-CUM- LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR

Date : 18-9-2008

Case No. CGIANGP21003

The management Party No. 2 despite the notice did not appear and file ang repis to the claim of Petitionег. Therefore , the reference proceeded ex - parte . The Petitioner Shri Yugal Kishore preteed his evidence on Alliskes it but due to the absence the management , it also remained un-crossed . On the irrsis of the above pleading , the only point that arises for any consideration is as under Petitioner Paris No 1

Shri Yugal kishor Shri kesh Kumar Yadav

State Bank of ladı . Bastar Road , P0..

Whether the Petitioner has cosiplered 240 days continuous service as Messenger on temporary basis and his termination is ille .. ?"

Distt. Dhammihatisgarh

Versus

Respondent/Parts No 2

The Regions Marsager . Union Bank of a stil , Mahavir Godia Complex . K. K. Road, Maulapas Raipur ( Chhrosgarh)

AWARD

Dated 18th September , 2008

I have gone through the record. The Petitioner has filed pursis to treat les snement of claim as an argилеты and requested to close the case for award . The perusal of statement of claim indicates that the workman was appointed on a temporary basis as a Messenger in the year 1996 and he was termum, ned we.t. 1-2-2002 . 11 seenis ac claims to have worked continuously for more than 6 years as a Messenger. However , he has not produced a single document to support is contention There is no evidence except the bare statement in the Aflidavit . Not a single document is filed to show that he worked with a specific date in a particular name Even the specific period ofworking is not stated in an Alticavit or us the statement of clam . The vague allegations are made that he worked from1996 . He has not filed a single order of appointment to show that he worked as a Messenger on a temporary basis continuously on the vacant sanctioned post for more than 240 days . There is no docionent or even the submission to calculate the specific peted 2410 days when he was working on the time scale . Soms written order trom the Bank w 1. The Ventral Government after satisfying the existence of dispute between Shri Yugal Kishore, s okesh Kumar Yadav . State Bank of India. Bastar Road , P.O. , Dhamtan , Das : 1 . Dhamtari ( Chharisgarh) ( Pant : No. | Пала the Regional Manager . Union Bank of India , Ist Hour . Mahavir Gaushala Complex, K. K. Road, Murdпрага . Raipur ( Chhatisgarh ) ( Party No. 2 ) referred the same for adjudication to this Tribunal vide its letter No.1-1201285 2003 - JR ( B - I1 ) dated 31-7-2003 under clause ( di of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub- section ( 2A ) of Section 10 of Industrikal Disputes Act . 1947 14 of 1947 ) with the following schedule:

[भाग 1 ]- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

5979

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 25, 2008 /कार्तिक 3 , 1930

expected because the Bank must have paid him for his work . He has not produced that Muster Rollas expected to have signed by the Petitioner. It is not clear how the payment was made. Suffice to say there is no voucher on record showing any payment to him.

He has stated in the statement of claim as well as in theAffidavit that his appointment was shown in different names though he himself was working on the same post. It is also alleged that the Bank has played his mischief to avoid to grant permanency to him . Here he has not produced any documents like the appointment orders in a different names given to him and the salary drawn in the different names though he himself was getting it . He even did not mention the names of the persons on which he worked for 240days . How the submission can be accepted without any proof that he was the same person that the Bank was paying in the different names to him . Thus , the evidence of the Petitioner is vague and no reliance can be placed on him.

No doubt the management did not appear and file the written statement but it does not mean any allegation of the workman without any proof shallbe accepted as true and correct. In my view, all the allegations and evidence are vague, uncertain either to calculate actual working days or to prove that the management was taking work from him in the different names . In my view, the evidence is insufficient and vague to prove that he has acquired the permanency. Hence , there is no question of granting permanency to him . He cannot be either reinstated or paid inback wages . In the result , the Petitioner failed to prove his claim and the reference deserve to be rejected. Hence , I pass the negative award.

Date: 18-9-2008

A.N. YADAV, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 1 अक्तूबर , 2008

का.आ. 2975.-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 , हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 112/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 1-10-2008 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-12025/03/2008- आईआर ( बी-1 ) ] अजय कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the Ist October, 2008

S.O. 2975. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 112 / 2003) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the management of State Bank of India , and their workmen , which was receivedby the Central Government on 1-10-2008 .

[No. L- 12025/03/2008- IR (B- I) ) AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

PRESENT

SHRI VED PRAKASH GAUR, Presiding Officer Dated the 11th day of September , 2008 Industrial Dispute No. L.C. I. D. 112/2003

BETWEEN

.....Petitioner Sri Badugu Rama Rao, S/oB. Nagendram , R/ o Bethapudi Post & Village, RepalliMandal , GunturDistrict - 522252 AND

The Assistant General Manager, StateBank of India, Zonal Office, Region - II Vijayawada-520004

.....Respondents APPEARANCES

For the Petitioner : Sri C. Vijaya Sekhar Reddy, Advocate For the Respondent: Smt . B. Lalitha Kumari , Advocate

AWARD

This is a case taken under Sec . 2 A (2) of the I.D.Act 1947 in view of thejudgment ofthe Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/ s . Cotton Corporation of India and two others and numbered in this Court as L.C.I.D. No. 112/2003 and notices were issued to the parties.

2. The Petitioner filed this petition against the Respondent State Bank of India against his oral termination w.e.f. 31-3-1997 . He submits that he has joined in the services of the Respondent as Non - Messenger on 1-1-1983 and he worked for about 5 years . He submits that the managerment of Bank decided to wait -list temporarily employed personnel who were found suitable for permanent appointment. After a settlement dated 17-11-1987, the management has made some wait- lists by dividing aspiring candidates into three categories i.e. , A , B and C. After second and third agreements and circulars , two separate 5980

GAZETTE OF INDIA OBER 25.2008 KARTIKAS , 1950

the proceeding of the care for last several adjournments Since 14-12-2006 one and Petiouct is not coming nor his witness appearing, as sper ,I have no option but to close the evidence of both the parties. Parties evidence is hereby closed.

select panels were prepted by the management Agrad workmen due 15 Lutregularization of their servicesti.r these panels filed WP 1194-1997 in Hon'ble Andhra Praste the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh by order Jated 5-3-1997 directed the bac implement the wikament as amended from times Contrary to the directions of the Hon'ble fingh Courts Andhra Pradesh management of the bank wed its authorities to continue the temporary from 1-4-1997 Angieved by this, the unrary worker filed W.P. No. 9206 1997. He explained thep.cosof agreements , sendetpat notifications circuits . panels.c He prayed biet the Responde the the order of on rated 1-3-1997 and res and absorb hinn the with consequental ber 2013 .

6. I have gone thigh the material available on the record . Evidence is close It seems that Petitioner is not interested in this case. Howe, this petition is dismissed Award passed araply Transmit . Dictatedto Smt. P. Pi Gowri , Personal Assistabe transcribed by her , con zied and pronounced by this the 11th day of Sept. 2008 VED PRAWASIL GALER . Presiding Otico Appendis of evidenet

Witnesses examined Re the Petirioner . Matresses examined tor ndent

WWI : Sri B. Ravana R... Vil

Documents marked for the Petitioner 3. The Resp om tiled counter stating ti exigency ofwork teraporary wurkmen are talent sea It has further explne il the settlements , agreement , circulars from tree and writ petitions. lh by ke workman in the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh. As the Petitoner was ppointed on temporary basis, lie cannot be continued it there is no work It is therefore prayed that the petition ve dismissed

Ex. Wl : Copy of clicate of temporary service of WW ) dt. 26-8-18

4. The Petitioner examined in chiet on 20-6-20 .He reiterated the facts mentioned in his petition. Hemarked Xerox copies of the documents which are twilwas . Ex. Wl is the certificate of temporary service of WWi dt. 26-8-1988. x. We is the panel list . Ex. W3 is the caste certificate. Ex . W4 is the employment registrat Ex. W5 is the Transfer certificate showing that WW possed card IX class . Ex. Wo is the fail memo of ceruficate ofX Cass

Ex. W2: Ex. W3: Ex. W4: Ex. WS: WWI Copy of panel is Copy od certificate Copy olennent registration card Copy of inter certificate showing that passed IX class

Ex.W6: Copy of smo of certificate of X Class Documents wat ked for the Respondent 5. Case called out several times but back parties dre absent . This case is fixed for cross - exammu dior of workman's evidence But neither workmante nor Respondent is present . Buth parties are hol attending

Parted by the Mataess , Ring Road. Maзиран Pub Publications . Delhi-...